However, whilst I would prefer a single location on grounds of cost and efficiency, I rather imagine that the co-sited HQ is rather traditional now.
Then, if we agree that, in the modern EU, the Brussels/Strasburg axis is too far to the west, then one or the other should be sacrificed for a more eastern location. Brussels has a lot going for it, but it's a crowded and expensive town with little room for expansion. Strasburg is actually better in these aspects, but is hamstrung by not being a transport hub in the way that Brussels is. So, and it is reluctantly, Brussels gets my nod for the western arm.
But, y'know, if you think I'm just trashing your hometown out of anti-French spite, there's little I can do to persuade you otherwise. keep to the Fen Causeway
But I do note that you pile on on the topic almost each time it's posted in a Salon. I know you're trying to bring a note of rationality to what is just stupid blather by the media, but the effect is to reinforce the notion that it is actually a topic with merit. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
However, your pardoning is undermined when you note that I "pile on the topic..". Maybe that has a different connotation for you, but I understand it to mean that I press an unfair advantage to give an undeserved kicking. Not quite the same as introducing the "note of sanity", is it ? So you do feel I am demonstrating anti-French bias.
As I said, there's nothing I can do about that, but it's disappointing to say the least.
Would you prefer that I say that the Brussels/Strasburg axis makes excellent sense, that what was true in the 70s remains true now ? When it is so blatantly untrue and the situation is absurd ?
But I can see your so sensitized to the subject that we are unable to discuss it reasonably here, so I'll withdraw. keep to the Fen Causeway
The French barely bother to defend Strasbourg's role, in general. It's the Germans who are the most attached to Strasbourg.
The constant harping on this topic (like the same harping on a caricatured version of expenses) is just anti-European (waste, bureaucracy, corruption, bla, bla, bla). I don't know that it is anti-French, although it might be that too. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Put it in Bruxelles and be done with it. This would make the EU more popular, especially in the Netherlands, UK and Nordic nations.
The real estate in Strasbourg could be used to create an European elite technical university, as is often proposed. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
Anyway, I'd like to throw in the city of Mariehamn into contention as the home of the EU parliament. "The basis of optimism is sheer terror" - Oscar Wilde
Plus, of course, until recently they travelled by plane where the main waste of time was probably spent hanging around in the terminal shopping on expenses. keep to the Fen Causeway
It doesn't really matter if it exists in the real world or not (does it exist?), as long as it exists in the minds of the public. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
The [Espace Léopold] complex is not the official seat of Parliament, which is the Immeuble Louise Weiss in Strasbourg, France, but as most of the other institutions of the European Union are in Brussels, Parliament built the Brussels complex in order to be closer to their activities. A majority of the Parliament's work is now geared to its Brussels site, but it is legally bound to keep Strasbourg as its official home.
The city of Strasbourg (France) is the official seat of the European Parliament. The institution is legally bound to meet there twelve sessions a year lasting about four days each, other work takes place in Brussels and Luxembourg city (see Location of European Union institutions for more information).[5][6]
