> It is much easier for lobbyists with deep pockets to influence policies on the continent.
I don't know what you're comparing it with (i.e. easier than what?), but in my mind one advantage of the "bureaucracy" of the EU is that you have to convince way more people to get them to execute on your wishes. You can influence a Commissioner (the Commission is indirectly elected, i.e. appointed by the member governments, which are often appointed by the majority parties in a government, which are elected), but then it also needs to be approved by Parliament (directly elected) and the Council (the governments, usually appointed by the elected majority parties). And then I assume there's also a whole bunch of roadblocks that civil servants can throw up if a plan is really inconvenient.
I don't know what you're comparing it with (i.e. easier than what?), but in my mind one advantage of the "bureaucracy" of the EU is that you have to convince way more people to get them to execute on your wishes. You can influence a Commissioner (the Commission is indirectly elected, i.e. appointed by the member governments, which are often appointed by the majority parties in a government, which are elected), but then it also needs to be approved by Parliament (directly elected) and the Council (the governments, usually appointed by the elected majority parties). And then I assume there's also a whole bunch of roadblocks that civil servants can throw up if a plan is really inconvenient.