🇪🇺 Resource context (publisher & authors) This resource is a short pro-EU film titled “The EU costs you the same as Netflix – is it worth it?”, published by The Guardian and created by Dutch architects Rem Koolhaas and Stephan Petermann. It was produced to help audiences understand, through concise design and data, what EU membership delivers in practice.
Cost framed as a familiar subscription
The central comparison is financial: the film equates the monthly cost of EU membership to a Netflix subscription, citing £7.99 per month in the UK and €11.99 per month in Europe. By using a widely known consumer reference point, it aims to make the scale of EU spending feel concrete and easier to assess.
What the film says the EU funds and enables
Using figures attributed to the European Commission, the film lists multiple areas where EU budgets and programmes are presented as having measurable outcomes. Examples highlighted include investment connected to infrastructure—“15,000 miles of roads, railways and canals”—and biodiversity protection, with “1,322 species of animals and plants” referenced as being protected. The film also points to EU support for critical medical research and positions the EU as a contributor to peace.
Environment, nature, and implications for sustainable living
Among the themes explicitly referenced is protection of the environment and nature. While the film is not focused on housing, the environmental dimension is relevant to a pan-European audience interested in sustainable housing because it frames EU action as affecting shared standards and outcomes across borders (for example, the protection of ecosystems and broader sustainability goals).
Rights, regulation, and enforcement tools
The film also stresses rights and regulatory powers associated with the EU. One example mentioned is the right to access personal data held by large organisations. It additionally claims the EU has fined large companies “over £18 trillion” for manipulating prices of consumer goods, presenting this as consumer protection through competition enforcement.
Why it was made: information design and civic participation
Koolhaas is quoted explaining that the project aimed to encourage voting in European elections, especially among younger voters. The accompanying statements argue there is a shortage of “concise, understandable and appealingly designed information” about what the EU does, and that public debate often relies on simplified slogans rather than detailed argument.
Overall message and structure of benefits
The film is presented as organising its case around nine topics—power, infrastructure, nature, food, science, anti-cartel, rights, value for money and peace—using them to assemble a fact-based argument that EU membership provides tangible outputs at a relatively small monthly cost when framed per person.