The UK share of the vote in the EU Council of Ministers is 8%, down from 17% when we joined.
It has declined, but a new system based on population makes the UK's vote worth 13%. A lot of Council decisions are made by consensus after negotiation, so vote share doesn't neatly capture the UK's influence.
8%: the UK vote share in the Council, down from 17% in 1973
Vote Leave, 5 January 2016
It's correct that the formal voting weight of the UK in the important EU Council of Ministers has decreased over the years. 8% was right before a recent change in the system that pushes the UK's influence back up to around 13%.
While this is the formal position, the EU's culture encourages countries to all agree on decisions. On some issues, the rules require this.
Continent united, votes divided
One of these is what's often known as the Council of Ministers, because it's a committee of government ministers from the different member countries. Along with the European Parliament, it passes most EU law.
But the Council voting system changed from November 2014. Larger countries like the UK "are seen as the main beneficiaries of the change", according to the independent European Parliamentary Research Service.
The old system can still be used in votes up to the end of March 2017, if a country requests it.
The UK can veto some laws alone, but needs three allies to block others
Not all EU decisions affecting the UK can be passed against its wishes. Some important issues can only be decided if every country voting agrees.
These areas include foreign affairs, taxation, justice and the EU budget. If the UK is adamantly opposed to a law requiring unanimous approval, it's unlikely to make it as far as a vote.
But in other areas, majorities are enough. Under the new system for majority voting, a law has to pass two hurdles.
The UK naturally counts for only 1/28th from this point of view.
But there is a second condition: population matters. Member states representing 65% of all the people in the EU have to vote for a law before it passes.
The ability of the UK to combine with a couple of other big countries to block a law it doesn't like is made more difficult by a rider to this rule. You can get to 36% against a proposed law from just three countries, but they won't be able to block it unless joined by at least one more.
In other words, if fewer than four countries oppose or abstain on a law in the Council, it passes.
Let's say the European Commission has proposed a new law on air pollution. When it gets to the Council, Germany, Poland and the UK vote against it, but all other countries are in favour. It has 25 out of 28 votes, passing the first test, but only 64% of the votes by population. It still passes the second test, even though it hasn't hit 65%, because there are only three countries not voting for it.
But if another country joins the Nos or abstains, the law then fails. It doesn't matter which country it is, in this scenario—it could be tiny Cyprus or Malta.
We recommend playing with the EU's vote calculator to get the hang of how this works.
Traditionally, decisions are made without the need for a vote
There are a lot of reasons put forward to explain this consensus. It doesn't mean that the vote, or at least the prospect of a vote, isn't important. A lot of work goes on behind the scenes to prepare laws that everyone can support, as there's ultimately no point in pushing something to a vote when many countries oppose it.
The UK usually votes with the majority, but is now on the losing side more than any other nation
When votes are taken, the UK has recently been on the losing side more often than any other country.
It still voted on the winning side nearly 90% of the time over the past six years, according to academics at the London School of Economics.
So the UK has to accept some EU decisions that it didn't vote for.
Not every decision is equally important. The authors also point out that simply counting votes lost doesn't take into account how strongly British officials feel about them compared to the votes they won.
Can you help protect this election from the influence of bad information? Support Full Fact
This election, clear, accurate facts won’t always be a guarantee. False and harmful claims are spread every day by our public figures and media. Intentional or not, they have the power to shape the choices we make. We all deserve better than that.
That’s why we’re fighting to keep this election more honest and accountable. And we can’t do it without you. In a fast-paced campaign, our supporters mean we can hold all candidates to the same three principles: get your facts right, back them up with evidence, and correct your mistakes.
Just a small monthly donation keeps us scrutinising the most harmful false claims around the clock, and challenging the people who make them.
If you, like us, don’t want your vote to be influenced by bad information, can you help out?