Nothing. As far as I'm concerned, no-one over the age of about 11 has any business celebrating Hallowe'en (except parents of young children). So as a proud non-parent, I plan to stay at home and be glad I live in a gated block. But just in case somebody decides to buzz the gate for obnoxious kids, I shall avoid answering the door.

It has been used actually, in the mid 1990s. More recently the EP also used its power to reject an entire Commission line-up because it objected to one particular candidate.

This particular vote is non-binding, but the same is true about a lot of votes in national parliaments. You are also wrong to say that the Europarliament "[is] very weak and has limited influence"; actually it has equal power with the European Council over all EU legislation, and it has full veto pwer. For instance, MEPs rejected ACTA last year, meaning that the EU is unable to sign the treaty. It also rejected the software patents directive (remember that?) in 2005. Also because of the principle of separation of powers, MEPs are independent of both the Council and the Commission: there is no "payroll vote" as in most national parliaments, and consequently party discipline is much weaker. The situation is similar to that of US Congress; a US President cannot bank on unqualified support from Congress even when both the House and Senate are controlled by his own party. Finally the European Commission is indeed the executive branch of the EU, but it is NOT "directed by national governments": you are probably thinking of the Council, which is indeed made up of representatives of national governments. You can think of it as a kind of unelected Senate. Commissioners are appointed by national governments of each country, but once appointed they are independent of the government that appointed them.

because it's not science fiction, but political fiction. The only "futuruistic" technology mentioned is the telescreen, and that is only described in vague terms. Sure, it's a two-way communication / one-way surveillance device, but beyone that no attempt is made to describe how it's supposed to work. Everything else in the book is late 1940s technology.

Of course 1984 shouldn't be on the list, as it is not science fiction. It imagines a political dystopia, and does not go into details about the technology. In fact, apart from the "telescreens", the technology depicted in the story is crude and primitive compared to the real 1980s. 1984 is about the use of the /political/ power of a one-party state to achieve total control over people's lives.

It's also illegal in the EU, where privacy is taken very seriously. Frankly I'm shocked this is even an issue in the US; employers have no business demanding confidential personal info from employees or candidates.

Gender? Words have gender. People have sex.