> It makes sense to see if things can be improved, but any action proposed must be weighed against its downsides.

This is that. What you are seeing, repeated attempts to discuss a proposal, is the process by which the EU bureaucracy weighs the downsides. When you see it being pushed, that's evidence that some member states do not find "the correct answer" to be "no further change". That will eventually necessitate a compromise, as all things do.

> (Ab)using child sex abuse to push through surveillance overreach is particularly egregious

You are editorializing to a degree that makes it impossible to have a rational discussion with you. You HAVE to assume the best in your political adversaries, otherwise you will fail to understand them. They are not abusing anything, and they don't think it's "surveillance overreach". They believe it to be just and fair, otherwise they wouldn't propose it.

The people proposing it believe it to be to their own personal advantage. They don't necessarily believe it to be just and fair.