The European Council 1-2 March 2012 trailer (= synthesis report)

The only document submitted to the European Council 1-2 March 2012, according to the relevant EUCO web page, is the annotated draft agenda (English version, dated 23 January 2012). The latest EUCO background note is for the meeting 30 January 2012.

For the public, the preparatory work by the General Affairs Council (GAC) remains hidden. Hidden or scattered is how the rest of the input from the Council configurations and others can be described as well, despite many resolutions and letters specifically addressed to EUCO.


EUCO synthesis

Few have either the time or the inclination to go out on a wild-goose chase on the broken paper trail. However, many would profit from some sort of pre-view beyond the recycled agenda items.

What should you choose, if you have time for one document only?

The following paper from the Danish presidency of the Council of the European Union fits the bill, because it brings together a number of inputs in summary fashion:

Implementation of the European Semester - Synthesis report; Brussels, 22 February 2012, Council document 6662/12 (21 pages)

In addition to the Annual Growth Survey (AGS) from the Commission, which kicked off the European Semester 2012, and the recent resolutions by the European Parliament, various Council configurations have made contributions: Economic and Financial Affairs (ECOFIN); Employment, social policy, health and consumer affairs (EPSCO); Competitiveness; Transport, Telecommunications and Energy (TTE); Environment; as well as Education, youth, culture and sport.

Even if links to the sources are not provided, the references are mostly specific enough to enable fairly easy search for those who want to dig deeper.



Ralf Grahn
speaker on EU affairs, especially digital policy and law

P.S. For better or for worse, between the global issues and the national level, the European Union institutions and the eurozone coteries shape our future. At the same time we see an emerging European online public sphere. Grahnlaw, Grahnblawg (in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish) are among the more than 900 euroblogs aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Is your blog already listed among them? Are you following the debates which matter for your future?

Growth and jobs: Denmark's EU Council presidency

Prime minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt and the rest of the Danish government presented the presidency programme Friday:

Europe at work: Programme of the Danish Presidency of the European Union 2012, 1 January to 30 June 2012 (61 pages)

The programme is available in Danish, French and German as well through the presidency web pages.


Priorities

The government of Denmark offers four wide headings as its priorities for the first six months of 2012:

* A responsible Europe
* A dynamic Europe
* A green Europe
* A safe Europe

The introduction presents the themes in a nutshell (pages 4-6), with more detail added for each of them in the general part of the programme (pages 7-22).

I already commented in Swedish (Grahnblawg) on A responsible Europe facing the financial and economic crises in the euro area.

After the macroeconomic section, in this blog post I turn to the second prioroity A dynamic Europe, on pages 10-14.


A dynamic Europe

The catchwords are growth and jobs, and the means include revitalising the single market (the Single Market Act). The reform of the European patent system is mentioned as a concrete measure. A digital single market requires a number of actions.

The Danish government underlines the social dimension(s) of the single market. Simplified rules for public procurement, effective standardisation, as well as better framework conditions for companies and consumers are outlined, together with an internal market for energy.

The next generation of EU programmes for education, research and innovation is treated under the headline A competitive single market for knowledge, which includes the programme Horizon 2020.

Social aspects regarding mobile workers and eHealth have already brought some Danish nuances to the fore, and the same can be seen in relation to the subheading Sustainable growth and development throughout the EU, which gravitates around cohesion policy as an important part of the next long term budget (Multiannual Financial Framework).

The programme takes account of the European Year for Active Ageing and Solidarity between Generations (2012), discussing the health of older people as well as their participation in the labour market. Gender equality and labour market flexibility can be seen as Danish highlights.

Denmark wants to see fewer boys dropping out of school and more young women enrolling in education programmes in growth areas. Legal immigration of qualified labour is seen as essential for the future, as is freer movement for services and workers within the EU.

The programme aims at promoting external trade with the EU neighbourhood and other countries.


Comments

The Danish presidency programme is very much in line with the purposes of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (although the EU2020 strategy is explicitly named just a few times).

Most Council presidencies have mentioned knowledge, social aspects, labour market flexibility, gender equality, sustainable growth etc., but my feeling is that these are among the areas where the government of Denmark wants to export some of its ideas, solutions and experiences to the European Union as a whole.

Denmark's combination of competitiveness, equality and functioning institutions make it one of the success stories in the light of international comparisons, so most EU countries could profit.

All in all, despite some emphasis with country colouring, the Danish presidency programme gives the impression of being quite mainstream: an honest broker diligently carrying the torch for a period of six months.


Media

Perhaps the next priority, A green Europe, goes a bit beyond that, as the Espacio de Ideas blog by Pau Solanilla comments (in Spanish).

The CTA Brussels Office Blog has reported briefly on the priorities and the Open Europe blog has compared the (slim) presidency budget with others.

On the European Voice, Simon Taylor offered some background to the Danish EU Council presidency: a country outside the eurozone and a government from the left.

If we believe that ”no news is good news”, we can conclude that the Danish presidency has caused few ripples in media dedicated to European affairs. Perhaps Danish design evokes sinister plots much less than it does sleek form and function.



Ralf Grahn

Hungarian EU Council presidency: Small but telling signs?

The holders of the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union (Wikipedia) have not contributed only to the great events and mundane work of European integration, but the main developments are reflected in more intimate details.

Traditionally, the presidency appeared on the web in the form eu-year-national top level domain, such as www.eu2009.cz (although France could be counted on to use the inverted ue characteristic of French and other Romance languages).

Even back then, although the member state in question tended to be forgetful, it was not the EU President but the president (chair) of the Council (configurations).


Sweden

Sweden was the last member state to begin its EU Council presidency under the Treaty of Nice, chairing the European Council summits and the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) in addition to the other Council configurations.

The Swedish government added a small, but nice touch, by profiling its competent presidency under the EU top level domain: www.se2009.eu


Presidency trios

The Treaty of Lisbon, which finally entered into force on 1 December 2009, enshrined and tried to boost the principle of presidency trios in order to promote continuity and consistency in the work of the Council.

If you are interested, you find the references back to the Lisbon Treaty in the decision adopted:

EUROPEAN COUNCIL DECISION 2009/881/EU of 1 December 2009 on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council (OJEU 2.12.2009 L 315/50)

Article 1 provides for the 18 month trio (officially, group) and its common programme:

Article 1

1. The Presidency of the Council, with the exception of the Foreign Affairs configuration, shall be held by pre-established groups of three Member States for a period of 18 months. The groups shall be made up on a basis of equal rotation among the Member States, taking into account their diversity and geographical balance within the Union.

2. Each member of the group shall in turn chair for a six-month period all configurations of the Council, with the exception of the Foreign Affairs configuration. The other members of the group shall assist the Chair in all its responsibilities on the basis of a common programme. Members of the team may decide alternative arrangements among themselves.

(Worth noticing are the provisions on the Coreper and FAC and other preparatory external action bodies, as well as the noble intentions to strengthen the fledgling General Affairs Council GAC, which in spite of this still today looks like an additional habitat for foreign ministers.)


EU Trio ES-BE-HU

Spain did not know very much in advance before assuming the presidency that the Lisbon Treaty would be in force, and the Spanish government had some difficulties in adapting to the more modest role of the new presidency of the Council, so we find the website at the old style address: www.eu2010.es

However, the Spanish government did use the eutrio logo extensively.

There was (and is) a joint programme for the work of the ES-BE-HU presidency trio, although officially it is still called a draft and it has not, to my knowledge, been printed in a more glossy form like the individual six month work programmes:

[Draft] 18 month programme of the Council (27 November 2009, document 16771/10)

Belgium seems to have been the main protagonist of team spirit, producing web pages for the Trio of Presidencies of the Council of the European Union and profiling itself as a part of the team: www.eutrio.be

The Belgian presidency offered us the following explanation about the logo:

Each version of the logo assumes the colours of the country's flag, but the addition of the word “trio” as an exponent denotes the solidarity between the three countries.

Hungary

As I wrote before, the government of Belgium showed team spirit by using the www.eutrio.be web address and the #EuTrioBe hashtag on Twitter, in: Belgian EU Council presidency legacy (6 January 2011).

The last thing the Belgian presidency did on its web page www.eutrio.be was to hand the presidency over to www.eutrio.hu

If the take-off was European, the landing is Hungarian. You arrive at: www.eu2011.hu

You find the Hungarian part of the common logo displayed all over the place, but without references to the trio. The web address is distinctly from the past.

Pure coincidence or tell-tale sign? Was team spirit a six month flash in the pan? Are we back at the spirit of the Nice Treaty in A.D. 2011 and beyond?



Ralf Grahn



P.S. ” Hongrie 2011 : Une présidence de trop ? ” asked the French euroblogger Cédric Puisney in the latest post on his blog Un européen jamais content, although I would be happy to se him post more often. (Combine improving knowledge and language skills by reading Euroblogs.)

EPP president Wilfried Martens versus Free Press for Hungary

A short while ago 2,129 persons had already joined the new Facebook group Free Press For Hungary. International Version.

Established earlier, the Hungarian version had attracted 54,834 supporters against the authoritarian media law of the government of Viktor Orban.

There are many convincing media reports and blog posts about the essentials of the Hungarian censorship law, but translations into English and other EU languages would be most welcome for those who want to study the legislation in detail.


EPP ”dominant position”

The European People's Party likes to remind editors of its importance:

The EPP is the largest and most influential European-level political party of the centre-right, which currently includes 73 member-parties from 39 countries, the Presidents of the Commission, Council, and Parliament, 14 EU and 6 non-EU heads of state and government, 13 members of the European Commission and the largest Group in the European Parliament.

Update 2, 5 January 2011: Actually even this note is too modest. If the president of the Council means the rotating presidency, now held by EPP member party Fidesz in the Hungarian government of Viktor Orban, the text forgets to mention the president of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy.


From EU competition law and policy we know the concept ”abuse of a dominant position”.

We have seen all too many examples of cronyism, turning a blind eye and abdication of responsiblity from the EPP in various situations.

This is why we have to ask: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


Top down reform

The real low water mark internationally was recorded by the EPP chairman Wilfried Martens who actively lauded the Hungarian media (censorship) law as an improvement ”with the aim to strengthen the freedom of the press, the culture of respect, the protection of minors and human dignity”.

I would like to see the biggest Europarty, the European People's Party, taking the greatest responsibility for our basic values, but instead I realise the need for a crash course from the top down concerning the European Convention on Human Rigths (ECHR), the founding values of the European Union (Article 2 TEU), the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rigths of the European Union (Article 6 TEU) and the process to start determining a serious breach of the founding values (Article 7 TEU).

They are the cornerstones of European integration and for the citizens of the European Union, and they should be for the EPP (otherwise it is ineligible for Europarty funds).

Perhaps EU citizens could tweet @MartensEPP before his Europarty has become even more discredited.

I am not against the European People's Party. On the contrary, I want a better EPP and a better EU for voters, citizens and businesses of the European Union. Taking a principled approach is the only salvation from the current morass.


Update 5 January 2011: Thanks to Andreas Müllerleile who pointed out an English translation of the Hungarian Act on Media Services and Mass Media (about 200 pages).



Ralf Grahn


P.S. Despite the diminished stature of the presidency of the Council of the European Union, the government of Hungary has deservedly gained an astonishing amount of visibility in a few days, as seen on the front page of Bloggingportal.eu, the multiligual aggregator of 729 Euroblogs. Should we congratulate PM Orban on the achievement?

Help EPP group leader Joseph Daul defend media freedom

The leader of the European People's Party group in the European Parliament had this to say on Facebook with regard to fundamental rights of EU citizens, especially the Hungarian media law:

Let's see what the Commission says after it has examined the law. You remember the Roma case ? The Commission concluded that there was no breach of Eau law. But very few reported about that decision. So if this law contains dispositions contrary to EU law or international conventions, it will be changed. Let's see. But don't be naive: it is not purely because of their preoccupation for the rights of the media that socialists, liberals and greens atrack an EPP government.

Selective memory

Despite the conspicuous lack of support for the Commission, with regard to the Roma issue, Daul forgot to mention that the European Commission dropped the threat of infringement procedures after the French government submitted detailed documentation to the Commission, including draft legislative measures and a credible calendar for putting the procedural safeguards required under the EU's Free Movement Directive into French legislation by early 2011. When the demolition instruction to target Roma camps had leaked, the government had hastened to change it. France is still under Commission scrutiny.


Party political arguments - whose?

Scores of media reports and blog posts about the contents of the Hungarian gag law have seemed unequivocal enough to allow for clear condemnation long before now.

How much is still unclear after an article such as Slugger O'Toole ”Draconian press laws in the EU's new Presidency” (1 January 2011)?

Is it possible, in good faith, to avoid the impression that Daul is procrastinating or worse?

I feel offended when Daul equates criticism of the Hungarian censorship law with party political schemes to discredit an EPP government. I try to base my evaluation of the actions of the EU institutions and political actors on principles, primarily the interests of the citizens of the EU.

If various Europarties come out differently, it is not necessarily my fault.

I hope that I could see the EPP as an active protagonist for free speech, but I wonder if Daul's argument can be seen to be exempt from party political bias and cronyism. (Various Hungarian government representatives have dismissed criticism as party politically motivated.)

For me the European Convention on Human Rigths (ECHR), the founding values of the European Union (Article 2 TEU), the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rigths of the European Union (Article 6 TEU) and the process to determine a serious breach of the founding values (Article 7 TEU) are the cornerstones of European integration and for the citizens of the European Union.

I would like to see the biggest Europarty, the EPP, taking the greatest responsibility for our basic values.

Dear readers, even if we are aware of the troubled history of the rule of law in France regarding freedom from political interference, please enlighten EPP group leader Joseph Daul about founding principles, non-discrimination and fundamental rights, as if the EU was intended to serve its citizens first.


Non-discrimination

Since the Treaty of Rome (1957), any discrimination on grounds of nationality is prohibited (now Article 18 TFEU).

Time enough for the basic principle of non-discrimination to sink in, methinks.

The Hungarian government of Viktor Orban is under fire for a number of controversial policies, including Commission scrutiny for alleged discrimination. According to the Wall Street Journal, thirteen large companies from France (Daul's country of origin, a founding member of the EEC), Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic complained to the EU Commission, saying Hungary is targeting "select sectors and foreign companies in particular, to balance the state budget."

You can comment on this blog, tweet @JosephDaul or comment on Daul's new year wishes on Facebook for 2011 to become a better year.



Ralf Grahn


P.S. The Swedish MEP Gunnar Hökmark has shown that high profile EPP members can take a principled approach, as he has done in his blog posts ”Det blev ett nytt år – om Ungern, Estland och Sarkozy” with regard to the media law and ”Dåliga signaler från EU:s ordförandeland” concerning discrimination. Respect.

Project Europe 2030: Three stations to oblivion or Europa rediviva?

The first station was the handing over.



On 8 May 2010, the chairman of the EU Reflection Group, Felipe González delivered the report by the Reflection Group the European Council had appointed in December 2007: Project Europe 2030.




President Herman Van Rompuy received the report on behalf of the European Council.



Distributing the report

The second stopping place was that the Reflection Group report was distributed to the heads of state or government:



Project Europe 2030 - Challenges and Opportunities 10559/1/10 REV 1



Ahead of the European Council meeting 17 June 2010, which was going to hear a presentation by González, I wondered if the report was going to get more than a kind nod before being dispatched to the burial ground for high level EU reports, the archives.



European Council conclusions




The third station of the itinerary is pictured in the conclusions of the European Council 17 June 2010 (document EUCO 13/10).

Under Other issues (point 22, on page 9), the heads of state or government used a minimalist formula to acknowledge the 18 month work of twelve Europeans of stature:

22. The European Council expresses its appreciation for the work achieved by the Reflection Group. The Group's report on "Project Europe 2030 - Challenges and Opportunities" will provide useful input for the European Union's work in the future.

Useful input?

How is Project Europe 2030 going to provide “useful input”, or has it already entered afterlife?

Let us turn to the latest programme document for the future work of the Council of the European Union:



Programme of the Belgian Presidency of the EU Council


Seek, and you shall not find any mention of the Reflection Group or Project Europe 2030.


Requiescat in pace?



Resurrection?

Even if the European leaders seem to have inscribed the epitaph and sent Project Europe 2030 into limbo, there remains the hope of resurrection.

All the member state governments are busy preparing their macroeconomic stability or convergence programmes, synchronised with the national reform programmes (NRPs), in the framework of the Europe 2020 strategy and the integrated guidelines for economic and employment reform policies.

If ministry officials, national politicians, business groups, unions and EU cohesion policy project hosts keep the Europe 2030 report at hand as a guiding document, the work of the Reflection Group may bear some fruit.

Europa rediviva?




Ralf Grahn

Belgium’s EU Council presidency website: First impressions

Euroblogger Julien Frisch noted the fresh look of the website of the Council of the European Union, redesigned in a manner similar to the new web pages of the European Council. Julien liked the look, but essentially the navigability had not improved that much. I agree with his remarks:

I want to click on the Agriculture Council and find all meeting documents, news, photos etc. (including the work of the Working Parties) available instead of having to search for them with a lot of efforts in the Council document register.

Speaking about the register that is linked under "Documents" in the main menu, I'd recommend that you don't need to click through four links until you actually can search for documents. Why not having a search right after clicking on "Documents"?

Lacomeuropeenne.fr, officially Se former à la communication européenne, has analysed (in French) various aspects of how the EU institutions communicate. A few days ago, they assessed the European Commission’s Internet Providers Guide (IPG), the Internet handbook for webmasters, editors, content providers, web developers and contractors, as well as others who publish material on EU websites. After a detailed study, they concluded that there is a deep gap between the recommendations the Commission gives to officials and the advice of social media experts .



Two days ago, Lacomeuropeenne made a quick audit of the usability of new Council website. Despite some signs of progress, there were still confusing aspects and the experiences of users are needed for more definitive conclusions.

Both assessments noted the lack of interactive, user-friendly features.



Belgium’s presidency website




Outwardly the newly launched website of the Belgian presidency of the Council of the European Union is like a sister or brother to the site of the European Council and the redesigned web pages of the Council.

It is clear, well ordered and pleasing to the eye.

A few days before the start of the Belgian presidency, on 1 July 2010, there is mainly basic material to test on, so user experiences will mainly have to be deferred.

A few impressions, though.



If you look, you are able to locate the 18 month programme and the Belgian six month programme.




In my opinion, the Swedish presidency had the best website to date, and they started to interact with users of social media and to monitor blogs. How about the Belgian presidency?

There is not much in the line of interactivity. A poll deep down on the front page asks:

Did you know that Belgium was to take upon the rotating Presidency of the EU on the 1st of July?

I would not expect people to find the Belgian presidency pages without knowing what to look for, but potentially the polls can be used for less inane purposes.



It may be that I lack technical savvy, but I do not know why the EU institutions and presidencies insist on speaking about feed burners but fail to clearly tell us the actual feed URLs, especially ones that actually work.

Test for instance:


http://www.eutrio.be/media/feed ?

http://www.eutrio.be/rss ?


After a process of trial and error, I was finally able to find a feed for my blog.

Somewhere there was an oblique promise of a blog to come (with the potential for interactive use), but I failed to locate it when I visited the website again.




The page on Logo and guidelines fails to make a distinction between official use and use by others of different graphic designs, without wading through a detailed graphic charter or asking for permission.

I would imagine that the Belgian government (if there is one) would be pleased to see its banner all over the place, but public institutions almost always seem to be obsessed by potential abuse and to end up with less than clear and inviting policies.

Is a newspaper or a blogger allowed to use the banner (and other material) freely?

It would be simple to give a clear answer up front, without sending people off to chase wild geese. Now the difference between official and other use is quite unclear.


Only the coming six months will tell if the quality of information is going to improve under the Belgian presidency, after the obvious lapse during the Spanish semester.


I hope that Julien Frisch, Lacomeuropeenne and others more expert in web communications than I, offer their views and user experiences of the Belgian presidency pages. There are still six months to make improvements, if there is a need.

Naturally, it would also require the right kind of attitude.





Ralf Grahn

EU Council presidency primer - Belgium’s website launched

With less than a week to go to the beginning of July, Belgium yesterday launched the website of the Belgian Presidency of the EU Council.


This is primarily a primer or background note on matters relating to the Council presidency under the Lisbon Treaty.



Slimmer presidency


The presidency is still held on the basis of equal rotation (Article 16(9) TEU). If we want to be exact, it is not the presidency of the Council, but of Council configurations other than that of foreign affairs.

The Treaty of Lisbon has limited the scope of the presidency in two respects:

1) The European Council has a full time president (now Herman Van Rompuy), elected for two and a half years according to Article 15(5) TEU.

2) According to Article 18(3) TEU the high representative for foreign affairs and security policy (now Catherine Ashton) presides over the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC).



Presidency trio


According to Article 236(b) TFEU the European Council adopts by qualified majority a decision on the presidency of Council configurations, other than that of foreign affairs.

When the Lisbon Treaty entered into force, the European Council adopted such a decision:




EUROPEAN COUNCIL DECISION 2009/881/EU of 1 December 2009 on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council; OJEU 2.12.2009 L 315/50


Article 1 of the decision lays down the principles of presidency trios and a common programme, both intended to improve continuity (although in practice the system had been introduced earlier):

Article 1

1. The Presidency of the Council, with the exception of the Foreign Affairs configuration, shall be held by pre-established groups of three Member States for a period of 18 months. The groups shall be made up on a basis of equal rotation among the Member States, taking into account their diversity and geographical balance within the Union.

2. Each member of the group shall in turn chair for a six-month period all configurations of the Council, with the exception of the Foreign Affairs configuration. The other members of the group shall assist the Chair in all its responsibilities on the basis of a common programme. Members of the team may decide alternative arrangements among themselves.

What still makes the presidency a big circus appears from the next provision.

The responsibility to chair the Council configurations is not limited to the formal meetings of ministers in the Council. According to Article 2, it entails chairing the (weekly) meetings of the ambassadors and their deputies (Coreper) as well as the preparatory bodies of various Council configurations (with the exception of the Political and Security Committee and expressly made exceptions).


The intended coordinating role of the General Affairs Council (GAC) is stated in Article 3.



Exercising the presidency


An implementing decision sheds more light on the order of the presidency trios until 2020, the chairing of the preparatory bodies of the FAC, and the chairing of the other Council preparatory bodies (fixed chairs):





COUNCIL DECISION 2009/908/EU of 1 December 2009 laying down measures for the implementation of the European Council Decision on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council, and on the chairmanship of preparatory bodies of the Council; OJEU 9.12.2009 L 322/28



Current presidency trio


Spain during the first half of 2010, soon Belgium from July to December and thereafter Hungary during the first six months of 2011. These EU member states constitute the current 18 month presidency trio responsible for chairing the Council of the European Union.





The 18 month programme of the Spanish, Belgian and Hungarian presidencies is still available.



Council work


More information on the work of the Council is found in the Rules of Procedure (see Annex), which have been adapted to the Lisbon Treaty:




COUNCIL DECISION 2009/937/EU of 1 December 2009 adopting the Council's Rules of Procedure (consolidated version)



Council configurations


Annexed to the Council’s Rules of Procedure, we find a list of Council configurations. Nine of them are expected to be chaired by the rotating presidency, but the trio can agree to share responsibilities:


1. General affairs;
2. Foreign affairs (chaired by the high representative);
3. Economic and financial affairs (including the EU budget);
4. Justice and home affairs (including civil protection);
5. Employment, social policy, health and consumer affairs;
6. Competitiveness (internal market, industry and research) (including tourism);
7. Transport, telecommunications and energy;
8. Agriculture and fisheries;
9. Environment;
10. Education, youth and culture (including audiovisual affairs).



List of preparatory bodies


The list of preparatory bodies (16 pages) published by the General secretariat offers additional information about the variety of areas where experts from the member states lay the groundwork for the formal Council meetings, which are only the tip of the iceberg:



List of Council preparatory bodies; Brussels, 11 February 2010, document 5869/1/10 REV 1



Belgium’s presidency programme



The programme of the Belgian Presidency of the EU Council (52 pages) offers an updated view of the EU Council’s work during the coming months.



News feed on Grahnlaw


Grahnlaw has added a news feed in the right hand margin. Scroll down until you find the headline www.eutrio.be




Ralf Grahn

Report on Sweden’s EU Council Presidency

The Swedish government has published a report on its presidency of the Council of the European Union during the second half of 2009 (in Swedish):



Regeringens skrivelse 2009/10:174 Redogörelse för det svenska ordförandeskapet i Europeiska unionens råd andra halvåret 2009 (31 March 2010; 69 pages).

This special report describes how the Swedish government prepared for the presidency and how it was put into practice. The main achievements are noted, as well as the costs.

Even if Sweden handled the last EU Council presidency under the old Nice Treaty rules, the report is valuable for future presidencies and students of EU politics. For instance, the text on Sweden’s successful web communications is worth noting.




General Reports



With pictures, charts and graphic design, the European Commission’s General Report on the Activities of the European Union 2009 has become shorter and lighter than its predecessors (132 pages), and the monthly Bulletin has been discontinued.

There are, of course, a plethora of special reports and news pages, but for a comprehensive view of the main events in the European Union, few beat the traditional annual general report of the Swedish government:



Regeringens skrivelse 2009/10:150 Berättelse om verksamheten i Europeiska unionen under 2009 (410 pages).

The Swedish annual report has become an even more valuable resource for those who know enough of a Nordic language to be able to read Swedish.



Ralf Grahn

EU Lisbon Treaty implementation: Presidency of the Council

Article 16(9) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), as amended by the Lisbon Treaty, lays down that the presidency of the Council configurations is held by member state representatives (ministers) in the Council on the basis of equal rotation. (The Foreign Affairs Council is the exception, chaired by the high representative.)

Article 236 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) informs us that the European Council decides, by qualified majority, a decision on the Council figurations and a decision on the presidency of these configurations (except the Foreign Affairs Council).



We mentioned the decision on the Council configurations in an earlier post. Now we look how the presidency is supposed to function under the Lisbon Treaty.

Conveniently, the EU member states had agreed on a joint declaration (9) annexed to the treaty, with a draft decision waiting for the Lisbon Treaty to enter into force (OJEU 9.5.2008 C 115/341). This decision was then adopted by the European Council on the first day the reform treaty was in force:




EUROPEAN COUNCIL DECISION of 1 December 2009 on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council (2009/881/EU), published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU 2.12.2009 L 315/50).


Trio presidency


Article 1 of enshrines the so called trio presidencies, 18 months with a common programme, divided into three six month presidencies. The rotating presidency country chairs all the Council configurations (except the FAC), if the team members have not decided on alternative arrangements:

1. The Presidency of the Council, with the exception of the Foreign Affairs configuration, shall be held by pre-established groups of three Member States for a period of 18 months. The groups shall be made up on a basis of equal rotation among the Member States, taking into account their diversity and geographical balance within the Union.

2. Each member of the group shall in turn chair for a six-month period all configurations of the Council, with the exception of the Foreign Affairs configuration. The other members of the group shall assist the Chair in all its responsibilities on the basis of a common programme. Members of the team may decide alternative arrangements among themselves.

Coreper & preparatory bodies



Article 2 tells us that the country chairing the coordinating GAC also chairs Coreper. Preparatory bodies follow the chair of the Council configuration (except FAC).

The HR’s representative chairs the important PSC:

The Committee of Permanent Representatives of the Governments of the Member States shall be chaired by a representative of the Member State chairing the General Affairs Council. The Chair of the Political and Security Committee shall be held by a representative of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. The chair of the preparatory bodies of the various Council configurations, with the exception of the Foreign Affairs configuration, shall fall to the member of the group chairing the relevant configuration, unless decided otherwise in accordance with Article 4.

General Affairs Council (GAC)


Article 3 underlines the need for consistency and continuity through the GAC:

The General Affairs Council shall ensure consistency and continuity in the work of the different Council configurations in the framework of multiannual programmes in cooperation with the Commission. The Member States holding the Presidency shall take all necessary measures for the organisation and smooth operation of the Council's work, with the assistance of the General Secretariat of the Council.

Implementing decision

According to Article 4, the Council adopts an implementing decision:

The Council shall adopt a decision establishing the measures for the implementation of this decision

.




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Do you find EUSSR myths fascinating? Are we EU citizens worth a better European Union? Educate yourself! Growing, multilingual Bloggingportal.eu now aggregates 494 euroblogs, representing both national viewpoints and pan-European angles.

You can access all the posts on the Posts page or concentrate on the editors’ choice of articles on the Home page. On most of the blogs you can comment and discuss our common European future.

Blogs on EU affairs and European themes, by associations, networks or individuals, can join Bloggingportal.eu. Gain visibility, credibility and readers by proposing a new blog!

EU Council configurations (Lisbon Treaty implementation)

With the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the European Council formally became an institution of the European Union (Article 13(1) TEU; Article 15 TEU), and the treaty enshrines two new Council configurations: the General Affairs Council (GAC) and the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC), which replace the former General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC).

According to Article 16(6) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), the Council shall meet in different configurations, the list of which shall be adopted in accordance with Article 236 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), namely by the European Council.

A temporary list of these other Council configurations has now been adopted by the Council and published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU 2.12.2009 L 315/46):



DECISION OF THE COUNCIL (GENERAL AFFAIRS) of 1 December 2009 establishing the list of Council configurations in addition to those referred to in the second and third subparagraphs of Article 16(6) of the Treaty on European Union (2009/878/EU)


List of Council configurations

The list is published in the Annex to the decision, together with explanatory notes, which I have joined:


1. General affairs
This configuration is established by Article 16(6), second subparagraph, of the Treaty on European Union.


2. Foreign affairs
This configuration is established by Article 16(6), third subparagraph, of the Treaty on European Union.


3. Economic and financial affairs
Including budget.


4. Justice and home affairs
Including civil protection.


5. Employment, social policy, health and consumer affairs


6. Competitiveness (internal market, industry and research)
Including tourism.


7. Transport, telecommunications and energy


8. Agriculture and fisheries


9. Environment


10. Education, youth and culture
Including audiovisual affairs.


***

Extraordinary rush



The Swedish presidency of the EU Council has had and still has a heavy load of Council meetings leading up to the European Council on 10 to 11 December 2009. In addition to the ordinary rush, many of the substantive decisions are coloured by the Lisbon Treaty (and the new Commission in waiting), and a number of implementing decisions are needed to get the Lisbon Treaty up and running (such as the one above).

Despite the challenges, the Swedish presidency has generally managed to inform the public more fully and by more versatile means than any preceding Council presidency. As far as I can assess, the Swedish presidency has handled the substantial dossiers with a high degree of professionalism, including the uncertainties surrounding the Irish 2009 Lisbon referendum and the Czech constitutional crisis delaying the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. Chapeau !




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Do you find EUSSR myths fascinating? Are we EU citizens worth a better European Union? Educate yourself! There are already 488 Euroblogs aggregated on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. You can access all the posts on the Posts page or concentrate on the editors’ choice of articles on the Home page. On most of the blogs you can comment and discuss our common European future.

EU & USA: SWIFT agreement ─ Sweden “informs”

Yesterday, in the blog post SWIFTly signed – Long term damage? (Updated), I criticised the Swedish EU Council presidency for acting against its proclaimed principles of openness, transparency and accessibility with regard to the proposed bank data transfer deal with the United States of America.

Important as the fight against terrorism is, expediency should not override democratic scrutiny and open debate, when fundamental rights are at stake.

Have matters improved since early Friday afternoon?

Actually, Friday brought some improvements, but left the fate of the SWIFT agreement between the EU and the US hanging in the air.


Presidency and Council information



During Friday, the Swedish presidency of the Council of the European Union published information about the Council meeting Monday 30 November 2009, Justice and Home Affairs configuration: Stockholm Programme and work to combat human trafficking at Council meeting. The general press release highlights “some of the issues”, but not the SWIFT agreement.



The provisional agenda of the JHA Council meeting (dated 13 November 2009; document CM 4735/09) still mentions the bank data transfer agreement, without any reference to documents of substantive value:

“Council Decision authorising the signing of an Agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on the processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Programme
- Adoption”

Understandably, the short pre-meeting video with ambassador Christian Danielsson on preparation in Coreper II concentrates on the strategically important five year Stockholm Programme, which covers the whole of the evolving area of freedom, security and justice, but the interview makes no mention of the SWIFT deal.



The Background note on the Justice and Home Affairs Council 30 November to 1 December 2009, by the Council Press service (dated 27 November 2009), breaks the silence by mentioning the US agreement among the highlighted questions (front page):

“Ministers will also discuss a draft EU-US agreement on financial messaging data for counterterrorism investigations.”

Under Home Affairs (Monday, 30 November), the background note presents the following general information about the financial data transfer agreement (page 5):

“EU-US agreement on financial messaging data for counter-terrorism investigations

The Council will discuss an EU-US agreement on the processing and transfer of financial messaging data for purposes of the US Terrorist Finance Tracking Programme (TFTP).

The negotiations on the agreement started in July 2009 and responded to a decision by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) to store its European financial messaging data no longer in a database located in the US, but only in Europe. The agreement aims to continue to allow the US Department of the Treasury to receive European financial messaging data for counter-terrorism investigations, while ensuring an adequate level of data protection.

Under the Terrorist Finance Tracking Programme (TFTP), the US Department of the Treasury seeks to identify, track and pursue suspected terrorists and their providers of finance. It was set up shortly after the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001.

Relevant results of the US analysis have been and will, under the draft agreement, continue to be shared with EU member states. A report by the former French investigating judge Jean-Luis Brugière, commissioned by the Commission, concluded in December 2008 that the TFTP had generated considerable intelligence value also to the EU member states.

SWIFT is a Belgium-based company which operates a worldwide messaging system used to transmit, inter alia, bank transaction information. It has been estimated that SWIFT handles 80% of the worldwide traffic for electronic value transfers.”

***


Where do we stand?


We note that the background note Friday says “discuss a draft”, not “sign” or “approve”. Does this mean that concluding the agreement is off the agenda Monday, and that the governments are going to give the EU’s data protection rules and parliamentary procedures some serious thought?

We also note that the information on offer – although a huge improvement on past practice – is bland, incomplete and one-sided. Privacy, data protection or fundamental rights are not mentioned, but valuable intelligence is. There are no documentary references to enlighten debate.




The SWIFT agreement is not among the issues debated publicly on the JHA webcast Monday 30 November 2009.

The fight against terrorism is too important to spoil by shady dealings and sowing mistrust in an EU on the threshold of becoming a union, “in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen”.

Admittedly, proceedings behind closed doors have created a problem with the end of the year approaching fast. Still, I am reasonably optimistic that, given the opportunity, the European Parliament would do its bit to look for temporary solution if the Council agrees to trust our system of representative democracy.




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Do you find EUSSR myths fascinating? Are we EU citizens worth a better European Union? Educate yourself! There are already 487 Euroblogs aggregated on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. You can access all the posts or concentrate on the editors’ choice. On most of the blogs you can comment and discuss our common European future.

Spain: Presidency of the EU Council 2010

“The Presidency of Council configurations, other than of Foreign Affairs, shall be held by Member State representatives in the Council on the basis of equal rotation, …” says Article 16(9) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Lisbon Treaty. The European Council, where the heads of state or government meet, has its own President – Herman Van Rompuy – under the Lisbon Treaty.


In other words, from the beginning of 2010 the formula “Presidency of the European Union” is even less correct than during the Swedish EU Council Presidency.



By the looks of it, Spain is not about to be more modest than the current presidency, or more exact. That is the impression one gets as a reader of the information material published by the Spanish prime minister’s office on the upcoming turn for Spain during the first half of 2010: Rodríguez Zapatero avanza que la Presidencia española de la UE va a ser "transformadora", "exigente y comprometida" (12 February 2009). The same press information (minus a few links) in English here.

Or should we forgive them because nobody was sure that the Lisbon Treaty would enter into force by the end of 2009?

Trio presidency



Actually, Spain is the first country of the presidency trio, to be followed by Belgium and Hungary during an 18 month period.



A draft programme from last summer of the presidency trio Spain-Belgium-Hungary has been posted on the web.



Real Instituto Elcano

Tomorrow and the day after TEPSA and the Spanish think tank Real Instituto Elcano arrange a conference on the Spanish presidency 2010: New Rules for a Closer Union in a Multipolar World, a Renewed Impetus for Sustainable Growth in a Globalised Economy; in Madrid 26 to 27 November 2009.

Growth and employment, enlargement, energy and the Mediterranean are on the programme of the conference.


Real Instituto Elcano has recently published several papers on previous EU Council presidencies and on themes of interest during the Spanish (and trio) presidency: the enlargement challenge of Iceland, the Czech and the Swedish presidencies, a European immigration policy, irregular immigration, Turkey’s accession, EU relations with Switzerland and Swiss participation in foreign policy missions.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Do you find EUSSR myths fascinating? Are we EU citizens worth a better European Union? Read some or all of the 481 Euroblogs aggregated on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. On most of the blogs you can comment and discuss our common European future.

EU: Swedish presidency & Lisbon Treaty implementation

First the good news: With regard to communication, the Swedish presidency of the Council of the European Union is generally the most versatile and modern of rotating EU Council presidencies I can remember. Prime minister Fredrik Reinfeldt has handled the main press conferences in a professional manner, and foreign minister Carl Bildt and EU minister Cecilia Malmström have blogged about events beyond the call of duty.

The Swedish presidency has nudged the EU forward on important policy issues, like climate change, and it served as midwife to the top appointments under the Lisbon Treaty, with Herman Van Rompuy as the first president of the European Council and Catherine Ashton as the “double-hatted” high representative for foreign affairs and security policy and vice-president of the EU Commission (to be confirmed). Naturally, the Swedish government shares in the burden of proof that these appointments turn out to be wiser than many underwhelmed commentators have anticipated.

On the other hand, the Lisbon Treaty enters into force in little more than a week, on 1 December 2009. The amending treaty requires a number of implementing decisions by the EU institutions, but only the European Parliament has prepared and debated these issues in a systematic manner (although it could improve its presentation by presenting all the questions as a whole, both for the general public and for more serious students).

Peruse the Swedish presidency web pages, and you find few indications of preparation for the Lisbon Treaty or items with proposals for public debate. These issues should now be tackled in an open and systematic manner, and they should be visibly and comprehensively presented. Both political and legal aspects need clarifications.

The nominations for the new top jobs gave us a prime example of how intergovernmental cooperation works (and its outcomes), but it is now high time to move on to the union in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Do you find EUSSR myths fascinating? Are we EU citizens worth a better European Union? Read some or all of the 481 Euroblogs aggregated on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu, and discuss our common European future.

Swedish EU Council Presidency explains the Lisbon Treaty

The Swedish Presidency of the Council of the European Union calmly explains what the Lisbon Treaty is about and what is at stake for the EU.

The tone is factual, the text is easy to read and it is less than a page.


Ralf Grahn

Swedish openness and Lisbon Treaty

Preparing the implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon, in case it enters into force, is going to be a real test for the vaunted openness of the Swedish Presidency of the Council of the European Union.

There are important new posts to fill: the President of the European Council, the High Representative of the EU for foreign affairs and security policy (and Vice-President of the Commission) and the Secretary-General of the Council. In addition, the next President of the Commission needs to be nominated officially, as well as the members of the European Commission.

(The European Parliament seems to have decided on its Presidents for the next five years without bothering with public discussion of engaging the EU citizens.)

In addition to the candidacies and nominations, decisions are needed on the tasks and benefits of the new offices. Preparation is needed for implementing decisions, including new or adapted Rules of Procedure for the Council.

With the exception of a few ‘ad hoc’ decisions by the European Council on the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty (Irish guarantees, composition of the European Parliament etc.) no progress report has surfaced since the Slovenian Council Presidency and no proposals have been tabled for public discussion.

There have been no open nominations of candidates for the new top jobs and consequently no real public discussion about their merits (only speculation fueled by leaks).

The Government of Sweden has a golden opportunity to open up the procedures to the public and to engage in real discussion about the coming proposals, breaking with the catastrophic habit of stitch-ups behind closed doors.

The citizens of the European Union have a right to expect something better than the old ways from the Swedish Council Presidency, which already has managed to produce the best Presidency website in EU history.




Ralf Grahn

Swedish EU Council Presidency site launched

One month ahead of the start Sweden’s Minister for EU affairs, Cecilia Malmström, has launched the web site of the Swedish EU Council Presidency at http://se2009.eu.



As far as I remember, this is the first Council Presidency to use the .eu top level domain, instead of the national one. A nice gesture, and the logo has style.

The pages are available in Swedish, English and French.

Another novelty is that the pages already have more information and interactive features than any Council Presidency I remember long into its term.

However, when I wanted to subscribe to a suitable RSS feed, the promised alternatives failed to show up. Hopefully, these teething problems will be sorted out shortly.

Let us hope that the substantial running of the Council will be a success.


Ralf Grahn

EU politics: Czech Council in tray

Today the Czech Government published its Work Programme for the EU Council Presidency running from 1 January to 30 June 2009. Europe without Barriers is the theme for the programme, available here:

http://www.eu2009.cz/en/news-and-documents/news/the-czech-presidency-presents-its-priorities-and-work-programme-4810/

The Czech Republic’s stint at the head of the Council of the European Union occurs in the middle of the second 18 month Presidency trio programme, drafted by France, the Czech Republic and Sweden. Especially the later Presidencies have reasons to update the joint programme, but their own programme offers certain possibilities to underline their own priorities.

In addition to the motto – Europe without Barriers – the Czech Government tries to catch attention by three Es: Economy, Energy and the European Union in the World. These are presented as priorities of the Czech Presidency.

Knowing that the Czech Parliament has not approved or even voted on the Treaty of Lisbon, we are served the following enlightening sentence on the introductory page:

The issue of institutional reform, connected to the future of the Lisbon Treaty ratification, is a task of no lesser importance for the efficient functioning of the European Union and its internal and external policies.

***

Why should anyone read this Presidency programme voluntarily?

The European Union has a lot of dossiers moving (or not) at any given time, so the Presidency programmes can be read as valuable refreshers on where different issues stand from the Council’s point of view.

After the introductory (thematic) pages, the following 28 pages offer the reader a glimpse of the Council’s in tray for the coming six months. The Czech programme is divided into 16 policy areas and these into 84 further sub-headlines in all.

Consequently, the treatment is brief, concentrated or bland (however you want to see it), almost telegraphic in style.

***

Following the age old custom of writers to carp, let me pick one introductory phrase (on page vii): The EU is a significant global player…

Are Hamas and Israel listening?


Ralf Grahn

P.S. As a reminder to mainstream media: In spite of hype the which has surrounded Nicolas Sarkozy, the Czech Republic has not taken over the EU Presidency, just the Presidency of the EU Council, one of the main three political institutions of the European Union, even if arguably the most important one.

Lisbon Treaty: Czech mates

The Parliament of the Czech Republic has voted to postpone the ratification debate on the EU Treaty of Lisbon until 3 February 2009.

EurActiv in the article ‘Czechs postpone Lisbon Treaty vote’ cites Prime Minister Mirek Topolaneks difficulties in keeping his largely eurosceptic ODS (Civic Democrat) party together after a divisive leadership contest and the exit of founder Vaclav Klaus, currently President of the Republic:

http://www.euractiv.com/en/future-eu/czechs-postpone-lisbon-treaty-vote-2009/article-177927

Jean Quatremer of the excellent Coulisses de Bruxelles blog quotes Prime Minister Topolanek holding the Lisbon Treaty hostage to a “truce” to be negotiated with the opposition pro-EU Social Democrats for the duration of the six month Czech EU Council Presidency starting on 1 January 2009. The blog post ‘Lisbonne: nouveau pas de deux tchéque’ can be found here:

http://bruxelles.blogs.liberation.fr/coulisses/2008/12/lisbonne-nouvea.html

***

Regardless of the combined reasons, which are purely domestic, we can be assured that the Czech Prime Minister and the Czech Parliament are the only ones among their peers in 27 member states to have made a deliberate decision to disregard the target date of 1 January 2009 set in unison by the member states’ governments for the Lisbon Treaty to enter into force.

The Czech Republic may be as competent as any other member state drawn by lot to chair the Council, but Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek for domestic reasons and President Vaclav Klaus by his disregard for his European partners have set the tone for the Czech Council Presidency and laid the foundations for their country’s reputation in Europe.

I sometimes wonder at the class of hero the anti-EU has to adulate, given the dearth of uplifting choices.


Ralf Grahn

Lisbon Treaty: Sarkozy accused

The Irish ’no’ side has hurled accusations at the current president of the European Council, France’s Nicoalas Sarkozy, for suggesting a second referendum in Ireland on the EU Treaty of Lisbon, ahead of his discussions with the Irish government 21 July 2008.

Criticism against bullying, a more resounding ‘no’ victory next time, as well as national or pan-European ‘no’ campaigns at the European elections 2009 have been aired by different activists.

Without constructive proposals, these opinions would lead to the Treaty of Nice remaining the crowning achievement of European integration.

The common objective of the campaigners seems to be to harden resistance against any constructive solution for Europe.

The supposedly pro-European Irish have baffled not only European opinion, as recorded by The Irish Times ‘Lisbon vote baffles US, says Bruton’ (17 July 2008):

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2008/0717/1216073186168.html

***

A number of Irish government ministers have only been able to say that they need time to think about solutions.

Not a great help, this far.

***

Legally, the European Union is based on the Nice Treaty, and the Lisbon Treaty requires the ratification of all 27 member states, as it now stands.

Still, it is highly simplistic to say that the Lisbon Treaty is dead, period.

It would be foolish to disregard the political dynamics behind almost a decade of EU treaty reform exertions.

All the member states’ governments have signed up to the Treaty of Lisbon, and more than four out of five of the national parliaments have approved the amending treaty. The ratification processes have continued, with only three parliamentary ratifications missing.

***

If neither ‘no’ campaigners nor the government in Ireland are willing or able to formulate solutions, what should the rest of Europe do?

President Sarkozy has the unwelcome duty to look for ways to solve the problems.

In spite of abuse from opponents, a second referendum leading to a ‘yes’ vote, is legally possible within the constraints of the Lisbon Treaty. Supposing that all the other member states ratify, this would preserve the unity of the European Union. Sarkozy is almost duty bound to ask if this is the first option of the Irish government.

(Personally, I doubt the wisdom of putting the same question to a second vote in Ireland.)

Sooner or later the Irish government has to decide.

Is there going to be a new plebiscite?

Are there Irish concerns which can be accommodated within the parameters of the Lisbon Treaty?

What happens if a second referendum leads to a new ‘no’ vote?

How is Ireland going to act in case of a new ‘no’ victory, or if no second referendum is arranged?

Is Ireland going to look for a solution, which allows the ratifying states to move along?

Is Ireland going to fight to the end to fetter the rest of Europe to the Nice Treaty?

***

In each case, the other EU member states have to decide what they want and what it takes to achieve it.

But first they need answers from Ireland. Dallying is no help.


Ralf Grahn