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

Obama blocks the Lisbon Treaty?

The Obama administration is less hot than the Bush presidency about a deal on radar stations in the Czech Republic.

Ergo, the Czech Republic ─ a member state of the European Union, not the United States of America ─ is unable to ratify the Treaty of Lisbon, it seems.

This, from the prime minister of the country holding the presidency of the EU Council.

The Czech government has made it abundantly clear that the European Council needs a competent presidency.


Ralf Grahn

Lisbon Treaty implementation (Finland)

Legal uncertainties surround the European Union preparing for the European elections and a new Commission without knowing if the Treaty of Nice will continue in force or exactly how the Treaty of Lisbon takes over, if ratified.

The previous blog post ‘Lisbon Treaty ratification (Ireland)’ presented the main points of the memorandum discussed by the EU Committee of the Finnish Government on 25 February 2009 with regard to the state of play since the December 2008 European Council concerning Irish ratification and assurances from the member states (Lissabonin sopimus ─ Eteneminen joulukuun 2008 Eurooppa-neuvoston jälkeen ─ Tilannekatsaus).

The memo is available only in Finnish, but available to the public here:

http://www.valtioneuvosto.fi/tiedostot/julkinen/eu-briefit/2009/20090225/lissabon-jatko.pdf

***

European Parliament seats

We turn to institutional issues and implementation, as seen by the Finnish Government in its information to the Parliament.

Under the Lisbon Treaty twelve member states would gain seats in the European Parliament, whereas Germany would lose three. The Government presents the declaration of the December 2008 European Council to arrange the allocation of the additional seats as soon as possible (from 2010), when the Treaty of Lisbon has entered into force. Germany would be allowed to retain 99 MEPs until the end of the parliamentary term from 2009 to 2014, which would raise the total number above the maximum foreseen by the Lisbon Treaty (754 instead of 751).

The Government concludes that implementation of the declaration requires treaty level changes, insofar as they differ from the wording of the Lisbon Treaty. One possibility is a separate document, which would be ratified alongside the following accession treaty. Initially allowing the ‘extra’ MEPs into the European Parliament as observers of sorts has been discussed.

How to fill the additional seats will probably be solved at the national level, but these questions do not directly concern Finland or Ireland.

***

Commission composition

The Government repeats the declaration that the nomination of the new Commission and especially the President of the Commission should start directly after the European elections in June 2009. (There is no comment on President Sarkozy’s public speculation, against the unanimous conclusions during the French Council Presidency, about postponing the nomination of the new Commission President until after the second Irish referendum.)

The term of office of the current Commission is until the end of October. According to the Lisbon Treaty each member state would nominate a Commissioner until 2014, but the Treaty of Nice lays down that the number should become smaller than the number of member states.

The Government of Finland explains the main differences between Lisbon and Nice with regard to the appointment procedures, and it notes that the European Parliament sees them as significant. They concern the appointment of the Commission President, the list of Commissioners and the approval of the Commission. The High Representative becomes part of the equation under the Lisbon Treaty.

How to implement the political agreement in December to retain one national from each member state as Commissioner after 2014, if the Lisbon Treaty enters into force, is seen as problematic legally. According to the wording, the European Council could change the number of Commissioners, but permanent representation for all member states goes against the objective of the provision.

If the larger Commission is enshrined by treaty level amendments, it would be more difficult to reform the size (downsize) the Commission in the future. There is time until 2014, and the treaty could be amended simultaneously with an accession treaty.

***

EU Council Presidency

The memorandum explains that the rotating Council Presidency continues under Lisbon, modified by the chairmanship of the High Representative (foreign affairs configuration) and the (semi)permanent President of the European Council. The Finnish Government refers to the December 2008 declaration by the European Council on transitional arrangements. Should the Lisbon Treaty enter into force during a Council Presidency, the current holder would continue until the end of its turn. In practice this could concern Sweden or Spain.

***

Preparatory work ─ Ireland

The memorandum states that preparatory work at EU level regarding the Irish arrangements has not started, but it expects that the Permanent Representatives will discuss these issues later in the spring. The spring European Council (19 to 20 March) may hear a report on the situation, but a real discussion at European Council level is expected on 18 to 19 June.


***

Preparatory work generally

The Finnish Government notes that preparatory work to implement the Lisbon Treaty was done especially during the Slovenian Council Presidency, during the first half of 2008.

The blog post ‘Lisbon Treaty implementations’ (29 June 2008) referred to Slovenian and Finnish material at the time:

http://grahnlaw.blogspot.com/2008/06/lisbon-treaty-implementation.html

The memorandum notes that preparatory work ceased after the Irish referendum result. Especially the European External Action Service requires preparation.

The Czech Council Presidency programme mentions that the continued work depends on the ratification timetable, but the Czech Government has not given more precise indications about when the preparations could start.

***

Comments on preparation and implementation of the Lisbon Treaty

(European) Council

Regardless of different opinions about the Lisbon Treaty, the questions mentioned and many details have to be prepared for implementation, should the amending treaty enter into force (as 27 governments have agreed and 25 national parliaments approved).

The member states (the Council) are responsible for most of these issues, but there has been a deafening silence for a long time.

The Finnish Government’s memorandum confirms this sad state: the minimal EU level preparation of the Irish ratification issues and a total lack of common preparatory work of general implementation questions.

Firstly, the Council has to start preparing the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty. If the Czech Council Presidency continues to sit on its hands, Sweden will have even more catch up to do than previously thought.

Secondly, the Council must adopt an open and transparent mode of operation. This requires a timetable which facilitates a constructive debate with the European Parliament, national parliaments, think-tanks, researchers and the public.

This means publishing regular, comprehensive and reasoned updates of preparatory work for public debate. One of the major questions is the European External Action Service (EEAS).


***


Commission

Where the Commission has a leading role to play in preparing proposals (for instance the European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps, EVHAC), it should set a good example by preparing and consulting openly.


***


Publication

All preparatory proposals should be added as a thematic whole to the web pages about the Treaty of Lisbon, in order to make them visible and easy to find.


***


European Parliament

The European Parliament seems to be the only institution working on the Lisbon Treaty implementation issues in an open manner.

We are going to take a look in a coming blog post.


Ralf Grahn