State of the Union: openness and Democracy Package

After the latest State of the Union (SOTEU) 2017 blog posts looking at EU citizens, reform and future and Citizens’ Dialogues,  we recall that public opinion - despite the clunky Eurobarometer questions - seems to have been ahead of the EU27 heads of state or government, at least until the openings in the Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker’s SOTEU address SPEECH/17/3165 and the French president Emmanuel Macron’s Sorbonne speech (English summary) gave the leaders some impetus.

Openness (transparency)  

The European Commission has said very little about European level democracy, but at least in principle the Commission is open to input from citizens of the union. In addition to the Citizens’ Dialogues discussed earlier, we take note of the public consultations, even if most of the issues are of interest to specific business and consumer lobbies more than politically engaged EU citizens. On the State of the Union 2017 web page, we find the Commission’s button with an invitation to send our comments after the SOTEU address, although we do not know what, if anything, happens after the feedback  enters the black hole.

Through the State of the Union 2017 web page we can access a two-page factsheet on Better Regulation, with a focus on priorities offering European added value and improved enforcement. The leaflet is available in all the official EU languages. You can also consult my State of the Union blog post on better regulation and enforcement.

The SOTEU 2017 web page provides a link to a press release IP/17/3167 related to one aspect of transparency, namely a Code of Conduct for Members of the Commission. The press release - available in the official EU languages - leads us to the official document:

Draft Commission decision of 12.9.2017 on a Code of Conduct for the Members of the European Commission; Brussels, 12.9.2017 C(2017) 6200   

Democracy Package

The SOTEU 2017 web page offers us a link to the Commission’s so called Democracy Package IP/17/3187, with MEMO/17/3168, both available in 23 official EU languages. There is also a brief pastel coloured factsheet on the revision of the ECI Regulation.

One proposal wants to make the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) more user-friendly and the other revision wants to tighten the rules on funding for European political parties (Europarties) and their political foundations.

If you follow the link in the press release for the revision of the revision of the ECI Regulation, you find the materials - proposal, annex and Commission staff working document - plus an invitation to subscribe to get notifications and an invitation to provide feedback within eight weeks from publication. The same principles apply, if you follow the link to the amendment of the Regulation regarding European political parties and foundations.

The official documents comprise 161 pages in all, but let us post the details of the main proposals through Eur-Lex for future reference:

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European citizens’ initiative; Brussels, 13.9.2017 COM(2017) 482 final; procedure  2017/0220 (COD)

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 1141/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council of 22 October 2014 on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations; Brussels, 13.9.2017 COM(2017) 481 final; procedure 2017/0219 (COD)  

The Civil Liberties Union for Europe (Liberties) NGO - @LibertiesEU on Twitter - interviewed professor Alberto Alemanno - @alemannoEU -  about president Juncker’s SOTEU speech and these positive but modest Democracy Package steps towards strengthening democracy in the European Union.

Ralf Grahn

European political parties on social market economy

If the treaty based aim of the European Union is a highly competitive social market economy, how do the political parties at European level deal with this objective?

I skim a few documents with political principles from the main Europarties.

The 2012 manifesto of the European People’s Party (EPP) begins by presenting the values of the party, then concludes:

The only political system in which these values can thrive is in a pluralist democracy, in which citizens accept responsibility. The best economic concept to safeguard them is the Social Market Economy based on environmental sustainability in which competitiveness and entrepreneurial freedom are balanced with social justice. The appropriate framework for this is a strong European Union, which provides the best answers to the challenges of our times.

The 2011 declaration of principles of the Party of European Socialists (PES) does not mention the words ‘social market economy’, but the elements seem to be there:

A society based on our values means a new economy that embodies them. Values-driven growth, means that environmental sustainability, human dignity and well being are fundamental to wealth creation. This new economy must foster social progress that raises living standards, secures homes and creates jobs. The public sector plays an essential role in this new economy.

The election manifesto (2014) of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) offered classical liberal fare: to develop the single market, competitiveness and free trade in order to solve social challenges.

According to the Reykjavik declaration, the Alliance of Conservatives and Reformists in Europe (ACRE) is committed to the spread of free commerce and open competition, in Europe and globally.

Without using the words ‘social market economy’, the 2014 election manifesto of the European Green Party (EGP) emphasised a social Europe:

Europe must be built on a foundation of social justice and yet, for an increasing number of people, social hardship has become the reality. European Greens believe in policies that tackle growing levels of inequality and are adamant that there should be no second-rate citizens in the EU. It is therefore essential that social impacts such as inequality and poverty are taken into account.

The political document from the 2016 Party of the European Left congress (EL) rejects the liberal treaty aims and politics of the European Union, but the word ‘social’ crops up everywhere.

***

According to this rough outline of principles (not practical politics), the European People’s Party seems to the only main Europarty to tie itself to the mast of a social market economy.  

The Party of European Socialists and the European Green Party seem to prefer other terms to promote their vision of a social Europe.

Out of 751 MEPs, the EPP Group has 217, the S&D Group 189 and the Green Group 51 (457 MEPs in all).

ALDE (68) and ACRE (74) proclaim functioning internal and global markets, rejected by the European Left (52).

Ralf Grahn

PES challenges other Europarties in 2014 EP elections

The Party of European Socialists intends to field a candidate for the presidency of the EU Commission in the elections to the European Parliament in 2014. The nomination and selection procedure is going to be based on ”consultation” of the members of the national PES parties, although not necessarily one or more regular primaries.

In the 2009 elections the European social democrats lacked a coherent and clear message, according to Marita Ulvskog MEP. Just resisting Barroso was not enough to make voters enthusiastic.

The European Citizen, who covered the PES Re:New convention as a euroblogger, saw the selection procedure as a good step for European democracy. It commits the PES to a more European campaign.


Europarty response?

Ahead of the EP elections 2014 the PES challenges the other Europarties: the European People's Party EPP, the European Liberal and Reform Party ELDR and the European Green Party. Are they going to field top candidates selected through open procedures?



Ralf Grahn

PES candidate for EU Commission president through ”consultation”

The Party of European Socialists (PES) has taken a step forward with regard to the next elections to the European Parliament, by adopting a resolution on the selection of the PES candidate for president of the European Commission:

PES Resolution: Selecting our common candidate in 2014; Adopted by the PES Council on 24 November 2011

The procedure set out from the second page of the resolution is described as open and transparent, and the process is divided into nomination, verification and decision-making.

The PES member parties can consult their members either directly or indirectly, which means that regular primaries won't necessarily be arranged in every country.


Comments

The PES actually fields a candidate for the Commission top job in 2014 and the selection process becomes more open.

The woolly consultation alternatives hardly promise the propaganda victory the Campaign for a PES Primary was aiming for. In the end, much will depend on the national parties.

Even if the PES advances somewhat cautiously, it is enough to challenge the other constructive Europarties: the European People's Party EPP, the European Liberal and Reform Party ELDR and the European Green Party. How are they going to respond?



Ralf Grahn

More Europe Manifesto: pan-European lists and elected Commission president

In order to overcome the crises in the eurozone and the wider European Union, a group of Spanish eurobloggers has launched an appeal for More Europe.

You can read and sign the appeal on the More Europe blog. You can participate in the Twitter discussion @moreurope and under the hashtag #moreurope, and you can help to spread the word among citizens of the European Union.

The initiators act as EU citizens. Thus they want to build on European achievements important for ordinary people. Their appeal is now available in eight languages.

After stating the need for greater European integration, their fifth proposal aims at bringing real democracy a step closer at the European level.

“More Europe” Statement

Given the dramatic social situation in many Member States caused by the economical crisis and the anti-European voices predicting the breakup of the Economic and Monetary Union, the undersigned ask for More Europe.

We consider it is necessary to move to a greater European integration in order to address the current situation of social and economic crisis affecting Europe and for this reason we will join our forces as European citizens. To achieve our goal we claim that:

-----

5) We believe it is very important to increase the participation of citizens in the European decision making process. With that aim we suggest the direct election of the European Commission’s President through the creation of supranational European Parliament electoral slates.

Pan-European lists

Andrew Duff MEP has drafted a report adopted by the Constitutional Affairs Committee of the European Parliament, but not voted on yet by the plenary.

The proposal would attribute an added 25 seats in the EP to candidates proposed by the European political parties (Europarties) throughout the 27 member states. These members would be elected in a pan-EU constituency from transnational lists.

Every elector would have two votes - one for the national or regional list and one for the transnational, pan-European list:

Committee on Constitutional Affairs: DRAFT SECOND REPORT on a proposal for a modification of the Act concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage of 20 September 1976; 20.9.2011, rapporteur: Andrew Duff

You can follow the next steps of the procedure under 2009/2134(INI).

The election procedure is one of the rare legislative issues where the right of initiative belongs to the European Parliament. However, the dismal progress of EP electoral law during more than 30 years is due to the lack of political will and the unanimity requirement in the Council (government representatives) and at member state level (ratification by every national parliament).

The proposal means that the political parties at European level would finally have to do what they are meant to do: become active in the election campaign, putting forward their best candidate for president of the European Commission and their political programme for the next five years.


PES primary

Activists in the Party of European Socialists (PES) have proposed that the top candidate, the possible president of the European Commission, should be elected through a primary.

This would set activists going earlier, engender publicity and possible adherents and give the chosen front runner a firmer claim on democratic legitimacy.

The PES has promised to study the proposal (and the practical implications).

It is going to be interesting to see how the EPP, the Liberals, the Greens and the other Europarties are going to take up the challenge.


President of the Commission

Through pan-European debates and media coverage, the election campaign would bring European issues to the fore, instead of the comatose Europarties and 27 national campaigns on mainly domestic issues we have seen this far.

We have to assume that the European Council would not only take into account the elections to the European Parliament, but actually carry out the will of the people when proposing the Commission president to the European Parliament.

The reform would be one step forward on the road towards a functioning representative democracy at EU level, which should entail a parliamentary system of accountable government based on the votes of the citizens.

However, it falls short of truly representative government, if the rest of the commissioners are still essentially nominated by the governments of the member states, not as a coalition government resulting from the EP election.

Even if only a step in the right direction, the More Europe Manifesto calls for electoral reform to give the EU citizens more voice in union affairs.


Democratic European Union?

About sixty years into European integration (Council of Europe, Schuman declaration, European Coal and Steel Community ECSC) the institutions of the European Union have democratic embellishments, but democracy has not arrived at the European level.

With political leaders half paralysed and citizens increasingly despairing, I think we have reached the point of no return. Either the failures continue to pile up, or we establish democracy and sufficient powers where the issues and challenges are: at the level of the European Union or the eurozone.

I recommend reading the following two articles thoughtfully.

Stefan Collignon wrote a column for the Social Europe Journal, where he discusses European level democracy in plain words. Citizens are the sovereign, not states, and they have a common interest in controlling their government, he says in European Catharsis.

A democratic union (eurozone) or disintegration? Ulrike Guérot of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) discusses the crisis in the eurozone and the need for democracy: Germany in Europe: the politics of disintegration.

More ”comprehensive solution” failures, or a new beginning? Our leaders owe us some answers, but citizens need to raise the questions as well.


More Europe proposals

I have mentioned the refreshing More Europe initiative of the Spanish eurobloggers in earlier posts: announcement, free movement, EU symbols and education about European integration, as well as fiscal and social harmonisation in the eurozone.


Read and sign the appeal on the More Europe blog, participate in the Twitter discussion @moreurope, hashtag #moreurope, and help to spread the word.

***

Popular sovereignty is the essence of citizenship; so it should be for the EU citizenship we have in name. We have to start claiming our rights.



Ralf Grahn

Domestic legislation as an embarrassment for the EU (Hungarian media law)

Politically, already serious discussion about the commencement of proceedings is an embarrassment for a wayward government, despite the slender risk of condemnation, I said in my comment regarding the founding values of the European Union in Article 2 TEU and the possible sanctions for serious breaches foreseen in Article 7 TEU: Are EU founding values effective? (Hungarian media law)(11 January 2011).

Governments in the European Union (and beyond) want to be seen as respectable, even when their actions are not. The Hungarian Fidesz government of Viktor Orban moved from angry denial to more conciliatory language in order to defuse the problem, but the embarrassment must be felt by their political friends, such as Wilfried Martens, the president of the European People's Party, who endorsed the Hungarian media law, and EPP group leader Joseph Daul, who belittled and procrastinated instead of taking a principled stand for the rights of EU citizens. .

I have no special desire to see the EPP leadership with egg on its face, but the freedoms and rights of EU citizens are more important to me than misplaced consideration for blatant political misjudgments.

In summary, even when national political leaders think that they can act with impunity domestically, they can cause serious political damage to their country and their ”friends” at the European level.


International repercussions

The potential damage is not limited to intra-European affairs. Internationally the European Union portrays itself as the champion of the universal values of human rights. The foreign, security, defence and trade policy (external action) of the European Union is not based on interests alone, but on acting in accordance with and promoting the founding values of the EU.

This is (or should be) more than wishful thinking, since Title V of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), General provisions on the Union's external action and specific provisions on the foreign and security policy, opens by stating the value based character of all EU action on the world stage, in Article 21(1) TEU:

GENERAL PROVISIONS ON THE UNION’S EXTERNAL ACTION

Article 21 TEU

1. The Union’s action on the international scene shall be guided by the principles which have inspired its own creation, development and enlargement, and which it seeks to advance in the wider world: democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.

The Union shall seek to develop relations and build partnerships with third countries, and international, regional or global organisations which share the principles referred to in the first subparagraph. It shall promote multilateral solutions to common problems, in particular in the framework of the United Nations.

Evidently, if the European Union, even by individual member states, slips at home, it loses credibility abroad. In other words, a domestic embarrassment becomes a global shame.

Dictators and authoritarian rulers are quick enough to praise their rule(s), if a ”fifth column” inside the EU passes the ammunition.

On the website of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) and in the Social Europe Journal, Susi Dennison made the point about double standards and welcomed a debate at European level (7 January 2011):

... it has to be a positive development that a political conversation has finally started about these matters at a European level. A Union that has in its founding treaties respect for democracy, rule of law and human rights cannot credibly turn a blind eye to potential breaches of these principles by constituent states.

Member states and Europarties

In the eyes of EU citizens and the wider world, the acts of national governments can seriously undermine the purposes and credibility of the European Union. The member states who ”own” the union and the Europarties who are supposed to contribute to forming European political awareness and to express the will of the citizens of the union have special responsibilities, including robust peer pressure on bad apples.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Thoughtful analysis, reasoned arguments, European perspectives … already as an undergraduate Conor Slowey aka Eurocentric wrote one of star blogs of the Euroblogosphere, The European Citizen. Now a graduate student in Leiden, he is a generous contributor on Facebook and on Twitter as @EuropeanCitizen. Highly recommended.

Exploiting France’s “Romagate” for party political ends? European Parliament

"I sincerely hope that following the deletion of any explicit reference to Roma in the circular in question, France will redress other legal and procedural shortcomings as well. I also hope that the European Commission will take the necessary actions if the French measures prove to be discriminative and the rights of Roma as European citizens are not fully guaranteed", said the Hungarian member of the European Parliament Lívia Járóka in a press release on the web pages of the EPP group.

So far, so good, but Járóka went on to say:

It is vital, however, that the Roma issue is not taken hostage in a squabble between the Commission and a Member State, or abused by political groups for short-sighted and cheap political purposes.

When the president of the European People’s Party Wilfried Martens welcomed the conclusions of the European Council, he said:

Also the Roma issue was discussed at the EPP Summit and all parties involved were able to air their differences in a positive and constructive manner. It is very unfortunate that our political opponents tried – unsuccessfully – to exploit this delicate issue and to use it as a weapon against us.

(I’ll leave the positive and constructive airing of differences aside, although it appeals to my sense of humour.)



EPP wrong-footed?

Our series on the French “Romagate” affair have stayed clear of party politics this far, but the government actors in Italy and France, the heads of state or government convening in the European Council, and the European Parliament (even the Commission, although tempered by the general interest) have their party political ties.

Do party politics explain some of the stances taken, such as the defensive posture of the European People’s Party?

Let us look at the European Parliament.



The summary of the Roma debate in the European Parliament showed marked differences between the political groups.



The resolution adopted by the EP plenary 9 September 2010 called for France to end all expulsions of Roma, as well as intervention by the Commission, the Council and the member states. The resolution as a whole was approved by 337 votes to 245 (with 51 abstentions).



According to the Legislative observatory Oeil, the text adopted in plenary was tabled as a joint resolution by the S&D (Socialists and Democrats), ALDE (Liberals and Democrats), Greens/ALE (Greens/European Free Alliance)and GUE/NGL (European United Left/Nordic Green Left).



This defeated the evasive or long grass motion for a resolution tabled by the centre-right EPP (European People’s Party (Christian Democrats)) group, with the lead government party in most EU member states, and the ECR group (European Conservatives and Reformists, which includes the UK Conservatives, the bigger coalition party) to wind up the discussion.



The Socialist-Liberal-Green-Left motion for a resolution also prevailed over the sovereignty oriented motion by the EFD group (Europe of Freedom and Democracy, which includes the UK Independence Party and the Italian Lega Nord).



The largest political group in the European Parliament is the EPP with 265 members. Of these, 29 (including the group leader Joseph Daul) come from France, whereas 35 are Italians, both contingents tied to the domestic government.



Prime minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy and president Nicolas Sarkozy have been the main leaders of government crackdowns on Roma, challenging what Radio Free Europe – Radio Liberty called the benevolent self-image of Europe.

Even if the members of the European Parliament are joined in party political groups (Europarties), they have both their nationality and their domestic party political affiliation.

Sadly, I must say, the EP Roma resolution was not the finest hour for the European People’s Party as a defender of EU citizens’ rights. The EPP got wrong-footed by its government ties. This, in my view, explains the defensive posture. Accusations that others exploit the issue have a hollow ring to them.




Ralf Grahn

Activists challenge Party of European Socialists (PES): Spent force or renewable resource?

Even if the Campaign for a PES Primary is directed at socialist, social democratic and labour party activists right now, the call for action by Desmond O’Toole and José Reis Santos challenges the leadership of the Party of European Socialists (PES) - in French Parti Socialiste européen (PSE) – and especially the leaders of the national parties.



On the campaign blog Neil Warner of Irish Labour Youth argues that the Campaign for a PES Primary is an absolute necessity; for Europe, democracy and progressive politics.

This is hardly an exaggeration with regard to the future of the PES-PSE. The reformist left parties have been beaten in most parliamentary elections in the member states of the European Union.



Paralysis or renewal?


In the 2009 elections to the European Parliament a paralysed PES failed to field a candidate for the Presidency of the European Commission, and the socialists predictably fell far behind the centre-right European People’s Party (EPP).



The Wikipedia article on the Party of European Socialists was last modified on 16 August 2010, but even this entry seems to share the melancholy feeling by presenting outdated information about the PES in the European institutions (as of 2007).

Is the PES a spent force or a renewable resource in the political landscape of Europe?

The Campaign for a PES Primary is the most concrete and imaginative initiative for the Party of European Socialists to reconnect with activists and engage EU citizens ahead of the EP elections in 2014.



Growing Facebook group


Last Friday morning the Facebook campaign page had gathered 590 supporters, and the following morning, Saturday 14 August 2010, they were 650.



In less than four days the number of campaign group members on Facebook has grown by 118 (to 768), so the initiative is making headway and for once the PES activists are seen to be on the offensive in a positive sense.



Euroblogs supportive


In addition to Jon Worth, The European Citizen and Grahnlaw (here and here), new Euroblogs have taken up the PES campaign in a positive light.



Joël Cordier had already published the campaign call in French on his blog, but Jean-Sébastien Lefebvre on the Europa451.fr blog seems to be the first to analyse the proposal in French: Primaires européennes, le réveil des leaders socialistes pour 2014 ?



Peter Sain ley Berry’s View from the Outfield (EUobserver blog) calls the PES campaign An Encouraging Proposal.



Other Europarties?



The campaign challenges the leadership of the PES and the national socialist parties, but it has also left the activists of the other Europarties (political parties at European level) in the starting blocks: the European People’s Party (EPP), the European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party (ELDR) and the European Green Party.

Are they going to stay crouched until the race is over?




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments has skyrocketed. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your pertinent comment appears.

It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across borders and between linguistic communities. Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:

I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.


The European Commission in the UK arranges a Day of Multilingual Blogging on 26 September 2010, joined by the multilingual aggregator Bloggingportal.eu and individual Eurobloggers. Please, spread the word and start preparing for the event.

EU Commission President: Campaign for a PES-PSE Primary growing by the day

Social media are a wonderful thing. Online you can make contacts and campaign for good causes across borders, such as the Campaign for a PES Primary we looked at yesterday. Check for updates on the active blog, which gets today’s #bkaeb recommendation (the Twitter tag for Better Know A EuroBlog, a #FF or #followfriday for Euroblogs).



In less than 24 hours the online media campaign on Facebook has grown by 60 persons (from 590 to 650). I hope that all members of the social democratic, socialist and labour parties in Europe, especially the activists of the Party of European Socialists (PES; Parti socialiste européen, PSE), join the demand to hold primary elections, involving PES party members across Europe, to select their candidate for the Presidency of the European Commission.



Naturally, I am going to be even more impressed if the PES-PSE shows the way, although as an independent citizen of the EU and Finland I am not included in the target group - party members – but see the campaign in the wider context of developing European level representative democracy.

Since PES-PSE activists were the first off the blocks, my thoughts turn to people active in other constructive national political parties and Europarties. Are they ready to take up the challenge in their own political party at European level, and do they have enough drive to make their Europarty commit to democratic primaries ahead of the European Parliament election in 2014?

There are two parts to the challenge. First of all, each Europarty should clearly and visibly field its candidate for the presidency of the European Commission ahead of the European Parliament election in 2014. Second, the nomination of the candidate should be decided through a democratic primary election in each political party.

A President of the European Commission with a stronger mandate from voters is not enough to turn the European Union into a parliamentary democracy, and it would not by itself institute politically accountable government at EU level, but it is a step in the right direction, well worth campaigning for and deciding on.



In the Euroblogosphere, Jon Worth and The European Citizen wrote about the campaign for a PES primary before the first entry appeared here on Grahnlaw. Follow the stream of new posts on Bloggingportal.eu to see when other Euroblogs take up the challenge by spreading the word.



The European public online space keeps growing. Multilingual Bloggingportal.eu now aggregates the posts of 648 blogs related to EU affairs (Euroblogs).




Ralf Grahn



P.S. It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across borders and between linguistic communities. Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:

I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.

Europarties: Yes to primaries for EU Commission President 2014

Conor Slowey (Eurocentric) drew my attention to the campaign for the Party of European Socialists (PES), to which he dedicated a thoughtful post on The European Citizen blog: PES primaries and a Parliamentary EU.



This made me reread the blog entry by Jon Worth as well: Campaigning for a PES primary.



This time around, I went a little bit further. I checked the Campaign for a PES Primary website, launched by Desmond O’Toole, as well as the Facebook campaign page.

A short while ago, the Facebook Campaign for a PES Primary group had already gathered 590 members, among them a number of top Eurobloggers and citizens keen to build a more democratic European Union, such as Jon Worth, Valéry-Xavier Lentz, Laurence Modrego, Martin T. Teubner and Conor Slowey.

The campaigners make the following demands:

WE want to be involved in selecting the candidate who will lead our party in 2014.

WE want to make European democracy a reality for ordinary citizens.

WE demand the holding of primary elections, involving PES party members across Europe, to select our candidate for the Presidency of the European Commission.

I hope that all the activists of PES and members of the national social democratic and socialist parties join the Facebook group, and that the campaign is successful.

However, the party loyalists who framed the call limited the scope to members (“our party”).


As an independent outsider I hope that all constructive Europarties field candidates for the presidency of the European Commission ahead of the European Parliament election in 2014, and that they nominate their candidate through primaries.


I still value my independence to treat the political parties without second thoughts, while waiting for one Europarty (and its political foundation) to show enough leadership in EU affairs and interaction with citizens.

Although I do nothing to hide my belief in the need for a democratic and federal European Union, as a lawyer I serve entrepreneurs and individuals of all persuasions, so a party political label is not necessarily on the top of my personal agenda.



The invitation to join the campaign was one of my first experiences on Facebook, where I have taken my first tentative steps, having participated actively on Twitter for a few months before that.




Ralf Grahn



P.S. It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across borders and between linguistic communities. Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:

I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.

Funding for Europarties and their foundations 2011: Misleading calls for proposals

Europarties and their political foundations are going to receive 28.8 million euros in subsidies in 2011 from the European Parliament (and EU taxpayers).

Even if the established political parties at European level, represented in strength in the European Parliament, are insiders who know the applicable rules, it is disconcerting to read the calls for proposals.

First of all, the announcements refer to a defunct Treaty.

Second, they to refer to a Bureau Decision of 29 March 2004, replaced by a later Decision, which does not acknowledge the fact that it is an amending Decision. Thus, both the Decision and the calls for proposals are misleading.

Third, it would have added a nice touch, if the calls for proposals had mentioned that Regulation No 2004/2003 applies as amended.

Given this sad state of affairs, I am not sure that I have got things right, but here is an effort to offer correct and updated information, which should have been given by the European Parliament, especially when this is one area of EU law where the EP is in pole position.



Calls for proposals


For 2011 the European Parliament is going to award an estimated EUR 17,400,000 in operating grants to political parties at European level, colloquially Europarties. The call for proposals has been published in the Official Journal of the European Union:



Call for proposals IX-2011/01 — ‘Grants to political parties at European level’; OJEU 24.6.2010 C 164/12


The EP will award an estimated EUR 11,400,000 to the political foundations of the political parties at European level for 2011. Further details regarding the Eurofoundations are found in:




Call for proposals IX-2011/02 — ‘Grants to political foundations at European level’; OJEU 24.6.2010 C 164/17


In both cases 85 per cent of the subsidies will be distributed in proportion to the number of MEPs of parties eligible for these European level grants.

The closing date for applications is 1 November 2010.



Embarrasing Treaty miss


It is somewhat embarrassing that the European Parliament – at the centre of EU level democratic life – shows such lack of attention to detail that the very first sentence of both announcements refers to the defunct Treaty:

Article 191 of the Treaty establishing the European Community says that the political parties at European level are an important factor for integration within the Union.

Copy-pasting is wonderful, but there is always the risk of errors.


Let us try to give guidance to the potential applicants and other interested parties.

After the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, Article 10 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) deals with the democratic life of the union. The political parties at European level (Europarties) are mentioned in the fourth paragraph (consolidated version, OJEU 30.3.2010 C 83):

Article 10 TEU

1. The functioning of the Union shall be founded on representative democracy.

2. Citizens are directly represented at Union level in the European Parliament.

Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government and in the Council by their governments, themselves democratically accountable either to their national Parliaments, or to their citizens.

3. Every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. Decisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen.

4. Political parties at European level contribute to forming European political awareness and to expressing the will of citizens of the Union.

The legal base concerning political parties at European level and funding for them is provided by Article 224 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU):

Article 224 TFEU
(ex Article 191, second subparagraph, TEC)

The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, by means of regulations, shall lay down the regulations governing political parties at European level referred to in Article 10(4) of the Treaty on European Union and in particular the rules regarding their funding.

Amended Regulation No 2004/2003


The calls for proposals mention Regulation No 2004/2003, which has been amended. It would have added a nice touch to mention the amendment, so here is a link to the consolidated version of 27 December 2007:




REGULATION (EC) No 2004/2003 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 4 November 2003 on the regulations governing political parties at European level and the rules regarding their funding



Europarty and Eurofoundation


The crucial bar to eligibility for Europarties is found in Article 3(1)(b) of Regulation No 2004/2003:

it must be represented, in at least one quarter of Member States, by Members of the European Parliament or in the national Parliaments or regional Parliaments or in the regional assemblies, or

it must have received, in at least one quarter of the Member States, at least three per cent of the votes cast in each of those Member States at the most recent European Parliament elections;

Misleading EP Bureau Decision



The calls for proposals refer to the Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 29 March 2004 laying down the procedures for implementing Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003, published OJEU 12.6.2004 C 155/1.


However, while misleadingly keeping the name unchanged, the European Parliament has published a new and amended decision, at least in 2008:



DECISION OF THE BUREAU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT of 29 March 2004 laying down the procedures for implementing Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the regulations governing political parties at European level and the rules regarding their funding; OJEU 3.10.2008 C 252/1.


The Decision does not even mention that it replaced or amended the preceding Decision, so there is no guarantee that this is the final word on the subject. The amendments can only be inferred by comparing the contents.

Roughly, the later Decision incorporates the changes caused by the financing of Eurofoundations.



Comment

Given the state of affairs, I cannot be sure that my searches have been able to locate the applicable rules, but these examples suffice to show the need for improvement by the European Parliament.




Ralf Grahn

Bloggingportal challenges Europarties

Bloggingportal.eu has grown considerably since the start. It now brings together 487 Euroblogs in one convenient place on its Posts page. Voluntary editors tag the entries according to their contents (although the system needs improvement) and post their choices on the Home page. RSS feeds are available for all posts or for the editors’ choice on the “front page”.

Here are some of my reflections on Bloggingportal.eu generally, the editors’ choices and blogging politicians representing Europarties.


Multilingualism?

Bloggingportal.eu is multilingual, offering the choice of 25 languages (including Norwegian). In practice, English is by far the dominant language by number of blogs, numerically followed by French, but some of them of high quality.

When we think that German is the most widely spoken mother tongue in the European Union, the rarity of German language EU blogs is striking. On the other hand, there are now a few active quality blogs in Spanish.

Without exaggerating much, one could say that most of the other languages are represented by one or a few individuals.

There are still wide uncovered areas in an EU with 500 million inhabitants.


Editors’ choices

The editors should, in my opinion, look for original content as opposed to boilerplate announcements, journalistic quality, various viewpoints, variety of themes and linguistic diversity.

In practice, professional journalists and some experienced citizen bloggers seem to be highlighted on the Home page most frequently, and there is fairly little linguistic variety.

Bloggingportal.eu offers a Feedback button, so readers can offer their views and suggestions for improvements.


Europarties

Fairly few professional EU politicians blog actively. Interestingly, blogging foreign ministers like Carl Bildt and Alexander Stubb seem to be able to post original content frequently, although their languages – Swedish and Finnish – remain behind the language barrier for most readers.

If we look at the number of MEPs and staffers, relatively few have taken up blogging (or found their way to Bloggingportal.eu). There are a few encouraging examples, but even among them there are some problems from a reader’s viewpoint.

Many politicians’ blog posts are hasty announcements of the “I’ll be in Strasbourg next week” type. Some report events, not only national in scope, but from constituency level, such as the birthday of a local party loyalist. Then there are posts, which rattle off links to parliamentary questions and letters, or reproduce announcements by political groups, without added value or a European dimension.

All in all, there are not many MEP posts with serious, reflected content, inviting political discussion with citizens on issues of common European concern.

Naturally, elected politicians have to tend to their constituents, but do the European level parties – Europarties – step into the breach?

If we discount self-promotion on national or local issues by individual politicians, there is practically only one political party, which bridges the gap to citizens, by offering political discussion with a European dimension.


This exception is the Party of European Socialists [tagged pse on Bloggingportal.eu] and especially the Social Europe Journal, which is not listed on Bloggingportal.eu in the category of MEPs / MPs / Political parties, but among Think tanks / Academic / Federations.

Although some elected politicians write for Social Europe, most of the columnists are intellectuals (academics and party activists), who discuss the future of reformist socialism and social democracy in Europe.

The articles are reasoned and often well written, from a European perspective, which means that many of them are promoted to the front page of Bloggingportal.eu.

Good for them! If they deserve to be highlighted, they should be.

But this still leaves us with some questions. In a European Union dominated by centre-right, liberal and (far) right political forces, with active Greens staking out their visions for the future and uppity newcomers like the Pirate Party claiming the front row on web related issues, where are these other Europarties?

Do they think and act at European level? If so, why is there so little to be seen?

I have no yearning for boilerplate resolutions, but for ideas about our European future, engaging citizens to read, reflect and respond.

It is time for the other Europarties, their political foundations and the EP political groups, as well as staffers and activists, to take up the challenge and for the PES to fight to keep its lead.




Ralf Grahn

Alliance of European National Movements

Nothing is more international than nationalism, the great “-ism” of the 19th and 20th century, but these nationalisms tend to be mutually exclusive, where ethnic groups and national borders do not coincide.

The establishment of the Alliance of European National Movements (AENM) is an effort to lay the foundations for a European level party (Europarty) and later a political group in the European Parliament, in order to resist the European Union, immigration and globalisation.




According to the new and still very short Wikipedia article, the Alliance of European National Movements has been formed in 2009 by a number of nationalist and far-right parties in the European Union. Founding members are Jobbik (Hungary), Front National (France), Fiamma Tricolore (Italy), National Democrats (Correction 2 November 2009; see below: Nationaldemokraterna, Sweden) and National Front (Belgium). Other organisations of the European new right have announced participation, including groups from Austria, the United Kingdom, Spain and Portugal.

Here are some news items for further study.



EUbusiness: Far-right European parties forge alliance (25 October 2009)



Politics.hu: Jobbik signs agreements with other European nationalist groups (26 October 2009)



EUobserver: Jobbik, BNP move to form pan-European far-right alliance (26 October 2009)


EurActiv: Extreme-right seeks European unity, again (29 October 2009)



Czech Happenings: Czech DS [Workers’ Party] wants to enter European nationalists’ association (29 October 2009). – The Czech government has recently proposed abolishing the DS because of neo-nazi links.

***



Among others, the racist and fascist British National Party (BNP) (Wikipedia) as well as the Freedom Party of Austria (Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs, FPÖ) (Wikipedia) will probably join the European Alliance of Nationalist Movements.

There are some jolly interesting characters out there.



Ralf Grahn




P.S. Update & Correction 2 November 2009 following comment: Sverigedemokraterna and Nationaldemokraterna are different parties, with own articles in Swedish Wikipedia.

EU: European level political parties and their foundations

The Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) 5.6.2009 C 125 has two important announcements for the fledgling Europarties and their political foundations (and indirectly for the forming of a European awareness and for the expression of the political will of the citizens of the EU).

They are the European Parliament’s:


Call for proposals IX-2010/02 — Grants to political foundations at European level





Call for proposals IX-2010/01 — Grants to political parties at European level




***

Given the millions on offer, I sincerely hope that the European level parties and their foundations finally start to offer some value for money in 2010.



Ralf Grahn

European elections: Role of Europarties

Ahead of the European Parliament elections, we recap some basics and signal new research on the Europarties, officially political parties at European level, meant to form a European awareness and to express the political will of the EU citizens.


***

Current Treaty


Article 191 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) lays down the basic principles governing political parties at European level.

According to the first subparagraph the Europarties are seen as a factor for EU integration.

Regulations concerning (the status of) European parties and their funding can be issued by co-decision (OJEU 29.12.2006 C 321 E/132):


Article 191 TEC

Political parties at European level are important as a factor for integration within the Union. They contribute to forming a European awareness and to expressing the political will of the citizens of the Union.

The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251, shall lay down the regulations governing political parties at European level and in particular the rules regarding their funding.


***


Consolidated Lisbon Treaty

The Treaty of Lisbon is not in force (yet), but in many instances it represents the updated view of the member states (and EU institutions) on how the European Union should function.

The basic provisions on representative democracy and the Europarties have been renumbered in the consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty.

Article 10 of the amended Treaty on European Union, in Title II Provisions on democratic principles (OJEU 9.5.2008 C 115/20) sets out the framework with the political parties mentioned in paragraph 4:


Article 10 TEU

1. The functioning of the Union shall be founded on representative democracy.

2. Citizens are directly represented at Union level in the European Parliament.

Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government and in the Council by their governments, themselves democratically accountable either to their national Parliaments, or to their citizens.

3. Every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. Decisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen.

4. Political parties at European level contribute to forming European political awareness and to expressing the will of citizens of the Union.



**

Article 224 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) took over the substance of the second subparagraph of Article 191 TEC, with the minor amendments (OJEU page 149):


Article 224 TFEU
(ex Article 191, second subparagraph, TEC)

The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, by means of regulations, shall lay down the regulations governing political parties at European level referred to in Article 10(4) of the Treaty on European Union and in particular the rules regarding their funding.


***

Secondary legislation


Statute for a European political party

There are existing statutes for European companies (SE) and European co-operatives as well as proposals for European associations and European mutuals, but there is no enactment on truly European political parties.


***

Funding for Europarties


It took a long time before the European Parliament and the Council were able to agree on European level political parties. The result was Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 on the regulations governing political parties at European level and the rules regarding their funding (OJEU 15.11.2003 L 297/1), since amended by Regulation No 1524/2007 (OJEU 27.12.2007 L 343/5).

The consolidated version (of 27 December 2007) of Regulation 2004/2003 is available here:





Even if no true category of European political party is created, the Regulation lays down certain criteria for the parties eligible for funding from the European Union.


***

Implementing decision



The Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 29 March 2004 laying down the procedures for implementing Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the regulations governing political parties at European level and the rules regarding their funding, has been published as amended by the bureau Decision 1 February 2006 in OJEU 28.6.2006 C 150/9.



***


Expenditure

Under the European Parliament in the European Union budget for 2009 there are the following appropriations:

Article 402 contains EUR 10.858 million for European political parties and Article 403 allows contributions to their European political foundations worth 7.0 million.


***

New study


The French think tank Notre Europe has actively studied and organised ahead of the upcoming European Parliament elections.

One of the results is the study on the political parties at European level, by Francisco Roa Bastos Des « partis politiques au niveau européen » ? Etat des lieux à la veille des élections européennes de juin 2009. (Published 20 May 2009)


The study 25 page paper encapsulates the stages of development of the Europarties. It analyses their main characteristics on an integration continuum and exposes their weaknesses. Additionally, it ssees the need for further study on how these parties function in reality.


Ralf Grahn

European elections: Libertas saving our money?

Someone might see an ironic contradiction in the two announcements we see today on the web pages of Libertas.eu:



1) The European elections begin in some 28 days.
2) Policies: The Libertas programme for a better Europe will be published on this site in the coming weeks.

***

Waiting for Godot, we turn to what Libertas has on offer regarding the future of Europe and the next five years of legislative work in the European Parliament.

The third core principle of Libertas is:

“Save money: €10 billion in savings to be identified by the Commission in the next financial year.”

Sounds great, doesn’t it? At least until you take a closer look. Let’s do that.


***

Long term budget

The European Union lives by the multiannual financial framework essentially set by the heads of state or government of the member states, currently from 2007 to 2013, although formalised by an agreement between the institutions.

Income and expenditure hover around 1 per cent of gross national income (GNI) annually, far from a federal budget of proportions.


***

Annual budget

The framework is the basis for the expectations of the EU member states and for recipients of EU funds until the end of 2013.

The annual budgets are prepared within this framework by the Commission, and approved by the Council and the Euroepan Parliament.

Based on the existing framework and legitimate expectations, the Commission presented its preliminary draft budget for 2010 on 29 April 2009.

Mainly within the framework constraints, but with new measures towards an economic recovery, the proposed sum total of expenditure grows to € 139 billion. This translates into about 284 euros per EU resident.

How does a radical proposal for savings fit the economic circumstances and the timetable?

Even if the final vote on the budget takes place in December, the financial framework is in place until the end of 2013, and the European Council has given green light to certain recovery measures.

The budget exercise for 2010 is well under way. The Commission will take the opinions of the Council and the European Parliament into account before its final proposal. The Council and the EP will then fix their positions, before having to reconcile their views before final approval.

Nothing tells me that any of these institutions is going to veer off course to heed calls for unspecified budget cuts.

Libertas’ “core principle” is a figment of their imagination, meant to be swallowed by uninformed voters.


***

Who is responsible?

We have to admit that calls for profound change, including budget reform, can be justified even if they have no immediate chance of success. Every reform starts from modest beginnings until it gains acceptance.

What makes Libertas’ call hypocritical and cowardly is that they don’t even try to tell us where to cut. The savings should be identified by the Commission, without Libertas taking any responsibility.

In the realm of sanctimonious bluster, this is worth an Oscar.

The draft budget contains € 59 billion spending on agriculture and € 49.4 billion on structural funds. This is about 78 per cent of the total budget, and it is mainly spent in the member states.

Does Lisbertas want to cut back our dependence on subsidy-driven farming? Do they want to terminate “cohesion” funding in rich member states, or deprive the new member states of their structural funds?

Surely, a new political party with a “pan-European vision” knows where to save and has the guts to tell us(?)


The rest of the proposed budget (about 21.8 per cent) is shared between competitiveness, citizenship, freedom, security and justice, external action and administrative expenditure.

Even if the sums are minor in comparison, we need to be told about possible savings.


Ralf Grahn


P.S. A few observations outside the theme of this post: Libertas has introduced a certain professionalism and dynamic in its campaigning techniques during these last days. They contact people through e-mails and social media. Today there are several additional posts on their central web pages. Behind language barriers activists in different member states seem to be free to concoct wildly diverging messages without much outside notice.

In terms of (inter)active campaigning, the competition is still in the starting blocks. Despite the fact that the policies we have looked at this far have been shown to be populist rubbish, the established Europarties ignore Libertas at their peril.