In Britain, the decision of the Conservative Party to leave the mainstream group of the European People’s Party (EPP) in the European Parliament in order to set up the anti-integrationist European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group continues to cause debate because of the Tories’ choice of political bedfellows.
BBC News has taken a closer look at the chairman of the ECR group, Polish MEP Michal Kaminski: Digging up the truth about Michal Kaminski (23 November 2009).
Kaminski has strenuously denied allegations that he is a homophobe, an anti-Semite or a neo-Nazi.
At national level Kaminski represents the Law and Justice Party (PiS), established by Lech and Jaroslaw Kaczynski.
The third main component of the ECR group is the Czech Civic Democratic Party (ODS), established by Vaclav Klaus.
***
War crimes, moral conservatism, Catholic fundamentalism and homophobia offer a heady mix for public debate in 21st century Europe.
Political influence in European Union affairs is another matter, but at least as important.
The ECR group is anti-integrationist, although it describes it as opposition to EU federalism. This sets it against the European mainstream, represented by the EPP, the Socialists and Democrats (S&D), the Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) and the Greens, all of which see the EU as a common project and strive to make it work better.
The ECR group does not describe itself as nationalist, but that is the effect of its emphasis on the sovereign integrity of the nation state, when the European Union has been established to achieve effective sovereignty by pooling, i.e. joining forces.
The ECR group does not support the European consensus view of a highly competitive social market economy; its formula of minimal regulation, lower taxation and small government embodies a vision built on free market fundamentalism.
These fundamental contrarian choices have left the European Conservatives and Reformists politically isolated in the European Parliament (and more widely in EU affairs). The ECR group has only one committee chairman among 20 in the European Parliament.
There are few indications that the ECR group will make hay in the nominations for the next EU Commission, or the assignment of portfolios.
“Freely cooperating, sovereign nation states” may still bring the ECR (UK Conservatives) a revival of fortunes, if the Tories win the general election about half a year from now. Veto powers and obstruction in the most intergovernmental EU institution, the Council, with a long tradition of consensus seeking – advancing according to the convoy principle – can give a new UK government an amount of negative influence: the power to stop, to slow down and to water down proposals.
But David Cameron and William Hague have promised more than that: In part, they want to prevent future integration by domestic legislation, partly they want to put integration into reverse gear, by repatriating powers during the next Parliament. The formula goes some way to appease anti-EU opinion at home, but it is hardly a recipe for coalition building with other member state governments within the European Union.
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.
Showing posts with label European Conservatives and Reformists Group. Show all posts
Showing posts with label European Conservatives and Reformists Group. Show all posts
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
Friday, 26 June 2009
European Conservatives: Prague declaration analysis (Part three)
What does the Prague declaration of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECRG) in the European Parliament tell us about the future policies of the new political group, built around the UK Conservative Party of David Cameron and William Hague (26 MEPs), the Polish Law and Justice Party (PiS) of the Kaczynski twins (15 MEPs) and the Czech Civic Democratic Party (ODS) of Mirek Topolanek (formerly Vaclav Klaus) (9 MEPs), with a fluctuating number of individual representatives from other member states?
The ECRG has presented ten short principles. The part looked at the preamble. The second part presented the principles from 1 to 5, and this third part contains the remaining principles, one at a time, with subjective comments.
***
NATO first
6. The overriding value of the transatlantic security relationship in a revitalised NATO, and support for young democracies across Europe.
Comment
The plethora of common interests between the United States and the European Union – values, trade, foreign, security and defence – are reduced and made subservient to the defence alliance NATO, although the US needs a coherent Europe to deal with in all mutual areas and as an ally in the world. Despite the importance of NATO, the US has more pressing global challenges to think about, and twenty years after the fall of the Soviet Union it has a right to expect that the EU will be able to defend itself in most conceivable situations before long.
The ECRG says nothing about developing the foreign, security and defence policy, or the common defence, of the European Union. The most fundamental challenges for the EU are left unanswered (but the UK Conservatives’ European Election Manifesto was outright hostile towards the timid Lisbon Treaty reforms in the foreign policy area.)
My reading is that it is an error to do anything to keep the UK within the European Union based on its foreign policy influence or military capabilities, as long as Britain is opposed to using them for the common good.
Young democracies need support, from Morocco to Murmansk, but the crux of the matter is how we are going to achieve coherent and cohesive European Union action with regard to the Eastern Partnership, the Union for the Mediterranean or Russia. The sovereign integrity of each EU member state is a recipe for disaster.
***
Immigration control
7. Effectively controlled immigration and an end to abuse of asylum procedures
Comment
Improved immigration control and asylum procedures seem to be in line with the EU’s aims under the Hague Programme and the future Stockholm Programme on justice and home affairs (area of freedom, security and justice).
Given the participating parties, it is surprising thing that the European Conservatives mention these policies in a document on the European Union. Great Britain has opted out of the Schengen area of free internal travel and external border control. Under the Lisbon Treaty Britain would opt out of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and together with Poland from the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights containing the guiding values with regard to individuals.
The ECRG parties are hardly the ones most famous for promoting effective, but fair responses to the common challenges of migration and asylum.
***
Public services
8. Efficient and modern public services and sensitivity to the needs of both rural and urban communities.
Comment
Who could oppose such gifted platitudes?
***
Waste
9. An end to waste and excessive bureaucracy and a commitment to greater transparency and probity in the EU institutions and use of EU funds.
Comment
Who could oppose such gifted platitudes?
***
Equality of member states
10. Respect and equitable treatment for all EU countries, new and old, large and small.
Comment
Who could oppose such gifted platitudes?
***
The European Conservatives are potential saboteurs in the evolving foreign, security and defence area. They are hardly credible as European reformers in the area of freedom, security and justice, either.
With almost nothing to give, it remains a mystery why they don’t act forcefully for their countries to withdraw from the European Union.
Ralf Grahn
The ECRG has presented ten short principles. The part looked at the preamble. The second part presented the principles from 1 to 5, and this third part contains the remaining principles, one at a time, with subjective comments.
***
NATO first
6. The overriding value of the transatlantic security relationship in a revitalised NATO, and support for young democracies across Europe.
Comment
The plethora of common interests between the United States and the European Union – values, trade, foreign, security and defence – are reduced and made subservient to the defence alliance NATO, although the US needs a coherent Europe to deal with in all mutual areas and as an ally in the world. Despite the importance of NATO, the US has more pressing global challenges to think about, and twenty years after the fall of the Soviet Union it has a right to expect that the EU will be able to defend itself in most conceivable situations before long.
The ECRG says nothing about developing the foreign, security and defence policy, or the common defence, of the European Union. The most fundamental challenges for the EU are left unanswered (but the UK Conservatives’ European Election Manifesto was outright hostile towards the timid Lisbon Treaty reforms in the foreign policy area.)
My reading is that it is an error to do anything to keep the UK within the European Union based on its foreign policy influence or military capabilities, as long as Britain is opposed to using them for the common good.
Young democracies need support, from Morocco to Murmansk, but the crux of the matter is how we are going to achieve coherent and cohesive European Union action with regard to the Eastern Partnership, the Union for the Mediterranean or Russia. The sovereign integrity of each EU member state is a recipe for disaster.
***
Immigration control
7. Effectively controlled immigration and an end to abuse of asylum procedures
Comment
Improved immigration control and asylum procedures seem to be in line with the EU’s aims under the Hague Programme and the future Stockholm Programme on justice and home affairs (area of freedom, security and justice).
Given the participating parties, it is surprising thing that the European Conservatives mention these policies in a document on the European Union. Great Britain has opted out of the Schengen area of free internal travel and external border control. Under the Lisbon Treaty Britain would opt out of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and together with Poland from the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights containing the guiding values with regard to individuals.
The ECRG parties are hardly the ones most famous for promoting effective, but fair responses to the common challenges of migration and asylum.
***
Public services
8. Efficient and modern public services and sensitivity to the needs of both rural and urban communities.
Comment
Who could oppose such gifted platitudes?
***
Waste
9. An end to waste and excessive bureaucracy and a commitment to greater transparency and probity in the EU institutions and use of EU funds.
Comment
Who could oppose such gifted platitudes?
***
Equality of member states
10. Respect and equitable treatment for all EU countries, new and old, large and small.
Comment
Who could oppose such gifted platitudes?
***
The European Conservatives are potential saboteurs in the evolving foreign, security and defence area. They are hardly credible as European reformers in the area of freedom, security and justice, either.
With almost nothing to give, it remains a mystery why they don’t act forcefully for their countries to withdraw from the European Union.
Ralf Grahn
European Conservatives: Prague declaration analysis (Part two)
What does the Prague declaration of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECRG) in the European Parliament tell us about the future policies of the new political group, built around the UK Conservative Party of David Cameron and William Hague (26 MEPs), the Polish Law and Justice Party (PiS) of the Kaczynski twins (15 MEPs) and the Czech Civic Democratic Party (ODS) of Mirek Topolanek (formerly Vaclav Klaus) (9 MEPs), with a fluctuating number of individual representatives from other member states?
The ECRG has presented ten short principles. The previous post looked at the preamble. Now we present the principles, one at a time, with subjective comments.
***
Free enterprise
1. Free enterprise, free and fair trade and competition, minimal regulation, lower taxation, and small government as the ultimate catalysts for individual freedom and personal and national prosperity.
Comment
Conspicuously absent is any mention of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe, the main aim of European integration since the Treaty of Rome (EEC Treaty) more than 50 years ago; thus, an objective every member state has embraced when joining the European Communities or the European Union. The ECRG rejects the basic tenet of the European Community (European Union).
Free enterprise is but an unnamed part of the European Community task to promote a harmonious, balanced and sustainable development of economic activities and a high level of employment and of social protection. In the Treaty of Lisbon this has been defined as a highly competitive social market economy. The ECRG does not pay even lip service to the European Community’s (European Union’s) concept of a social market economy.
The member states form a customs union and they are treaty bound to contribute to the harmonious development of world trade, the progressive abolition of restrictions on international trade and the lowering of customs barriers. The ECRG’s aim to promote free and fair trade is compatible with the stated aims of the EC (EU), and the ECRG is probably a force for positive change with regard to foot-dragging member states.
Free and fair competition is in line with the EC (EU) aim to ensure competition in the internal market.
Minimal national regulation has contributed to burdening taxpayers with trillions of debt because of reckless financial institutions and failing regulators, so the minimal regulation credo seems to come from the backbone of Conservative thought rather than from the brain.
The huge socialised liabilities caused by the financial mess and the economic downturn undermine the credibility of the call for lower taxation. Add the rising burdens of ageing societies, and lower taxation (a national competence) turns intellectually dishonest.
Small government is a populist and reductionist view of the public sector. I would prefer smart government, i.e. effective and efficient.
Individual freedom seems to be designed for the privileged, and the ECRG makes no effort to indicate how their (national) prosperity would benefit society as a whole.
All in all, there is nothing compassionate about this brand of Conservatism, and precious little to place it near the European mainstream of socially responsible government.
***
Freedom
2. Freedom of the individual, more personal responsibility and greater democratic accountability.
Comment
Freedom of the individual seems to be rooted in the absence of government action, and more personal responsibility looks like the free choice to sink or swim without societal help. Most Nordic Conservatives would see these unadorned principles as callous, because they lack any reference to the wellbeing of society as a whole.
If the ECRG is interested in a rounded and modern message on EU citizens’ rights, it should promote the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
There is no attempt to explain where and how of greater democratic accountability.
***
Energy security
3. Sustainable, clean energy supply with an emphasis on energy security.
Comment
The energy policy targets are crucial and commendable, but much more is needed to make them into viable policies.
***
Family
4. The importance of the family as the bedrock of society.
Comment
Is this a sop to the Polish Law and Justice Party (PiS), a tacit approval of its Catholic agenda against deviants?
***
Nationalism
5. The sovereign integrity of the nation state, opposition to EU federalism and a renewed respect for true subsidiarity.
Comment
The ECRG does not use the words nationalism or nationalistic, but that is what the sovereign integrity of the nation state indicates as their ideological backbone.
Anti-federalism further underlines the commitment to solve European level and global problems at national level.
Every EU legislative proposal is screened with regard to subsidiarity and proportionality, so this is the third phrasing in one sentence of a minimalist view of the role of the European Union.
***
This far, the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECRG) could contribute to the European Union’s aims with regard to international trade and competition in the internal market, although they reject the consensus on economic and social policy.
On the other hand, the European Conservatives reject the basic aim of European integration and they prefer nationalism to common procedures and solutions. They offer no promise of a European Union able to speak with one voice on the global stage. Their minimalist message is not only anti-federalist, but against European mainstream political thought.
In the third part we look at the remaining principles of the European Conservatives. (It is better to leave out the Reformists, when revisionists would be more apt.)
Ralf Grahn
The ECRG has presented ten short principles. The previous post looked at the preamble. Now we present the principles, one at a time, with subjective comments.
***
Free enterprise
1. Free enterprise, free and fair trade and competition, minimal regulation, lower taxation, and small government as the ultimate catalysts for individual freedom and personal and national prosperity.
Comment
Conspicuously absent is any mention of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe, the main aim of European integration since the Treaty of Rome (EEC Treaty) more than 50 years ago; thus, an objective every member state has embraced when joining the European Communities or the European Union. The ECRG rejects the basic tenet of the European Community (European Union).
Free enterprise is but an unnamed part of the European Community task to promote a harmonious, balanced and sustainable development of economic activities and a high level of employment and of social protection. In the Treaty of Lisbon this has been defined as a highly competitive social market economy. The ECRG does not pay even lip service to the European Community’s (European Union’s) concept of a social market economy.
The member states form a customs union and they are treaty bound to contribute to the harmonious development of world trade, the progressive abolition of restrictions on international trade and the lowering of customs barriers. The ECRG’s aim to promote free and fair trade is compatible with the stated aims of the EC (EU), and the ECRG is probably a force for positive change with regard to foot-dragging member states.
Free and fair competition is in line with the EC (EU) aim to ensure competition in the internal market.
Minimal national regulation has contributed to burdening taxpayers with trillions of debt because of reckless financial institutions and failing regulators, so the minimal regulation credo seems to come from the backbone of Conservative thought rather than from the brain.
The huge socialised liabilities caused by the financial mess and the economic downturn undermine the credibility of the call for lower taxation. Add the rising burdens of ageing societies, and lower taxation (a national competence) turns intellectually dishonest.
Small government is a populist and reductionist view of the public sector. I would prefer smart government, i.e. effective and efficient.
Individual freedom seems to be designed for the privileged, and the ECRG makes no effort to indicate how their (national) prosperity would benefit society as a whole.
All in all, there is nothing compassionate about this brand of Conservatism, and precious little to place it near the European mainstream of socially responsible government.
***
Freedom
2. Freedom of the individual, more personal responsibility and greater democratic accountability.
Comment
Freedom of the individual seems to be rooted in the absence of government action, and more personal responsibility looks like the free choice to sink or swim without societal help. Most Nordic Conservatives would see these unadorned principles as callous, because they lack any reference to the wellbeing of society as a whole.
If the ECRG is interested in a rounded and modern message on EU citizens’ rights, it should promote the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
There is no attempt to explain where and how of greater democratic accountability.
***
Energy security
3. Sustainable, clean energy supply with an emphasis on energy security.
Comment
The energy policy targets are crucial and commendable, but much more is needed to make them into viable policies.
***
Family
4. The importance of the family as the bedrock of society.
Comment
Is this a sop to the Polish Law and Justice Party (PiS), a tacit approval of its Catholic agenda against deviants?
***
Nationalism
5. The sovereign integrity of the nation state, opposition to EU federalism and a renewed respect for true subsidiarity.
Comment
The ECRG does not use the words nationalism or nationalistic, but that is what the sovereign integrity of the nation state indicates as their ideological backbone.
Anti-federalism further underlines the commitment to solve European level and global problems at national level.
Every EU legislative proposal is screened with regard to subsidiarity and proportionality, so this is the third phrasing in one sentence of a minimalist view of the role of the European Union.
***
This far, the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECRG) could contribute to the European Union’s aims with regard to international trade and competition in the internal market, although they reject the consensus on economic and social policy.
On the other hand, the European Conservatives reject the basic aim of European integration and they prefer nationalism to common procedures and solutions. They offer no promise of a European Union able to speak with one voice on the global stage. Their minimalist message is not only anti-federalist, but against European mainstream political thought.
In the third part we look at the remaining principles of the European Conservatives. (It is better to leave out the Reformists, when revisionists would be more apt.)
Ralf Grahn
Thursday, 25 June 2009
European Conservatives: Prague declaration analysis (Part one)
What do we know about the politics of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECRG) in the European Parliament?
The strongest manifestation is the establishment of the new political group, built around the UK Conservative Party of David Cameron and William Hague (26 MEPs), the Polish Law and Justice Party (PiS) of the Kaczynski twins (15 MEPs) and the Czech Civic Democratic Party (ODS) of Mirek Topolanek (formerly Vaclav Klaus) (9 MEPs), with a fluctuating number of individual representatives from other member states.
The Tories and the ODS left the EPP-ED group, the home of the mainstream group of the European People’s Party (EPP) and the sub-group European Democrats (ED). The divorce from the European mainstream is accentuated by the new union with the nationalist and populist PiS on the fringes.
Prague declaration
There is not much to go on with regard to policies, but the three main parties have agreed on some common principles, the so called Prague declaration.
Let us look at the declaration and provide some subjective comment on its contents.
***
Preamble
The Prague declaration of principles of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group in the European Parliament
Conscious of the urgent need to reform the EU on the basis of Eurorealism, openness, accountability and democracy, in a way that respects the sovereignty of our nations and concentrates on economic recovery, growth and competitiveness, the European Conservatives and Reformists Group shares the following Principles: …
Comment
The euphemism Euroskeptic is mainly used by people who oppose European integration and in many cases propose breaking up the European Union, or at least their country’s secession from the EU. Anti-EU and anti-European are preferable terms.
Eurorealism is seen as a softer version of anti-EU action. European integration as a process leading to closer political union is rejected. Dismantling parts of the institutional EU and repatriating some powers to the member states are distinct possibilities. This is the first – and key – auto-definition of the ECRG.
Without using the word, the ECRG defines itself as nationalist, because the Eurorealism, openness, accountability and democracy it mentions as the cornerstones of EU reform are all subject to the respect of the sovereignty of their nations, i.e. the member states.
The political scope of the “reformed” European Union is practically reduced to the economic area: economic recovery, growth and competitiveness.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. The European Citizen has written a thoughtful blog post on the new political group: The European Conservatives and Reformists (24 June 2009).
The strongest manifestation is the establishment of the new political group, built around the UK Conservative Party of David Cameron and William Hague (26 MEPs), the Polish Law and Justice Party (PiS) of the Kaczynski twins (15 MEPs) and the Czech Civic Democratic Party (ODS) of Mirek Topolanek (formerly Vaclav Klaus) (9 MEPs), with a fluctuating number of individual representatives from other member states.
The Tories and the ODS left the EPP-ED group, the home of the mainstream group of the European People’s Party (EPP) and the sub-group European Democrats (ED). The divorce from the European mainstream is accentuated by the new union with the nationalist and populist PiS on the fringes.
Prague declaration
There is not much to go on with regard to policies, but the three main parties have agreed on some common principles, the so called Prague declaration.
Let us look at the declaration and provide some subjective comment on its contents.
***
Preamble
The Prague declaration of principles of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group in the European Parliament
Conscious of the urgent need to reform the EU on the basis of Eurorealism, openness, accountability and democracy, in a way that respects the sovereignty of our nations and concentrates on economic recovery, growth and competitiveness, the European Conservatives and Reformists Group shares the following Principles: …
Comment
The euphemism Euroskeptic is mainly used by people who oppose European integration and in many cases propose breaking up the European Union, or at least their country’s secession from the EU. Anti-EU and anti-European are preferable terms.
Eurorealism is seen as a softer version of anti-EU action. European integration as a process leading to closer political union is rejected. Dismantling parts of the institutional EU and repatriating some powers to the member states are distinct possibilities. This is the first – and key – auto-definition of the ECRG.
Without using the word, the ECRG defines itself as nationalist, because the Eurorealism, openness, accountability and democracy it mentions as the cornerstones of EU reform are all subject to the respect of the sovereignty of their nations, i.e. the member states.
The political scope of the “reformed” European Union is practically reduced to the economic area: economic recovery, growth and competitiveness.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. The European Citizen has written a thoughtful blog post on the new political group: The European Conservatives and Reformists (24 June 2009).
Wednesday, 24 June 2009
European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECRG)
The UK Conservatives have announced the establishment of a new political group in the European Parliament: the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECRG).
At least the following Euroblogs have commented: Jon Worth, Nosemonkey, Julien Frisch, Coulisses de Bruxelles and La Oreja de Europa.
***
At the latest count the new group seems to have 56 MEPs, and it may pick up a few more before the inaugural session of the EP on 14 July 2009. The ECRG will probably be the fourth largest group in numbers.
There is no group in the European Parliament with enough votes to amend legislation on its own, so a majority of the component members (736) has to be sought over party lines. These coalitions will be formed among the four groups in the European mainstream.
According to the Wikipedia article European Parliament election, 2009 these probable groups and sizes are the following (latest update 23 June 2009):
• European People’s Party (EPP) 263
• Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (PASD) 183
• Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) 82
• European Greens-European Free Alliance (Greens-EFA) 53
The European Parliament is going to function through the mainstream groups. The British voters have backed only 29 MEPs (out of 72) who will exert real influence by sitting in the groups with power.
Opposition groups to the left and the right of the European mainstream will be able to table and to air their alternative proposals, or vote with the majority, but they are going to remain marginal.
British business interests and the US administration have seen the first omens of a future Conservative government led by David Cameron and William Hague.
***
By the way: Looking at the make-up, the addition of the word “Reformists” to the name of the ECRG expresses a profound sense of humour.
Ralf Grahn
At least the following Euroblogs have commented: Jon Worth, Nosemonkey, Julien Frisch, Coulisses de Bruxelles and La Oreja de Europa.
***
At the latest count the new group seems to have 56 MEPs, and it may pick up a few more before the inaugural session of the EP on 14 July 2009. The ECRG will probably be the fourth largest group in numbers.
There is no group in the European Parliament with enough votes to amend legislation on its own, so a majority of the component members (736) has to be sought over party lines. These coalitions will be formed among the four groups in the European mainstream.
According to the Wikipedia article European Parliament election, 2009 these probable groups and sizes are the following (latest update 23 June 2009):
• European People’s Party (EPP) 263
• Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (PASD) 183
• Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) 82
• European Greens-European Free Alliance (Greens-EFA) 53
The European Parliament is going to function through the mainstream groups. The British voters have backed only 29 MEPs (out of 72) who will exert real influence by sitting in the groups with power.
Opposition groups to the left and the right of the European mainstream will be able to table and to air their alternative proposals, or vote with the majority, but they are going to remain marginal.
British business interests and the US administration have seen the first omens of a future Conservative government led by David Cameron and William Hague.
***
By the way: Looking at the make-up, the addition of the word “Reformists” to the name of the ECRG expresses a profound sense of humour.
Ralf Grahn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To Grahnlaw
Posts
All Comments
