A while ago Nosemonkey sparked off a lengthy discussion by asking: What percentage of laws come from the EU? (2 June 2009)
***
Over at the French think tank Notre Europe, Yves Bertoncini has published an assessment of the proportion of EU legislation: La législation nationale d’origine communautaire : briser le mythe des 80% (Les Brefs de Notre Europe No 13, mai 2009).
Bertoncini notes that the 80 per cent figure has caught on rapidly among both anti-Europeans and Euro-enthusiasts. It is difficult to reach a reliable figure, when assessing two different legal systems, but many have not been especially diligent in explaining that.
On 1 July 2008 the acquis communautaire comprised 28,031 legal acts (secondary acts, based on the treaties). Of these, 9,685 were Directives or Regulations.
Each year, the European Community produced between 2,181 (from 1978 to 2007) and 2,744 (from 1998 to 2007) Directives and Regulations.
In 2008 there were 2,249 Regulations and 247 Directives published in the Official Journal of the European Union (total 2,496).
The proportion of Community norms to French norms was a little less than 15 per cent.
The most heavily regulated areas were agriculture with about 42.6 per cent of all Regulations and Directives, the internal market including free movement with about 20 per cent and external relations (technical, economic and financial) with about 10 per cent.
The proportion of Community norms among legal norms applicable in France vary hugely between different sectors:
• Almost half in the agricultural sector
• About 20 per cent in the field of the economy and “foreign affairs”
• A little less than 5 per cent in “ecology”
• Less than 2 per cent in ten other sectors studied
Even given the methodological difficulties, Bertoncini concludes that the proportion of Community norms is closer to 20 than to 80 per cent.
Ralf Grahn
Showing posts with label Notre Europe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Notre Europe. Show all posts
Saturday, 6 June 2009
Saturday, 23 May 2009
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
***
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
Sunday, 26 April 2009
European elections and EU citizens
The think tank Notre Europe has published an interesting policy brief by Renaud Dehousse on the gap between the legislation the institutions of the European Union (are treaty bound to) produce and the expectations of EU citizens: L’action de l’Union répond-elle aux preferences des citoyens ? (25 April 2009; 4 pages).
How much does the difference between demand and offer diminish participation in the European elections?
The bulk of legislative output concerns agriculture and fisheries as well as the internal market.
Citizens’ expectations concern measures against insecurity, immigration and the environment, followed by energy, social issues and solidarity with poorer regions.
Dehousse notes that the Commission has become more responsive to the expectations of citizens (than the other institutions).
***
Dehousse does not find it surprising that participation is on a downward trend. Citizens cannot decide the composition of the executive. Citizens’ preferences must be given a greater weight, by expressing their preferences for the President of the Commission and by reforming the exclusive right of the Commission to propose legislation. Meanwhile, the citizens themselves can become agents for change by voting for candidates whose visions of Europe resemble their own:
Dans ces conditions, la baisse régulière du taux de participation aux élections européennes n’a rien pour surprendre. Pourquoi les électeurs se passionneraient- ils pour une consultation qui ne leur permet pas de peser sur la désignation de l’exécutif , ou pour un système politique dont les priorités leur paraissent éloignées des leurs ? Pour redonner du sens au vote européen, il faut trouver une façon de donner plus de poids aux préférences des citoyens, que ce soit en leur permettant d’exprimer leurs préférences quant au choix du président de la Commission, comme l’a proposé Notre Europe, ou en réfléchissant à une réforme des dispositions qui réservent à la Commission l’initiative en matière législative. Et les électeurs eux-mêmes peuvent s’ériger en acteurs du changement en apportant leur voix à des candidats qui s’engageraient à utiliser la panoplie des pouvoirs dont disposent les parlementaires pour défendre la vision de l’Europe à laquelle ils adhèrent.
Ralf Grahn
How much does the difference between demand and offer diminish participation in the European elections?
The bulk of legislative output concerns agriculture and fisheries as well as the internal market.
Citizens’ expectations concern measures against insecurity, immigration and the environment, followed by energy, social issues and solidarity with poorer regions.
Dehousse notes that the Commission has become more responsive to the expectations of citizens (than the other institutions).
***
Dehousse does not find it surprising that participation is on a downward trend. Citizens cannot decide the composition of the executive. Citizens’ preferences must be given a greater weight, by expressing their preferences for the President of the Commission and by reforming the exclusive right of the Commission to propose legislation. Meanwhile, the citizens themselves can become agents for change by voting for candidates whose visions of Europe resemble their own:
Dans ces conditions, la baisse régulière du taux de participation aux élections européennes n’a rien pour surprendre. Pourquoi les électeurs se passionneraient- ils pour une consultation qui ne leur permet pas de peser sur la désignation de l’exécutif , ou pour un système politique dont les priorités leur paraissent éloignées des leurs ? Pour redonner du sens au vote européen, il faut trouver une façon de donner plus de poids aux préférences des citoyens, que ce soit en leur permettant d’exprimer leurs préférences quant au choix du président de la Commission, comme l’a proposé Notre Europe, ou en réfléchissant à une réforme des dispositions qui réservent à la Commission l’initiative en matière législative. Et les électeurs eux-mêmes peuvent s’ériger en acteurs du changement en apportant leur voix à des candidats qui s’engageraient à utiliser la panoplie des pouvoirs dont disposent les parlementaires pour défendre la vision de l’Europe à laquelle ils adhèrent.
Ralf Grahn
Thursday, 12 March 2009
Democracy in the EU
Ahead of the European elections, a collaborative effort between European think-tanks has produced ‘Democracy in the EU and the role of the European Parliament’ (edited by Gianni Bonvicini).
The 76 page publication is available at least from Notre Europe:
http://www.notre-europe.eu/uploads/tx_publication/Quaderni_E_14_external1__2_.pdf
The articles try to answer the question how to make European integration more legitimate.
Ralf Grahn
The 76 page publication is available at least from Notre Europe:
http://www.notre-europe.eu/uploads/tx_publication/Quaderni_E_14_external1__2_.pdf
The articles try to answer the question how to make European integration more legitimate.
Ralf Grahn
Thursday, 26 June 2008
Vote and advance!
The chairman of the think-tank Notre Europe, Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa, makes an interesting – and true – observation of the history of European integration. France has been the determining factor. When France has put the brakes on, to preserve its veto, the European communities have stalled, often leading to severe crises. When France has agreed to effective decision-making, the European project has advanced and the common good has been given a firmer footing.
In other words, France has effectively regulated progress.
Padoa-Schioppas article ‘Président Sarkozy, faites voter !’ can be found in Le Monde (26 June 2008) :
http://www.lemonde.fr/opinions/article/2008/06/25/president-sarkozy-faites-voter-par-tommaso-padoa-schioppa_1062635_3232.html
In addition to his interesting analysis, the chairman of the think-tank founded by Jacques Delors issues an impassioned plea to France to use the six months of its Council presidency to become, once again, the engine of the European Union. Key to this is not to accept blocking vetoes, but to vote, to decide and to progress. The gist of Padoa-Schioppa’s plea can be read in the concluding paragraph of the article:
« La France a entre ses mains les clés pour libérer l'horizon. La présidence de l'Union représente une occasion unique qu'elle ne doit pas rater. Les débats sur le bilan de santé de la PAC, la politique d'immigration et l'énergie s'y prêteraient à merveille. Dès lors, ma recommandation centrale à la future présidence française tient en deux mots : n'acceptez pas le blocage par le veto, n'acceptez pas de retarder une décision pour attendre tout le monde, "faites voter !" La France démontrera ainsi sa capacité à redevenir le moteur d'une Europe en mouvement. »
***
Padoa-Schioppa is right in his long term analysis of France’s often contradictory role as perceived engine of the European project, but persistently intergovernmentalist in practice, the phenomenon I have branded the “French paradox”.
He is also correct in pointing out the crucial factor between unanimity leading to minimalist solutions and qualified majority voting opening up vistas for the common good of the citizens of the European Union.
President Nicolas Sarkozy seems to have the requisite amount of ambition. But has he the courage needed to act?
Ralf Grahn
In other words, France has effectively regulated progress.
Padoa-Schioppas article ‘Président Sarkozy, faites voter !’ can be found in Le Monde (26 June 2008) :
http://www.lemonde.fr/opinions/article/2008/06/25/president-sarkozy-faites-voter-par-tommaso-padoa-schioppa_1062635_3232.html
In addition to his interesting analysis, the chairman of the think-tank founded by Jacques Delors issues an impassioned plea to France to use the six months of its Council presidency to become, once again, the engine of the European Union. Key to this is not to accept blocking vetoes, but to vote, to decide and to progress. The gist of Padoa-Schioppa’s plea can be read in the concluding paragraph of the article:
« La France a entre ses mains les clés pour libérer l'horizon. La présidence de l'Union représente une occasion unique qu'elle ne doit pas rater. Les débats sur le bilan de santé de la PAC, la politique d'immigration et l'énergie s'y prêteraient à merveille. Dès lors, ma recommandation centrale à la future présidence française tient en deux mots : n'acceptez pas le blocage par le veto, n'acceptez pas de retarder une décision pour attendre tout le monde, "faites voter !" La France démontrera ainsi sa capacité à redevenir le moteur d'une Europe en mouvement. »
***
Padoa-Schioppa is right in his long term analysis of France’s often contradictory role as perceived engine of the European project, but persistently intergovernmentalist in practice, the phenomenon I have branded the “French paradox”.
He is also correct in pointing out the crucial factor between unanimity leading to minimalist solutions and qualified majority voting opening up vistas for the common good of the citizens of the European Union.
President Nicolas Sarkozy seems to have the requisite amount of ambition. But has he the courage needed to act?
Ralf Grahn
Tuesday, 25 March 2008
EU TFEU CAP: Common agricultural policy objectives
The main objectives of common agricultural policy (CAP) of the European Economic Community (EEC) were fixed in the Treaty of Rome in 1957, and the Treaty of Lisbon fifty years later would actually ultimately restore the original Article number, without changing the slightest detail of the contents.
In spite of this immovable background the CAP is a hotly contested policy area and historically the greatest user of Community funds.
The CAP “Helath Check” in 2008, the Budget Review in 2008/09 and the next financial perspective from 2014 are all played out within the framework of the basic treaty provisions.
***
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) had nothing specific to say after Article 32 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), point 47, until Article 36 TEC, point 48 (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/33).
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) changes the name of the treaty, which becomes the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Part Three becomes ‘Policies and internal actions of the Union’ and fisheries are added to Title II (renumbered Title III) which consequently becomes ‘Agriculture and fisheries’ (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/207).
No horizontal amendments seem to apply to Article 33 TEC, which becomes Article 33 in the Treaty of Lisbon version of the TFEU, but destined for later renumbering to become Article 39 TFEU.
Thus, we present the new setting and retrieve the wording of the provision from the latest consolidated version of the treaties (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/54):
Part Three Policies and internal actions of the Union
Title II (renumbered Title III) Agriculture and fisheries
Article 33 TFEU (ToL), renumbered Article 39 TFEU
1. The objectives of the common agricultural policy shall be:
(a) to increase agricultural productivity by promoting technical progress and by ensuring the rational development of agricultural production and the optimum utilisation of the factors of production, in particular labour;
(b) thus to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, in particular by increasing the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture;
(c) to stabilise markets;
(d) to assure the availability of supplies;
(e) to ensure that supplies reach consumers at reasonable prices.
2. In working out the common agricultural policy and the special methods for its application, account shall be taken of:
(a) the particular nature of agricultural activity, which results from the social structure of agriculture and from structural and natural disparities between the various agricultural regions;
(b) the need to effect the appropriate adjustments by degrees;
(c) the fact that in the Member States agriculture constitutes a sector closely linked with the economy as a whole.
***
The European Convention did not change a comma of corresponding provision of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, Article III-123 (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/51).
The IGC 2004’s Article III-227 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe observed the same degree of orthodoxy.
More than that, strict observance is highlighted through the fact that, word for word, the renumbered Article 39 TFEU would be the same as Article 39 of the original Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (Treaty of Rome, 1957).
***
Those who want to understand the present common agricultural policy and its future can turn to the UK House of Lords European Union Committee’s report ‘The Future of the Common Agricultural Policy’, with Volume I: Report (HL Paper 54-I) and Volume II: Evidence (HL Paper 54-II) (7th Report of Session 2007-08, published 6 March 2008):
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/54/54.pdf
The French think tank Notre Europe runs projects which aim at budget reform and CAP reform post 2013. Among a plethora of policy papers there is a fresh one by Eulalia Rubio ‘EUBudget Review: Addressing the Thorny Issues’, published 7 March 2008. The CAP 2013 project is preparing proposals. A presentation including links to preparatory work is offered in English on the following web page (although the French page has been updated later):
http://www.notre-europe.eu/en/axes/competition-cooperation-solidarity/projects/projet/proposals-for-the-cap-post-2013/
An official tour of CAP legislation and the budget can start from the Commission’s SCADPlus web page Agriculture: General framework:
http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/s04018.htm
Ralf Grahn
In spite of this immovable background the CAP is a hotly contested policy area and historically the greatest user of Community funds.
The CAP “Helath Check” in 2008, the Budget Review in 2008/09 and the next financial perspective from 2014 are all played out within the framework of the basic treaty provisions.
***
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) had nothing specific to say after Article 32 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), point 47, until Article 36 TEC, point 48 (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/33).
The Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) changes the name of the treaty, which becomes the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Part Three becomes ‘Policies and internal actions of the Union’ and fisheries are added to Title II (renumbered Title III) which consequently becomes ‘Agriculture and fisheries’ (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/207).
No horizontal amendments seem to apply to Article 33 TEC, which becomes Article 33 in the Treaty of Lisbon version of the TFEU, but destined for later renumbering to become Article 39 TFEU.
Thus, we present the new setting and retrieve the wording of the provision from the latest consolidated version of the treaties (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/54):
Part Three Policies and internal actions of the Union
Title II (renumbered Title III) Agriculture and fisheries
Article 33 TFEU (ToL), renumbered Article 39 TFEU
1. The objectives of the common agricultural policy shall be:
(a) to increase agricultural productivity by promoting technical progress and by ensuring the rational development of agricultural production and the optimum utilisation of the factors of production, in particular labour;
(b) thus to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, in particular by increasing the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture;
(c) to stabilise markets;
(d) to assure the availability of supplies;
(e) to ensure that supplies reach consumers at reasonable prices.
2. In working out the common agricultural policy and the special methods for its application, account shall be taken of:
(a) the particular nature of agricultural activity, which results from the social structure of agriculture and from structural and natural disparities between the various agricultural regions;
(b) the need to effect the appropriate adjustments by degrees;
(c) the fact that in the Member States agriculture constitutes a sector closely linked with the economy as a whole.
***
The European Convention did not change a comma of corresponding provision of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, Article III-123 (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/51).
The IGC 2004’s Article III-227 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe observed the same degree of orthodoxy.
More than that, strict observance is highlighted through the fact that, word for word, the renumbered Article 39 TFEU would be the same as Article 39 of the original Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (Treaty of Rome, 1957).
***
Those who want to understand the present common agricultural policy and its future can turn to the UK House of Lords European Union Committee’s report ‘The Future of the Common Agricultural Policy’, with Volume I: Report (HL Paper 54-I) and Volume II: Evidence (HL Paper 54-II) (7th Report of Session 2007-08, published 6 March 2008):
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/54/54.pdf
The French think tank Notre Europe runs projects which aim at budget reform and CAP reform post 2013. Among a plethora of policy papers there is a fresh one by Eulalia Rubio ‘EUBudget Review: Addressing the Thorny Issues’, published 7 March 2008. The CAP 2013 project is preparing proposals. A presentation including links to preparatory work is offered in English on the following web page (although the French page has been updated later):
http://www.notre-europe.eu/en/axes/competition-cooperation-solidarity/projects/projet/proposals-for-the-cap-post-2013/
An official tour of CAP legislation and the budget can start from the Commission’s SCADPlus web page Agriculture: General framework:
http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/s04018.htm
Ralf Grahn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To Grahnlaw
Posts
All Comments
