EU: From Monti report to Single Market Act

In his ”State of the Union” speech, the president of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, outlined the Commission’s Work Programme for 2011.

With regard to the economy, including the internal market, Barroso set the tone during the introduction:

Now is the time to modernise our social market economy so that it can compete globally and respond to the challenge of demography. Now is the time to make the right investments for our future.

The inter-related efforts, dealing with the economic crisis and governance, as well as restoring growth for jobs by accelerating the Europe 2020 (EU2020) reform agenda, were the first two major challenges Barroso mentioned out of five in all.

The 7 September 2010 speech in the European Parliament saw sound public finances as a means to an end: sustainable and inclusive growth for jobs. The aim of the Europe 2020 strategy is to get more people into jobs, boost the competitiveness of companies and deepen the single market.




Single Market Act



Barroso referred to the report by Mario Monti and he promised Commission proposals in October 2010 to deepen the internal market.



Barroso’s letter to the members of the European Parliament (MEMO/10/393) contained more detail about the draft Commission Work Programme (CWP) for 2011, to be adopted by the end of October.



After reminding the MEPs of the flagship initiatives of the EU2020 strategy, Barroso described the coming proposals to unlock the potential of the Single Market. The CWP 2011 will include:

- Measures to be set out in the Single Market Act
- A European framework of reference for contract law and action against the obstacles that businesses and citizens meet when trying to recover debt claims in other Member States. When access to capital is limited, rapid enforcement of claims is essential for the survival of businesses
- An assessment of progress on the development of roaming services
- Revised rules on the re-use of public sector information
- The conclusion of work on collective redress
- Defining how the EU can contribute to addressing the huge challenge of pension reform

Barroso also promised smart regulation, namely proposals to reduce the administrative burden on economic operators, especially small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs).




Ralf Grahn





P.S. Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?



Politics, policies, economics and law at a European level are becoming more important in a globalising world. So does the multilingual aggregator for EU-related blogs. There are now 669 Euroblogs, or blogs related to European Union (and Council of Europe) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.

Buzzword Bingo victory interview: Barroso’s “State of the Union”

Sadly, a tropical fever reduced the editor of the Bloggingportal.eu blog to a state of such infirmity that his weekly roundup of Euroblogs was limited to the announcement of the winner of the Barroso “State of the Union” Buzzword Bingo: The Week in Bloggingportal: Bingo! (12 September 2010).

We hope for speedy and full recovery for the Bloggingportal.eu blog editor. At the same time we have a joyful message to the fans of Grahnlaw (if any):

Ralf Grahn, dix points !

This gave Grahnlaw, the blog, the opportunity to conduct a victory interview with the winner Ralf Grahn, its writer. (Speak of being close to the subject, or a lean operation in these hard times.) Here is the transcript.



Grahnlaw: What do you think where the keys to your success in a field of expert Eurobloggers?

Ralf Grahn (with a blush of false modesty): I had to place myself in the shoes of Barroso’s speechwriting team and to go for the obvious with deadpan seriousness. It gave me a trump to realise that Barroso’s address was misleadingly branded as a “State of the Union” speech, even if it was, in fact, a presentation of the Commission’s Work Programme for 2011. My tactic was to eliminate all urges to play, to succumb to humour or to give in to any creative impulses. I knew that if I slipped, I would be caught by the highly qualified competition.



Grahnlaw: What are you going to do with the coveted prize?


Ralf Grahn: The gift bag has been declared to be virtual, so no castles in Spain or anywhere else are likely to materialise. (Euro)blogging is about linking and sharing, so I am going to pass on the prize I suggested when the Barroso Buzzword Bingo was first announced: a free link to Barroso’s address. I am going to share it with all of you: the letter to the Members of the European Parliament and Barroso’s speech to the EP plenary session.



Grahnlaw: Do you have any advice for young hopeful Eurobloggers?

Ralf Grahn: You have to be resilient enough to read tons of official EU documents, train hard on a daily basis to begin to understand what they say and what they leave untold. If, after this, you still feel a passion for Europe, you may be champion stuff.



Grahnlaw: Thank you for this remarkable interview.

Ralf Grahn: My pleasure.



Your interviewer, interviewee and transcriber

Ralf Grahn

“State of the Union”: Draft Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission

Despite saying so, the draft report for the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) on the revision of the framework agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission [5.8.2010; 2010/2118(ACI)] did not contain an annex with the agreement, nor did the draft reports by Paolo Rangel clarify the supposedly new “State of the Union” address.

In order to find the legal base for the “State of the Union” debate and to fill the gaps in my knowledge, I decided to search the register of the Council of the European Union. Luckily, I found what I was looking for:



Council document 12717/10: Draft Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission - Reply to the letter of 30 June 2010 of the President of the Coreper

When we search the document, we actually find the “State of the Union” address and debate. Their position is far from prominent: We have to go Annex 4 – Timetable for the Commission Work Programme, which starts on page 24 of the Council document (and page 22/23 of the draft agreement).

On the same page, in point 5, we find the relevant text:

Each year in the first part-session of September, a State of the Union debate will be held in which the President of the Commission shall deliver an address, taking stock of the current year and looking ahead to future priorities for the following years. To this effect, the President will in parallel set out in writing to the Parliament the main elements guiding the preparation of the Work Programme for the following year.

After continued exchanges (point 6), the Commission adopts its Work Programme for the following year in October (point 7) and the European Parliament may hold a debate and adopt a resolution in December (point 8).

I am happy, if the European Parliament and the European Commission further develop an orderly, harmonious and forward-looking relationship.

However, the advance information from the Commission gave the public (on Barroso’s website and in his letter to the MEPs) the distinct impression that the “State of the Union” address was based on the (new) framework agreement, but as we have seen, this agreement has not been approved by the EP plenary, nor has it entered into force.

In my humble view, the “State of the Union” address and debate constitute institutional innovations of a highly symbolic nature, not to be buried into an obscure provision of an annex to an agreement.

In addition, the AFCO Committee failed to mention this novelty in either of its draft reports, and it neglected to annex it to its report, despite the contrary wording.

Thus, the EC and the EP have failed to act transparently.



Luckily, as I pointed out in the previous blog post, the members of the AFCO Committee still have the possibility to table amendments to the Rangel reports before the final versions are voted on. Excluding the “State of the Union” would protect the image of the EP and the EC.



Outside help



In an earlier blog post on the “State of the Union” debate, I asked for help to find relevant legal and political decisions.

I am grateful for valuable comments, which strengthen my belief in collaboration and quick corrections in the online world.



The Twitter pseudonym @Elena2020 offered links to two state of the Union speeches by Romano Prodi, which punctured the impression of a first ever and led to a corrective blog entry.

An Anonymous commenter supplied a reference to the Council document and a succinct description of the decision-making process. Even if I had found the document by then, and located the provision, this confirmed the view I had formed.



Yesterday, after the Strasbourg session week, the EP spokesperson Jaume Duch Guillot sent me a useful parallel text of the current and future framework agreement, which clarified matters further (Wikipedia).

I want to thank them for their kind assistance and contributions.



Council reservations?

This is more like a footnote to the “State of the Union” saga:



The third party in the “institutional triangle”, namely the Council, seems to have (had) some reservations about the deal between the other two. Thus, on the heavy agenda of the Committee of the Permanent Representatives (Coreper, Part 2) for 9 September 2010 (document 13257/1/10) was the following point:

44. Draft framework agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission
− Legal Service opinion 12964/10 JUR 348 INST 302

We can surmise that the Council’s Legal Service has either been asked to draft an opinion, or done so on its own initiative, but the contents are not public.



Conclusion



Today’s two blog posts add some information, but confirm our earlier view: The “State of the Union” is in fact the mislabelled state of the Commission’s Work Programme for 2011.




Ralf Grahn

European Parliament: Save your image!

It was mystifying: The European Commission informed the public that president José Manuel Barroso had agreed with the European Parliament to deliver a yearly “State of the Union” address, incorporated into the Framework Agreement between the institutions. However, I failed to find any such speech in the agreement annexed to the latest version of the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure (July 2010; Annex XIV, Annex 2).

How could it be that an institutional innovation with high symbolic meaning was not where it was supposed to be?

Concluding that I must have missed something, I asked for help from readers and I decided to look for more information.



Draft reports

This search led me to two draft reports by Paolo Rangel for the EP Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO).

The first document concerns a draft revised framework agreement:



DRAFT REPORT on the revision of the framework agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission; 5.8.2010; 2010/2118(ACI)
[ACI = Interinstitutional agreement procedure]


Even after renewed reading, I failed to find any explicit mention of the symbolically important and supposedly new “State of the Union” address. The agreement to be approved and “annexed to this decision” (point 11) was in fact not included.


The second draft report concerned changes to the EP’s Rules of Procedure, caused by the new agreement:




DRAFT REPORT on the adaptation of Parliament's Rules of Procedure to the revised framework agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission; 12.8.2010; 2010/2127(REG)
[REG = Parliament’s Rules of Procedure]


As we see, these amendments are intended to enter into force on the first day after the entry into force of the revised framework agreement. No mention of a “State of the Union” address was found in this report either, including the proposed amendments to the Rules of Procedure.



Interim conclusion

The AFCO Committee had not voted on its final report. The final AFCO report had not been approved by the EP plenary. The revised framework agreement was not in force.

In addition, the Rangel draft reports are deficient. No mention of a major novelty, the “State of the Union” address. Despite the wording, the agreement to be approved is absent, so lack of transparency adds to the material flaw.

Based on these findings, the Commission’s information about the agreement with the European Parliament on the delivery of a yearly “State of the Union” address, incorporated into the Framework Agreement between the institutions, looks incomplete, not to say misleading.



In both cases, the members of the AFCO Committee have until 15 September 2010 to table amendments to the draft reports.



There are enough blog and other media reactions to show that the title “State of the Union” led to false expectations and detracted from the real purpose of the speech: to introduce the Commission’s Work Programme to the European Parliament, offering the EP an opportunity to add its views to the process.



All is not lost

Members of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO), you still have the opportunity to put this right. Table and agree on an amendment to exclude the “State of the Union” address from the revised framework agreement between the European Parliament and the Commission.

It would be a wise move to protect the image of your own institution, the European Parliament, and it would save the European Commission from its own foolishness.




Ralf Grahn

Barroso: The state of the Commission’s Work Programme

Yesterday The European Citizen called José Manuel Barroso’s “State of the Union” address The Commissarial Speech (8 September 2010).

According to Eurocentric:

The speech itself actually wasn't that bad, if you dropped your preconceptions about the State of the Union imagery. As Honor Mahony pointed out, it was quite good as a work programme speech (particularly for a Barroso-speech).

Honor Mahony’s EUobserver blog post The speech (7 September 2010).


In my view, Eurocentric and Mahony clearly showed the conflict between a speech about the Commission's Work Programme (which it was) and a State of the Union address (which it wasn't, but was marketed as).

Underlining the 'special relationship' between the Commission and the European Parliament meant that Barroso directed the speech even more at the MEPs, who know pretty well what's coming up in their Committees anyway, and are fairly blasé.

This effectively excluded a speech to the citizens of the European Union, as well as themes, concerns and images they (we) relate to.

Eurocentric’s headline and post encapsulated this well.

For some strange reason, both Commission leadership (president Barroso) and EP leaders (president Jerzy Buzek) have wanted to market Barroso’s speech as an EU “State of the Union” address (a first), and the concept lies buried in an obscure point in an annex to the revised framework agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission, soon to be approved and to enter into force.




However, essentially Barroso’s intervention was about the Commission’s Work Programme for 2011, which he presented in two parts: a letter to the Members of the European Parliament and in his speech to the EP plenary session.

Read them as such, and they begin to make sense.

But what should they call it, when some day one of the EU presidents decides to starts discussing with the citizens of the European Union?

A fireside chat?




Ralf Grahn

Prodi preceded Barroso’s first EU “State of the Union”

Many of us have believed (and reported) that EU Commission president José Manuel Barroso held the first “State of the Union” address for the European Parliament, but instead it was his first.

Information published on the Internet can be corrected or augmented in almost real time. I feel duty bound to publish a correction.



On Twitter @Elena2020 has tweeted two links with speeches by then Commission president Romano Prodi, both headlined State of the Union. She was also kind enough to supply the information in the comments section on this blog. The first press release, from December 2001, speaks about an annual State of the Union debate. The second link reproduces the text of a speech Prodi held in November 2003, presented as his last address to the European Parliament on the state of the Union.



In an off topic post, Kommissions-Präsident Barroso spricht zum Volk (7 September 2010), Kartellblog linked to the Prodi address 2001 mentioned in the first link.

In other words, Barroso’s “State of the Union” speech was not quite the novelty I (and many others) presented it as.

Corrected as we stand, should we retract our criticism of the pretentious title now when we know that there are precedents? We should learn from our mistakes, shouldn’t we?

Before drawing conclusions, let us look at what a few European thinkers have said on Euroblogs.



On the Federal Union blog, Richard Laming saw “a delightful power struggle going on within the EU institutions”, in the blog entry : Who’s in charge (7 September 2010).



Vihar Georgiev on European Union Law spoke about The Hidden Agenda of the State of the European Union Debate (7 September 2010), here in Bulgarian. He conjectured that a tweet by the president of the European Parliament, Jerzy Buzek, revealed not only an objective for the future – a parliamentary Europe - but also some satisfaction with the results already achieved.



In Barroso’s Power Play: The State of the Union Address (7 September 2010), instead of the dawning of “parliamentary Europe” Eurogoblin saw President Barroso’s latest move in the chess-game of power politics being played between the EU institutions as the hidden agenda.

No integration “by stealth” or “hidden agenda” for me. I want to see the birth of a federal, effective and democratic European Union - overt agenda - but I still think that a “State of the Union” address by the president of the EU Commission is unwarranted by the current institutional setup and it falls flat when compared to the USA.



There has been so much negative criticism of the title and content of Barroso’s speech that I want to mention one spirited defence. In the blog post Más presidente (8 September 2010) the Spanish blogger Eva Peña, on Eva en Europa, saw the debate in Strasbourg as a historic day on the road towards a political Europe.



Dear reader, judge for yourself. Regardless of the glorified title, at the heart of Barroso’s intervention was the Commission’s Work Progamme for 2011, which he presented in two parts: a letter to the Members of the European Parliament and in his speech to the EP plenary session.




Ralf Grahn

Cheering crowds? Barroso’s EU “State of the Union” address

In the United States of America with a population of 310 million (Wikipedia), President Barack Obama’s first State of the Union address drew 48 million television viewers, according to USA Today.

With the same 15.5 per cent of the 501 million population of the European Union, about 78 million EU citizens would have followed the “State of the Union” speech by Commission President José Manuel Barroso.



Before the “big speech” I remarked on the constitutional difference between the powers and the election of the President of the USA versus the position of the European Commission in the “institutional triangle”. In the USA, the State of the Union speech is enshrined in the Constitution, while in the European Union you have to struggle to find a legal base. (I am still waiting for clarifications promised from the European Parliament.)

When the chiefs of the EU Commission and the European Parliament felt the pressure to draw a decent crowd among 736 MEPs, they panicked.



In How many presidents does it take to run Europe? (7 September 2010), The Economist’s new Charlemagne noted how Nigel Farage, of the Europe of Freedom and Democracy (EFD) group and UKIP, seized on the constitutional differences and the viewer numbers between the USA and the EU.



The European Parliament’s press release, State of the (E)Union: The Europe of today and tomorrow debated in the EP, mentions no figures for viewers on the EP’s own channel europarltv, nor did I find any statistics regarding the session elsewhere on the EP website.



We can only speculate that EP Live may have experienced a peak of viewers because of the hyped name and the critical discussion preceding the “State of the Union” address, but how many thousands would we speak about?.



Despite the absence of cheering (or jeering) crowds, “Séance en direct” is an important public service, giving EU citizens online access to the plenary sessions – live or recorded - of the European Parliament in the original language and 22 other language channels. Agendas and documents complement the supply, which guarantees a certain level of transparency in EU affairs.




Ralf Grahn

Barroso’s “State of the Union” speech: A comedy of errors (The trailer)

Part of our common European cultural heritage is The Comedy of Errors, by the great William Shakespeare. Then we have a comedy of errors, by and for us lesser mortals, “a dramatic work in which the action usually features a series of comic instances of mistaken identity” (sources: Wikipedia).

We are firmly in the lowlier category during pre-season build-up for the European Union’s first “State of the Union” address, starring Commission president José Manuel Barroso this Tuesday morning in Strasbourg.

We have the pompous title, borrowed from the United States of America.

We have the case of mistaken identity.

In the USA: “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America”, elected according to the Constitution (Article II, as amended). He is, among other things, the Commander in Chief and he has the Power to make Treaties as well as administrative, ambassadorial and judicial appointments (with the Advice and Consent of Senate). “He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient, … “.

In the European Union, the Commission plays an important part in the “institutional triangle”. The Commission promotes the general interest and it takes initiatives to that end. It ensures the application of the Treaties, it executes the budget and manages programmes, and it ensures parts of the EU’s external representation.

However, the President of the Commission is not the executive of the European Union. The member states, represented in the European Council and the Council of the European Union, ultimately the national parliaments, hold the crucial levers of power.

The directly elected European Parliament represents the citizens of the European Union, but it does not legislate alone, mainly together with the Council and the EP is (partly) excluded from fundamental questions, such as Treaty reform, the long term budget (taxes and expenditure), as well as foreign and security policy and defence.

Therefore, when the President of the Commission José Manuel Barroso and the President of the European Parliament Jerzy Buzek have agreed on a “State of the Union” address, we have a case of mistaken identity, even if I actually want the European Union to become a parliamentary democracy with a politically accountable government.



We are reminded of Aesop’s Fable “The Frog and the Ox”, where the frog tried to inflate itself to the size of an ox (source: Wikipedia). You may remember how it ended.



We descended into pure slapstick when the leadership of the European Parliament decided to impose penalties on MEPs absent from the “State of the Union” debate, a decision met by opposition and ridicule (source: England Expects blog).



The farcical talents were put to full use when the EP leadership apparently backtracked on the sanctions, as told by England Expects.


According to USA Today, President Obama’s first official State of the Union address drew 48 million viewers in the US alone.




When the chiefs of the EU Commission and the European Parliament felt the pressure to draw a decent crowd among 736 MEPs, they panicked.

Minute differences at the box office, methinks.


Communication and PR teachers, as well as public affairs consultants will flourish on this for ages to come.


To continue in the vein of light entertainment, the Bloggingportal.eu blog received twenty comments (including suggestions) for its Barroso Buzzword Bingo. Soon the real speech will be measured against the guesses of and expectant crowd. (Coming to think of it, I jotted down a list of all too serious and probable words, missing out on the humorous potential.)

The trailer of the new comedy from Strasbourg town was promising enough. When do you get to see the real stuff?



A comedy of errors is coming really soon to a screen near you, courtesy of EP Live, broadcast today from 8:55 local time in Strasbourg. You can choose between twenty three language channels (original plus 22).




Ralf Grahn

Help me find legal and political decisions concerning EU “State of the Union” debate

The European Commission’s agenda from 6 September to 3 October 2010 tells us:

During his second mandate, the President has agreed with the European Parliament to give a yearly address on the State of the Union. This has been incorporated into the Framework Agreement that has been agreed with the European Parliament. President Barroso will give an assessment of where the Union stands and outline the political challenges for the next 12 months.

I looked for the framework agreement between the European Commission and the European Parliament, annexed to the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure (July 2010): Annex XIV, from page 177 (including its annexes).

Even if there are many commendable provisions on how the Commission shall keep the European Parliament informed, I failed to find an annual address on the “State of the Union” or a speech resembling that scheduled for September.



The newsletter from the European Parliament on the 6-9 September 2010 Strasbourg plenary session offers us the following information about the State of the Union debate with President Barroso:

Commission President José Manuel Barroso will give his first-ever State of the Union address to the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Tuesday. The ensuing debate will enable MEPs to review with Mr Barroso the developments in the European Union since the EP elections of June 2009 and the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in December 2009.

The Legislative Observatory Oeil adds the following referral regarding the procedure: EP 110-p2. Let us quote the first two paragraphs of Rule 110:

Rule 110 Statements by the Commission, Council and European Council

1. Members of the Commission, the Council and the European Council may at any time ask the President of Parliament for permission to make a statement. The President of the European Council shall make a statement after each of its meetings. The President of Parliament shall decide when the statement may be made and whether it is to be followed by a full debate or by 30 minutes of brief and concise questions from Members.

2. When placing a statement with debate on its agenda, Parliament shall decide whether or not to wind up the debate with a resolution. It shall not do so if a report on the same matter is scheduled for the same or the next part-session, unless the President, for exceptional reasons, proposes otherwise. If Parliament decides to wind up a debate with a resolution, a committee, a political group or at least 40 Members may table a motion for a resolution.

If Barroso’s “statement” has morphed into a “State of the Union” debate, does this mean that all other members of the Commission, the Council and the European Council can, from now on, use the same epithet for their statements to the EP plenary?

How about the president of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, whose duty it is to make a statement after each meeting of the European Council?


Since I must have missed some pertinent points, could the European Commission or the European Parliament, please give me more accurate information about the legal and political decisions concerning this major institutional novelty, the State of the Union address?




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 valued 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.

European Commission: Start by publishing Reding’s ‘communication revolution’ plan!

The information leaked to EurActiv remains the main basis for the public discussion about the communication ‘revolution’ planned by commissioner Viviane Reding for the European Commission, but the information is far from complete.



The College of commissioners has discussed Reding’s communication proposals on 1 to 2 September 2010, but we have seen no further information about how the plans were received or what the next steps are going to be.



How the Commission communicates = interacts with 501 million citizen-stakeholders is much more than a matter of internal organisation; it is a fundamental question, especially in the wake of the latest Eurobarometer poll of public opinion in the European Union.

More mundane matters than the Commission’s relationship with the citizens it has been appointed to serve are routinely discussed at length: published in press releases, highlighted in speeches, augmented by independent studies and stakeholder seminars, published for public consultations and later refined as policy proposals.

Tuesday morning 7 September 2010, the president of the Commission, José Manuel Barroso, should use his first “state of the union address” to explain how the European Commission intends to start interacting with the citizens of the European Union in new and better ways, including full disclosure of its approach to communication.

Before any policy or administrative decisions are taken, a public consultation on Reding’s communication plan is an important first step to re-engage with civil society.

Naturally, a wise Commission would then take sensible advice on board.




Ralf Grahn




P.S. The purpose of the European Day of Languages on 26 September 2010 is to inspire you to learn a foreign language.



In this context the European Commission in the UK arranges a Day of Multilingual Blogging, as described by Antonia Mochan on the Euonym blog (Talking about the EU). The UK Representation is joined by the multilingual aggregator Bloggingportal.eu and individual Eurobloggers.



Besides being fun and enriching for your soul, languages are an important business, an advantage when you trade and crucial for landing EU jobs, Antonia tells her British compatriots. (The same goes for other EU countries.)



On the event page on Facebook, 122 European bloggers have already signed up to participate in the pan-European Day of Multilingual Blogging, and 109 may be attending. Join the event!

The Twitter hashtag is #babel.

Have you noticed the multilingual blog aggregator, where you can find the posts from blogs related to EU affairs?



It is called Bloggingportal.eu, and it has grown to collect the entries by 662 Euroblogs. You can access the page with all the new posts or the front page selection, subscribe to RSS feeds for all posts or editors’ choices (front page), and subscribe to the daily and weekly newsletter.

Reading foreign language Euroblogs offers you two benefits: You become better informed about European affairs and you have fun learning languages.



One example: Even without the Day of Multilingual Blogging, I practice multilingual blogging by occasional posts on my Finnish blog Eurooppaoikeus and my Swedish blog Grahnblawg, in addition to more frequent posting on Grahnlaw (in English).

What’s in a name? Barroso’s State of the Union address

What’s in a name? that which we call a rose,
By any other name would smell as sweet;

(William Shakespeare: Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene ii)

As we know, the two young lovers died, so perhaps a name is not as innocuous as they wanted to believe.



One to underline the symbolic value of a name is the president of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, whose website announces his first State of the Union address:

"President Barroso will deliver the first State of the Union Address 2010 on Tuesday 7 September 2010 at 9 o'clock"

The President of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso will deliver the first "State of the Union Address 2010" on Tuesday, 7 September 2010 at the European Parliament at 9 o'clock.

In his speech the President will give his assessment of where the Union stands and outline the political challenges for the next 12 months.

It seems as if Matizandrea’s Blog was the first among Eurobloggers to pay attention to the State of the Union speech: Lo stato dell’Unione (31 August 2010). Andrea Matiz sees the speech as the first step under the new communication strategy, but he wonders about the media attention the speech will get.



According to The Parliament magazine, the State of the union speech is going to top the Strasbourg plenary agenda of the European Parliament.



The Week in Bloggingportal newsletter and blog have already announced a pan-European Barroso Buzzword Bingo. (See Wikipedia article Buzzword bingo.)

This attempt at humour is one of the kinder reactions this far, although the newsletter text which laid the ground was fairly cutting.



In her EUobserver blog (1 September 2010), Honor Mahony stated that Barroso is not the only one who could aspire to speak for the European Union. The State of the Union name attracts critical comparison with the United States. Still, an honest assessment of where the EU is at, a little humility on the part of the commission president admitting where he could have done more and a few ambitious and clear plans for future would be a good start.



In a post ironically headlined Barroso, Leader of the Free World (but text in German), Max Steinbeis on Verfassungsblog asks if this is the right time to attract comparison which can only be embarrassing.



In the blog entry State of the Union Address, Your Freedom and Ours remarks that the president of the United States was elected according to the US Constitution.



Great Expectations?

Is it a justified move by Barroso and his team to name the Tuesday morning speech the State of the Union Address?

Have they given rise to expectations beyond the powers of the Commission?

Can Barroso, helped by his speechwriters, communicate an engaging vision for EU citizens?




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 valued 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.