Single Market concerns

The Single Market Act II had been anticipated by the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council (of ministers) of the EU. We have presented their contributions in various blog entries, some of them found in the compilation Single Market Act blog posts.  

Here we look at one more contribution, this from the European Commission.

Citizens’ and businesses’ 20 main concerns

In 2011 the European Commission published The Single Market through the lens of the people: A snapshot of citizens’ and businesses’ 20 main concerns (27 pages), an analysis made of queries and complaints handled by the Commission and assistance services such as SOLVIT, Your Europe Advice, the European Consumer Centres, the European Employment Service and the Enterprise Europe Network, then checked with statistically representative data and refined through focus groups.

This was one of the contributions going into the making of the Single Market Act II.

Problems for mobile citizens

• Cumbersome social security procedures discourage citizens’ mobility
• Citizens receiving healthcare abroad are often frustrated when receiving the bill
• Obtaining a residence card in another Member State for non-EU family members is too complex
• Professionals have difficulties getting their qualifications recognised in another Member State
• Workers can be victims of discriminatory employment practices in another Member State
• Tax barriers för cross-border workers and employers
• Opening a bank account abroad remains too difficult
• Students facing discrimination regarding recognition of diplomas, fees, and financial support
• Retiring abroad and inheriting across borders leads to complex taxation issues
• Taking a car to another Member State is costly and burdensome
• Passengers find it difficult to defend their rights

Problems for consumers

• Consumers do not easily find their way in banking and financial services markets
• Europeans do not feel comfortable shopping on-line in other Member States
• In spite of an increased choice, many Europeans are frustrated by their energy bills
• Internet and telephone services could be better and cheaper

Problems for businesses

• Businesses are discouraged from participating in foreign public tenders
• Access to finance and support measures is too challenging
• Burdensome rules and procedures prevent entrepreneurs and investors from doing business in another country
• Reclaiming VAT paid in another Member State is cumbersome
• Fighting for your intellectual property rights in a cross-border context remains very difficult

The brochure ended by referring EU citizens and businesses encountering problems to the Your Europe web pages and by describing the help and information services available (pages 26-27):

SOLVIT – a network created in 2002 to solve cross-border problems encountered by citizens and businesses due to incorrect application of EU rules by national public authorities, without formal procedures and within ten weeks. In 2010 SOLVIT handled almost 3 800 cases, of which 1 363 fell within its remit;

Your Europe Advice (YEA) – a network of experienced multilingual lawyers from all EU Member States who provide answers to European citizens’ legal questions regarding the exercise of their EU rights in cross-border mobility situations. In 2010, YEA experts handled more than 12 000 queries;

Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) – a network created to provide European businesses with transnational business cooperation, to benefit from the Single Market and to provide their feedback to legislation (SME panels). The network is made up of 600 support service organisations involving more than 3 000 staff in 50 countries;

European Consumer Centres (ECCs) – a network created to provide consumers with information and help in dispute resolution, to enable them to take full advantage of the Single Market, in particular with regard to cross-border issues. The European Consumer Centres network handles over 70 000 cases every year;

Europe Direct Contact Centre (EDCC) – the European Commission’s multilingual central information service, accessible by free-phone, email or web-chat, which provides answers to questions from the public concerning general information on the European Union’s activities and policies, and guides citizens to the sources of information and advice that best meet their needs. Out of 100 000 enquiries handled overall in 2010, about 30 000 were related to cross-border issues and 5 200 were transferred to the legal experts of Your Europe Advice for further assistance;

European Employment Service (EURES) – a network of more than 850 employment advisors who help match jobs to jobseekers across Europe.

Ralf Grahn

General sources:

General Report on the Activities of the European Union 2011 (freely downloadable at the EU Bookshop in all the official EU languages)

General Report on the Activities of the European Union - 2012 (free to download at the EU Bookshop in all the official EU languages)

Regeringens skrivelse 2011/12:105 Berättelse om verksamheten i Europeiska unionen under 2011

Regeringens skrivelse 2012/13:80 Berättelse om verksamheten i Europeiska unionen under 2012

A single market to consumers and citizens (2010) continued

The United Kingdom used to project itself as a champion of the EU single market, but if you take a closer look, you are about to detect a paradox.   

If you compare what the European Parliament said in May 2010 about lowering and eliminating barriers in the internal market, with what the UK prime minister Theresa May said on 17 January 2017 about her government’s priorities to create new obstacles to the four freedoms of movement, depriving British and other EU citizens of rights, it offers you a certain perspective on the United Kingdom’s incompatibility with single market aspirations.

Sadly, bad examples are catching. Even some government ministers in EU member states have started to sound like English tabloids with their calls to roll back EU achievements for citizens.

Resolution P7_TA(2010)0186

After a short introductory blog post, we return to the European Parliament resolution of 20 May 2010 on delivering a single market to consumers and citizens P7_TA(2010)0186, which underlined (11):

that the relaunch of the single market should achieve concrete, measurable, achievable, relevant and timed targets, which must be achieved by proper and effective policy instruments based on the four freedoms of movement that are available to all EU citizens;

The European Parliament also highlighted (12):  

the fact that the single European market is in dire need of a new momentum, and that strong leadership from European institutions, especially the Commission, and political ownership by the Member States is required to restore credibility and confidence in the single market;

In addition, the European Parliament called for (18):

a new paradigm of political thinking, focusing on citizens, consumers and SMEs in the relaunch of the European single market; holds the view that this can be achieved by putting European citizen at the heart of European Union policy making;

Citizens would have to be better informed about their rights, the European Parliament called (65):

on the Commission and the Member States to develop a targeted communication strategy focusing on the day-to-day problems that citizens encounter when settling and taking up employment in another Member State, especially when undertaking cross-border transactions moving, shopping or selling across borders, and the social, health, consumer-protection and environmental-protection standards on which they can rely; considers that this communication strategy should expressly include problem-solving methods such as SOLVIT;

Single Market Act

The resolution had already mentioned the Small Business Act (SBA) a few times, before it introduced the concept Single Market Act, accompanied by reform values and guidelines:

76. Believes that in order to establish an effective single market, the Commission must produce a clear set of political priorities through the adoption of a ‘Single Market Act’, which should cover both legislative and non-legislative initiatives, aimed at creating a highly competitive social market and green economy;

77. Encourages the Commission to present the ‘Act’ by May 2011–- well ahead of the 20th anniversary of the 1992 Single Market Programme – putting citizens, consumers and SMEs at the heart of the single market; emphasises that it should be looked upon as a blueprint for future action if we are to achieve a knowledge-based, highly competitive, social and environmentally friendly, green market economy which also ensures a credible level playing field;

78. Calls on the Commission to incorporate in the ‘Single Market Act’ specific measures aimed at, but not limited to: - putting the consumer interests referred to in Article 12 TFEU and social policy based on Article 9 TEFU at the heart of the single market; - making the single market fit for the future by improving consumer and SME access to e-commerce and digital markets; - supporting the creation of a sustainable single market based on Article 11 TFEU through the development of an inclusive, low-carbon, green, knowledge-based economy, including measures to further any innovation in cleaner technologies; - ensuring the protection of services of general economic interest on the basis of Article 14 TFEU and Protocol 26; - creating a strategy for better communication of the social benefits of the single market;

The European Parliament wanted the Commission. in preparing the ‘Single Market Act’, to take into account the various EU institutions’ consultations and reports (EU 2020, Monti, Gonzales and IMCO reports, etc.), and to launch an additional wide-ranging public consultation, with a view to bringing forward a coordinated policy proposal for a more coherent and viable single market (79).

Ralf Grahn

A single market to consumers and citizens (2010) introduced

The latest Grahnlaw blog post concerning the development of the internal market during this decade looked at the report by professor Mario Monti: A new strategy for the single market at the service of Europe’s economy and society (9 May 2010; 107 pages).

Consumers and citizens

In parallel with Monti’s work the European Parliament prepared an own-initiative report - 2010/2011(INI) -  drafted by Louis Grech (S&D) and approved 3 May 2010 by the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (IMCO) for the plenary.

The report on delivering a single market to consumers and citizens A7-0132/2010 was debated in the EP plenary on 19 May 2010 together with three other reports - here a summary of the discussion in Swedish - and voted the following day: 578 for, 28 against and 16 abstentions.

Resolution P7_TA(2010)0186

After documenting the relevant internal market policy and assessment papers at the time, the European Parliament resolution of 20 May 2010 on delivering a single market to consumers and citizens P7_TA(2010)0186 reminded readers of the remaining obstacles  in the way of citizens, consumers and SMEs wishing to move, shop, sell or trade across borders with the same sense of security and confidence they enjoy in their own member states.

***

Today, this is a potent reminder of how negligently many national (even European Council and EU Council) politicians treat their duty to promote the EU citizenship right to move and reside freely, as well as the four internal market freedoms: the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital.

Ralf Grahn

European Commission's State of the (European) Union #SOTEU full picture booklet

The European Commission's State of the (European) Union web page in English contains a link to a publication described as the ”complete picture”, with a page element hinting at future translations of this extended version of the 9 September 2015 address to the European Parliament.

The full picture booklet (64 pages in all; 9MB) offers president Jean-Claude Junckers' written (authorised) #SOTEU speech text, the Commission's letter of intent to the European Parliament and the Council of the EU, the progress report on the Commission's ten priorities and a transcript of the speech delivered, plus closing remarks (at the end of the plenary debate).

Our general interest

According to Article 17(1) TEU the Commission shall promote the general interest of the Union and take appropriate initiatives to that end.

As I see it, the general interest of the EU is the (enlightened) interest of the citizens of the European Union. In practice, the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats facing the EU are translated into the political vision and will of the European Commission, leading to legislative proposals and other initiatives.

In the State of the Union publication we are offered a view of how president Juncker and his Commission - #teamJunckerEU - intend to promote our interests in 2016.

Ralf Grahn

European Council and Euro Summit: Van Rompuy promises more of the same

Habemus what? White smoke rose from the Justus Lipsius building. Without a black ball, both a cabal of 27 and a coterie of 17 political leaders in Europe made it clear that they want more of the same.

Late and almost imperceptibly the selection of Herman Van Rompuy to chair the Euro Summit coterie and the European Council for the next two and a half years had been introduced into the meagre advance information from EUCO to the public.

The selection of Van Rompuy to chair both clubs from 1 June 2012 to 30 November 2014 has now been confirmed.

In his acceptance speech Van Rompuy reminded his backers that ”our duty is to preserve the trust of the citizens in the Union”.

It would have been even better, if he had remembered that we are citizens of the European Union (even if we still lack full political rights).

Can we hope for better governance and more openness? Van Rompuy's thank-you address seems to dash any hope of improvement: ”In my second mandate, I intend to remain true to my style and working methods.”

Despite this, Van Rompuys audaciously speaks about winning over the hearts and minds of the Europeans.

How about democratic reform of the European Union and its institutions? For Van Rompuy democracy becomes a value worth effort right beyond the external border of the EU:

Without exaggerating the means at our disposal, we must act united whenever our interests and our values -- in particular democratic values -- are at stake, in the first place in our neighbourhood. This is where our credibility starts.

In addition, president Van Rompuy reported about the discussions at the first EUCO session. True to his style and working methods, he still did not share the paper he had circulated to the heads of state or government on how to revive growth and employment.

Update 7 March 2012: Through Twitter the Council press office yesterday made an Issues Paper (29 February 2012) available to the public.

Ralf Grahn
speaker on EU affairs, especially digital policy and law

P.S. With a sometimes tenuous hold on democracy, between the global issues and the national level, the European Union institutions and the eurozone coteries shape our future. At the same time we see a European online public sphere emerging. Grahnlaw (ranked fourth among politcal blogs in Finland), Grahnblawg (in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish) are among the more than 900 euroblogs aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Is your blog already listed among them? Are you following the debates which matter for your future?

European Council versus sewing circle governance

Oblivious of its two years as the most important official institution of the EU, the European Council (EUCO) convenes 1-2 March 2012 at the same level of governance as a sewing circle (thematic page).

In order to prolong this sad state of affairs, the preparatory General Affairs Council (GAC) left us with these recycled generalities (page 8):

PREPARATION OF THE MARCH EUROPEAN COUNCIL

The Council examined draft conclusions for the European Council meeting to be held on 1 and 2 March.

The European Council is due to focus on:

• Economic policy:

– assessing progress made in implementing country-specific recommendations under the EU's European Semester and commitments under the Euro Plus Pact;

– giving guidance to member states, on the basis of the Commission's annual growth survey, for the preparation of their national reform programmes (structural reforms) and stability or convergence programmes (fiscal policies);

– highlighting labour market reforms and employment and competitiveness issues; and

– providing guidance to the Commission and the Council on the implementation of flagship initiatives for jobs and growth.

• International summits: preparations for a G-8 summit on 19-20 May, a G-20 summit on 18-19 June and a UN "Rio+20" conference on sustainable development on 20-22 June;

• Foreign policy, including the southern neighbourhood (one year after the start of the Arab
Spring) and Syria;

• Other issues, including EU enlargement (Serbia) and accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Schengen area.

The Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union ("fiscal compact") will be signed in the margins of the meeting.

The draft conclusions will be reviewed in the light of the Council's discussion. An annotated draft agenda was discussed by the Council on 27 January (5354/12).

***

In short, there is no documentation of the input to the coordinating General Affairs Council and there is no meaningful public output from the GAC, which sits on the draft conclusions.

The European Council continues to act like a club of ladies meeting for tea, gossip and sewing, with the tiny difference that the EUCO happens to be the supremo among official instutions for 502 million EU citizens.

Here, at least, the Lisbon Treaty would allow the GAC and EUCO more than perennial underachievement with regard to the openness (transparency) mandated by Article 1 TEU.



Ralf Grahn
speaker on EU affairs, especially digital policy and law

P.S. For better or for worse, between the global issues and the national level, the European Union institutions and the eurozone coteries shape our future. At the same time we see an emerging European online public sphere. Grahnlaw, Grahnblawg (in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish) and more than 900 other euroblogs are aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Is your blog already listed among them? Are you following the debates which matter for your future?

Political crisis at the bottom of euro troubles – solutions?

The first four instalments were Transparency during the eurozone crises and Euro crises: European Council eviscerated? and Eurozone governance: Fundamental flaws but better presentation and Euro crises exposed and added to EU lack of legitimacy and democracy. The articles were based on my speech at the 22 February 2012 Attac seminar about the implications of the new fiscal discipline in the EU. These blog entries contain some modifications, updates and documentary references, which complement the oral presentation.

Here I continue the discussion with facts and opinion beyond the short address.


”Comprehensive solutions”

After umpteen ”comprehensive solutions”, the limits at EU and eurozone level are finally sinking in (although the solutions deemed possible and necessary are likely to drive us to distraction or despair).

In The European Council in 2011, the tone of EUCO and Euro Summit president Herman Van Rompuy was quite sober. In the General Report on the Activities of the European Union 2011, even Commission president José Manuel Barroso had toned down his often flowery rhetoric.

”Victories” had turned sour often enough for a mood of quiet determination to become appropriate.


Breathtaking, still...

Still, what the cascade of conclaves, summits and institutions has churned out during a short period is breathtaking by EU standards, and ordinary citizens of the union have most certainly been left out of breath by:

The European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) of the euro countries (beefed up), the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism of the EU, the permanent European Stability Mechanism (ESM) already beefed up, the integrated planning tool the European Semester, with the Annual Growth Survey (AGS), the Euro Plus Pact (23 countries), the six-pack legislation, the Green Paper on eurobonds (sorry, stability bonds), the two-pack proposals, the TSCG or ”fiscal compact” to be signed, the Commission's first Alert Mechanism Report, as well as the rescue packages for Ireland and Portugal, and now twice into the seemingly bottomless pit of Greece, firefighting in Spain and Italy etc.

Fast and unprecedented by EU standards, but we are still far from where we should be.

Without the operations of the much vilified European Central Bank (in conjunction with other central banks in the world), meltdown would probably have occurred in the eurozone in December or a little later, with disastrous consequences for Europe and the global economy.

We have seen emergency solutions to the financial and economic ills, but not acknowledgement of the root cause, the political crisis at the bottom of this.

The crucial issues of legitimacy, democracy, sufficient powers, accountability and transparency have been almost totally absent from the discourse of the national and EU leaders, and these challenges have figured only marginally in the wider public debate.

Essentially, our leaders communicate their desire for nicer interior design of the prison they have built for themselves and their hope that the crises will somehow go away.

Are we getting what we deserve to get? Or, should we upgrade our thinking and that of our leaders?



Ralf Grahn
speaker on EU affairs, especially digital policy and law

P.S. 1: For better or for worse, between the global issues and the national level, the European Union institutions and the eurozone coteries shape our future. At the same time we see an emerging European online public sphere. More than 900 euroblogs are aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Is your blog already listed among them? Are you following the debates which matter for your future?

P.S. 2: Referring the anti-piracy treaty #ACTA to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) marks a lull in the proceedings, but not an end to the political battle. A few moments ago, the online petition launched by @Avaaz for the European Parliament (and the national parliaments) to reject ACTA had already been signed by 2,444,822 netizens, but more are welcome until the official burial.

Euro crises exposed and added to EU lack of legitimacy and democracy

The discussion began in the entries Transparency during the eurozone crises and Euro crises: European Council eviscerated? and Eurozone governance: Fundamental flaws but better presentation. This is the fourth instalment based on my speech at the 22 February 2012 Attac seminar about the implications of the new fiscal discipline in the EU. This text contains some modifications, updates and documentary references, which complement the oral presentation.


Democracy

The preceding discussion about openness (transparency) brings us to the the need for democracy.

Let me start with the good news.

In addition to EU citizenship and the principle of equality of citizens (Article 9 TEU), Article 10(1) of the Treaty on European Union tells us:

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

Even the second paragraph – Article 10(2) – looks promising:

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

However, the European Union is essentially ”owned” by the member states, represented in the two most important institutions, the European Council and the Council, by their governments. The member states hold the treaty making powers (and fairly little radical change can be accomplished without bumping into the walls of the absurdly detailed treaties).

New competences (powers) require treaty change, almost a mission impossible with unanimous decisions and national ratifications by every member.

The member states control expenditure through the long term budget (officially the multiannual financial framework MFF), so the European Parliament is allowed to play along with regard to the annual budget within the framework.

The member states limit the EU's opportunities to tax and to borrow for its policies.

Most importantly, the citizens are not able to vote in, or out, those who govern the union.

In short, the European Union could not become a member of the EU, because it is not a functioning democracy, although it has democratic elements or ornaments.


A democratic union

In my view, it would be better for the security and prosperity European citizens in a globalising world to have a fully democratic union, with accountable government, robust structures and needed powers, starting with foreign and security policy and a common defence, plus a real federal budget.

It is not for the Basic Law to prescribe the contents of the policies to shape, but to offer the ground rules for democratic government and to guarantee fundamental rights.

The arrangement with multiple unanimity rules, 27 national governments dealing with each other in diplomatic mode and as many national parliaments more or less diligently scrutinising what they are up to, was artificial.

The repeated financial, economic and sovereign debt crises since 2008 have exposed fundamental flaws.

The informal coteries and intergovernmental agreements have worsened the situation.

The current system is neither legitimate nor effective.

In interdependent 21st century Europe the question should be the sovereignty of the people, not the sovereignty of states.



Ralf Grahn
speaker on EU affairs, especially digital policy and law

P.S. 1: For better or for worse, between the global issues and the national level, the European Union institutions and the eurozone coteries shape our future. At the same time we see an emerging European online public sphere. More than 900 euroblogs are aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Is your blog already listed among them? Are you following the debates which matter for your future?

P.S. 2: Referring the anti-piracy treaty #ACTA to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) marks a lull in the proceedings, but not an end to the political battle. A few moments ago, the online petition launched by @Avaaz for the European Parliament (and the national parliaments) to reject ACTA had already been signed by 2,436,282 netizens, but more are welcome until the official burial.

Netizens of the world, unite! Follow ACTA ad acta

Here are some more twitterers I enjoy following with regard to #ACTA and other things concerning politics in the digital era.

Professor Michael Kennedy @Prof_Kennedy offers a transatlantic perspective on the European citizens' uprising for digital freedoms.

The knowledgeable Internet policy advisor Ralf Bendrath @bendrath provides insights in both German and English.

The pseudonym A.Wood.B.Maven @awbMaven is an active and intelligent participant in the discussions.

Jérémie Zimmermann @jerezim is a pillar of La Quadrature du Net.

With selective tweets and discussion @CWICKET contributes more than a ”simple geek”.

Switching between English and Portuguese, net freedom is not the least of causes for @jmcest.

The founder of the first Pirate Party, in Sweden, @Falkvinge is now the evangelist promising weeping and gnashing of teeth to those who want to encroach on digital freedoms.

There are, obviously, many worthies missing. Follow, participate and share #ACTA to find your own favourites, then keep watching Internet politics.

Netizens of the world, unite!



Ralf Grahn
speaker on EU digital policy and law


P.S. For better or for worse, between the global issues and the national level, the European Union shapes our digital future and online freedoms. More than 900 euroblogs are aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Is your blog already listed among them? Are you following the debates which matter for your future?

ACTA parties - Let them eat (humble) pie

The blatant attempted robbery of citizens' digital rights by the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America, through the Anti-Counterfeiting (and much more) Trade Agreement ACTA, deserves generous helpings of humble pie on their menu.

They must renounce short-circuiting open and democratic policy and law making through closed trade negotiations. If vigilant citizens prevented the actual theft of net freedoms, the process was wrong and the intent was there. The failure is, in a benign light, perhaps a mitigating circumstance.

Plat du jour: Let them eat (humble) pie, by jettisoning ACTA and wiping the slate clean by converting to democratic ways.

Just des(s)erts: Only then can they make a fresh start with regard to copyright and other issues of intellectual property, on parole but under the watchful eyes of citizens.

Until this has happened, I suggest that citizens worldwide keep following #ACTA on Twitter to prevent any relapse.



Ralf Grahn
speaker on EU digital policy and law

P.S. For better or for worse, between the global issues and the national level, the European Union shapes our digital future and online freedoms. More than 900 euroblogs are aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Is your blog already listed among them? Are you following the debates which matter for your future?

Civil society beating back ACTA assault

On and off line beating back ACTA is the greatest pan-European civil society campaign ever.

We note that media interest is widening.

The Economist: Internet freedom and copyright law: ACTA up – Protests across Europe may kill anti-piracy treaty

Financial Times, Stanley Pignal and Jan Cienski: Latest pact on internet piracy set to be derailed


Ratification on hold

By now, the governments of Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Latvia and Germany have put ACTA ratification or signing on hold, following the protests.

This may be only temporary relief, but it could also be the first step towards withdrawal.


PES joined the battle

Thanks to @jonworth I noticed that the Party of European Socialists (PES) - @PES_PSE on Twitter - came out against ACTA in a press release and a declaration.

Hannes Swoboda, the leader of the second largest political group in the European Parliament, the Alliance of Socialists & Democrats (S&D) - @TheProgressives on Twitter – made a statement envisioning possible rejection of the treaty.


Citizens mobilise

The Twitter discussion under #ACTA is intense ahead of the biggest action day against the anti-piracy agreement tomorrow, Saturday 11 February 2012, with more than 200 new demonstrations taking place.

The total numbers participating remain to be seen, but the defence of Internet freedom unites Europeans across borders.

The stream of new signatures on the Avaaz petition for the European Parliament (and the national parliaments) to reject ACTA is continuing. A few moments ago 2,076,598 had already signed.

***

Signs that the ACTA assault may be petering out raises hopes for the netizens. The EU trade commissioner Karel De Gucht is ”not impressed” by the demonstrations, but he may be one of his kind.

Popular opinion gives the remaining supporters in the parliaments cause to ponder the wisdom of further confrontation with voters.



Ralf Grahn
speaker, trainer and advisor

P.S. For better or for worse, between the global issues and the national level, the European Union shapes our digital future and online freedoms. Is your blog already listed among the more than 900 euroblogs aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu? Are you following the debates which matter for your future?

Forcing ACTA on EU citizens

Was it too much to tweet the following to @davidmartinmep – the new ACTA rapporteur in the European Parliament: 100 demonstrations this week & 1.8 million signatures against #ACTA cause for rejection of current IPR agenda?

On the face of it, yes, as @awbMaven pointed out: By themselves they're not cause 4 rejection, but it IS cause 4 IN DEPTH consideration of the issues raised imv.

Good point, but what about the wider questions of the right aims and objectives, common sense (proportionality), legitimacy and acceptance?

The Group of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) had just appointed David Martin MEP the new rapporteur for ACTA in the Committee on International Trade (INTA) in the European Parliament. Martin seemed to dismiss the widespread concerns among citizens as myths, and took a narrow, technical view of the treaty, removing ACTA from the context of the EU Commission's copyright and IPR enforcement agenda.

I was not the only one worried by the first signs from the new rapporteur, after the recent spectacular defection by Kader Arif. La Quadrature du Net asked: Will the New ACTA Rapporteur Stand For Citizens' Freedoms?


Wider issues are real concerns

The Anti-Counterfeiting (and much more) Trade Agreement ACTA has wider implications than its deceptive packaging as merely an intergovernmental trade pact and the misleading headline evoking counterfeit goods would lead us to believe.

Read the article about the wider stakes and common sense by professor Michael Kennedy, For Your Digital Freedom and Ours, mentioned in the previous Grahnlaw post (about the EU IPR enforcement agenda).

David Jolly reports from Paris for the New York Times: A New Question of Internet Freedom. The article was written for American readers, so it offers an excellent introduction to others as well, who are curious about the commotion, but do not yet know the issues.

Alexander Furnas provides a more detailed analysis in The Atlantic: Why an International Trade Agreement Could Be as Bad as SOPA. Even if some people make exaggerated assertions about ACTA, the treaty seen in context is dangerous.


Legitimacy

After the wave of protest in Central Europe, the BBC speaks about a hundred demonstrations planned for this week all over Europe. Saturday, 11 February 2012, is the main day of action according to the map and the facts provided by stoppacta-protest.info.

The Avaaz online petition for the European Parliament (and the national parliaments) to reject ACTA has now been signed by 1.84 million citizens, and the number keeps growing every few seconds.

For a treaty which allegedly changes nothing in EU law (but perhaps something in the member states), it looks stupid to purposefully lose the respect of citizens, especially the younger generations.

Aren't the relations of the European Union with civil society bad enough as they are, without a determined effort to poison them further?

I am all for statesmen having to do the right thing, when needed. But leadership and legitimacy are not about persisting in doing the wrong thing, however efficiently.

Paradoxically, the stubborn and callous policies of the EU Commission and its repressive allies have united Europeans more than anything to date. My humble congratulations.

With the arrival of the new EP rapporteur, the need for the petitions and demonstrations has only grown greater.



Ralf Grahn

P.S. For better or for worse, between the global issues and the national level, the European Union shapes our digital future and online freedoms. Is your blog already listed among the more than 900 euroblogs aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu? Are you following the debates which matter for your future?

CDU's steps towards EU political union

When the leading German coalition party, the Christian Democratic Union CDU, proposes some steps towards political union, national leaders and European media are guaranteed to comment in various ways.

After the next steps in the euro crisis, how does the CDU resolution Starkes Europa – Gute Zukunft für Deutschland outline the capable, democratic and transparent political union needed?

The Christian Democratic Union quickly wants to shape a consensus [among whom?]. A Convention with a clear mandate to put this consensus into practice should then be called.


Economic and political union

The CDU sees the completion of economic and monetary union (EMU) as a new milestone on the road to political union. The party has the following aims for the Convention:

1) The stability and growth pact (SGP) has to be strengthened by automatic penalties. The SGP has to be made harder to amend through integration into the EU treaties. The CDU wants the Court of Justice of the European Union to judge breaches of the EMU and the SGP.

2) Serious breaches of the SGP require a procedure with several levels in order to get their finances back in order:
* First, advice from the Commission.
* Commission staff to support the efficient use of budget resources and the coordination of EU funds.
* If necessary, the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) can offer assistance on strict financial and economic conditions.

3) A procedure for debt restructuring. Voluntary secession from the eurozone without losing EU membership.

4) Developing the ESM into a ”European Monetary Fund”.

5) The citizens of the European Union to elect the president of the Commission directly (but the rest of the commissioners to remain national government appointees).

6) A democratic system with two chambers on an equal footing: the directly elected European Parliament and the Council of Ministers representing the member states. Both chambers could initiate legislation.

7) In the medium term the allocation of seats in the European Parliament has to reflect population size better.


CDU ”compass”

The CDU presents a ”compass” or creed: France as the most privileged European partner, more Europe where needed and less petty regulation, a privileged partnership for Turkey instead of full EU membership, a common foreign, security and defence policy which eventually leads to a defence union, and a more capable, legitimate and transparent Europe for citizens.


Popular sovereignty

The Christian Democratic Union is prepared to advance a few steps in the direction of economic and political union in Europe.

The CDU has not yet adopted popular sovereignty at European level as its first principle. This would lead to a democratic union based on its citizens: representative democracy and government elected by the people of Europe.

What is the added value for EU citizens of sharing their sovereignty at EU level with the states?



Ralf Grahn

Sharing informal EU Council meetings (Employment)

Let us look at how informal meetings of the EU Council inform and enlighten citizens, choosing the first example offered this year by the Hungarian presidency and relevant to the competitiveness challenges important to us all. This leads us to the nourishing gathering of employment ministers, relevant in the context of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (EU2020).


Background

Beyond the official Council conclusions reflected on the Consilium website, we noted the informal Council meetings arranged by the presidencies of the Council of the European Union.

The Hungarian presidency programme acted as a GPS navigation device (Wikipedia) offering a clear picture of the main roads and destinations regarding EU efforts to improve competitiveness.

Rereading the first priority of the Strategic framework of the presidency programme 'Growth, jobs and social inclusion' offered me a general roadmap. The following sections of the Operational programme gave more detail about the main challenges for the different Council configurations with regard to European competitiveness: 5. Transport, Telecommunications and Energy (TTE; from page 32), 6. Competitiveness (COMP; from page 37) and 7. Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs (EPSCO; from page 41).


HU news and events

If we want to follow the most recent activities, we can study the homepage of the Hungarian presidency, or we can move on to News and events, where we find press releases ordered chronologically, with the events of today on top.


HU presidency calendar

This time we are interested in information and materials regarding informal meetings of the three Council formations most directly concerned with competitiveness challenges (EU2020): TTE, COMP and EPSCO.

With these limitations, through the Hungarian presidency calendar January – June 2011 we find three relevant informal Council meetings and one just around the corner:

16-18 January EPSCO (employment)
7-8 February TTE (transport)
11-13 April COMP (research and development; industry)
2-3 May TTE (energy)

Nowadays, the formal Council meetings are arranged in Brussels or Luxembourg, but the informal meetings offer the rotating presidencies opportunities to act as hosts to ministers, officials and journalists, as well as to make the presidency visible to the home crowd.


Employment ministers

I decided to look for information based on the specific dates of the informal Council gatherings. There must be more to life than meetings, so the item to turn up on top 'Gala dinner at the Museum of Fine Arts', shared the culinary delights on 17 January 2011 with us EU citizens, in detail equal to an EU legislative act.

If you scroll deep enough, you find that the ministers and state secretaries for Employment were going to discuss in the framework of two workshops: youth employment, and employment friendly growth-recovery and more and better jobs.

We are able to share in on one related document: the Menu of the gala dinner.

After the event, we find the press release 'EU ministers discuss employment in Gödöllö', much less detailed than the culinary exposition.

The summary offered some generalities about the Europe 2020 goal of raising the employment level to 75 per cent, the Commission's flagship initiative Youth in Motion, contributions by the other members of the presidency trio, the use of the European Social Fund (ESF) and other structural funds to improve employment, as well as discussions with the social partners and non-governmental organisations.

The menu excepted, I found no illuminating documents, with a bearing on the workshops or employment issues generally, shared through the web pages of the informal meeting of employment ministers.

Those who remember the Hungarian media law wonder if this is balanced enough reporting.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Joe Litobarski has littered his basket with comments about blogging versus Facebook, opening and shutting down his new Facebook comment system within a few hours due to critical comments. Interesting questions for all and sundry.

EU Stockholm Programme Action Plan: European judicial culture needed?

According to the final draft agenda for the Strasbourg session 22 to 25 November 2010, Monday 22 November the European Parliament plenary is going to discuss the Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme and on Tuesday 23 November the EP is going to vote (pages 3 and 9).

In the background we have the five year strategic guidelines adopted by the European Council in December 2009, with the definitive version published in the Official Journal of the European Union in May (OJEU 4.5.2010 C 115/1):

The Stockholm Programme — An open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens

Based on the guidelines, we have the action plan to implement the strategic guidelines, proposed by the European Commission in April:

Communication from the Commission: Delivering an area of freedom, security and justice for Europe's citizens - Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme; Brussels, 20.4.2010 COM(2010) 171 final

We also know that the Commission's monitoring system PreLex loses the traces of the action plan after the sour conclusions by the JHA Council 3 June 2010.

Before the Stockholm Programme was adopted, the European Parliament tried to make its voice heard a year ago, when it voted a resolution:

European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2009 on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council – An area of freedom, security and justice serving the citizen – Stockholm programme; P7_TA(2009)0090 (procedure 2009/2534(RSP) )

(Yesterday I presented a few extracts of the 25 November 2009 EP resolution relevant to citizens and enterprises, in Finnish on my trilingual blog Grahnlaw Suomi Finland.)


Citizens and businesses

This time around the European Parliament decided to take a closer look at legal issues relevant to EU citizens and businesses active across borders, in an own-initiative report:

Report on civil law, commercial law, family law and private international law aspects of the Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme; A7-0252/2010, 24.9.2010 Committee on Legal Affairs, Rapporteur: Luigi Berlinguer (procedure 2010/2080(INI) ) (20 pages)


European judicial culture

Even if the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) congratulates the Commission on its ambitious proposed action plan, the report calls for reflection on the future of the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ).

Interestingly, the JURI committee takes a very long term view. The beginning of the report is heavily laden with suggestions for discussions and exchanges with judges and practitioners, representatives of legal education and training etc. in order to nurture a European judicial culture.

Later the report discusses proposed actions with more immediate impact on mobile citizens, cross-border consumers and companies active in the internal market, but it may be more opportune to treat these initiatives in the context of the latest policy statements and proposals from the Commission, first collectively and later individually.



Ralf Grahn



J.K. After a long silence the EU Law Blog has returned to the European legal blogging scene. The blog declares: This is a web log about European Union law for students, academics, practitioners and anyone else who may be interested in it. - I hope you are interested and that the EU Law Blog keeps up the good work.

Eurobarometer: Separating the wheat from the chaff

Since the spring 2009 Eurobarometer, EU citizens see unemployment and the economic situation as the main worries facing their country. In May 2010 rising prices (inflation) are still the principal concern at a personal level (although with great differences between countries), followed by the economic situation and unemployment.

About four out of five respondents feel that the national, the EU and the world economy are in a bad shape, and more than a third experience the domestic employment situation as “very bad”.



It’s the economy, stupid


Now put yourself in the position of the European Commission, treaty bound to promote the general interest of the European Union.



Confronted with the First Results of the Spring 2010 Standard Eurobarometer 73, could you realistically contemplate ignoring or even downplaying the massive evidence of public opinion, what Europeans are worried about?

Writing your press release, could you disregard that these citizens expect more from the European Union than from their national governments or international financial institutions? (We are going to return to the expectations in a future blog post.)



It’s the economy, stupid, said a curious Yankee in Europe’s court: US and EU citizens share common priorities about economic woes.

Could you refuse to take notice, in good faith?

Hardly.



Back to square one

Discussion can improve our understanding, if we are willing to look at the evidence and test various claims in order to arrive at reasonable interpretations and conclusions.

Big ifs, it seems.

The hyperactive Swedish libertarian blogger Henrik Alexandersson works for the Pirate Party (Green Group) MEP Christian Engström in the European Parliament, and he produces a mass of blog entries on important issues, such as data retention, privacy, netizens’ rights and intellectual property rights.



To keep his libertarian juices flowing, he regularly takes swipes at the European Union. In a blog post yesterday he accused the Commission of cheating in a press release: EU fifflar med opinionen.

Henriksson does not mention the Eurobarometer poll. He does not even specify the ‘dishonest’press release or link to it.



He disregards the whole Eurobarometer controversy and the later discussion, uncritically using Open Europe’s blog post as his only source and link.

No hearing the other side - Audiatur et altera pars - for Henriksson.



Almost a week from the EU Commission’s press release (26 August 2010, IP/10/1071; available in 22 languages) and Open Europe’s vehement attack, Henriksson brings the discussion back to square one, having learnt nothing in the meantime.

Henriksson may have indulged his readers by feeding their prejudices, but he did nothing to make the discussion move forward.



The attitude of the French blog La lettre volée is as cavalier, dismissing the Commission’s interpretation as Orwellian, without caring to look at the facts and arguments.

Pretty useless, in fact.



Commission press release



I already opined that it would have been unbelievable if the European Commission had disregarded the massive worries of Europeans - economic ones - and ignored citizens’ expectations concerning EU level action, but the press release did actually mention sinking support for EU membership, even if discreetly and in context:

When asked about the benefits of EU membership, 49% of Europeans said in May that EU membership of their country was a “good thing” (-4 compared to autumn 2009). Public support for EU membership was still higher than in 2001, when following the downturn after the burst of the "Internet bubble", public support for EU membership stood at 48%.

The survey also found that in May 2010 trust in the EU institutions remained higher compared to national governments or national parliaments (42% vs. 29% and 31%, respectively), even though confidence in the EU fell at the height of the crisis (to 42% from 48% in autumn 2009). Trust was most pronounced in Estonia (68%), Slovakia (65%), Bulgaria and Denmark (61%), whilst it was lowest in the United Kingdom (20%).

In addition, confidence in the EU and national governments/parliaments from spring 2001 to spring 2010 was depicted in one of the few selected charts in the press release, which also contained a link to the first full results and country factsheets.




Having sorted out the chaff, let us move on to the wheat.




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.