EU2020 stands for 20 missing languages

What does the Commission's Europe 2020 web page Annual Growth Surveys have in common with Economic and Financial Affairs (Ecfin) page EU economic governance and president José Manuel Barroso's own res gestae on New action for growth, governance and stability?

They all offer access to the Annual Growth Survey 2012 and its four annexes in three of the 23 official languages of the European Union: English, French and German.

In my humble opinion it might be easier to inspire politicians and officials at local, regional and national level, people engaged with EU funds and civil society players, as well as the public in most member states, if the Commission cared enough to inform them in their own language.

It is not really that hard, since the Annual Growth Survey 2012 proper seems to exist in 22 of the EU languages, with Irish Gaelic the only exception. (Contrary to normal practice the English, French and German versions were not posted on Eur-Lex where the 19 other language versions were tucked away, but without links to the important annexes.)

Even the four annexes exist (ADD 1, 2, 3 and 4), if you search for Council document 17229/11 in all languages (or the language of your choice).

In other words, the Commission could easily remedy its omission with regard to 19 of the missing languages. After all, the Annual Growth Survey with its annexes is where the Commission wants to show its leadership.



Ralf Grahn

Update: For some reason, after posting, the link to the Annual Growth Survey 2012 on Eur-Lex turned up the Draft Joint Employment Report instead, but without links to the AGS or the other annexes. Mysterious.

Update 2, 6 January 2012: When the Commission seemingly added the English, French and German versions of the Annual Growth Survey 2012 (AGS) to the 19 existing language versions, it linked to one of the annexes instead, so the number of correct versions is still 19 on Eur-Lex. The annexes in national languages are still missing on the EU2020 pages.

Thanksgiving

This Thursday, 25 November 2010, is Thanksgiving Day in the United States, a national holiday.

Often enough I have criticised the Commission's lack of leadership and dedicated communication with regard to its grand Europe 2020 (EU2020) growth strategy.

Let this Thanksgiving be the day I trumpet that, perhaps two weeks ago, the Commission finally launched a collection of web pages worthy of the role of Europe 2020 in its planned activities.

Let us hope that the Commission will keep updating and integrating the new materials from ”Brussels” and the member states.

EU2020 is what we have, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness or in health, to love and to cherish 'till 2020.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Norway remains as resolutely outside the European Union as it stays inside the European Economic Area (EEA). Written by a number of journalists, Europabloggen.no follows EU events through Norwegian eyes. Recommended reading.

European Council: Impetus for European disintegration?

The European Council meets Thursday and Friday (28-29 October 2010), but two days ahead of the meeting of the heads of state or government of the EU member states the public information appears poorly structured and incomplete in the light of the published press releases and the old draft agenda.

Yesterday president Herman Van Rompuy defended the proposals of the Task force on economic governance in a speech in Brussels. A few days earlier Van Rompuy had sent a letter to members of the European Council, with the Task force report published 21 October 2010. There is a fact sheet dated the same day.

Otherwise, there was little of substance from the European Council or the Council this morning.


Institutions

Van Rompuy has rejected the perception that the European Council meetings are summits. He has underlined the European Council as an institution of the European Union

However, for the citizens of the EU, little resembles an institution deliberating public affairs transparently and accountably. What we see from the outside looks like a summit of the leaders, by the leaders, and for the leaders.

It is unclear if Van Rompuy even wants the European Council to evolve institutionally, or if he prefers to nurture a high level workshop in the (vain?) hope of creating an esprit de corps strong enough to overcome great obstacles.

There is also a lack of connection between the conclusions customarily published after (not before) the meeting and the real discussions taking place.


(Wo)men

Not even an EU summit seems to be enough. French president Nicolas Sarkozy and German chancellor Angela Merkel short-circuited the European Union, by making a deal on the stability and growth pact bilaterally. Merkel has certainly antagonised supporters at home and abroad, but her gains look less certain (see for instance Spiegel International in English and Deutsche Welle in German).


(Wo)men and institutions

Jean Monnet is quoted as saying: "Nothing is possible without men; nothing is lasting without institutions."

Naturally, Charles Kupchan was declared to be wrong when he concluded that the EU needs a new generation of leaders who can breathe life into a project that is perilously close to expiring, and that for now, they are nowhere to be found.

What do you think?

Are the current national leaders willing and the European Council as an institution able to provide anything better than top-down impetus for European disintegration?




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Technology is changing politics, says Personal Democracy Forum, which has sent missionaries to the scattered tribes on the Old Continent. Between the great powwows (highly acclaimed), Antonella Napolitano regularly reports to US HQ and the world in general through the Euro Roundups on her blog. One to follow.

Despite national and linguistic borders there is a European online public space of sorts. You can find the new posts from 680 Euroblogs on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu.

Europe 2020 strategy leadership and communication: State of the art or lying in state?

The seven flagship initiatives promised by the European Commission under the Europe 2020 (EU2020) strategy were Innovation Union, Youth on the move, A digital agenda for Europe, Resource efficient Europe, An industrial policy for the globalisation era, An agenda for new skills and jobs, and a European platform against poverty. See the blog post: Europe 2020 strategy: Barroso’s reform flotilla (flagship initiatives) (20 June 2010).

During October we have looked at some aspects of the Commission’s grand strategy. For context and your convenience, here they are:



EU: From Monti report to Single Market Act (2 October 2010) [There are other blog posts on the promised internal market reforms – a crucial element - if you are interested.]



EU: “European Semester” towards economic stability and growth? (3 October 2010)



Europe 2020 website: From deplorable to absolute disgrace (4 October 2010)



Europe 2020 Press pack: Better, but still shotgun approach (5 October 2010)



Europe 2020 strategy: Innovation Union (7 October 2010)



Europe 2020 web page(s)



Naturally, we have to make a mandatory stop at the central web page(s) for the Europe 2020 strategy to see if the Commission as a body has taken ownership of its make or break strategy.

Even if we are told that the one short web page was last updated 15 July 2010, a few discreet links have been inserted in the margin.



The 19 July 2010 press release IP/10/966 was there before: €6.4 billion for smart growth and jobs – Europe’s biggest ever investment in research and innovation


News links


Under News, a link to a press release has made its appearance: Youth on the Move – strengthening support to Europe’s young people (15 September 2010, IP/10/1124).



There is also a new link to the press release: The “Innovation Union” – turning ideas into jobs, green growth and social progress (6 October 2010, IP/10/1288).



In the ´plus column´ we can chalk up that the press releases are available in all the official languages, while the defining project for the Commission’s five year term (and the rest of the decade) offers the central web page only in English, French and German.


Document links

Under Documents, we find an unobtrusive link to the Communication from the Commission (although the pdf document did not open when I used the Google Chrome browser, but did when I switched to Internet Explorer):



Youth on the Move - An initiative to unleash the potential of young people to achieve smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in the European Union; 15 September 2010 COM(2010) 477 final (“print” version with pictures, 26 pages in all)


Under Documents, we also find an unpretentious link to another Communication from the Commission (opening with Google Chrome):



Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union; 6.10.2010 COM(2010) 546 final (no frills version, 44 pages)

For both flagship initiatives you find references to the accompanying SEC documents.


Digital Agenda and other flagship initiatives

The latest explicit links to the Digital Agenda, the flagship initiative first launched, seem to be from 19 May 2010.

There is nothing in express works words about the flagships soon to be launched, nor on activities in the member states (at central, regional or local level).



EU2020 Press pack



The Europe 2020 strategy Press pack has been enriched by a few disjointed press releases and speeches, valuable as such, but far from putting things into perspective as regards the EU2020 strategy as a whole.



Assessment


There have been improvements in the margins – literally – through the links under News and Documents, but Barroso’s reform flotilla seems to lack an Admiral to set the course and Head Communicator to steer, by creating a sense of purpose internally and by conveying the message to the member states and EU citizens. There is, of course, nothing inviting discussion and interaction.

Individually, the Captains (Commissioners) of the different ships – “Digital”, “Youth” and “Innovation” – steer their own course. They show leadership and communication skills. They are pioneers in the use of social media among the Commission services. Their itineraries have to be traced one by one, however.



Nothing can, however, compensate for the lack of overall direction and comprehensive communication. If this continues, you will have me longing for the economic “dynamism” of the Brezhnev years in the late Soviet Union as a source of inspiration (source: Wikipedia).




Ralf Grahn



P.S. A small, but dynamic team of journalists on European affairs can be found on Twitter @Europa451. Fernando Navarro, Jean-Sébastien Lefebvre, Julie Gonce and Francesca Barca write and collaborate to distribute articles on their European blog through websites in French, Spanish and Italian. The contents are similar, but not exact copies.

The Europa451 collective is doing a great job, with the Spanish blog the most active during the last seven days.



The number of Euroblogs is still on the increase. There are now 675 blogs on European Union and Council of Europe affairs listed on the multilingual blog aggregator Bloggingportal.eu. A few more voluntary editors are needed to get the daily posts tagged. Join the team and see Europe in all its splendour and misery!

EU Reflection Group delivered report: Project Europe 2030

We start by recalling the conclusions of the European Council 14 December 2007, one day after the Treaty of Lisbon was signed (document 16616/1/07). Reflections on “institutional” matters, current policies and the next long term budget were expressly prohibited:

Reflection Group horizon 2020-2030

8. In order to help the Union anticipate and meet challenges more effectively in the longer term (horizon 2020 - 2030), the European Council establishes an independent Reflection Group. Taking as its starting-point the challenges set out in the Berlin Declaration of 25 March 2007, the Group is invited to identify the key issues and developments which the Union is likely to face and to analyse how these might be addressed. This includes, inter alia: strengthening and modernising the European model of economic success and social responsibility, enhancing the competitiveness of the EU, the rule of law, sustainable development as a fundamental objective of the European Union, global stability, migration, energy and climate protection, and the fight against global insecurity, international crime and terrorism. Particular attention should be given to ways of better reaching out to citizens and addressing their expectations and needs.

9. The Group shall conduct its reflections within the framework set out in the Lisbon Treaty. It shall therefore not discuss institutional matters. Nor, in view of its long-term nature, should its analysis constitute a review of current policies or address the Union's next financial framework.

10. In its work, the Reflection Group will need to take into account likely developments within and outside Europe and examine in particular how the stability and prosperity of both the Union and of the wider region might best be served in the longer term.

11. The Group will be chaired by Mr Felipe Gonzalez Marquez, assisted by two Vice-Chairs, Ms Vaira Vike-Freiberga and Mr Jorma Ollila, and will include no more than 9 members selected from across the Union on the basis of merit. The Chairman and the Vice-Chairs are invited to submit a list of names to be considered by the European Council during the French Presidency.

12. The Group will consult as it deems appropriate and be responsible for the organisation of its own work.

13. The Group shall present its report to the European Council meeting of June 2010.

Project Europe 2030


Before the appointment, it was generally referred to as the Group of Wise Persons. In the report the Group added a few words to its name, in order to become discernible from past and future groups, so it became the Reflection Group on the Future of the EU 2030.



On 8 May 2010 the Felipe González, Chairman of Reflection Group, handed over the report to the President of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy:

Project Europe 2030 (for the English version; 46 pages)



The report is also available in Dutch, French, German and Spanish.



Creation of jobs and growth


The main message of the Project Europe 2030 report is:

Our top priority must remain creating jobs and growth.

The beginning of the report is written in the form of a letter from the Reflection Group to the European Council (pages 3 to 6).


The Reflection Group calls for more decisive political leadership from the intergovernmental bodies of the EU: the European Council and the Eurogroup (in coordination with the Commission and the European Parliament; page 6).


The strategic challenges mentioned in this summary are generally well known, but where the European Union has mainly tinkered on the edges, the need for concrete and decisive action is pronounced with gravity.


Among the challenges requiring solutions are:


• Avoiding protectionist temptations
• Medium and long-term reforms in addition to measures to overcome the current crisis
• Strengthening economic governance by correcting losses in competitiveness, reflected in balance of payments and current account deficits
• Reforming the functioning and supervision of financial institutions
• Achieving a highly competitive and sustainable social market economy in order to maintain social cohesion and fight against climate change
• Catching up in the race towards a knowledge economy
• Implementing a common energy policy
• Leading the fight against climate change
• Tackling the demographic challenge
• Strengthening the Single Market including services, the digital society and other new sectors driving growth and job creation
• Reforming the labour market
• Modernising corporate governance practices



The letter is rounded off with a few remarks on how the EU should become a citizens’ project.


At a first glance, the recommendations read like a damning report card on the lost decade of the Lisbon Strategy.


The European Communities and the EU could establish a museum dedicated to the reform reports which were politely received by the leaders and silently shunted aside to gather dust.


Are the prospects any better now?


Possibly. Since the beginning of this year there is one EU citizen with a vested interest to make the European Council deliver, its President Herman Van Rompuy.


Can he set the wheels in motion?


A haiku for your thoughts.




Ralf Grahn

Who are Libertas? And what?

The Libertas web pages tell us that chairman Declan Ganley spoke at the Rome convention yesterday, but I have seen no record of when he was elected or by whom.

Was it the incoming chairman speaking, or the outgoing one?

Naturally, the convention is the place to elect the party leadership, its board or council and other officials and to approve its bylaws, as well as its political programmes.

At least in a movement obsessed by the alleged unaccountability and lack of transparency, openness and democracy of others.

The Libertas About Us page gives us a Brussels address and a telephone number, but not a word of the needed information about the party or its officials.



Did the convention vote? Who were voted in, and who failed? Where are the records of the votes?

Are there democratically legitimate office-holders?

It is astonishing. Reading the information provided by Libertas, we are unable to tell if it is a political party which follows democratic procedures or if it is the private puppet theatre of Mr Declan Ganley.


Democracy starts at home, even in the European Union. EU citizens have a right to require some proof of credibility from Libertas, intent on saving our continent in the European elections.


Ralf Grahn

The Huffington Post

Read ‘The EU’s Political Deficit’ by Max Bergmann in the Huffington Post (4 March 2009):

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-bergmann/the-eus-political-deficit_b_171959.html

The current dithering is in no small measure due to the EU's failings over the last decade to consolidate and strengthen its political union, as well as to take adequate action to alleviate the "democratic deficit", says Bergmann.

***

With new rules (beyond Lisbon) and new leadership there just might appear the silver lining Bergmann seems to hope for.


Ralf Grahn

France does not need wildcat strikes

France does not need wildcat strikes to vent protectionist sentiments – it has Nicolas Sarkozy as President.

Read EUbusiness: Sarkozy under fire in Europe for ‘protectionism’ (7 February 2009), available at

http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/1233941522.08

Recently hailed by many (including himself) as the great leader of Europe, Sarkozy shows a mind-boggling lack of understanding of or a total disregard for the basic tenets of European integration.

Good grief!

Ralf Grahn

Nine lives of Lisbon Treaty

Forget it. The EU Treaty of Lisbon is not a cat-o’-nine-tails to whip the citizens of the European Union into submission. The Lisbon Treaty, or in a wider sense the aim of treaty reform, bears more resemblance to a cat with nine lives.

If the European leaders unanimously and national parliamentarians in the ratifying member states overwhelmingly have supported various versions of the amending treaties, might they not have good cause? Would it go totally astray to suspect a hint of the ‘vision thing’?

Thinking about it, are not the national leaders and parliamentarians the main victims of a more powerful European Union?

Are they not the ones with the most to lose – much more than their populations – if their cosy satrapies are emasculated by control and command from Brussels?

Would they ‘sign away’ their prerogatives, if it was merely an act of self-flagellation?

Why on earth would politicians, dependent on popular votes, alienate their electorates?

***

Would it be amiss if citizens in Europe made the effort to think about the challenges of our globalising world and then tried to reach some answers on how to meet them?

Would people then understand the efforts of European politicians to join forces through the European Union and their (timid) attempts to improve the workings of our shared institutions?

Already twice an amending treaty has reached ratification by 18 member states, but thrice plebiscites during the last leg of treaty reform have contemptuously rejected the offered cure.

But if there really is a need to reform the EU institutions?

Is the chasm between the ‘elites’ and the citizens really the fault of the elected politicians?

Is the wall of popular distrust and incomprehension too thick to penetrate by any means humanely possible?

Is the temptation to ‘Bite the nose to spite the face’ too great to be resisted, even if people end up flogging their own best interests?

***

I have to admit that I feel a tinge of respect, even admiration, when I see Nicolas Sarkozy running for the presidency and promising to bring about EU reform, despite the recent rejection by French voters of the Constitutional Treaty.

Or when chancellor Angela Merkel crafts a deal with the rest of the EU governments to rescue the essential reforms, including fundamental principles enhancing openness, transparency and citizens’ rights, well knowing that the only option is to deal behind closed doors to achieve (a modicum of) its opposite in the long run.

Or when France’s foreign minister Bernard Kouchner is accused of bullying the Irish voters by stating that they will bear the consequences of their possible rejection, when he was plainly stating a fact, based on the unpalatable experience of president Jacques Chirac and France having become lame ducks within the European Union for two years as a result of the French ‘non’.

Would they – and their fellow leaders – take the abuse out of sheer masochistic pleasure, if they did not believe that they were doing the right thing?

***

If people show both disrespect and distrust to their elected leaders, do all the faults lie with the latter?

***

If I understand correctly, the Irish voters did not bury the Lisbon Treaty. They resurrected it, whipping their own leadership and marginalising their country.

If the voters in Ireland and elsewhere imagine that the leaders of France and Germany lack spunk, they should read the joint statement issued Friday evening on the outcome of the referendum. Chancellor Merkel and president Sarkozy met the result with respect and regret, but they expected that the remaining states proceed with ratification.

The leaders were convinced that the Treaty of Lisbon is necessary to make the European Union more democratic and effective.

Treaty reform has nine lives, because the needs are there. Where there’s a will, there’s a way.


Ralf Grahn


Sources:

Déclaration franco-allemende suite au résultat du référendum irlandais (13-06-08 à 18 :28)
www.elysee.fr

Gemeinsame Presseerklärung von Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel und dem französischen Staatspräsidenten Nicolas Sarkozy zum Ausgang des irischen Referendums über den Vertrag von Lissabon vom 12. Juni 2008 (13.06.2008)
www.bundesregierung.de