Consultation report on European Pillar of Social Rights

In February and March I wrote a number of blog posts compiled in the entry EU social market economy and social pillar. It is time to register the progress of the social dimension and the social pillar of the European Union, but let us first return to the public consultation after a reminder of one of the aims of the EU, as laid down in Article 3(3) TEU: a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress.

While we are at it, why not recall the horizontal clause (provision having general application) Article 9 TFEU? Like this:

Article 9

In defining and implementing its policies and activities, the Union shall take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of education, training and protection of human health.

Consultation on European Pillar of Social Rights

In March 2016 the European Commission launched a public consultation on a European Pillar of Social Rights, presenting four documents for orientation. There was a test version of the Social Pillar  in the annex to the communication:

Launching a consultation on a European Pillar of Social Rights; Strasbourg, 8.3.2016 COM(2016) 127 final (11 pages; available in 23 official EU languages)

First preliminary outline of a European Pillar of Social Rights; Strasbourg, 8.3.2016 COM(2016) 127 final ANNEX 1 (18 pages; available in 23 official EU languages)

The communication was accompanied by two commission staff working documents (SWDs):

The EU social acquis; Strasbourg, 8.3.2016 SWD(2016) 50 final (17 pages; only in English)

Key economic, employment and social trends behind a European Pillar of Social Rights; Strasbourg, 8.3.2016 SWD(2016) 51 final  (37 pages; only in English)  

Consultation report

This time I am not going to return to the documents which launched the public consultation lasting until the end of 2016, but head for the summary of the contributions during the consultation process.

The Commission staff working document (available only in English) accompanying the Communication Establishing a European Pillar of Social Rights COM(2017) 250 “presents the consultation process and summarises its main findings”:

Report of the public consultation; Brussels, 26.4.2017 SWD(2017) 206 final (53 pages)

The consultation report, which was published on the same day as the Reflection paper on the social dimension of Europe COM(2017) 206  and the launch of the social pillar (link above), reveals how active and organised the consultation process was.

The role of the member states and the EU Council is crucial regarding the establishment of and the Interinstitutional Proclamation on the European Pillar of Social Rights COM(2017) 251, the upcoming Social Summit for Fair Jobs and Growth 17 November 2017 i Gothenburg - #SocialSummit17 on Twitter - and the chances for practical progress, given the social policy powers vested in the member states.

Therefore, it is interesting to see how active the member states were during the public consultation (page 6):

Member States engaged actively in the consultation. The Commission received contributions from 21 national governments or their responsible ministries: Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Sweden and the UK. Moreover, five national parliaments (the German Bundesrat, the French Assemblée Nationale, Italy's Camera dei Deputati, the Czech Senate and Romania's Camera Deputaților) and a number of regional governments and authorities handed in their replies.

For the general reader the trends and challenges are valuable. Thus, it is worth quoting (page 7):

During consultation events and work streams discussions, four key priority trends emerged which the Pillar should address:  

• The social consequences of the financial crisis, with increasing poverty, social exclusion, inequalities and unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment and among young people, and the long period of economic stagnation, with low growth and competitiveness;  
• Technological progress and automation; the future of work, the emerging digital labour market, education and reskilling;  
• Demographic developments, with the ageing of Europe's population; the modernisation of social protection and welfare systems; and  
• Economic divergence across Member States.

Citizens first

Not only do we have the aims of the treaties, we also have the interests of the citizens of the European Union to guide action (page 9):

For experts, the debate should not be about ‘more or less Europe’, but about putting ‘citizens-first’ to provide security, opportunity and resilience in times of change. The consultation highlighted that the challenges of societies and the world of work are often similar across Member States. Therefore, the Pillar was seen as a means to set the conditions for sustainable convergence towards better employment and social outcomes, by creating a common consensus on social goals against which reforms can be pursued.

How can this be made to contribute to competitiveness and fiscal sustainability? These questions were important for many respondents (page 9).

Euro area or beyond?

Is the European Social Pillar for the euro area, or for the EU27 as a whole? The European Parliament had contributed with its views (page 11):

In the consultation, it was recognised that more in-depth action to stimulate convergence towards better employment and social outcomes in the euro area would be key to make its single monetary policy suitable for all its members, to improve its functioning, and to reinforce the EMU's economic, social and political resilience. The European Parliament for instance considered that the constraints of euro area membership call for additional specific social targets and standards to be established and relevant financial support to be considered at the euro area level, while remaining open to non-euro area Member States on a voluntary basis [European Parliament resolution P8_TA(2017)0010 of 19 January 2017 on a European Pillar of Social Rights (2016/2095(INI))]

The reference to the European Parliament resolution reminds us of the keynote call, paragraph 1:

1. Calls on the Commission to build on the review of the social acquis and of EU employment and social policies as well as on the outcomes of the 2016 public consultation by making proposals for a solid European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR) that is not limited to a declaration of principles or good intentions but reinforces social rights through concrete and specific tools (legislation, policy-making mechanisms and financial instruments), delivering a positive impact on people’s lives in the short and medium term and enabling support for European construction in the 21st century by effectively upholding the Treaties’ social objectives, supporting national welfare states, strengthening cohesion, solidarity and upward convergence in economic and social outcomes, ensuring adequate social protection, reducing inequality, achieving long overdue progress in reducing poverty and social exclusion, facilitating national reform efforts through benchmarking and helping to improve the functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) and of the EU’s single market;

After an introductory part, the consultation report discusses the role and the nature of the Social Pillar, with the second half dedicated to the principles (under the headlines equal opportunities and access to the labour market, fair working conditions and adequate and sustainable social protection).

I am impressed by the process, as well as the presentation. Complex issues are presented clearly as a valuable background for EU #SocialRights and the upcoming #SocialSummit17, as well as the Commission’s priority to deepen the economic and monetary union (EMU) - #deepeningEMU on Twitter.  

Ralf Grahn

Towards a Single Market Act (2010)

On this blog, we traced Mario Monti’s new strategy for the Single Market and the European Parliament’s resolution on delivering a single market to consumers and citizens (here and here).

For the first semester of 2010 we still needed to check on the collective views from the EU member states, namely the conclusions of the Council of the European Union and the European Council:

Economic and Financial Affairs (Ecofin) 16 February 2010 (6477/10)

Competitiveness (Internal Market, Industry and Research) 1-2 March 2010 (6983/1/10 REV 1)

European Council 17 June 2010 (EUCO 13/1/10 REV 1)

COM(2010) 608 final/2

It came to pass in those days , when José Manuel Barroso was president of the European Commission and Michel Barnier was commissioner for the internal market,  that the EU Commission responded to the strategy, the resolution and the conclusions  by publishing a communication on 27 October 2010.

However, about two weeks later the English language version was replaced by a new and corrected text:

Towards a Single Market Act

For a highly competitive social market economy

50 proposals for improving our work, business and exchanges with one another

Brussels, 11.11.2010 COM(2010) 608 final/2 (45 pages)   

The other language versions remain unaffected.

On page 2 we find a reminder that this is a text with relevance to the European Economic Area (EEA) and the Commission’s credo that during the past two decades, the creation of the single market and the opening of borders have been two of the main driving forces behind economic growth in Europe.

Consultation paper  

The European Commission presented this consultation paper (“Green Paper”) hoping that the relaunch of the single market would become the subject of a wide-ranging public debate for four months throughout Europe.

After this discussion, the Commission intended to invite the other institutions to give their formal agreement to the final version of the Act.

The Commission saw the future adoption of the Single Market Act as a dynamic way to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the single market at the end of 2012.

The Commission also recalled that the Single Market Act and the EU Citizenship Report 2010 were meant to complement each other (page 5), with the Citizenship Report dealing with non-economic rights (page 20).

The drawbacks of market fragmentation were among the problems the Commission underlined (page 6):

Businesses often cite the fragmentation of the single market as a handicap to their competitiveness and, indeed, the variety of different national regulations places a considerable burden on them, delaying investment, limiting economies of scale and synergies and raising barriers to market entry. It is therefore important for markets to be integrated and obstacles removed by precisely identifying the areas where a lack of coordination and harmonisation are hampering the proper functioning of the single market.

Fifty proposals!

Rereading the fifty proposals after all these years still makes me wonder if I see an emerging strategy or a mythological cornucopia. I still feel at a loss to present this loosely structured collection of good intentions, an inventory of actions for the internal market.

But reading continues to make sense as an immersion into the different aspects related to achieving a real single market in some distant future. If they keep going like this, a lot of patient grunt work is going to be needed from here to something close to eternity.

Eternal harmonisation or a real upgrade through unitary market rules of strategic importance, is the question that nags me.

With regard to the public consultation, the Commission asked for the contributions by 28 February 2011, in order to turn the 50 measures into a Single Market Act, comprising a definitive policy action plan for 2011-2012. (page 35). A second phase was promised for later (page 36).

Ralf Grahn

BEREC consultation on draft Guidelines on Net Neutrality and Transparency

At the political level the European Parliament, the EU Council and the Commission (Digital Agenda, Digital Single Market) have all been active on net neutrality issues recently. Closer to the ”factory floor”, the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) tries to find common ground among some 35 national eCommunications regulators, aspect by aspect.


Draft guidelines

This autumn the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) published:

Draft BEREC Guidelines on Net Neutrality and Transparency: Best practices and recommended approaches BoR (11) 44 (October 2011; 64 pages)


Transparency and net neutrality consultation

BEREC launched a public consultation on 3 October 2011 (the announcement provided informationa about related net neutrality issues, but did not contain the end date of the consultation). The deadline, 2 November 2011, did appear on the News page.

Stakeholders, including individuals, delivered 77 contributions, available on the consultations page.


Board of Regulators

The Board of Regulators (BoR) 8-9 December 2011 gave its broad support to the documents submitted for approval. The BoR approved the Guidelines on transparency and the report from the public consultation for publication. The two documents:

Draft report on the contributions received during the public consultation on the draft Guidelines on transparency as a tool to achieve net neutrality BoR (11) 66

Revised draft Guidelines on transparency in the scope of net neutrality: best practices and recommended approaches BoR (11) 67


Consultation report

In other words, the report about the public consultation has been published:

BEREC report on the public consultation on the draft BEREC Guidelines on Transparency in the scope of Net Neutrality BoR (11) 66 (December 2011; 15 pages)

With a variety of respondents from different backgrounds, the contributions contain a number of approaches and opinions on the best manner to proceed regarding many issues.

Thus, the consultation report mainly provides a general summary of various opinions, without delving into specific contributions. Recommended reading for people interested in net neutrality issues.

One outcome is worth mentioning in order to link the draft guidelines with the final version (page 15):

Since the received general comments on net neutrality were very numerous and extensive, it was decided in particular to change the title of the document to “BEREC Guidelines on Transparency in the scope of Net Neutrality: Best practices and recommended approaches”, to better reflect the intended scope of the guidelines and avoid any further confusion in this respect.

Approved guidelines

The guidelines approved for publication by the BEREC Board of Regulators (BoR):

BEREC Guidelines on Transparency in the scope of Net Neutrality: Best practices and recommended approaches BoR (11) 67 (December 2011; 69 pages)



Ralf Grahn

Report on the consultation of the BEREC draft Work Programme 2012

BEREC, the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications, is an important cog in the machinery to deliver on the Digital Agenda for Europe. BEREC enhances cooperation among national regulatory authorities (NRAs) and strengthens the internal market in electronic communications networks.

In the previous blog post I looked at some procedural aspects (transparency) and the scope of ”interested parties”. Here I turn to the contents of the report with the Work Programme 2012 consultation summary.

Following the WP 2012 public consultation from 6 October to 4 November 2011, including an oral hearing 21 October, BEREC published a report. The fifteen stakeholder contributions are available in full on the BEREC page for public consultations.

The consultation summary title more exactly:

BEREC report on the consultation of the BEREC draft Work Programme 2012 BoR (11) 61 (9 December 2011; 15 pages)


WP consultation report

The report advances through the draft WP, mentioning both the comments made by the interested parties and the proposed reactions prepared for the Board of Regulators (BoR).

Thus, the contributions offer an overview of issues seen as critical, at least by some. They also indicate (group) interests of individual contributors regarding electronic communications in Europe.

In addition to themes covered by the draft WP, contributors proposed additional issues to address in the course of BEREC work.


WP 2012 adapted

Here are a few issues where BEREC indicated a clear will to adapt the text of the final Work Programme 2012 (although naturally feedback can influence future actions without textual adjustments). I quote the theme and the BEREC comment.

Universal Service Provisions: The remarks made by PhoneAbility, Telecom Italia and SFR where taken into account and the theme of calculation of net costs has been added to the Work Programme.

Recommendation on termination rates: As a result BEREC added the evaluation of SMS termination to the Work Programme.

Benchmarks: BEREC added the evaluation to include further benchmark exercises in the future to the Work Programme.

Access to special rate services: BEREC takes note of the comments. The concrete suggestions such as DQ services have been added to the Work Programme.

Cross-border and demand side related issues: BEREC is glad to see so much support for this issue. The harmonisation question as well as further detailed evaluation in the field of cross-border issues and business services will be covered in the Work Programme with regard to the outcome of two reports on this issue by the end of 2011.

Cooperation with RSPG (Radio Spectrum Policy Group) and ENISA (European Network and Information Security Agency): BEREC will evaluate questions of further harmonisation in the Work Program Programme.

Additional items... Migration from legacy services: BEREC welcomes the comment made on this issue and will look into it within the existing EWGs.

***

In some cases, such as the adoption of certain standards for seamless interoperability and the creation of a single market for pan-European businesses, BEREC saw the proposals as going beyond its remit.



Ralf Grahn

BEREC draft Work Programme 2012 consultation procedure

After the public consultation from 6 October to 4 November 2011, including an oral hearing 21 October, BEREC published a report on the public consultation. The fifteen stakeholder contributions are available in full on the BEREC page for public consultations.

The consultation summary:

BEREC report on the consultation of the BEREC draft Work Programme 2012 BoR (11) 61 (9 December 2011; 15 pages)

In this blog post I present the basic procedural aspects, before I look at the ”interested parties”.


Transparency

The BEREC Regulation 1211/2009, published two years ago, is available in 23 official EU languages; the English version:

REGULATION (EC) No 1211/2009 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 25 November 2009 establishing the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and the Office (Text with EEA relevance); OJEU 18.12.2009 L 337/1

With regard to transparency, Article 17, in Chapter IV General Provisions, lays down a general rule on consultation, subject to confidentiality (Article 20) and further to the rules on public access to documents (Article 22):

Article 17
Consultation

Where appropriate, BEREC shall, before adopting opinions, regulatory best practice or reports, consult interested parties and give them the opportunity to comment within a reasonable period. BEREC shall, without prejudice to Article 20, make the results of the consultation procedure publicly available.

The annual work programme is specifically mentioned as requiring consultation ahead of adoption, in Article 5(4) about the tasks of the Board of Regulators:

4. The Board of Regulators shall, after consulting interested parties in accordance with Article 17, adopt the annual work programme of BEREC before the end of each year preceding that to which the work programme relates. The Board of Regulators shall transmit the annual work programme to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission as soon as it is adopted.

By publishing the draft, the consultation announcement, the contributions, the consultation summary and the final Work Programme 2012, BEREC acted in accordance with the principles on transparency. (A minor detail: The calls for contributions could further identify the document in question by adding the number to the name as well as by linking.)


Interested parties

During this consultation regarding future activities BEREC received contributions from fifteen stakeholders interested enough to want to influence electronic communications policies at the European level (summary page 2, consultations web page): EIDQ Association – the Association for the Directory Information and Related Search Industry, FTTH Council of Europe, The Number – Directory provider, The Voice on the Net (VON) Coalition Europe, Virgin Media, Telekom Austria, Telecom Italia, Belgacom, INTUG – International Telecommunications Users Group, ECTA, Cable Europe, Bundesverband Breitbandkommunikation, ETNO, Phone Ability and SFR.

In comparison, on a more concrete issue, the public consultation on draft guidelines on Transparency in the scope of Net Neutrality received 77 contributions (report BoR (11) 66).

On the other hand, some public consultations have received far fewer comments than the draft Work Programme 2012.

Participation is still way below the true numbers of participants in market and regulation activities. My impression is that the public and private players in the European electronic communications markets have not yet fully discovered BEREC as a new hinge between Digital Agenda aims at the European level and (converging) regulatory activity at the national level.



Ralf Grahn

EU electronic communications: BEREC Work Programme 2012

After the brief presentation of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC), we looked at the ongoing public consultation on the draft BEREC medium term strategy outlook.

Relating to the Digital Agenda for Europe, in this blog post we turn to the BEREC Work Programme 2012 documents.


Board of Regulators

The conclusions of the BEREC Board of Regulators meeting in Bucharest (Romania) 8-9 December 2011 deal with the Work Programme for next year in point 7 (page 3). The conclusions after some editing:

7. Draft 2012 BEREC WP

Summary of the contributions received during the public consultation on the 2012 draft BEREC WP BoR (11) 61

Revised 2012 draft BEREC WP BoR (11) 62

Proposal for operationalisation of the BEREC WP 2012 – set-up of EWGs BoR (11) 63

Background

The 2012 BEREC Chair (RTR) presented the results from the public consultation on the BEREC WP for 2012, held in the period 6 October - 4 November 2011, the revised draft WP and a proposal for operationalisation of the BEREC WP 2012, incl. the set-up of EWGs.

Conclusion

The BEREC 2012 WP and the consultation report were approved for publication and implementation.


Documents

If we concentrate on the main documents for the public, we have the draft Work Programme BoR (11) 40 Rev1 (October 2011; 16 pages).

After the public consultation from 6 October to 4 November 2011, including an oral hearing 21 October, BEREC published a report on the public consultation BoR (11) 61 (9 December 2011; 15 pages). The fifteen contributions are available also on the BEREC page for public consultations.

The final WP:

Work Programme 2012 BEREC Board of Regulators BoR (11) 62 (9 December 2011; 18 pages)

***

For the future BEREC could consider linking directly to the relevant documents in its conclusions.

I am going to look at the consultation summary and the final Work Programme 2012 in future blog posts.



Ralf Grahn

EU electronic communications: BEREC medium term strategy consultation

In the introduction to the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC), I mentioned that BEREC has announced a public consultation, which runs until 16 January 2012.


Board of Regulators

The latest meeting of the Board of Regulators (BoR) took place 8 to 9 December 2011 in Bucharest (Romania).

According to the conclusions the BoR held an extensive discussion on the draft medium term strategy and decided to publish it for consultation. The draft:

Draft BEREC medium term strategy outlook; 14 December 2011 BoR (11) 58 (7 pages)


Medium term strategy

In order to achieve a multi-annual perspective, BEREC is elaborating strategic goals and promises to present a document outlining its midterm strategy in the course of 2012.

According to the BEREC announcement the public consultation runs until 16 January 2012. The draft strategy document outlines the activities of this advisory body for the next 3 to 5 years.


Internal market for electronic communications

In the draft, BEREC starts by setting out its role in general terms as a contributor to the Digital Agenda, before going into detail (page 2):

BEREC’s task is to promote the consistent application of the regulatory framework and thereby contribute to the development of the internal market for electronic communications. In doing so, BEREC aims to play its part in the promotion of growth and innovation in the EU. BEREC can also provide considerable expertise and professional advice on European policy initiatives and related debates in the electronic communications sector.

Emphasis on the digital single market is added through the announcement of the main focus (page 3):

The main focus of BEREC in the medium term will be on its contribution to the realisation of the internal market. The contributions in this area, both upon request from the EU institutions and on its own initiative, will include in particular:

a. Adopting common regulatory approaches and best practices in areas where differences impede the internal market, and monitoring conformity with those approaches thereafter.

b. Issuing robust and respected opinions on Article 7 cases. [Footnote 1 adds the explanation: Article 7 and article 7a of the amended Framework Directive describe the process in case an NRA takes a market analysis decision. That NRA has to notify its draft decision to the Commission and to BEREC. Both BEREC and the Commission can then provide the NRA with advice. If, in a later stage, a final decision is notified, the Commission may have serious doubts regarding the decision. In such a case, the Commission has to ask BEREC for advice. The Commission has to take the utmost account of that advice.]

c. Advising the EU institutions on draft legislation and regulation.

Priorities

After describing some trends in infrastructure and services and among consumers (page 3-4), the BEREC draft discusses the following core or priority issues for the coming years (page 4-5):

1. Infrastructural developments: Next generation networks
2. Consumer empowerment: boosting consumer choice and protection
3. Service related developments

The BEREC draft then turns to the quality of its output, by describing its level of ambition regarding common positions, guidelines, the sharing of best practices, information and experiences between NRAs, the monitoring and benchmarking exercises, as well as Article 7/7a procedures related to the Framework Directive (see above) (page 6).

The last page mentions the need for efficiency during times of budget austerity for the NRAs.


Comment

In this first draft strategy BEREC has placed a few signposts outlining main goals and principles for the longer term. For those interested, it offers an introduction to the activities of BEREC.

In the midst of budget consolidation and weakening growth prospects, the European Council has repeatedly called for the establishment of a European digital single market as a means to engender economic growth and job creation. BEREC and the NRAs are in a strategic position between European level aims and the reality of national level regulation.

The stakeholders – including telecommunications enterprises, online service providers and content creators - now have the opportunity to contribute to the final version, although the annual Work Programmes can be expected to remain the main source for plans in the short term.

***

I wish the readers of my blogs, as well as my Facebook and Twitter friends, a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2012!



Ralf Grahn

EU telecommunications: Public consultation on net neutrality (2010)

From the Digital Agenda for Europe communication 26.8.2010 COM(2010) 245 final/2, our next step regarding the open and neutral nature of the internet takes us to the public consultation.


Public consultation

The Commission launched the promised public consultation on net neutrality 30 June 2010 (press release IP/10/860, available in 22 languages). The Commission wanted to know more about potential problems linked with certain forms of traffic management and whether the new telecom rules are sufficient to tackle them; technical and economic aspects; quality of service considerations; and whether net freedoms may be affected.

The Commission web page about the public consultation on the open internet and and net neutrality offers i.a. the consultation questionnaire, the responses and a summary, as well as video recordings from a seminar (”summit”) which discussed the issues in November 2010.

The Commission's questionnaire (12 pages) offers a presentation of the issues and indications of what the executive wanted respondents to comment on, but the focus was on (page 2):

This questionnaire therefore focuses principally on the behaviour of operators, and in particular how they may manage traffic flowing over their networks (through a set of practices commonly referred to as 'network management' or 'traffic management'), in order to see how this behaviour might impact on the 'net freedoms' of citizens (i.e. their 'ability to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice') [reference in footnote 1: This is a regulatory policy objective enshrined in Article 8 of the amended Framework Directive.]

This consultation invites views on how best to preserve the open and neutral character of the internet, given the will of the European Institutions to enshrine this goal as a policy objective and regulatory principle to be promoted by national regulatory authorities, and to consider whether further public policy responses are needed.

For your convenience: Annex I on page 10 contains the Commission's 2009 declaration on net neutrality (also published in the Official Journal).


Responses

The consultation ended 30 September 2010, and on 9 November the Commission informed about the 318 responses through a press release (IP/10/1482, available in 22 languages), with main findings.

A summary report on the responses offers more detail (6 pages). The EU telecoms framework had still to be tested on the ground and various concerns were expressed with regard to the future, but the main findings indicated no need for new legislation, although further guidance might be welcome.

The responses of individual stakeholders can be found here.



Ralf Grahn

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).