Digital Agenda for Finland: glossy or original?

As we have seen, Finland has a domestic Digital Agenda, which has been published English in addition to the national languages:

Productive and inventive Finland – Digital Agenda for 2011-2020 (pdf brochure; 49 pages)

There is a comparable brochure in the original Finnish:

Tuottava ja uudistuva Suomi – Digitaalinen agenda vuosille 2011-2020 (49 pages)

The glossy publications are probably intended for the wider public and international partners. However, the information in the original government reports to Parliament has been rearranged, at least. Did they aim at making the strategies more pleasing to readers?


Original government reports

If you are interested, you can compare the colour booklets with the original government reports in Finnish and Swedish, as available through the web pages of the Parliament (in pdf format; with document and page numbers added since the ministry versions):

Finnish: Tuottava ja uudistuva Suomi – Digitaalinen agenda vuosille 2011–2020; Valtioneuvoston selonteko eduskunnalle VNS 10/2010 vp (39 pages)

Swedish: Ett produktivt och nyskapande Finland – Digital agenda för åren 2011–2020; Statsrådets redogörelse till riksdagen SRR 10/2010 rd (41 pages)


Government report

Here the word 'report' has a more forward-looking meaning than usually ('matter relating to the governance of the country') according to the Constitution of Finland, Section 44 - Statements and reports of the Government:

The Government may present a statement or report to the Parliament on a matter relating to the governance of the country or its international relations.

----- No decision on confidence in the Government or its Member shall be made in the consideration of a report.

This means that the national Digital Agenda for Finland was discussed at plenary sessions and dealt with in committies, but the end vote did not involve the confidence of the government.



Ralf Grahn

Report on Sweden’s EU Council Presidency

The Swedish government has published a report on its presidency of the Council of the European Union during the second half of 2009 (in Swedish):



Regeringens skrivelse 2009/10:174 Redogörelse för det svenska ordförandeskapet i Europeiska unionens råd andra halvåret 2009 (31 March 2010; 69 pages).

This special report describes how the Swedish government prepared for the presidency and how it was put into practice. The main achievements are noted, as well as the costs.

Even if Sweden handled the last EU Council presidency under the old Nice Treaty rules, the report is valuable for future presidencies and students of EU politics. For instance, the text on Sweden’s successful web communications is worth noting.




General Reports



With pictures, charts and graphic design, the European Commission’s General Report on the Activities of the European Union 2009 has become shorter and lighter than its predecessors (132 pages), and the monthly Bulletin has been discontinued.

There are, of course, a plethora of special reports and news pages, but for a comprehensive view of the main events in the European Union, few beat the traditional annual general report of the Swedish government:



Regeringens skrivelse 2009/10:150 Berättelse om verksamheten i Europeiska unionen under 2009 (410 pages).

The Swedish annual report has become an even more valuable resource for those who know enough of a Nordic language to be able to read Swedish.



Ralf Grahn

Swedish EU Council presidency: Effective and professional

The Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies (Sieps) has published its customary mid-term review of the presidency of the Council of the European Union. Normally, these reports are written by experts in the presidency country, but this time Sieps engaged a number of experienced European presidency watchers, offering the reader a variety of viewpoints from past and future presidency capitals.

Sweden entered its presidency of the EU Council at a peculiar juncture: The almost interminable treaty reform process was still unfinished, with the Lisbon Treaty in the doldrums; with an outgoing Commission and incoming European Parliament; with two summer months at the beginning of a six month stint.



Sieps has gathered Swedish media reports and reactions on its web page Sieps in media, but most of them reproduce the news item by the news agency TT, so there is little variation despite the impressive number of articles: Sveriges betyg: Effektivt men trist (Sweden’s report card: Effective but boring).

A pragmatic and consensual approach without an overdose of national interests (honest broker), hard work and diplomatic skills in securing the passage of the Lisbon Treaty generally received high marks. After France and the Czech Republic, Sweden was the first “normal” Council presidency in a while.

The lack of advance job descriptions for the new top jobs and the secretive negotiation process leading to the nomination of Herman Van Rompuy and Catherine Ashton got lukewarm appraisals. The December UN Climate Change Conference in was seen as crucial, but was still a future event at the time of writing.

The communication efforts of the Swedish presidency got dual marks. The innovative presidency web site got positive ratings, but there was a perceived lack of forceful direct messages by Sweden to the EU’s 500 million inhabitants.



Fredrik Langdal and Göran von Sydow (Eds.): The Swedish Presidency: European Perspectives
– SIEPS 2009:3op – (Occasional papers; December 2009; 74 pages).


Comment

The provisional remarks will mature into more permanent perceptions after the end of the Swedish presidency, with the final moments of COP15 just days ahead.

For most of the strategic issues, half a year is a very short time to achieve substantial results, although there are milestones along the way, such as the Stockholm programme in the area of freedom, security and justice.

I share the positive assessment of the authors of the report, but I would have headlined the half-term card less critically than Swedish media: Effective and professional.



Mats Engström offers a nuance in between in his informed blog post: The Swedish Presidency: Effective but not Exciting (14 December 2009). In some areas Engström would have hoped for a modern eco-car with more acceleration, instead of a Volvo diesel. Despite successes, opportunities were lost.

The presidency trios are a modest response to the need for coherent long term action, but it remains to be seen if Spain, Belgium and Hungary are going to form a cohesive trio, despite their common 18 month programme. The Lisbon Treaty introduced a more permanent chairmanship only for the European Council and the Foreign Affairs Council, whereas the General Affairs Council and the other Council configurations will still be chaired by the rotating presidencies.


From a citizen’s point of view, the Council proceedings remain opaque, despite public deliberations, and the governance standards the European Council has set for itself as a formal institution are dismal, but the Sweden managed to instil a certain degree of openness in its handling of the presidency, and the web communication effort of the Swedish presidency was the best to date. Despite the limitations, it would be a positive surprise if the following trio succeeds better in this respect.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Discover 494 euroblogs on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu.

Implementing the Lisbon Treaty (Swedish report)

Grahnlaw has called on the Swedish Council presidency to report on the implementation of the EU’s Lisbon Treaty. This has now happened in the form of an implementation report, submitted to the European Council meeting Thursday 10 and Friday 11 December 2009.



***

The General Affairs Council 7 December 2009 dealt with the implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon.

The GAC took note of a report from the presidency on progress in implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon.

The report will be forwarded to the European Council (10 and 11 December) (17033/1/09 REV1).


Implementation report



The five page report lists the decisions taken by the European Council and the Council on 1 December 2009 and published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

The initial presentation on Grahnlaw:

Grahnlaw: Lisbon Treaty implementation – first day (1 December 2009)


Published and commented


The decisions adopted on 1 December are the following:


• Decisions adopted by the European Council:


- European Council Decision adopting its Rules of Procedure
Published OJEU 2.12.2009 L 315/51


Grahnlaw: European Council’s new Rules of Procedure (3 December 2009)


Grahnlaw: European Council’s Rules of Procedure (Contents: Articles 1 to 3) (3 December 2009)


Grahnlaw: European Council’s Rules of Procedure (Contents: Articles 4 to 8) (7 December 2009)


Grahnlaw: Rules of Procedure of the European Council (Articles 9 to 14) (7 December 2009)


EU Law Blog: Rules of Procedure of the European Council (7 December 2009)

***

- European Council Decision electing the President of the European Council
Published OJEU 2.12.2009 L 315/48


Grahnlaw: Herman Van Rompuy President of the European Council (official decision) (2 December 2009)

***

- European Council Decision taken with the agreement of the President of the Commission appointing the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
Published OJEU 2.12.2009 L 315/49


Grahnlaw: Catherine Ashton High Representative of the (European) Union (official decision) (2 December 2009)

***

- European Council Decision on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council
OJEU 2.12.2009 L 315/50


Grahnlaw: EU Lisbon Treaty implementation: Presidency of the Council (7 December 2009)

***


• Decisions adopted by the Council:


- Decision of the Council (General Affairs) establishing the list of Council configurations in addition to those referred to in the second and third subparagraphs of Article 16(6) of the Treaty of the European Union
Published OJEU 2.12.2009 L 315/46


Grahnlaw: EU Council configurations (Lisbon Treaty implementation) (2 December 2009)

***


Road ahead

After this recapitulation, in future posts we are going to turn to the decisions not officially published by the date of the implementation report (4 December 2009) and not presented on this blog.


Thus, for future posts, we are going to present and comment on the following Council decisions mentioned in the Swedish report Implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon (document 17033/1/09 REV 1; page 3):

- Council Decision adopting the Council's Rules of Procedure (16525/09)

- Council Decision laying down measures for the implementation of the European Council Decision on the exercise of the Presidency of the Council (16517/09)

- Council Decision appointing the Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union (16533/2/09)

- Council Decision laying down the conditions of employment for the President of the European Council (16519/09)

- Council Decision laying down the conditions of employment for the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (16521/09)

- Council Decision laying down the conditions of employment for the Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union (16536/09)




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Growing, multilingual Bloggingportal.eu now aggregates 494 euroblogs. Blogs on EU affairs and policies can gain visibility, credibility and readers by joining our common European “village well” for facts, opinion and gossip.

Baltic Sea report (Finland)

The Baltic Sea joins eight member of the European Union and Russia. The EU is preparing a Baltic Sea strategy, geared towards economic opportunities.

The government of Finland has prepared a national report, which deals with the marine environment, marine traffic and economic cooperation.

Here is the text of the Finnish government’s press release:

Government Communications Unit
5.6.2009 12.05

Government outlined measures to save the Baltic Sea

At its plenary session on Friday 5 June, the Government approved a report on measures to improve the marine environment of the Baltic Sea, to increase the safety of marine traffic and to strengthen economic cooperation.

The report concentrates on actions that, for Finland, are the most important and most urgent in terms of the Baltic Sea. The most serious problem concerning the Baltic Sea is eutrophication, which is most visible in the form of water surface algal proliferations recurring every summer. To stop eutrophication, measures to reduce the nutrient load from households, industry and agriculture are needed.

In Finland, agriculture accounts for the largest burden on water bodies. The Government proposes in the report measures that will decrease the nutrient load from agriculture in Finland in the next few years. This will take place especially by means of a more careful targeting of agri-environmental support at the most risk-prone areas and field parcels.

The higher traffic volumes in oil and chemical transports and passenger traffic, particularly in the narrow Gulf of Finland, increase accidents risks. The report outlines measures to improve the safety of marine traffic and to prevent accidents in advance. Oil-spill response capabilities will be enhanced by drawing up concrete plans together with Sweden, Estonia and Russia in order to correct shortfalls in equipment, for example.

For Finland, the Baltic Sea region is also an economic opportunity and a route for transports and energy. These issues are treated comprehensively in the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, currently under preparation. The Government report focuses on economic issues that are the most important for Finland, such as the promotion of the business environment of Finnish companies in the Baltic Sea countries.

The EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region forms a central instrument for Finland’s Baltic Sea policy and a channel for exerting influence. The achievement of concrete results concerning the Baltic Sea calls for parallel and simultaneous measures and close cooperation with all countries in the Baltic Sea region. The Northern Dimension provides a functional forum for Baltic Sea cooperation with non-EU countries, particularly Russia.


Further information: Kare Halonen, State Secretary for EU Affairs, Government Secretariat for EU Affairs, tel. +358 9 1602 2180 and Mikaela Grönqvist, Special Adviser, Ministry of the Interior, tel. +358 9 1604 3511


***

Report

The Report is addressed to the Parliament of Finland: Itämeren haasteet ja Itämeripolitiikka. Hallistuksen selonteko (in Finnish).



In Swedish: Östersjöns utmaningar och Östersjöpolitiken. Statsrådets redogörelse




Ralf Grahn

EU: Detailed competition policy implementation paper posted

In a quick post, we drew our readers’ attention to the Commission’s Communication Report on the functioning of Regulation 1/2003 (Brussels, 29.4.2009 COM(2009) 206 final).




Later we added a comment to guide readers to the blog post Commission Report on How Regulation 1/2003 Works, by the EU Law Blog, which offers a neat explanation of the issues as well as links to the original Regulation, the Commission Report and the Staff Working Paper.





***


Staff Working Document



The accompanying Commission staff working document SEC(2009) 574 has now been posted more officially on the Eur-Lex pages as well (at 29 April 2009).


We add the exact references for the 97 page detailed document:

Commission Staff Working Paper accompanying the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and Council Report on the functioning of Regulation 1/2003 {COM(2009) 206 final}; Brussels, 29.4.2009 SEC(2009) 574 final.




***

Regulation 1/2003

Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty was originally published in the Official Journal 4.1.2003 L 1/1.

This text with EEA relevance has since been amended. The latest consolidated version of Regulation 1/2003 is of 16 October 2006.





Ralf Grahn

Monitoring the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

The first Convention prepared the Charter of Fungamental Rights of the European Union, and it was solemnly adopted as politically binding at the European Council in Nice, in December 2000.

Later it was incorporated into the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, as Part II, and published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) 16.12.2004 C 310.

When the ratification processes of the Constitutional Treaty had petered out, the Treaty of Lisbon proposed to make the Charter legally binding, but the text was published separately, OJEU 14.12.2007 C 303/1.

Cf. Article 6 of the amended Treaty on European Union, OJEU 9.5.2008 C 115/19.

In other words, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights enters into force if the Lisbon Treaty does, but one should bear in mind that the United Kingdom and Poland opted out of the Charter. (The UK has embarked upon a disconnected exercise to craft a national Bill of Rights.)


The differences between the versions are small, so if you have no need for a certain version, it is convenient to use the latest one.

***

Monitoring

The Commission, which drafts legislative proposals, systematically check them against fundamental rights.

The Commission has now published an appraisal of its monitoring activities: The Report on the practical operation of the methodology for a systematic and rigorous monitoring of compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights (Brussels, 29.4.2009 COM(2009) 205 final).



The Commission stresses the growing importance of fundamental rights issues in the area of justice, freedom and security (page 3), and it names the so called asylum package as a case in point. The obligations are not only procedural, but substantive as well.

The Commission then goes on to discuss improvements to the monitoring process.

The Commission concludes by underlining the need to foster a fundamental rights culture and that the respect for fundamental rights must be a common goal of all the institutions involved in the legislative process.



Ralf Grahn

European Union: Report on competition policy implementation

Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty was originally published in the Official Journal 4.1.2003 L 1/1.

This text with EEA relevance has since been amended. The latest consolidated version is of 16 October 2006.



***


Report

The Commission’s Communication Report on the functioning of Regulation 1/2003 (Brussels, 29.4.2009 COM(2009) 206 final) is now available.



It is accompanied by a Commission staff working document SEC(2009)574.



Ralf Grahn

EU: Brussels I Regulation (new documents)

When we wrote about the Brussels I Regulation, we were unable to locate the report and the green paper referred to in the Commission’s press releases.

They have now been posted on the Eur-Lex pages dedicated to preparatory acts, among COM documents:

Brussels I Regulation report

Brussels, 21.4.2009
COM(2009) 174 final
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters



Green paper Brussels I Regulation

Brussels, 21.4.2009
COM(2009) 175 final
GREEN PAPER ON THE REVIEW OF COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 44/2001 ON JURISDICTION AND THE RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS



***

Overview

IP/09/606

We have the Commission’s press release: European citizens and business to benefit from greater access to justice - strengthening co-operation in civil and commercial matters (21 April 2009; IP/09/606).



According to the press release, on 21 April, the Commission adopted a report and a green paper on the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement in civil and commercial matters. This Regulation, widely known as the "Brussels I Regulation", is the matrix of European judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters. It aims at providing the legal support for the good functioning of the internal market, addressing two key questions which arise in the event of a dispute involving natural or legal persons from different Member States:

• The courts of which Member States shall have jurisdiction to rule on the dispute;
• How the judgment given by that court will be recognised and enforced in the other Member States.


MEMO/09/169

Report and Green paper on the review and application of regulation (ec) no 44/2001 on jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (21 April 2009; MEMO/09/169)

On 21 April 2009, the Commission adopted a report and a green paper on the functioning of the existing rules on jurisdiction of the courts and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. It concludes that time has come to achieve a free circulation of judgments in civil and commercial matters in the European Union on the basis of mutual recognition of judgments among Member States.


Ralf Grahn

Finland: Government Report on EU Policy (now in English)

When the Government of Finland published its Report on EU policy on 8 April 2009, it promised that an English version would be made available later (in addition to the Finnish and Swedish texts published initially).

The English version has now been published, and it is available for free.

The Government Report on EU Policy (Prime Minister’s Office Publications | 20/2009; 44 pages) has been given three sub-headings:

An empowered Union in the world

An empowered citizen in the Union

An influential Finland in Europe




The abstract offers the following descrpiton of the publication:


Abstract

The Government Report on EU Policy analyses the development of the European Union and the significance of EU membership to Finland. The report also lays down basic principles and key objectives for Finland’s EU policy and considers ways to develop the exercise of influence in the EU. Finland’s priorities in the European Union are related to a Europe of citizens, the economic success of Europe and the EU’s role as a prominent global actor.

Finland’s EU policy is based on constructive exercise of influence. The present report will serve as a basis for a future project aimed at developing the coordination of EU issues and tools for exerting influence in the EU.


Ralf Grahn

EU: Application of Community Law

Yesterday the European Parliament fired a broadside against the Commission’s handling of its responsibilities and its failures to remedy the problems the EP had remarked upon earlier.

The application of Community law is a cornerstone of the European Union. As “guardian of the Treaties”, the Commission has a duty to monitor the correct implementation of Community legislation, which is crucial for EU citizens and businesses engaged in cross-border activities.


Yesterday’s resolution is an example that seemingly dull reports can be both “hot stuff” and important for citizens and businesses.

***

European Parliament

On Friday, the European Parliament voted on a resolution based on a report by the Committee on Legal Affairs (rapporteur Monica Frassoni) with regard to the application of Community Law. The resolution was adopted by 297 votes, against 13, with 7 abstentions.

At this stage, you can find the adopted resolution in the compilation of texts adopted Friday 24 April 2009 (from page 311).


The exact references are:

P6_TA-PROV(2009)0335

25th annual report from the Commission on monitoring the application of Community law (2007)

European Parliament resolution of 24 April 2009 on the 25th annual report from the Commission on monitoring the application of Community law (2007) (2008/2337(INI))

***

Parliamentary scrutiny

The main document under scrutiny was the 25th annual report from the Commission on monitoring the application of Community law (2007) (COM(2008)0777).

The accompanying Commission staff working documents (SEC(2008)2854 and SEC(2008)2855), as well as the Commission Communication of 5 September 2007 entitled “A Europe of results – applying Community law” (COM(2007)0502), and the Commission Communication of 20 March 2002 on relations with the complainant in respect of infringements of Community law (COM(2002)0141), formed the basis for the EP’s own initiative report.

The resolution is critical of the Commission’s activities as the “guardian of the Treaties”.

The European Parliament regrets that, unlike in the past, the Commission has not responded in any way to the issues raised by Parliament in its previous resolutions, in particular its resolution of 21 February 2008; notes the lack of significant improvement with regard to the three fundamental issues of transparency, resources and the length of procedures.


The rest of the resolution lists specific criticisms of the Commission’s handling of one of its core tasks.

***

Citizenship Directive

I would like to pick out one detail, of concrete interest to EU citizens and their families, the resolution text concerning the so called Citizenship Directive 2004/38/EC (point 15), where the criticism is aimed more at the member states than at the Commission:


Notes that the Commission has declared that a fundamental directive such as Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States has for all practical purposes not been properly transposed in any Member State; notes that the Commission has received more than 1 800 individual complaints in relation to that directive, registering 115 of them as complaints and opening five cases of infringement on the grounds of failure to apply the directive properly, recognises that the Commission has worked with Parliament to useful effect and in a spirit of openness where Directive 2004/38/EC is concerned; endorses the Commission’s proposed approach, whereby the directive is to be kept under continuous and exhaustive review, support, in the form of guidelines to be published in the first half of 2009, is to be provided to help Member States apply the directive fully and properly, and infringement proceedings are to be instituted against Member States whose legislation does not conform to the directive; expresses grave concern, however, as to the Commission’s ability to perform its role as “guardian of the Treaty” and the opportunity afforded to Parliament to check the complaint registration policy implemented by the various Commission departments;

***


The resolution is instructive reading for everyone interested in the rights of EU citizens and businesses, and together with the Commission documents it offers a number of avenues for reasearch.

Even if an own initiative report is not legally binding, it would be surprising if the Commission does not spring into action after the broadside delivered by the European Parliament.


Ralf Grahn

European Union: Justice abroad (Brussels I)

The Commission is moving on the so called Brussels I Regulation, officially Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (OJEC) 16.1.2001 L 12/1.

The latest consolidated version is of 4 December 2008.




Report on Brussels I Regulation

Green Paper on Brussels I

For a quick overview, you can read the press release European citizens and business to benefit from greater access to justice – strengthening co-operation in civil and commercial matters (21 April 2009; IP/09/606).




***


There were no links in the press release to the Report or to the Green Paper (consultation paper), and I was unable to locate them on the pages of the Directorate-General for Justice, Freedom and Security or the Pre-Lex pages, so interested readers have to try again later.


Ralf Grahn

Lisbon Treaty & European Council: President’s job

In these troubled times, new job openings are scarce. Have you thought about becoming President of the European Council?

If the EU Treaty of Lisbon enters into force, the heads of state or government of the member states are going to fill a new post, that of the President of the European Council. We look at the official job description and look at how openly our leaders have prepared the position and the perks.



***

Lisbon Treaty

Article 15(6) of the amended Treaty on European Union describes the tasks of the new President (OJEU 9.5.2008 C 115/23):


Article 15(6) TEU

6. The President of the European Council:

(a) shall chair it and drive forward its work;

(b) shall ensure the preparation and continuity of the work of the European Council in cooperation with the President of the Commission, and on the basis of the work of the General Affairs Council;

(c) shall endeavour to facilitate cohesion and consensus within the European Council;

(d) shall present a report to the European Parliament after each of the meetings of the European Council.

The President of the European Council shall, at his level and in that capacity, ensure the external representation of the Union on issues concerning its common foreign and security policy, without prejudice to the powers of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

The President of the European Council shall not hold a national office.



***

Liaisons

In addition, as President of the European Council you would have to liaise with the new General Affairs Council (GAC) and the Commission:


Article 16(6) TEU, second subparagraph

The General Affairs Council shall ensure consistency in the work of the different Council configurations. It shall prepare and ensure the follow-up to meetings of the European Council, in liaison with the President of the European Council and the Commission.


***

Emergency meetings

The leisurely pace of four annual meetings may be broken if developments on the international scene turn for the worse. You may have to convene an extra meeting:


Article 26(1) TEU, second subparagraph

If international developments so require, the President of the European Council shall convene an extraordinary meeting of the European Council in order to define the strategic lines of the Union's policy in the face of such developments.


***

Convention

If the European Council decides to call a Convention to examine treaty amendments, your job is to send the invitations:


Article 48(3) TEU, in part

3. If the European Council, after consulting the European Parliament and the Commission, adopts by a simple majority a decision in favour of examining the proposed amendments, the President of the European Council shall convene a Convention composed of representatives of the national Parliaments, of the Heads of State or Government of the Member States, of the European Parliament and of the Commission. ---


***







Package deal

If you apply for this prestigious job, to become a member of the European Council (without a vote), you will have to convince at least a qualified majority of the current members that you are their man or woman.

But besides your personal qualities, you will have to fit into a larger pattern. In Declaration 6 the heads of state or government (intergovernmental conference) agreed on the following guidance for the (s)election of the President of the European Council. Note that political affiliation and gender are not mentioned among the relevant factors of diversity (OJEU 9.5.2008 C 115/338):



6. Declaration on Article 15(5) and (6), Article 17(6) and (7) and Article 18 of the Treaty on European Union

In choosing the persons called upon to hold the offices of President of the European Council, President of the Commission and High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, due account is to be taken of the need to respect the geographical and demographic diversity of the Union and its Member States.


***

Taking over

When you take over the reins, you may need to know how your buddies have planned the transition:


8. Declaration on practical measures to be taken upon the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon as regards the Presidency of the European Council and of the Foreign Affairs Council

In the event that the Treaty of Lisbon enters into force later than 1 January 2009, the Conference requests the competent authorities of the Member State holding the six-monthly Presidency of the Council at that time, on the one hand, and the person elected President of the European Council and the person appointed High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, on the other hand, to take the necessary specific measures, in consultation with the following six-monthly Presidency, to allow an efficient handover of the material and organisational aspects of the Presidency of the European Council and of the Foreign Affairs Council.


***


Salary and perks

According to Article 243 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), your salary and perks will be decided by your peers:


Article 243 TFEU
(ex Article 210 TEC)

The Council shall determine the salaries, allowances and pensions of the President of the European Council, the President of the Commission, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Members of the Commission, the Presidents, Members and Registrars of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the Secretary-General of the Council. It shall also
determine any payment to be made instead of remuneration.


***

Preparatory work: Start

You might be interested in how the implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon is moving along. Your first source of information is naturally what the European Council has decided in public. First you encounter the initial decision right after the signing of the treaty. The Presidency Conclusions reassuringly tell you that on 14 December 2007, the European Council agreed that it will take stock of progress on necessary preparatory work when appropriate so as to ensure the full functioning of the Treaty as soon as it enters into force. It underlines the comprehensive nature of this exercise and the consequent need for a single framework as well as political guidance at the highest level. Technical work will start in Brussels in January on the basis of a work programme which will be presented under the authority of the incoming President of the European Council [Slovenia].


***

Follow-up

The following tidbits are offered to you and the rest of the public half a year later, in the 13 June 2008 report by the Slovenian Council Presidency to the 18 and 19 June 2008 European Council (document 10650/08). This is what it has to say about your coming job with regard to the needed new Rules of Procedure of the European Council:

Considerable progress was made on technical aspects of the European Council's Rules of Procedure; some other issues, related in particular to the preparation of European Council meetings, will require further work. A preliminary exchange of views focussed on the respective roles of those involved in the preparation of European Council meetings. There was broad support for the need for all of them to work closely together. A significant number of delegations underlined the need to ensure an adequate role in European Council meetings for the Head of State or Government of the Member State holding the Council presidency. These issues will require further work.


***

Up-to-date information

Having seen that further work is needed, you want fresh information on progress.

The December 2008 meeting of the European Council was mainly interested in Ireland. It also tried to envision the transition to the Lisbon Treaty with regard to the numbers of MEPs and Commissioners, as well as the nomination of the President of the Commission and the rest of the Commission.

It did, however, without preceding public discussion, offer a glimpse of its thoughts about the preparation of the decisions concerning your new job and other matters of interest (document 17271/1/08 REV 1 Annex 1). As you see, you are to be consulted, if elected:

Declaration of the European Council

Treaty of Lisbon – Transitional measures concerning the Presidency of the European Council and the Presidency of the Foreign Affairs Council

In the event that the Treaty of Lisbon enters into force at a date when a six-monthly Presidency of the Council has already begun, the European Council agrees that, as a matter of transition, in order to take into account the preparatory work and ensure harmonious continuity of work:

− the competent authorities of the Member State holding the six-monthly Presidency of the Council at that time will continue to chair all the remaining meetings of the Council and the European Council, as well as third-country meetings, until the end of the period of office;

− the following six-monthly Presidency of the Council will be in charge of taking the necessary specific measures relating to the organisational and material aspects of the Presidency of the European Council and of the Foreign Affairs Council during its period of office, in conformity with the Treaty. On these issues, close consultation will be established between this Presidency and the President (elect) of the European Council and the High Representative (designate) of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.


***

Other matters

You may be interested in the nomination procedure, the public debate, the weighing of your merits and the decision making, before you are consulted about the organisational and material aspects of your office as President of the European Council.

Sorry, the best public information you are able to lay your hands on is yesterday’s response from Europe Direct, available with comments on the Grahnlaw blog (Lisbon Treaty implementation: State of play).

Why worry? If you don’t belong to the charmed circle readily informed about the real state of affairs, you have no chance of getting the job.



Ralf Grahn

European Council’s Progress Report (subsidiarity & proportionality)

According to Article 4 of the Treaty on European Union the European Council shall submit to the European Parliament a yearly written report on the progress achieved by the Union.

***

Commission’s obligation

Protocol (No 30) on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality (1997) places on the Commission an obligation to report annually on the application of Article 5 TEC:

…submit an annual report to the European Council, the European Parliament and the Council on the application of Article 5 of the Treaty. This annual report shall also be sent to the Committee of the Regions and to the Economic and Social Committee.



Better Lawmaking 2007

The Commission has indeed reported, in the Report from the Commission on subsidiarity and proportionality (15th report on Better Lawmaking, 2007); Brussels, 26.9.2008 COM(2008) 586 final.


***

European Council’s obligation

According to point 10 the same Protocol No 30:

10. The European Council shall take account of the Commission report referred to in the fourth indent of point 9 within the report on the progress achieved by the Union which it is required to submit to the European Parliament in accordance with Article 4 of the Treaty on European Union.


***

General Affairs Council

Yesterday the Council (General Affairs and External Relations) took note of the European Council’s Draft report on the progress achieved by the European Union in 2008 (Council document 6788/1/09 REV1).

(The provisional General Affairs conclusions are found in Council document 7564/09.)

***

Taking into account?

The Draft report is, as usual, meagre: 11 pages in all.

But how is the world going to know if or how the European Council takes into account the Commission’s report with regard to subsidiarity and proportionality?

The draft does not mention subsidiarity or proportionality or Article 5. The Commission’s report is not mentioned either.

***

Treaty level obligations


Earlier we came to the (provisional) conclusion that the European Parliament shows no interest in the treaty obligation to discuss the Commission’s Annual General Report.

Today we wonder if the European Council acknowledges the report on subsidiarity and proportionality by osmosis.

Nit-picking or not, but why agree on legally binding obligations without even formally bowing to their existence?


Ralf Grahn

Implementing the Lisbon Treaty: European Parliament

The Committee on Constitutional Affairs of the European Parliament (AFCO) voted Monday 9 March 2009 on three reports we have written about in earlier blog posts, namely the Dehaene report on institutional balance, the Leinen report on the EP’s new role implementing the Lisbon Treaty and the Brok report on relations between the European Parliament and the national parliaments.

Fortunately at least the European Parliament is showing interest in the Lisbon Treaty issues requiring implementation, if the amending treaty enters into force.

At this moment we have no comparable indications on preparatory work from the Commission or the Council.


Ralf Grahn

Lisbon Treaty implementation (European Parliament: Leinen report)

The governments of the member states and therefore the EU Council are responsible for the Treaty of Lisbon and for preparing implementation. The Commission would have to present new proposals and practical measures. But the European Parliament seems to be the only institution actually doing anything ─ and in the open.

Monday evening 9 March 2009, the European Parliament’s Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) is holding an extraordinary meeting to vote on three reports with some bearing on Lisbon Treaty implementation issues.

The draft reports are known by the names of the rapporteurs: Jo Leinen, Elmar Brok and Jean-Luc Dehaene.

We start by taking a look at the Leinen report.


***

European Parliament’s implementing role

Drafted by Jo Leinen the draft Report on Parliament's new role and responsibilities in implementing the Treaty of Lisbon was dated already 13 June 2008.

The procedure of this own-initiative report can be tracked under 2008/2063(INI), and it is available at:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+COMPARL+PE-407.780+02+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&language=EN


The Report reiterates EP positions on main novelties of the Treaty of Lisbon (points 1 to 12) and discusses new legal bases (points 13 to 26).

The Report then presents the European Parliament’s views on new co-decision powers (points 27 to 38), new budgetary powers (points 39 to 41), the new consent procedure (points 42 to 45), new powers of scrutiny (points 46 to 53), new rights to be informed (points 54 to 57) and new rights of initiative (points 58 to 60).

The Leinen Report goes on to discuss new procedures: scrutiny by national parliaments (points 61 to 63), delegated acts (points 64 to 66) and implementing acts (points 67 to 70), as well as priorities for the transition period (points 71 to 73).


***

Proposals

Even if the preceding points include a number of requests by the European Parliament to the Council and the Commission, the bulk of the EP’s active suggestions begin under the heading Proposals.

The EP proposes both a new interinstitutional agreement on a work programme for the Commission and EP term beginning in 2009 and on the implementing measures concerning the Lisbon Treaty. In addition, the EP proposes an overhaul of the existing main interinstitutional agreements (points 74 to 78).

The report calls on the Commission to present an initiative on the citizens’ initiative and to adopt regulations on good administration as well as a number of other proposals and measures based on the Lisbon Treaty (points 79 to 89).

Further the Report calls for urgent re-appraisal of the EU’s status in international organisations as well as a number of other measures concerning future policies (points 90 to 97).


***

Comment

On 14 pages the Leinen Report manages to remind the reader of many of the institutional reforms of the Lisbon Treaty and to present a summary of the expectations of the European Parliament ahead of possible entry into force.

The listing of new EP powers and thus increased EU legitimacy is impressive, but the Report has been drafted within the framework of the amending Lisbon Treaty. Therefore, the remaining weaknesses of the directly elected European Parliament and EU level representative democracy appear indirectly rather than directly.

Hopefully the European Parliament can inject some energy into the member states and the Council Presidencies, as well as the Commission.


Ralf Grahn

European Parliament: Committees ─ parliamentary engine

Many are content to see the more or less shiny exteriors of a car, but some want to understand how the engine works. The committees of the European Parliament are essential parts of the parliamentary engine.


Plenary sittings are the tip of the iceberg, but the preparatory work takes place in specialised committees, most of them standing (permanent).

The names of the committees give a fair indication of their areas of activity. In Eurospeak the committees are known under their acronyms.


***

Overview

The European Parliament’s web pages offer a listing on the existing committees, and from there you can access information about the work of each of them:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/activities/committees/committeesList.do?language=EN





Standing committees

AFET
Foreign Affairs


Sub-committee DROI Human Rights


Sub-committee SEDE Security and Defence


DEVE
Development


INTA
International Trade


BUDG
Budgets


CONT
Budgetary Control


ECON
Economic and Monetary Affairs


EMPL
Employment and Social Affairs


ENVI
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety


ITRE
Industry, Research and Energy


IMCO
Internal Market and Consumer Protection


TRAN
Transport and Tourism


REGI
Regional Development


AGRI
Agriculture and Rural Development


PECH
Fisheries


CULT
Culture and Education


JURI
Legal Affairs


LIBE
Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs


AFCO
Constitutional Affairs


FEMM
Women's Rights and Gender Equality


PETI
Petitions



Temporary committees

CLIM
Climate Change





***

Common rules

The first paragraph of Article 197 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (and Article 14(4) of the Treaty on European Union as presented in the consolidated version of the Treaty of Lisbon) leave most of the internal organisation to be decided by the European Parliament itself.

The EP’s Rules of Procedure (16th edition, October 2008) constitute the backbone of its internal organisation:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+RULES-EP+20081022+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&language=EN

***

Committee procedures

Here we are going to sample the common rules on procedure in committee, dealt with in Chapter 2 of the Rules of Procedure.

Legislative report

The committee chair proposes the procedure to follow and the committee appoints a rapporteur to draft the report. The rapporteur drafts amendments to the legislative proposal (with short justifications) and a draft legislative resolution (with an explanatory statement including financial impact):


CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURE IN COMMITTEE

Rule 42 Legislative reports

1. The chair of the committee to which a Commission proposal has been referred shall propose to the committee the procedure to be followed.

2. Following a decision on the procedure to be followed, and if Rule 43 does not apply, the committee shall appoint a rapporteur on the Commission proposal from among its members or permanent substitutes if it has not yet done so on the basis of the annual legislative programme agreed under Rule 33.

3. The committee's report shall comprise:

a) draft amendments, if any, to the proposal, accompanied, if appropriate, by short justifications which shall be the responsibility of the rapporteur and shall not be put to the vote;

b) a draft legislative resolution, in accordance with Rule 51(2);

c) if appropriate, an explanatory statement including a financial statement which establishes the magnitude of any financial impact of the report and its compatibility with the financial perspective.


***

Simplified procedure

If there is overwhelming support in the committee for approving the legislative proposal without amendments, a simplified procedure can be adopted. Likewise if the amendments seem clear enough on the basis of the initial discussion:


Rule 43 Simplified procedure

1. Following a first discussion of a legislative proposal, the chair may propose that it be approved without amendment. Unless at least one-tenth of the members of the committee object, the chair shall present to Parliament a report approving the proposal. Rule 131(1), second subparagraph, (2) and (4) shall apply.

2. The chair may alternatively propose that a set of amendments be drafted by the chair or by the rapporteur reflecting the committee's discussion. If the committee so agrees, these amendments shall be sent to the members of the committee. Unless at least one-tenth of the members of the committee object within a set time limit, which may not be less than twenty-one days from the date of dispatch, the report shall be considered as having been adopted by the committee. In this case the draft legislative resolution and the amendments shall be submitted to Parliament without debate pursuant to Rule 131(1), second subparagraph, (2) and (4).

3. If at least one-tenth of the committee's members object, the amendments shall be put to the vote at the next meeting of the committee.

4. The first and second sentences of paragraph 1, the first, second and third sentences of paragraph 2 and paragraph 3 shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to committee opinions within the meaning of Rule 46.


***

Non-legislative report

The European Parliament does not deal solely with legislative proposals, but expresses its opinion on a variety of Commission consultation papers and requests for opinion:

Rule 44 Non-legislative reports

1. Where a committee draws up a non-legislative report, it shall appoint a rapporteur from among its members or permanent substitutes.

2. The rapporteur shall be responsible for preparing the committee's report and for presenting it to Parliament on behalf of the committee.

3. The committee's report shall comprise:

a) a motion for a resolution;

b) an explanatory statement including a financial statement which establishes the magnitude of any financial impact of the report and its compatibility with the financial perspective;

c) the texts of any motions for resolutions to be included under Rule 113(4).


***

Own-initiative report

The EP may want to express its opinion and request legislative proposals on certain issues, but the Rules of Procedure impose the judicious use report on the EP’s own initiative by the requirement that such a report has to be authorised by the Conference of Presidents.

The official explanations add: The Conference of Presidents shall take a decision on requests for authorisation to draw up reports submitted pursuant to paragraph 1 on the basis of implementing provisions which it shall itself lay down. If a committee's competence to draw up a report for which it has requested authorisation is challenged, the Conference of Presidents shall take a decision within six weeks on the basis of a recommendation from the Conference of Committee Chairs, or, if no such recommendation is forthcoming, from its chair. If the Conference of Presidents fails to take a decision within that period, the recommendation shall be declared to have been approved.

Rule 45 on own-initiative reports:


Rule 45 Own-initiative reports

1. A committee intending to draw up a report and to submit a motion for a resolution to Parliament on a subject within its competence on which neither a consultation nor a request for an opinion has been referred to it pursuant to Rule 179(1) may do so only with the authorisation of the Conference of Presidents. Where such authorisation is withheld the reason must always be stated.

2. Motions for resolutions contained in own-initiative reports shall be examined by Parliament pursuant to the short presentation procedure set out in Rule 131a. Amendments to such motions for resolutions shall not be admissible for consideration in plenary unless tabled by the rapporteur to take account of new information, but alternative motions for resolutions may be tabled in accordance with Rule 151(4). This paragraph shall not apply where the subject of the report qualifies for a key debate in plenary, where the report is drawn up pursuant to the right of initiative referred to in Rule 38a or 39, or where the report can be considered a strategic report according to the criteria set out by the Conference of Presidents. [Cf. Annex XVIc]

3. Where the subject of the report comes under the right of initiative referred to in Rule 38a, authorisation may be withheld only on the grounds that the conditions set out in the Treaties are not met.

4. In the cases referred to in Rule 38a and Rule 39, the Conference of Presidents shall take a decision within two months.


***

Opinions of committees

Reports to be drafted have to be assigned to a responsible committee, but the issues often have implications for other policy areas (and committees). Therefore it is standard parliamentary practice to request opinions from other committees with regard to their remit:


Rule 46 Opinions of committees

1. Should the committee to which a question was first referred wish to hear the views of another committee, or should another committee wish to make known its views on the report of the committee to which a question was first referred, such committees may ask the President that, in accordance with Rule 179(3), one committee be named as the committee responsible and the other as the committee asked for an opinion.

2. In the case of documents of a legislative nature within the meaning of Rule 40(1), the opinion shall consist of draft amendments to the text referred to the committee accompanied, if appropriate, by short justifications. Such justifications shall be the responsibility of the rapporteur for the opinion and shall not be put to the vote. If necessary the committee may submit a short written justification for the opinion taken as a whole.

In the case of non-legislative texts, the opinion shall consist of suggestions for parts of the motion for a resolution submitted by the committee responsible.

The committee responsible shall put these draft amendments or suggestions to the vote.

The opinions shall deal solely with those matters that fall under the areas of responsibility of the committee giving an opinion.

3. The committee responsible shall fix a deadline within which the committee asked for an opinion must deliver it if it is to be taken into account in the committee responsible. Any changes to the announced timetable shall be immediately communicated by the committee responsible to the committee(s) asked for an opinion. The committee responsible shall not reach its final conclusions before that time limit has expired.

4. All adopted opinions shall be annexed to the report of the committee responsible.

5. Only the committee responsible may table amendments in Parliament.

6. The chair and rapporteur of the committee asked for an opinion shall be invited to take part in an advisory capacity in meetings of the committee responsible, insofar as these relate to the matter of common concern.


***

Joint responsibility

Borderline cases where a matter falls more or less equally within the remit of more than one committee require rules for cooperation in order to ensure consistency in the reports brought to the floor (and the output of the European Parliament).

The official explanations add: The wording of this Rule does not lay down any limits to its scope. Requests for application of the procedure with associated committees concerning non- legislative reports based on Rules 45(1) and 112(1) and (2) are admissible.


Rule 47 on associated committees:


Rule 47 Procedure with associated committees

Where a question of competence has been referred to the Conference of Presidents pursuant to Rules 179(2) or 45, and the Conference of Presidents, on the basis of Annex VI, considers that the matter falls almost equally within the competence of two or more committees, or that different parts of the matter fall under the competence of two or more committees, Rule 46 shall apply with the following additional provisions:

- the timetable shall be jointly agreed by the committees concerned;

- the rapporteur and the rapporteurs for opinions shall keep each other informed and shall endeavour to agree on the texts they propose to their committees and on their position regarding amendments;

- the chairs, rapporteur and rapporteurs for opinions concerned shall endeavour to jointly identify areas of the text falling within their exclusive or joint competences and agree on the precise arrangements for their cooperation;

- the committee responsible shall accept without a vote amendments from an associated committee where they concern matters which the chair of the committee responsible considers, on the basis of Annex VI, after consulting the chair of the associated committee, to fall under the exclusive competence of the associated committee and which do not contradict other elements of the report. The chair of the committee responsible shall take account of any agreement reached under the third indent;

- in the event of a conciliation procedure taking place on the proposal, Parliament's delegation shall include the rapporteur of any associated committee.


***

Drafting reports

Even if the explanatory statement is the responsibility of the rapporteur, he or she has to respect the rule that it has to accord with the approved draft resolution. At least the total committee vote is recorded as well as a summary of the minority opinion. In some cases a report may not be forthcoming; the committee can appoint a new rapporteur or propose a plenary debate on the basis of an oral report:



Rule 48 Drafting of reports

1. The explanatory statement shall be the responsibility of the rapporteur and shall not be put to the vote. It must, however, accord with the text of the motion for a resolution as adopted and any amendments proposed by the committee. If it fails to do so, the chair of the committee may delete the explanatory statement.

2. The report shall state the result of the vote taken on the report as a whole. In addition, if at least one-third of the members present so request when the vote is taken, the report shall indicate how each member voted.

3. Where the committee's opinion is not unanimous the report shall also give a summary of the minority opinion. Minority opinions shall be expressed when the vote on the text as a whole is taken, and may, at the request of their authors, be the subject of a written declaration not exceeding 200 words in length, annexed to the explanatory statement.

The chair shall settle any disputes which may arise as a result of the application of these provisions.

4. On a proposal from its bureau, a committee may set a deadline within which the rapporteur shall submit the draft report. This deadline may be extended or a new rapporteur appointed.

5. Once the deadline has expired, the committee may instruct its chair to ask for the matter referred to it to be placed on the agenda of one of the next sittings of Parliament. The debates may then be conducted on the basis of an oral report by the committee concerned.

***

The committees are central to the functioning of the European Parliament, and the common rules sampled above cover just a part of nearly forty index references to EP committees in the Rules of Procedure.


Ralf Grahn

Future EU policy: Finland

The Government of Finland hosts a seminar on 2 February 2008 about future Finnish EU policy.

The report being drafted is a policy paper addressed to the Parliament. At the conclusion of the debate on a government report, the report shall be referred to a Committee for preparation, unless the Parliament decides to revert to the agenda without such referral. After the Committee has considered the government report, it shall in its report propose a formula for the Parliament’s opinion on the government report; the Parliament shall decide the final content of the formula and revert to the agenda.

Here is the text of the Government’s press release:


Government Communications Unit
26.1.2009 12.19

Broad-based seminar to consider Finland’s future EU policy

Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen has convened a seminar to discuss the vision for Finland’s EU policy on Monday, 2 February. The aim of the seminar is to map out priorities for EU policy and support the preparation of the Government report on EU policy currently being drafted.

The seminar ‘Vision for Finland’s EU policy in the 2010s’ to be held at Finlandia Hall will be attended by some 300 participants representing NGOs, interest groups, parties, administration and the media.

Prime Minister Vanhanen will address the seminar with an opening speech and a conclusion of the discussions at the end of the day. All participants have been asked to determine three priorities for Finland’s EU policy in the 2010s. A summary of the results of the advance enquiry will be heard at the seminar.

Two themes have been chosen to provoke discussion. Presentations on the internal strength and efficiency of the Union will be held by Chairman of the Finnish Social Democratic Party Jutta Urpilainen, President of the Finnish Confederation of Professionals STTK Mikko Mäenpää and Minister for Foreign Affairs Aleksander Stubb. The theme ‘EU as a global actor’ will be addressed by President Martti Ahtisaari, Member of the European Commission Olli Rehn and Vice-Chair of the Reflection Group on EU’s future Jorma Ollila.

The entire seminar will be filmed. The webcast will be available after the seminar on the Government website at www.valtioneuvosto.fi.

Further information: Jukka Salovaara, State Under-Secretary for EU Affairs, Government Secretariat for EU Affairs, tel. +358 9 1602 2182 and Mikko Norros, Chief Communications Specialist, Government Communications Unit, tel. +358 9 1602 4008

***

Source: Government press release Press release 24/2009 (in English):
http://www.valtioneuvosto.fi/ajankohtaista/tiedotteet/tiedote/fi.jsp?oid=251975

The press release is also available in Finnish and Swedish.


Ralf Grahn

EU Law: Commission Annual RTD Report

Annually – although not at the beginning of each year – the Commission presents a report on research and technological development (RTD) activities to the European Parliament and to the Council.

Reports such as this can sound boring, but to students and other interested persons they are valuable resources. These reports offer both quick overviews and distilled knowledge about the policy area in question.

So, if research, technological development, innovation, the FP7 or the like is up your alley, read on.

***

Article 173 TEC


Article 173 (ex Article 130p) of the current Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) contains an obligation for the Commission to report on research and technological development (RTD) activities and dissemination of results during the previous year. The report shall include the work programme for the current year.

This report is supposed to be sent at the beginning of each year, to the European Parliament and the Council.

Here is Article 173 TEC, as published in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJEU 29.12.2006 C 321 E/123:


Article 173 TEC

At the beginning of each year the Commission shall send a report to the European Parliament and to the Council. The report shall include information on research and technological development activities and the dissemination of results during the previous year, and the work programme for the current year.


***


Original Lisbon Treaty (ToL)

Article 2, point 142 inserted a new Article 172a and point 143 amended Article 174 (OJEU 17.12.2007 C 306/86–87).

No specific amendment concerned Article 173 TEC.


***


Renumbering the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL)

(As we have noted earlier, the Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that Title XVIII first became Title XVIII with the addition of space in the TFEU (ToL), and later renumbered Title XIX Research and technological development and space in the consolidated version.)

Article 173 TEC first became Article 173 TFEU (ToL), but was then renumbered Article 190 TFEU in the consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty (OJEU 17.12.2007 C 306/217–218).


***


Lisbon Treaty consolidated

Article 190 TFEU

The Article was renumbered, but apart from that it is one of the fairly rare instance of a provision where not a single word is changed. Article 190 TFEU appears like this in the consolidated version of the Treaty of Lisbon (OJEU 9.5.2008 C 115/132):

(TITLE XIX
RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AND SPACE)


Article 190
(ex Article 173 TEC)

At the beginning of each year the Commission shall send a report to the European Parliament and to the Council. The report shall include information on research and technological development activities and the dissemination of results during the previous year, and the work programme for the current year.



***

Annual report

The beginning of the year must be given a liberal interpretation and, perhaps, be seen as unrealistic with regard to gathering and processing the data necessary for a meaningful retrospective report. Anyway, the latest annual RTD report based on Article 173 TEC was published 18 August 2008.

The latest Report from the Commission Annual Report on research and technological development activities of the European Union in 2007 (Brussels, 18.8.2008 COM(2008) 519 final), is available here:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0519:FIN:EN:PDF

The eleven pages of Annual Report are a useful summary of policy initiatives concerning the European Research Area (ERA) and the first year of implementation of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7) as well as key findings on funding etc.

The Annual RTD Report was accompanied by a Staff Working Document:
Commission Staff Working Document Accompanying the Report from the Commission Annual Report on research and technological development activities of the European Union in 2007 (Brussels, 18.8.2008 SEC(2008) 2380 final). The 121 pages present a more detailed picture of individual research programmes and activities:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SEC:2008:2380:FIN:EN:PDF


In the European Parliament the Industry, Research and Energy Committee is responsible for the evaluation. The Council reference to the documents is number 12554/08. No indications of follow-up have been indicated to date.


Ralf Grahn

European Union: Social situation report

The preambles of existing and future treaties mention economic and social progress among the main reasons for European integration.

The Commission has a treaty obligation to report annually on the achievement of the social policy objectives and on the demographic situation in the European Community (European Union).

We look at the relevant provisions of the current Treaty establishing the European Community and of the Lisbon Treaty.

The latest annual report The social situation in the European Union 2007, published 22 May 2008, calls for social cohesion through equal opportunities. In other words, its message is to invest in people.

Students, researchers and politicians can profit from the report for the benefit of EU citizens.

***

Article 143 TEC

According to Article 143 (ex Article 120) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) the Commission has the obligation to produce an annual report on the achievement of the social policy objectives of the Community. To these is added the demographic situation of the Community.

The second paragraph entitles the European Parliament to request special reports on social questions.

The current Article 143 TEC, as published in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/110:

Article 143 TEC

The Commission shall draw up a report each year on progress in achieving the objectives of Article 136, including the demographic situation in the Community. It shall forward the report to the European Parliament, the Council and the Economic and Social Committee.

The European Parliament may invite the Commission to draw up reports on particular problems concerning the social situation.


***

Social policy objectives

The social policy objectives of the European Community (European Union) mentioned in Article 136 TEC (ex Article 117), in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/103, are:

– promotion of employment

– improved and harmonised living and working conditions

– social protection

– dialogue between management and labour

– development of human resources

– combating exclusion.

Article 143 TEC adds the demographic situation in the Community to the matters to be covered in the report. The European Parliament, the Council and the Economic and Social Committee are named as recipients of this annual report.


***

More reporting?


Article 145 TEC (ex Article 122) adds the obligation to include a separate chapter on social developments in the Commission’s (general) annual report and mandates the European Parliament to ask for specific reports on social conditions. The second paragraphs of Article 143 and Article 145 are almost identical:


Article 145 TEC

The Commission shall include a separate chapter on social developments within the Community in its annual report to the European Parliament.

The European Parliament may invite the Commission to draw up reports on any particular problems concerning social conditions.




***


Original Lisbon Treaty (ToL)

Article 2, point 120 of the original Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) amends Article 143 TEC (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/82):

120) In Article 143, the second paragraph shall be deleted.


***

Renumbering ToL

The Table of equivalences of the original Treaty of Lisbon tells us that the social policy title was to be renumbered Title X. Article 143 TEC first became Article 143 TFEU (ToL), then then to be renumbered Article 159 TFEU in the consolidated versions of the amending treaties (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/216).


***


Consolidated Lisbon Treaty

Following renumbering of Article and referral, the horizontal amendment replacing ‘Community’ by ‘Union’ and the specific amendment deleting the second paragraph, Article 159 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), appears as follows in the consolidated TFEU, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/118,:

(TITLE X
SOCIAL POLICY)

Article 159 TFEU
(ex Article 143 TEC)

The Commission shall draw up a report each year on progress in achieving the objectives of Article 151, including the demographic situation in the Union. It shall forward the report to the European Parliament, the Council and the Economic and Social Committee.


***

The Lisbon Treaty eliminates one of the overlapping second paragraphs concerning particular problems.

***

The social situation in the European Union 2007

The Commission’s (Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities; Eurostat) latest annual social policy report is called The Social Situation in the European Union 2007 – Social Cohesion through Equal Opportunities (published 2008; 199 pages):

http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/spsi/docs/social_situation/ssr2007_en.pdf

For a quick take on the findings, you can read the press release issued when the report was published, 22 May 2008 (MEMO/08/326):

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/08/326

***

‘Economic and social progress’ denotes that the European Union is more than an economic community.


Ralf Grahn