Sharpening the axes: EU Council long term budget discussion

What did the discussion about the EU's long term budget offer the public?

Yesterday the General Affairs Council (GAC) publicly debated the long term budget (officially, the multiannual financial framework MFF), which is going to determine the EU's annual budgets 2014-2020.

The MFF is how the EU member states control income and expenditure, despite the much touted new powers of the European Parliament regarding the annual budgets. The EP can only accept or reject the MFF.

Yesterday, the ministers did not discuss the long term budget, but a ”negotiating box” covering four categories of expenditure (known as "headings"): heading 1 “Smart and inclusive growth” (except for cohesion policy and the Connecting Europe Facility), heading 3 “Security and citizenship”, heading 4 “Global Europe” (EU's external action) and heading 5 (administration).

In other words, it was not like the discussion of a house, but of an important section of the blueprint of the building.


Openness

The Council press people have written an article about the GAC meeting and tried to make the MFF negotiating process comprehensible. There are helpful links to web pages concerning the Multiannual Financial Framwork 2014-2020 (and further news, proposals and videos) and the outline of the negotiating box.

The discussion was webcast directly, and those who are interested can watch the recording as an example of Council debate. The recording also serves, if you want to know the main negotiating aims of one or more countries. You can also see the emerging front lines.

When the interventions of the chairman and Commissioners are added to each of the 27 EU member states (plus Croatia) making its main points in three minutes, this ”tour de table” or series of monologues took about two hours and a quarter.

There is also the 30 min video recording of the press conference with the Danish minister Nicolai Wammen, who chaired the meeting, and the commissioners Maroš Šefčovič (inter-institutional relations and administration) and Janusz Lewandowski (financial programming and budget).

Even if this was an 'early stages' discussion, the press conference offers some distilled information and intelligent questions from journalists.

It is not easy to summarise the diverging opinions of the member states, but perhaps for the first time the GAC conclusions look as if someone had made an effort (without naming and shaming individual countries):

3158th Council meeting General Affairs; Brussels, 26 March 2012 (document 8129/12)

Read the conclusions, if you want to know the bones of contention at a general level.


Improvements

The General Affairs Council has been been a real disappointment with regard to openness, governance standards and effectiveness during the first two years of the Lisbon Treaty.

It is therefore worth noting that the quality of advance information (although very late) and the conclusions has improved during the Danish presidency.

As in the case of the eurozone (Eurogroup, Euro Summit), the Council press service has enhanced the quality of presentation lately, although the opaque nature of these coteries remains.


Media

About ten countries want to squeeze the Commission proposals by some EUR100 billion. Here are some media reports.

Eight countries want to scrap the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF), which spends about EUR500 million annually, according to the Swedish EU minister Birgitta Ohlsson (Europaportalen.se). No financial transaction tax (FTT) for the EU coffers to reduce the national contributions, according to Ohlsson.

Ten countries asked for macroeconomic conditionality to be extended to all forms of EU expenditure, Europolitics reported in a good summary of the contents of the GAC discussion.

Ahead of the annual budget for 2013, the Commission tells the institutions to limit expenditure (EUobserver). While member states want to cut expenses for administration, the Commission counters with problems to recruit officials from the rich member states or from fields where the private sector offers more for top talent (EUobserver).



Ralf Grahn
speaker and lecturer on EU affairs

P.S. The multilingual Bloggingportal.eu already aggregates the posts from 948 Euroblogs. They represent an integral part of the emerging European online public sphere, discussion across national and linguistic borders. Regards-citoyens is a highly productive French blog, which mixes own articles and analysis with selected writings from other media and news from the EU institutions.

Among the Euroblogs on Bloggingportal.eu you find my current blog trio, Grahnlaw (recently ranked fourth among political blogs in Finland), the Nordic Grahnblawg (written in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (meaning European Law, in Finnish). I write and speak about democracy and openness in the European Union, but increasingly about the crucial challenges of the global era for Europe: growth (EU2020) and the (digital) single market in the making.

The other social media where I am active: Twitter, Facebook ja Google+

Is the Europe 2020 strategy jinxed?

In the article EU action plan to improve access to finance for SMEs I mentioned the information note from the Danish Council presidency:

European Council - Follow-up by the Council; Brussels, 19 March 2012 (document 7824/12)

The content is described on the front page:

In order to ensure that the General Affairs Council can fully play its general coordinating role as well as its specific role in ensuring the follow-up to European Council meetings, the Presidency has prepared the attached information note. The note outlines steps taken in implementation of the orientations agreed by the European Council at its meetings of December 2011 and March 2012, as well as at in the declaration of the Heads of State and Government of 30 January 2012. This note also sets out how these orientations will be taken forward by the Presidency within the Council until the end of the Presidency period, notwithstanding upcoming discussions to be held in Coreper and Council in respect to the orientations set out by the March 2012 European Council, in particular as regards paragraph 16 of its conclusions.

Peer pressure

So what did paragraph 16 of the conclusions of the spring (March) 2012 European Council say? The EUCO conclusions are available in all 23 official EU languages; here the English text, under Economic policy, which highlights some aspects of single market reform and compliance (although the single market has been mentioned in these and other conclusions as well):

16. The European Council considers that enhanced "peer pressure" can help raise the ownership and responsibility at the level of Heads of State or Government as regards the Council's and individual Member States' role in developing the Single Market and complying with its rules. To this effect, the European Council invites :
− the Commission to provide transparent scoreboards as a basis for appropriate benchmarking;
− the President of the European Council to promote regular monitoring by the European Council of progress achieved on key Single Market proposals in the various Council formations.

Follow-up note

The follow-up note deals with the growth agenda, including:

* the single market, Single Market Act,
* acces to finance for SMEs, the COSME programme,
* the forthcoming employment package,
* the reduction of the administrative and regulatory burden,
* innovation and Horizon 2020,
* the digital single market,
* the internal energy market


Under Economic policy, the following themes were among those mentioned:

* the next steps within the European Semester leading to recommendations on the National Reform Programmes and the Stability or Convergence Programmes of the member states as well as the prevention of macroeconomic imbalances revealed by the Alert Mechanism Report,
* the regulation of financial services,
* the two-pack proposals on euro area surveillance,
* the contribution of taxation to fiscal consolidation and growth,
* piloting European project bonds

Additional themes were the long term budget (Multiannual Financial Framework MFF), Justice and Home Affairs (including Schengen enlargement and governance, the Common European Asylum System), Climate (low-carbon 2050 strategy), Trade and Enlargement.


Jinxed Europe 2020?

Only a few weeks ago the spring European Council reminded itself and others that:

2. "Europe 2020" is Europe's strategy for jobs and growth and its comprehensive response to the challenges it is facing. In particular, the five targets set out for 2020 remain fully relevant and will continue to guide the action of Member States and the Union to promote employment; improve the conditions for innovation, research and development; meet our climate change and energy objectives; improve education levels and promote social inclusion in particular through the reduction of poverty.

However, yet again we see a paper from one or more member states skillfully evading the main EU2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, despite dealing with certain concrete aspects of it.

It looks improbable that an EUCO president or EU member state can – in good faith - write an eight-page issues paper or equally long information note [edited] about the EU's growth agenda and economic policy, or the five pages of a twelve-country plan for growth in Europe without mentioning the Europe 2020 strategy.

Is EU2020 jinxed, or what?

Europe 2020 is supposed to be the main uniting economic reform strategy for all levels of government in the European Union and its member states, as the heads of states or government reiterated at the beginning of this month.

Have we ever seen or heard an intelligent explanation from the governments of the EU member states, or have the EU members shown us a diagnosis of amnesia?



General Affairs Council

Monday, 26 March 2012, the coordinating General Affairs Council (GAC) meets to discuss two main items, of which the second one is: Follow-up to the European Council 1-2 March 2012 (agenda).

In this respect, the background note for the GAC meeting offers practically nothing in addition to the presidency note 7824/12:

Follow-up to the [December] European Council

The Council will take stock of the follow-up to be given to the European Council meeting held on 1-2 March, on the basis of a presidency note (7824/12).

The meeting focus[ed] in particular on the growth agenda and on economic policy.

The follow-up discussion is not public, so if the General Affairs Council does not make drastic improvements to its conclusions, the presidency note is probably the best thing the public is left with regarding growth and economic policy for a while.



Ralf Grahn
public speaker on EU affairs

P.S. The multilingual Bloggingportal.eu already aggregates the posts from 944 Euroblogs. They represent an important part of the emerging European online public sphere, discussion across national and linguistic borders. Erkan's Field Diary is more than a Turkish delight. The anthropologist, Dr Erkan Saka follows and links to global, European and Turkish politics and events, not forgetting human rights, cyberculture and social media. Some of the posts are in English. Recommended reading.

Among the Euroblogs on Bloggingportal.eu you find my currently active blog trio, Grahnlaw (recently ranked fourth among political blogs in Finland), the Nordic Grahnblawg (written in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (meaning European Law, in Finnish). I write and speak about democracy and openness in the European Union, but increasingly about the crucial challenges of the global era for Europe: growth (EU2020) and the (digital) single market in the making.

European Council versus sewing circle governance

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

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

PREPARATION OF THE MARCH EUROPEAN COUNCIL

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

The European Council is due to focus on:

• Economic policy:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

***

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

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

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



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

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

Euro crises: European Council eviscerated?

The European Council was inaugurated as the supremo among the official EU institutions just two years ago, by the Lisbon Treaty. A cascade of meetings, both official ones and inofficial summits, has followed during the financial, sovereign debt and economic crises.

It may sound paradoxical, but my feeling is that the European Council has been gutted by the euro area crises and by design.

This blog post continues the discussion in the entry Transparency during the eurozone crises, based on my presentation at the 22 February 2012 Attac seminar, but with some modifications, updates and documentary references.


Eviscerated European Council?

Already, the latest statements from the informal summits for the EU as a whole, such as 26 October 2011, and the formal European Council conclusions, 23 october 2011 (EUCO 52/1/11) and 9 December 2011 (EUCO 139/1/11), look pretty anaemic.

It is as if the European Council had been eviscerated, emptied of content of late.

The spring meeting has traditionally been dedicated to all aspects of economic issues, but we have to wait to see what EUCO produces in terms of substance 1-2 March 2012 in the light of the EUCO annotated draft agenda (Council document 5354/12).


Summit or EU institution?

The first two years of the European Council as an official EU institution could be marked down as a lost opportunity with regard to openness and closeness to the citizen of the European Union.

In the beginning, EUCO president Herman Van Rompuy underlined that the European Council was an official institution, but in practice it continued to act as an international summit between leaders, without adopting practices of openness and good governance.

By this I mean in particular the preparatory phase from the Council configurations through the coordinating General Affairs Council (GAC), which has proved a real disappointment.

In order to illustrate the point, I ask you to look at the draft agenda of the GAC and the background note ahead of the 28 February 2012 meeting. Do we see clear proposals going in and can we expect the GAC to make public propositions to EUCO for public debate ahead of conclusions?

For comparison, we also have the customary annotated agenda from the government of Sweden: Allänna rådets möte den 28 februari 2012 – Kommenterad dagordning. Thin, is how I see it, instead of a clear paper trail from proposal to discussion, with public debate in between.

***

Perhaps some of us find it comforting to see that we citizens are in such noble company – at least in part with the heads of state or government of the non-euro states – watching more of real policy making disappear into the even bigger black hole of beefed-up Eurogroup support and the permanent Euro Summit.

Perhaps some of us are comfortable with the GAC and EUCO continuing to labour in the mode of diplomatic conferences, instead of as accountable and transparent institutions of European government and governance.

Perhaps we should not be. Yesterday, the Swedish economist Anders Bäckstrand wrote on Europaportalen that the euro crisis has started a process towards a more distinctly political Europe, but political legitimacy is necessary for this to succeed.



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

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

P.S. 2: Referring the anti-piracy treaty #ACTA to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) marks a lull in the proceedings, but not an end to the political battle. A few moments ago, the online petition launched by @Avaaz for the European Parliament (and the national parliaments) to reject ACTA had already been signed by 2,427,119 netizens, but more are welcome until the official burial.

Today, Saturday 25 February 2012, European netizens join forces through more than 150 demonstrations for open and democratic legislation and Internet freedoms. In Finland Stop ACTA Helsinki convenes in front of the Central Railway Station at 14:00 hours.

EU General Affairs Council: Feeding the cuckoos?

Have you ever followed the hectic life of small birds, unwittingly having become foster parents for a gluttonous young cuckoo?

Hectic and unrewarding, the life of these unsung heroes.

How about having two of these rapacious strangers, instead of only one, as in nature?

Why do I think about the thankless task of these desperate and overworked foster parents, when I turn to the visible output from the General Affairs Council of the European Union?


More than foreign affairs

Although the European Union is much, much more than foreign affairs, the coordinating General Affairs Council (GAC) is still dominated by foreign ministers, for whom it is a sideshow.

At the same time, the foreign ministers face the enormous challenge to shape the European Union into an effictive and influential actor in world affairs, in all fields of external action. Enough of a challenge to keep the foreign ministers busy for a decade or more, I would think, even if they concentrated on this main job.


GAC role

Currently the GAC does not fulfil the expectations created by the Lisbon Treaty, which gave it a permanent and important treaty based position.

The GAC was entrusted with the vital role to coordinate Council work (other configurations). It is also the task of the General Affairs Council to prepare and to ensure the follow-up of the European Council.

The bulk of real EU powers and resources concerns about two dozen policy areas of internal action, so the challenge looks daunting enough, but consistency has been left to the foreign policy divas, as a diversion.

In addition, the spring European Council is supposed to be the crowning moment for economic governance and economic reforms for growth and employment, guiding the work towards Europe 2020 (EU2020) goals.


Treaty aims vs delivery

The principles of as much openess as possible and as much closeness to the citizen as possible are laid down in Article 1 of the Treaty on European Union.

The enhanced role and tasks of the GAC were established by Article 16(6) TEU.

Article 16(6) TEU finally separated the GAC from its then dominant Siamese twin, the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC).

In the name of openness and closeness, the GAC could and should become an important stage in public discourse just ahead of the European Council (as well as after), but what has happened?

Make your own assessment of how the aims and potential have come to fruition. Reflect on the gap between expectations, potential and delivery:

3079th Council meeting General Affairs; Brussels, 21 March 2011 (Council document 7932/11)


Concrete conclusions

Instead of reasoned proposals and supporting materials, we get these inane ”conclusions”, with regard to the issues on the agenda of the European Council:

The Council took stock of the humanitarian situation in Libya and neighbouring countries.

The Council took stock of the EU's response to the humanitarian crisis in Japan.

The Council examined draft conclusions for the European Council meeting to be held on 24 and 25 March.

This is parody, pure and simple.

The rest of the text concerning economic policy is in essence an agenda, since it presents only the issues to be dealt with at the European Council (page 8-9).

The only redeeming feature would have been the report from the presidency on progress in implementation of the European Semester submitted to the European Council (doc. 7745/11), if the link in the original had actually worked.

If the GAC actually said something worthwhile, its tasks would be a bit more rewarding than feeding the cuckoos.


European Semester: implementation

Going back, the document reference is useful, though. If we substitute the broken link by Council search, we find the presidency report in 22 official EU languages, including English:

Implementation of the European Semester - Synthesis report; Brussels, 16 March 2011 (document 7745/11; 21 pages)



Ralf Grahn



P.S. The web pages of the Hungarian presidency of the Council of the European Union are one of the important sources of day to day information about EU events, including ones less visible than formal Council meetings.

EU General Affairs Council (GAC) communication: Wrong, stupid and a missed opportunity

Yesterday I published two blog posts in Swedish regarding the upcoming meeting of the General Affairs Council (GAC) the same day, 21 February 2011. The first entry looked at how the advance material published centrally by the Council managed to enlighten and engage the public. My conclusion was that despite coordinating heavyweight issues, the governments seem to exclude the citizens of the European Union on purpose: EU-rådet för allmänna frågor 21 februari 2011: Bedrövlig förhandsinformation.

I wondered how long the Nordic ministers participating in the GAC meetings would tolerate such lousy information before revolting, so in the second post I took a closer look at how the governments in Sweden, Finland and Denmark informed domestically about the issues on the agenda of the General Affairs Council. Sadly, even the Nordic governments seemed to have missed the GAC as an opportunity to communicate in any meaningful way or to invite valuable contributions from the wider society: EU-rådet för allmänna frågor: Vad gör Norden?

In my view, the GAC could be an important stock-taking and engaging milestone on the road towards improved guidelines from the European Council summits.


GAC conclusions

If the advance information was lousy, how much did the GAC meeting improve matters with regard to economic coordination and progress?

We now have the press release from the Council, with the GAC conclusions:

3068th Council meeting General Affairs; Brussels, 21 February 2011 (Council document 6762/11; 8 pages)

With regard to the follow-up of the February European Council, we are informed that:

The Council took stock of the follow-up to be given to the European Council's meeting on 4 February, which [only officially; my addition] focused on energy and innovation.

Not a word, not a document about substance, how guidelines are put into practice or preparations advancing.

***

With the eurozone crisis, economic governance, the ”competitiveness pact” and the Europe 2020 growth reforms, the future of European Union citizens hangs in the balance at the the March European Council.

How does the General Affairs Council improve our knowledge and reassure us about progress being made towards needed reforms?

Here are the GAC conclusions:

The Council examined a draft annotated agenda for the European Council meeting to be held on 24 and 25 March, drawn up by the President of the European Council in cooperation with the presidency and the Commission (doc. 6231/11).

The March European Council is due to focus on:

Economic policy: Conclusion of the first phase of the European Semester (annual monitoring of budgetary policies and structural reforms), adoption of a decision amending the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union with regard to the future European Stability Mechanism (ESM), finalisation of work on the ESM and on the strengthening of the European Financial Stability Facility, finalisation of work by the Council on legislative proposals on economic governance, and a decision on economic policy coordination in the euro area.

– Developments in the EU's southern neighbourhood and follow-up to the 4 February European Council declaration on Egypt.

Not a word, not a document indicating anything of substance, any indication of progress.

Does anyone find even a shred of new and valuable information compared with the already poor background note published before the GAC meeting or the old draft agenda?


GAC – missed opportunity

Despite the treaty based obligation to ensure a maximum of openness, the General Affairs Council and the European Council have, in tandem, adopted working habits and communication patterns designed to keep the public without any meaningful information about how crucial political issues are advancing.

Not only is this 'modus operandi' legally and morally wrong, it is stupid, counterproductive and a great opportunity missed to boot.



Ralf Grahn




P.S. What do Neelie Kroes, Andris Piebalgs, Maria Damanaki, Kristalina Georgieva and Cecilia Malmström have in common? They belong to the blogging minority among members of the European Commission. Kudos to them and to the Commission representation and services blogs you find behind the link.

P.S. 2: Political and macroeconomic guidelines emanating (or not) from the European Council and Council configurations at the top are important for our future, as are the questions of accountability and transparency from the viewpoint of EU citizens.

Details of internal market reform (Single Market Act) and the Europe 2020 strategy (EU2020 flagship initiatives) are going to be among my recurring themes as well.

On my Euroblogs I want to discuss legal and political issues relevant to European enterprises, jobs, employers and employees, consumers and citizens, especially in cross-border situations.

Hopefully my blogs succeed in educating and guiding readers towards relevant sources. For me the blogs offer continuous updating and disciplined study as basic training for my teaching and legal counseling activities.

My blogs are: Grahnlaw (in English), Grahnblawg (in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish), as well as downstream the trilingual Grahnlaw Suomi Finland (usually later, with more sediment). On topic comments are most welcome.

If we share an interest in the European economy, business, politics or law, we could get acquainted through Twitter @RalfGrahn or Facebook.

Busy week in Brussels: EU politics and governance

With the General Affairs Council (GAC), the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) and the European Council, it was a busy week in Brussels politics. Here is a roundup of my main blog posts (often the second on the same theme, downstream) about the meetings and reflections on governance, including openness and transparency.

There are, in addition to fairly extensive references to documents, critical assessments of how the EU institutions work, as well as positive comments about praiseworthy efforts to get EU citizens on board.

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland: EU General Affairs Council 31 January 2011 (30 January 2011)

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland, in Swedish: Egypten anslöjar EU:s utrikespolitik (Utrikesrådet 31 januari 2011) (31 January 2011)

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland, in Finnish: EU:n yleisten asioiden neuvosto valmisteli Eurooppa-nevoston kokousta 4. helmikuuta 2011 (1 February 2011)

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland: Miracle of European Council conclusions (4 February 2011) (2 February 2011)

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland, in Swedish: EU-rådet mörkar samordningen av ekonomisk politik och budgetpolitik (3 February 2011)

Grahnlaw: European Semester and Annual Growth Survey: Governance by mushroom principle (3 February 2011)

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland: European Council 4 February 2011: Main issues (4 February 2011)

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland: European Council 4 February 2011: Energy (4 February 2011)

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland: European Council 4 February 2011: Eurozone solutions? (4 February 2011)

Eurooppaoikeus, in Finnish: Eurooppa 2030 -hanke: Haasteet ja mahdollisuudet (5 February 2011)


In future blog posts we return to the results of the meeting of the European Council 4 February 2011.



Ralf Grahn


P.S. The multilingual aggregator Bloggingportal.eu brings you the posts from 737 Euroblogs, part of an emerging European public online space. Keep up to date and improve your language skills!

P.S. 2: I am happy if you want to read my Euroblogs, which aim to discuss legal and political issues relevant to European enterprises, jobs, employers and employees, consumers and citizens, especially in cross-border situations. Internal market reform (Single Market Act) and the Europe 2020 strategy (EU2020 flagship initiatives) are going to be among the main themes, upstream on Grahnlaw (in English), Grahnblawg (in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish), as well as usually downstream on the trilingual Grahnlaw Suomi Finland. If you are interested in European business, politics or law, we can get acquainted on Facebook and on Twitter @RalfGrahn.

European Semester and Annual Growth Survey: Governance by mushroom principle

The impact of these heartening messages from president Herman Van Rompuy would be even more positive if the (European) Council did less to keep EU citizens in the dark.


Annual Growth Survey

When the Commission presented the ”clear direction on where Europe should be heading in the next year, with ten pressing actions focussed on macro-economic stability and fiscal consolidation, structural reforms and growth-enhancing measures” (IP/11/22), it told us that the Annual Growth Survey consists of different parts:

1. Communication of the Commission: "Annual Growth Survey: towards a comprehensive response to the crisis".
The first part focuses on urgent key messages, which cover the fiscal, macro-economic and "thematic" areas. They represent a selection of issues, which should be addressed as a matter of priority by the Heads of State or Governments when they meet at the March European Council.

2. Progress Report on Europe 2020
It reviews the situation as regards the EU headline targets, the draft NRPs and the reform path envisaged by the Member States.

3. Macro-economic Report
It provides the macro-economic outlook and pinpoints measures that have the highest potential of delivering positive growth-enhancing effects.

4. Joint Employment Report
It reviews the employment situation and labour market related policies. It is also the basis for the "Joint Employment Report", to be adopted jointly by the Commission and the Council in accordance with article 148.5 (TFUE).

The Annual Growth Survey is accompanied by a:

5. Proposal for a Council Decision on employment guidelines.
This is a technical extension of the Employment guidelines adopted only a few months ago, to comply with a legal obligation of adopting such guidelines annually.

Finding the information

The first part, the communication from the Commission, is easy enough to find. On the legal portal Eur-Lex, 22 language versions are available, and among them in English:

Annual Growth Survey: advancing the EU's comprehensive response to the crisis; Brussels, 12.1.2010 COM(2011) 11 final (10 pages)


GAC: Findings and proposals

Monday, the General Affairs Council (GAC) took stock of implementation of the ”European Semester”, as a part of reformed EU economic governance. The Commission presented main findings of its first annual growth survey (Council document 18066/10) and the Hungarian presidency made proposals for implementation during the first part of the European Semester, while there is still need for added detail concerning the second phase, from 25 March 2011 (page 9):

3064th Council meeting General Affairs; Brussels, 31 January 2011 (document 5640/11)

It did not seem to trouble the ministers that the proposals and draft proposals were not presented to the public.

If we search the Council website, only the first part of the package is public, i.e. the communication COM(2011) 11 (Council document 18066/11), although even here the Council caused a raised eyebrow. At some point, for some reason, the communication had been reclassified from ”Limite” to ”Public”, meaning it too had been under wraps.

The other parts of the annual growth survey, the annexes dated 14 January 2011, and which are of real public interest, are not accessible:

Annex 1 Progress report on Europe 2020
Annex 2 Macro-economic report
Annex 3 Draft joint employment report



So much for openness and transparency. Instead of stimulating discussion about real issues and mobilising engagement for EU2020 and other economic reforms Europe sorely needs, the Council inexplicably continues to apply the mushroom principle, keeping EU citizens in shit and in the dark: Belgian EU Council presidency legacy (6 January 2011).

Sancta simplicitas!



Ralf Grahn



P.S. The Hungarian presidency of the Council of the European Union runs a fairly active blog, written in English by two officials, Urkuti György and Ódor Bálint. The two latest posts are relevant to the upcoming European Council meeting tomorrow, Friday.

P.S. 2: I am happy if you want to read my Euroblogs, which aim to discuss legal and political issues relevant to European enterprises, jobs, employers and employees, consumers and citizens, especially in cross-border situations. Internal market reform (Single Market Act) and the Europe 2020 strategy (EU2020 flagship initiatives) are going to be among the main themes, upstream on Grahnlaw (in English), Grahnblawg (in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish), as well as downstream on the trilingual Grahnlaw Suomi Finland. If you are interested in European business, we can get acquainted on Facebook and on Twitter @RalfGrahn.

Immaculate conception of the European Council 4 February 2011

Ahead of the European Council ”summit” on Friday, 4 February 2011, we looked at the preparatory General Affairs Council (GAC) in the blog post: An energetic and innovative European Council? (29 January 2011).

Yesterday the foreign ministers and the ministers for Europe representing the EU member states laboured to bring us the following conclusions, currently available only in English:

3064th Council meeting General Affairs; Brussels, 31 January 2011 (asiakirja 5640/11)

(I have published some general GAC remarks in Finnish.)


Ensuring follow-up

According to Article 16(6) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), the General Affairs Council shall ensure the follow-up of meetings of the meetings of the European Council...

Yesterday's GAC left us with this memorable, elegant and enlightening sentence concerning the follow-up to the December 2010 meeting (page 8):

The Council took stock of the follow-up being given to the European Council's meeting on 16 and 17 December.

No need to burden the public with any explanations, clarifications, document references or links to relevant documents.

St Matthew knew: Neither cast ye your pearls before swine.

***

Just in passing, let it be known that the Council has provided us with an additional opportunity to ascertain the decisions to be followed in the first place. They have published, in English:

The European Council in 2010 (about 46 pages)

In the introductory part, president Herman Van Rompuy discusses the work of the European Council in 2010. The second part contains the conclusions of the six meetings in 2010, all conveniently in one place. The conclusions of the December meeting duly begin on page 42 for us to read.

The publication is available in Dutch, French and German as well.

Readers of other languages still find the conclusions on the web pages of the (European) Council, as before.


Preparation

Coordination and preparation are the GAC tasks indicated first in Article 16(6) TEU, so let us turn to the preparatory contribution yesterday: Preparation of the February meeting.

The first sentence of the conclusions of the General Affairs Council admirably bring us 'in medias res' (page 8):

The Council examined the draft conclusions for the European Council meeting to be held in Brussels on 4 February.

If we fast-forward to the concluding sentence, leaving out the chaff in between, we may marvel at:

Revised draft conclusions will be submitted to the European Council.

Despite drawing inspiration from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe, this is probably as close as you ever get to the miracle of transubstantiation or the immaculate conception in temporal affairs. Miraculously the immaterial draft conclusions turn into revised draft conclusions, unseen by the 'profanum vulgus', untouched by any agent.

Never mind that you would expect the proposals going in to the most important official institution of the European Union to be public knowledge and openly discussed well before the decisions, even guidelines, affecting 501 million people are taken.

Evidently, good governance does not start at the top.

As long as the European Council acts like a summit, the General Affairs Council remains a joke.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Blenderlaw is the enjoyable legal blog with a transnational twist, written by Caronline Bradley.


P.S. 2: I am happy if you want to read my Euroblogs. The internal market and the Europe 2020 strategy (EU2020 flagship initiatives) are going to be among the main themes, upstream on Grahnlaw (in English), Grahnblawg (in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish), as well as downstream on the trilingual Grahnlaw Suomi Finland. We can get acquainted on Facebook and on Twitter @RalfGrahn, too.

An energetic and innovative European Council?

The European Council has a rendezvous with energy and innovation 4 February 2011 in Brussels, but can we expect the institution to become energetic and innovative? The meeting web page only reiterates the information contained in the annotated draft agenda, dated 7 December 2010, without offering added wisdom (Council document 17163/10).

Before the European Council, the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) and the coordinating General Affairs Council (GAC) are going to meet, both Monday 31 January 2011.

Let us take a look at the quality of the advance information for the coordinating GAC meeting.


GAC background

The background note prepared by the Council press office for the General Affairs Council 31 January 2011 offers a summary on the first page and more detail on the following three pages.

The draft conclusions for the European Council are kept under wraps, but the texts tells us something about the items to be discussed.

Much real world interest hangs on the eurozone, but here little is on offer.

However, if the Council had wanted to be really service minded, it could have provided journalists and other interested people with direct and clear references and links to perhaps ten or twelve of the relevant documents.

Some things are better done once centrally, than hundreds of times in a dispersed manner.


Hungarian Council presidency

The Hungarian presidency of the Council of the European Union offers a brief page with the main items of the General Affairs Council.

In addition, the GAC page links to related news and pages, such as a description of the GAC and the priorities of the Hungarian presidency, the recent meeting of ministers and state secretaries for EU affairs, the launch of the first ”European Semester” for synchronised economic policy coordination, the development of European Roma policy and the strategy for the Danube Region (with further links leading to the communication from the Commission COM(2010) 715 final). Of course, it might be a good idea to link to the Eur-Lex page with all the available language versions.

There is a link to a GAC agenda dated 27 January 2011 and to the Council background note I mentioned earlier.

On the whole, the Hungarian presidency presents the advance information in a structured and fairly detailed manner, although using generic texts. Until now the General Affairs Council has been treated as a step-child, so this is still pretty good in comparison. Better presentation and preparation at the GAC stage should improve communication (including reception) at the European Council meeting, although energetic and innovative may be a lot to ask for.



Ralf Grahn


P.S. Do you think that there are differences between how Members of the European Parliament and domestic politicians use the web? Fleishman-Hillard's second European Parliament Digital Trends Survey reports on MEPs. You can discuss #epdigitrends on Twitter.

P.S. 2: I am happy if you want to read my blogs. The internal market and the Europe 2020 strategy (flagship initiatives) are going to be among the main themes on Grahnlaw (in English), Grahnblawg (in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish), as well as the trilingual Grahnlaw Suomi Finland. We can get acquainted on Facebook and on Twitter @RalfGrahn, too.

EU conclusions regarding Switzerland

Through legislation and jurisprudence the body of European Union law is in constant movement, but with Switzerland each relevant change has to be negotiated separately and every one of the 179 bilateral treaties administered. This is more cumbersome than the European Union is willing to accept for the future: EU relations with Switzerland: End of the road for bilateral model (30 December 2010).

Publicly, the the European Union has described its aims in vague terms, and voters in Switzerland have earlier rejected EU membership and even joining the European Economic Area (EEA). Surrounded by EU member states, Switzerland needs smooth relations, but until now only the piecemeal approach embodied by the concept ”bilateral” has been able to satisfy sovereignist electors.

There are, perhaps, many ways to skin a cat, but it becomes more complicated if you have to get the agreement not only of the cat, but of all (Swiss) felines.

In states affected by referendumitis anything can happen, so do not count your blessings until the referendum results are in.


Specific conclusions


After the general remarks in yesterday's blog entry, the main purpose of this blog post is to present the specific conclusions of the EU General Affairs Council (GAC) with regard to EFTA country Switzerland:

Council conclusions on EU relations with EFTA countries; 3060th GENERAL AFFAIRS Council meeting Brussels, 14 December 2010

There are a number of issues the GAC wanted to comment on, and the EU seems set to drive a bargain (paragraphs 37 to 50):

SWISS CONFEDERATION

37. Relations between the EU and Switzerland are good, intensive and broad. Situated in the very heart of the European territory, Switzerland is one of the EU's major trading and investment partners and EU and Swiss economies are closely interlinked. In the past two years, relations have intensified even further.

38. In this context, the Council welcomes in particular the full participation of Switzerland in the Schengen area, as well as the extension of the Free Movement of Persons Agreement to Bulgaria and Romania. It congratulates Switzerland on the breakthrough of the Gotthard base tunnel, an important step in the realization of this impressive infrastructure project, which will contribute significantly to the development of efficient and environmentally sustainable transport in Europe.

39. The Council welcomes the existing cooperation with Switzerland in the area of Common Foreign and Security Policy, in particular in civilian crisis management operations, and stands ready to further strengthen cooperation in this area. It pays careful attention to the Swiss interest in holding a formal political dialogue and wishes to express its similar aim to augment our cooperation and explore together the appropriate format.

40. EU-Switzerland relations include a contribution to reduce economic and social disparities in the EU. The EU believes that such support contributes to enriching overall relations between the parties and reinforces mutual solidarity. The Council is therefore confident that Switzerland's contribution will continue in the future, on the basis of the review of the existing mechanisms.

41. Following Switzerland’s rejection of the EEA in 1992, the EU and Switzerland decided to deepen their relations through the conclusion of agreements in chosen sectors. The Council takes note of the European Policy Report of the Swiss Federal Council of September 2010, reaffirming this choice.

42. The Council notes that this sectorial approach has allowed closer cooperation in a few areas of mutual interest but has turned in the course of the years into a highly complex set of multiple agreements. Due to a lack of efficient arrangements for the take-over of new EU acquis including ECJ case-law, and for ensuring the supervision and enforcement of the existing agreements, this approach does not ensure the necessary homogeneity in the parts of the internal market and of the EU policies in which Switzerland participates. This has resulted in legal uncertainty for authorities, operators and individual citizens.

43. In this context, the Council is concerned by an incoherent application of certain agreements and the introduction by Switzerland of subsequent legislative measures and practices incompatible with those agreements, in particular the Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons. The Council calls upon Switzerland to abrogate such restrictions (for instance, the obligation in force in Switzerland to provide prior notification with an 8-day waiting period) and to refrain from adopting new measures incompatible with the Agreement.

44. The Council remains very concerned regarding certain cantonal company tax regimes of Switzerland creating an unacceptable distortion of competition, and reaffirms its position on this matter. It regrets that the lengthy dialogue on this issue has not yet led to an abolition of the state aid aspects of these regimes. The Council reiterates its call on Switzerland to abolish these tax incentives and to avoid taking internal measures, such as certain aspects of the New Swiss Regional Policy, which would be incompatible with the Agreement and may have the effect of distorting competition between EU border regions and Switzerland. Other difficulties in the implementation of Protocol II of the Free Trade Agreement and in the application of the Agreement on Trade in Agricultural Products remain a matter of concern.

45. With regard to harmful business tax practices, the Council encourages Switzerland to continue discussions with the EU on the application of the principles and criteria of the EU Code of Conduct on business taxation.

46. Concerning the taxation of savings, the Council welcomes the readiness of Switzerland to consider an extension of the scope of the savings taxation agreement, once the EU has finalised its work on the revision of the savings taxation directive.

47. Regarding cooperation and information exchange in tax matters and the fight against fraud and evasion in tax matters, the Council welcomes the commitment taken by Switzerland in spring 2009 to implement OECD standards on transparency and tax information exchange. It expects a quick and consistent implementation of these standards in the relationship between Switzerland and the EU and all its Member States.

48. In full respect of the Swiss sovereignty and choices, the Council has come to the conclusion that while the present system of bilateral agreements has worked well in the past, the key challenge for the coming years will be to go beyond that system, which has become complex and unwieldy to manage and has clearly reached its limits. As a consequence, horizontal issues related to the dynamic adaptation of agreements to the evolving acquis, the homogeneous interpretation of the agreements, an independent surveillance and judicial enforcement mechanisms and a dispute settlement mechanism need to be reflected in EU-Switzerland agreements.

49. In addition to making the existing agreements more efficient and solving the outstanding problems in their implementation, the Council recognises that cooperation should be developed in certain areas of mutual interest. However, as regards agreements providing for Switzerland’s participation in individual sectors of the internal market and policies of the EU (a status normally only granted to members of the European Economic Area (EEA)), the Council recalls its conclusions of 2008, that the requirement of a homogeneous and simultaneous application and interpretation of the evolving acquis - an indispensable prerequisite for a functioning internal market - has to be ensured as well as supervision, enforcement and conflict resolution mechanisms. In this context, the Council welcomes the setting-up of an informal Working Group of the Commission and Swiss authorities.

50. Furthermore, the Council reiterates its conclusion of 2008 that in assessing the balance of interests in concluding additional agreements, it will have in mind the need to ensure parallel progress in all areas of cooperation, including those areas, which cause difficulties to EU companies and citizens.

As we see, EU-Swiss relations are more complex than with the EEA EFTA states Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, although in matters of taxation the ambitions of the European Union are expressed in practically identical terms with regard to Liechtenstein and Switzerland.

Salud, amor y dinero in 2011 to all my readers!



Ralf Grahn



P.S. If you are active in social media, you should know something about the legal issues involved. One place to look is the Social Media Recht Blog, written (in German) by the attorney Nina Diercks.

Liechtenstein heading for Schengen area

We still do not know if the parliamentary question about EU trade agreements with Liechtenstein is nonsense, but we hope that reasons will be forthcoming if it makes sense: What does the Earl of Dartmouth know about the EU? (26 December 2010).

In this post we look at available information about the entry of Liechtenstein into the Schengen travel area with common external borders.


GAC conclusions

We return to the conclusions from the General Affairs Council (GAC) of the European Union:

Council conclusions on EU relations with EFTA countries; 3060th GENERAL AFFAIRS Council meeting Brussels, 14 December 2010

This is what the GAC had to say about the entry of Liechtenstein into the Schengen area:

20. Preparations for the association of Liechtenstein to the Schengen acquis are well advanced on both sides. The Council is looking forward to a rapid entry of Liechtenstein into the Schengen area.

Nice as such general remarks are, the public would be better served if the Council would be considerate enough to publish a memo on where matters stand and which issues remain open.


Liechtenstein protocol

The Treaties Office Database of the European Commission offers many useful features if you are looking for international agreements. 'By country' we find 67 treaties involving the European Union and Liechtenstein.

Among them we find the Liechtenstein protocol, officially:

Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (signed 28 February 2008, but not yet in force)

There is a summary of the contents of the Liechtenstein Schengen protocol, a link to the summary of the Schengen agreement of Switzerland and a link to the text of the Liechtenstein protocol.

Alternatively, you could have used word search 'Schengen' to locate two agreements with Iceland and Norway (1999), the agreement with Switzerland (2004) and the Liechtenstein protocol (2008).


Liechtenstein Schengen procedure

The Liechtenstein accession procedure to Switzerland's Schengen agreement can be followed under NLE/2006/0251 on the Legislative Observatory Oeil of the European Parliament.

After the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, a new consultation was launched.

The draft report by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs is heading for the plenary on 14 February 2011. According to Oeil, the draft report is dated 1 December, but the document behind the link is actually dated 18 November 2010:

Draft recommendation on the draft Council Decisions on the conclusion on behalf of the European Union of the Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (06077/2010– C7-0141/2010 – 2006/0251(NLE))


Media

Finding useful information on the Council website or the government of Liechtenstein was not very rewarding, but local media are sometimes more informative than official sources:

Liechtensteiner Vaterland: Liechtenstein wartet auf grünes Licht (7 November 2010)



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Sauvons l'Europe is a pro-European 'progressive' voice for citizens, well worth reading and following.

Principality of Liechtenstein views the European Union

Recently the General Affairs Council (GAC) of the European Union adopted conclusions about the relations between the EU and the four EFTA countries: the three members of the European Economic Area (EEA) Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, as well as fourth EFTA member Switzerland, which remains outside the EEA:

Council conclusions on EU relations with EFTA countries; 3060th GENERAL AFFAIRS Council meeting Brussels, 14 December 2010

We took a first look at Liechtenstein in the blog post 'EU relations with Liechtenstein (general conclusions)' (22 December 2010), presenting the general remarks including Liechtenstein, but addressed at the EEA or EFTA states.

Since Liechtenstein and its relations with the European Union are not widely known, we are going to look at some materials about and from this fascinating Principality.


Liechtenstein background

Here is a link to the Wikipedia article about the Principality of Liechtenstein (German: Fürstentum Liechtenstein), a country with more registered companies than citizens.

Digital Liechtenstein offers you added opportunities to look at interesting topics in English, German, French or Chinese.


EEA Fact Sheet

The EEA Coordination Unit offers readers a recently updated brochure in English: European Economic Area (EEA) Fact Sheet (November 2010; 12 pages).


EEA population

A brochure detail: On the authority of the CIA World Factbook the brochure starts by stating that the EEA is a single market of about 496 million consumers (as per July 2010).

Why not check the facts instead?

According to Eurostat we have the following population figures for 2010:

EU 27 501090520
Iceland 317630
Liechtenstein 35894
Norway 4858199

This adds up to an internal market of about 506 million people. If we equate inhabitant with consumer (as I suppose the intention has been), the population of the European Economic Area exceeds the number in the folder by ten million.


EEA Coordination Unit

There is an explanatory web page in English about the EEA Coordination Unit, with a link to the active pages in German of Stabsstelle EWR.


Embassy of Liechtenstein in Brussels

Another important player is the Embassy of Liechtenstein in Brussels. It serves as a mission to the European Union and handles EEA and EFTA affairs (besides functioning as the Embassy to Belgium).


Detailed EEA report

There is a fresh government position paper, with a detailed evaluation of Liechtenstein's 15 years in the European Economic Area (23 March 2010), in German:

Bericht und Antrag der Regierung an den Landtag des Fürstentums Liechtenstein betreffend 15 Jahre Mitgliedschaft des Fürstentums Liechtenstein im Europäischen Wirtschaftsraum (EWR) Nr. 17/2010 (306 pages)

In a nutshell, the report depicted the 15 year EEA membership as a Liechtensteinian success story.

On 21 April 2010 the Liechtenstein Parliament (Landtag) took notice of the annual report of the EEA/EFTA parliamentary delegation as well as the EEA report from the government (Jahresbericht 2009 der Delegation für die EWR/EFTA-Parlamentarierkomitees Information; 15 Jahre Mitgliedschaft des Fürstentums Liechtenstein im Europäischen Wirtschaftsraum (EWR), (Nr. 17/2010) Landtagsprotokolle 21 April 2010).

The discussion gave me the impression that the positive assessment of EEA membership is shared by the Landtag, even if coordination with neighbouring Switzerland outside the European Economic Area requires constant attention.

***

The next blog post in this series is going to change perspective, from the Liechtensteinian viewpoint to EU materials and resources.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Mathew Lowry wrote a timely blog post called 'Censoring Hungarian blogs during the Hungarian EU Presidency' spreading the word about the ignominious media law and the Twitter Hashatag #NoToHuEU.

The presidencies of the Council of the European Union were supposed to be about team spirit and presidency trios. It worked during the Belgian presidency @EuTrioBe on Twitter. Why did the government of Hungary discard this manifestation of European team spirit? I hope that the hashtag #EuTrioHu will keep the idea alive, despite the nationalistic Twitter address @HU_Presidency by a government badly discredited even before the presidency starts.

EU view of EFTA and EEA country Iceland (not excluding controversy)

Iceland has been getting a lot of attention in Brussels lately. The EU Commission presented its progress report and conclusions regarding the process of Iceland to become a member of the European Union:

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland: EU enlargement: Iceland (20 December 2010)

The General Affairs Council (GAC) adopted conclusions on enlargement, including Iceland, on 14 December 2010:

Grahnlaw: EU Council on enlargement: Iceland (20 December 2010)

But the same day, the General Affairs Council also adopted conclusions about the relations between the European Union and the members of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), as described on Grahnblawg (in Swedish): EU-relationerna med Norge (19 December 2010).

Naturally Iceland, an EFTA member and a participant in the European Economic Area (EEA) was dealt with in these GAC conclusions as well:

Council conclusions on EU relations with EFTA countries; 3060th GENERAL AFFAIRS Council meeting Brussels, 14 December 2010


EEA remarks

The Council was satisfied with the contributions from Iceland, Liechtenstein and especially Norway to poorer EU member states (point 2):

The Council appreciates the financial contributions of the EFTA countries to the economic and social cohesion in the European Economic Area (EEA). Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland (the "EEA EFTA States") recently committed themselves to a substantial increase of their continued contributions.

In practice the EEA states pay for access to the internal market, although it differs somewhat from the membership contributions from EU countries.

The Council was happy to note the excellent transposition record of the EEA EFTA states (point 3):

Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway are integrated in the internal market through the EEA Agreement of 1994. This Agreement functions properly so long as all Contracting Parties incorporate the full body of the relevant EU acquis relating to the internal market into their national law. The Council welcomes that the EEA countries have demonstrated an excellent record of proper and regular incorporation of the acquis into their own legislation and encourages them to maintain this good record to ensure the continued homogeneity of the internal market.

The GAC remarks about homogenous implementation of EU law and the smooth functioning of the special institutions are directed at all EFTA countries (point 7):

Though EU relations with the EFTA countries were extended over the years to many areas not covered by the internal market, these relations are mainly based on the progressive integration of the EFTA countries' economies into the EU internal market. In view of the need for a level playing field for all economic operators of the parties concerned and the continued development of internal market relevant acquis, the EU and the EFTA States should ensure homogeneity in the implementation of the acquis and the good functioning of the institutions.

Icelandic accession negotiations

Officially, Iceland conducts negotiations to become a member of the European Union, which puts it in a different category from the other EEA states, Liechtenstein and Norway, with the remaining EFTA member, non-EEA Switzerland even farther apart. The GAC stated the position of Iceland (point 5):

The Council welcomes the opening, in July 2010, of accession negotiations with Iceland, which conserves its status as EEA EFTA State while negotiations are ongoing.

Specifically Iceland

The GAC conclusions contained a number of points specifically related to the EU's relationship with Iceland (10-16):

ICELAND

10. The Council welcomes the launching of accession negotiations with Iceland in July 2010, takes note of the findings presented by the Commission on 9 November 2010 to the Council and the European Parliament in its Progress Report on Iceland and refers to the Council conclusions on enlargement - Iceland - to be adopted by the General Affairs Council on 14 December 2010.

11. The opening of an EU delegation in Reykjavik in 2010 will contribute to the rapprochement of Iceland and the EU in this dynamic phase of relations.

12. The Council appreciates the solidarity shown by the Icelandic people when committing to renew their contribution to the reduction of social and economic disparities in the EEA for the period 2009-2014.

13. While accession negotiations are ongoing, the EEA Agreement remains the key contractual basis for EU-Iceland relations. In the past two years, Iceland continued to be an active and constructive partner in that framework as well as in the Schengen area, with a good record of implementation of the evolving EU acquis. The Council encourages Iceland to maintain the same good record also in the future.

14. The Council welcomes the good cooperation with Iceland in many areas of common interest, in particular on environmental and energy issues, as well as in the field of Common Foreign and Security Policy, with Iceland frequently supporting EU declarations and voting together with the EU in the UN. The Council is looking forward to further strengthening cooperation with Iceland on issues such as Arctic policy, the Northern Dimension, fisheries, renewable energy and climate change.

15. Regarding fisheries, the Council continues to call for a constructive approach of all Coastal States (EU, Norway, Faeroe Islands and Iceland) on the joint management of mackerel fisheries, and encourages Iceland to resume negotiations on this issue, in particular as regards a reasonable long term sustainable quota sharing arrangement, taking into account the track records of all relevant actors.

16. The Council welcomes Iceland's continued commitment to move toward economic stabilization and to address all issues deriving from the 2008 banking collapse. In this context, the Council recalls the need for Iceland to address existing obligations, such as those identified by the EFTA Surveillance Authority under the EEA Agreement, as well as weaknesses in the area of financial services, identified in the Opinion of the Commission on Iceland's application for EU-membership.

”Mackerel War”

As we saw, the last two points referred to controversial issues. In point 15 the GAC called for the resumption of negotiations in the ”Mackerel War”. Se for instance:

FISHupdate.com: Iceland and Faroes set to announce new mackerel quotas (20 December 2010)

FISHupdate.com: Lochhead comments on Iceland's 'irresponsible' mackerel quota action (20 December 2010)

BBC Scotland: Scottish fishermen condemn Iceland mackerel quota move (18 December 2010)

Fishnewseu.com: Iceland warns that Norway and EU will overfish mackerel next year (20 December 2010)

Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture, press release: Decision on Iceland's Share in Mackerel Fisheries in 2011 (20 December 2010)


Icesave / Landsbanki

The catastrophic fallout from the Icelandic banking collapse has haunted the people of Iceland and its government, but also relations with the Netherlands and the United Kingdom (point 16). See for instance:

Reuters: Iceland finance minister presents new Icesave bill to parliament (16 December 2010)

Eygló Svala Arnarsdóttir in Iceland Review Online: Icesave: Not my headache (ESA) (17 December 2010)

Bloomberg: Grimsson Says He'll Decide by February on Icesave Referendum (20 December 2010)



Ralf Grahn



P.S. In the blog post Not losing sight of the basics, Mathew Lowry calls on the EU institutions to do some serious work on Europa and other websites to serve a huge array of audiences. Read the discussion as well.

EU Council: Why keep EU2020 implementation report secret? (Updated)

Yesterday I tried to follow single market developments and the Europe 2020 strategy (EU2020) by publishing two blog posts on Grahnlaw Suomi Finland:

EU Competitiveness Council on Single Market Act

Latest on Europe 2020 strategy

In the later post I mentioned the follow-up from the Belgian presidency of the Council of the European Union:

The document in question is probably 'Europe 2020 Strategy - Implementation report' (dated 7 December 2010, Council document 17574/10), sadly not public at this moment, but hopefully it will be published with the GAC conclusions today.

General Affairs Council

Today, 15 December 2010, we go to the press release from the GAC:

3060th Council meeting General Affairs; Brussels, 14 December 2010 (Council document 17871/10)

On page 26 we find the Europe 2020 strategy (interesting in itself and relevant to the Single Market Act). I regret to say that my hope for publication was dashed:

EUROPE 2020 STRATEGY FOR JOBS AND GROWTH

The Council took note of a report from the presidency on implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy for jobs and growth. --- The report will be submitted to the European Council with a view to its meeting on 16 and 17 December. It provides an overview of work undertaken since Europe 2020 was launched in June.

Meaning of openness?

I understand if the European Council wants to prevent its conclusions from being published ahead of time (although a greater problem would seem to be how to get even a few people to read them voluntarily at any time, i.e. without duty and salary).

But why on earth does the Council keep this report on implementation under wraps? Is not this implementation report o typical example of a document which could promote informed discussion about the grand strategy of the European Union for the decade until 2020?

Is it not important for openness (transparency) that the public is informed about facts and proposals before they are discussed officially and possible decisions (even if dull conclusions) are taken, especially by the most influential institution of the EU?


Update early hours 17 December 2010: Europe 2020 Strategy - Implementation report, addressed to the General Affairs Council (7 December 2010, document 17574/10) is still not accessible on the Council website.


Update two, 17 December 2010: Somehow, I feel that the lack of openness and response ties in with what Jon Worth wrote about the precipitated taking down of the #EUCO Twitter wall yesterday evening.


Update three, 30 December 2010: Sadly, in the dying days of the Belgian presidency of the Council of the European Union, the EU2020 implementation report 17574/10 of 7 December and 17574/1/10 REV 1 of 13 December 2010 are still not accessible to the public.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Michael Geist's Blog tries to keep the interests of netizens and users at the forefront in a world where the critical distance between copyright lobbies on the one hand, and national governments and EU institutions on the other hand, still seems to be negligible.

European value added - EU General Affairs Council style

Where did we leave the EU's General Affairs Council (GAC)?

Potentially influential, but sandwiched in between the other Council configurations and the European Council, largely with the wrong participants based on redundant thinking in many capitals and with conclusions of anaemic pallor: EU General Affairs Council has taken note – So have we (24 November 2010).


Commission Work Programme for 2011

We return to the provisional conclusions of the GAC:

Press release, 3047th Council meeting, General Affairs, Brussels, 22 November 2010 (document 16572/10)

In addition to the English version, the GAC conclusions can be found in Dutch and French.

The entire page 9 is dedicated to the Commission's Work Programme for 2011 (CWP 2011), and the GAC is the coordinating spider in the web, as described earlier, so let us give you the text in full for your enlightenment:

COMMISSION WORK PROGRAMME FOR 2011

The Council took note of the presentation by the Commission of its work programme for 2011 (doc.
15772/10 + ADD 1).

For the sake of fairness, let me add that the document number and the ADD 1 are links in the original.

So much for European added value.


CWP 2011 documents

Published 27 October 2010, the CWP 2011 documents in question are:

Commission Work Programme 2011 VOLUME I - Commission document COM(2010) 623 final - VOLUME I (Council document 15772/10) (12 pages)

Commission Work Programme 2011 VOLUME II - Commission document COM(2010) 623 final - VOLUME II (Council document 15772/10 ADD 1) (43 pages)


What should I say?

Four weeks on from publication, eager Europeans have been offered links to these public documents as numbered by the Council.

We are none the wiser with regard to the views about the choice of priorities, possible consensus, simmering tensions etc.

European added value?

Zilch.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. You don't have to be able to read Swedish in order to understand how the thematic portal Europaportalen.se offers a rich fare of news, links and debate concerning European issues, from domestic sources as well as from ”Brussels”. Europaportalen.se is a jointly owned by the main trade unions and the confederation of industry in Sweden. How about making it possible elsewhere in the European Union?

EU General Affairs Council 14 June 2010 background note

The previous blog entry, EU General Affairs Council 14 June 2010, showed us that the bare bones agenda for a Council meeting, in this case the General Affairs Council (GAC), is far from a rich basis for informed public debate about real issues.

For instance, the words “European Council, Brussels, 17 June 2010” refer to the whole summit: draft conclusions, possible statements and perhaps scores of underlying reports and documents. Europe’s actions to create jobs and growth and to put its public finances in order are only some of the “trifles” the June 17 summit is supposed to lead on, aided by enlightened citizens.

Background notes may be more helpful, although their quality varies. Let us take a look.



The GAC background note presents issues in general terms and without references or links to relevant documents. For people who follow EU affairs, such as the journalists probably intended to be the primary recipients, it can serve as a check-list to tick off various items, but it is pretty worthless as a source of information.

The Council’s standards of governance and its will to communicate are far from impressive in a union in which “decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen”.



About 16:00 local time, the Council is going to hold a public debate on the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI), for those who are interested in this “innovation” with limited scope.



Other public information


During the Swedish Council presidency, the materials ahead of the meetings were sometimes informative, useful and easy to navigate from generalities to more detailed information. My impression is that the quality has lapsed with Spain at the Council helm, although there have been a few positive exceptions.



Now the Swedish government’s web page on the GAC meeting is as bland as the paper from the Council.



Traditionally, the government of Sweden offers an annotated agenda ahead of each Council meeting (Kommenterad dagordning), naturally in Swedish. Even if cautious and general in tone, the four page note by the Swedish representation in Brussels names a few issues actually being discussed.




The Finnish government published a fairly general press release about the GAC meeting, in Finnish, Swedish and English.


***


Second order elections, third order public information, fourth order debate and fifth order participation seem to be the stuff the “democratic life of the Union” is made of.




Ralf Grahn

EU General Affairs Council 14 June 2010

The General Affairs Council (GAC) shall ensure consistency in the work of 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 (Article 16(6) TEU).



Coordination, preparation and follow-up



Article 2 of the Rules of Procedure of the Council adds some detail to how the GAC is intended to coordinate policies and to prepare the European Council meetings, with a final GAC meeting within five days of a coming summit, as a rule preventing later discussion by other Council formations on items on the European Council’s agenda.

Even if the GAC tasks seem to cover all policy areas, it continues to meet in parallel with the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC). Thus, the coordinating role of the GAC is probably negligible with regard to the EU’s external action. (Cf. Article 2(5) of the Rules of Procedure.)

The GAC also follows up the guidelines, conclusions and decisions by the European Council.



GAC agenda 14 June 2010



The General Affairs Council will meet Monday, 14 June 2010 in Luxembourg, where the Council meetings take place three months annually.



The items on the agenda are:

Non-legislative activities

- European Council, Brussels, 17 June 2010

- EEAS [European External Action Service]

- Strategic Report of 2010 by the Commission on the Implementation of the Cohesion Policy Programmes (Presentation by the Commission; Council conclusions)

- Outermost Regions (Presentation by the Commission of the 2010 Forum for Outermost Europe, Brussels, 27/28 May 2010; Council conclusions)



Legislative deliberations

- European Citizens' Initiative (General Approach)

The European Council meets Thursday, 17 June 2010.




Ralf Grahn