Yesterday we looked at the tragicomical story of the language regime necessary for the EU patent (formerly the Community patent).
Under the Belgian presidency of the Council of the European Union there is advance information about the Competitiveness Council in Luxembourg Monday and Tuesday (11-12 October 2010):
The agenda
A more detailed background note with links to relevant documents
A timetable for public deliberations and public debates, as well as the items
A link to the audiovisual service to follow the public discussions through video streaming
A clear press release from the Commission, with links to additional documents
I evaluated these materials on Grahnblawg in Swedish earlier today. My impression was fairly positive in comparison with Council standards generally. In addition I looked at advance information from Sweden, Denmark and Finland.
Ann Mettler
If you are interested in the wider picture of innovation in Europe, I recommend the blog post by Ann Mettler, of the Lisbon Council: Informal Competitiveness Council: Innovation (Not) @ Work (8 October 2010).
Ralf Grahn
Saturday, 9 October 2010
Friday, 8 October 2010
Why is Europe falling behind? Look at EU patent
The governments of the EU member states meet in the Council of the European Union, Monday to Tuesday (11 to 12 October 2010) in Luxembourg.
Yes, even when the Council presidency is in Belgian hands (Brussels), the October Council meetings are held in the Grand Duchy.
Internal market
The Council configuration known as Competitiveness (Internal Market, Industry, Research and Space) has the following internal market items on its agenda:
You can follow press conferences and public deliberations by video streaming, courtesy of the audiovisual services of the Council.
EU Patent
If you want to understand why Europe is falling behind, you can study the neverending(?) history of the future Community Patent, nowadays the EU Patent, with the Commission’s latest proposal for translation arrangements (press release 1 July 2010, IP/10/870) and Frequently Asked Questions (MEMO/10/291).
The official Commission communication is:
Proposal for a Council Regulation (EU) on the translation arrangements for the European Union patent; Brussels, 30.6.2010 COM(2010) 350 final; consultation procedure2010/0198 (CNS)
Around the time of the informal meeting of competitiveness ministers (internal market) on 29 to 30 September, EurActiv reported on the efforts of the Belgian EU Council presidency to find a compromise in the battle about the language regime for the EU patent, and suggested that the deadlock may lead to the launch of enhanced cooperation between a group of member states. Nikki Tate in the Financial Times essentially had the same story.
Europolitics presents the state of play (= blockade) between the member states (7 October 2010), as does Simon Taylor in the European Voice (7 October 2010).
Legal: Unanimity for language regime
In the Lisbon Treaty the member states were able to agree on the ordinary legislative procedure for European intellectual property rights, but unable to include the language requirements, which need unanimity.
The member states failed then and will probably fail again, leaving European businesses with ten times the costs of patent protection in the USA.
The relevant provision is Article 118 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, with the language regime in the second paragraph (OJEU 30.3.2010 C 83/96):
Sweden
Ewa Björling, who continues as trade minister in Fredrik Reinfeldt’s new Swedish government appointed 5 October 2010, says that Sweden supports the three-language regime proposed by the Commission (English, German, French).
On the same page there is a link to the customary annotated agenda (kommenterad dagordning; in doc form), posted yesterday. The document states that two member states are opposed to the Commission proposal, but diplomatically it does not name Italy and Spain.
If the Council fails to reach unanimity, Sweden is willing to initiate enhanced cooperation for a working language regime.
Denmark
The Europe Committee of the Danish Parliament (Folketingets Europaudvalg) offers a memorandum on the issues for the Competitiveness Council (with the EU patent language regime from page 8).
It recalls the Commission’s original proposal (for a then Community patent) in 2000 and the negotiation history, and notes the unanimity requirement in Article 118(2) TFEU. A unanimous decision on the language arrangements is needed for the political agreement on the rest of European patent protection, negotiated during the Swedish EU Council presidency, to enter into force.
Provisionally, Denmark supports a possible compromise based on a restricted language regime, but the memorandum notes that the Council presidency and the Commission have indicated starting the process towards enhanced cooperation in case of failure.
Unanimity
The EU patent is an example of ‘freely cooperating, sovereign nation states’, and European businesses continue to foot the bill until the deadlock is broken.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. I have decided to give my “domestic” Grahnlaw blog a new twist. Instead of, or at least in addition to cross-posting EU entries in Finnish from Eurooppaoikeus, I intend to blog in Finnish, Swedish and English about entrepreneurship, work and expats in Finland, giving the blog a distinct identity.
Yes, even when the Council presidency is in Belgian hands (Brussels), the October Council meetings are held in the Grand Duchy.
Internal market
The Council configuration known as Competitiveness (Internal Market, Industry, Research and Space) has the following internal market items on its agenda:
– Proposal for a Council Regulation on the translation arrangements for the European Union patent
– Political orientation
Public deliberation
– Functioning of the internal market
(a) Communication from the Commission: Single market delivering smart sustainable and inclusive economic growth
– Presentation by the Commission
– Exchange of views
Public debate
(b) Report from the Commission on monitoring the retail market
– Progress report
You can follow press conferences and public deliberations by video streaming, courtesy of the audiovisual services of the Council.
EU Patent
If you want to understand why Europe is falling behind, you can study the neverending(?) history of the future Community Patent, nowadays the EU Patent, with the Commission’s latest proposal for translation arrangements (press release 1 July 2010, IP/10/870) and Frequently Asked Questions (MEMO/10/291).
The official Commission communication is:
Proposal for a Council Regulation (EU) on the translation arrangements for the European Union patent; Brussels, 30.6.2010 COM(2010) 350 final; consultation procedure2010/0198 (CNS)
Around the time of the informal meeting of competitiveness ministers (internal market) on 29 to 30 September, EurActiv reported on the efforts of the Belgian EU Council presidency to find a compromise in the battle about the language regime for the EU patent, and suggested that the deadlock may lead to the launch of enhanced cooperation between a group of member states. Nikki Tate in the Financial Times essentially had the same story.
Europolitics presents the state of play (= blockade) between the member states (7 October 2010), as does Simon Taylor in the European Voice (7 October 2010).
Legal: Unanimity for language regime
In the Lisbon Treaty the member states were able to agree on the ordinary legislative procedure for European intellectual property rights, but unable to include the language requirements, which need unanimity.
The member states failed then and will probably fail again, leaving European businesses with ten times the costs of patent protection in the USA.
The relevant provision is Article 118 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, with the language regime in the second paragraph (OJEU 30.3.2010 C 83/96):
Article 118 TFEU
In the context of the establishment and functioning of the internal market, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall establish measures for the creation of European intellectual property rights to provide uniform protection of intellectual property rights throughout the Union and for the setting up of centralised Union-wide authorisation, coordination and supervision arrangements.
The Council, acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure, shall by means of regulations establish language arrangements for the European intellectual property rights. The Council shall act unanimously after consulting the European Parliament.
Sweden
Ewa Björling, who continues as trade minister in Fredrik Reinfeldt’s new Swedish government appointed 5 October 2010, says that Sweden supports the three-language regime proposed by the Commission (English, German, French).
On the same page there is a link to the customary annotated agenda (kommenterad dagordning; in doc form), posted yesterday. The document states that two member states are opposed to the Commission proposal, but diplomatically it does not name Italy and Spain.
If the Council fails to reach unanimity, Sweden is willing to initiate enhanced cooperation for a working language regime.
Denmark
The Europe Committee of the Danish Parliament (Folketingets Europaudvalg) offers a memorandum on the issues for the Competitiveness Council (with the EU patent language regime from page 8).
It recalls the Commission’s original proposal (for a then Community patent) in 2000 and the negotiation history, and notes the unanimity requirement in Article 118(2) TFEU. A unanimous decision on the language arrangements is needed for the political agreement on the rest of European patent protection, negotiated during the Swedish EU Council presidency, to enter into force.
Provisionally, Denmark supports a possible compromise based on a restricted language regime, but the memorandum notes that the Council presidency and the Commission have indicated starting the process towards enhanced cooperation in case of failure.
Unanimity
The EU patent is an example of ‘freely cooperating, sovereign nation states’, and European businesses continue to foot the bill until the deadlock is broken.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. I have decided to give my “domestic” Grahnlaw blog a new twist. Instead of, or at least in addition to cross-posting EU entries in Finnish from Eurooppaoikeus, I intend to blog in Finnish, Swedish and English about entrepreneurship, work and expats in Finland, giving the blog a distinct identity.
Thursday, 7 October 2010
Europe 2020 strategy: Innovation Union
The seven flagship initiatives promised by the European Commission under the Europe 2020 (EU2020) strategy are Innovation Union, Youth on the move, A digital agenda for Europe, Resource efficient Europe, An industrial policy for the globalisation era, An agenda for new skills and jobs, and a European platform against poverty. See the blog post: Europe 2020 strategy: Barroso’s reform flotilla (flagship initiatives) (20 June 2010).
An overview of the plans for EU and national level action, as well as different Council configurations was offered in the blog entry: Europe 2020 strategy: Flagship initiative Innovation Union (21 June 2010)
Innovation Union launched
Yesterday, 6 October 2010, the Commission launched the flagship initiative Innovation Union. The press release The “Innovation Union” – turning ideas into jobs, green growth and social progress (IP/10/1288) is available in 23 languages.
Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, Commissioner for research, innovation and science and Vice-President Antonio Tajani, responsible for industry and entrepreneurship, highlight the potential economic growth through research and development (R&D). The press release briefly presents ten key elements of the Innovation Union initiative, and it contains links to other documents.
Turning Europe into a true Innovation Union (MEMO/10/473), available only in English, contains more detailed background information. It offers a link to the Commission’s Innovation Union web page, where you can find links to key documents, including the full text of the communication:
Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union; Brussels, 6.10.2010 COM(2010) 546 final (43 pages)
The communication is accompanied by the Commission staff document SEC(2010) 1161.
It is somewhat ironic that the web page with key Innovation Union documents links to the still un-updated central web page for the Commission’s grand project, the Europe 2020 strategy. So much for the Commission communicating an image as a dynamic actor.
You can look for additional information on the Innovation page of DG Enterprise and Industry.
You can find research findings on the costs of non-innovation on the web page Research – Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities (SSH).
Next step
On Tuesday, 12 October 2010, the Competitiveness Council (Internal Market, Industry and Research) will have an exchange of views on the potential of EU research and innovation in the light of the challenges posed by globalisation ("Innovation Union"). This item will also be discussed in the afternoon by ministers for science and research. In addition, the Council is expected to adopt conclusions on the simplification of EU research programmes and on the launching of joint programming initiatives for research related to "agriculture, food security and climate change", "cultural heritage" and "healthy food for healthy life".
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Nowadays it is increasingly hard to find European enterprises, public authorities or interest groups without an active social media presence or a stake in European Union affairs. Politics, policies, economics and law at a EU level are becoming more important in a globalising world, at least if Europe still wants to weigh in.
EU-related blogs are a significant aspect of the emerging European online public space. There are now 671 Euroblogs, or blogs related to European Union (and Council of Europe) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator.
You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
An overview of the plans for EU and national level action, as well as different Council configurations was offered in the blog entry: Europe 2020 strategy: Flagship initiative Innovation Union (21 June 2010)
Innovation Union launched
Yesterday, 6 October 2010, the Commission launched the flagship initiative Innovation Union. The press release The “Innovation Union” – turning ideas into jobs, green growth and social progress (IP/10/1288) is available in 23 languages.
Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, Commissioner for research, innovation and science and Vice-President Antonio Tajani, responsible for industry and entrepreneurship, highlight the potential economic growth through research and development (R&D). The press release briefly presents ten key elements of the Innovation Union initiative, and it contains links to other documents.
Turning Europe into a true Innovation Union (MEMO/10/473), available only in English, contains more detailed background information. It offers a link to the Commission’s Innovation Union web page, where you can find links to key documents, including the full text of the communication:
Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union; Brussels, 6.10.2010 COM(2010) 546 final (43 pages)
The communication is accompanied by the Commission staff document SEC(2010) 1161.
It is somewhat ironic that the web page with key Innovation Union documents links to the still un-updated central web page for the Commission’s grand project, the Europe 2020 strategy. So much for the Commission communicating an image as a dynamic actor.
You can look for additional information on the Innovation page of DG Enterprise and Industry.
You can find research findings on the costs of non-innovation on the web page Research – Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities (SSH).
Next step
On Tuesday, 12 October 2010, the Competitiveness Council (Internal Market, Industry and Research) will have an exchange of views on the potential of EU research and innovation in the light of the challenges posed by globalisation ("Innovation Union"). This item will also be discussed in the afternoon by ministers for science and research. In addition, the Council is expected to adopt conclusions on the simplification of EU research programmes and on the launching of joint programming initiatives for research related to "agriculture, food security and climate change", "cultural heritage" and "healthy food for healthy life".
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Nowadays it is increasingly hard to find European enterprises, public authorities or interest groups without an active social media presence or a stake in European Union affairs. Politics, policies, economics and law at a EU level are becoming more important in a globalising world, at least if Europe still wants to weigh in.
EU-related blogs are a significant aspect of the emerging European online public space. There are now 671 Euroblogs, or blogs related to European Union (and Council of Europe) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator.
You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Wednesday, 6 October 2010
EU: What is the Single Market Act? Preview by Barnier
On Europe Day, 9 May 2010, professor Mario Monti delivered his report on the internal market to the president of the European Commmission, José Manuel Barroso: A new strategy for the Single Market – At the service of Europe’s economy and society (107 pages).
On 17 June 2010 the European Council endorsed Monti’s report and called for concrete Single Market proposals from the Commission. The European Council promised to discuss the matter in December.
At the European Parliament, Barroso has referred to the report by Mario Monti and he has promised Commission proposals in October 2010 to deepen the internal market.
Single Market Act
On 16 September 2010 Michel Barnier, the Commissioner responsible for the Internal Market and Services, offered an outline of what the promised Single Market Act is going to be. Some of the remarks are specific to the forum, a conference on the Baltic Sea Strategy in Tallinn (Estonia), but most of the section on the Single Market Act is relevant to businesses, from large corporations to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Naturally they are important for politicians, public authorities and interest groups in the thirty nation strong European Economic Area (EEA) as well.
In his preview, Barnier was at pains to demonstrate that the Single Market Act will bring direct benefits to citizens of the EEA countries, too:
Road ahead
The Single Market Act, promised during October 2010, is going to be a framework communication about actions by 2012. In addition to enterprises, the Commission clearly wants to bring tangible benefits to consumers in general and in cross-border situations, as well as mobile citizens.
Barnier’s list of Gordian knots is impressive, even if mentioned only as examples. However, only the Commission’s concrete proposals will reveal its reform ambitions, and the European Council the prospects for progress.
For now, Mario Monti’s report remains the main public source for the reasons behind and the scope for the coming proposals.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Nowadays it is increasingly hard to find European enterprises, public authorities or interest groups without an active social media presence or a stake in European Union affairs. Politics, policies, economics and law at a European level are becoming more important in a globalising world, not less.
EU-related blogs are a significant aspect of the emerging European online public space. There are now 671 Euroblogs, or blogs related to European Union (and Council of Europe) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator.
You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
On 17 June 2010 the European Council endorsed Monti’s report and called for concrete Single Market proposals from the Commission. The European Council promised to discuss the matter in December.
At the European Parliament, Barroso has referred to the report by Mario Monti and he has promised Commission proposals in October 2010 to deepen the internal market.
Single Market Act
On 16 September 2010 Michel Barnier, the Commissioner responsible for the Internal Market and Services, offered an outline of what the promised Single Market Act is going to be. Some of the remarks are specific to the forum, a conference on the Baltic Sea Strategy in Tallinn (Estonia), but most of the section on the Single Market Act is relevant to businesses, from large corporations to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Naturally they are important for politicians, public authorities and interest groups in the thirty nation strong European Economic Area (EEA) as well.
In his preview, Barnier was at pains to demonstrate that the Single Market Act will bring direct benefits to citizens of the EEA countries, too:
Services and e-commerce are important initiatives that have to be completed.
But I feel we have to go further.
I do not know if one can "fall in love with the Single Market", to quote the words of Jacques Delors.
But what I know is that the Single Market is there for the people; it was made for them and it must work to their benefit.
Students, workers or pensioners, consumers or public services users… Everyone experiences obstacles to the Single Market in everyday life. And then they wonder: "what's the point of all this, if it does not work when I need it?"
This is a very serious challenge that we face, and it needs an ambitious response. This response I propose to you today is the 'Single Market Act'. To save and consolidate our common economic and social space of life, and to fight against so many tendencies of protectionism and populism.
This Single Market Act will be a framework communication setting out what the Commission intends to do by 2012.
And what is expected of the other public authorities – meaning you.
I have never believed that Europe could be made by Brussels or some institutions in isolation. Europe is not an abstraction; it is everywhere, here in Tallinn as much as in Berlin or Madrid.
The EU has much more to offer to its people than institutions and rules: it is first and foremost about freedoms and opportunities.
This is the meaning of the Single Market Act.
The Single Market Act will put a strong focus on business and SMEs. SMEs make up 99% of businesses and employ 90% of the work force in Europe.
The Single Market Act will stress the urgency of improving the capacity to innovate of European companies – and I hope we will soon find a solution on patents; my aim is that the first European patent be granted in 2014.
We will also step up the fight against piracy and counterfeiting. These practices do not empower consumers, as some demagogues could make people believe. Quite on the opposite; they ultimately impoverish them by stopping innovation. Why would you take your time and money to create something for which you will not be rewarded?
It will propose ways to help businesses get easier financing. I think of helping out venture capital funds, creating regional stock exchanges for SMEs, and simplifying EU rules on public procurement.
More generally, the Single Market Act will attempt to reduce red tape especially – but not only – for cross-border activities, including in the field of taxation and standardisation policy.
We will act abroad to ensure that European companies get fair access to third country markets, especially public procurement procedures.
The other pillar of the SMA will be to show that Europe works for all citizens.
It will notably concern services of general interest, universal access to banking services or patients' rights to the provision of health services.
We will also ensure that consumers are not discriminated against simply because they do not live in the "right" country. Give them more efficient means of redress in case of cross-border abuse.
Finally, we will improve the free movement of workers by reforming the system of recognition of professional qualifications.
And – I know this is a major issue in the Baltic Sea region – we will try to improve the implementation of the Posting of Workers Directive. We must find the right balance between fundamental social rights and equally fundamental economic freedoms to provide services and set up a business in the EU.
Last but not least, the Single Market Act will be about making all stakeholders better informed: if citizens do not know their rights and if practitioners and national administrations do not enforce those rights, there is no point changing the rules in the first place.
This will in turn allow us to develop a clearer view of the malfunctioning in the single market. For that purpose, the Commission will be holding an annual Single Market Forum from 2011 onwards, which is a very good proposal of the European Parliament.
This will start with publishing a list of the "Top 20" of single-market related sources of dissatisfaction for citizens. That way, we can concentrate on what really matters to them and what national obstacles still are to be lifted.
And indeed what we are doing here today, is a kind of a Single market forum at the regional basis for the Nordic countries. I think it is extremely useful and I would like to thank you for this initiative.
As a conclusion, let me say that the Single Market is not all about economics, competition and market opening. It is also about building bridges based on human values, dialogue, understanding, living together – in several nations but in one Europe. A Europe that is united, but not uniform.
I want to listen and understand the challenges you face, especially in the regional context of the Baltic Sea. My services and I are fully committed and available to support you, and I am now eager to hear how we can further help.
Road ahead
The Single Market Act, promised during October 2010, is going to be a framework communication about actions by 2012. In addition to enterprises, the Commission clearly wants to bring tangible benefits to consumers in general and in cross-border situations, as well as mobile citizens.
Barnier’s list of Gordian knots is impressive, even if mentioned only as examples. However, only the Commission’s concrete proposals will reveal its reform ambitions, and the European Council the prospects for progress.
For now, Mario Monti’s report remains the main public source for the reasons behind and the scope for the coming proposals.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Nowadays it is increasingly hard to find European enterprises, public authorities or interest groups without an active social media presence or a stake in European Union affairs. Politics, policies, economics and law at a European level are becoming more important in a globalising world, not less.
EU-related blogs are a significant aspect of the emerging European online public space. There are now 671 Euroblogs, or blogs related to European Union (and Council of Europe) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator.
You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Tuesday, 5 October 2010
Europe 2020 strategy Press pack: Better, but still shotgun approach
What the Barroso II Commission has presented as its make of break challenges (raison d’être) are sound public finances and growth-enhancing reforms leading to new jobs. However, a long time has passed since formal endorsement of the Europe 2020 strategy by the European Council (17 June 2010; EUCO 13/10).
Since then the Commission as a body has done little to take ownership of or at least to communicate the developments concerning the Europe 2020 strategy (EU2020) in a holistic manner, as seen in yesterday’s blog post about the central web portal: Europe 2020 website: From deplorable to absolute disgrace (4 October 2010).
This morning, the latest unsorted updating link on the Commission’s central Europe 2020 strategy web page was still from 17 July 2010, regarding funding for research and innovation.
EU2020 Press pack
On selected wide themes the Commission offers Press packs. In this case there is a Press pack on offer: Europe 2020 – a new economic strategy.
It clearly beats the central Europe 2020 strategy website, as it contains recent speeches by Commissioners and other press releases relevant to the EU2020 theme.
I have picked some of the more interesting ones for EU2020 as a whole:
Vice-President of the European Commission and the Commissioner responsible for inter-institutional relations and administration Maroš ŠEFČOVIČ spoke at the EESC: The Commission programme and social players' ownership of the Europe 2020 Strategy (17 September 2010; Speech/10/460).
The president of the European Commission, José Manuel Durão Barroso, spoke to the US Council on Foreign Relations: Stabilise, Consolidate, Reform: EU Moves from Crisis Management to Reform Agenda (23 September 2010; Speech/10/478).
The Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, László Andor, addressed the Employment Committee of the European Parliament: 2011 Commission Work Programme (September 2010; Speech/10/512 30).
During the ongoing Open Days 2010 in Brussels, the European Week of Regions and Cities from 4 to 7 October 2010, 6,000 regional and local representatives meet under the headline Europe 2020: competitiveness, co-operation and cohesion for all regions.
The updated Press pack is better than the central EU2020 web page, which is dead as the dodo, but it still reflects a shotgun approach, without clear ownership.
Europe is worth something better.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. The multilingual aggregator for EU related blogs keeps growing. There are now 670 Euroblogs, or blogs related to EU (and CoE) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not keep informed by reading about European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Since then the Commission as a body has done little to take ownership of or at least to communicate the developments concerning the Europe 2020 strategy (EU2020) in a holistic manner, as seen in yesterday’s blog post about the central web portal: Europe 2020 website: From deplorable to absolute disgrace (4 October 2010).
This morning, the latest unsorted updating link on the Commission’s central Europe 2020 strategy web page was still from 17 July 2010, regarding funding for research and innovation.
EU2020 Press pack
On selected wide themes the Commission offers Press packs. In this case there is a Press pack on offer: Europe 2020 – a new economic strategy.
It clearly beats the central Europe 2020 strategy website, as it contains recent speeches by Commissioners and other press releases relevant to the EU2020 theme.
I have picked some of the more interesting ones for EU2020 as a whole:
Vice-President of the European Commission and the Commissioner responsible for inter-institutional relations and administration Maroš ŠEFČOVIČ spoke at the EESC: The Commission programme and social players' ownership of the Europe 2020 Strategy (17 September 2010; Speech/10/460).
The president of the European Commission, José Manuel Durão Barroso, spoke to the US Council on Foreign Relations: Stabilise, Consolidate, Reform: EU Moves from Crisis Management to Reform Agenda (23 September 2010; Speech/10/478).
The Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, László Andor, addressed the Employment Committee of the European Parliament: 2011 Commission Work Programme (September 2010; Speech/10/512 30).
During the ongoing Open Days 2010 in Brussels, the European Week of Regions and Cities from 4 to 7 October 2010, 6,000 regional and local representatives meet under the headline Europe 2020: competitiveness, co-operation and cohesion for all regions.
The updated Press pack is better than the central EU2020 web page, which is dead as the dodo, but it still reflects a shotgun approach, without clear ownership.
Europe is worth something better.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. The multilingual aggregator for EU related blogs keeps growing. There are now 670 Euroblogs, or blogs related to EU (and CoE) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not keep informed by reading about European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Monday, 4 October 2010
Europe 2020 website: From deplorable to absolute disgrace
Macro-economic and fiscal stability, as well as growth-enhancing reforms are the make or break priorities for the European Commission. At EU level the Commission promises, among other things, to unleash the potential of the internal market through a Single Market Act.
All in all, the member states work on the basis of ten integrated guidelines, to be ‘localised’ in national Stability and Convergence Programmes SCPs, based on the Stability and Growth Pact SGP, and National Reform Programmes NRPs which aim to improve growth potential.
The Commission has promised seven flagship initiatives concerning EU level action.
Action and communication
On the Commission’s Europe 2020 strategy website there is now an undated, but useful document on the governance, tools and policy cycle of Europe 2020, but otherwise there is only one last update from 19 July 2010 regarding research funding and a previous press release with the integrated guidelines regarding economic policy and growth reforms (13 July 2010).
These are the only developments I notice since my 10 July 2010 blog post about the EU2020 flagship initiative Youth on the Move, when I called the state of the Commission’s central website for the Europe 2020 strategy deplorable.
The website does not redirect the visitor to a new and better portal for the Europe 2020 strategy. There are neither descriptions nor links to what has been going on since then, except for the three documents mentioned.
About twelve weeks from the previous blog post, by early October 2010, the Commission’s EU2020 website can only be called an absolute disgrace.
It is an elementary rule that action and communication have to advance hand in hand.
The Commission cannot rely solely on the charm of president Barroso. Neither can it let each Commissioner and Commission service communicate as best it can, without pulling together all the plans, proposals, speeches, interviews, discussions, decisions and actions into a meaningful whole.
There has to be one central portal where macro-economic and growth-reforms, at EU level and national level, are presented comprehensively and with daily updates. The Commission as a body must take ownership of both substance and presentation of its key strategies during this formative phase, in a dynamic manner and readable for EU citizens.
Enough time has been wasted.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments keeps skyrocketing. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your valued comment appears.
It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across linguistic and national borders. We can link to blogs and other sources in foreign languages and share different viewpoints with our readers, perhaps explaining the gist of the arguments. Check out Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator for blogs related to the European Union and the Council of Europe.
Another opportunity is to invite comments in different languages, those we are able to read or by using machine translation to understand the essentials.
Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:
I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.
All in all, the member states work on the basis of ten integrated guidelines, to be ‘localised’ in national Stability and Convergence Programmes SCPs, based on the Stability and Growth Pact SGP, and National Reform Programmes NRPs which aim to improve growth potential.
The Commission has promised seven flagship initiatives concerning EU level action.
Action and communication
On the Commission’s Europe 2020 strategy website there is now an undated, but useful document on the governance, tools and policy cycle of Europe 2020, but otherwise there is only one last update from 19 July 2010 regarding research funding and a previous press release with the integrated guidelines regarding economic policy and growth reforms (13 July 2010).
These are the only developments I notice since my 10 July 2010 blog post about the EU2020 flagship initiative Youth on the Move, when I called the state of the Commission’s central website for the Europe 2020 strategy deplorable.
The website does not redirect the visitor to a new and better portal for the Europe 2020 strategy. There are neither descriptions nor links to what has been going on since then, except for the three documents mentioned.
About twelve weeks from the previous blog post, by early October 2010, the Commission’s EU2020 website can only be called an absolute disgrace.
It is an elementary rule that action and communication have to advance hand in hand.
The Commission cannot rely solely on the charm of president Barroso. Neither can it let each Commissioner and Commission service communicate as best it can, without pulling together all the plans, proposals, speeches, interviews, discussions, decisions and actions into a meaningful whole.
There has to be one central portal where macro-economic and growth-reforms, at EU level and national level, are presented comprehensively and with daily updates. The Commission as a body must take ownership of both substance and presentation of its key strategies during this formative phase, in a dynamic manner and readable for EU citizens.
Enough time has been wasted.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments keeps skyrocketing. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your valued comment appears.
It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across linguistic and national borders. We can link to blogs and other sources in foreign languages and share different viewpoints with our readers, perhaps explaining the gist of the arguments. Check out Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator for blogs related to the European Union and the Council of Europe.
Another opportunity is to invite comments in different languages, those we are able to read or by using machine translation to understand the essentials.
Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:
I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.
Sunday, 3 October 2010
EU: “European Semester” towards economic stability and growth?
Yesterday’s blog post, EU: From Monti report to Single Market Act, observed that the European Commission is going to publish its work programme (CWP) for 2011 and a Single Market Act, both during this month of October.
On the central Commission website for the Europe 2020 strategy, there is a document of interest for those who work with or monitor the processes at European, national or corporate level: Governance, tools and policy cycle of Europe 2020 (8 pages).
The document describes how the five headline targets for the European Union will be translated into national targets by the member states, leading to National Reform Programmes (NRPs). It also describes the Commission’s work to launch seven growth-enhancing flagship initiatives at EU level.
The instruments of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP; Stability and Convergence Programmes, SCPs) and the Europe 2020 (EU2020) growth strategy will be aligned, with the “European Semester” as a headline concept for the process. They are based on three integrated strands:
1. Macro-economic surveillance (numbers 1 to 3 of the Integrated Guidelines)
2. Monitoring of growth-enhancing reforms (numbers 4 to 10 of the Integrated Guidelines)
3. Fiscal surveillance under the Stability and Growth Pact.
In January the Commission will publish an Annual Growth Survey with both a review and a forward-looking part, in good time before the spring meeting of the European Council (normally late March).
The different Council configurations will provide input for the European Council and monitor developments all year round.
Both reports (NRPs and SCPs) should be fully integrated within the national budgetary procedure.
The guideline document outlines the timetable and the shift towards the “European Semester”, a more coherent framework towards economic stability and growth.
However, the EU member states wasted the Lisbon Strategy decade. This taught us that more than pious goals are needed if Europe wants to become a dynamic player in the world economy and create real jobs for its young and old during EU2020.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments keeps skyrocketing. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your valued comment appears.
It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across linguistic and national borders. We can link to blogs and other sources in foreign languages and share different viewpoints with our readers, perhaps explaining the gist of the arguments. Check multilingual Bloggingportal.eu to get a grip on the discussions.
Another opportunity is to invite comments in different languages, those we are able to read or by using machine translation to understand the essentials.
Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:
I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.
On the central Commission website for the Europe 2020 strategy, there is a document of interest for those who work with or monitor the processes at European, national or corporate level: Governance, tools and policy cycle of Europe 2020 (8 pages).
The document describes how the five headline targets for the European Union will be translated into national targets by the member states, leading to National Reform Programmes (NRPs). It also describes the Commission’s work to launch seven growth-enhancing flagship initiatives at EU level.
The instruments of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP; Stability and Convergence Programmes, SCPs) and the Europe 2020 (EU2020) growth strategy will be aligned, with the “European Semester” as a headline concept for the process. They are based on three integrated strands:
1. Macro-economic surveillance (numbers 1 to 3 of the Integrated Guidelines)
2. Monitoring of growth-enhancing reforms (numbers 4 to 10 of the Integrated Guidelines)
3. Fiscal surveillance under the Stability and Growth Pact.
In January the Commission will publish an Annual Growth Survey with both a review and a forward-looking part, in good time before the spring meeting of the European Council (normally late March).
The different Council configurations will provide input for the European Council and monitor developments all year round.
Both reports (NRPs and SCPs) should be fully integrated within the national budgetary procedure.
The guideline document outlines the timetable and the shift towards the “European Semester”, a more coherent framework towards economic stability and growth.
However, the EU member states wasted the Lisbon Strategy decade. This taught us that more than pious goals are needed if Europe wants to become a dynamic player in the world economy and create real jobs for its young and old during EU2020.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments keeps skyrocketing. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your valued comment appears.
It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across linguistic and national borders. We can link to blogs and other sources in foreign languages and share different viewpoints with our readers, perhaps explaining the gist of the arguments. Check multilingual Bloggingportal.eu to get a grip on the discussions.
Another opportunity is to invite comments in different languages, those we are able to read or by using machine translation to understand the essentials.
Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:
I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.
Saturday, 2 October 2010
EU: From Monti report to Single Market Act
In his ”State of the Union” speech, the president of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, outlined the Commission’s Work Programme for 2011.
With regard to the economy, including the internal market, Barroso set the tone during the introduction:
The inter-related efforts, dealing with the economic crisis and governance, as well as restoring growth for jobs by accelerating the Europe 2020 (EU2020) reform agenda, were the first two major challenges Barroso mentioned out of five in all.
The 7 September 2010 speech in the European Parliament saw sound public finances as a means to an end: sustainable and inclusive growth for jobs. The aim of the Europe 2020 strategy is to get more people into jobs, boost the competitiveness of companies and deepen the single market.
Single Market Act
Barroso referred to the report by Mario Monti and he promised Commission proposals in October 2010 to deepen the internal market.
Barroso’s letter to the members of the European Parliament (MEMO/10/393) contained more detail about the draft Commission Work Programme (CWP) for 2011, to be adopted by the end of October.
After reminding the MEPs of the flagship initiatives of the EU2020 strategy, Barroso described the coming proposals to unlock the potential of the Single Market. The CWP 2011 will include:
Barroso also promised smart regulation, namely proposals to reduce the administrative burden on economic operators, especially small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs).
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Politics, policies, economics and law at a European level are becoming more important in a globalising world. So does the multilingual aggregator for EU-related blogs. There are now 669 Euroblogs, or blogs related to European Union (and Council of Europe) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
With regard to the economy, including the internal market, Barroso set the tone during the introduction:
Now is the time to modernise our social market economy so that it can compete globally and respond to the challenge of demography. Now is the time to make the right investments for our future.
The inter-related efforts, dealing with the economic crisis and governance, as well as restoring growth for jobs by accelerating the Europe 2020 (EU2020) reform agenda, were the first two major challenges Barroso mentioned out of five in all.
The 7 September 2010 speech in the European Parliament saw sound public finances as a means to an end: sustainable and inclusive growth for jobs. The aim of the Europe 2020 strategy is to get more people into jobs, boost the competitiveness of companies and deepen the single market.
Single Market Act
Barroso referred to the report by Mario Monti and he promised Commission proposals in October 2010 to deepen the internal market.
Barroso’s letter to the members of the European Parliament (MEMO/10/393) contained more detail about the draft Commission Work Programme (CWP) for 2011, to be adopted by the end of October.
After reminding the MEPs of the flagship initiatives of the EU2020 strategy, Barroso described the coming proposals to unlock the potential of the Single Market. The CWP 2011 will include:
- Measures to be set out in the Single Market Act
- A European framework of reference for contract law and action against the obstacles that businesses and citizens meet when trying to recover debt claims in other Member States. When access to capital is limited, rapid enforcement of claims is essential for the survival of businesses
- An assessment of progress on the development of roaming services
- Revised rules on the re-use of public sector information
- The conclusion of work on collective redress
- Defining how the EU can contribute to addressing the huge challenge of pension reform
Barroso also promised smart regulation, namely proposals to reduce the administrative burden on economic operators, especially small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs).
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Politics, policies, economics and law at a European level are becoming more important in a globalising world. So does the multilingual aggregator for EU-related blogs. There are now 669 Euroblogs, or blogs related to European Union (and Council of Europe) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Friday, 1 October 2010
To The European Citizen: The EUnion is behind us, we shall not be moved
Thoughtful, well reasoned and moderate, The European Citizen is a star among Euroblogs. The posts by Conor Slowey are a pleasure to read and instructive to boot, for those interested in the law and politics of the European Union.
Now there is a special reason to note The European Citizen, who in his blog entry Onward, Community Soldiers replied that the defunct “Community method” could be replaced by the “Union method” for co-decision under the Lisbon Treaty, perhaps opposed by the “Council method” or “Special method” for more intergovernmental forms of decision-making.
After I argued that the “Union method” would be a seamless and (politically) correct shift, but the “Federal method” a better description, The European Citizen returned with a pondered reply: Calling a spade a federal method.
He now proposes the “States’ method” for intergovernmental decision-making, but still favours the “Union method” as a replacement for the “Community method”:
The reason for my series of blog posts was that leading EU politicians, such as Herman Van Rompuy and Martin Schulz recently used the old term “Community method”, terminology central to European integration (not only ‘cosmetics’).
Slowey and I seem to be in agreement that a new term to reflect the Treaty of Lisbon is preferable, and our different preferences can be described as a matter of taste.
However, continuing the hymn-like headlines, I do not embrace Slowey’s argument that the choice of the “Federal method” is dictated by political ideology and aspiration, at least in my case (although I am a federalist). I see the term “federal” as a better, though wide, description of co-decision in the European Union, including the ordinary legislative procedure (default mode).
I don’t buy ‘ever closer union’ as a supportive argument either. All the Treaties have stated this phrase about the latest leg of the journey, while leaving the ultimate goal (finalité) undisclosed, but this is a slightly different issue. In addition, we have the various forms of intergovernmental decision-making, so “federal” describes only a part of the functioning of the European Union, not the whole.
A rhetorical question, if you like: Do you want a physician to offer a politically or clinically correct diagnosis?
Politicians and officials may, or may not, prefer politically correct terms, in order to evade sensitive issues, especially when the ‘liberum veto’ forces them to adopt the lowest common denominator, but I see no reason why researchers, teachers, students, practitioners or other free citizens should.
Ergo, at this stage I still prefer the “Federal system” to replace the antiquated “Community system”.
The “States’ system” can, in my view, be tested as a headline concept for more or less intergovernmental decisions relating to the EU.
Perhaps there are others in the EU related online community thinking about these tools of trade(?)
Ralf Grahn
Now there is a special reason to note The European Citizen, who in his blog entry Onward, Community Soldiers replied that the defunct “Community method” could be replaced by the “Union method” for co-decision under the Lisbon Treaty, perhaps opposed by the “Council method” or “Special method” for more intergovernmental forms of decision-making.
After I argued that the “Union method” would be a seamless and (politically) correct shift, but the “Federal method” a better description, The European Citizen returned with a pondered reply: Calling a spade a federal method.
He now proposes the “States’ method” for intergovernmental decision-making, but still favours the “Union method” as a replacement for the “Community method”:
It will probably be a matter of taste - who knows, the Community method label could survive for quite a while longer, and other different variations will probably surface. Avoiding "federal" may be a politically correct option, but I feel that if federal has been rejected from the Treaties in favour of "ever closer union", then adopting the f-word is a declaration of political ideology and aspiration, even if European law has a federal character. I have little problem with the term "federal method" in itself, but I'll stick with the (in my opinion) more neutral "Union method" and "States' method".
The reason for my series of blog posts was that leading EU politicians, such as Herman Van Rompuy and Martin Schulz recently used the old term “Community method”, terminology central to European integration (not only ‘cosmetics’).
Slowey and I seem to be in agreement that a new term to reflect the Treaty of Lisbon is preferable, and our different preferences can be described as a matter of taste.
However, continuing the hymn-like headlines, I do not embrace Slowey’s argument that the choice of the “Federal method” is dictated by political ideology and aspiration, at least in my case (although I am a federalist). I see the term “federal” as a better, though wide, description of co-decision in the European Union, including the ordinary legislative procedure (default mode).
I don’t buy ‘ever closer union’ as a supportive argument either. All the Treaties have stated this phrase about the latest leg of the journey, while leaving the ultimate goal (finalité) undisclosed, but this is a slightly different issue. In addition, we have the various forms of intergovernmental decision-making, so “federal” describes only a part of the functioning of the European Union, not the whole.
A rhetorical question, if you like: Do you want a physician to offer a politically or clinically correct diagnosis?
Politicians and officials may, or may not, prefer politically correct terms, in order to evade sensitive issues, especially when the ‘liberum veto’ forces them to adopt the lowest common denominator, but I see no reason why researchers, teachers, students, practitioners or other free citizens should.
Ergo, at this stage I still prefer the “Federal system” to replace the antiquated “Community system”.
The “States’ system” can, in my view, be tested as a headline concept for more or less intergovernmental decisions relating to the EU.
Perhaps there are others in the EU related online community thinking about these tools of trade(?)
Ralf Grahn
Thursday, 30 September 2010
EU: Union or federal method?
I have suggested that federal decision-making or the “federal method” could replace the obsolete “Community method”, when the European Commission proposes, the Council and the European Parliament jointly dispose, and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) interprets the acts and actions.
This far the only contribution regarding the ‘cosmetic part of the question’ I have seen is by The European Citizen, who suggests the use of the “Union method”, as opposed to the “Council method” or “Special method”.
Naturally, the “Union method” in an EU context cannot be wrong, because it takes into consideration the peculiarities of the European Union (‘sui generis’). It seamlessly marks the shift from the era of the various European Communities to the verbal monolith European Union.
My reason for putting forward the “federal method” was to describe one part of the European Union more bluntly for what it is, a federal system, using terms in general use around the world, even if there are many variations between different federal systems.
In my humble opinion, political correctness should not prevent us from describing the European Union as it is, though only in part.
‘Cosmetics’, especially make-up, has been used for thousands of years both to accentuate and to conceal. Political terms aren’t that different.
The Lisbon Treaty has created a ‘verbal monolith’, but structurally and operationally the European Union is still fragmented.
In my view, “intergovernmental” still covers the rest of the areas, from decisions (predominantly) by the European Council and the Council of the European Union (Council of Ministers) to agreements made between all or some EU member states as such.
How would Herman Van Rompuy, José Manuel Barroso, Yves Leterme and Didier Reynders and and Olivier Chastel (provisionally), Jerzy Buzek, Joseph Daul, Martin Schulz, Guy Verhofstadt, Daniel Cohn-Bendit and about 501 million other Europeans (including the readers of this blog) act as make-up artists in a European Union where the Lisbon Treaty is in force?
Union method or Federal method? Something else?
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Politics, policies, economics and law at a European level are becoming more important in a globalising world. So does the multilingual aggregator for EU related blogs. There are now 669 Euroblogs, or blogs related to European Union (and Council of Europe) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
This far the only contribution regarding the ‘cosmetic part of the question’ I have seen is by The European Citizen, who suggests the use of the “Union method”, as opposed to the “Council method” or “Special method”.
Naturally, the “Union method” in an EU context cannot be wrong, because it takes into consideration the peculiarities of the European Union (‘sui generis’). It seamlessly marks the shift from the era of the various European Communities to the verbal monolith European Union.
My reason for putting forward the “federal method” was to describe one part of the European Union more bluntly for what it is, a federal system, using terms in general use around the world, even if there are many variations between different federal systems.
In my humble opinion, political correctness should not prevent us from describing the European Union as it is, though only in part.
‘Cosmetics’, especially make-up, has been used for thousands of years both to accentuate and to conceal. Political terms aren’t that different.
The Lisbon Treaty has created a ‘verbal monolith’, but structurally and operationally the European Union is still fragmented.
In my view, “intergovernmental” still covers the rest of the areas, from decisions (predominantly) by the European Council and the Council of the European Union (Council of Ministers) to agreements made between all or some EU member states as such.
How would Herman Van Rompuy, José Manuel Barroso, Yves Leterme and Didier Reynders and and Olivier Chastel (provisionally), Jerzy Buzek, Joseph Daul, Martin Schulz, Guy Verhofstadt, Daniel Cohn-Bendit and about 501 million other Europeans (including the readers of this blog) act as make-up artists in a European Union where the Lisbon Treaty is in force?
Union method or Federal method? Something else?
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Politics, policies, economics and law at a European level are becoming more important in a globalising world. So does the multilingual aggregator for EU related blogs. There are now 669 Euroblogs, or blogs related to European Union (and Council of Europe) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Wednesday, 29 September 2010
Van Rompuy’s European Council: EU institution or workshop?
There is an interesting dichotomy between how president Herman Van Rompuy presents the European Council and how he tries to get this EU institution to meet the challenges facing Europe.
Earlier we have looked at his speeches plus some reports and reactions (here, here, here and here).
Official institution
The European Council had arguably been the most influential body of the European Union, the main responsible for the EU’s advances and shortcomings. However, the Treaty of Lisbon turned the European Council into an official EU institution and gave it a full time president.
The European Council consists of the heads of state or government of the member states. Its president (Herman Van Rompuy) and Commission president (José Manuel Barroso) are also members, although without a vote. The High Representative/Vice-President (Catherine Ashton) takes part in its work (Article 15 TEU).
Herman Van Rompuy has referred to the European Council as a now official institution of the European Union, not a “summit” like the G20 and others.
Officially, the main task of the European Council is – or at least, should be – to give the EU “impetus”, strategic guidelines and priorities. It does not exercise legislative functions, but it makes certain crucial decisions officially.
Workshop?
In practice, the role of the European Council as the most important official institution for “deep integration” benefiting 501 million citizens is in sharp contrast with its transparency standards way below those of a municipal board somewhere in the boondocks of my country.
In addition, the participants in the European Council meetings make unofficial and unrecorded ‘de facto’ decisions, which short-circuit public debate and decent standards of transparency, even if the formal decisions are later rubber-stamped by the Council (of Ministers).
The ‘official institution’ is almost as intergovernmental as it gets, and president Van Rompuy has been careful not to improve openness and accountability.
Instead, he tries team-building, by engaging the heads of state or government in more frequent informal strategy “workshops” to create “ownership” and improve outcomes.
There have been mixed responses to Van Rompuy’s idea to hold frequent meetings. National political leaders feel important and are busy, and media have commented on lack of preparation, thin agendas and empty conclusions.
Strategy processes and “ownership” require time and effort, but they ill fit the ‘official institution’ role or outside expectations.
The latest European Council meeting was hijacked by a tempestuous Nicolas Sarkozy, so we remain in the dark with regard to Van Rompuy’s effort to infuse team spirit.
Questions
The conflicting roles and expectations leave us with some important questions.
What kind of a European Council do we need to tackle Europe’s main challenges?
How much can an official institution, especially the most influential one, dispense with decent standards of transparency, open debate and accountability?
If Van Rompuy’s vision is correct, are the national leaders willing to be guided even by the chair they selected themselves?
Ralf Grahn
P.S. The multilingual aggregator for EU related blogs keeps growing. There are now 669 Euroblogs, or blogs related to EU (and CoE) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Earlier we have looked at his speeches plus some reports and reactions (here, here, here and here).
Official institution
The European Council had arguably been the most influential body of the European Union, the main responsible for the EU’s advances and shortcomings. However, the Treaty of Lisbon turned the European Council into an official EU institution and gave it a full time president.
The European Council consists of the heads of state or government of the member states. Its president (Herman Van Rompuy) and Commission president (José Manuel Barroso) are also members, although without a vote. The High Representative/Vice-President (Catherine Ashton) takes part in its work (Article 15 TEU).
Herman Van Rompuy has referred to the European Council as a now official institution of the European Union, not a “summit” like the G20 and others.
Officially, the main task of the European Council is – or at least, should be – to give the EU “impetus”, strategic guidelines and priorities. It does not exercise legislative functions, but it makes certain crucial decisions officially.
Workshop?
In practice, the role of the European Council as the most important official institution for “deep integration” benefiting 501 million citizens is in sharp contrast with its transparency standards way below those of a municipal board somewhere in the boondocks of my country.
In addition, the participants in the European Council meetings make unofficial and unrecorded ‘de facto’ decisions, which short-circuit public debate and decent standards of transparency, even if the formal decisions are later rubber-stamped by the Council (of Ministers).
The ‘official institution’ is almost as intergovernmental as it gets, and president Van Rompuy has been careful not to improve openness and accountability.
Instead, he tries team-building, by engaging the heads of state or government in more frequent informal strategy “workshops” to create “ownership” and improve outcomes.
There have been mixed responses to Van Rompuy’s idea to hold frequent meetings. National political leaders feel important and are busy, and media have commented on lack of preparation, thin agendas and empty conclusions.
Strategy processes and “ownership” require time and effort, but they ill fit the ‘official institution’ role or outside expectations.
The latest European Council meeting was hijacked by a tempestuous Nicolas Sarkozy, so we remain in the dark with regard to Van Rompuy’s effort to infuse team spirit.
Questions
The conflicting roles and expectations leave us with some important questions.
What kind of a European Council do we need to tackle Europe’s main challenges?
How much can an official institution, especially the most influential one, dispense with decent standards of transparency, open debate and accountability?
If Van Rompuy’s vision is correct, are the national leaders willing to be guided even by the chair they selected themselves?
Ralf Grahn
P.S. The multilingual aggregator for EU related blogs keeps growing. There are now 669 Euroblogs, or blogs related to EU (and CoE) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Tuesday, 28 September 2010
EU politics and law: Part federation, part something else? What?
Yesterday’s blog post “EU politics and law: “Community method” dead and reburied – What instead?” found that the European Union has “parliamentary” traits, but because of the structure of the EU it still feels artificial to try to cram even co-decision (the ordinary legislative procedure) under such a heading, now that the term “Community method” is obsolete.
I still hope for teachers, researchers and students of European Union politics and law, as well as others, to offer their views, but in the meanwhile I will continue the soliloqui.
Federal?
By the structure of the European Union I mean that its powers are basically derived from its constituent parts, the member states, not from the people, although democracy is one of the founding values of the EU (Article 2 TEU) and the functioning of the union is said to be founded on representative democracy (Article 10 TEU).
When the directly elected European Parliament acts at eyelevel with the Council, we can describe the system and the decision making as federal, although the term seems to lack precision.
Should we try that: federal decision making or the federal method?
Does it satisfy sense and sensibility?
What about the rest?
If part of EU decision making is described as federal, we are still left with a few problems.
Are we to exclude the term “federal” when we discuss EU politics, policies or issues, where the European Parliament plays a lesser role than the governments of the member states?
I have a hard time imagining that a 21st century political system in Europe could be called federal, if not also democratic: based on legitimate representative democracy at federal level (with powers at least equal to those of the states).
This leaves outside a number of matters on a sliding scale of intergovernmentalism, from more limited participation by the European Parliament and the Commission to inexistent.
On the flip side of the coin, there are special legislative procedures where the European Council and the Council decide as EU institutions, within the EU framework and its powers (competences), but in principle everything outside the attributed powers is left to purely intergovernmental decisions.
Actually, the existential questions for the European Union are in the hands of the member states, each of them sovereign enough on its own to prevent a decision (liberum veto). Only unanimous agreement by all governments (possibly requiring ratification by all parliaments, or even some national electorates) can reform the structures and powers.
This means that the future development of the European Union could be held hostage by first the government, then the parliament and possibly (if national constitutional requirements so say) the voters as well, even in the smallest member state; at present Malta with about 416,000 people, something like 0.083 per cent of the total EU population of 501 million. Big or small, is this legitimate?
Despite my reticence, should anything on this sliding scale of intergovernmental decision making be included under the concept “federal”?
If not federal, which terms should we employ for the various modes?
Intergovernmental? Confederal? International?
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments keeps skyrocketing. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your valued comment appears.
It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across linguistic and national borders. We can link to blogs and other sources in foreign languages and share different viewpoints with our readers, perhaps explaining the gist of the arguments.
Another opportunity is to invite comments in different languages, those we are able to read or by using machine translation to understand the essentials.
Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:
I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.
I still hope for teachers, researchers and students of European Union politics and law, as well as others, to offer their views, but in the meanwhile I will continue the soliloqui.
Federal?
By the structure of the European Union I mean that its powers are basically derived from its constituent parts, the member states, not from the people, although democracy is one of the founding values of the EU (Article 2 TEU) and the functioning of the union is said to be founded on representative democracy (Article 10 TEU).
When the directly elected European Parliament acts at eyelevel with the Council, we can describe the system and the decision making as federal, although the term seems to lack precision.
Should we try that: federal decision making or the federal method?
Does it satisfy sense and sensibility?
What about the rest?
If part of EU decision making is described as federal, we are still left with a few problems.
Are we to exclude the term “federal” when we discuss EU politics, policies or issues, where the European Parliament plays a lesser role than the governments of the member states?
I have a hard time imagining that a 21st century political system in Europe could be called federal, if not also democratic: based on legitimate representative democracy at federal level (with powers at least equal to those of the states).
This leaves outside a number of matters on a sliding scale of intergovernmentalism, from more limited participation by the European Parliament and the Commission to inexistent.
On the flip side of the coin, there are special legislative procedures where the European Council and the Council decide as EU institutions, within the EU framework and its powers (competences), but in principle everything outside the attributed powers is left to purely intergovernmental decisions.
Actually, the existential questions for the European Union are in the hands of the member states, each of them sovereign enough on its own to prevent a decision (liberum veto). Only unanimous agreement by all governments (possibly requiring ratification by all parliaments, or even some national electorates) can reform the structures and powers.
This means that the future development of the European Union could be held hostage by first the government, then the parliament and possibly (if national constitutional requirements so say) the voters as well, even in the smallest member state; at present Malta with about 416,000 people, something like 0.083 per cent of the total EU population of 501 million. Big or small, is this legitimate?
Despite my reticence, should anything on this sliding scale of intergovernmental decision making be included under the concept “federal”?
If not federal, which terms should we employ for the various modes?
Intergovernmental? Confederal? International?
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments keeps skyrocketing. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your valued comment appears.
It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across linguistic and national borders. We can link to blogs and other sources in foreign languages and share different viewpoints with our readers, perhaps explaining the gist of the arguments.
Another opportunity is to invite comments in different languages, those we are able to read or by using machine translation to understand the essentials.
Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:
I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.
Monday, 27 September 2010
EU politics and law: “Community method” dead and reburied – What instead?
Almost two decades ago, from 1 November 1993, the Treaty on European Union (TEU; Maastricht Treaty, 1992) established the European Union (EU) as the overall term and as the framework for intergovernmental second pillar foreign and security policy, as well as third pillar justice and home affairs.
However, the European Community (EC) carried on the activities of the European Economic Community (EEC), and these manifold policy areas were lumped together under the so called first pillar.
Only the 2007 Treaty of Lisbon sent the European Community to kingdom come, when the reform treaty entered into force on 1 December 2009. The pillar structure was formally abolished, although many intergovernmental traits remain, under two distinct Treaties.
Therefore, the easy part was the Coroner’s renewed verdict on the death of the EC and ordering the reburial, when leading EU politicians had recently exhumed the body of the “Community method”, which had become a historical term. This was done in the blog post “EU: Community method RIP – or a stake through its heart!” (25 September 2010), because the first pronouncement had not been heeded.
Now the more difficult part remains. We need to settle the succession and we need a Baptist for the newborn.
At present, we have only the European Union, as in the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). What should we call the process when the Commission proposes and the Council and the European Parliament jointly dispose?
Officially, we have the “ordinary legislative procedure”, which can be boiled down to “EU legislation” or “EU lawmaking” in everyday speech.
But the scope of decisions and processes is wider (formally: regulations, directives, decisions, recommendations and opinions; Article 288 TFEU). There are budgetary issues and a host of administrative matters, such as plans, reports, duties to inform, comitology procedures and scrutiny processes.
There is need for a wider, more political term.
The directly elected European Parliament represents the citizens of the European Union and the Council represents the (special interests of the) member states. When the EP and the Council decide on an equal basis, on a proposal from the Commission (duty bound to promote the general interest), they act as a first chamber and a second chamber of representatives in a federal system.
Should we stretch the term “parliamentary” to encompass at least this part of the EU political system?
The president of the Commission is, in practice, appointed by the European Council, although taking into account the elections to the European Parliament. Formally, the candidate is elected by the European Parliament, even if I consider the term “elected” in Article 17(7) TEU to be a misnomer for the right of refusal.
The other members of the Commission are, effectively, nominated by the governments of the member states, although by common accord with the president-elect. The Commission as a body needs the consent of the EP and it can be deposed by a vote of censure.
In other words, there are elements of normal parliamentary political accountability in play, but not rule by a simple majority in Parliament.
Where the Commission makes formal proposals, it is difficult for the EP and the Council to vote them down or amend them, if the Commission does not change its opinion. (In intergovernmental matters the role of the Commission varies from recommendations to almost non-existent.)
Does this mean that we have to discard the “parliamentary method” as well? If the EU is ‘sui generis’ enough to escape existing terms in this respect as well, which concept should we adopt to replace the outdated “Community method”?
Are you going to be our Baptist? How would you name the baby?
Your help is needed.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. The multilingual aggregator for EU related blogs keeps growing. There are now 668 Euroblogs, or blogs related to EU (and CoE) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not keep informed by reading about European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
However, the European Community (EC) carried on the activities of the European Economic Community (EEC), and these manifold policy areas were lumped together under the so called first pillar.
Only the 2007 Treaty of Lisbon sent the European Community to kingdom come, when the reform treaty entered into force on 1 December 2009. The pillar structure was formally abolished, although many intergovernmental traits remain, under two distinct Treaties.
Therefore, the easy part was the Coroner’s renewed verdict on the death of the EC and ordering the reburial, when leading EU politicians had recently exhumed the body of the “Community method”, which had become a historical term. This was done in the blog post “EU: Community method RIP – or a stake through its heart!” (25 September 2010), because the first pronouncement had not been heeded.
Now the more difficult part remains. We need to settle the succession and we need a Baptist for the newborn.
At present, we have only the European Union, as in the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). What should we call the process when the Commission proposes and the Council and the European Parliament jointly dispose?
Officially, we have the “ordinary legislative procedure”, which can be boiled down to “EU legislation” or “EU lawmaking” in everyday speech.
But the scope of decisions and processes is wider (formally: regulations, directives, decisions, recommendations and opinions; Article 288 TFEU). There are budgetary issues and a host of administrative matters, such as plans, reports, duties to inform, comitology procedures and scrutiny processes.
There is need for a wider, more political term.
The directly elected European Parliament represents the citizens of the European Union and the Council represents the (special interests of the) member states. When the EP and the Council decide on an equal basis, on a proposal from the Commission (duty bound to promote the general interest), they act as a first chamber and a second chamber of representatives in a federal system.
Should we stretch the term “parliamentary” to encompass at least this part of the EU political system?
The president of the Commission is, in practice, appointed by the European Council, although taking into account the elections to the European Parliament. Formally, the candidate is elected by the European Parliament, even if I consider the term “elected” in Article 17(7) TEU to be a misnomer for the right of refusal.
The other members of the Commission are, effectively, nominated by the governments of the member states, although by common accord with the president-elect. The Commission as a body needs the consent of the EP and it can be deposed by a vote of censure.
In other words, there are elements of normal parliamentary political accountability in play, but not rule by a simple majority in Parliament.
Where the Commission makes formal proposals, it is difficult for the EP and the Council to vote them down or amend them, if the Commission does not change its opinion. (In intergovernmental matters the role of the Commission varies from recommendations to almost non-existent.)
Does this mean that we have to discard the “parliamentary method” as well? If the EU is ‘sui generis’ enough to escape existing terms in this respect as well, which concept should we adopt to replace the outdated “Community method”?
Are you going to be our Baptist? How would you name the baby?
Your help is needed.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. The multilingual aggregator for EU related blogs keeps growing. There are now 668 Euroblogs, or blogs related to EU (and CoE) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.
Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not keep informed by reading about European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Sunday, 26 September 2010
Blogging in tongues
The bridge between the ‘Biblical’ headline and the Day of Multilingual Blogging is finding the key to a richer life.
Day of Multilingual Blogging
At a deeper level the aims of the Day of Multilingual Blogging are to promote language education and to entice you to learn a foreign language and to explore other cultures. The practical objective is to motivate you to write a blog post this Sunday, 26 September 2010, in another language than your mother tongue.
Facebook
You can find more information on the Facebook page, and there you can link to your blog entry.
Twitter #babel
You can announce your contribution under the Twitter hashtag #babel, or you can post a short message if a full blog post feels too laborious.
Open 26 September 2010
The Day of Multilingual Blogging takes place on the Internet, and it is open to all netizens and languages. In real life, it is arranged by the European Commission representation in the United Kingdom. Therefore, most of the information is in English, so spreading the word in other languages is much appreciated.
Bloggingportal.eu
Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator for EU related blogs, has joined the event, as have many bloggers in Europe and beyond. (See the confirmed and possible participants on the Facebook page.)
There are now 668 Euroblogs listed on growing Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or following the entries highlighted by the editors. You can also subscribe to the streams and the newsletters without cost.
By the way, Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors to tag posts according to subjects. Why not keep informed by reading about European affairs, improve your language skills daily and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Grahnlaw and sister blogs
I have written about the event earlier. My latest Grahnlaw blog post on the subject appeared yesterday: ”Brush up your Shakespeare, Goethe, Molière, Dante, Cervantes or whoever: Day of Multilingual Blogging” (with links to entries with suggestions).
Today I have posted in Finnish on Eurooppaoikeus “Kielillä bloggaamaan” and in Swedish on Grahnblawg “Tungomålsbloggande”, both posts with ‘blogging in tongues’ connotations.
Give it a shot - try blogging in tongues!
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments keeps skyrocketing. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your valued comment appears.
It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across borders and between linguistic communities. We can link to blogs and other sources in foreign languages and share different viewpoints with our readers, perhaps explaining the gist of the arguments.
Another opportunity is to invite comments in different languages, those we are able to read or by using machine translation to understand the essentials.
Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:
I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.
Day of Multilingual Blogging
At a deeper level the aims of the Day of Multilingual Blogging are to promote language education and to entice you to learn a foreign language and to explore other cultures. The practical objective is to motivate you to write a blog post this Sunday, 26 September 2010, in another language than your mother tongue.
You can find more information on the Facebook page, and there you can link to your blog entry.
Twitter #babel
You can announce your contribution under the Twitter hashtag #babel, or you can post a short message if a full blog post feels too laborious.
Open 26 September 2010
The Day of Multilingual Blogging takes place on the Internet, and it is open to all netizens and languages. In real life, it is arranged by the European Commission representation in the United Kingdom. Therefore, most of the information is in English, so spreading the word in other languages is much appreciated.
Bloggingportal.eu
Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator for EU related blogs, has joined the event, as have many bloggers in Europe and beyond. (See the confirmed and possible participants on the Facebook page.)
There are now 668 Euroblogs listed on growing Bloggingportal.eu. You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or following the entries highlighted by the editors. You can also subscribe to the streams and the newsletters without cost.
By the way, Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors to tag posts according to subjects. Why not keep informed by reading about European affairs, improve your language skills daily and do something useful by joining the team of editors?
Grahnlaw and sister blogs
I have written about the event earlier. My latest Grahnlaw blog post on the subject appeared yesterday: ”Brush up your Shakespeare, Goethe, Molière, Dante, Cervantes or whoever: Day of Multilingual Blogging” (with links to entries with suggestions).
Today I have posted in Finnish on Eurooppaoikeus “Kielillä bloggaamaan” and in Swedish on Grahnblawg “Tungomålsbloggande”, both posts with ‘blogging in tongues’ connotations.
Give it a shot - try blogging in tongues!
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments keeps skyrocketing. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your valued comment appears.
It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across borders and between linguistic communities. We can link to blogs and other sources in foreign languages and share different viewpoints with our readers, perhaps explaining the gist of the arguments.
Another opportunity is to invite comments in different languages, those we are able to read or by using machine translation to understand the essentials.
Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:
I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.
Saturday, 25 September 2010
Brush up your Shakespeare, Goethe, Molière, Dante, Cervantes or whoever: Day of Multilingual Blogging
Yes, brush up your Shakespeare, Goethe, Molière, Dante, Cervantes or whoever, or start learning a new language.
Tomorrow, Sunday 26 September 2010, people all over Europe celebrate the European Day of Languages, organised by the Council of Europe and the European Union as an inspiration to language learning.
For bloggers in Europe there is a special event on the Internet tomorrow: the Day of Multilingual Blogging. The blog post behind the link offers some suggestions how you can participate, as well as information about the event, the Facebook page and the Twitter hashtag #babel. Because the event is arranged by the Commission Representation in London, and the information is in English, it is especially important that bloggers spread the word in other languages too.
For a richer life, knock aside a few linguistic or national borders and join the blogging carnival!
Ralf Grahn
Tomorrow, Sunday 26 September 2010, people all over Europe celebrate the European Day of Languages, organised by the Council of Europe and the European Union as an inspiration to language learning.
For bloggers in Europe there is a special event on the Internet tomorrow: the Day of Multilingual Blogging. The blog post behind the link offers some suggestions how you can participate, as well as information about the event, the Facebook page and the Twitter hashtag #babel. Because the event is arranged by the Commission Representation in London, and the information is in English, it is especially important that bloggers spread the word in other languages too.
For a richer life, knock aside a few linguistic or national borders and join the blogging carnival!
Ralf Grahn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To Grahnlaw
Posts
All Comments
