You are currently browsing the category archive for the 'EU borders' category.
As Ireland’s second vote on the Lisbon Treaty nears, concesssions won by the Irish government coupled with a resurgent civil society ‘yes’ movement could see the ‘No to Lisbon’ camp face an uphill struggle in the coming weeks
Source: EurActive [edited]
As Ireland’s second vote on the Lisbon Treaty nears, concesssions won by the Irish government coupled with a resurgent civil society ‘yes’ movement could see the ‘No to Lisbon’ camp face an uphill struggle in the coming weeks, experts told EurActiv.
Background:
Ireland rejected the Lisbon Treaty in a referendum in June 2008, effectively stalling the reforms contained in the treaty and causing widespread consternation among European politicians.
Following the result of the referendum, the Irish government conducted detailed research into why the public voted against the treaty and found concerns over military neutrality, the potential impact on Ireland’s corporate tax rates, workers’ rights and ethical issues related to the position of the family and abortion. Question marks over whether Ireland would lose its European commissioner were also said to be of concern.
Leaders meeting in Brussels in December 2008 agreed to find a legally-binding solution to clear up confusion over how the treaty would affect Ireland in the hope that this would allow a second referendum.
Following June’s European elections, where only one of Ireland’s 12 MEPs was elected on an anti-Lisbon platform, EU leaders reached a compromise in offering Ireland legally-binding guarantees on the Lisbon Treaty without requiring other countries to re-ratify the text.
The Irish government set Friday 2 October as the date for the second referendum.
There is a precedent for Ireland having a second vote on a European treaty, as two referenda were required to pass the Nice Treaty.
With the second referendum six weeks away, both pro and anti-Lisbon campaigns are grinding into gear.
While many of the 2008 arguments from both sides are being re-circulated this time around, experts told EurActiv that the political backdrop to this year’s referendum is profoundly different to that of last year.
According to the sources, who did not wish to be named given the politically sensitive nature of the current debates, many of the grounds for argument raised by the ‘no’ camp in 2008 are no longer in play, given that the guarantees and concessions granted to Ireland by EU leaders appear to have assuaged many of the fears expressed by Irish ‘no’ voters last June.
As a result, they indicated, the ‘no’ campaign could face an ‘uphill struggle’ to recreate its 2008 success.
Given the changed context, the ‘no’ camp will largely have to base its arguments on issues they feel have not been addressed by the EU guarantees, using, in particular, workers’ rights as a spearhead for its campaign.
Indeed, the combined ‘no’ campaign was launched earlier this week with a warning that the treaty would leave workers worse off and more exposed to spending cuts.
A profoundly undemocratic document, says ‘no’ camp
Speaking at the launch, Ireland’s sole anti-Lisbon MEP, Socialist Joe Higgins, argued that the Lisbon Treaty “is a profoundly undemocratic document, which seeks to turn right-wing economic policies into the only show in town”.
According to the MEP, if Lisbon is passed, “the EU Commission would uphold the right of big business to profit from public services, over and above the rights of workers to take action to defend these services”.
However, Andrew Byrne, Chief of Operations for pro-Lisbon advocacy group Ireland for Europe, dismissed the ‘no’ camp’s claims, arguing that its “scattergun approach” continues to falsely portray Lisbon as part of a “neoliberal economic agenda”.
According to Byrne, the ‘no side’ “will continue to misrepresent and distort the truth, playing on peoples’ fears and anxieties”.
Groundswell of groups adds legitimacy to ‘yes’ camp
But pro-Lisbon Byrne believes that despite what he sees as the fear-mongering on the ‘no’ side, the emergence of a plethora of civil society ‘yes’ bodies are giving a stronger legitimacy to the overall pro-Lisbon campaign.
“You only have to look at the number of groups out there to see that there is a groundswell of people who are not part of the normal political scene, who care about the future of the country and feel that Lisbon is a big part of that,” he said.
This “shows that there are people throughout Ireland who feel this issue is too important to leave to politicians and traditional groups”.
Byrne argued that the proliferation of civil society ‘yes’ groups “takes the wind out of the ‘no’ camp’s sails”, in that “it doesn’t allow the ‘no’ groups to paint Lisbon as merely an ambition of the political establishment”.
“We’re making the point to people that there is a new deal on the table and their concerns have been addressed. The loss of the Commissioner, for example, was a huge concern to people,” said Byrne.
The Ireland for Europe representative concluded that in his opinion, the ‘no’ camp is weaker this time around, but urged against “complacency,” among pro-Lisbon activists, arguing that all groups should remain active on the ground until the referendum.
Boris Johnson: If you do the philosophy as well, it gives you a huge understanding of the origins of European civilization.
Source: Festival Latin Grec [edited]
This interview was done in April 2009, for our “Job’s Corner” by Olivier Coen (Anarès) and Elizabeth Antébi, writer, historian et creator of the Festival.
EA: It’s almost the First Anniversary of your election as Mayor of London. At that time, do you remember what your father said, that he who can master Demosthenes and knows Pericles can master a city like London? What would you say, one year after, about that?
BJ: I have no reason to depart from that opinion, it’s absolutely true ! I spent myself almost twenty years, well, I cannot remember exactly how much, anyway Latin and Greek was the bedrock of my own education. I think, it’s invaluable. It teaches you about Civilisation, about Politics, about Democratic participation and all sorts of difficulties that leaders encounter.
EA: We try to convince parents and children that Latin and Greek can really help you to be able to work better, to find a job and construct a career. What would you think of it ?
BJ: I think it’s a fantastic mental training, because to do Latin and Greek properly requires a great deal of intellectual discipline – you have to understand the grammar and you have got to fit all together, and it teaches you obviously how to think, how to think straight. If you do the philosophy as well, it gives you a huge understanding of the origins of European civilization. So I thoroughly encourage everybody to do it, but don’t bubble … don’t think you can just do it without learning Latin and Greek, you must learn the languages.
EA: Some parents think that it is more useful to speak Chinese ?
BJ: Absolute nonsense ! And there is an increasing school of Chinese studies of Latin and Greek and quite right too. Because Latin and Greek, Latin in particular of course, is the origin of so many other Romance languages around the world. If you read Latin you can pick up a newspaper across Latin America, across much of Europe, and you can more or less understand what is being written and it is invaluable too. Of course, it’s true that Chinese is an important language to learn. But English is the language of global capitalism and I would thoroughly recommend that people study Latin and Greek and English.
EA: In the East, there are many Web sites speaking Latin for the news in particular, in Finland, in Germany …
BJ: Let me make a point to you. We have a huge issue in Europe today. And it’s a great feeling that this continent, this city was founded by the Romans. And nobody feels the sense of European unity, that they used to under the Roman Empire, do they ? And it seems to be that one way we can inspire that again, will be to encourage every people in Europe to learn Latin. Because when the Roman Empire existed and when Europe was genuinely united, everybody studied the same texts. And every child could read the story of Dido and Aeneas and could recite it, but it’s no longer true. But if they read it again and if only it was common curriculum of every European country, then once again you would have a sense of collective cultural heritage.
EA: Well, as a political man, when you are looking at Iran, do you think of Xenophon ? When looking at Egypt of Herodotus ? When you see peace in Europe of Aristophanes?
BJ: I do, of course I do ! And I see the huge continuity between the Ancient world and the Modern world. And if you go to Athens, what’s so astonishing is the linguistic continuity : you can pick up “Tachidromos” or any newspaper, and you can read it! It’s the language of Pericles ! It is the same script, the words are the same. And if you go to Egypt, it’s absolutely true, you can see the same Pyramids that Herodotus saw, you can see the same Sphynx that Herodotus saw, you can buy the same souvenirs, and you can be ripped off exactly the same way by the same guides.
EA: For the children, could it be a key to the world ? You said once that against the “culture” (if it is a culture) of knives, the best thing would be to teach Latin and Greek in all the schools ?
BJ: I never said that: journalists make things up. But, it’s true ! I mean it’s certainly true that one of the things you can do is to give better education; one of the things that I find sad about education in Britain is that we have such a restricted number of schools that actually offer Latin and Greek. I’d like to expand it, that’s one of the reasons we are having seminars here, in City Hall, to encourage it.
UK Election Day : 4 June 2009
About the author : Emily Robinson is Research and Publications Officer at Unlock Democracy and has previously worked at the New Local Government Network and the Institute for Public Policy Research. Her publications include My Election: A Voters’ Eye View of the 2007 Scottish Elections (with Patrick Casey, Unlock Democracy, forthcoming); General Election 2005: What the Voters Saw (with Justin Fisher, New Politics Network, 2005); Living with Regions: Making Multi-level Governance Work (NLGN, 2004) and The Benefits of Community Engagement (with Ben Rogers, ippr/Home Office, 2004). Emily is also the series editor of New Politics, Unlock Democracy’s regular discussion paper.
Source: UnlockDemocracy.org [edited]
Author: Emily Robinson
British Citizens and the European Union : Findings from a deliberative process
Britain’s relationship with the European Union excites a great deal of emotion. It is a staple of the tabloid press and one of the few political topics that is regularly discussed in pubs and offices. However, this does not necessarily mean that we know much about the EU or how it works.
British citizens are less confident that they know about the EU’s policies and institutions than the people in any other member state, except Hungary. In a Eurobarometer poll conducted in Autumn 2005, only 46% of British respondents were aware of the UK’s Presidency of the EU and MORI research found that 82% of those
polled do not feel they have enough information to make an informed decision on whether or not to adopt the Constitutional Treaty.
Lack of knowledge leaves us vulnerable to misinformation and myth-creation. This is worrying, not only because it leads to frustration and alienation but also because political parties shape their policies on Europe according to what they believe the public will accept. If the public do not have enough information to engage in a serious debate about the future of the European Union and our relationship to it, then it is likely that our policies will be unsound.
This project was designed to gauge informed public opinion on Europe. We wanted to find out what citizens would think when all the information had been presented to them.
…
The [research] highlighted a sense of unease about the way that the European Union is governed. Even the most Europhilic panellists complained about a lack of democracy, transparency and accountability.
The panellists felt very strongly that, as the only directly elected body, the European Parliament should be at the centre of European decision making. It was also suggested that the Commission should be made in some way accountable to the Parliament. Important steps to enhance the transparency and accountability of European procedures could be taken at the national level. For instance, it was suggested that British members of the Council of Ministers should have to report back to Parliament and that the House of Commons Select Committee on Europe should meet in public. We think these are both important proposals, which would place Europe more clearly in our existing democratic framework and create a new layer of accountability.
Another problem identified by many of the panellists was a lack of reliable accessible information about the EU and its activities. This was seen to be partly a problem with the information made available by the European institutions, but also the result of a lack of media interest in the workings of the EU. It was suggested that the broadcast and print media should cover the European Parliament in the same way as Westminster.
Download the full report here: http://www.unlockdemocracy.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/british-citizens-and-the-european-union.pdf
The European Parliament is the only directly-elected body of the European Union. The Members of the European Parliament are there to represent you, the citizen. The European Parliament channel offers you insights into the parliament´s work and show you which of our activities and decisions affect your daily life.
You are invited to be informed and also create awareness for the upcoming elections as well as to interact with others from all European countries.
Visit http://www.youtube.com/user/EuropeanParliament
Users can look up MEPs' individual voting records or access voting data according to nationality or political group affiliation.
Source: EurActiv [edited]
Citizens will be able to track the voting records of their MEPs ahead of next elections following the launch of a new website making such details easily accessible to the public. VoteWatch.eu was developed by political scientists from the London School of Economics (LSE) and the Free University of Brussels (ULB). Those involved include Sara Hagemann of the European Policy Centre, a Brussels-based think-tank, LSE professor Simon Hix, Doru Frantescu of the Qvorum Institute in Bucharest and Adbul G. Noury, associate professor of economics at ULB.
VoteWatch.eu is described as a “not-for-profit organisation” supported by the Open Society Institute, an NGO, Burson Marsteller, a consultancy, and Electionmall.com. The VoteWatch.eu project – which seeks to boost the transparency of EU decision-making and improve the quality of debate – collates publicly available attendance, voting and activity data on MEPs on a single, searchable portal.
The project “provides detailed information about parliamentarians’ voting records and formal political activities – from committee work to parliamentary reports – and includes easy-to-access information on the political coalitions that are formed around policy issues,” reads a statement on the website. “We’re not campaign-oriented, party-political, or receiving any money from the EU institutions or government organisations,” explained project leader Sara Hagemann of the European Policy Centre (EPC), a Brussels-based think-tank. “All the info is publicly available, but it’s difficult to find. We’ve collated it all,” she said.
Users can look up MEPs’ individual voting records or access voting data according to nationality or political group affiliation. The search tool allows users to identify whether an MEP voted with or against his or her government or political group’s line on a particular issue.
“Cohesion scores” displayed alongside the results allow for comparisons with members’ previous votes on similar issues or alignment with the party line, allowing users to track how the positions of their MEP or a political group have evolved over the years. “There are shifting coalitions in the European Parliament, just like the shifting coalitions in the US Congress,” said Simon Hix of the London School of Economics, another of the site’s developers.
‘No naming and shaming’
The information on VoteWatch.eu is purely objective. “This is not a naming-and-shaming site, and I think it’ll be difficult to use the site for this. It is not subject to any editorial manipulation. It means people can now use the information that the Parliament is providing. Before, this was not the case.” One drawback of the website is that it can only track roll-call votes, and not electronic or show-of-hands ones. “But all the most important votes, and all those that involve lobbying, are roll-call,” Hix said.
Site ‘must not hide’ EU institutions’ failings
But EU Ombudsman P. Nikiforos Diamandouros warned that the initiative must not be allowed to hide the European Parliament’s own communication troubles, and especially not those of the Council. “Citizens will not be satisfied until all legislative deliberation is made public,” said Diamandouros, expressing his belief that with the upcoming Swedish EU Presidency committed to improving transparency, the issue is “likely to acquire even more importance in the years to come”. .
Hailing the launch of the tool, EU Ombudsman P. Nikiforos Diamandouros said the best way of increasing trust in the Union was to improve transparency of decision-making. “Lack of transparency in the legislative process, alongside difficulties in accessing documents, is by far the most common complaint I hear from citizens,” he said. “Transparency did not feature highly on the EU agenda until recently, but it’s at the forefront now. The Access to Documents Regulation was a key landmark, because it made openness the rule and secrecy the exception. But the situation is still far from perfect,” Diamandouros said.
EU election and voting links released by JMECE Lab
JMECE Lab presents a selection of online sources aiming to share European Elections 2009 campaing onlne links and other useful EU websites. To access the publication, click here or download it from here http://www.box.net/shared/jbng3vkpk8
Sarkozy proposed to create a large joint economic area, noting that a similar concept might work to bind Russia closer to the EU.
Source: EuroActiv [edited]
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has strongly rejected German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s idea of a “privileged partnership” between the EU and Turkey, saying his country would not accept any alternative to full membership of the European Union.
Speaking at a gathering of young conservatives on 10 May, Merkel said it does not make sense for the EU to continuously expand if it leaves the Union unable to operate. She added that she would prefer Turkey to receive a privileged partnership from the EU, rather than full membership, echoing recent comments made by French President Nicolas Sarkozy at the launch of his EU election campaign (EurActiv 8/05/09).
At the same meeting, Sarkozy told German newspaper Bild am Sonntag: “We need a well-organised Europe [...] That means we cannot expand without borders. We shouldn’t make any empty promises to Turkey.” As an alternative, Sarkozy proposed to create a large joint economic area, noting that a similar concept might work to bind Russia closer to the EU.
The Turkish press expressed widespread dismay at the statements, made by the two EU leaders during a young CDU (Christian-Democrats) activists’ event. The daily Milliyet wrote that “Merkel has officially shocked Turkey”. Before being elected president in May 2007, Sarkozy frequently spoke out against Turkey’s EU accession, but softened his stance after his election (EurActiv 28/08/07). In the case of Germany, Merkel’s unfavourable view of Ankara’s accession is tempered by the more positive attitude of her foreign minister and Social Democratic coalition partner Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
The French press, for its part, interpreted Merkel’s statements as a veiled attack on the UK Conservative party. “Those who refuse the Lisbon Treaty – which would allow us to work better and to take aboard new members – but who still talk about enlargement, we refuse to shake their hand,” the AFP agency quoted Merkel as saying.
The agency quotes an unidentified member of the French government as saying that Merkel was referring to the Conservative party led by David Cameron. The Eurosceptic tone adopted by the British Conservatives, who decided to leave the centre-right European People’s Party, is “worrying” Paris and Berlin, the source added.
Petition for the Prime Minister to inform all citizens and residents to vote in the European Elections on 4 June 09.
Source: Nath Henry
It is the Government’s duty to communicate the importance of these fast-approaching, and largely invisible, elections to all voters. The European Parliament is responsible with the Council of Ministers for passing legislation that affects us all. The Government is represented in the Council of Ministers. It is its job to inform us what it does and how important the European elections are for making the EU accountable to its citizens.
Thank you for adding your name online if you would like to support the petition.
Nath Henry
SIGN IT HERE: http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Date4Europe/
European Health Insurance Card
Protection Of Cultural Heritage
Human rights throughout the world
Recent Comments