It's red-red for Berlin

Wowi decides he'd like to continue the coalition with the PDS - große Koalition (grand coalition) between the CDU and the SPD in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania.

Preliminary talks have ended and negotiations are about to begin, but these should be a 'Formsache' in both cases.

The result in Mecklenburg is the only good one, the result in Berlin regrettable. It would have been better to have a red-green coalition, which would have been a coalition of two winners, and would govern more on the centre. Also, with the PDS in the government, it can't get the protest vote come the next elections. It's likely that more of it will go to the extreme right.

Euromyths

Nosemonkey has a must-read piece up on The Sharpener.

Eurospeak

You know, I hardly even notice this anymore.

But I have to admit that the press release (bananas) was a bit dense even for me. And I am in the middle of writing a paper on the CAP and the budget.

This means that it is not only incomprehensible for almost the entire public, but for most journalists as well! This is how you keep your press releases in the house, so to say.

Jon suggests using an English native speaker, or someone with political savvy, to prevent these kinds of cock-ups. But I have a better option!

Now I hadn't recognised just how dense this press release was. This left me a bit worried about the readability of my own site. So, I remembered taking a readability test over a year ago. Good news! Since last time, you now need a year less of education to be able to read it.

The press release, on the contrary, has a very high 'fog' index (17.00 to my 11.17). Reports over 17 are reported as 17 over this site, and in fact it's over 20. I am on the level of the Wall Street Journal, whereas the press release gets this grade:

Only government sites can get away with this, because you can't ignore them.

The reading ease is extremely low (5.95 to my 60.75) - on a scale of 100 you are supposed to aim for 60 to 70.

This free web page has its imperfections - it probably erred on the good side for the press release, which is in fact worse than even these dismal results. But there is affordable software that will do the trick. I highly recommend buying some.

Tagging Margot Wallström, Mariann Fischer Boel, Siim Kallas.

EU Banana Aid, Straightened?

Just couldn't resist the title...

CAP Reform: Commission proposes new banana regime

Mariann Fischer-Boel had the following comment:

"The current aid scheme for EU banana producers is a relic from the past and has to change,” said Mariann Fischer Boel, Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development. “Producers are artificially isolated from the market by payments which automatically compensate them for price changes. This is inconsistent with our modernised Common Agricultural Policy which aims to encourage producers to follow market signals. Such payments are also difficult to defend in global trade terms. We therefore have to act urgently to bring this regime into line with our reformed CAP.”

Straighten 'em out...

For the backstory: The EU made large changes in the way it supports agriculture in 2003. Support still exists and is only slightly reduced. But it is given in a way that is less distortionary in market terms, more streamlined in its bureaucracy (in some ways) and a bit more friendly to the environment.

The Commission is now busy mopping up the remnants of the old system, which are still in place for a range of agricultural products - including, it seems, bananas.

We're talking about 300 million Euros a year here on a total agricultural budget of over 50 billion Euros, so it's relatively insignificant that these 300 million Euros of support will now be handed out in a different way. But every small step counts. And this provides something of a view of what's going on with this policy in a larger way.

The Oneseat Reception

We're back to the irregular spin - have to finish work on a paper on the CAP & the Budget so a few days of light blogging ahead.

EurActiv has a nice piece up on how the oneseat campaign will play out. Strangely, they take a French gaullist MEP to comment upon it - not exactly the most neutral source. But if the people at EurActiv are to be believed, he'll become the next leader of the EPP, so it may be worth listening to what he says:

Joseph Daul MEP, a Frenchman who is tipped to lead the Parliament's largest political group next year - the centre-right EPP-ED - says the question of the Assembly's location is "a false issue".

"It is written in the Treaties", says Daul. "Those who do not agree have to tell their heads of state and governments that the treaties have to be renegotiated," he told EurActiv. "But we saw it already - no one is ready to put the Treaty back on the table again."

However, Daul says he is open for discussion. "If the treaties have to be renegotiated, then we renegotiate the whole [of the institutional arrangements], not just the Parliament's seat."

"Why have all these agencies in London, Frankfurt or Parma?" he asks. "They too cost a lot of money. Why not relocate them too in Brussels?" According to Daul, these decisions are of a political nature, which, by definition, involves horse-trading.

Daul is right on a most points but simultaneously gets it wrong (or just doesn't get it) on a lot of the same points. These decisions are, of have been, of a political nature and do involve a lot of horse-trading. The point is that this is not the kind of Europe that will inspire. Bickering ministers haggling out package deals without regard to allocative efficiency is not the kind of Europe that the people want; the oneseat campaign should suffice as a demonstration.

The policy that each Member State shall get its own quango is a stupid one. First, quangos have to be created on a basis of necessity and not because it would be nice to hand out some dole to Member State x, y, or z or to have the EU 'in it'. Symbolic representation of the EU can be achieved through (drumroll please...) symbolic representation!

That said, questions of location have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis. It's probably better to have the European Central Bank in Frankfurt, which is after all a major financial center, quite unlike Brussels. Whether it is efficient to have Europol situated in the Hague is a bit more open to discussion and having the European Food Safety Authority in Parma is unarguably a waste of money.

All of this would be easier to solve if there were an equitable solution to the distribution of funds in the EU budget (all the more reason for me to get back to work).

As to no one being willing to put the Treaty back on the table again, Daul must have not been paying attention to the news lately...

High-Minded Metablog of the Day

If Kerron Cross can become the #1 Labour Blogger on this crap template, I might keep it after all.

A couple of pictures do work miracles for the general colour scheme, it must be said (in my best interior decorator's voice impression).

That and blogging about the Hoff, apparently. I know that at least one of my long-time regular readers would appreciate some heavy Hoffblogging - and statistically, that's at least 15%!

On another note, the special election dish is now over (as are the elections).

I will run more specials in the near future - Belgian council elections are coming up. Along with American midterms and Dutch general elections in the next two months. Plus the run-up to the French presidential elections next year. Blogged. All Over You Screen!

Update: Plus Poland?

Data Retention -> Data Sharing

Karl-Friedrich Lenz: Enabling American Surveillance.

Yet more evidence on why the Directive on Data Retention is an ugly stain on the EU.

Swinging Left

Mats Engström explains why the right won in Sweden - it moved to the left.

This issue was raised earlier on AFOE where Doug Merrill (or was it someone else) notes that this anticipates David Cameron - who has moved the Tories to the left in England. It is also asked whether this is an international trend.

I don't know if it's international, but regionally it definitely applies. Mark Rutte, the new leader of the right-liberal VVD party in the Netherlands, has also shifted his party to the left and has modernised its politics. So far it's working in the polls.

Are you seeing this Guido?

Oneseat Gets 1 Million

The oneseat campaign passed the 1 million mark yesterday. Congratulations to Cecilia Malmström. Now to see what is done with this...

On Margot Wallström's blog, I ask her what her plans are with regard to Sweden. The Swedes are all calling for her to come home.

Update: More links on both these stories.

EUpolitix - Wallström: EU must ‘listen’ to 1m signature Strasbourg petition

The Local - Wallström 'honoured' by leadership support

EUchanges

Yesterday this blog noted that the secretariat general of the Commission was objecting to a draft alcohol strategy because of concerns about subsidiarity.

Today we note that the EU has introduced step 1 of the 'yellow card' procedure, by transmitting all policy initiatives directly to the national parliaments.

Link (ctsy of Margot).

Brussels really is changing...

Bagdad

Really has some of the best Döner Kebab in Berlin.

More in the IHT.

Election Results

A short update and some impressions.

In Sweden the center-right coalition under Reinfeldt has managed to win a narrow majority over Persson's social democrats. A change in leadership after 12 years of social-democratic rule might be good for Sweden, and a change in leadership of the social-democratic party after 10 years of Persson might be good for the social-democrats.

In Berlin the SPD under Wowereit has won the elections easily. The big losers are the christian-democrat CDU and the socialist PDS. The CDU has gotten the lowest results in over 50 years, in terms of percentage. The PDS lost almost 10 percentage points. Not having the alliance with the (new West-German left party) WASG really hurt them. The WASG got 3%, not enough to make it into the Berlin Senate, but if they would have had the alliance with the PDS both parties would be stronger.

The big winners besides Wowi are the greens.

A red-green government would be the expected outcome of the negotiations, but the greens have campaigned quite strongly against the incumbent red-red coalition. A continuation of that coalition is still in the cards, as both a red-red and a red-green government would have a small - but comfortable enough - majority. Wowereit now holds the trump card, and the greens need to make the switch quickly.

In that other German state, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, the SPD has just narrowly edged out a victory over the CDU, losing 10 percentage points. A continuation of the red-red government is possible, but would have a majority of only one seat. Here the socialist PDS held out strong, with the CDU losing a bit, the liberal FDP gaining a lot and the neonazi NPD gaining even more.

In Transnistria the referendum for independence (and eventual incorporation into Russia) was accepted with a 97% majority. These are the kind of majorities one usually associates with Saddam's Iraq, or Mubarak's Egypt. Still, that doesn't mean that it is not supported by a sizeable majority of the population.

The Rise of the German Right

Even though the elections in two States in Germany could well see the return of two red-red governments, the big story will be the electoral gains of the neonazi NPD.

The NPD is looking to enter the State government in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, and could enter several local district councils here in Berlin.

The Hauptstadtblog asks what is to be done about the NPD's election posters here (de). Should they be ignored, or should they be discussed? But this question is bigger. What can be done about the NPD?

In the Netherlands, a somewhat less criminal far-right party called the Centre Democrats was succesfully isolated and cast out of the electoral system. The strategy taken for this was twofold: isolation of the party in the sense of no discussion on content, but also an active and ongoing argument against the social acceptability of the party's existence.

On the other hand, in Belgium the so-called 'cordon sanitaire' against the far-right Vlaams Blok is a complete failure, giving them ever greater electoral gains, and the legal steps against the movement have triggered little other than getting it to change its name.

The difference is that the Vlaams Blok is addressing a theme which is not being dealt with in Belgian politics - the disparate economic development of the Dutch and French speaking parts. A similar situation exists in Italy and fuels the support of the Lega Nord.

Another difference is that the leader of the CD in the Netherlands - Janmaat - was as thoroughly uncharismatic as a politician can get, and his demise was accomponied by a more restrictive take on immigration in the right-liberal VVD party at the time.

In Germany, there is a large suspicion that the NPD is behind a string of racist attacks and other brown-shirt tactics, or at least accommodates these. If sufficient evidence can be gathered, declaring the party a criminal organisation and breaking it up is a strong option. But even if this is done, a more explicit tactic to deal with a lot of other far-right parties will be needed.

- Off to vote now. Another beautiful day in Berlin - should be good for attendance.

Prodi's EU Plans

How do they mesh with Sarkozy's?

The EUobserver has a piece up on Prodi's proposal to at least cut down a significant part of the Constitution in order to be able to keep key elements of the institutional reforms:

"In my opinion it is possible to restart the constitutional project, but in a greatly simplified form," the Italian leader stated.

"The third chapter cannot be approved in its current state," he said, referring to Part III of the document which is a detailed description of EU policies and decision-making methods.

The question is how Prodi will do this - and with whom. In an earlier interview with the Zeit, he stated that he was looking to work with Germany on this, which would indicate a somewhat different line than working with Sarkozy in France. What Prodi is looking for is what the Germans call a 'Kopfvertrag', a kind of head treaty which would retain its constitutional elements. This head treaty would then have precedence over the existing treaties or would have to be received in them in some way.

What Sarkozy is looking for is far simpler and less constitutional, whereas Germany wants to preserve a lot more of the 'Constitution' than Prodi does. In the end, I think Sarkozy's proposal is more realistic. There will be a broader renegotiation anyway and it is better to base this on a compact proposal than on the existing text, and to drop the entire constitionality idea. Another snippet from the EUobserver:

Polish prime minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski suggested in August that Warsaw will re-open the debate on Poland's voting weights in Part I.

Warsaw plans to present detailed proposals for a new charter to the upcoming German EU presidency early next year, Mr Kaczynski explained, predicting that the federalist-sounding text "will probably need to change its name."

Reopening the debate on voting weights is a bad idea, as the settlement in the 'Constitution' was good and clear. Poland and Spain lost some relative weight with regard to the bigger states, but they gained some with regard to the smaller ones. Their complaints seem to have mostly psychological origins.

On the other point, I couldn't agree more.

Kyprianou's Alcohol Strategy

It's going to go down the drain - before it even gets published.

The European Voice reports:

According to Rodolphe de Looz-Corswarem, secretary-general of the Brewers of Europe, the current version proposes raising excise duties on beer and spirits by up to 40% in seven EU countries with the lowest rates. But he said this would make little difference to the large disparities in rates among EU countries and would hurt consumers and Europe’s thousands of small brewers.

[...]

The draft has also met opposition within the Commission. The secretariat-general has questioned whether the version respects the principle of subsidiarity by straying into policy areas which are the prime responsibility of member states. It also criticised an impact assessment which accompanies the strategy.

We talked about the EU strategy - in development - on alcohol here before. And little has been published. But subsidiarity! There's a novel objection!

Brussels really is changing...

Election Fight in Berlin!

The more things stay the same, the more they change?

Come sunday, we go to the polls here in Berlin. And the outcome of the election is already decided. Klaus Wowereit's SPD will win another election, and is likely (but not certain) to continue the coalition with the socialist PDS party. As the election draws near, the most exciting question is who will be the coalition partner for Wowereit. The PDS, the Greens, or both?

The christian-democrat CDU has run an unelectable candidate and a frankfully awful campaign. It has gone full-on negative, charging on its election posters that 'Berlin is governed by zeroes' and showing dark grey images of old ladies about to be robbed - apparently caused by the current red-red government. This wouldn't be any problem, if the CDU's supposedly positive advertisements weren't run in the same unseemly grey, making their unelectable candidate (Friedbert Pflüger) look more like a shady character in some film noir than Berlin's next mayor.

On the left, the PDS is perhaps suffering from the fact that it has not managed to build an alliance with the new left-wing party WASG for the city elections. The combination has been succesful on the national level. The PDS is set to decline a bit, also because their charismatic leader (Gregor Gysi) - who led them into the last elections - has moved to the national scene. The PDS is in a struggle for third place with the Greens, who are running a good campaign, but their (female) candidate also lacks real charisma. The FDP we already talked (well, linked) about. The failure of their campaign comes down to the basic folly of repeatedly chanting their neo-liberal mantra instead of reaching out. This is also the way Westerwelle is taking the party nationally, and it's a dead end (or a way of staying in the single digits).

The disgusting far-right NPD and Republikaner fortunately have no chance of making it into the city-state's government, but they could make one or two local district councils in the east. As a citizen of the European Union, I can also vote for my district council, but unfortunately I can't vote for the city-state government (probably due to Berlin being a city as well as a state).

I have become a bleeding-heart leftist. The Wahl-O-Mat, which I took, says that I should vote PDS (yes!).

Greens in 2nd place, then the WASG; SDP; CDU, and FDP in order. The Wahl-O-Mat is of course for the city-wide elections which I can't participate in, and there are other things that matter in politics than mere policy. So I'll ignore it and go Green, as I already intended.

(The Wahl-O-Mat and election poster links are through the excellent German-language Haupstadtblog, which has much more election coverage.)

So Much Election It Is All Over You Screen!

September 17th is going to be a pretty big date in Europe:

Elections in Sweden

Elections in Berlin

Elections in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania

And a referendum in Transnistria (yes!)

More news on some of these, coming up!

(I.Just.Had.To.Say.It.)

France's Presidential Race

Or the first installment of our special election edition...

As Loïc Le Meur has also discovered, blogging about Sarkozy can do wonders for your traffic. Progress here is measured on a somewhat smaller scale, but it's still noticeable. So with that in mind, here we go again.

Foreigners are often seen as having no business supporting this or that candidate. Indeed, such support can and will often backfire. However, I have long ago taken the decision to boldly ignore this convention as a self-declared citizen of the world. If the outcome of a foreign election is important in some regard, it is worth blogging about and hiding a bias is in blogging terms worse than being open about it.

Now, the French presidential election is certainly important. To me, it's mostly important in and by itself. It will bring an energetic new president to France, who will shake up the existing order and provide a dynamic way forward. France is in a good position for change and under a new president it will also re-assume its role at the heart of Europe with new vigour.

The thing is, I see this scenario happening both with Ségolène Royal with and Nicolas Sarkozy. So I have no dog in this fight. I just hope Ségo and Sarko get the nod from their parties for the first round and fight a spirited campaign. For Sarkozy it is inevitable that he will get the nod, Ségolène seems to be in a bit less certain water as there still are some credible contenders in her Parti Socialiste (Jospin, DSK) who could combine to oppose her. But she is really the only one who has a good shot at beating Sarkozy.

Minding that I have decided to be satisfied with both options on the table, any enthousiasm expressed at Sarkozy's EU plans (sauf les idées sur la Turquie) is not to be taken as support. That said, Ségo does need to get a response in. She seems to have been caught off guard by this, cancelling a trip to press conference in Brussels and all. David Rennie has a report - but it's rather irritating.

Rennie says that any talk of the EU is a sure loser on the French left. I would say that it's a big challenge for Royal, but she's managed breakthrough initiatives and thinking on other topics. So why not on this? She would surely get a lot of capital for it. He also thinks that Sarkozy's plans are 'never going to fly'. But again, why not? Where is the opposition going to come from?

The Brits, certainly, are asleep at the wheel. And as a commenter on David's blog says, it is inevitable that some parts of the 'Constitution' will find their way into a new treaty, along, we might note, with other reforms. If the UK intends to remain in Europe and wants these reforms to be somewhat in accord with its interests, it had better start pushing.

Sarkozy Mop-Up

When I finally get myself to make a somewhat longer post, there are always some odds and ends left dangling. Sometimes these are too interesting not to write about. And the Sarkozy post is another case. So consider this a mop-up...

The reason why Sarkozy's EU speech struck me as important was somewhere on the back on my tongue. In part, it certainly has to do with the sheer amount of media attention the guy gets when he speaks on anything. This is a bit unfair, as his likely challenger on the left, Ségolène Royal, will have as good a shot at the presidency. But at the moment Sarkozy is a minister, officially the number 3 man in France and unofficially perhaps already as influential as the President.

Another part certainly also has to do with the presentation. Some things Sarkozy is proposing have been buzzing around for a while. Prodi has also suggested essentially taking the first and second part of the Constitution, and a lot of other proposals are buzzing around. The significance of what Sarkozy suggests is in what he leaves out, such as the charter of fundamental rights. Or the official song of the Union, its flag and the seat of the European Parliament in Strasbourg, among many more unnecessary provisions.

What's interesting about Sarkozy's speech is that it was delivered as a bold statement, rather than as a hint dropped in an interview. It also contains a number of new elements, most notably the proposed democratisation of the Commission. So, this could help the debate on the way to move forward.

Because the other part of the equation is that the current politics of most important Member States consists of delaying and not dealing with the issue, or pursuing a pipe-dream of resurrecting the 'Constitution'. In this desert of political imagination, Sarkozy's ideas are remarkably innovative - while staying realisable.

I was beaten to the punch by Carl Bildt and EURSOC, who both offer an excellent news analysis. I tried to use my post to elaborate on the way Sarkozy's proposals would play into the current institutional architecture and the debate on changing it. Carl Bildt focuses more on question of Turkey (where I agree with him), while EURSOC gives a broader political analysis from a British point of view.

Sarkozy's EU Plans

This speech (.pdf, in French) has been reported on pretty widely in the press. See EUoberver here; EUpolitix here. Erkan has more links.

Sarkozy will attract a lot of attention for saying once again that he doesn't want Turkey in the EU, but that is not the most interesting aspect of his speech.

Among the items discussed by Sarkozy is a proposal for a mini-treaty to replace the rejected 'Constitution'. This mini-treaty would contain the following elements, which we will run through:

Expansion of codecision

Currently voting procedures in the EU are different. For some topics, there is qualified majority voting under the codecision procedure. In this procedure the European Parliament has a strong role: it can introduce amendments and reject a legislative proposal. Member States in the Council of Ministers decide by a qualified majority. There are also items on which the EP is only consulted and which have to be decided upon unanimously by the Council; items that have to be decided upon unanimously by the Council on which the EP has to give its assent, and then there is the budget procedure which different from all that. Expansion of codecision would mainly apply to immigration and other justice and law-enforcement policies.

'Double Majority' voting

Under co-decision, there are now various rules for voting that overlap. Member States are alloted a given number of votes. For instance, Germany, the UK, France and Italy all have 29 votes, and from there on it slowly goes down until Malta, which has 3 votes. This system favours the small Member States, Poland and Spain. On top of this system, there is double majority voting, which means that at least half the Member States must agree and at least half the population must agree. This gives the larger Member States a bit more power, but it only allows them to block legislation and thus creates more veto points. The mini-treaty would do away with the numbers of votes and only retain the double majority voting.

Election of the Commission President by the European Parliament

In the current system, the president of the Commission is selected through haggling on the European Council, a summit of the government leaders in Europe. If the European Parliament were to elect the president, we would in all likelihood have the Verhofstad Commission instead of Barroso.

The 'Yellow Card' Procedure

This is a procedure through which national parliaments are alerted of proposals made by the Commission and can tell the Commission that they don't like them as they don't comply with the principle of subsidiarity. Whether the Commission is bound by this is not specified, in the 'Constitution' it wasn't.

A Council President and a Minister of Foreign Affairs

The Presidency of the Council rotates between Member States. The last half year, it was Austria, now, it is Finland which holds the presidency. The presidency mainly has organisational tasks and agenda-setting power. A permanent Presidency with a President who is elected for a given period (4 or 6 years) would improve the operation of the Council and could make it more European. On the other hand, the President might run into conflicts with the elected President of the Commission, if the former acquires more power. Foreign affairs are now handled by the 'high representative' of the Council and by the Commissioner for external relations. The MFA would merge these two functions.

The Citizen's Initiative

See the previous post. There is currently no legal provision for this, although the Commission has hinted that it would favour citizen's initiatives delivered to it anyway.

Legal Personality for the EU

Currently only the European Community has a legal personality, but part of the European Union's tasks are organised in other 'pillars' which represent intergovernmental cooperation on a common foreign and security policy and justice and home affairs. In these areas, the EU cannot enter into international treaties.

A limit on the number of Commissioners from 2014

At this moment, each Member State has one Commissioner. Before 2014, however, it is possible that the EU has taken up 5 more Balkan states, and Norway, Switzerland or Iceland may also decide to join. Then, there is the question of Turkish membership, which Sarkozy is against, and on the longer term also Ukranian or Moldovian membership. The Commission is currently already far too big, with 25 and soon 27 Commissioners. Expanding to 37 is not an option.

All of these elements were already contained in the 'Constitution', except for the elected Commission President. They are significant because they represent Sarkozy's selection of what essential parts of the changes proposed in the Constitution he wishes to preserve. Prodi has formulated a similar wish to create a mini-treaty, so there may be a good chance of it becoming reality.

Going beyond this list of essentials, Sarkozy makes some more radical proposals for reforming the Commission and the EU in general. On the Commission, he advocates letting the Commission President elect the individual Commissioners. This is a clear difference with the current system where the Member States nominate their Commissioners and the European Parliament approves the Commission.

On unanimity voting, Sarkozy proposes scrapping it all together and replacing it with a different procedure, by which a 'super majority' of 70 or 80% can decide measures, which will not be binding on those who disagree. If this 'super majority' is also to be calculated through the 'double majority' rule, Sarkozy may want to make it at most 75%, because otherwise Britain and one small Baltic state would suffice to block a measure.

On the budgetary framework, Sarkozy wants to use the mid-term review to change the method of financing. Again, a short explanation of the current state. The budget is financed in part through the levies that the EU collects at the common border. As a custums union, goods can travel freely within the EU but, save for free-trade arrangements, various duties are imposed upon goods that enter. The benefits accrue directly to the EU, which is really the only way a custums union can function fairly. The largest part of the financing, however, comes from direct payments made by the Member States. There are several ad-hoc mechanisms attached to this system, which arise from the feeling by some Member States that they are paying too much.

Sarkozy thinks that instead of direct payments the EU should have its own resources. Presumably (he doesn't mention how) these will be raised in the form of a tax, for instance a percentage will be taken out of the VAT.

Another proposal Sarkozy makes is that Member States should keep a tab on how much money they spend nationally on realising the EU's goals, and should publish these. For most European policies, the EU only provides a small percentage of the funding, the Member States provide the rest of the money. Sarkozy thinks that this is useful for public education, but also to cast the entire process of budgetting more clearly in the setting of a monetary union. Practically, however, I think this might be difficult. How do you distinguish between measures that aim at aiding Member States and measures that seek to realise European projects?

Finally, Sarkozy proposes that the next European elections should see clearly European party programs of the various parliamentary groups. In the past elections, only ALDE (liberal democrats) and the greens ran a European campaign. This would be improved by the next elections by making the elections about the selection of the head of the Commission, and Sarkozy urges the parties to nominate front-runners who would be their candidate for that post.

Other than the demand that Europe should define its borders once and for all and exclude Turkey, there isn't much I would disagree with. There are a number of fresh proposals here which could re-inject some life into European integration, and they address crucial issues like the democratic deficit, the negative perception of the cost of the EU and the stalemate on issues like taxation.

How realistic the different proposals are is hard to say. Not all of them depend upon Sarkozy getting the presidency, which is still far from certain if Ségolène Royal gets the nod from the left. Changing the method of financing the budget has been a concern for a while, for instance. With Prodi also looking to make a mini-treaty, it's definitely got more momentum than Germany's mistaken bid to revive the 'Constitution'.

People Power

Radio Netherlands reports upon the state of the citizen's initiative, in the Netherlands - and in Europe.

The fate of the first petition to make its way into parliament is telling:

Up to now, the anti-smoking association Clean Air Nederland is the only one to collect enough signatures for its campaign for smoke-free cafes and restaurants. Nevertheless, the issue did not make it onto the Dutch parliamentary agenda, because it had just been dealt with. Mr Nijeboer of the Referendum Platform calls it a disgrace:

"If an issue is popular and enough signatures have been collected, it should not be refused on these grounds. We want to prevent that happening when Europe introduces citizens' initiatives."

This is a rather difficult case. I would say that, while a citizen's initiative is underway and has collected a certain amount of votes, parliament should be blocked from discussing the issue until the petition reaches parliament (with limited exemptions, terms, etc. etc.) Ideally, the parliament should provide for this in its own rules. When parliament discusses a citizen's initiative there may be a different level of public pressure and scrutiny, so discussing the issue before the initiative reaches parliament might be a way to torpedo it.

The report also talks about a campaign for a citizen's initiative in Europe. For our readers in the Netherlands, you can sign online here. For the others, read more about it here.

Digital Activism

The Deutsche Welle reports on Dropping Knowledge.

Table of Free Voices

Well, that was fun. See the Dropping Knowledge weblog for running coverage.

Not really something for a live audience, though, you couldn't hear anyone talk and there wasn't some big videoscreen broadcasting live. People were complaining that they couldn't hear anything (which is logical when you have 112 people talking simultaneously -- you could hear the questions and there were interludes) and I heard one woman say that the voices should look outwards towards the audience, instead of inwards, so the audience could see them.

The weather was great, so the camera takes should be awesome. Now to find out how worthwile the answers were. With so many voices from different backgrounds, there are bound to be a lot of good ideas.

Got a booklet and a poster as memorabilia for a small donation, but I'm figuring the real way to contribute is to talk about this. Watch this space.

The Limits of Tolerance

Christopher Cadwell reviews Buruma's book on tolerance in NL and the death of Van Gogh (Vincent) in the IHT.

Bonus link: Cafe Babel investigates if Amsterdam is still the most liberal city in Europe.

The salience of this issue seems to have declined in the Netherlands. So this would be a prudent time to start working on the analysis I promised long ago. As always, in due time...

Bulgaria: Keeping More Chips on the Table

Some more linkage.

As I mentioned earlier, the important question with regard to the Bulgarian (and to a lesser extent, the Romanian) accession into the EU is not whether they fulfil the criteria, but how we get it to become a stable and prospering democracy tied to the EU. One thing one needs to realise in this context is that the negotiations do not end after accession.

At this time, the Commission's strategy appears to be headed towards accession instead of a 1-year postponement, but it wants to keep more chips on the table to bargain with.

The European Voice reports.

Update: Also see this diary written on Eurotrib.

Your First Shot of EU Alcohol Policy

EUpolitix: EU Proposes New Alcohol Duties.

The Dead Horse is Blocking the Road

From the EUobserver:

[...] the idea of removing the justice veto, which is set to come up at an informal meeting of justice ministers later this month, still faces heavy resistance from Germany in particular.

In the negotiations on the shelved EU constitution, Berlin agreed to give up its veto only because it got concessions from other member states in return, according to diplomats.

Berlin fears that if the veto is scrapped already in the current EU treaty, the chances of a revival of the EU constitution as a whole will be damaged.

The 'idea of removing the justive veto' is to be done through a passerelle clause in the EC Treaty, as reported earlier on this blog. There are a lot of for and againsts in this context. A common immigration policy, which is what the EUobserver article is about, is urgently needed. The Commissioner of Justice, Frattini, has however not always shown due respect for privacy concerns. But the Member States have been even worse. So I think that lifting the veto will be a good thing overall.

Let's hope that Germany can let go of its fantasy that the Constitution can be revived, then the train can finally go forward again.

The Politics of Anti-Politics

Jon Worth comments on the FDP's poster campaign in Berlin.

One short add on: A post about the elections is coming up (had one half finished but it was deleted by circumstances beyond my control). But all in due time.

As we say, chi va piano va sano, and the post will be long too...

Dropping Knowledge

As a person midly interested in bettering the world and its inhabitants, I'm easily excited by big intellectual projects that try to change the way people relate to the world and to one another. If you have a big idea, you have to execute it in a big way. A good example of how to do this is the Long Now Foundation, which is building a 10,000 year clock and library in order to get people take a long term view, and to re-inject myth into our understanding of reality.

But there are many other important improvements to make to our society. Building a global dialogue is definitely one of these. This is where our not-so-far in the future topic jumps in. This Saturday (9th of September) a group called Dropping Knowledge is organising a round table in Berlin - in big style.

112 of the world's most compelling thinkers, artists, writers, scientists, social entrepreneurs, philosophers and humanitarians from around the world will come together in Berlin, Germany, as guests of dropping knowledge.

Seated around the worlds largest table in historic Bebelplatz square, these inspiring individuals, renowned for their lasting creative or social contribution, will engage with 100 questions out of the thousands donated to dropping knowledge by the international public.

You, my dear reader, can also contribute. And all you have to do is ask...

Update: Gratuitous namedropping on behalf of the sick Rose:

Willem Dafoe is the moderator, Wim Wenders, Terry Gilliam, Cindy Sheehan, Bianca Jagger, Howard Zinn, Jane Goodall, Sir David Attenborough, Salman Rushdie, Pedro Almodovar and Erykah Badu will be among the 112 speaking into the cameras.

Hmmm, I got some names wrong, because they were mentioned in a commercial. Perhaps these people asked questions or supported the thing in another way...

Bonus weather prediction: In the morning cloudy with a bit of sun, in the afternoon sunny with a few clouds. Maximum temperature 20 degrees Celsius. No rain. Wind about 2-3 Beaufort. Should be perfect camera conditions.

Will I go? I do think so...

Euroblogs - The Aftermath

A week and a half ago I blogged about an attempt that I made at compiling a list of the Pan/European blogosphere. The results are listed here. Although it is termed 'blogosphere', it is important to note that, as I said earlier, no real 'sphere' exists. It is more a list of different Euroblogs, although a sphere may still emerge out of these, if there were something like 100 more of these blogs.

Some updates...

I wrote a diary at the European Tribune about the blogosphere to get them to collaborate, and I've gotten quite a lot of feedback on it. Not in terms of what other blogs there are out there, but an interesting discussion developed about the potential of blogs for political activism, and about why you would need a sphere in the first place. Link.

Erkan's Field Diary, which I discovered in the search for these blogs, has been kind enough to pick this up.

A Wandering Woman notes in the comments that the Brussels Journal is well... yucky. No disagreement that they're too right-wing. That the editor was sought by the police for comparing muslims to animals, I didn't know. There are many contributors to the BJ, among them Daniel Hannan, a MEP for the tories, so it's worth checking every now and again to see what the eurosceptic right is talking about.

One blog to follow if you're into climate change policy is carbonara, which has interesting coverage on emissions trading in Europe. But eh, guys, do link back please.

I made some first steps in trying to map the foreign-language Euroblogs, but this hasn't progressed very far yet. Especially Sweden has a lot of blogging MEPs, Margot Wallström seems to have set a good example there...

EU Alcohol Policy

The German tabloid Bild has a big headline today charging about "New EU Nonsense" (de).

The topic is a report made for the Commission called 'Alcohol in Europe' - which was published last June. A slow news day, or is the Bild Zeitung really this far behind the curve?

In perfect tabloid style, Bild talks about the conclusions of the report as though they were already Commission policy, but to quote the report page: "The findings of this report represent the view of the contractor and are not binding on the Commission."

So the Bild Zeitung writes

"For instance, innkeapers are to become downright Drink-Trainers, the EU wants to obligate them to attend lessons "to decrease the risk of drunk driving." (my translation)

But of course, the EU has not decided anything of the kind, nor does the study say that the EU wants to do this, only that it should.

The Commission's Communication on Alcohol and Health is still forthcoming, before that we only have a discussion paper (.pdf) and this report.

Some of the ideas expressed are quite paternalistic, and will not win the EU many hearts. Another worrying thing is that there does not seem to be much of a balance in the report between the economic interests of the EU's alcohol industry and the health effects that the EU should address. The economic effects of regulation are all played down, but for instance for the effect on export strength this is not substantiated at all, and for the effect of labour in the related sectors, like restaurants and cafes, there are huge uncertainties.

Still, there are a number of areas where EU involvement could be beneficial, like coordination of information campaigns, or harmonisation of alcohol standars, or even some mild restrictions on advertisements. Pretending to know better than the innkeeper about who should be served is not one of these.

Bulgaria - On the Way To a Delay?

The pressure is mounting.