Posts filed under ‘European Commission’
Hungary poses a stern test for Europe
The European institutions have rarely faced a sterner test than in their dealings with Hungary. As defender of the European treaties the Commission must do all in its power to protect the fundamental principles that underpin liberal democracy in the EU, yet any decision to block an EU-IMF aid package until Hungary’s authoritarian measures have been scrapped risks further serious damage to an already fragile European banking sector.
A collapse of the Hungarian currency and subsequent default would hit Austrian banks particularly hard. They have €40 billion in liabilities in Hungary. Italian banks would also suffer with liabilities of €20 billion. The damage would not end there, as contagion spread. No doubt Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and his Fidesz party hope to rely on the threat of such collateral damage to secure “precautionary” support from the IMF without having to make too many other concessions.
Hungarian negotiators may say that everything is negotiable and that there are “no preconditions” in talks with the IMF taking place in Washington this week. There may even be a move to restore some independence to the Hungarian National Bank, but there are so many wider issues to be resolved in Hungary-EU relations such as press control, dismantling of the Constitutional Court, weakening of the judiciary, changes to the electoral system, grant of nationality and voting rights to Hungarian minorities in neighbouring countries, limited recognition for religious groups and the arrest of the Socialist party leader – to name but a few. Here is a recent analysis.
Hungary’s new constitution which came into effect on January 1 2012 seems indeed to have many of the trappings of an authoritarian state. The European Commission and the other EU institutions must do all they can to reverse this situation. In the background is always the threat of Hungary’s suspension or expulsion from the EU. A paradoxical outcome in pursuit of democratic principles!
It is a sad irony that the death of Vaclav Havel, standard bearer of freedom for all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, should occur at a time when another country of Eastern Europe is donning the apparel of a one-party state. It’s a further irony that Hungary’s governing party, with a clear parliamentary majority, is apparently intent on entrenching a single party in government. It has some of the hallmarks of Putin’s Russia, including party control of administrative, judicial and constitutional appointments – in other words a “nomenclatura” without the checks and balances vital to a democratic society.
Breaking news from UK PM – Commission supports completing internal market
I have to admit to being a little bit of a pro-European (no? never! you say), so it is with some fidgeting discomfort that I read overnight the happenings in my native land on the EU. Our London office have done a quick round up of the rebellion on their blog (sounds like something Darth Vadar would want to crush).
I think it’s worthwhile reading the Prime Minister’s full statement to the House of Commons from last night in case you missed it. As Jon Worth notes (hat tip for making the front of the Guardian’s online edition yesterday) being in office has driven probably the most Eurosceptic of Prime Ministers closer rather than farther from Europe. As I read through his speech I noted many of the arguments that pro-Europeans make for why the EU is a good thing and in our national interest. Pity it’s taken a financial crisis and frightful backbench rebellion to get Mr. Cameron to say these things out loud and in public. I do have to laugh however that he’s only just noticed that the Commission are actually for completing the internal market and a friend of the UK’s agenda generally…One has to wonder where’s he’s been since the Single European Act, oh, the UK (well that explains it).
As for the future, I’m of the opinion this debate is not going away, especially in light of the further integration needed as a result of what’s happening in the Euro-zone and the PM’s desire to fundamentally renegotiate our relationship with the EU as expressed in the same speech. As the Americans would say, “Good luck with that”. Well, so be it. It’s time the UK had this discussion and that those who are generally have an aversion to “Europe” acknowledge the good things that the EU does deliver for UK business and citizens. As someone who takes delight in seeking to convert London cabbies to the European cause I’m up for it.
James
(note – see top right, all views expressed on this blog are personal)
The Power of Reding
I’m a big fan of the FT Brussels Blog. Today’s headline in particular caught my eye: “Women take over the Berlaymont.”
It outlines the growing attention around European Commissioner for Justice Viviane Reding’s latest crusade: increasing quotas for the percentage of women in the executive boardroom.
The European Parliament advised EU businesses last week to increase numbers of women in their boardrooms by next year or face a mandatory quota of 40% by 2020. While their recommendation is still non-binding at the moment, should voluntary efforts to increase female representation at the highest levels of EU businesses fail by next year, they encourage the European Commission to table legislation to make it binding. And here is where Commissioner Reding steps in.
As the FT points out, she has a tough job ahead. While some countries such as France, the Netherlands and Spain support binding quotas – Norway already has them – some expect the UK and others to resist. Social legislation has always been an uphill battle in Europe and this will be no exception. Yet if anyone can do it (I’m agreeing with the FT here), Viviane Reding can. You can keep track of the pledges she is collecting here.
As a colleague and I just discussed, were we policymakers, we’d be more eager for the social benefits that enable women in the workplace to come through (wide spread access to good childcare, proper maternity & paternity leave, etc). But obviously this isn’t enough.
Bottom line is, I have a general mistrust of quotas – but I more or less support any initiatives that try to even out the playing field…
But let’s open it up: what do you think?
Jess
PS – Looking forward to following what groups that regularly talk about such issues in Brussels think about the initiative, including the European Women’s Lobby and WIIS Brussels.
A Social Media Butterfly: an event for your calendars
Dear readers,
Before you head home for Christmas take a moment to put this date in your diaries. On 12th January at 1530 in the European Parliament the pleasantly named Butterfly Europe is holding an event. The Italian web magazine turned ‘social think-tank’, Lo Spazio Della Politica and GliEuros are joining together to invite EU decision makers, functionaires and consultants for a roundtable discussion on social networks and social media.
What distinguishes this event is the calibre of speakers: not only do they have some of the most digitally savvy MEPs around; Alexander Alvaro, Gianni Pittella, Maritje Schaake and Marie-Christine Vergiat, they also have the people involved in getting the institutions online and active in the social media sphere on board. For the European Parliament this is Stephen Clark and from the Commission Antonia Mochan. The consultancy world is also given a voice, with representatives from multiple agencies; not least FH Brussels’ own Steffen Thejll-Moller .
There will be two main roundtables followed by open debate. The first roundtable will centre on social networks; and the second on online media. It should be an interesting look at the characteristics of ‘a new journalism style’ that is, online and participative, something which you will be hearing more from us in the future. As the final session is on EU public opinion it is appropriately going to be open debate.
In preparation for the event, Butterfly Europe has interviewed Steffen on ‘Making digital tools your comms strategy’. He addresses the reasoning behind our blog, becoming an online resource for decision makers and journalists, as well as our upcoming study on EP digital trends which will be released at the event.
So that’s it for now and remember: 12th January. Register here.
Rosalyn
Posts I’ve enjoyed on this blog
After nearly eight years in our Brussels office and coming up to three years posting on this blog I’m off to our Washington D.C. office for a couple of years at the end of the month.
Before I leave I thought it not a bad idea to indulge myself just a tad, forgive me folks, and point to some of the blog posts I’ve enjoyed writing or reading on this blog. I say enjoyed because, as my wife (sorry, my luv) will testify, relaxation of an evening has become me on the laptop tinkering with this blog, the twitter feed or various other websites that are in some way work related.
Which MEPs use Twitter?
Part of our hypothesis when we started the blog was that digital communications was changing how policy-makers were interacting with voters and stakeholders. To support our view we created a long list of MEPs, the good folks at Europatweets aggregated them a couple of months later on their nice website, Digimahti had another go at listing them and finally we’ve now created our own Twitter lists to categorise them by Committee on our twitterfeed in recent weeks.
65% of MEPs use Wikipedia at least twice a week
Spotting MEPs that tweet was one thing, but we wanted to go a little deeper in understanding how they use the internet and how we may be able to use it to communicate to them. Our EP Digital Trends study sought to do this in 2009. The results led to three conclusions on how our results influence our thinking on public affairs here. It also turned out that MEPs aren’t the only ones who rely on Wikipedia – seemingly the Commission services have a penchant for it too…
Grayling’s EU office starts it’s own blog
We are known to say that to be a thoughtleader one has to have thoughts and they have to be leading ones. Well one measure of thoughtleadership may well be that others follow where you have gone. Grayling’s team has a super blog. We wish more agencies in town would join them (and us).
Helen Dunnett explains the value of blogging for trade associations
Helen’s views on how ECPA was using its blog in Brussels was enlightening and uplifting. It underlined that there are organisations out there who do recognise the value of using digital tools in Brussels.
Scoop: European Parliament talks about European Parliament
Wordle is a great tool. Never more so than when reminding us of the fact that the Bubble likes to talk about the Bubble. The outgoing EP President’s speech was a classic.
Parallels between a Mel Gibson film and the President of the European Council
Sometimes it’s just been fun writing. No more so than one Sunday morning over coffee when I delighted in the fact that the nomination of the President of the European Council was like a seen from a 1980s US action film.
James
Zero growth offers no relief in euro crisis
Zero GDP growth in the eurozone for the last quarter of 2009 and a feeble recovery in the first quarter of 2010 is not what Europe’s finance ministers might wish to hear, but that’s the latest message from the OECD. It just shows what a challenge Europe faces in restoring the strength of public finances, most especially in Greece and other eurozone countries facing massive budget deficits.
There is certainly no sign of growth in the Greek economy. Yet without economic revival there is no way that Greece’s euro crisis can be settled.
It seems clear that the package of “support” announced by Europe’s leaders on March 25-26 will do little to resolve the crisis. The package was so hedged about with conditions that the markets have given it little credence. The spread between Greek and German interest rates on ten year bonds has continued to widen, from three to four percentage points since the summit – not a sign of market confidence.
The summit statement is more of a threat than a promise. Bringing in the IMF as the first potential source of funding echoes the family threat – “just you wait till your father comes home” – the disciplinarian who can put on the pressure which European institutions cannot. And if bilateral support is required from fellow members of the eurozone it will be offered at quite explicitly penal rates of interest, despite the fact that the high cost of borrowing is a significant element in the Greek crisis.
Many commentators have identified the summit as evidence that Germany has turned its back on European integration. Indeed, it was quite a shock to see that even Charles Grant of the Centre for European Reform, a staunch supporter of European integration, could say that “not until this year’s euro crisis did I think the EU could go backwards”. He saw the summit outcome as symptomatic of deep divisions between Germany and France, of the isolationism of Germany, and of Europe’s introspection.
The summit did confirm beyond a peradventure that there will be no economic government for Europe. Any ambitions France might have in that direction are clearly thwarted despite a commitment in the summit communiqué to strengthen economic governance. President Sarkozy presented the outcome as a triumph for Franco-German co-operation; in fact it was largely Chancellor Angela Merkel’s work.
Germany’s dominance in European affairs is evident. Berlin is now more important to Paris than Paris is to Berlin. The economic challenge of German reunification has been met and relations with Russia have become a new priority. The German constitutional court has put the brake on any federalist tendencies. People may criticise Germany for its failure to boost domestic spending, but there is little sign of any response in Berlin.
Today’s OECD report has made one politician very happy: UK prime minister Gordon Brown. He can rejoice at the news that the British economy is predicted to grow at an annual 2 per cent rate in the first quarter of 2010 and by 3.1 per cent between April and June. Not bad timing for him, just one day after calling a general election. He can also take comfort from the fact that at least Europe is not likely to pose any problems for him on May 6 election day. After all, it was he that resisted Tony Blair’s wish for the pound sterling to join the euro in 1997!
Michael
Who said what last week on energy?
We’ve flagged our conference last week on financing Europe’s energy needs shamelessly on this blog in recent days and weeks. You’ll be happy to know, no more. This is the last reference to it we shall make. Just to note for the 150 souls that didn’t make it off the waiting list to gain entrance, many of the principal speakers agreed kindly to repeat some of their main points to camera post their conference interventions.
You can find everyone from Sharon Bowles MEP to Philip Lowe of DG Energy speaking on energy, climate and Europe here.
A highlight was hearing Dr. Fatih Birol from the IEA contrast the good that could come from Europe reasserting its leadership role on climate while warning Europe about the impact such leadership could have on European competitiveness. Jos Delbeke from the Commission perhaps unsurprisingly argued for a renewal of EU leadership in the field. Today’s Commission work programme suggests he may well win out.
James
Combating climate change: it’s a marathon
At the Financing Europe’s Energy Needs conference on Wednesday, which, I might add (and completely impartially), was a huge success, speaker Russel Mills (Global Director of Energy & Climate Change Policy for Dow Chemicals) described the climate change mission as a ‘long marathon’ and profoundly questioned, ‘how do we win this marathon?’
In an attempt to inspire the pessimists and sceptics amongst you I wanted to take Mr. Mills’ incredibly apt metaphor and extend it somewhat. I wanted to describe the efforts of those who have started us all thinking about this global problem and educating us on how to begin tackling it as the coaches training us all before the big race. I wanted to talk about the need to invest in the proper equipment and the need to have strict rules because, after all, we can’t be taking shortcuts. I even had ambitious plans for a pun on pre-race carb-loading/pre-Copenhagen carbon-loading.
However, whilst searching for a motivational picture to accompany such descriptions, I came across this rather interesting article which led me to a new train of thought: Thinner is better to curb global warming, study says.
The conference brought up a number of ideas on how to deal with and finance climate change and future energy needs, from Emissions Trading Schemes and Clean Development Mechanisms to EU FP7 funding for non-nuclear clean energy research, to name but a few. But whilst these measures are of course essential to managing the big picture, it is still important to consider the role that we as individuals can play in combating this problem.
So, what a pleasure to now know that each of us can do our bit for the environment not just by turning off lights and keeping the heating on low, but by cutting out the chocolate, avoiding the chips or, say, by running a marathon.
Jess
Carbon Market – The EU Goes It Alone?
Yesterday at the FH/Barclays Capital Conference on Financing Energy Needs, a lot was said about financing mechanisms for energy investments and climate mitigation measures.
As argued by Philip Lowe and Jos Delbeke, the lion’s share of funds will have to come from private sources, because of Member States’ reluctance to dedicate national funds in these times of economic crisis. Another source of revenue will eventually come from carbon markets, but with current low carbon prices, this is a long-term perspective rather than an immediate solution. A high carbon price is deemed necessary for expensive technologies such as CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage). Participants generally argued in favour of a global carbon market, which would yield more benefits and generate more revenues (estimated at $2 trillion by 2020 if the U.S. gets on board).
Jos Delbeke underlined the Commission’s willingness to link up cap-and-trade systems by 2015 at a global level. Today this perspective seems unrealistic, given that other big emitting countries are still far away from adopting a model comparable to the EU ETS.
It is still unsure whether the US will enter the race. As described in The Economist last week, the cap-and-trade provision in the US Senate Climate Bill will not be a centrepiece of the legislation, as it should only apply to electrical utilities and leave out transport and industrial emissions – at least for now. Reasons for this are threefold: industry reluctance, skepticism for market mechanisms as a result of the financial crisis and fear for the US competitiveness when China does not intend to put a cap on its emissions for the time being.
In Japan, the Cabinet approved a Climate bill early March, but its provisions on a cap-and-trade system have been watered down. The text will now be examined in Parliament and industries covered are still to be defined, but for the same reason as in America, the end result may differ greatly from the EU ETS.
In sum, there are still several hurdles to a global carbon market…
Clara
Bilateral deals will open up EU trade
Eighteen months ago, when the world economy seemed on the brink of collapse, one of the biggest fears was that economic depression would trigger a global wave of protectionism. So it’s all the more surprising that Europe is busily working on new trade treaties. The EU is on the brink of finalising a major free trade agreement (FTA) with South Korea, has opened negotiations with Vietnam and Singapore and is aiming to conclude a deal with India by next October.
Bilateral agreements are being forged at the same time as global trade negotiations are blocked. The Doha Round seems completely becalmed, and unlikely to move as long as President Obama remains domestically on the defensive. There was some tut-tutting in Brussels when the US president announced a target of doubling of US exports, rather than a doubling of trade – but you can see his problem! Still, there is a G-20 commitment to finalise Doha by the end of 2010.
All the planned bilateral deals are giving the EU’s trade commissioner Karel de Gucht a busy year. His trip round the Asian countries earlier this month seems to have been highly productive. He returned home with an agreement to launch an FTA with Vietnam, the start of bilateral talks with Singapore and a “new impetus” for negotiations with India.
It certainly makes sense to strengthen trade relationships with these dynamic economies, but of course there will be resistance from some of Europe’s industrial players, for instance Europe’s automobile, textile and footwear industries, and no doubt from others who are concerned about the environmental or social aspects of potential deals.
The new elephant in the room is the European Parliament, newly empowered by the Lisbon Treaty as co-decider on international agreements. MEPs will want a big say in the negotiating process and will be no push-over in ratifying free trade agreements – see the letter to the Council from Vital Moreira, Chair of the EP Committee on International Trade, demanding more involvement.
As Commissioner de Gucht has said, putting the parliament on equal terms with the Council “will change the political environment and will also probably change my life”.
As a former MEP de Gucht knows the kind of problems to expect. For instance could the EU-South Korea FTA, which was initialled last October, be blocked by the Parliament because the death penalty has not been formally abolished in South Korea, or because public procurement liberalisation does not cover rail transport, where Alstom and others are facing discrimination in the Korean market?
The Koreans hope the deal will be signed off by the end of April. Wishful thinking, perhaps.
The economic impact of these EU-Asian FTAs is potentially enormous. With South Korea, for instance, whose EU trade in 2008 amounted to €65 billion, 97 per cent of tariffs would be abolished within three years, amounting to €1.6 billion saving for EU exporters. Both goods and services would be covered by the agreement, with clothing, luxury goods, drinks, legal and financial services, pharmaceuticals, advanced engineering and low carbon technologies all expected to benefit.
A judicial dispute settlement mechanism would also be introduced.
As for other bilateral partners, EU-Vietnam trade amounted to €12 billion in 2008 and EU-Singapore trade to €55 billion. An agreement with India would be the biggest prize of all. The aim is to double bilateral trade to €150 billion dollars annually over the four years following a free trade deal.
If these agreements can be negotiated, ratified and implemented in the time scales envisaged it will be a major achievement for the new Commission and demonstrate a welcome resilience in Europe’s abilities to resist protectionism even in difficult times.
Michael
