European Union

On this International Day against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia, the EU stands together with LGBTI people all around the world in the struggle to end discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity. All human beings are equal in dignity and all are entitled to enjoy their rights as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Over the past years in some parts of the world LGBTI persons have made substantial progress towards obtaining equal rights. Yet in many places they continue to suffer discrimination and violence on account of their sexual orientation and gender identity. In several countries, same sex sexual relations between consenting adults are still criminalised and carry sentences of imprisonment or even the death penalty.

We will continue to make the case for the respect of human rights for all individuals, irrespective of sexual orientation and gender identity, in line with the EU's Guidelines on the rights of LGBTI persons. Through dialogues with third countries, our work in multilateral fora, public statements, and through our support to civil society, the EU will continue to advocate measures to combat discrimination and violence against LGBTI persons, and to actively promote their rights.

The member states permanent representatives endorsed the informal agreement reached between Council and European Parliament representatives on the decision concerning the establishment and operation of a market stability reserve (MSR) at their meeting on 13 May 2015.

The consolidated text presented today will be reviewed by the Lawyer-Linguists and then formally adopted by the Council at one of its forthcoming meetings.

The decision, which introduces measures to tackle structural supply-demand imbalances in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) caused by a surplus of emission allowances accumulating since 2009, is an important step in the fight against climate change and paves the way for the wider review of the EU ETS.

"I am pleased that the agreement is reached and COREPER approved it today" said Kaspars Gerhards, Latvian Minister for Environment, "It was a priority for the Latvian Presidency to establish the Market Stability Reserve in order to improve the operation of the carbon market in the EU. This is certainly a success."

Aim of the MSR

In 2013 the emission allowances surplus reached approximately 2,1 billion allowances - which was partly due to the economic crisis and has significantly weakened the carbon price. Furthermore, the structural surplus is expected to remain in the system up to and beyond 2020.

The decision proposes therefore to automatically withdraw from the market a percentage of EU  ETS allowances that will be placed into a reserve if the total number of allowances exceeded a certain threshold. In the opposite case, allowances will be returned to the market.

Main features of the final compromise package  

• a market stability reserve will be established in 2018 and will be operational from 1 January 2019
• "backloaded" allowances (the 900 million allowances whose auctioning was postposed from the years 2014-2016 until 2019-2020) will be placed in the market reserve
• unallocated allowances will be transferred directly to the MSR in 2020 and their future usage is to be considered under the wider EU ETS review
• temporary exemption of the "10% solidarity component" of allowances from the scope of the MSR until the end of 2025
• the EU ETS review is to consider the possible use of a limited number of allowances before 2021 to supplement existing resources to promote CCS, renewables and low-carbon industrial innovation projects
• the EU ETS and MSR reviews to take into account carbon leakage and competitiveness aspects, as well employment and GDP related issues.

What is the EU ETS?

The aim of the EU ETS is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in an economically efficient manner.

The EU ETS is based on the so-called "cap-and-trade" approach: each year the EU establishes a limit (cap) for overall emissions from power plants, energy-intensive industry and commercial airlines covered by the system.

Within this limit, companies can buy and sell emission allowances as needed. Each allowance gives the holder the right to emit one tonne of CO2, the main greenhouse gas, or the equivalent amount of another greenhouse gas.

From 2013 to 2020, the cap is reduced annually by 1.74% and from 2021 onwards by 2.2%, reflecting the EU's new 2030 target for greenhouse gas emission reductions.

Altogether the EU ETS covers around 45% of total greenhouse gas emissions from the 28 EU countries.

Background

The Commission submitted its proposal on a market stability reserve to the Council in January 2014, alongside its communication on "A policy framework for climate and energy in the period from 2020 to 2030".

In its October 2014 conclusions, the European Council agreed on the 2030 climate and energy policy framework for the European Union and endorsed a binding EU target of an at least 40% domestic reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared to 1990. 

As regards the EU ETS, the European Council stated that a well-functioning, reformed Emissions Trading System with an instrument to stabilise the market will be the main European instrument to achieve this target and gave a number of further orientations, including on free allocation and the continuation of existing measures after 2020 to prevent the risk of carbon leakage.

A compromise text for a new directive to increase protection of seafarers' labour rights was confirmed by the Council's Committee of Permanent Representatives (Coreper). The Coreper approved the agreement reached by the Presidency with the European Parliament in a trilogue on 6 May 2015.

Further protection

The new piece of legislation gives seafarers the same rights with regard to information and consultation as those enjoyed by workers on shore while taking into account the particular nature of the shipping sector. It is based on a joint position reached by the social partners in the maritime sector.  

Apart from ensuring a level playing field in the maritime sector, the directive aims at increasing the quality of maritime jobs. The goal is to reverse the current decline in the number of young Europeans entering certain maritime professions and to retain skilled workers in the profession.  

It also intends to remedy the current legal situation which gives rise to unequal treatment of the same category of workers by different member states. Currently this differs depending on whether or not they apply the exemptions and derogations allowed by the current legislation. Most member states have made little or no use of the exclusions.  

Legislative process: next steps

The European Parliament's Employment Committee is expected to confirm the text during its meeting on 28 May 2015. Following lawyer-linguist revision, the text could be voted by the European Parliament's Plenary in July 2015 and signed by the two institutions in September. 

The Council has agreed to reinforce the civilian mission EUCAP Sahel Niger as part of the actions of the European Union to prevent irregular migration.

The EU will offer the Nigerien authorities support in preventing irregular immigration and combatting associated crimes. This would include advice on a related strategy and training to the Nigerien security services. EUCAP Sahel Niger would also have an outpost in Agadez, a major trafficking hub on the road to Libya.

The High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Commission Vice-President Federica Mogherini said: "Today the EU confirms that it is taking up its responsibilities, in partnership with key countries and in a comprehensive way. Two weeks after the European Council's request to increase our support to partner countries to prevent irregular migration flows, we have agreed on reinforcing our presence in Niger: 90% of migrants from Western Africa travel through Niger. Only by working jointly with countries of origin and transit, with the African Union and the UN, we will succeed to tackle the root causes of the emergency while disrupting criminal organisations and helping migrants to escape from them".  

Niger is in a critical geographical location for migration flows to Europe: 90% of migrants from Western Africa travel through Niger on their way to Libya. Half of the migrants arriving irregularly in Italy in 2014 came through Libya, according to the EU's border management agency Frontex.  

EUCAP Sahel Niger already provides advice and training to support the Nigerien authorities in strengthening their capacities to combat terrorism and organised crime. The mission works to promote the interoperability of Nigerien security forces, to develop criminal investigation capacities, to facilitate coordination in the fight against terrorism and organised crime as well as to improve the sustainability of the security forces. EUCAP is embedded in the EU regional strategy for security and development in the Sahel.  

Around 50 international experts from 12 EU member states currently work in the mission, which is based in Niamey. Since May 2014, Filip de Ceuninck from Belgium has been Head of Mission.  

The decision was taken in the Council's Political and Security Committee.

Another round of constructive discussions on new EU rules for novel foods took place between the Latvian presidency and representatives of the European Parliament and the Commission on 12 May 2015. Despite certain convergence on some elements further work is required to reach an agreement. The presidency will brief the Council's Committee of Permanent Representatives on 13 May to reflect on the next steps. Novel foods are foods not consumed in the EU to a significant degree before May 1997. They include for instance foods to which a new production process is applied.  

Added value 

The rules under discussion are aimed at making the authorisation process of novel foods faster and cheaper while preserving the high level of protection of human health. The draft new rules are also expected to facilitate the access to the EU market for traditional foods from third countries having a history of safe food use.  

Still under discussion 

Two of the most challenging elements of the discussions that remain to be addressed are the reference to cloning and the choice of the type of secondary decisions to authorise novel foods.  

Background

The novel foods authorised under the current rules in the EU include for instance "rapeseed oil high in unsaponifiable matter", "rye bread with added phytosterols/phytostanols", "milk type products and yoghurt type products with added phytosterol esters", "coagulated potato proteins and hydrolysates thereof" and "phospholipids from egg yolk".

Today I was pleased to welcome the President of Georgia Giorgi Margvelashvili on his first official visit to Brussels.

Georgia is a close partner of the European Union. With the Eastern Partnership Summit in Riga just around the corner our meeting was well-timed. I assured President Margvelashvili that the Riga Summit will reaffirm the European Union's strong commitment to the Eastern Partnership and the objective of developing strengthened, closer, and differentiated relations between the EU and its sovereign, independent Eastern partner states.

I also praised the President for the significant progress his country has made so far with regard to meeting the requirements for visa free travel to the EU. The remaining steps are clearly identified and we agreed to redouble our efforts to successfully finalise the process as soon as feasible. We will continue working towards our common goal: visa free travel to the EU for all of Georgia's citizens.

The smooth implementation of the Association Agreement with its Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area is another priority. Since the provisional application started on 1 September 2014 Georgia's exports to the EU have grown by around 18% compared to the same period in the previous year. We will continue building on this progress. The Association Agreement is boosting our relationship and will help to unlock its full potential.

For the Georgian government the time is now ripe to drive forward necessary reforms while maintaining a close dialogue with the citizens to ensure long-term public support for the process. We share the objective to fully transform Georgia into a modern state and an effective economy with opportunities for all of its citizens.

Last and by no means least, I stressed again the European Union's unwavering support to Georgia's territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders as well as our strong commitment to conflict resolution in the context of the Geneva International Discussions and through the presence of the EU Monitoring Mission. Thank you. And now Mr. President, Giorgi, the floor is yours.

Representatives of the EU Member States, the Western Balkans and Turkey, the Commission and the European Central Bank, as well as representatives of the central banks of the Western Balkans and Turkey met for the annual economic policy dialogue[1][2]. Participants welcomed the submission of the 2015 Economic Reform Programmes (ERPs) of the Western Balkans and Turkey. For the Western Balkans, these programmes consist of two distinct parts: Part I outlines the medium-term macroeconomic and fiscal framework as well as concrete macro-structural reforms to support the policy framework and are thus an enhanced version of the previous Pre-Accession Economic Programmes submitted by candidate countries. Part II, as a new element, covers structural reforms of a sectoral nature (such as transport, energy, education, etc.) to enhance competitiveness and long-term growth. Turkey was only asked to submit Part I. The programmes cover the period from 2015-2017.

Participants took note of the Conclusions of the General Affairs Council on 16 December 2014 in which the Council welcomed the Commission's proposal to strengthen the dialogue on economic governance with the Western Balkans and Turkey, including through the preparation of ERPs, to better reflect the European Semester process at EU level. Participants recalled the commitment to set out targeted policy guidance to support efforts towards meeting the Copenhagen economic criteria.

As regards statistics, Participants underline the importance of reliable and up-to-date data and therefore welcome the 2015 Progress Report on the Action Plan on Economic, Monetary and Financial Statistics in the Western Balkans and Turkey. They were comforted that all the Western Balkans and Turkey made progress in fulfilling the Action Plan requirements, but noted that additional efforts in some statistical areas are still needed to achieve a full compliance with the Action Plan requirements.

[1]           The conclusions of this dialogue are without prejudice to EU Member States' positions on the status of Kosovo.
[2]           Montenegro, Serbia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Albania and Turkey are candidate countries for EU accession.

 

Place:         Justus Lipsius building, Brussels
Chair(s):    Federica Mogherini, High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy

All times are approximate and subject to change

+/- ttbc        Doorstep by High Representative Mogherini
+/- 09.30     European Defence Agency Steering Board
+/- 11.00     Beginning of the Foreign Affairs Council meeting
                     Meeting of EU Defence ministers
                     Adoption of the agenda
                     Adoption of A Items
                     Military operations under the Common Security and Defence Policy
+/- 12.15     Working lunch of Foreign and Defence ministers-  Security challenges in the EU's neighbourhood
+/- 13.15     Joint meeting of Foreign and Defence ministers
                     Preparations for the June European Council
                     Migration - follow-up to the Special European Council of 23 April
                     Strategic review
+/- 17.00     Press conference
                     Meeting of EU Foreign ministers
                     Middle East peace process
                     Other items  

In the margins of the Council:

+/- 08.00                      EU-Turkey Association Council (TV/photo opportunity)
+/- 09.05                      Press conference

after the Council        EU-Uzbekistan Cooperation Council (TV/photo opportunity)

The Council adopted the following conclusions:  

1. The economic and financial crisis has put a significant burden on public finances and has led to rising deficits and debt levels. Ensuring the long-term sustainability of public finances is therefore particularly important at the current juncture. The Council STRESSES the need for appropriate growth friendly fiscal consolidation and for further implementation of structural reforms in order to enhance the sustainability of public finances.
2. Against this background, the Council ENDORSES the 2015 Ageing Report: economic and budgetary projections for the 28 EU Member States and Norway (2013-2060) prepared by the Economic Policy Committee (Ageing Working Group) and the Commission (DG ECFIN) on the basis of commonly agreed methodologies and assumptions. In line with previous editions, the projections in the 2015 Ageing Report cover public expenditures on pensions, health care, long-term care, education and unemployment benefits.
3. The Council HIGHLIGHTS the main findings of the 2015 Ageing Report:  
   - Over the whole period 2013-2060, average annual GDP growth in the EU is projected to be 1.4%, unchanged compared to the 2012 Ageing Report. However, there are significant differences in the growth potential across Member States.
   - Total age-related public expenditures are projected to increase by 1.4 p.p. of GDP between 2013 and 2060 in the EU, to reach 27% in 2060, with large differences across countries. Excluding unemployment benefits (strictly-age-related expenditure), an increase of 1.8 p.p. of GDP between 2013 and 2060 is projected in the EU, to reach 26.3% in 2060.
   - Taking into account possible more adverse macroeconomic assumptions, such as the TFP risk scenario, strictly ageing-related public expenditures could increase by 2.1 p.p. of GDP between 2013 and 2060. As a result of recent reforms and more benign demographic developments projected for the EU as a whole in EUROPOP2013, the projected increase in the total age-related expenditure over 2013-60 is now significantly lower than projected in 2012 (3.3 pp. of GDP).
   - After a projected increase up to 2040, also related to the baby boom generation reaching the retirement age, public pension expenditure is projected to return close to its 2013 level by 2060 (11.3 % of GDP for the EU). The diversity across Member States is very large, depending on the degree and timing of population ageing, the specific features of national pension systems and, notably, countries' progress with structural reforms. In most countries, recent pension reforms have had a visible positive impact by containing public expenditure dynamics. Pension reforms have also contributed to an increase in the effective retirement age and thus labour input. The scale of reforms in some Member States is however still insufficient to curb the increase in public pension expenditure.
   - Public expenditure on health care and long-term care is projected to increase by 2 p.p. of GDP between 2013 and 2060 in the EU in the AWG reference scenario with considerable differences across countries, reaching 10.6 % of GDP in 2060, which is mainly due to demographic developments. Taking into account possible future developments in non-demographic cost drivers in health care and long-term care spending, as foreseen in the AWG risk scenario, the projected increase in care-related spending could even reach 4 p.p. of GDP between 2013 and 2060.
4. In light of the updated age-related expenditure projections and the current economic situation, the Council, while welcoming recent reforms in many Member States, REAFFIRMS that there is a need to continue appropriate policy action in the EU in all age-related areas, notably pension, health and long-term care reforms while taking into account country specificities, and to avoid measures resulting in the reversal of sustainability enhancing reforms already undertaken. This entails a prompt implementation of the Country Specific Recommendations issued under the European Semester and of the three-pronged strategy for addressing the economic and budgetary consequences of ageing, i.e. by reducing government debt, raising employment rates and productivity, and reforming pension, health care and long-term care systems.
5. The Council HIGHLIGHTS specifically that further steps still need to be taken by Member States, though to varying degrees, to raise the effective retirement age, including by avoiding early exit from the labour market and by linking the retirement age or pension benefits to life expectancy. Moreover, the Council, recalling its Conclusions of 7 December 2010, INVITES Member States to balance the need to provide universal health care and long-term care, meet an increasing demand related to an ageing population, as well as growing patient expectations due to technological development in the coming decades with the need to reduce high public debt levels. This highlights the need to assess the performance of health and long term care systems and implement sound and necessary reforms in order to achieve a more efficient use of public resources as well as the provision of high quality health and long term care.
6. The Council INVITES the Commission to factor these findings related to ageing challenges and other relevant information including updated estimates of nearer-term potential GDP growth[1] into its analysis and surveillance under the European Semester, and to take account of its implications in all relevant fields of economic policy coordination in the EU.
7. The Council INVITES the Commission to undertake its regular in-depth overall assessment of the sustainability of public finances by the end of 2015 using this set of comprehensive and comparable updated projections. The Economic Policy Committee should on the basis of the assessment report back to the Council.
8. The Council INVITES the Economic Policy Committee to update, on the basis of new population projections to be provided by Eurostat, in close cooperation with the National Statistical Institutes (NSIs), its analysis of the economic and budgetary implications of population ageing by the autumn of 2018. Moreover, the Council INVITES Eurostat to systematically provide annual updates of their population projections, in particular as regards migration flows, to be used over the short to medium term forecast horizon.

 

[1]           On April 1st 2015 the EPC endorsed a revised approach to projecting population growth for the purposes of potential GDP estimation for Ireland, Latvia and Lithuania. 

 

The Council (ECOFIN):  

1. WELCOMES the publication of the Commission's single integrated country reports analysing the economic policies for each of the Member States and the euro area, including the in-depth reviews (IDRs) in the context of the Macroeconomic Imbalances Procedure (MIP), as well as the accompanying Communication summarising the main results of the IDRs.
2. CONSIDERS that this way of streamlining of the European Semester has proven to be a useful first step to better examine and discuss the economic policies of Member States, thus allowing for improved transparency and feedback on the Commission's analysis. For the future, further enhancing ownership, as well as multilateral surveillance, aimed at strengthening the process will be needed.
3. CONSIDERS that the IDRs are structured in an appropriate way and present a thorough analysis of the imbalances in each of the Member States under review, taking country-specific circumstances and qualitative information into account. Relevant analytical tools are also applied in view of the specific challenges of each economy. I - IN-DEPTH REVIEWS
4. AGREES that 16 of the examined Member States which are identified in Alert Mechanism Report 2015 (Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Ireland, Spain, France, Croatia, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Finland, Sweden and the UK) are experiencing macroeconomic imbalances of various natures and magnitudes. CONSIDERS that enhanced transparency on the criteria for the categorisation of macroeconomic imbalances as well as greater stability and predictability of the procedure itself would be welcome. AGREES that, since last year, the imbalances in Slovenia should no longer be considered as excessive, although high corporate leverage and persistent financial sector fragilities continue to warrant specific monitoring. This is based on the fact that decisive policy actions have been taken on the restructuring of the banking system. Furthermore, improved export performance and growth conditions have reduced risks compared to last year, in particular those linked to the external sustainability.
5. AGREES with the view of the Commission that excessive imbalances exist in 5 Member States (Bulgaria, France, Croatia, Italy, and Portugal), and the Commission's intention to consider in May the policy measures of France and Croatia, taking into account the level of ambition of the National Reform Programme and other commitments presented by that date, and to decide whether further steps are needed under the corrective arm of the MIP.
6. UNDERLINES the need for policy action and strong commitment to structural reforms in all Member States, in particular when they face macroeconomic imbalances, especially if affecting the smooth functioning of EMU. Imbalances should be addressed in a durable manner, reducing risks, facilitating the rebalancing of the EU economies and creating conditions for sustainable growth and jobs; and INVITES the Commission to come forward with well-focused and consistent recommendations to the Member States addressing macroeconomic imbalances in the context of the European Semester.
7. WELCOMES the Commission's plans with regard to specific monitoring of the recommendations by the Council to the Member States with excessive imbalances (Bulgaria France, Croatia, Italy and Portugal). Specific monitoring will also apply to a number of euro area Member States with imbalances requiring decisive policy action (Ireland, Spain and Slovenia), and INVITES the Commission to outline the concrete timing and content of such monitoring. In line with established practice, the monitoring for Ireland, Spain and Portugal will rely on post programme surveillance to avoid duplication.
8. RECOGNISES that a number of macro-economic imbalances are being corrected, but UNDERLINES that there are still sizeable risks in certain Member States. In particular, large external liabilities make debtor countries vulnerable, and improvements in current account are not always sufficient to diminish the stock of external debt. Although losses in price competitiveness compared to pre-crisis levels have been partly corrected in a number of debtor countries, strengthening export growth through further structural efforts remains a priority in order to achieve a sustainable and growth-friendly rebalancing. At the same time, current account surpluses remain high in some Member States: these reflect to some extent weak domestic demand, which can be  partially linked to low levels of private and public sector investment. In addition, UNDERLINES that high levels of private and government debt remain an important challenge in some countries, also in the context of low inflation and moderate growth rates. Structural reforms are needed to enhance the growth potential and to tackle high unenemployment, in particular among the youth and long-term unemployed. II - IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNTRY SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
9. WELCOMES the overall progress made in addressing the 2014-15 Country Specific and the euro area Recommendations. TAKES note that reform implementation has been uneven over policy areas and across countries and AGREES that reform implementation needs to be stepped up to  address the individual policy challenges confronting each Member States and to ensure swift and sustainable economic recovery.
10. RECOGNISES that further structural reforms in the services, product and labour markets and responsible fiscal policies are needed in all Member States to strengthen and sustain the economic recovery, correct harmful imbalances, achieve fiscal sustainability, improve the conditions for investment and reinforce the single market, unleashing the growth potential of Member States' economies.
11. LOOKS FORWARD to the Commission's publication of the 2015-16 Country Specific Recommendations in mid-May to ensure the necessary in-depth multilateral discussions before their adoption by the Ecofin council. INVITES the Commission to take into account the discussion on Country Reports as well as the National Reform Programmes when drafting the country-specific recommendations 2015.
12. STRESSES that country-specific recommendations should focus on areas of macroeconomic significance where there is an urgent need for action, in order to give these issues more visibility in the Member State's national political debate. At the same time, common challenges for the euro area and the EU as a whole will continue to be identified and monitored. CONSIDERS it important to continue to ensure a sound and transparent analytical basis for the CSRs, safeguarding equal treatment through consistency over time and across countries. 

Nobody can tackle IUU fishing alone: Will opportunities for global leadership be grasped?

IUU fishing activity detected by Google Earth Images

Those who doubted the potential of the European Union’s Council Regulation 1005/2008 (the IUU Regulation) to change the laissez faire culture that has been prevalent for too long in respect of illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing activities inside and outside EU borders have had plenty of food for thought over the past four and a half years. In the time since the IUU Regulation came into force, the yellow card warning system, followed up on occasion by a trade-suspending red card, have seen a significant change in the administrative practices of a number of fish producing countries.  Most importantly, the IUU Regulation has placed IUU fishing high in the agendas of nations that had previously not been predisposed to delve into the issue.

True, the regime is not perfect and there is yet much work to do to make a true dent in the global IUU trade. IUU fishing practices continue to cause vast losses to the worldwide economy (Eur. 10 Bn, according to the European Directorate for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries – DG Mare- which is equivalent to 19% of the reported value of catches worldwide). In addition, the destructive and insidious nature of IUU operations cause important harm not only to fish stocks and the marine environment, but also undermines every seafood producing fleet that plays by the rules. The ungovernable nature of covert IUU activities means that administrations that are keen to ensure sustainable exploitation have their work systematically undermined by the covert, dishonest nature of unreported captures.

Millions of people depend on seafood for nutrition as well as work and income, not just in producing countries, but also through the processing, importation and distribution and retail of seafood products. Further, many of those involved in fisheries have close, even ancestral, cultural ties to the activity. In many regions of the world (including of course the EU) domestic fishery production cannot match internal demand, and imports from third countries have become a necessity.

What this means, of course, is that the conservation and sustainable management of fishery resources is a collective, thoroughly intertwined effort of many actors and of very diverse nationalities. Nobody can tackle IUU fishing alone, irrespective of how much they may want to.

Yet, not everyone wants to. Routine commercial narratives evidence attitudes where business as usual, and turning a blind eye to stock erosion and illegality creep, are rife. A good illustration of such attitudes was a recent comment made to the Thai press by the head from a national fishery association, asserting his view that the yellow card presented to Thailand over IUU fishing by the EU must have more to do with protectionism and political intervention rather than with the relevance of Thailand’s mismanagement of the considerable presence of IUU activity in their production chains (not to mention the serious mistreatment of people, including their trafficking and abuse, marring the Thai seafood industry). If a comment ever represented a lack of consciousness as well as conscience, then this is it.

The interviewee’s suggestion that Thailand should seek to export to the Middle East, rather than put in an effort to clean up its act is sadly representative of a type of viewpoint that prioritises short-term, entrenched approaches that are not only ultimately doomed to failure, but which also represent a real risk for all administrations working toward long term, rational and fair approaches to seafood production and trade.

It is clear that a sustained collective effort is needed in order to address and change such attitudes and get to the root of IUU activity. With this in mind, the Presidential Task Force on Combating IUU Fishing and Seafood Fraud has recently presented its Action Plan for Implementing the Task Force Recommendations has caused some degree of concern at House of Ocean. Whilst much of what is contained here is ambitious and commendable, it is striking that no mention is made anywhere in the report with regard to trade measure compatibility with existing programmes and regimes. In particular, coordination with the EU is only mentioned in the context of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP) agreement, the negotiations of which are still ongoing. No mention is made anywhere in the Action Plan of the specific measures adopted by the EU to combat IUU fishing to date, nor those adopted by Regional Fishery Management Organisations since the onset of the 21st Century. Perhaps the Task Force is reluctant to admit that the US has lagged behind in the development of IUU-specific trade measures?

However, it now has a golden opportunity to seek convergence with existing regimes, to make a substantial contribution to their improvement and expansion, and to become a formidable co-architect and a leading engineer in the fight against IUU operations. To sacrifice such an important global role for the sake of more self-serving solutions may yet become a tragedy of similar proportions to the uncooperative disease that has for far too long affected our ocean commons.

Sources

http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/documentation/publications/2015-04-tackling-iuu-fishing_en.pdf

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ia/iuu/noaa_taskforce_report_final.pdf

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/EUs-motive-behind-yellow-card-queried-30259466.html

 

 

The post The US, the EU and IUU – Part 2 appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Not long ago, I presented a paper at a conference, an experience many of the writers and readers of the blogs hosted in this site have probably had at some point.

In my presentation, I defended the main argument of my thesis: that Western European states promote international human rights law insofar as it fits in their idea of international order, not because they believe in human rights as a matter of justice. In this sense, I claimed that representatives of the English School of International Relations of the 1960s and 70s (so-called pluralists) were right when they argued that order is the main driver of the international society.

In her turn, one of my co-panellists made the argument that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine is best explained by classical realism, that is, by the idea that the incorrigible human nature predisposes national leaders to mistrust each other, and that countries are forced to maximise their relative power as a result of the anarchic condition of the international system (please, excuse my simplicity). Not that it necessarily matters, but for the sake of full disclosure, she was a Ukrainian citizen.

There was a cocktail at the end of a day full of methods, theories, slides, metaphors, arguments and counterarguments. The Ukrainian co-panellist and I started to exchange some ideas while a thoughtful waiter made sure our glasses were sufficiently wet. As a good classical realist, she believed international law does not matter much. My view, on the other hand, had to be different, since part of my argument is built on the principle of pacta sunt servanda, “promises must kept”.

At some point, one professor from the hosting university got close to us. He wanted to make us feel welcome, which was very nice of him. He asked about the conversation topic, so we summarised our disagreement and explained that she located her argument in classical realism and I located mine (partly) in the first wave of the English School.

He smiled: “You two are quite retro, aren’t you?!”

He left pretty much right away, and we kept talking until the nice waiter decided to carry on with his life and the wine evaporated totally, a clear sign that it was time to leave.

But the professor’s comment did not leave me. I must admit I found it quite funny. And I still do. In fact, I think he picked the right word.

I hereby assert my right to be retro.

I wonder if you feel the way I do, dear reader (if you have got this far! Thanks, by the way), but I feel the pressure to follow a certain academic fashion, either because you are supposed to choose trendy topics, as if your PhD could fit in a tweet, or because you are encouraged to combine mixed methods, or, above all, because impact must drive your research.

I have no problem with any of the above, particularly with the idea of impact, if by it we mean that Academia should try to provide answers to the questions and dilemmas of the world today.

However, it sometimes feels as if that’s all there is in campus nowadays. Theoretical and interpretivist approaches would not be for this time. They were overtaken in the behaviouralist turn of the 1970s, and were left one lap behind by the post-modern, constructivist and critical turns of the 80s and 90s. Previous stuff is retro, not good for the quick and flashy taste of present times.

Well, I just refuse to accept that the interpretivism of classical realists or indeed of English School has been outpaced by other approaches in International Relations.

In university, if I have to choose, I’d rather be retro than sexy.

The post Retro, not sexy appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

General : The International Day against Homophobia is marked every 17 May to raise awareness about the importance of non- discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people around the world. This year also marks the 25th anniversary of the decision by the World Health Organization to remove homosexuality from the list of mental disorders. MEPs highlighted the importance of fighting discrimination during a discussion with experts in the Parliament on 12 May.

Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP

General : The International Day against Homophobia is marked every 17 May to raise awareness about the importance of non- discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people around the world. This year also marks the 25th anniversary of the decision by the World Health Organization to remove homosexuality from the list of mental disorders. MEPs highlighted the importance of fighting discrimination during a discussion with experts in the Parliament on 12 May.

Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP

May 1975: Chinese Vice-Premier Li Xiannian and ECC Commissioner for external affaires Christopher Soames.

These days, the People’s Republic of China and the European Union celebrate the 40th anniversary of their diplomatic relationship. At the age of 40 one might assume that this relationship has indeed ‘grown up’ by now.

But has it, really?

Here are three indicators supporting this view and three against it:

FOR: China established diplomatic relations in 1975 with the – back then – European Economic Community at a time that is commonly dubbed “Eurosclerosis”, with European integration stalling and a Community that was far from establishing a common foreign policy. The move thus underlines the strategic importance for global politics that China has seen in the European integration project from the very beginning, and even during an era that was clearly dominated by only two Cold War superpowers.

AGAINST: Times have changed, notably the old bipolar
world has come to an end. But even if we believe theories
of a multipolar configuration, there are still doubts
whether the now much more mature European Union,
which even has a face to show to the world, can be considered
one of these “poles” or even an actor in global politics, with
institutional crisis having become a permanent feature
and 28 members attached to their individual prerogatives.

FOR: The trade relationship between China and the EU
is still the largest in the world. For several years now,
China is Europe’s No. 2 partner and Europe is China’s
No. 1 partner. Goods and services of over 1 bn EUR
per day are exchanged between the two economic giants.
Initiatives such as the new investment treaty and
possibly a free trade agreement are likely to foster
EU-China trade further.

AGAINST: If TTIP comes, the US-EU trade relationship may
outperform the Sino-European one. The fact that Europe and
China could not even find common ground in terms of China’s
WTO-status (market economy or not) indicates the level of
difficulty to turn negotiations into concrete outcomes.
What is more, EU-China relations are still based on an agreement
of 1985 as the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement failed.

FOR: Even if international relations are increasingly
dominated by business, investment and economics,
one cannot exclude politics. We’ve come a long way
over the last 40 years in terms of approaching each
other politically. Since 1998 China and the EU have
held annual summits. Politicians at all levels from
China and all member states and at EU-level constantly
meet each other. Chinese has become a popular
language to study and cities such as Beijing and Shanghai,
which host some of the finest universities worldwide,
have become attractive destinations for European
exchange students and vice versa.

AGAINST: Notwithstanding the exponential increase of
people-to-people exchange, a recent survey by the
EU-Asia Institute at ESSCA School of Management
and Oklahoma University has confirmed the negative
perceptions of Europeans towards China, notably the Chinese
government. It is noteworthy that strong trade relations do not
seem to help mitigate the situation: the Germans are among the
most skeptical Europeans vis-à-vis the Chinese.

This blogpost was published simultaneously on the website of the EU-Asia Institute and on Blogactiv.eu.

The post 40 years – the age of maturity? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.