European Union

Plenary sessions : “It is time for our people to live in freedom, without walls and checkpoints”, urged President of the Palestinian National Authority Mahmoud Abbas in his address to MEPs on Thursday. He conveyed his people’s gratitude to the European Parliament for recognising a State of Palestine and criticised Israel for pursuing its occupation of Palestinian territories.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : “It is time for our people to live in freedom, without walls and checkpoints”, urged President of the Palestinian National Authority Mahmoud Abbas in his address to MEPs on Thursday. He conveyed his people’s gratitude to the European Parliament for recognising a State of Palestine and criticised Israel for pursuing its occupation of Palestinian territories.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

will take place on Thursday 30 June, 9:00-11:00 (room Paul-Henri Spaak 4B001) and 11:15-12:45 (room Altiero Spinelli 5E-2) in Brussels.

Organisations or interest groups who wish to apply for access to the European Parliament will find the relevant information below.

Further information
watch the meeting live
Access rights for interest group representatives
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : A proposal to grant Belgium €1,824,041 in EU aid to help find new jobs for 488 workers made redundant by construction machinery manufacturers in Wallonia was approved by MEPs on Thursday. A further 300 young unemployed people should also benefit from the aid, to come from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF).

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : A proposal to grant Belgium €1,824,041 in EU aid to help find new jobs for 488 workers made redundant by construction machinery manufacturers in Wallonia was approved by MEPs on Thursday. A further 300 young unemployed people should also benefit from the aid, to come from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF).

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : New rules for deciding which country’s courts should settle property disputes in divorce or death cases involving international couples or registered partnerships were approved by MEPs on Thursday. These rules should end parallel proceedings – costing around €1.1bn annually – in various member states whose courts have to settle such property disputes. They will apply in 18 EU countries which were willing to join this “enhanced cooperation” initiative.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : New rules for deciding which country’s courts should settle property disputes in divorce or death cases involving international couples or registered partnerships were approved by MEPs on Thursday. These rules should end parallel proceedings – costing around €1.1bn annually – in various member states whose courts have to settle such property disputes. They will apply in 18 EU countries which were willing to join this “enhanced cooperation” initiative.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : An EU deal with Monaco, which will make it harder for EU citizens to hide cash from the tax man in bank accounts there, was endorsed by Parliament in a vote on Thursday. Under the deal, the EU and Monaco will automatically exchange information on the bank accounts of each other's residents, starting in 2018 for information collected since 1 January 2017.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : An EU deal with Monaco, which will make it harder for EU citizens to hide cash from the tax man in bank accounts there, was endorsed by Parliament in a vote on Thursday. Under the deal, the EU and Monaco will automatically exchange information on the bank accounts of each other's residents, starting in 2018 for information collected since 1 January 2017.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : MEPs urge all parties fighting in north-eastern Congo to put an “end to the violence, lay down their arms, release all children from their ranks and promote dialogue” towards a peaceful solution, in a resolution voted on Thursday, after a debate on Wednesday. "There can be no impunity for perpetrators", they add.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : MEPs urge all parties fighting in north-eastern Congo to put an “end to the violence, lay down their arms, release all children from their ranks and promote dialogue” towards a peaceful solution, in a resolution voted on Thursday, after a debate on Wednesday. "There can be no impunity for perpetrators", they add.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : The EU multiannual plan for managing Baltic Sea cod, sprat and herring stocks was approved in plenary on Thursday. This is the first new Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) regional plan that takes account of interactions between species. It aims to ensure the sustainability of fisheries and offer fishermen better economic conditions in the long run. Parliament and Council negotiators reached an informal agreement on it in March.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : The EU multiannual plan for managing Baltic Sea cod, sprat and herring stocks was approved in plenary on Thursday. This is the first new Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) regional plan that takes account of interactions between species. It aims to ensure the sustainability of fisheries and offer fishermen better economic conditions in the long run. Parliament and Council negotiators reached an informal agreement on it in March.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : The European Parliament named the 65 members of its “Panama Papers” Committee of Inquiry, into tax evasion and money laundering, on Thursday, after approving its remit on 8 June. The committee’s shorthand label will be “PANA”.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : The European Parliament named the 65 members of its “Panama Papers” Committee of Inquiry, into tax evasion and money laundering, on Thursday, after approving its remit on 8 June. The committee’s shorthand label will be “PANA”.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

After years of speculation, months of campaigning and weeks of intense focus, the UK’s referendum on EU membership has finally arrived. As voters cast their ballots across the UK and Gibraltar, here are the key things to watch for as the results come in:

EU Referendum Poll Card, Abi Begum, CC-BY-2.0

1. Voter turnout

Turnout could be particularly decisive in this contest. In contrast to elections to the UK Parliament, for instance, where first-past-the-post applies in each constituency, the referendum will be decided on a simple majority of the UK and Gibraltar. As a result, every vote cast will ‘count’ and make a difference to the overall result. Particularly in the last few days, the campaigns have focused on encouraging their supporters to turn out, as it could make the difference. Turnout at the 2015 General Election was 66%, while in the 2014 Scotland independence referendum it was 85%.

2. Margin of victory

The margin by which the victorious side wins will also be important. If the margin is large, it will likely be seen to give greater legitimacy to the outcome, and perhaps make it more definitive. If the margin is small, it will probably heighten tensions and make it more difficult for the other side to accept. The sum of the opinion polls appears to indicate that the contest will indeed be close. After the referendum, a process of national reconciliation will need to take place to rebuild common spirits after a divisive campaign and the final result.

3. Differences across the UK

Differences in the vote across the different nations of the UK could have constitutional implications. Although the referendum will be decided on a UK-wide basis, challenges could emerge if some nations vote one way, and some the other way. For instance, if Scotland were to vote to stay, but the UK as a whole voted to leave, that could raise questions about Scotland’s constitutional future. If England were to vote to leave, but the UK as a whole voted to stay, that could also call into question the UK’s systems of governance. In that sense, this referendum is as much about the future of the UK’s political arrangements as it is on its relationship with the EU.

4. Time to decision

The length of time it takes for a definitive outcome to be confirmed will also be interesting. It will serve as a reflection of how close or not the vote has been in reality. It will also be intently watched by a number of politicians who may be considered their positions in the event of the vote going a particular way. Polls close at 10pm and counting generally begins soon thereafter. The count will continue throughout the night and into the morning. Most people will likely be waking up on Friday morning to find that the UK has voted one way or the other.

5. Referendum result

Most important of all, of course, is the result itself. Once the outcome is clear, it is likely that we will have a timely reaction from the UK government. We can envisage David Cameron making another speech outside 10 Downing Street to announce the initial response to the result. If the vote is to remain in the EU, much will continue as before and the UK’s EU renegotiation is meant to be taken forward. If the vote is to leave the EU, the UK will need a new relationship with the EU and the process of withdrawal and negotiation will have to take place. In either case, the impact of the referendum on politics in the UK is likely to be substantial and will only be fully understood in time.

Please read the comments policy before commenting.

Shortened link: britainseurope.uk/23

How to cite this article:

Salamone, A (2016) ‘Five Things to Watch For on EU Referendum Day’, Britain’s Europe (Ideas on Europe), 23 June 2016, britainseurope.uk/23

The post Five Things to Watch For on EU Referendum Day appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Europeans are scared, angry, lost. Their world is in turmoil, their children’s future suddenly uncertain, their way of living under threat. Europe’s politicians need to listen, tell hard truths and rise to the challenge, offering a way forward if Europe is to avoid the undoing of its post-WWII achievements and legacy: peace and prosperity. Austria’s recent presidential election sent ripples of concern across the continent and beyond, and while there was an audible sigh of relief at the final outcome, the final 30,000-vote lead for Green party candidate Alexander Van der Bellen over his right-wing populist opponent wasn’t exactly a comfortable margin.

This populist surge was not just an Austrian issue, but yet another sign of rising economic, ethnic and social tensions across the continent. And Europe’s political class is largely responsible. Throughout much of the EU, resurgent right-wing populist movements rally throngs around anti-immigration and eurosceptic slogans, finding strong electoral support in Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden. France’s Front National is today an ‘established brand’ after over 30 years during which the Le Pens were an exception in Europe – it is no longer so. The spectacular results obtained by Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) last March shook up Germany’s political landscape, dramatically upping the stakes by entering three state parliaments for the first time. This breakthrough – from a party that did not even exist little more than three years ago – is arguably the most striking element of these elections.

“‘Overwhelming majorities disapprove of the way the EU has handled the current migration crisis”

If the refugee and migration crisis has clearly fuelled a backlash against traditional political parties, the current pan-European wave of discontent also taps into long-standing fears about globalisation, jihadi terrorism, as well as a dilution of national identity and traditional structures. Unresolved issues following the 2008 economic downturn, consistently-high unemployment, uncontrolled migration and failed integration, the euro and the perceived impotence of traditional parties have contributed to making the bread-and-butter issues of hard-right populist movements acceptable if not mainstream.

While I do not believe this swing to the far right means Europe is about to succumb to its old demons, I feel we should certainly take our cues and learn from the continent’s past. Europe’s politicians need to squarely confront the profound and understandable angst that is gripping the peoples of Europe. They need to give them a sense of being heard and of seeing their fears and concerns addressed. They also have to credibly and courageously chart a course that allows the EU to overcome its challenges and preserve its decades-long achievements while still remaining faithful to its values.

In 1952, Jean Monnet, one of the EU’s founding fathers, wrote that ‘Europe’s nations should be guided towards the super-state without their people understanding what is happening, […] by successive steps, […] which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.’ This ‘leadership by stealth’ is no longer accepted, nor acceptable.

The results of a Pew survey released on 7th June – of more than 10,000 participants – showed strong disgruntlement with the Union is on the rise across the continent. Only 51% of those polled expressed a positive view of the Brussels-based institutions, while 42% expressed the desire to have certain powers restored to their national governments. The poll data indicates ‘overwhelming majorities’ in each of the 10 countries surveyed disapprove of the way the EU has handled the current migration crisis. Furthermore, the EU’s management of economic issues was seen as ‘another huge source of disaffection with the institution.’ Quite clearly, Brussels needs to be much more attentive and responsive to the messages sent back by Europe’s peoples. Actions such as circumnavigating the loud and clear ‘Nay’ votes in 2005 from the Dutch and the French on the European Constitution by rolling out the Lisbon Treaty, or forcing the Irish to vote twice on that very treaty because the results of the first referendum were unfavourable, do little to help Europeans feel heard.

“While European elites may see themselves as citizens of a globalised world, the great majority of Europeans have longstanding emotional ties with their nations”

The EU, or rather its ancestors the Coal and Steel Community and then the European Economic Community, was created to make war between its member states impossible. But to achieve this, Brussels constantly denigrated patriotism and national pride, offering in its stead a post-modern vision of the world in which such national identities were a parochial relic to be stamped out or relegated to the football pitches. While European elites may see themselves as citizens of a globalised world, the great majority of Europeans have longstanding emotional ties with their nations and to this day still primarily define themselves through their affiliation to their home country.

Mass migration – not just the Syrian refugee crisis, but the movement that started decades ago – is seen by many as changing the face of Europe in a radical way. Since 2014, nearly 2 million refugees have entered Europe – less than 0.5% of the EU’s population, but a formidable number nonetheless. Denying the impact and the challenges this movement of people presents is at the root of Europe’s populist test. Indeed, many in Europe feel that changes affecting their lives have been imposed on them without ever having been discussed. And if they were, it was either under the caveat that questioning or opposing immigration meant that you had to be racist and were, therefore, disqualified from any debate, or that Europe’s ageing societies needed immigration to self-sustain and preserve its welfare-state, and that was that.

The lack of debate as to what these changes mean, and the lack of any serious discussion as to an arrangement between newcomers and their host societies – such as the recent Integration Law in Germany – have steadily fuelled the rise of populism. The EU’s motto, ‘unity in diversity’, may be very appealing, but it has to translate into more than pretty rhetoric and good intentions for the EU to remain stitched together. While Europe certainly needs immigration for its labour markets and social systems to function or to protect its prosperity, it also has to be able to debate and to address issues raised by largely unassimilated and disaffected immigrant communities – many of whom are Muslims. European countries in general have done a poor job of ensuring that immigrants integrate and of proposing a clear set of rights and duties for both immigrants and host countries. Islamophobia has no place in Europe, no more than anti-Semitism or any other form of religious, ethnic or sexual-orientation prejudice. But ‘unity in diversity’ also means we need to agree on a set of core values that represent our shared understanding of the world and bind us together, and for those wanting to live in Europe to embrace them and abide by them.

Brussels also needs to focus more on what will help create a better life for the Union’s citizens. This means economic growth and jobs, especially for Europe’s youth. European growth rates are anaemic at best and socio-economic inequality is on the rise. The newer members of Central and Eastern Europe, even relatively successful Poland, have failed to bridge the income gap with the richer half of the continent. Youth unemployment remains catastrophically high, and the activity rates of senior workers are just as depressingly low across much of the EU. Europe’s ailments are deeply embedded in economies that lag behind on investment, innovation and competitiveness. There is a consensus, however, on how to fix these issues, even if it means difficult and painful reforms in the short term. Such growth-orientated reforms, including lowering taxes, opening up labour markets and offering a more supportive environment for risk taking, are well-known. But it will take courageous politicians, in Brussels and in member states, to lay open the hard truths and map a clear course forward.

“Europe’s politicians need to squarely confront the profound angst gripping the peoples of Europe”

Brussels should lead Europe on the issues that are best or can only be tackled together, such as migration, commercial agreements, and common economic and financial policies. Countries that want to pool more sovereignty on these issues must be able to do so. But let’s also make sure the famous ‘subsidiarity principle’, as defined in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union, is put back at the core of the European project. Decisions need to be taken as closely as possible to the citizens, and the EU should not take action (except in the areas that fall within its exclusive competence), unless it is more effective than action taken at national, regional or local level.

After decades of European integration, the role of the nation-state as the heart of political life remains unchanged. Brussels needs to both acknowledge this and celebrate much more forcefully the extraordinary achievements of the European Union: for the first time in history, close to 30 countries and 500 million people have come together without anyone coercing them to do so. As we remember the centenary of the battles of Verdun and the Somme, as we think of the 60 million lives lost in two world wars, it is important to realise that the citizens of the European Union live in the safest place on Earth. The EU can boast one of the world’s lowest violent crime rates, its governments abolished the death penalty, and it has renounced war within its borders. For now, it may look as if the limits of integration have been reached. But if the peoples of Europe feel they are being heard by Brussels, and its responses are of relevance to their daily lives, then, and then only, some of Europe’s nations may yet return to the path of ever-closer union.

IMAGE CREDIT: CC / FLICKR – European Parliament

The post Responding to Europe’s populist challenge appeared first on Europe’s World.

Welcome to Thursday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

It is finally here. After months of negotiations, threats, Nazi-comparisons, pasty-waving and even rapping by politicians, voters will head to the polls today to answer a simple question with profound implications: should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?

The bickering will come to a close and a surreal peace will break out on British airwaves during the day due to reporting restrictions for mainstream outlets. Even swings on the markets – some in the City have paid for private exit poll data – will not be analysed in depth.

Read more

Turkey is not going to join the European Union any time soon; then what is this noise about Turkey acceding into the EU and Turkish people coming into the United Kingdom?  And so what if Turks come to the United Kingdom, there are already more than 100,000 people of Turkey live in the UK. Plus why would Turks want to come to the UK; the sun is not shining in the grey and wet UK and the Turkish economy growing better than the UK’s. Yes it is right to say that significant section of people in Turkey look up to the European culture and life style, but the rest of the Turkish population see EU as a threat to their Islamic traditions and conservatism.

Furthermore, Turkey is backsliding on democracy and drifting towards authoritarianism, so how can it meet the EU conditionality to join the EU. Having countries like Hungary and Poland in the EU as member states, which have been bluntly veering further and further towards illiberal democracies and the EU’s migration deal with Turkey– when there are critical questions about democracy, rule of law and the free press about this country– it becomes genuine worry for the Leave and Remain camps whether the EU may bend its principles as it has been doing so with Hungary, and admit Turkey into the EU regardless. Brussels must stand up to the EU’s principles if it wants maintain the EU’s credibility and unity.

The UK state policy seemed to have been to favor Turkey’s membership of the EU club since the late 1980s. There is a common agreement in the academia that the underlying reason for the UK state’s policy on Turkey’s EU membership is the UK’s fear of the EU’s deepening policies and move towards a federal club with supranational institutions. Admitting countries like Turkey, with a population of 74 million and with its endemic domestic problems and weaknesses, into the EU, the UK government believed they could to hinder and problematise Brussels’s aspirations for an ever-closer union. Since Prime Minister David Cameron have been promised by the heads of the 27 members states that the UK would able to opt out from the ever closer union clause of the EU, provided the country votes to Remain today, I believe the UK would change its attitudes towards not only on the admission of Turkey, but also on further enlargements of the EU. The British voters should not worry about further enlargements of the EU or should not vote on the basis of the EU’s possible further enlargements, because change is on the way.

That said Prime Minister David Cameron was right to say that Turkey is unlikely to join the EU until year 3000.  He was right in the sense that Turkey’s relations with the EU have been slow progressing. Neither the development of Turkey–EU relations (1959-2005) nor Turkey’s accession negotiations with the EU (2005-2016) have been uninterruptedly smooth. Turkey’s first application for the Associative Membership of the EU was made in 1959, however the Turkish army’s coups of 1960, 1971 and 19 80 meant that the EU had to put on hold on all the political dialogue with Turkish authorities during these periods. Thus the EU did not sign the Customs Union with Turkey until 1995. The economic crisis of mid-1970s, inconsistent coalition governments, and the government’s handling of the Kurdish issue meant that democracy never became the only game in the town and civil liberties were barely protected in Turkey. Thus Turkey’s application for full membership was partly refused in 1989.

Furthermore to date, eleven years on Turkey began accession negotiations with the European Union on 3 October 2005, and there has not been noticeable progress in the accession process. Only fourteen negotiation Chapters had been opened to negotiations; one of these (Science and Research) was provisionally closed; and Chapter 22 (Regional Policy and Coordination of Structural Instruments) was only officially opened in November 2013. At the same time eight Chapters have been blocked by the EU Council decision over Turkey’s non-implementation of the Additional Ankara protocol since December 2006; five Chapters blocked by France since June 2007; and six Chapters were blocked by Cyprus since December 2009.

This proves the point that Turkey-EU relations have been a fluctuating one, resulting in a slow progressing relationship. Plus at the moment the future of Turkey-EU relations looks bleak than ever as Turkey slides to authoritarianism and illiberal democracy. Thus the British voters should not worry about Turkey now. The British voters should pay attention to what the benefits of the EU have been for the Europe: ‘Peace to the Western Europe’ and ‘Democracy to the Eastern Europe’.  And the EU should hold tight on to its principles, if the EU looses its credibility, it is very likely that there would be further alike referendums that could risk not only the peace and stability in Europe, but also could speed up the disintegration of the EU. This is pertinent in the light of the electoral success of the far-right political parties and rise of Euroscepticism and illiberal democracy across Europe.  I suggest the British voters should listen to arguments coming from sane voices from the remain camp clearly outlining the benefits of the preserving status of the UK within the EU rather than listening to Nigel Farage’s xenophobic comments on Turkey and immigration.

 

The post Why the Brits should calm down about Turkey’s possible EU membership appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

This report outlines the potential for a more structured and strategic relationship between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Iran following the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). To both address areas of disagreement and complaints, as well as pursue common interests and matters of mutual benefit, the EU needs to put in place an institutional framework that can withstand the various setbacks that have, to date, derailed all previous efforts of political dialogue. There are a number of areas where both actors can benefit from cooperation; trade, environmental and sustainability issues, education, and combatting drug trade. Even when pursuing more contentious issues such as human rights, having a strategic and fully-fledged multilevel relationship will be helpful. There are also a number of political crisis in the region (ISIS, migration) where reaching a solution without Iranian involvement will either be unnecessarily costly or near impossible.
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP