European Union

Pesce and Others
Agriculture and fisheries
The Commission may require Member States to remove all plants capable of being infected by the Xylella fastidiosa bacterium, even when there are no symptoms of infection, when such plants are in the vicinity of plants already affected by that bacterium

EGEDA and Others
Approximation of laws
The copyright directive precludes fair compensation due to authors for private copying of their works from being financed by a budgetary scheme such as that established in Spain

EGEDA and Others
Approximation of laws
The copyright directive precludes fair compensation due to authors for private copying of their works from being financed by a budgetary scheme such as that established in Spain

EGEDA and Others
Approximation of laws
The copyright directive precludes fair compensation due to authors for private copying of their works from being financed by a budgetary scheme such as that established in Spain

http://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/d60a6fea-054c-11e5-8bb4-bc764e084e2e_180.76_thumb_169_1464617129_1464617129_129_97shar_c1.jpg

EU Ministers of Justice and Home Affairs meet in Luxembourg on 9-10 June 2016 to discuss the supply of digital content and the regulation on a European public prosecutor's office. They are also to reach a political agreement on regulations on matrimonial property regimes and property consequences of registered partnerships. Issues related to criminal justice in cyberspace are also being discussed. In the Home Affairs session, The Council is discussing several security and migration-related issues. It is also addressing visa liberalisation.

Download this video here.

Looking around in these final weeks before the 23 June vote, there hasn’t much reason to feel that the EU referendum has come to occupy a central place in the lives of the British public. While the papers and the news programmes have been full of stories and arguments, this hasn’t seemed to fully translate into a public debate.

Let’s take a couple of markers of this.

Firstly, for all their ambivalent headline findings, the opinion polls do seem to have been pretty consistent on the volume of don’t knows. As NumberCruncherPolitics’ helpful site shows, this has hovered around the 10-15% mark since September. last year While it has drifted down since March it hasn’t moved at a rate that suggests a deep penetration of either side’s arguments, particularly if we also consider the broad stability of the polls: people don’t appear to be changing their minds very much.

Secondly, my work on social media that I’ve been blogging about each Friday has also shown that online campaigns have yet to show any big pick-up, in either followers or sharing of content. While this needs to be contextualised by the broader social media debate, it does, once again, suggest that both camps have yet to make a strong connection with the electorate.

All of which makes this week’s developments the more interesting.

Tuesday’s technical failings on the electoral roll registration website, and yesterday’s decision to extend the deadline to midnight (Thursday), was in many ways a classic piece of political ex-temporisation (i.e. making it up as you go along) and a reflection on the extent to which we still have to deal with the unexpected.*

On the other hand, it does mark one of the first instances where the public appear to have got active (albeit a skewed cross-section, not tucked up in bed of a Tuesday night): the spike easily exceeded that for last May’s general election, although in part that was down to the much greater volume of calls to register by government, media and activists.

Whatever the reasons, this mobilisation will matter.

For one thing, it means a not-insignificant number of voters will be now more likely to vote, after the drama of registering: a paradox of making it harder/more uncertain that they could vote at all is likely to be that they will now vote, as it has more value to them.

In addition, this influx will benefit the Remain campaign more, given the strong age gradient in late registrations. If there is a close outcome in a fortnight, then expect some re-visiting of this episode.

Finally, it matters because it’s given both sides a way into broader issues about the democratic life of the country. Tellingly, while Leave might have suffered from more young (more pro-EU) voters getting registered, they have been generally happy to extend the deadline. Of course, when a key part of your argument is that ‘we, the people’ need to take back control, it’s hard to then say ‘no, not you people’. Even the more wild and conspiratorial fringes have been quite constrained in their cries of a plot, at least so far.

The big challenge though is to now keep that interest and mobilisation. the TV debates might help, but if they follow the pattern established by the two to date (on Sky and ITV), then they will be more a case of not messsing up, rather than making the case. As I’ve observed elsewhere, good TV isn’t the same as good public debate and if the public doesn’t feel it’s got a voice or a role in the clash of politicians, then it’s likely to switch off, both literally and metaphorically.

Right now we stand on the cusp of matters. Which way we go from here is open. But if we want to find a more lasting settlement, then we all need to try and make the most of this time.

 

 

* Although as one academic who works a lot with online data collection told me yesterday, anyone who can’t cope with 500,000 queries, especially after having trailed the looming deadline so much, needs to take a long, hard look at themselves and their processes.

The post Registering your interest? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

History is full of great projects left half finished – the Sagrada Família cathedral in Barcelona, the Beach Boys’ Smile album, the last Tintin book … could the euro area’s banking union join them?

Forged at the height of the debt crisis as a way to restore trust in the financial sector, the banking union remains very much a work in progress, and it’s increasingly unclear whether its architects are all working off the same plans.

While the European Central Bank is firmly installed as the currency bloc’s banking supervisor (something examined in-depth in this new study by Bruegel,) and new rules on handling financial crises are on the statute books, discussions are becoming bogged down over the banking union’s third pillar – a centralized scheme for guaranteeing bank deposits. That plan, known as EDIS, is loathed in Berlin while strongly supported by the ECB and governments in southern Europe.

The row between national capitals over EDIS is only part of a larger, and extremely complex negotiation – one that is hampering efforts by Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the Dutch finance minister, to sign off his country’s EU’s presidency by getting a deal on a banking union workplan. The split is likely to be a topic of discussion among policymakers at today’s Brussels Economic Forum.

Read more

The Jean Monnet Center of Excellence and the UNESCO Chair at the University of Macedonia (Thessaloniki – Greece), headed by Assistant Professor Dr. Despoina Anagnostopoulou (EU Institutions & Policies – Univ. Macedonia) offer two excellent opportunities for International Summer Schools conducted in English, during July 2016, at the beautiful Pelion in Greece – APPLY NOW:

08-11 July 2016 (Application deadline 5 July 2016), International Summer School in the EU Area of Freedom, Security & Justice, organized by the Jean Monnet Center of Excellence. The School aims at advancing “understanding of the law, policies, challenges and dynamics in the integration process of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (ASFJ).” It has 5 Cycles:

• Cycle 1: Structure/institutional evolution of AFSJ
• Cycle 2: EU Citizenship, Schengen/Free movement,
• Cycle 3: EU Migration/Asylum Policy,
• Cycle 4: EU Internal-External Security,
• Cycle 5: EU Civil/Criminal Justice,

Faculty teaching:

• Assistant Prof. Despoina Anangnostopoulou (Univ. Macedonia)
• Associate Prof. Michalis Chrysomallis (Democritus Univ. Thrace)
• Assistant Prof. Ioannis Papageorgiou (Aritstotle Univ. Thessaloniki)
• Assistant Prof. Foteini Bellou (Univ. Macedonia)
• Prof. Miguel G. Santiago (Autonomous Univ. Barcelona)
• PhD cand./Research Assist. Niovi Vavoula (Queen Mary Univ. London).

14-19 July 2016 (Application Deadline: 10 July 2016), 1st International Summer School in European Studies and Human Rights Law: Protection of Human Rights in Europe, organized by the UNESCO Chair. The School aims at advancing “understanding of the significance of human rights protection at the international and the European level.” It has 5 Cycles:

• Cycle 1: Universal/Regional Mechanisms for Protection of Human Rights
• Cycle 2: ECHR,
• Cycle 3: EU Fundamental Rights & Personal Data Protection,
• Cycle 4: Non-discrimination (emphasis on LGBT),
• Cycle 5: Refugees, Minorities, Cultural Rights,

Faculty teaching:

• Assistant Prof. Despoina Anangnostopoulou (Univ. Macedonia)
• Associate Prof. Lina Papadopoulou (Aristotle Univ. Thessaloniki)
• Prof. Eugenia Alexandropoulou-Egyptiadou (Univ. Macedonia)
• Associate Prof. Alina Tryfonidou (Univ. Reading)
• Assistant Prof. Ioannis Papadopoulos (Univ. Macedonia)
• Former Prof. Paroula Naskou Perraki (Univ. Macedonia)
• Assistant Prof. Ioanna Papavasiliou-Alexiou (Univ. Macedonia)
• Dr. Nikos Gaitenidis, Head of the Constitutional Values of the Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence (Univ. Macedonia)
• Ms. Dagmara Rajska, Council of Europe expert

For both Summer Schools, certificates of attendance to all, and graduation certificates after passing a multiple choice exam, will be awarded.

Visit the Jean Monnet University website

For more information email: danag@uom.gr or call: +30 2310891 442 or +30 6979 348008.

The post Jean Monnet Center of Excellence & UNESCO Chair International Summer Schools – University of Macedonia appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Plenary sessions : The Turkish parliament’s decision to lift the immunity from prosecution of 138 of its members was criticized by MEPs on Wednesday. In a debate with EU Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn, they described it as an attempt by Turkey’s President Erdoğan to silence the opposition and grab more powers. This decision undermines the rule of law and freedom of expression and might harm EU-Turkey relations, they added.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : The Turkish parliament’s decision to lift the immunity from prosecution of 138 of its members was criticized by MEPs on Wednesday. In a debate with EU Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn, they described it as an attempt by Turkey’s President Erdoğan to silence the opposition and grab more powers. This decision undermines the rule of law and freedom of expression and might harm EU-Turkey relations, they added.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

On 9 June 2016, 18 member states reached a general approach on two regulations aimed at determining the rules applicable to property regimes for married couples or registered partners in cross-border situations (i.e. couples of different EU nationalities and/or who own properties in a another EU member state).

The regulations aim to determine which court will have jurisdiction and which law will be applicable in matters of matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships. They will also facilitate the recognition and enforcement of decisions in cross-border situations on these matters. They will establish clear rules on applicable law in case of divorce or death, bringing greater legal certainty and putting an end to parallel and possibly conflicting proceedings in various member states.

The eighteen member states participating in the enhanced cooperation are Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Spain, France, Croatia, Italia, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Slovenia, Finland and Sweden. Other member states are free to join at any time after its adoption. In this respect, Estonia announced its intention to take part in the cooperation after its adoption. 

Dutch minister Van der Steur, on behalf of the Netherlands presidency, said : "The Netherlands Presidency is very pleased that the Council has made a lot of progress, very swiftly,  to overcome the deadlock in this file, by means of enhanced cooperation. Already 18 member states are on board. The Commission, European Parliament and Council have been working hard on this file during this semester and we hope that, after the adoption of the proposals, other member states will join the enhanced cooperation as well."

The regulations leave untouched the underlying institutions of marriages and partnerships, which remain matters that are defined by the national laws of the member states. They also include a series of safeguards in order to respect national legal systems. For example, nothing obliges participating member states whose law does not recognise the institution of registered partnership to provide for it, nor to assume jurisdiction for such partnerships.

The Council also adopted today, without discussion, the decision authorising the enhanced cooperation itself. In accordance with the rules on enhanced cooperation, all Member States took part in that vote.

The enhanced cooperation was proposed after the Council concluded, at its meeting of 3 December 2015, that it would not be possible, within a reasonable period of time, to reach an EU-wide unanimous agreement on the original Commission proposals on these matters presented in 2011.

Next steps

Following the adoption of this general approach, the European Parliament will give its opinion on the texts in the course of the month. Consequently, the regulations will be formally adopted by the 18 participating member states. This formal adoption is expected at the end of June 2016.

Background

In 2011, the European Commission estimated that there are about 16 million couples in the European Union who live in a cross border situation.

Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP

Plenary sessions : A plan to lend Tunisia €500 million on favourable terms to help it reduce its external debt and consolidate its democratic mechanisms was backed by MEPs on Wednesday.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : A plan to lend Tunisia €500 million on favourable terms to help it reduce its external debt and consolidate its democratic mechanisms was backed by MEPs on Wednesday.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP