European Union

EU data protection authorities have hinted at more uncertainty for companies when it comes to EU-US data transfers, at least until April.

So what do we know?

Companies which are still relying on the Safe Harbor framework to transfer data between the EU and the US could be investigated by national data protection authorities in the EU, said the chair of the Article 29 Working Party in Brussels today. Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin heads the group, which brings together all the national data protection authorities in Europe. In a live statement this afternoon, she confirmed that companies using other legal mechanisms to transfer data (such as Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) or Binding Corporate Rules (BCRs)) would escape investigation for a few more months, as data protection authorities continue to carry out a review on this issue which won’t be concluded until April at the earliest.

This review includes a thorough analysis that it has done on the US surveillance systems. The Article 29 Working Party has raised concerns that the scope of surveillance in the US and remedies available to citizens could impact the effectiveness of BCRs and SCCs.  The new Privacy Shield agreement could help improve the situation, but the devil is in the details. A recent statement outlines four essential guarantees for intelligence activities (which Mrs. Falque-Pierrotin during the press conference made a point that it applies to EU countries as well):

1. Processing should be based on clear, precise and accessible rules where people are reasonably informed should be able to foresee what might happen with her/his data where they are transferred;
2. Necessity and proportionality with regard to the legitimate objectives pursued need to be demonstrated: a balance needs to be found between the objective for which the data are collected and accessed (generally national security) and the rights of the individual;
3. An independent oversight mechanism should exist, that is both effective and impartial: this can either be a judge or another independent body, as long as it has sufficient ability to carry out the necessary checks;
4. Effective remedies need to be available to the individual: anyone should have the right to defend her/his rights before an independent body.

Why wait until April? What’s the delay?

The Article 29 Working Party has not yet received any documentation on the new Privacy Shield agreement from the Commission. They have received verbal statements from Commissioner Jourova this morning with a promise to receive the detailed texts by the end of February. Once the documents have been received, the Article 29 Working Party will need to review and meet again to make a final decision.

It is worth noting that there was a lot of optimism in the voice of the Article 29 Working Party’s President today, but much still needs to be reviewed.  Will the new measures announced by Commissioner Jourova yesterday be robust, enforceable and secure enough to pass the data protection authorities’ test?

 

Ray Pinto

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : The European Commission must table a communication on a new strategy for gender equality and women’s rights 2016-2020 as soon as possible and deliver on its political commitments, say MEPs in a resolution voted on Wednesday. The communication should address gender equality issues which is in line with the international agenda, they add.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : The European Commission must table a communication on a new strategy for gender equality and women’s rights 2016-2020 as soon as possible and deliver on its political commitments, say MEPs in a resolution voted on Wednesday. The communication should address gender equality issues which is in line with the international agenda, they add.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Threatening to leave a club is often a balancing act. Push the other members too hard and you may face a brick wall; push too little and the exercise becomes useless. What’s more, to have any degree of success you need ambitious goals and a realistic strategy to achieve them. This is more or less the situation David Cameron is in, as he wields his threat of pulling Britain out of the European Union. Alas, his goals are weak and his strategy is creaking.

The British Prime Minister outlined his conditions for staying in the EU in November 2015. Eagerly awaited both in and outside Britain, the shopping list proved disappointing when unveiled.

Michael D Beckwith / Flickr Creative Commons

Cutting benefits for EU migrants coming to Britain and a symbolic request for exemption from the idea of ‘ever closer union’ were among the conditions laid down. But they are hardly the big issues that affect people’s daily lives. Threatening to pull the country out of a union which underpins the world’s largest economic market, unless these sorts of conditions are met, betrays some worrying thinking.

Of course, Mr Cameron doesn’t intend to exit the EU. The chances are he cares little about any damage to his reputation among other EU leaders. His real priority is stopping the haemorrhage of Tory Party members to the United Kingdom Independence Party, a right-wing party whose raison d’être is to get Britain to quit the EU.

What better way to outflank UKIP than to defeat it in a popular vote on its favourite territory: Europe.

But here too David Cameron is revealing some disturbingly poor strategy. He, like many in his party, is averse to the institutions in Brussels . He has spent his political career criticising the EU. When he eventually does start campaigning, voters will find it hard to believe him when he says Britain should stay in the EU. His messaging will certainly have a whiff of Jekyll and Hyde about it.

The situation on the ground is worrying, though not yet desperate. Polls today show a victory for those who want to leave the European Union. Much of the mainstream media supports a British withdrawal. Hysterical, partisan headlines like ‘Millions of jobless Bosnians could be headed for Britain as country applies to join EU’ are all too common [1]. The main political parties are still too divided. Labour and the Conservatives will not be backing one side or the other, instead allowing every Member of Parliament to campaign how he wishes.

Weakness plagues the other side too of course. Those campaigning for a ‘Brexit’, or British exit of the EU, are currently divided into two bickering groups (Vote Leave and Leave EU). But they are likely to merge sooner or later in outrage at Mr Cameron’s weak demands in his renegotiation of Britain’s EU membership. The Brexit campaign has so far been far more effective at rousing its supporters with emotional arguments.

The one sector that has been vocal is big business. They have most to lose from quitting the EU as their cheerleader, the UK government, would no longer be able to frustrate rules governing the single market. But messaging about falling turnovers and weaker job creation is hardly the stuff of campaign victories. We need stories about people.

This means Mr Cameron has to change course quickly if he wants to avoid hitting the iceberg.

He has little time in which to do this. This means he of all people needs to start campaigning passionately about the benefits of Britain in the EU. That also means getting those in his party to start being vocal. It means
ministers should be travelling up and down the country to spread a positive message.

It’s time to start using the things that Europe has given us, like the ERASMUS programme, cross-border travel or strong consumer rights. And to start using the things it can do for us, like more cooperation on research, migration or foreign policy. Where are the celebrities campaigning for Britain to stay in the EU? Another good starting point would be to inject some life into the online platform for the Stay In campaign.

The referendum is likely to take place in mid-2016. The British people deserve a real debate on what being part of the EU is about, not hear the usual stories about bureaucrats and bendy bananas. The EU isn’t perfect, but then nor is Westminster. Both Britain and the EU have too much to lose if they divorce. If Mr Cameron doesn’t start moving soon, the UK is at risk of sleepwalking towards Brexit.

[1] Daily Express, 27 January 2016.

The post Sleepwalking towards Brexit? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Plenary sessions : The ongoing talks on a Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA), among countries representing 70% of world trade in services, should deliver a deal that eases EU firms' access to international markets but does not force EU, national and local authorities to open up public services to competition, or otherwise restrict their right to regulate in public interest, say MEPs in recommendations approved on Wednesday.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : The ongoing talks on a Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA), among countries representing 70% of world trade in services, should deliver a deal that eases EU firms' access to international markets but does not force EU, national and local authorities to open up public services to competition, or otherwise restrict their right to regulate in public interest, say MEPs in recommendations approved on Wednesday.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : A move to veto a plan to temporarily raise NOx emission limits for diesel cars was rejected by MEPs on Wednesday, after the EU Commission promised a review clause and tabled a long-term legislative proposal to revamp the EU car approval regime.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : A move to veto a plan to temporarily raise NOx emission limits for diesel cars was rejected by MEPs on Wednesday, after the EU Commission promised a review clause and tabled a long-term legislative proposal to revamp the EU car approval regime.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Talks on a Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA), with countries representing 70% of world trade in services, should deliver international rules and more opportunities for EU firms to supply services such as transport and telecoms in third countries. But "nothing should prevent EU, national and local authorities from maintaining, improving and applying their laws", notably on labour, social protection and data protection, say MEPs’ recommendations to EU negotiators, voted on 3 February 2016.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Talks on a Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA), with countries representing 70% of world trade in services, should deliver international rules and more opportunities for EU firms to supply services such as transport and telecoms in third countries. But "nothing should prevent EU, national and local authorities from maintaining, improving and applying their laws", notably on labour, social protection and data protection, say MEPs’ recommendations to EU negotiators, voted on 3 February 2016.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : The EU Commission should not authorize the use of glyphosate-tolerant GM soybeans in food and feed, said Parliament on Wednesday. MEPs note that glyphosate, a herbicide, is classified as “probably carcinogenic” by the World Health Organisation (WHO), and that GMOs are being authorized in the EU without the support of member states.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : The EU Commission should not authorize the use of glyphosate-tolerant GM soybeans in food and feed, said Parliament on Wednesday. MEPs note that glyphosate, a herbicide, is classified as “probably carcinogenic” by the World Health Organisation (WHO), and that GMOs are being authorized in the EU without the support of member states.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : What will the UK’s future in Europe be like? The day after European Council President Donald Tusk proposed a settlement in response to UK demands for reforms, MEPs discussed the issue as part of a debate on the EU summit on 18-19 February, which will be dedicated to the talks as well as the migration crisis. Most MEPs stressed that the UK staying in the EU would be better for both the country itself as well as for the other member states, but questioned some of the requested reforms.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : What will the UK’s future in Europe be like? The day after European Council President Donald Tusk proposed a settlement in response to UK demands for reforms, MEPs discussed the issue as part of a debate on the EU summit on 18-19 February, which will be dedicated to the talks as well as the migration crisis. Most MEPs stressed that the UK staying in the EU would be better for both the country itself as well as for the other member states, but questioned some of the requested reforms.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

On 3 February 2016, the 28 member states agreed on how to finance the €3 billion EU refugee facility for Turkey. This will allow the EU to deliver additional humanitarian assistance to refugees in Turkey and their host communities. The help is mainly focused on meeting immediate needs by providing food, health services and education.

“We are working continuously to stem the flow of migrants to Europe. The agreements between the EU and Turkey are a vital part of this. They aim at targeting human traffickers and launching projects which will help give those in and around the refugee camps the hope of a better future. Europe is following  up on its decision to make 3 billion euro available for the Turkey Refugee Facility and we will continue to work hard with our Turkish partners to turn this into concrete results”, said Mark Rutte, Prime Minister of the Netherlands, which is currently holding the rotating Presidency of the Council of the EU.

This agreement puts into practice the commitment made by the EU at its summit with Turkey on 29 November 2015 to provide €3 billion additional resources to assist Turkey in addressing the immediate humanitarian and development needs of refugees and their host communities. €1 billion of this will be financed from the EU budget and the remaining €2 billion by contributions from the member states according to their share in EU GNI.

The facility will include a governance and conditionality framework. Its respect is an essential element for the execution of assistance actions.

The distribution of member states' contributions is set out in the following table and graphic: 

[1] Contributions made by member states could be adjusted downwards in 2017 according to the final contribution from the EU budget, without prejudice to the total amount planned for the instrument and without prejudice to the prerogatives of the budgetary authority.

[2] National contributions for the Facility will not be taken into account for the calculation of a member state's deficit under the Stability and Growth Pact.

[3] A contribution from Cyprus in the amount of € 2.3 million will be made to the EU budget for Jordan and Lebanon.

When talking about Yemen, one of the most common phrases amongst analysts is that “it’s complicated.” True, to a very large extent. Tribal politics, new movements being infiltrated by old power political structures and when looking at the political actors involved, it becomes less clear how the conflict falls under the ‘Sunni-Shia’ divide that seems to be a top theme when discussing MENA politics. Yet the fact that Yemen is “complicated” does not mean there is no clear power political dynamic.

In a nutshell, if former president Ali Abdullah Saleh did not form an alliance with the Houthis, a group who he has fought six wars with since 2004, including one in 2009 where he requested Saudi support via area bombardment, they would not have been able to stage a coup on Sana’a in September 2014. Before Saleh stepped down, he warned that if he let go of power, Yemen “would turn into another Somalia,” indicating his vengeful intentions. By looking at Yemen today, not only is it clear that Saleh has taken his revenge on his own people for revolting against him, but also against the city that has suffered the most as a result of the Saleh/Houthi tactical alliance: Taiz – the birthplace of the 2011 revolution.

Taiz city, whose province is directly on the old North-South border is currently under a siege imposed by Saleh and Houthis forces. All roads that lead outside the city are blocked. Food prices have soared dramatically as it has become scarce due to the Houthis blocking aid and hospital have run out of medical supplies, including oxygen. The largest public hospital in Taiz, Al Thawra has been forced to close multiple times over the past year and it is only able to function if medical supplies are smuggled through the mountains. Those who do attempt to smuggle basic living needs into the city are usually caught by Houthi and Saleh forces and shot or kidnapped.

When looking at the logistics supporting anti-Houthi forces in Taiz, it is clear that power politics have to a large extent influenced the assistance of the resistance movement. Taiz is well known for being an Islahi (Muslim Brotherhood) stronghold, which despite being the perceived lesser evil in Yemen’s context still has unstable relations with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). This has politicised the resistance movement because of a fear of what may come after the Houthis leave Taiz and how local successors would serve the security of their Arab allies. In some ways it looks as though the Arab coalition has learnt its lesson from its experience in Aden. After Aden province was liberated a security vacuum emerged, which gave enabled sporadic ISIS and Al Qaeda attacks. To ensure this mistake is not repeated in Taiz, there needs to be a guaranteed form of security for a post Houthi order. The main problem with this is that the more days go by, the more lives are lost as a result of daily shelling and the deadly siege. Moreover, there is some evidence for an alternative view that the lack of assistance to anti-Houthi forces in Taiz is because the UAE does not want to extend its military assistance to allies of the Muslim Brotherhood, however much the Saudis under King Salman are willing to ally with anyone against Iran.

Saleh needs to be beaten at all fronts

In light of these tensions within the Saudi-led coalition, what external powers need to do beyond defeating Saleh and Houthi militias militarily is to undermine them diplomatically and financially. While no party in the anti-Houthi movement recognises Saleh’s legitimacy, there are still ways to corner him. One of Saleh’s sons, Ahmed, is still living luxuriously in the UAE. Last April Riyadh even expressed suspicion towards Abu Dhabi’s intentions in Yemen, though this is unlikely to extend past the discontent of political officials in the foreseeable future because both are still in a formal military alliance. Saleh needs to be beaten at all fronts, not just militarily, because it is becoming clearer that as long as Saleh has the capability to destroy he will not surrender under any circumstances regardless of whether chaos will lead him to regaining power or not.

If a solution is not found, Europe will potentially face an influx of Yemeni refugees. Russia’s involvement has also become increasingly apparent, with Houthi and Saleh officials meeting with Russian ambassadors in Sana’a. As a consequence Yemen risks becoming another Middle Eastern political quagmire for EU policy. The policy mistake made in Syria must not be made in Yemen. With the growth of AQAP, terrorism remains a threat and EU policy should not look towards beating it through collusion with a former dictator who has perpetuated terrorism. A policy that aims for stability in Yemen should work in conjunction towards democracy and self-determination to ensure leaders who refuse to give up power do not have the tools to destroy all around them.

The post Why a military defeat of the Houthis is not enough for Yemen or Europe appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Plenary sessions : Social benefits for migrant workers in the UK, honesty versus populism and how to ensure respect for different countries' views on EU integration were the key issues raised by Parliament's political group leaders in Wednesday’s debate, with a view to the UK’s forthcoming EU membership referendum. The debate is Parliament's input to the 18-19 February EU summit, which will also focus on migration.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP