European Union

Length of video : 203'
You may manually download this video in WMV (1.8Gb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

The shockwaves of the UK’s Brexit referendum resemble those of an ocean-depths earthquake, creating tsunamis that grow and accelerate as they spread outwards. Nobody can yet tell the damage they will do to the 60-year project of European integration or to the global economy, but their effects will be felt for years to come.

It will no doubt be to David Cameron’s eternal regret that as Britain’s prime minister he paid no heed to the warning that earlier referendums on EU-related issues had come to grief in France, the Netherlands, Ireland and Denmark.

The UK’s outlook is for internecine political strife and longer-term economic decline, but it’s the wider European picture that is the more important. The UK’s bitter membership debate and the vote to leave by a substantial majority of over a million people has greatly exacerbated popular discontent around the EU, and notably in France and Germany.

Both have elections next year, and the triumph of eurosceptics in the UK may well trigger similar protest votes.  Germany’s chancellor Angela Merkel and French president François Hollande need to react with a credible plan of action that can allay voters’ doubts and discontent.

“Unless ideas for reforming the EU are bold and eye-catching, voters across Europe will dismiss them”

What, then, might a credible plan look like? It would not only have to be acceptable to EU governments that in many cases have resisted genuine EU reform for 20 years, but also convincing to public opinion in Europe that is increasingly impatient with the EU’s shortcomings. Unless ideas for reforming the EU are bold and eye-catching, voters across Europe will dismiss them, boosting the popularity of eurosceptic political parties.

Sitting tight and hoping for the best is no longer an option for Europe’s mainstream parties. In Germany, the eurosceptic AfD has been gnawing away at the traditional support base of Merkel’s centre-right CDU party. In France, the fear is that even if the Front National’s Marine Le Pen doesn’t make it into the presidency next Spring her party will nevertheless be a dominant force.

There’s no shortage of ideas for tackling the EU’s creaking and overly-secretive decision-making arrangements. Political scientists have been putting them forward for many years. A credible reform agenda for EU leaders could begin with a pledge to lift the veil of secrecy around Council of Ministers meetings that are in effect the EU’s legislature. Incredible though it must seem, there is no public record of their deliberations, and of who said what or how they voted.

A next step would be to bring national parliamentarians into the process of EU-level decision-taking. Until 1979, double mandates enabled some national MPs to sit in the delegated European Parliament, and that’s worth re-considering.

Other possible reforms include the creation of an EU Senate to make the European Parliament bi-cameral. Its members could include nationally-elected EU Commissioners, headed by a Commission president universally elected in EU-wide polling.

There are endless possibilities for shaking up the EU, but the key question is the future nature of the EU itself. Britain’s decision to leave opens the way to a very different and far more flexible European Union.

“Countries where freedom of expression is endangered and political pluralism threatened could be ‘re-classified’ as a signal to their electorates”

It is conceivable that today’s EU of 28, or rather tomorrow’s of 27, will consist of concentric circles and an abandonment of the founding fathers’ vision of perfect equality between member states regardless of their size or clout.

The inner core would of course be the eurozone’s strongest members; many of these have been urging new governance rules introducing checks to prevent countries from irresponsibly taking on debt.

This would add up to some form of ‘political union’ as these rules, and their enforcement, would override sovereignty. It is something Berlin has long urged and Paris has resisted because it would spell the end of the sweeping presidential powers with which Charles de Gaulle endowed the Fifth Republic.

Beyond this core, there would be an outer ring of eurozone countries with weaker economies – Greece, Portugal and perhaps Spain. This ring might also include in some manner economically-stronger non-eurozone Scandinavian countries.

The next concentric ring might consist of EU countries whose governments pose political rather than economic challenges. Poland, Hungary and increasingly the Czech Republic have been flouting the norms of liberal democracies that are the cornerstones of European integration. Countries where freedom of expression is endangered and political pluralism threatened could be ‘re-classified’ as a signal to their electorates.

That leaves the outer ring. This would be made up of a single country no longer in the EU – the United Kingdom. Limiting the impact of Brexit is in the common interest, and some sort of special association status – membership-plus of the European Economic Area – might be a halfway house. It would keep the UK within the single market, maintain the EU’s four freedoms, including movement of people, and require budget contributions. And like any fair compromise, it would be unpalatable for all concerned.

The post Brexit calls for urgent EU reform appeared first on Europe’s World.

On a visit to the US last month, Ukraine’s prime minister Volodymyr Hroysman said the country’s three main ‘enemies’ are populism, corruption and Russia. As Hroysman is a member of Petro Poroshenko’s team, it is worth analysing how his mentor is coping as President and Commander-in-Chief with these ‘enemies’.

The first, populism, is an abused term used everywhere to negatively denigrate one’s opponents, and most people, including Ukrainian politicians, use it without understanding what it means. It was always ridiculous for Viktor Yanukovych and the Party of Regions to accuse the opposition of being ‘populists’ when they themselves (oligarchs) were the biggest populists (towards working-class voters) in Ukraine. It was also a sign of the term being politicised when it was primarily used against Yulia Tymoshenko – if she is a populist then so is every other Ukrainian politician.

Poroshenko, who has routinely derided Tymoshenko for populism, has never undertaken any steps to deal with the issue. He has never invested in Ukraine’s political party system, and the absence of parties is a major problem; after all, parliamentary democracy cannot function without political parties. Poroshenko has always had close relations with oligarchs, who are the main funders of populist political projects. His failure to reduce their influence is something commonly accepted by experts all over, and it is almost universally thought that the next three years will see no change. Oligarchs are as bad for the development of European-style political parties as they are good for populism, as they often create election projects that use populist rhetoric. Their monopolisation of the economy prevents the growth of small and medium-sized businesses, which produce less than 20% of Ukraine’s GDP and are often forced to operate in the shadow economy – where half of Ukraine’s GDP has come from for the last two decades, double the size of Italy’s underground economy.

“Poroshenko is building a hybrid Ukraine that inherently generates political instability”

The ‘enemy’ of corruption has never been tackled by Poroshenko; and when the New York Times criticised him for this, he described it as part of the ‘hybrid war’ being conducted against Ukraine. Not a single member of Yanukovych’s mafia cabal has been brought to justice. As journalist and MP Serhiy Leshchenko wrote, ‘nowhere is the rottenness of Ukrainian politics more evident than in the prosecutor’s office’. It seemed, after the deaths under Viktor Yanukovych of people wanting a fair and democratic Ukraine, that punishments of corrupt officials should have been a matter of honour for the new government. But instead, Berkut snipers who murdered protesters have been allowed to flee Ukraine, others (such as Party of Regions MP Yuriy Ivanyushchenko) have been removed from Interpol lists of wanted Ukrainians and a third group (such as gas lobby leaders Yuriy Boyko, Dmytro Firtash and Serhiy Lyovochkin) have been given immunity from prosecution. President Poroshenko’s four prosecutor-generals have shown no commitment to fighting high-level corruption.

Leshchenko and other journalists and politicians from Tymoshenko’s Batkivshchina (Fatherland) party have repeatedly raised the president’s failure to combat corruption, but to no avail. Ukraine is in the midst of a battle between genuine pro-European political forces including Batkivshchina and civil society who are psychologically in Europe confronting Poroshenko’s faction that wants Ukraine to remain in the twilight zone between the Soviet past and European future. In other words, Poroshenko is building a hybrid Ukraine that inherently generates political instability as it fails to fulfil people’s expectations for justice.

“Poroshenko’s four prosecutor-generals have shown no commitment to fighting high-level corruption”

The third ‘enemy’ is Russia. This is an area in which Poroshenko has failed in four ways. First, he has been unwilling to reform Ukraine’s intelligence services and clean out Russia’s spies. The intelligence services are not only important for the ongoing war against Russia but also for the fight against high-level corruption. Ukraine has a Security Service (SBU), but is it Ukrainian? When one intelligence officer is caught spying in the West, it is a major scandal; but in Ukraine, there have been thousands found since 2014. The SBU recently published a list of 1,397 of its own officers who betrayed Ukraine in the Crimea. Even the Deputy Commander of the Anti-Terrorist Operation (ATO) – Ukraine’s official name for military operations in the Donbass – was a Russian spy.

The second was the signing of the Minsk accords, which benefitted Russian President Vladimir Putin’s transformation of the separatists into a large and well-equipped army and placement of the economy and finances of the DNR and LNR under the control of a Russian shadow government. Instead of dismantling the separatist institutions, as the Minsk accords outlined, they were consolidated. European leaders on the other hand were able to wash their hands of Ukraine by claiming Minsk had brought peace to Europe.

The third area is Western military support for Ukraine.  A lack of reforms in the SBU and its continued infiltration by Russia makes it problematical for it to run the ATO, as NATO and the West more generally are concerned that weapons sent to Ukraine would be stolen (through high-level corruption) or even sold to Russia. If Ukraine declared the Donbass conflict to be a war, not a terrorist threat, its commanders would be the military rather than the clearly unreliable SBU.

“Even the Deputy Commander of Ukraine’s military operations in the Donbass was a Russian spy”

Additionally, in providing immunity from prosecution for the gas lobby, Poroshenko is failing to assist the US in the pursuit of criminal charges against Firtash, who is waiting in Vienna for a response to American demands for his deportation to stand trial in the US. It is in Ukraine’s interests to do everything it can to please American politicians (who are influential in NATO) in order to receive political support, military equipment and training. By instead supporting the old boys’ network and putting personal gain first, the president is damaging Ukraine’s national security.

The last factor is the vast unpopularity of the commander-in-chief among Ukrainian soldiers. During my two visits to the front line in March and May of this year, I heard not a single soldier voice support for Poroshenko. Most soldiers said their enemies are Russia, politicians and incompetent and corrupt generals in Kiev. I mentioned this to the US government’s representatives at a seminar I gave last month in Washington DC, and they were genuinely shocked, indeed no one could imagine hearing such negative and at times threatening views of their commander-in-chief on an American or British military base, particularly during wartime.

Prime minister Hroysman pointed to Ukraine’s three ‘enemies’ of populism, corruption and Russia. What a pity that his mentor President Poroshenko is failing or unwilling to deal adequately with any of them.

IMAGE CREDIT: CC / FLICKR – Petro Poroshenko

The post Poroshenko is failing to combat Ukraine’s three “enemies” appeared first on Europe’s World.

The priorities of the Slovak Presidency of the EU Council of Ministers are being outlined to parliamentary committees by Slovak ministers at a series of meetings, during this week and in September.
Committee on Development
Committee on International Trade
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs
Committee on Legal Affairs
Committee on Culture and Education
Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection
Committee on Industry, Research and Energy
Committee on Regional Development
Committee on Transport and Tourism
Committee on Fisheries
Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

The priorities of the Slovak Presidency of the EU Council of Ministers are being outlined to parliamentary committees by Slovak ministers at a series of meetings, during this week and in September.
Committee on Development
Committee on International Trade
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs
Committee on Legal Affairs
Committee on Culture and Education
Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection
Committee on Industry, Research and Energy
Committee on Regional Development
Committee on Transport and Tourism
Committee on Fisheries
Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

The priorities of the Slovak Presidency of the EU Council of Ministers are being outlined to parliamentary committees by Slovak ministers at a series of meetings, during this week and in September.
Committee on Development
Committee on International Trade
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs
Committee on Legal Affairs
Committee on Culture and Education
Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection
Committee on Industry, Research and Energy
Committee on Regional Development
Committee on Transport and Tourism
Committee on Fisheries
Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Gutiérrez Naranjo
Approximation of laws
According to Advocate General Mengozzi, the temporal limit on the effects of the invalidity of ‘floor’ clauses included in mortgage loan agreements in Spain is compatible with EU law

Bougnaoui and ADDH
Principles of Community law
Advocate General Sharpston considers that a company policy requiring an employee to remove her Islamic headscarf when in contact with clients constitutes unlawful direct discrimination

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/8f310b58-4838-11e6-85bf-bc764e092fac_97.61_thumb_169_1468332014_1468332014_129_97shar_c1.jpg

The Informal meeting of Energy Ministers takes place on 12-13 July 2016 in Bratislava.

Download this video here.

Length of video : 136'
You may manually download this video in WMV (1.5Gb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

To receive the Brussels Briefing every morning, sign up here.

By Arthur Beesley

US treasury secretary Jack Lew visits Brussels today for talks withMargrethe Vestager, competition commissioner.

The meeting comes amid transatlantic tension over the European Commission’s long state-aid inquiry into Apple’s tax arrangements in Ireland.

Ms Vestager’s investigations continue. She had informal discussions on Tuesday with Irish finance minister Michael Noonan on the margins of a regular EU meeting in Brussels.

Read more

Good afternoon. We have just concluded the 18th summit between the European Union and China. We had rich and sometimes very candid discussions on all dimensions of our relations. But most importantly our talks with President Xi and Premier Li were fruitful and conclusive. As a result I can say that we moved the strategic partnership between the European Union and China forward.

You had a chance to listen to our opening remarks yesterday, so you should know where we stand on some of the key issues. Therefore allow me to highlight just a few elements.

First of all we discussed the importance of international cooperation based on rules. A global order based on common rules is in our mutual interest but clearly we have our differences in what it means in practise.

Secondly, ahead of the September G20 summit in China. I am happy that we agreed to tackle the migration crisis at the global level. Over 60 million displaced people around the world seek protection; so the international community needs to step up its efforts.

Thirdly we agreed to have another round of dialogue between the EU and China about human rights still this year in Brussels. There is no doubt that there are disagreements on this issue. But I welcome that China stands ready to engage.

On a different note let me just mention that this morning I had the opportunity to visit the National Museum in Beijing. It gave me a chance to appreciate Chinese history and its impressive culture.

Finally let me say this. We came here to discuss common challenges in an open and friendly manner. It is not always easy to have such talks because the stakes are high and real differences persist. But after these two days I can say that we made progress and we did it also thanks to the openness and frank approach by both President Xi and Premier Li. We had a good summit here in Beijing and I look forward to hosting the next bilateral EU-China summit in Brussels next year. Thank you.

Dear Prime Minister,

On behalf of the European Council, I would like to congratulate you on your appointment as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

I look forward to a fruitful working relationship and to welcoming you to the European Council.

A 9-strong MEP delegation from the Civil Liberties Committee will be in Calais on Wednesday 13 July to visit facilities for migrants and refugees, in the vicinity, which for years has been a gathering spot for people trying to cross from France to the UK. MEPs will meet with local authorities, NGOs, the French-British border authorities and the refugees and migrants themselves in order to assess the situation on the ground.
Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

A 9-strong MEP delegation from the Civil Liberties Committee will be in Calais on Wednesday 13 July to visit facilities for migrants and refugees, in the vicinity, which for years has been a gathering spot for people trying to cross from France to the UK. MEPs will meet with local authorities, NGOs, the French-British border authorities and the refugees and migrants themselves in order to assess the situation on the ground.
Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Framework Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Azerbaijan on the general principles for the participation of the Republic of Azerbaijan in Union programmes
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Report on the fight against trafficking in human beings in the EU's external relations
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

http://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/monaco_flag_thumb_169_1468332416_1468332361_129_97shar_c1.jpg

Through its special relationship with France, Monaco is part of the EU customs territory and located within the external borders of the Schengen area.

Download this video here.

The EU relations with Tunisia in the current regional context
Corporate liability for serious human rights abuses in third countries
Human rights and migration in third countries
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP