The European Union and truth

Apologies if this is stating the obvious to too many of my readers, but there is no truth about the European Union.

The words sound simple enough. But what do I actually mean?

People that are in favour of the European Union and their country’s continued membership of it have traditionally argued as if there is an outright truth about the EU. It is as if enough arguments are presented, enough reports written, enough number crunching done, a perfect answer will emerge: that the European Union should exist and whatever country should be a member of it.

The problem is that arguing in this way gets us nowhere, for at least three reasons.

Continue reading

Email This Post Print This Post

Driving nails into the ACTA coffin

When ACTA rapporteur Kader Arif threw in the towel a couple of weeks ago my initial thought was ‘OK, this is it, the European Parliament is about to capitulate‘. You can read more about Arif’s reasons here.

I couldn’t have been more wrong.

What has subsequently happened has been one of the fastest and strongest EU-wide mobilisations of opposition ever seen. The Economist rounds up critique and u-turns in national parliaments, while public protests are due across the EU tomorrow.

Meanwhile in Brussels, the Party of European Socialists has expressed its opposition to ACTA and thrown its weight behind the protests. In the EP a new rapporteur – UK Labour MEP David Martin has been appointed and he’s tweeted a link to the PES position, although his own take remains largely unknown.

If this level of opposition is kept up there may yet be a way to prevent ACTA entering into force…

UPDATE – 1800
EP President Martin Schulz is now getting involved – on German TV this weekend about ACTA:

Am Sonntag um 18.30 Uhr im Schaltgespräch zum ACTA-Abkommen im Bericht aus Berlin - ARD.
@MartinSchulz
Martin Schulz

Where has the pro-EU camp gone? Maybe the project is harder to defend these days?

Daniel Korski has written a short piece at Spectator Coffee House entitled Where has the pro-EU camp gone? It’s a valid question to ask, if you view UK politics along the traditional lines of pro-EU versus anti-EU. The problem is that very frame only gets you so far.

Korski rightly cites hardening attitudes to the EU in Labour. But equally how could any Labour person in their right mind support the Common Agricultural Policy or the agreement to ‘solve’ the Eurozone crisis through the fiscal pact that basically lumps the Eurozone countries with a commitment to austerity for a decade? So while the EU (and the UK’s membership of it) may be of enduring value, who spends their days arguing in favour of something that’s also getting things wrong?

The danger of course is that if Britain edges towards leaving the EU and a referendum were to be held, could those wanting Britain to remain in muster enough support and organisational competence at that time? That must be a worry. But for the moment, while Britain remains in, it’s much more worthwhile to argue about the direction the EU should go (more socially responsible, more free market, more decentralised – take your pick) than it is to simply man the barricades for its defence.

3 years of BloggingPortal.eu

Today marks 3 years of our little blogging project – BloggingPortal.eu

It started as a conversation between Stefan, Andreas and I, and all the coding work was done by Stefan. The inspiration for it came from this blog post I wrote, and I still own the domain name. Beyond that I am a rather inactive partner in the enterprise these days – others have taken on the everyday work.

The aim of the project is as important now as it ever was – to bring an alternative perspective on EU affairs to a wider audience. The site does not try to be a complete take on EU affairs – we cannot achieve that. But for an alternative view, something from outside the Brussels bubble, it remains a vital resource. We still have no cash and no real organisation behind the site, something we wonder about fixing, but we’re still going strong.

So that was a Presidency Press Trip. I’m feeling rather empty.

At one level it has been a privilege to attend the Danish Presidency Press Trip for the past four days. I’m the first blogger ever to have been allowed to attend, and hopefully not the last. But the whole experience leaves me feeling a little empty, although not quite for the reasons that may be immediately obvious.

Continue reading

Email This Post Print This Post

Why Nick Archer’s blog doesn’t work

I’m just back from the Presidency Press Trip in Copenhagen. It has resulted in numerous blog entries from me (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), a set on Flickr, and masses of activity on Twitter. The FT blog has a post about the trip, and Nicolas has a couple of posts in French (1, 2). OK, perhaps not stellar, but at least there is some online discussion about the Press Trip and the launch of the Presidency.

So the UK’s Ambassador to Copenhagen, Nick Archer, has decided to write a blog post on it too. I found out via this tweet. Number of links in his post: zero. Photos: zero. Engagement with anyone else writing about the same issue: zero. I don’t know whether it is Archer himself who writes, or a minion in the Embassy, but I really do wonder whether it is worth the time invested. Blogs work well when they network, form part of a wider conversation in social media. That isn’t happening from the Copenhagen Embassy’s Presidency blog yet.

Avedøre Power Station

Part of the Danish Presidency Press Trip is a tour of Avedøre Power Station. It’s a remarkable place – both in terms of its efficiency as a CHP plant, and in terms of its design. A set of photos (CC License, so share away) is now available on Flickr.

As a national parliamentarian, why would you bother with EU matters?

The first briefing today is from the EU Affairs Committee of the Danish Parliament. This committee has the reputation as being the toughest of the 27 national parliaments when it comes to holding national ministers to account before they head to Brussels to Council meetings, and often meet at the same time as the Ministers are meeting in Brussels. At any time Danish ministers negotiating in Brussels know they will need the approval of the EU affairs committee.

The real question for me is: why do these parliamentarians actually bother? Why spend time on this? Because if you’re an ambitious member of the House of Commons then why would you aim to be on the European Scrutiny Committee? It’s technical, complicated, and it’s hard to present to any voter what you have actually done as a member of that committee. No MP (except perhaps for raving EU-phobes like Bill Cash) can ever make a career of it.

Why, I wonder, is Denmark different? A small country? List-based election systems? Less everyday, direct contact between MPs and constituents? A more consensual, responsible political culture?