eu reporter oct 2010

8/8/2019 EU Reporter Oct 2010

1/32

October 2010

independent media for better debate

Online: www.eureporter.co.uk Video: www.eureporter.tv

Inside

A new vision of sustainabilityThe moment of truth for Turkey-EU relationsCan Sarkozy Achieve his French Connection?

The nuclear challengeGalileo A very European affair

The new Interinstitutional Agreement


2/32

Europe possesses an energy source which could power it seven

times over: the wind. European companies are world leaders in

wind power, generating thousands of jobs. Wind energy reduces

Europes dependence, and spending, on imported fossil fuels. It

lowers electricity prices and emits no CO2.

Over the next 12 years, Europe must build new power capacity

equal to half the current total. We must use this opportunity to

construct a modern power system that meets the challenges of

the 21st century.

Give Europe a breath of fresh air by adopting a wind turbine at

www.ewea.org/freshair

Give Europe a breath of fresh air

Breath AIRFRESHof

www.ewea.org/freshair


3/32

COVER IMAGE COPYRIGHT: Philippe SAMYN and PARTNERS architects & engineers,LEAD and DESIGN.Philippe Samyn and Partners, Studio Valle Progettazioni,Buro Happold Limited.

PUBLISHERHalf Tidy [email protected] House28 Cathedral RoadCardiffWalesCF11 9LJUnited Kingdom

DIRECTORColin Stevens

Reg: GB072246293VAT No: GB 995 6193 59

EDITORNicolas J [email protected]

CONTRIBUTORSChris WhiteDerk Jan Eppink MEPEmre KizilkayaFrank PrenestiIan Phillips

Jessica SoneJim GibbonsMark SinclairMichael J Warner

Nikki Sinclaire MEPThomas Bauwens

ADVERTISINGAndrew [email protected]

[email protected]

EDITORIAL CONSULTANTChris [email protected]

EU REPORTEREU Reporter is published monthly.

EU Reporter has used its best efforts in collecting andpreparing material for inclusion in EU Reporter, butcannot and does not warrant that the informationcontained in this product is complete or accurate anddoes not assume and hereby disclaims, liability toany person for any loss or damage caused by errorsor omissions in EU Reporter, whether such errors oromissions result from negligence, accident or anyother cause.This publication may not be reproduced or copied inwhole or in part by any means without the expresspermission of the officers of EU Reporter. 2010, EU Reporter. All rights reserved.

contents

3October 2010

ECONOMY4 NO EU TAXES EUROPEAN CITIZENS INITIATIVE

Derk Jan Eppink outlines his plans for an ECI preventing the EU from levying its own taxes

11 EGG SECTOR UNDER THREAT FROM NEW LEGISLATIONNikki Sinclaire MEP draws attention to the unequal application of new EU rules across the EU

13 ACHIEVING POWER AND INFLUENCE IN THE ONLINE AGEThe worlds social media footprint is an untapped resource for people who need to build supportfor their issues, writes digital communications expert Mark Sinclair

20 CAN SARKOZY ACHIEVE HIS FRENCH CONNECTION?Frank Prenesti on French President Nicolas Sarkozys plan for a Grand Paris

THE EU AT HOME9 THE NEW INTERINSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT

Does the new agreement promote democracy or abuse current EU treaties?

6 EUROPES SOFTWARE INNOVATION UNDER THREAT FROM PATENTSAre software patents justified? Do they help of hinder the European economy?

15 REVISION OF TREATY RAISES ITS UGLY HEADIs it really time to revise the Lisbon Treaty?

16 A NEW VISION OF SUSTAINABILITYWe profile the new European Council headquarters. What should policymakers take away from

the building?

26 GALILEO A VERY EUROPEAN AFFAIRWe look at the budget and deadline overruns on Europes prestige project. Is it still worth saving?

EXTERNAL RELATIONS23 THE MOMENT OF TRUTH FOR TURKEY-EU RELATIONS

Could Turkey become an Islamist Russia?

24 BUILDING A FUTURE ON THE PASTJim Gibbons on the crossing of cultures in Turkey

28 OBAMA IDEALISM MEETS RACIST REALITYOur man from across the pond on underhanded attempts to delegitimize Obama

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT19 GM CROPSIs the commission running away from its responsibilities?

30 THE NUCLEAR CHALLENGEChris White reviews two new energy pamphlets and talks to their author, Giles Chichister MEP

Building a Future on the PastCan heritage projects help boost sagging economies or resolve conflicts?

Jim Gibbons reports for www.eureporter.tv from one of the EUsCapitals of Culture: Istanbul.

October 2010

independent media for better debate

Online: www.eureporter.co.uk Video: www.eureporter.tv

InsideA new vision of sustainability

The moment of truth for Turkey-EU relationsCan Sarkozy Achieve his French Connection?

The nuclear challengeGalileo A very European affair



4/32

L

A S T M O N T H S E UReporter article on the

European Citizens Initiative(ECI), by Ian Phillips, providedreaders with a very thoroughand comprehensive guide tohow the process will work, onceit is formally in place.ECIs are already being organised,

in fact, before that formal point isreached, such as the one we aredeveloping at the website, www.noeutax.eu . There are some otherfundamental changes currentlybeing proposed to the workingsof the EU. These changes may

be too far down the line to givecitizens a chance to say no to them,if we wait until the ECI systemis in operation before draftingtexts and seeking signatories. Oncertain issues, we need to be ready

to hit the ground running with awell-subscribed ECI, ready for

submission, from the first momentwe can.Foremost among those issues, in

our view, is the proposal to createEU-wide taxation. At any levelof governance, tax is the mosttangible, direct link between thecitizen and government, yet thereare some very senior figures in theEU who would like to establishEU-wide taxes well before thenext elections to the EuropeanParliament - even though theywere not a serious issue in the

previous ones, held only last year.What voice will there be,therefore, for citizens acrossthe EUs member states, if EUtaxation is introduced as part ofthe next budget settlement, even

possibly buried away unnoticedin the inevitable rows about

agricultural funds and nationalrebates?In collaboration with Belgian

think tank Libera! as co-organizer and the Flemish Dutchtax payers platform VlaNeTax ,we have set up our No EUTax-ECI to ensure that citizenswill indeed have that voice. Thisinvolvement of civil societyplayers is significant: our initiativeis not a political ego-platformbut a joint project that finds itsroots in shared and spontaneous

indignation. With the help andco-operation, wherever possible,of other taxpayers platforms andsympathetic organisations acrossmany parts of Europe, we arecurrently building a coalition of

citizens who simply want to say noto EU-wide taxes. This coalition

will be open to all, irrespectiveof ideological backgrounds, whounderwrite our ECIs aims.We know it is a daunting task.We know that we need a millionsignatures from, as it looks now,at least a third of the memberstates (nine countries), but we areconfident we will get them, becausethe citizens realize they are payingmore than enough taxes already.They dont need additional taxbills from Brussels, especiallysince there is no real objective

requirement for it. The systemof national contributions now inplace allows for better scrutiny bynational parliaments than directEU taxation would. Theoretically,if there actually were rational and

No EU Taxes European Citizens InitiativeBy Derk Jan Eppink MEP

October 20104

economy

Derk Jan Eppink MEP


5/32

economy

5October 2010

concrete reasons to increase therate of national contributions, thenthese should be able to convincenational governments.It is disappointing that there

are many prominent EU leaderswho do not wish to acknowledgethis. In August, when theTaxation Commissioner, JanuszLewandowski, signalled hisplans for pan-EU taxes in aninterview with the FinancialTimes Deutschland, he breezilyremarked that the door is opento think about revenues that arenot claimed by (national) financeministers. The grand gates ofthe Berlaymont may be wideopen to it, but we believe ordinarytaxpayers will firmly shut all theirdoors and windows to the idea ofanother fiscal layer.In my new book, Bonfire

of Bureaucracy in Europe(and in my earlier book, Lifeof a European Mandarin), Ipredicted calls for EU taxes and Ialso showed how the EU elite haslost touch with todays realities inpursuit of the almost religious idealof ever-closer union, insteadof concentrating on its core taskssuch as the single market. Havingpreviously worked in the cabinetsof two commissioners over aperiod of eight years, I have seenfrom the inside the extent to which

this is so.Significantly, the Commission hasannounced it is sympathetic to thegeneral idea of EU-wide taxationbefore it has examined the variousoptions for its implementation (airtransport, financial transactions,greenhouse gas emissions, toname but three). Clearly, it doesnot take a big leap of imaginationto conclude that pan-EU taxesare an end in themselves for theCommission, rather than therebeing any real need to levy in

specific areas.Indeed, the EU has little need toraise its own taxes. Each year, itcannot even spend all the moneyit gets from national governments.In the structural funds budgetalone, four and a half billion eurosremained unspent in 2008, and,as is well known, major parts ofthe EU budget are spent in a waythat is not approved by the EUCourt of Auditors. And this hasbeen the case for many years now.There is no doubt scope for ample

budgetary rationalisation withinthe current EU-budget.The EU tax proposal , on the

other hand, at a time when citizensare being obliged to tighten theirbelts, sends the wrong signal. It will

only add to the total fiscal pressureson the citizen. Even CommissionerLewandowski admits it. His planmust be fought tooth and nail let Brussels tighten its belt too.Understandably, politicians like

increased budgets to spend onpet policies. Yet insisting on lesswaste and budgetary austerityis usually frowned upon in theEU parliament and almostinvariably labelled anti-EU. Ashame. Fighting big governmentand EU taxes is not aimed againstthe EU itself. After all, one canlove ones country and still fightgovernment waste, no? Whetherone favours or opposes further EUintegration is not even the point:opposing government waste andunnecessary taxes ought to be thereflex from well-meaning EU-sceptics and EU-patriots alike.Meanwhile, the taxpayers in

the EU member states needprotection. If politicians areunwilling, the citizen can nowtry to make the point directly.That is why we have set up ourCitizens Initiative.Already various MEPs are vowing

to block dangerous initiatives.That seems to include un-European ECIs, a very debatableconcept that would leave the doorwide open to politicized, subjectivetreatment. A strong signal from one

million or more citizens across nineor more member states againstdirect EU taxation, might beconsidered just such a danger.Indeed, we suspect that some

inside the EU institutions wouldview any ECI as dangerous. Weobserve among those a tendencyto regard the ECI as a markedshift away from representativedemocracy, something thatcould only disturb the currentbalance of power. This is astrong exaggeration: the ECI,

as foreseen by the Lisbonagreement would supplementrather then erode the way EUpolicy is shaped. Nevertheless,the original ECI proposal by theEU commission has built in awhole series of hurdles to limitthe possibility of an initiativeever reaching the finishing line.The requirement for a millionsignatures from at least ninemember states is merely the last ofthese hurdles.Before an ECI even triggers

the starting gun, let alone gets tothe finishing tape, its organisermust submit a request to theCommission for a decision onits admissibility, after havingcollected 300,000 signatures.

300,000 signatures just to letthe Commission decide if it isadmissible or not!Then there is the requirement

that each signature should beaccompanied by an item of thesignatorys personal data, suchas passport or ID card number,social security number or fiscalnumber. Clearly, there are serious

data protection considerationshere, compounded by theproposal that the organiser ofthe ECI should be designated asdata controller and should thenbe considered liable in civil orcriminal law for any infringements.All of this is just unnecessary;

signatures could quite perfectly andsimply be validated in conjunctionwith electoral registers. As thingscurrently stand, many will bedisinclined to give such sensitivedata and therefore will beconveniently removed from theECI process. Nor will it have goneunnoticed that many potentialorganisers of ECIs, particularlyindividuals and small voluntarygroups, could be deterred fromdoing so, because of the currentdeadline of 12 months in whichthe signatures must be collected.12 months for 1 million signatures?That will only prove realistic foralready previously established largenetworks, such as trade unions, or

Greenpeace for example.Most importantly, the EUCommission ought finally tostate clearly how it intends totreat successful initiatives. For allthe elaborate hurdles it currentlyputs in place, it promises almostnothing. We feel every successfulinitiative deserves at least a publichearing. A thank you lettersimply wont do.It is very sad, really, because in

the ECI, the EU has finally hitupon an excellent idea which

could genuinely put it back intouch with public opinion. It isup to us, the citizens, therefore,to usher it there. In order toreally give the citizen a voice, theCitizens Initiative must be easyto use and transparent. If theECIs only use turns out to beits theoretical existence, then itwill turn out just be anothersterile symbol .So please, if you are one of

the many who oppose pan-EUtaxation, go to www.noeutax.eu,

sign up to our draft ECI and, assoon as the system gets the greenlight, we will be ready straight awayto deliver a very important messagefrom the citizens to the politicalelite no to EU-wide taxation!

PhotoParlementEuropeen

...in the ECI, the EU

has finally hit uponan excellent idea

which could

genuinely put it back

in touch with public

opinion. It is up to us,

the citizens, therefore,

to usher it there.


6/32

THE EUS POLICY ontopics such as copyrights,patents, and trademarks

has been a bumpy road. Themost memorable is still thesoftware patents directive.Hotly debated for more thanthree years, that directive wasrejected definitively by theEuropean Parliament in 2005.Not only has the EU since

stayed away from the topic ofsubstantive patent law but massiveparticipation from citizens andSMEs has led to close scrutiny anddebate of related legislation eversince. Some subsequent proposals

have raised new problems, othershave been criticised as softwarepatents by the backdoor.These policies are often discussed

in terms of intellectual property,a term which seems to be at the

root of some of the EUs problems.The best known laws which fallunder this name are copyrights,

patents, and trademarks, each ofwhich are already very differentin their purposes and effects,but we also have design rights,utility model rights, geographicalindications (Champagne hasto come from the Champagneregion of France), database rights,and more.A trademark is a tool for avoiding

consumer confusion. A patent isa government granted right toprevent other product developersfrom using an idea - even if the

other product developers never sawthe patent or the patent holdersproduct and their use of thesame idea is purely coincidental.Copyright is an automatic (nogrant required, no fee to be paid)

right to prevent others frommaking copies of your work butcopyright doesnt prevent people

from independently making a workthats coincidentally similar.When the EU proposes a policy

about intellectual property, itsproposing a single way of thinkingabout these. The difficulty isclear: is wanting stronger or moreflexible trademark enforcementreally linked to wanting the samechange in enforcement of all thoseother laws? When wine growers orcheese makers push for a change inhow their geographical indicationsare enforced, should this result

in a change in enforcementof copyrights, patents, andtrademarks?The EU has proposed two

directives on enforcement of IPrights. The first got amended and

watered down until it had littlerelation to its original text. Thesecond (IPRED2) raised such

debate that it was neglected by theEU institutions. After being asleepfor five years, it was withdrawn inSeptember.

THE SOFTWAREPATENTS DIRECTIVE

The first draft of the SoftwarePatents Directive was publishedby the European Commission inFebruary 2002. The origin of thattext is unclear since, although itshould be written by the EuropeanCommission, journalists noticed

that the Author field of the fileinstead contained the name of alobbyist for the Business SoftwareAlliance a group that lobbiesfor software patents and whichhas strong ties to large corporations.

The EPO has granted in the region of 50,000 software patents

Europes software innovationunder threat from patentsBy Ciarn ORiordan, Executive Director, End Software Patents

EuropeanUnion,2010

October 20106

the eu at home


7/32

In any case, the proposed textclearly aimed to expand patents tocover software.Between copyrights, trademarks,

and patents, the latter has thedistinction of being difficultto avoid and very expensive todefend against. In fields such aspharmaceuticals or automobilemanufacturing, these problemsare eased by the manufacturershaving legal teams and a certainlevel of financing. To be in thoseindustries, you have to be able toafford factories, raw materials,machinery, and you have to havethe legal resources to pass an arrayof regulations. These organisationsput resources into avoidinginfringement, and they are alreadyset up to challenge any accusations.In software, theres a joke about

a manager who phones a lawyersaying: I got this letter sayingI have to license a patent for

5,000 do I have to pay this?and the lawyer replies I canreview it for 12,000.Today, software is increasingly

being written by developerswho are closer to the user of thesoftware. Instead of the mainframedays where software was anaccompaniment for hardware,software is now often written bysmall businesses and by userswho work as a team. The rise infree software software whosesource code is fully available

is a very visible example. Thesoftware that delivers most of theworlds websites today is a freesoftware system called Apache.The name comes from the way itwas developed, with many website

operators contributing patchesto a shared system, they built apatchy system which did whatthey needed. Free software alsoenables companies to improve andadapt software internally.The result of this shift is that

we have a large portion ofdevelopment being done by peoplewho are paid to do a non-software

job, and develop software in the

course of that work. Adding legalrisks and licensing costs to softwaredevelopment would stifle thisculture, returning us to the modelof the 80s and 90s where softwareis something you buy (take it orleave it) rather than something youdevelop or control.No surprise then that it was

companies like Microsoft andIBM who pushed for softwarepatents, while the coalitionagainst software patents includedrepresentatives of SMEs such as

CEA-PME and UEAPME (whichrepresents companies employing12 million people in Europe) andorganisations supporting openstandards and free software such asFFII and FSFE.

THE PROBLEMS OFTHE UNIFIED PATENT

JURISDICTION

There have been var iousproposals for unifying the patentjurisdictions of Europe. Some,such as UPLS, are EU proposals,

others such as EPLA are suggestedas international treaties. Allcontain three problems one is ademocratic problem, one a socio-economic problem, and the third isa mix of both.

The democratic problem is thatthese treaties propose variousways of avoiding the cost oftranslating all patent applicationsinto the languages of all targetcountries. Heres the snag: if youuse a patented idea, knowingly orunknowingly, without permission,youve broken the law. If a patentwas valid in your country despitebeing in a language you cantread, then youd be bound by lawswritten in a foreign language. Somein the European Commissionthink the solution is to publish allpatents in English, French, andGerman and let the rest of Europerely on their knowledge of theselanguages. I have to say, I dont gothirsty when left to fend for myselfin Spain, but asking me to readand abide by a legal document inSpanish is a bridge too far.The socio-economic problem

is about costs. The costs ofobtaining and enforcing patentsare much higher in Europe thanin the USA. Not only do patentapplications have to be translated

into the languages of all the targetcountries, but enforcement is lesscost effective because seeking fulldamages would require a separatecourt case in each country.This inefficiency is a problem,

but its paradoxically a solution tocertain other problems. If a globalcompany sees its patent being

violated all over Europe, theresno court they can go to to seekdamages for all those violations.Suing in Germany or the UKmight be worthwhile, or perhaps

one or two other countries, butwhat usually happens is that theysue in the USA, leaving Europeas a clearly less litigious region.Removing this inefficiency wouldnaturally increase the volume oflitigation. The current volumeof litigation is so low that manysoftware developers arent evenaware that software patentsare regularly granted and evenoccasionally upheld in Europeancourts. Its an inefficiency thatbottle necks a bigger problem.

The third problem is in thespecifics of the various proposals.If we create a central European (orEU) court, who should be a judgeon the court? Well, hiring patentexperts sounds like a reasonable

suggestion, until we look at whothis would be. A 2000 survey by the

European Commission received 18replies from people classed as IPRprofessionals, 17 of which arguedin favour of software patents. Thishappens continually, in the EU, theUSA, Australia, every time theresa consultation about patentability,theres a barrage of submissionsfrom lawyers explaining thatsoftware should be patentable.Its like the arms industry lobbyingfor war. Lord Justice Jacob wrotethis in his 2006 rejection of asoftware patent:

If the encouragement of patenting and of patent litigationas industries in themselves werea purpose of the patent system,then the case for construing thecategories [of exclusion] narrowly(and indeed for removing them) ismade out. But not otherwise.Other proposals have even

suggested putting the EuropeanPatent Office (EPO) in charge ofhiring and firing judges. Giventhat the EPO has granted in the

region of 50,000 software patents,they can hardly be called non-partisan.The legal situation is that patent

governance is divided in three.First, there are the legislativetexts, based on the EuropeanPatent Convention, which saysin black and white that: shallnot be regarded as inventions:[...] programs for computers [...]as such. Secondly theres theEuropean Patent Office, whichsays that this exclusion should be

interpreted so narrowly as to benearly non-existant. Thirdly, wehave the national courts whichuphold some EPO-grantedsoftware patents and reject others.The unified patent jurisdictionwould result in the national courtsbeing replaced by judges with abackground similar to the people inthe EPO, which means upholdingsoftware patents.This explains the observation

by attorney Alison Crofts ofDorsey & Whitney LLP that

The industry-based driving forcebehind the EPLA comes from thepro-software patent group as a wayof ensuring that their software orpotential software patents are fullyenforceable across Europe.

Much of the worlds server infrastructure runs on free software

the eu at home

7October 2010

...if you use a patented idea, knowingly or unknowingly, without permission, youve broken the law.

If a patent was valid in your country despite being in a language you cant read, then youd be

bound by laws written in a foreign language.


8/32


9/32

TH E E N T R Y I N T Oforce of the Treaty ofLisbon has seen an

express legal basis provided forInterinstitutional Agreementsfor the first time. The EuropeanPar l iament leapt at theopportunity to reinforce itspower of scrutiny over theEuropean Commission, andto be further placed on alevel par with the Council ofMinisters through the newInterinstitutional Agreementdrafted in September. Somesee this agreement as apotential staler of the Executivebranch, and others deem itan abuse of the Treaty of theFunctioning of the EuropeanUnion (TFEU) with a de factoempowerment of the European

Parliament beyond what wasagreed under the Treaty ofLisbon. Whichever way youlook at it, the Parliament hasdone well for itself.Though on the surface the

Interinstitutional Agreementappears to be a technica ld o c u m e n t , i t s p o l i t i c a lramifications are significant. Inthe area of legislative procedureand planning the Parliamenthas essentially secured itself a rolein setting the multiannual and

annual legislative programmes,a role hitherto strictly withinthe remit of the EuropeanCommission as the executivebody of the European Union.It has done so by ensuring

the Commission present itsprogrammes for scrutiny and

justification and thus giventhe Parliament a means ofapplying political pressure on theCommission to take Parliamentsrecommendations on board (points33, 36, 39, 43, 51, 59 and annex 4

of the agreement).As to the provisions in theagreement covering Parliamentaryscrutiny, these have givenParliament political clout as tohow the Commissioners conductthemselves in the exercise oftheir functions. No longer will aCommissioner be able to weartwo hats in the course of anelectoral campaign, he or shewill have to take unpaid leave(point 4 of the agreement). If theCommission seeks to amend the

Commissioners code of conduct,they must seek Parliamentsopinion. The provisions alsoprovide for Parliament to scrutinizeany incumbent for the top job ofa European agency. Add to thisthe previous interinstitutionalagreement, where the Parliamentauditions the candidates forCommission President andCommissioner, and you seethe Parliament have an increasedrole in the selection of theEuropean executive.

Poss ibly one of the mostsignificant developments fromthe agreement lies in the field ofinternational relations. Underpoints 23 to 27 and annex 3 ofthe Interinstitutional Agreement,

the Parliament has secured theright to be present at nearlyall international meetings thathave for purpose internationalagreements involving the EU,be it as a delegation or asobservers. The key here lies inParliaments right to scrutinize,

and consequently apply pressure,on the Commissions negotiatingremit. Tie into this the newobligations for the Commissionto provide the Parliament withsensitive documents, one seesParliament on equal footingwith Council.The final major element of

the agreement sees a muchgreater interaction between theParliament and Commission withthe President of the Parliamentattending meetings of the College

of Commissioners, and in turnthe Commission President andVice-President for externalrelations attending meetings ofthe Conference of Presidents.The agreement also stipulates thatthe Secretaries General of bothinstitutions be regularly in touch.The concern for some is that

if one combines the citizensinitiative, the right of Nationalparliaments under the TFEU toscrutinize Commission proposals,a long wi th the European

Parliaments new rights of scrutinyunder the InterinstitutionalAgreement, then we are in dangerof effectively freezing the executivebody of the European Union fromcarrying out its functions. Arguably

the European Parliament, asthe directly elected body withinthe EU, is merely exercising powerstraditionally found in parliamentsthe world over, which is to superviseand direct the executive branchof government. Parliament willalso argue that they are merely

putting in practice an underlyingtheme of the Treaty of Lisbonthat ca l l s for the greaterdemocratic accountability of theEuropean Union.For those who see this agreement

as a de facto seizure of power bythe European Parliament contraryto the TFEU, they may very wellfind themselves on the same sideas the Council of Ministers. TheCouncil having chosen not topartake in the negotiations on thenew Interinstitutional Agreement

now finds itself wishing it had.The Council argues that toomany powers were given to theParliament, specifically regardinginternational negotiations, andhas called for the Legal Services toreview the agreement. It has beenreported that they might considertaking the Parliament to courtif it adopts this agreement. Thisnotwithstanding, the Parliamenthas adopted the agreement attheir Strasbourg sitting this month,and this marks a steady path of

increased Parliamentary powerthat the European Parliamenthas successfully secured at everyrevision of the treaties of the EUsince it first became directly electedin 1979.


promoting democracy or abusing the treaties?By Ian Phillips, Senior Associate, Interel European Affairs

the eu at home

9October 2010

Closer scrutiny: Parliament would have greater say in the selection of the EUs executive

EuropeanU

nion,2010


10/32


11/32

THE UK EGG industryis currently enjoying aperiod of growth, with

the sector providing significantemployment. British producershave the largest free-range flockin Europe 41% of all layinghens are free range, comparedto an average of 17.1% acrossthe EU and after substantialinvestment and preparationare ready to implement new EULaying Hen Legislation, with allcaged hens to be housed in new-style welfare-friendly cagesby 1st January 2012. Germany,Sweden, the Netherlands, andAustria also have particularly

high standards in this sector,indeed their national legislationis way advanced over that ofthe EU. In Sweden all layinghens have been housed innew-style cages since 2009,an achievement equalled byGermany at the beginning ofthis year.There are, however, concerns

that egg producers in somemember states will not be readyfor implementation of the newlegislation in time, and that they

will be allowed to continue tomarket eggs produced morecheaply than those in countries thathave achieved full implementation.Not least amongst the factorsat play is the current economic

situation which will have anadverse effect on implementation,as it remains difficult for producersto access funding in order to invest

in new equipment.There are also other factorsinvolved. Whilst the NorthernEuropean states may have a moreenlightened attitude to animalwelfare, in other states the mindsetis different, and practices that somemight find barbaric may be thenorm for others. Until relativelyrecently, for example, Bulgaria hadno animal welfare act in place, andeven now enforcement of newlyintroduced legislation is consideredinadequate. Agriculture Minister

Miroslav Naydenov, however,recently proposed jail sentencesof 1 to 5 years for those convictedof committing acts of crueltyagainst animals, a positive movestrongly suggesting a correlationbetween economic developmentand improved attitudes towardsanimal welfare. Greece has alsocome under fire for its record onanimal welfare, and it is interestingto note that the Greek AnimalWelfare Fund was started by anEnglish woman, Eleanor Close,

and to this day receives no fundingat all from the Greek government.I mention these examples notin condemnation, but merelyto illustrate the different socialand economic factors that affect

attitudes, and commitment, toanimal welfare.

The European Commissionshould be ready to protect

producers who become compliantwith the new regulations on time,and forbid the export of cheaperand inferior eggs within the EU.It is not, however, only within the

context of the EU internal marketthat unfair competition couldpenalise those who are compliantwith the new legislation.The EU is a net exporter of eggs

and egg products production isestimated to be 104.8% of demand

and has been for some time,although some egg products for

processing purposes are imported,mainly due to price benefits. Thereare almost 30,000 egg producersin the EU, most of which are thesmall family owned businessesthat are the backbone of oureconomies.It would be disastrous for the egg

sector if the new legislation wereto drive retailers and processors toturn to imported eggs on the basisof price, as is already happeningto a degree. If this were to happen,and if increased costs were to have

the simultaneous effect of makingEU exports less attractive, theeffects on small businesses and theiremployees could be very seriousindeed. I fear this may be anotherexample of the Commission

pushing for new legislation withoutfully understanding the needs ofthe sector that is to be affected.Consumer choice and fair

competition are essential, and it isclear that consumers are preparedto pay a premium in the interestsof animal welfare in NorthernEurope particularly, demand forfree-range and organic eggs as apercentage of sales is rising - but if

we do not have a level playing fieldthen egg producers will be hit hardby cheap imports, and the workthey have already done to improveconditions for animals will beseriously undermined.

Egg sector under threat

from new legislationProgress on animal welfare to be undermined?By Nikki Sinclaire MEP

It would be

disastrous for the

egg sector if the new

legislation were to

drive retailers and

processors to turn

to imported eggs on

the basis of price.

economy

11October 2010


12/32


13/32

eureporter will be running freeseminars in the new year withMark Sinclair, aimed at trade groups,industry associations and lobbyists.Learn how to harness online data,monitor sentiment, analyse conversationthemes and trends, cut through thenoise and reach the right people.

Punch well above your weight by beingmuch more strategic and informed, in

real time, than those who compete forthe same attention.

Register now for more informationabout eureporters free seminars atwww.eureporter.co/seminars

POLITICIANS ARE DOINGit. So is the private sector.And the public cant get

enough of it. Social media is ahuge global phenomenon, thatsa given. But now smart playersare realising that social media isnot just a place to talk. Its also aplace to listen.

Whether your business ismarketing products or advocatinga point of view, new listeningand monitoring technology hastransformed the internet into afertile, and cost effective, groundfor stakeholder research.

Now off icially ahead ofpornography as the worldsnumber one online activity,

our collective musings on socialnetworks have spawned huge datawarehouses that record commentafter comment. One marketingcompany we work with is storingover 9 billion conversations, andis adding over 40 million moreevery day.

Were not just talking aboutcomments on Twitter andFacebook here either. Thisoperation is monitoring morethan 200 million sites aroundthe globe mainstream social

networking sites and all mannerof review sites and special interestcommunities. In other words,theyre covering all the publicplaces people go to talk on the web,English-speaking and otherwise.

While the amount of datais overwhelming, whats reallyinteresting is the evolution oftechnology that makes interpretingit not only manageable, but also

provides meaningful results. Accessto reliable measurement andmonitoring is one factor behindinstitutions growing willingness toembrace social media. Ultimatelyof course the prize is not the data,but what it enables organisationsto achieve the opportunity toimplement campaigns that turnindividuals into foot soldierswith a message. As Fords chiefmarketing executive James Farleysaid last year, if you are tryingto communicate, as we are, that

you have been reinventing thecompany, you cant just say it. Youhave to get the people to say it toeach other.

G o o g l e s o c i a l m e d i amonitoring and youll appreciatethe rapid emergence of technologyand serv ices tha t enableorganisations to understand whatpeople are saying and to whomthey are saying it.

Effectively were talking aboutmarket research but drawingon a massive, global dataset. And

because of advances in language-based technology, this is a multi-lingual solution.

A clear understanding abouthow your brand or issue is beingtalked about today is now within

reach of every organisation. Tracksentiment over time. Assess howcampaigns are resonating. Seewhat people are saying aboutspecific products or initiatives.

Monitor share of voice relativeto competitors. Identify activistsand geographical hotspots.Understand the buzz words peopleare using, and incorporate theminto the next campaign.

While the capabilities of socialmedia monitoring softwarecontinue to improve, somechallenges remain, in particularthe issues of how to respond toreal time criticism and accuratemeasurement of ROI for socialmedia campaigns. Despite this,

the industry has reached a pointwhere the worlds biggest brandsare relying on this kind of researchto inform multi-million dollarinvestment decisions.

Something Im asked a lot iswhat could people be saying onthe internet thats relevant to myorganisation? Its a legitimatequestion after all, while plenty ofpeople were happy to comment onthe latest Old Spice commercial,most peoples business is morelocal, or more niche.

My response is to come back tothe vast nature of the internet,the power of the technology,and the skill of the operator. Inother words, while searching ona specific organisation may not

yield rich results, more rewardinginformation can be found bysearching around the topic andgaining a deeper understanding ofthe stakeholders.

What you do wi th tha tinformation is largely up to you. There are a wealth ofapplications, from sales andmarketing, through to communityrelations, issues management,public affairs, and even productdevelopment. Perhaps a better wayof identifying applications is toask, what areas of our organisationwould be improved if we had amore intimate understanding ofwhat our stakeholders think, feeland do?

With engagement a hot topicin business today, many expertscaution that true engagementrequired to inspire loyalty andpassion in a customer base isimpossible without investment indata analysis to inform decision-making. Close analysis of currentopinion is now not only possible.When you factor in return oninvestment, it becomes affordableas well.

Any organisat ion wherelegitimacy depends on having a

engaged constituency and/or masssupport can benefit from takinga closer look at social media asa channel to speak and, arguablymore importantly in the firstinstance, as a channel to listen.

Achieving power and

influence in the online ageBy Mark Sinclair, yourBusinessChannelPhysical protests are dramatic, but social media monitoring is another way to demonstrate large scale support

economy

13October 2010


14/32

NEWS

POLITICS

BUSINESS

CAMPAIGNS

www. t v f ou r . e u

Tel: London +44 20 3384 4061 Brussels +32 2 808 12 24


15/32

AF T E R ALMOST Adecade and a numberof referendums, the

Lisbon Treaty finally enteredinto force. The road from Nice toLisbon was a long and rocky onewith the European Constitutionfailing to pass muster with theFrench and Dutch electorate andthe subsequent Lisbon treatyfailing to impress Irish voters,the first time at least. Now, inthe wake of the financial crisis,it would appear that the EU islooking to go another round.

In the wake of the financialcrisis, the EU is keen to ensurethat the conditions that provokedthe eurozone cris i s aren trepeated. As such, the institutionshave been working closely on afinancial supervision package. Apush towards greater economicgovernance at EU level hasprompted calls for even tighterrules as well as tough sanctions onmember states that are in violationof the rules set out by the EU.In a joint statement, the French

President, Nicolas Sarkozy andthe German Chancellor, AngelaMerkel called for revisions tothe Lisbon treaty to allow for suspension of the voting rightsof the Member State if they are

found to be in serious violation of

basic principles of Economic andMonetary Union. Such a changewould require the amendmentsto the Lisbon Treaty be adoptedand ratified by Member States inaccordance with their respectiveconstitutional requirements.However, since the entry into

force of the treaty, Council hashad less of a free reign in suchmatters as the council now needsthe consent of the EuropeanParliament as co-legislators. Indeedthe EPP group in the European

Parliament is committed to askingfor a convention to ensure thatprocess is as transparent as possiblewith igo Mndez de Vigo MEPstating that the process cannothappen behind closed doors.Opposition to the treaty change

does not simply come from the factthat it might happen behind closeddoors. The real problem somehave with the proposals is that theratification process will simplyserve as a distraction, preventingany concrete action from taking

place. Now is a time for action,not debate over institutional issuessaid Mr Mndez de Vigo arguingthat the real issue that ought tobe on the agenda is how to solvethe current economic crisis not

constitutional or institutional

debate. Indeed, Mr Mndez deVigo called on governments tostop being so concerned withinstitutional changes and get backto questions of policy.Another crucial point to be

considered is the effect thiscould have on some of the moreeurosceptic countries in the EU.There are extremely vocal callsfor a referendum on Europe inthe UK such as with ConservativeMEP Daniel Hannan who recentlylaunched a campaign in favour of

a referendum on EU membership.There have been s imi la rcampaigns from other parties too,such as Nikki Sinclaire MEP whobeat Hannan to the punch with hercampaign for a referendum on theUKs membership of the EU.There are also concerns over

Ireland where a supreme courtruling which states that significantchanges to European treaties mustbe put to a referendum before theycan be ratified by the government.The original Lisbon Treaty

required two referendums inIreland in order to pass, a sequenceof events that left many with abitter taste in their mouth overthe perceived democratic deficitof holding a second referendum

because the government didnt likethe result of the first one.With calls from igo Mndez

de Vigo MEP to engagerepresentatives at the nationallevel it would seem apparent that,if the council were to attempt toadopt changes to the Lisbon Treatythe process could easily get boggeddown in national parliaments fora good while. The cost of such

measures would undoubtedly bevery high both in terms of timeand money but, perhaps mostcrucially, in missed opportunitiesfor more concrete action in theshort term.

Revision of treatyraises its ugly headBy James Hempstead

the eu at home

15October 2010

The real issue that

ought to be on the

agenda is how to

solve the current

economic crisis not

constitutional or

institutional debate.

TheCounciloftheEuropeanUnion


16/32

A new vision of sustainabilityBy Nicolas White

September 201016

the eu at home

Philippe SAMYN and PARTNERS architects & engineers, LEAD and DESIGN. Phili ppe Samyn and Partners, Studio Valle Progettazioni, Buro Happold Limited.


17/32

the eu at home

17September 2010

THE EU HAS outgrown yet another building.With the enlargement

of the EU in 2004 and theentry into force of the LisbonTreaty, the European councilfound itself in need of a newheadquarters to accommodatethe new influx of membersand staff. As a result, the EUcommissioned a new buildingfor the councils headquarters.Construction is now underwaynext door to the councilscurrent home in the JustusLipsius building.T h e b u i l d i n g h a s b e e n

designed with sustainability andenvironmental factors in mind interms of carbon footprint but alsoother forms of pollution muchoverlooked in this modern age ofclimate change. It is hoped that thisnew building will serve as a newmodel of sustainability. Indeed,The mastermind behind the newbuilding, Dr Philippe Samyn,architect and civil engineer, seesthe current focus on CO2 as whatsome would imagine as the onlyform of pollution as being deeplyharmful to the integrity of newbuilding projects.Stating that energy saving should

not be done at any cost Samyn

explained how solely focussing onthe energy efficiency of a buildinghurts the senses. For example,when selecting materials, the glassused has a large impact on theenergy efficiency of a building.Energy efficient glass has thinoxide layers that provide for betterinsulation that clear glass. However,these oxide layers block out around20% of the light spectrum. It is

these layers that give glass a greentint when you look at the panefrom the side.Samyn points to these examples

as being in the grey-zone ofscience. Explaining that we dontknow how these deprivations ofthe senses affect us but that in hisopinion at least, they have a quitea bad effect on human comfort.The aim of many of the material

choices for the new ResidencePalace was to restore the sensoryexperience within the buildingas well as present a new model ofsustainability.T h i s n e w a p p r o a c h t o

sustainability appears to be rootedin the much repeated mantrareduce, re-use, recycle. Indeed,the new Residence Palace buildingcould be seen as that mantra givenphysical form.A building is more than the sum

of its parts and those parts canbe seen in more ways than theircarbon footprint. For example,the touting of wood and stonecladding over other materials asbeing more sustainable is seen asonly presenting part of the case.While its true that stone doesntemit as much CO2 as concrete,

the environmental damage ofquarrying can be monumental. InSamyns words, stone comes fromdestroying a mountain.Samyn does not see wood as the

sustainable building material thatmany do. Citing elements suchas deforestation, the comparativefragility and shorter lifespan ofwood, as well as the chemicalsneeded to protect it from theelements. Where there is wood inthe building, the floors for example,great care has been taken to ensurethat as much wood from the oldResidence Palace on the site isused. Indeed, when new wood hasbeen needed, small planks havebeen used in an effort to stem thedeforestation of older trees. For theprincipal structure, Samyn insteadopted to use steel as, even thoughit might have a higher carbonfootprint initially, it can be recycledwith relative ease.Describing his vision of a

somewhat utopian society, DrSamyn explained that one shouldsee the planet as a finite entity andthat, through the use of materialslike steel, we could one dayenter a closed circle of buildingcomponents and materials withsteel for new construction projectscoming from old, disused buildings

This approach to environmental sustainability

demonstrates a flexibility that one would

hope the European Council might take into

account once they take up residence in their

new headquarters.


18/32 October 201018

the eu at home

for example, just like stones and hard bricksin the past. In fact, Samyn asserts the fact thatbuilding materials were much more easilyreused in ancient times than they are now.While this may have something to do with theprimitive technologies available at the timeas opposed to those we currently have at ourdisposal, there remains a lesson to be drawnfrom such practices. While the new Council

building will not be easily dismantled, it doesrepresent a significant step towards the goal of arecyclable building.The new Council headquarters might not be

easily recycled just yet, but they are being built,at least in part, out of recyclable materials. Twosides of the building will be composed of apatchwork of old oak window frames sourcedfrom across Europe. Something the architecthopes will allow the building to express thediversity and coherence of European culture.It is somewhat ironic that these window framesare in such abundance for use in the newCouncil headquarters considering many of

them were discarded, not because they nolonger performed their intended function, butbecause of EU regulations concerning thermalperformance.Samyns approach to the i ssue of

sustainability can be seen as slightly at odds

with policymakers. While policymakers tendto see environmental issues in black and white,and legislate accordingly, Samyn takes the

view that, while some technologies might notbe environmentally friendly per se, they can beapplied in a responsible way.Rather than seeing products as green and

not green, Samyn is more inclined to analyzethe cost of using each material, taking into

account more than simply energy efficiency andCO2 emissions. Samyn sees material choicesas part of a larger budget. Perhaps groundedin his desire to see the kilowatt hour as auniversal currency, he explains that budgetingproperly can allow one to use nicer materialsthat would normally be rejected due to theirpoor environmental credentials.For instance, there are two types of fluorescent

strip light bulbs. One that allows for colourreproduction of 82% and one that allowscolour reproduction of 92% at the expenseof 3 to 4% energy efficiency. According toSamyn, in the environmentalists book, the more

efficient bulb would always triumph. However,for him, the answer is not always to choosethe best performer in terms of efficiency, insteadopting to use less efficient bulbs more sparingly.This approach to environmental sustainability

demonstrates a flexibility that one would hope

the European Council might take into accountonce they take up residence in their newheadquarters. In addition to carbon footprint,Samyn, as an architect, is concerned withthe quality of light in a building, noisepollution, air quality and even the eliminationof odours. For example, the ceilings in thebuilding will have open joins to allow foreasy cleaning, helping to keep air quality ashigh as possible.Some might question the need for a new

Council building, especially at a time whennational governments are being forced to cut

back on public spending, much to the chagrinof many Europeans. Indeed, some will hold upthe new Council headquarters as yet anotherexample of the EUs ballooning budget.Doubly so when one considers some of theother aspects of sustainability addressed in thedesign of the building.The carpets in the building are to be made

from densely knotted Merino wool afterdesigns by a collection of European artists.The original idea was to have them wovenby Tibetan craftsmen, something whichwould give the building a decidedlyinternational flavour. Samyn defended the

cost of the carpets by explaining that whenthe time comes for them to be replaced, theycan be sold at auction for more than theyoriginally cost, something which would alsoprevent the carpets from becoming part ofthe the garbage cycle. Whether this isrealistic or not remains to be seen, however,it certainly puts an interesting spin on the ideaof sustainability.The EUs desire for sustainability to be

reflected in all aspects of the building hascertainly been taken into account. The designis filled with minor touches that all addsomething to the sustainability of the

building. Whether it be covering the doorsin small tiles instead of one large covering tomake them easier to repair, or the umbrellaof solar panels covering the roof of the building.The question now is whether or not the EUcan live up to its new building.

The lantern part of the building will house the meeting rooms

A far cry from the current meeting room next door


19/32

energy and environment

19October 2010

FROM SALMON TO potatoes andmaize, the EU has a full GMO plate todeal with, one that irritates not only

ecologists, but farmers and member statesas well. Obviously, trying to pass the buck tonational governments wasnt a solution. TheCommission only showed its lack of ideas intrying to break the deadlock...Will 2010 be the year that decides on GMOs

European future? Thats what the Commissionseems to want at least. In July, it revived thedebate over GMOs with a proposal to let EUmember states rule on GM Crops. Two months

later, the Council of Ministers highlightedthe weaknesses of this solution and sent theCommission back to the drawing board. Afailure? Not for Commissioner John Dalli, whorepeatedly congratulated himself for revivingthe debate and pushing member states to takeresponsibility. Even though the plan has notbeen embraced by the Council, it will indeedserve as a basis for future discussions.Actually, one can grant the Commissioner

that he managed to do what seemed almostimpossible to achieve a couple years ago:make almost everyone, from GMO supporters

to opponents, agree to... disagree. Why?Supposedly, such a proposal would create adistortion of competition between memberstates. It would raise barriers on the EU internalmarket as soon as a member state decides toban a GMO authorised in other member states,it would go against EU treaties and it wouldopen door to complaints and sanctions from theWTO. The truth is, without the Commission toback them, member states that oppose GMOswould feel unprecedented pressure from biotechcompanies and farmers who want to keep pacewith global agriculture market developments.On the other hand, pro-GMO countries would

have to take responsibility when going againstthe will of their citizens. Appearances are deceptive: the singlemarket for GMOs actually ceased to exist along time ago. Right now the Commission istaking responsibility for most prohibitions, but

member states can decide to prohibit thecultivation of an EU-approved GM plant ifscientific research raises doubts about its safety.The new system would only go further, helpingthe Commission to artificially put an end to aten-year-old debate within its walls by lettingmember states make the final decision on eachproduct. Scientific evidence could even bereplaced by socio-economic considerations or,thanks to a new Article 26b in the Directive onthe Deliberate Release of GMOs, by any othermoral or ethical concerns.The problem is, with only two GM plants

currently authorised in Europe (MonsatosMON810 maize and BASFs Amflora potato)and under the current legal framework, the EUis already facing a lot of resistance. Germany,France, Luxembourg, Austria and Greece havealready banned the MON810 maize from theirfields in order to protect the environmentfrom its effects, despite the absence of anyscientific grounds to justify such a measure.Some researchers even mentioned thatMON810 had less impact on the environmentthan most chemical insecticides used toprotect plants from caterpillars. Hence, the

proposal to let national governments makethe decision by themselves would only fuelthe current conflict between supportersand opponents to GMOs, by moving it to alarger scale.Of course, as mentioned by Commissioner

Dalli when he responded critics of his proposal,the current situation is also unbearable. In 2006,following disputes with Argentina, Canadaand the USA, the WTO condemned the EUmoratorium on GM products, the delays onproduct-specific applications and the lack ofappropriate risk assessments in some memberstates. Since then, two of the three disputes have

been settled, but the one with the USA remains.The EU approval system is considered too slow,and therefore needs to be accelerated.Should this be done at all costs? Probably not.

Whilst the EU has a hard time dealing withGMOs, green organisations may be right on

one point: the reason for the current deadlockis, ahead the lack of qualified majority withinthe Council, the need to improve research,safety testing and transparency. While 60% ofEuropean citizens are opposed to the use ofGMOs according the a Eurobarometer surveypublished in 2008, the same survey indeedshows that Europeans in general tend to feelthat they lack information on this topic.So far, mainstream debate has been mostly

sterile, being focused on health and environmentwithout managing to build any scientificgrounds. One could wonder if accepting

ethical, moral and socio-economic concernswould not simply fuel the ambient paranoiaand create legal uncertainty, while threateningthe CAP itself. Shouldnt we make sure weknow what were dealing with before openingPandoras box?

So far, mainstream debate

has been mostly sterile,

being focused on health

and environment without

managing to build any

scientific grounds.

GM cropsIs the Commission running away from its responsibilities?

By Thomas Bauwens


20/32

F

RANCE HAS BEEN inthe news for all the wrong

reasons. A wave of nationalstrikes over pensions has broughtthe country to a standstill andPresident Nicolas Sarkozysimmigration policies haveprovoked international criticism.So where does that leave his

ambitious vision of a GrandParis, unveiled in 2008, thatwould see the biggest changes tothe city landscape in more than150 years and leave his indeliblemark on the capital?The 35 billion euro plan calls

for developments extendingbeyond the citys traditionalboundary of the periphique ringroad, but Sarkozys recent politicalwoes and the toughest economicclimate since the Great Depression

may result in someone else seeingthe dream come to fruition.

Sarkozy commissioned 10architects to come up with theirideas of what an expanded Parismight look like, in what has beencalled the biggest redesign of thecity since the 19th century whenBaron Haussmann created thegreat boulevards that define it.The remit is not just about

new buildings and breachingboundaries, it is about completinga 20-year cultural, social andeconomic project to bridgethe disconnect between the

metropolitan Paris most peopleassociate the city with and its localneighborhoods.The challenge was to find a

way to link Paris (a city of just2.2 million citizens) with its

outskirts an area that takes in11.5 million inhabitants over

12 square kilometers somespectacular, such as Versailles,and others that have severe socialproblems, such the La Courneuvehousing estate.Sarkozys ambitious scheme

also sets a target of creating onemillion new jobs over the nexttwo decades as all the pieces ofhis plan fall into place.The underlying aim is to create

economic growth throughinnovation and an increase inthe regions working population.

The government also wants toimprove the quality of life for thecitys inhabitants by way of jobs,transport, housing and cultureaccording to the Paris RegionEconomic Development Agency

(PREDA), set up to help promotethe area to foreign investors andhelp them when they arrive.One of the stumbling blocks

is the thorny question of whocontrols what within the project.The myriad of local councils

that surround the city of Parisare concerned that their viewswill be sidelined or that centralgovernment will start to take morecontrol over regional matters.The architectural teams, taking

in urban planners and landscapeexperts from around the worldcame up with a wide-rangingselection of how they saw Paris in2030. The resulting presentationshad everything from AntoineGrumbachs valley of the Seine,that stretched from Paris to the

port of le Havre in the west toChristian de Portzamparcs skytrain running through the city anda new train station in Aubervilliersto serve cities in northern Europe.The other part of the plan is to

link all the outlying regions with anew transport system. Central tothis is the creation of eight businessclusters within the regionsaround the city of Paris.Sarkozy has committed to

spending 18 billion euros on a 130kilometres of new metro track

that not only link areas of businessexpertise that complement eachother from within the clusters, butprovide integrated transport hubsthat give businesses swift access viaair or rail.

Can Sarkozy achievehis French connection?The French President has big plans to makeParis an economic hub, but can he pull it off?

By Frank Prenesti

October 201020

economy

La Dfense, Paris


21/32

PREDA chief executive DenisTersen sa id the economicstrength of the region is oftenunderestimated.We sometimes forget that it is an

economic powerhouse, Tersensays, compared with the traditionalnotion of it as the worlds mostromantic city.There are 4 million jobs

here and we have the highestGDP in Europe compared withother regions.PREDA is keen to showcase this

transport plan as a more reliablealternative to its cross-channel rivalLondon, notorious for its unreliableand expensive transport links. Thatcase was strengthened furtherwith the new British governmentsdecision not to go ahead with a

third runway at Heathrow airport.The contac t w i th loca lneighborhoods is an issue forairports all around the world, saysa spokesman for Charles de Gaulleairports terminal 2, noting that theairport sits on the citys outskirts onan area the size of Heathrow andFrankfurt airports combined andnot hemmed in by nearby suburbs.We have four parallel runways.

The difficulty in Europe is to getnew runways as the main issue isabout increasing capacity, he said.

CDG is promoted as a major hub,allowing smoother connections toflights around the world with 35percent of passengers there justfor connections. It also a majorlogistical centre with US courier

firm FedEx choosing the airportas its European base.CDG boasts four runways and

will be connected to the newsystem with Orly airport, Garedu Nord and Gare delEst trainstations allowing TGV and

Eurostar rail services to whiskbusiness people to the UK andother main European cities.Tersen says the new driverless

metro system would help tobring some districts of the regionout of isolation.It will be a new automatic metro

that runs 24 hours a day with only(new) 40 stations. It will be paidfor by the increased value of the(surrounding) properties that willbenefit from the new network,he said.

With refurbishment to theregional RER lines, Sarkozy wantsto ultimately have a transportsystem that operates around theclock with a single fare structure.The modernist La Defense

business area is also busypreparing for change with 13building projects on the cards orbeing constructed. EPADESA,the public body responsible forplanning in the district, wantsto boost economic output ofexisting businesses and create an

integrated city with residentialand open spaces to give it a moreurban feel.The projects involve some new

build and some demolition-reconstruction of older generation

buildings. The governmenteffectively owns the land andleases the sky above.Significant office space increases

will come from the 166-metreCarpe Diem tower, which startedconstruction in March and is due

for completion in 2012 and the D2tower on which work should startsoon. There are also two mixed-use (office, retail and housing)323-metre skyscrapers slated forconstruction, designed by BritainsNorman Foster, called Hermitage1 & 2. A 343-room hotel is alsoplanned, but there is no timeframefor construction yet.EPADESA officials hope the

new transport links will makeLa Defense an even moreattractive offer for business people

with the prospect of checking inluggage at a station in the districtand picking it up at whateverforeign destination they may betravelling to.Olivier Machault, the bodys

finance director said La Defensewould like a direct link to theairport and possibly a Eurostarlink for travellers from Britain.However, his pressing concern issomewhere to accommodate them.We need more hotels because

our hotels (there are four in the

area) are very, very full during theweek. We need 3 or four more,with one or two very high standardones, Machault said.Ironically, La Defense was in the

headlines for different reasons in

October 2009 when Sarkozys sonJean announced he was runningfor the top post at EPADESA. Hewas forced to withdraw soon afterwhen there was a public outcry.Financing for this massive scheme

comes from the government inthe form of a 35 billion handoutknown as the national loan.Banks that were bailed out

by the government during the2009 financial crisis will stumpup the 13 billion euros they owethe French taxpayer as partof the deal. The remaining22 billion euros will be raised

via debt markets through thegovernments own agencywith medium and long-termrepayment schedules.There are also ambitious plans

to transform a quiet area 20kilometres to the south of thecity into one of the worlds leadingscience and technological centres.It has been allocated 1.5 billioneuros out of the national loan tolink it with local universities.Plateau de Saclay currently

houses 4,000 companies and thetarget is to have 12,000 researchersworking there by 2015. However,remoteness of the site and thelack of transport links are causingconcern among some of theFrench scientific eliteGuillaume Pasquier, head of

the agency responsible for Paris-Saclay, said it will take 15 yearsto get everything in place andtransform an empty area into avibrant campus.

But the Times Higher Educationmagazine reported in Octoberthat Frances academic institutionsare lukewarm about moving toa remote location from rathermore plush and pleasant premisesin Paris.The magazine quoted Sarkozy,

speaking last month during a

visit to a nanotechnology site atSaclay, saying that academicsshould see the move as anopportunity to break down barriersbetween institutions.In the face of stiff world

competition, it is unreasonable tomaintain this mosaic of prestigiousinstitutions, which are divided bycompletely artificial and obsoleteadministrative barriers, he wasreported as saying.Sarkozy may have a have a

grand plan for expanding and

connecting the bustling citymore famous for brasseries andboulevards than its business,but like the metro system thatcriss-crosses Paris, the path aheadis unlikely to be straightforward.

ARD/MichelDerouault

economy

21October 2010

Are Sarkozys plans for Paris on track?


22/32


23/32

external relations

23October 2010

DURING A WORKINGl u n c h w i t h t h erepresentat ives of

the Muslim community inFrance, behind closed doorslast month, French PresidentNicolas Sarkozy uttered thefollowing words about TurkeysEU membership:Turkey is a very important

country. Ill visit it around theend of the year. However, myopinion about Turkeys EUmembership didnt change. EUleaders that say they supportTurkey are not honest. If Turkeyhas got so many friends, why isnt italready a member? It is clearthat these countries dont behavehonestly. At least, I am honest.Instead of as a full EU member,I would like to see Turkey as anelement of a new axis with the EUand Russia. A cooperation betweenthese three powers would be muchmore relevant.While he still insists on seeing

Turkey as an extra-Europeancountry, it seems that the FrenchPresident is on the verge ofmaking a Turkish initiativeby acknowledging Ankarasgrowing importance.But why has Sarkozy, a rightist

leader who has again beendubbed as a xenophobic populistfollowing the expulsion of theRoma in France, suddenly started

to talk about Turkey in such apositive tone?Because the Islamist AKP

government in Turkey is driftingaway from the EU, and is startingto pursue a bolder, wider and andmore independent foreign policywhile consolidating its domesticpower after eight years of rule?Kemal Ki l i cdarog lu , the

new leader of CHP, the mainopposition party in Turkey, wasin Brussels last month. During aspeech he made at the European

Policy Center on September 16th,Kilicdaroglu emphasized that hechose Brussels as the destination forhis first official visit to Europe.After reminding EU leaders that

Turkeys project of European

integration had been kickstartedand continued by CHP and otherSocial Democrats in Turkey,Kilicdaroglu talked ratherbitterly about the support thatEU leaders and institutions stillprovide to the AKP:The AKP government, does

not exhibit a concrete will totransmit universal values likedemocracy, rule of law andhuman rights required by theEU accession process to Turkeys

neighbouring states, whileclaiming to play a pivotal andproblem-solving role in the region.CHP, on the contrary, regardsit as very important to pursuea coordinated policy with theEU towards its neighbouringcountries like Iran and Israel.A coordinated approach inthis context would not only bebeneficial for the EU and Turkeybut also for the countries inthe region.Kilicdaroglu met with several

EU officials, as well as the SocialDemocrat leaders in otherEuropean countries and theEuropean Parliament. Almost allof them were asking him: Whereis Turkey heading to nowadays?

Where does the AKP take yourcountry to? Were concerned.

Kilicdaroglu reportedly replied.We were warning you about thisin 2003, when AKP had come topower, and you were then labellingus as the secularist old-guard.Now do you realize the danger,which is not only posed againstTurkey, but also against the EU?Take the never-ending economic

crisis... Add the demographicfacts about the EU Finally,

remember how the EU supportedAKPs recent constitutionalamendments that were approvedby a referendum in Turkey onSeptember 12th.Then youll see the big picture

of a crossroads where the numberof regretful EU officials rises asan omnipotent AKP governmentkeeps marching to form anauthoritarian one-party rule ina new Turkey with a politicalopposition suppressed and a freemedia castrated by financial threats

from the government, like the$2.5 billion tax penalty that wasimposed on Dogan, the biggestmedia group in the country.As we reach this crossroad, there

will surely be a moment of truth

and we are fast approaching it. Inthese circumstances, it is naturalthat even a politician like Sarkozygets scared as he sees where theEU and Turkey are heading. TheFrench leader is right: at least,he has always been honest andconsistent, unlike many otherEU leaders.To conclude, we can argue that it

is very probable that 2010 will bedecisive for the future of Europeand Turkey. If AKP should be

able to form another one- partygovernment following the generalelections, paving the way to thetransformation of Turkey intoa postmodern dictatorship byenforcing the presidential system,who should we accuse first? Thesecular opposition in Turkey or thetwo-faced EU leaders who havebeen trying to make us believe thatAKP is a democratising force?Whoever we accuse, the

ultimate result will not change:There will be a decayed EU, lost

without old Turkey, and its newneighbour in Southeast Europe:An Islamist Russia with Muslimoligarchs in charge...Will Sarkozy still be talking about

an EU-Turkey-Russia axis then?

The moment of truthfor Turkey-EU relationsWhat if Turkey becomes an Islamist Russia?

By Emre Kizilkaya

Kemal Kldaroglgu meeting tefan Fle, European Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy

EuropeanUnion,2010


24/32

ONE OF HIS greatestregrets, accordingto my highly erudite

Turkish friend, is that he cannotread and enjoy the great Turkishpoets of early last century andbefore. The reason for that, ofcourse, is the great revolutionof Mustafa Kemal Atatrk, theman who turned Turkey intoa western-looking, secularstate. But abandoning Arabicscript in favour of the Latinalphabet meant Turkish wordslost their etymological rootsand the great writers of thepast were consigned to being

enjoyed only by those who bothread Arabic and speak Turkish,which no longer go together,of course. Even so, despite thisliterary disjunction, nobodycould accuse Turkey of having

forgotten its past, whateverthe problems of its present, andnowhere is that more apparent

than in Istanbul. Even so, notbeing part of the EuropeanUnion might make it seem anodd choice as one of this yearsthree European Capitals ofCulture, a selection invariablymade the Council of theEuropean Union. The other twoare Essen in Germany and Pecsin Hungary.Of course, its not such an

unexpected choice as the venuefor the Third European HeritageForum, as thats a Council of

Europe initiative, and Turkeywas a founding member. Bycoincidence, this year marks the25th anniversary of the CouncilsEuropean Heritage Days, andthe Forum itself fell just one day

before another anniversary: itwas exactly five years since formalmembership negotiations began

between Turkey and the EU.In Istanbul, much that is oldand historic remains. But someof the less celebrated older parts

still with their own appeal arevanishing under the wheels ofprogress, as Turkey seeks newinvestment and greater prosperity.Which is odd, since the purposeof the Forum was to look athow heritage issues can helpovercome poverty, social exclusionand even conflict.The biggest problem we have in

Turkey is the Kurdish problem,admits Defne Gursoy, a Turkish journalist who also works as aresearcher at the Sorbonne. Manyprojects include these sociallyexcluded communities, so civil

society is starting to get them ontothe bandwagon to develop heritageprojects. It sounds like a great

idea, but the problem with tryingto unite disparate ethnic groupsthrough a shared heritage is thatthey each have a different takeon whose heritage it really is. Theprinciple is based on the Councilof Europes Faro Convention,agreed in 2005 and now boastingalmost enough signatures tocome into effect (things canmove painfully slowly in inter-governmental bodies). In simpleterms, it says heritage belongs to usall, so that, for example, a Swedish

architect, spotting an importantbut unregarded pillar in Anatolia,say, can insist on its preservationbecause its his (or her) heritage too.In other words, it makes heritagea human right. Itll need all the

October 201024

external relations

Always there in the background: is Islam on the rise in Turkey?

Building a future on the pastBy Jim Gibbons


25/32

signatures it can get; as the Englishphilosopher Jeremy Benthamobserved, real rights come fromreal laws. Natural rights is simplenonsense, he wrote, Natural andimprescriptible rights, rhetoricalnonsense nonsense upon stilts.But thats not to say that the forceof law cannot create such rights; itssomething the Council of Europeis rather good at.But one of the biggest obstacles

was raised right at the outset:preserving heritage and developingheritage projects costs money. EvenTurkey, which is recovering fromthe economic crisis faster thanmost of its western neighbours,has been accused of sacrificingolder buildings in favour of newdevelopment. Istanbuls old19th century wooden buildingsare a case in point. We havesome contradictions of interestbetween the people interested incultural heritage and the peopleinterested in the transformationof this cultural heritage, AhmetInsel, a Professor of Economics

at Galatasaray University, toldme. I think the majority of thoseproviding funds for heritageprojects are most interested in theirprofitability. And this profitabilitycan come in the form of moretourist business, improved services,but we must be careful, too,because we can also transformsome village somewhere into apiece of theatre. Disneyfication:perish the thought!Not much risk of that in Eastern

Turkey, but money is still an issue,

of course. I spoke with a spiceseller in Istanbuls crowded andaromatic Spice Market. I comefrom Anatolia but I got out ofthere, he said, But the cultureis better than in the western part,because when you go to the easternpart and you have no money youcan stay one month, two months,in someones house, no problem.But in Istanbul: no money, nohoney! I had just watched himsell two grams of pure saffron to apair of Australian tourists for

30, so somebody is makinghoney, but its not Orhan who isjust a salesman.

The Council of Europe, rootedas it is in juridical, human rightsand heritage issues, is bound to

take a view that cultural mattersmerit more attention fromgovernments. But they have apoint. Culture itself is a kind ofglue for society, its what makessociety human, says RobertPalmer, the Councils Director ofCulture, and governments mustrecognise the value of continuingtheir investment. But they mustalso recognise the amazing natureof heritage in terms of stimulatingthe economy. Yes, quite, but withbanks to bail out, currencies toshore up and unrest in the streetsits probably not the first thing ontheir minds.Turkey is still a long way from

being accepted into the EU, despiteformer German Foreign Minister

Joschka Fischer predicting thatthe economic crisis and Turkeysrelative economic success maysoften opposition in Germany,France and Austria, where itsstrongest. Even Prime MinisterRecep Tayyip Erdogan hasmountains to climb in terms ofsatisfying Brussels that all his ethnic

minorities and their respectiveheritages will be sufficientlyrespected, even if the constitutionalposition of the generals has beendealt a blow. In any case, manyobservers believe that the 58% yes

vote in the recent constitutionalreferendum should be seen moreas backing for Mr Erdoganssoftly Islamist party, rather thana rallying call for reform. Manyintellectuals voted no; they fearedit would weaken the independenceof the judiciary.

But heritage can be shared togood effect, putting an end toconflict, and nowhere displaysthat better than Istanbul. Theopening ceremony of the 3rdEuropean Heritage Forum washeld in the Hagia Irini museum.Built on the site of a pre-Christiantemple it was Constantinoplesfirst Christian church, becominga weapons store after the citysconquest in 1453 by Mehmet II,then a museum. Now its a concerthall, where traditional Turkish

music was played to delegatesunder the Turkish and Europeanflags and beneath a large crosspainted in the dome above. Ameeting of cultures, if not alwaysof minds.

Istanbuls historic Spice Market - only the neon is new

external relations

25October 2010


26/32 October 201026

the eu at home

Galileo, the EuropeanUnions prestigious andtactical satellite project

is coming under increasingpolitical pressure over risingcosts at a time when memberstates are facing savage cuts.However, the project still enjoysbroad support within the EUinstitutions.The 29th of September marked

a European day of action, titledNo to austerity Priority for jobs

and growth! led by the EuropeanTrade Union Confederation. Inaddition to the European day ofaction, there have been strikesacross the EU in reaction togovernment spending cuts with

the left pointing to the Keynesianmodel of increased publ icspending in order to promoteeconomic recovery. Indeed, allsides in the debate on the futureof the European economy agreethat something has to be done. Theleft calls for increased spendingwith the right calling for spendingcuts. One thing both sides couldcertainly agree on however, is thatgovernment waste does nothing tohelp anyone.

Why then, is the EU so insistenton pursuing its Galileo project tothe bitter end? In a recent reportby Open Europe it was revealedthat the cost of the project hasrisen dramatically from 2.6

billion in the year 2000 to around22.2 billion.The Galileo project was supposed

to be one of the jewels in Europescrown. A satellite navigation systemthat was developed and built inEurope. It would be more accuratethan the GPS system madeavailable by the Pentagon and,crucially, would not be under thecontrol of a foreign government.When completed, the Galileo

system will be accurate to within

one meter with a premium serviceavailable to paying customer that isaccurate to within one centimeter.It will also have strong encryptionas well as extra informationsuch as weather conditions. In

addition, the fact that it wont berun by the Pentagon will mean thatthe quality of service will not dropas GPS can when the US militaryneed extra capacity.The benefits for the European

consumer are not immediatelyclear however. While GPS is onlyaccurate to within ten meters, itis wholly sufficient for consumergrade satel l i te navigat ion,despite the occasional news storychronicling the unhappy journey

that ended with the driver beingtold to drive into a river by theirtrusty sat-nav.However well intentioned the

Galileo project was when it began,it quickly became an example of

Galileo A very European affairBy Jessica Sone


27/32

the eu at home

27October 2010

how not to run a project. A jointventure between the EU and theEuropean Space Agency (ESA)(although the project would bewholly funded by the EU) thefirst four years went relativelywell with the European court ofauditors noting that the EuropeanCommission had actively playedits role of initiating the programand getting it started. However,Delays and cost overruns becameapparent in the course of 2005,but no corrective action was takenuntil March 2007. This findingled the court to conclude that TheCommission failed to provideadequate leadership.In 2005 infighting between

member states about the detailsof where the money allocatedto the project should be spent aswell as the locations of key facilities

and infrastructure. Memberstates also fought with the privateinvestors who were meant tofinance two thirds of the project.Eventually, the private backerspulled out of the project altogetherc i t ing concerns about thecommercial viability of the projectgoing forward.Perhaps the private investors had

a better idea of the situation thanthe European Commission. It hassince been revealed that the projectwill be almost ten years overdue

and will cost almost ten times morethan originally forecast. Indeed,the Galileo project has become anexample of European cooperationat its worst. Infighting betweenmember states, EU institutions

and private enterprise have, itwould seem, almost come to definethe project.While a more accurate, European

controlled satellite navigationsystem still looks good, on paperat least, the fact is that theproject has been so delayed thatboth Russia and China have

completed and launched theirown rival services, casting doubton whether or not the Galileoservice, if completed, could ever becommercially viable.While the commercial viability

of the project remains in question,it would appear that there is still abroad wave of support for Galileo.Mathieu Grosch MEP was keento highlight the benefits thatGalileo would bring, citingindependence from foreigncontrolled systems as one of the

top reasons to continue with theproject. In addition he noted thatthe increased accuracy and extrafeatures supported by Galileo overGPS would allow for advances innavigation and security, especiallyin respect to the tracking ofcommercial goods.Indeed, Galileo could be exactly

what Europes transport sectorneeds. The EU is pressing for moreintelligent transport systems inan effort to cut down on CO2emissions. At the July plenary

before the summer recess, MEPsadopted a report by MathieuGrosch MEP which calledmeasures to combat bottlenecks inand around cities as well as a moreefficient interface between various

modes of transport across theEU, something that Galileo couldcompliment very nicely.When asked about the costs,

Grosch expressed concern but waskeen to point out that, while thesums of money may be large, therewere more obvious benefits to theGalileo project than there are to

many of the projects undertakenby the EU. Indeed, While the EUhas cut back on some spending ithas been all too eager to allocatelarge amounts of money to newprojects as well as make it clearthat things like the CAP are notgoing away any time soon. Indeed,the Commissioner in charge ofthe CAP, Dacian Ciolo, recentlycommented that farmers oughtnot be embarrassed because theyreceive state money.Grosch revealed his surprise

that member states and privateindustry had not been more keenon the project. Indeed, it couldperhaps be argued that with morestakeholders involved, there wouldhave been more oversight thatcould have prevented so manydelays and budget overruns, or atleast mitigated them.The EU has something of a

reputation for spending vastamounts of money on projectswhere the benefit is not clear or,at least, not unanimously agreed

upon. However, the Galileoproject must stand out amongstthem as one of the most bizarre.Whether they favour increasedpublic spending or spending cuts,one thing must be clear, there

will be cross party concern at theamounts of money the commissionis talking about to get Galileo upand running, especially given theGerman governments admissionthat once operational, Galileomay not be profitable, even in thelong term.At a time where member states

are slashing public spending andthe EU is talking about levying itsown taxes in order to increase itsbudget, this is perhaps the worstpossible time for such revelations tocome out.

Antonio Tajani, vice president of the european commission for industry and entrepreneurship at the Galileo Application Days

The Galileo project

was supposed to be

one of the jewels in

Europes crown. A

satellite navigationsystem that was

developed and built

in Europe.

EuropeanUnion,2010


28/32

ON JANUARY 20TH,2009, history wasmade and many

black Americans were feelingan increased sense of pride.With the swearing in ofBarack Obama as the 44thPresident of the United States,many black Americans werewalking a little straighter,holding their heads up alittle higher and, in many

cases, feeling a renewedsense of self. It even affectedthe children.In all my years of mentoring

young black men, I had never seensuch a sense of pride. For the firsttime, many of these young men aresaying that they want to be lawyers,senators and governors, instead ofrappers, basketball and footballplayers. The dawn of a

eu reporter oct 2010

Documents