[Comment] Recession could give birth to EU sustainability treaty
PETER SAIN LEY BERRY

28.11.2008 - EUOBSERVER / COMMENT :

I suppose there could be a sense in which the current recession may come in later years to be seen as a blessing in disguise.

That is not in any way to understate the pain of those who have lost or will lose their jobs and savings now. There is always pain in any transition. But if Europe comes out of the present recession facing in a different direction, then perhaps we shall be better able to avoid even greater pain in the years to come.

Could 200 billion euros be spent better than on clothes, cars and cosmetics? What do I mean? Well, it’s been pretty clear that our way of life in Europe has become unsustainable in terms of the resources it demands and the load that it puts on the planet.

We have learned to recycle but our appetite for energy, of course, and for steel, aluminium, tin, copper, coltan and so on seems practically inexhaustible. Moreover, we export our lifestyle and our consumption to the developing and the emerging worlds. They soon will overtake us, where they haven’t done so already, in their demands on the planet.

The rain forests are shrinking, our seas are polluted with fish stocks decimated; biodiversity is everywhere only a fraction of what it was a century ago. All this we know and now we see the visible effects of climate change in the melting of the permafrost, rising sea levels and drastic perturbations in the weather.

***

Stable and sustainable:

We know this cannot go on. We know that mankind needs to arrive at a point at which the burden that it lays on the planet is both stable and sustainable.

Technology may take us so far. With plant breeding techniques or genetic modification we may learn in the future to double the yield from an ear of wheat, but we know that we shall not be able to treble it.

Though technology may take us a long way from where we are now, we know that its capacity to assist us is not unlimited. We know there will come a point when we shall have to stop the headlong expansion of demand. The world and its resources are finite: we cannot place an infinite load upon it.

Climate change is pushing us towards a more sustainable future, towards using less energy, for instance, and towards recycling of consumables. Here the response from the European Commission and from national governments is clear. We are marching away from profligacy and towards sustainability. Industry must adapt.

Go out and spend:

Now comes the recession in whose icy grip most of western Europe’s economies are firmly held. Unlike climate change economic decline poses an immediate threat to our way of life. So the authorities have acted.

On Wednesday the Commission announced a programme - or rather it exhorted that a programme should be brought into being seeing as it is the Member States who will pay for most of it - of €200 billion of financial stimulus, approximately 1.5 percent of Europe’s GDP.

These measures are directed simply at returning Europe’s consumers to Europe’s High Streets again and to kick-starting the same old cycle of unsustainable consumption.

“Go out and spend,” the Commission says in a crude reversal of its usual financial prudence. “We shall lock the Stability and Growth Pact (the agreement that sets limits on Member State debt and fiscal deficits) in a cupboard until 2011. Do whatever you like. We shall bless your expenditure, save only that it should be “targeted” and “temporary” whatever those words may mean.

It all seems madness to me, I have to confess. Not that the situation is not serious. I know of three people already in my small circle of friends and acquaintances who have lost their jobs. And each firm that folds places a greater strain on all the others until the next weakest folds too. It is a vicious circle. Everyone in business is in survival mode, hoping they will struggle through and trying to safeguard reserves.

No, it seems madness to me to imagine that an undirected and barely co-ordinated financial stimulus of this sort will be sufficient to arrest this recessionary juggernaut.

The stimulus amounts to a few helicopter loads of water against a forest fire. There may be a temporary discernible effect, but the fire will take its own course and burn itself out according to natural factors.

A Treaty of Sustainability:

It seems madness to me to think of such sums of money which, though they may pale in comparison to the magnitude of the recession are nevertheless stupendous sums in their own right, being thrown away like this with so little expected benefit.

It seems madness because that money will have to be paid for. Whether I borrow €20,000 for a new car, or whether my government does so on my behalf, I shall still have to pay for it later - either by direct debits to my bank or by large cheques to the Inland Revenue.

And while I am paying such large cheques - and governments are repaying their financial stimulus debts - I am not in a position, and neither are they, to pay for the investment that should be leading us all towards a more sustainable and a more socially just world.

Instead of these €200 billion being spent on clothes, cars and cosmetics, how much better might it have been to have seen a massive increase in the funding available for research - into energy storage for instance, or hydrogen cars or energy efficiency and renewables, or - given the rise in food prices - into increased yields from sustainable agriculture.

Instead of cutting VAT across the board (as we have done in the UK) could the cut not have been selective to reward those industries that would lead us down more sustainable paths - recycling, repair and re-use, energy saving and so on?

Still in times of difficulty, the EU has the knack of conceiving a vision for the future. In the seventies, after the oil price shock, it conceived the idea Monetary Union; in the nineties - a grand expansion of the Union towards the east, re-uniting our Continent. What now?

Could we be looking in 20 years at a new treaty setting out a new vision? A treaty that dealt not with regulations or constitutional provisions or accessions but one which dealt with a way of living in the world of tomorrow. A Treaty of Sustainability in fact.

—————–

Peter Sain ley Berry is an independent commentator on European affairs.

From:      sander at brinkmanclimatechange.com
Subject: Information Toolkit for post-2012 climate policies, side event Poznan December 1st, 3.30pm
Date:      November 28, 2008

Toolkit for post-2012 climate policies will be presented in Poznan on the very first day:

December 1, 3.30-5.30pm, EU Pavilon: Rubinstein room.

We are pleased to invite you to have a look at the Toolkit and to be informed on the contents.

If you are already interested, you may freely download the Toolkit from:
 http://www.brinkmanclimatechange.com/Too…

For further information, please contact:
Sander Brinkman,  sander at brinkmanclimatechange.com
Koen Smekens,  smekens at ecn.nl

Czech court green-lights EU Lisbon Treaty. {sort-off ?}
LUCIA KUBOSOVA

26.11.2008 @ 16:59 CET
EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - The Czech constitutional court has unanimously ruled that the disputed parts of the Lisbon Treaty are in line with the Czech Constitution but, the judges have admitted they did not analyse the treaty as a whole, sparking speculation that the issue could be raised again by its critics in the country.

{The Lisbon Treaty does not change the fundamental direction of the EU - they said - But why did they not read the whole treaty so they can make a final judgement?? So now the game is not finished yet.}

In his closely watched verdict announced on Wednesday (26 November), Vojen Guttler, the presiding judge rapporteur, argued that the new reform treaty does not change the fundamental direction of the EU, nor does it harm the sovereignty of the member states.

He added that a new provision in the treaty that clears out the terms for countries that wish to leave the union is “the indisputable confirmation” of their sovereignty, while a transfer of powers to the EU level can only happen if it is approved by member states.

The statement contradicts the arguments put forward by President Vaclav Klaus on Tuesday (25 November) in his address to the judges during a public hearing. Reacting to the verdict, President Klaus commented that the court’s approach was “inexpert”, “subjective” and “political”.

“I regret to state that the Constitutional Court has not given appropriate response to my legal arguments. I expect a group of deputies or senators will raise these and more other arguments again,” he said in a statement.

The court itself pointed out that it was only reacting to the concrete questions received from senators earlier this year. Rapporteur Guttler said that if the judges had reviewed the treaty as a whole, they would not respect the right of other politicians or institutions to raise other issues.

But the chair of the Czech Senate, Premysl Sobotka, of the ruling centre-right Civic Democrat Party (ODS) said that it is “unlikely” that senators would address the constitutional court again, CTZ agency reported.

“At this moment, nothing is blocking the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty in both parliamentary chambers” in the Czech Republic, Mr Sobotka added. The ODS party is divided on the issue however, with some deputies following the line of President Klaus, who argues that the ratification should only continue if the treaty is approved in Ireland.

***
Reactions in Brussels:

Meanwhile, some EU personalities in Brussels rushed to comment on the keenly awaited verdict of the Czech court.

“Today’s decision of the Court brings to an end the treaty ratification standstill in the Czech Republic,” said European Parliament president Hans-Gert Pottering and reminded Prague of its key role as the country chairing EU’s rotating presidency country in the first half of 2009.

“In this regard in the European Parliament we trust that the new EU Presidency will seriously contribute to push forward the ratification process,” he noted, adding that “ideally” this process should be finalised by the June elections of the EU assembly.

“The decision of the Czech supreme court is very welcome, although hardly a surprise,” commented Andrew Duff, a British Liberal MEP in the constitutional committee. He said that the interventions by both senators and President Klaus were “erratic”.

“Neither the Senate nor the President showed a sure grasp of the realities of the legal constitutional order of the EU, or of the fact that when the Czech Republic signed up to become a member state of the Union it was subscribing not only to the acquis communautaire [rules] of the past but also to all future obligations.”

Nigel Farrage, the leader of the UK’s eurosceptics in the EU legislature also said that the verdict came as no real surprise - although for different reasons.

“The pressure from the European Commission and the Czech government’s desperate need to fall in line with Brussels as it prepares to take over the Presidency made it a foregone conclusion,” he said in a statement.

The European Commission said it does not want to comment on various stages of the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty in member states but its spokesperson added: “We are confident that the Czech parliament will honour the commitment which the country made when the treaty was signed.”

This is to draw your attention on the following event:

‘Climate Change and Energy Security - Major Challenges of European Energy Policy’

The Institute of European Studies and the Law Faculty of the University of Leuven in cooperation with the Energy Law Research Forum organize a two days event focusing on the analysis of the geopolitical and legal aspects of climate change and energy security.

Location: Auditorium Jacques Thierry, Rue du Trône, 1, 1000 Bruxelles, Belgium

Date: 15/16 December 2008

 http://www.elrf.org/

Among confirmed speakers:

Prof. Peter Cameron (Dundee University)
Prof. Leigh Hancher (Tilburg University)
Prof. Kurt Deketelaere (K.U. Leuven)
Prof. Philip Andrews-Speed (Dundee University)
Prof. Sebastian Oberthür (Vrije Universiteit Brussels - IPCC)
Prof. Paul. Nihoul (Université catholique de Louvain)
Prof. Jean-Pascal van Ypersele (Université catholique de Louvain - IPCC)
Prof. Nicolas de Sadeleer (Facultés Universitaires Saint-Louis)
Prof. Yves Smeers (Université catholique de Louvain)
Dr. Sanam Haghighi (Econgas)
Dr. Shamil Yenikeyeff (Oxford Institute for Energy Studies)
Mr. Claude Mandil (Former President IEA)
Mr. André Mernier (Secretary General of the Energy Charter)
Mr. Christian Cleutinx (Director General of Euratom Supply Agency)
Dr. Jorge Vasconcelos (Former president of CEER)
Mr. Jean-Arnold Vinois (DG TREN)
Mr. Jean-Marie Devos (Secretary General EUROGAS)

For any information please contact: Mme Danielle Bidoul, Tel: +3210474706,  danielle.bidoul at uclouvain.be

————-
On behalf of the ELRF,

Leonardo Massai

Researcher EU Environmental Law
T.M.C. Asser Instituut

P.O.Box 30461
2500 GL The Hague
The Netherlands

Tobacco farmers burn crops in protest at EU subsidy cut. {at least they could have used those leaves for energy.}
LEIGH PHILLIPS, November 19, 2008.

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - Thousands of raucous tobacco farmers from across Europe mounted a demonstration in the EU capital on Wednesday (19 November), setting alight a bonfire of tobacco leaves outside the European Council building in protest at changes to EU subsidies.

Claiming a crowd of 10,000 tobacco growers and workers from processing factories, organisers had called the day of action in Brussels to coincide with a meeting of EU agriculture ministers on the Common Agricultural Policy “health check.”

The EUobserver photo shows Tobacco farmers marching in Brussels against subsidy cuts on Wednesday.

The farmers and workers say the proposed cut of half their subsidies from 2010 will result in massive job losses across the industry. { that makes us feel really angry - so what - learn doing something that makes sense. Why should they expect the public to support insanity?}

The protesters demanded that existing subsidies, which link the money to production volumes, be extended to 2013 to give them more time to adjust to EU agricultural sector reforms and said they were hoping for a favourable decision from the agriculture ministers meeting today.

A 2004 agreement by member states will from 2010 see half of the payments to tobacco farmers delivered to a restructuring fund to help the sector switch to other crops.

“Without tobacco, there are no jobs - our countryside will become a desert,” read one large red and white home-made banner on sticks.

Tobacco growers from Germany, France, Spain, Italy, and Greece and also from new member states Hungary, Poland, and Bulgaria flew their national flags, chanted, set off sirens and also smoked heavily the length of the boulevard that separates the Council building from the headquarters of the European Commission.

Francois Vedel, delegate secretary of the International Tobacco Planters’ Union (UNITAB), said: “We’ve lost 250,000 jobs in the sector in the last three years, with the largest losses in Greece and Apuglia in Italy - everywhere governments have decided on a full de-coupling.”

De-coupling ends the system whereby farmers must keep a particular animal or grow a particular crop to secure a direct subsidy payment.

“De-coupling and tobacco is not working. Tobacco’s a different kind of product - it is so labour intensive, with an average of 40 workers per hectare, as opposed to most other crops, which have just one worker per 100 hectares,” he said. “It’s the most labour-intensive crop in Europe.”

“Most tobacco farms are just one to two hectares as well. These sites are very, very small - too small for farmers to switch to other products.”

Pierre Haein, president of the processors’ association, FETRATAB , said: “The sector today is fighting a battle that is vital for the maintenance of the dignity of small farms and for tens of thousands of associated jobs, for our rural livelihoods and against the stupidity of certain bureaucratic decisions which are completely disconnected with reality.”

Meanwhile, Regina Obergfell, an accountant with a tobacco-threshing firm in Karlsruhe, Germany, warned companies as well as tobacco growers will be affected.

“It’s not just farmers, but people in industry as well that will be hit. If they can’t grow tobacco, we lose our jobs,” she said.

Ms Obergfell does not smoke herself, however, saying that she saw a model of a tar-stained lung and it made her want to quit.

Reintroduction of subsidies? No way

The EU agriculture commissioner yesterday said she would not countenance any reintroduction of subsidies, however.

“The tobacco reform was made in 2004, it was supported by all countries and also all tobacco producing member states,” Ms Mariann Fischer Boel told MEPs in Strasbourg. “I have said lots of times, I am certainly not going to reopen the tobacco reform.”

The sizable protest did not move the Danish commissioner either, with her spokesperson on Wednesday saying: “Everyone reached agreement back in 2004. We are absolutely not about to re-introduce tobacco subsidies now. No way.”

However, Italy announced earlier in November that it would support only a partial decoupling of the subsidies from 2010. Rome is supported in its position by Bulgaria, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Romania and Spain.

Poland rejects French CO2 compromise as summit looms.
RENATA GOLDIROVA, November 20, 2008

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - Poland has given the cold shoulder to concessions offered by the French EU presidency on how the union’s power sector should reduce CO2 emissions.

“It does not solve the problem of electricity prices in a satisfactory way,” one Polish diplomat said on Wednesday (19 November) in response to the French proposal.

What will happen if the 11 December EU summit, the post-Poznan summit - fails to see agreement?

The concessions paper is aimed at addressing Warsaw’s key objection - against the buying of 100 percent of pollution permits under the union’s reformed emissions trading scheme (ETS), the cornerstone of the EU’s strategy against climate change.

Under the reform, EU governments would no longer give away permits to pollute to the power sector. Instead, the industry would be forced to buy the right to emit carbon dioxide by auction, with full auctioning expected to kick in from 2013.

To get Poland on board, the French EU presidency has offered a three-year long exemption from the regime to those countries that produce at least 60 percent of their electricity from coal and are poorly connected to the grids of other EU states.

Their plants could receive half of their pollution permits for free until 2016, France has suggested.

Poland - the chief opponent of the ETS reform - swiftly rejected the French ideas, however. It claims the changes would harm its economy, as almost 95 percent of the country’s energy production is based on coal.

***
Alternative suggestion:

Instead, Warsaw has tabled its own alternative to full auctioning - a so-called “benchmarking-auctioning approach” that suggests granting free allocations on the basis of actual production.

In practice, separate benchmarks would be set for each type of electricity production - hard coal, brown coal, natural gas and fuel oil - while free allowances would be granted “ex-post” based on actual emissions.

The system would reward best performers, a Polish diplomat said.

Starting from 2013, the base benchmark would be reduced by one percent each year - something that should put additional pressure on the power sector to modernise technologies.

Warsaw argues that its proposal helps address concerns about the level of electricity prices, while full auctioning is likely to see producers passing on the entire market price of allowances to consumers in the electricity price.

“In countries where coal is the main fuel for electricity production, the electricity price increases will be particularly visible due to a need to purchase a proportionately larger quantity of allowances at auctions,” the Polish paper says.

In addition, Poland suggests to promote development of clean coal technologies rather than to eliminate coal from electricity production. “The EU should treat coal as an energy source, which improves its energy security,” it says.

***

Another EU summit?

The 27-nation bloc has been in a race against time, trying to reach a deal on the ambitious package of green legislation in mid-December (11-12 December) when EU leaders are set to meet in Brussels .

“For the time being, we hope for an agreement on the 11th and the 12th. If there is no agreement, then we will see,” a French presidency spokeswoman told EUobserver.

 The EU Suffers From Not Having A Longer Term President - The Incoming First Half of 2009 Czech Presidency Starts Out With A Flap As Sarkozy And Blair Opt For Continuity In Dealing With The Global Financial Crisis. In Any Case, Czech President Vaclav Klaus Has Small Minority Views in Europe - He Even Does Not Believe In Human Caused Global Warming. Clouds Over The Czech Presidency.

France wants post-EU presidency financial summit.
PHILIPPA RUNNER, November 19, 2008,EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS

France has unveiled plans for a post-French EU presidency financial summit, despite the Czech Republic’s sensitivity over its upcoming chairmanship of the EU.

The Elysee Palace on Tuesday (18 November) formally announced an “international summit” to be held in Paris on 8 January, entitled “New World: Values, Development and Regulation,” continuing France’s ambition to create a “new model” for capitalism in the wake of the global financial crisis.

Mr Sarkozy - known for having a high-octane personality, is to chair another major international meeting.  The meeting is to bring together international leaders as well as intellectuals such as economist Joseph Stiglitz and philosopher Francis Fukuyama and will be co-chaired by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and former British PM Tony Blair.

The move comes after a G20 summit in Washington last weekend fell short of EU hopes to tighten global financial regulation.

The new Paris meeting is the latest in a long line of high-powered events organised by France since it took over the EU helm in July. An EU presidency normally hosts two EU summits, but Mr Sarkozy has already added one extraordinary Georgia war summit, one special financial crisis summit, a eurozone summit and a G4 financial summit.

***

French officials in October proposed that the eurozone should form an “economic government” led by Mr Sarkozy after the French EU presidency expires in December in order to maintain the “impetus, the energy” of the Elysee Palace’s efforts.

Mr Sarkozy and Mr Blair have also been floated as candidates for the Lisbon treaty-envisaged job of permanent EU president.

But the Czech Republic has resented any suggestions that a small, new EU state cannot lead the bloc in times of crisis.

Prague has also rejected MEPs’ accusations that it will be a lame duck presidency because it is split over ratification of the Lisbon treaty and because the ruling ODS party suffered defeats in local elections last month.

“Nobody can take the presidency away from the Czech Republic,” Czech deputy prime minister Alexandr Vondra said in October on the eurozone government idea.

Prague also plans to hold two extraordinary summits during its EU chairmanship, one on the Eastern Partnership of deeper integration with the EU’s post-Soviet neighbours and one to greet new US President Barack Obama.

French public policies minister Eric Besson toned down the language of the French president’s original statement on the 8 January event when talking to the Associated Press on Tuesday.

The meeting will be a “conference” not a summit, he said. “It’s not an operational and decision-making colloquium.”

——————-

Czech President, Vaclav Klaus came to the US in 2008 to back President Bush on his avoidance of dealing with climate change. He Spoke at that contrived Heartland Institute’s Anti-action New York City week. He even had the audacity to write to US Congress opposing Al Gore’s position on the issues please see:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54803

and our own

Vaclav Klaus, President of The Czech Republic, Sets The Timing For The Heartland Institute’s New York Climate Change Conference, He May Yet Become, Personally, A Serious Impediment On The Road To Copenhagen.

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 9th, 2008
by Pincas Jawetz ( PJ at SustainabiliTank.com)

What sort of a European meeting with President Obama does President Klaus think he wants to chair?

We hope that this brewing flap can open the eyes of Europe that time has come for a real EU Presidency.

And The Czech Republic deserves every little bit of the contraversary it has created:

“The EU cannot punish a country for having pluralist opinions” says the following Opinion column - but this is not the point - the point is that a minority of the EU should not be allowed to speak for the Union - and Vaclav Klaus is just the extreme example. We listened to him in New York and we know that he is a very fringe point of view, President of a complicated EU Member State - in no way President of the EU.

————————

[Comment] Prague is as capable as any capital of taking over EU helm
MAREK NEUMAN, The EUobserver, November 19, 2008

COMMENT - After a Hallowe’en working lunch, French president Sarkozy assured his Czech counterpart, prime minister Topolanek, that France in no way intends to sabotage the Czech Republic’s EU Presidency, which the country assumes on 1 January, 2009.

Despite this, recent weeks have witnessed a large amount of analysis and commentary by international media dwelling upon the question of whether the Czech Republic is a suitable country to lead the EU in times of crisis or whether an experienced administration, such as the French one, would not be a better option.


The EU cannot punish a country for having pluralist opinions.

Although the prospects of the Czech Republic being stripped of its presidency are at the very least hypothetical, the numerous comments certainly deserve further thought, since any such activity would clearly break with the long-established traditions governing the union.

Moreover, just by invoking this debate, are we not already deliberating about the possibility of creating a European Union of two classes?

***

There have been several arguments put forward by commentators as to why the Czech Republic might not be a suitable president of the EU for the upcoming six months, but the Czech Republic’s demography has been the overriding issue for a variety of pundits.

It is true that the country, with its population of roughly 10 million, is not one of the largest states, but neither does it belong into the group of European micro-states. However, as a closer look into the history of the rotating EU presidency shows that the size of a country has never been an issue for consideration until now.

Countries such as Belgium or Luxembourg have periodically held the EU chairmanship and have performed just as well - or just as badly - as any of the major European powers in terms of efficiency. Moreover, Slovenia, the first new EU member state to hold EU Presidency, which held the function at the beginning of this year, certainly did not let its demographic size be an obstacle. Indeed, Ljubljana handed over the baton to France largely to wide acclaim from the Brussels community.

In fact, it turns out that some of the major integrative steps in European integration have been advanced while these small countries have been at the helm, most notably the Maastricht Treaty under the leadership of Luxembourg.

Commentators have also claimed that the Czech Republic lacks the experience to lead the union through the financial crisis.

It is important to realize that the Presidency is to a large extent a representative function, which the respective country uses to move certain points up or down on the agenda. By no means does the existence of the EU Presidency imply that decisions will not be brought about collectively. Interestingly, thus far, the Czech Republic has been surprisingly lightly hit by the financial crisis and therefore might even have something to teach in terms of economic expertise to even the largest EU members.

Domestic difficulties

It is true that the Czech Republic is currently going through a bit of internal political turmoil and the current government is somewhat less than stable. However, by now, the main policy goals of the upcoming EU presidency are set and one can expect these to be followed up by whatever political party is in power during the first six months of 2009, since the proposed agenda goes beyond partisan issues.

Additionally, there are other EU members who are also experiencing domestic difficulties, not least of all Belgium, but it is questionable whether the ability of these countries to lead the EU would be disputed if it were their turn.

Finally, the international peanut gallery have repeatedly carped about the growing euro-scepticism among some parts of the Czech political elite.

While it is true that the Czech president, who refuses even to fly the European flag at Prague Castle, is a hardened eurosceptic, this has no bearing on the country’s ability to effectively perform its tasks while holding the EU presidency, since these would be performed by the rest of the government, not the head of state.

But even in the most extreme scenario, such as having a euro-sceptic party or coalition in power, the scheduled country still could not be denied its turn at bat. The EU cannot punish a country for having pluralist opinions if it wants to uphold the image of a democratic entity.

Nevertheless, this most extreme scenario is hardly likely to materialise in the Czech Republic in the next six months, since both major political parties are strongly in favour of further European integration and have proven to be so for the last five years of the country’s membership.

How long must a member state wait to prove its loyalty to the European “idea” before it can enjoy all rights that come from membership? In a community of pluralist, democratic states, the personal beliefs of one politician cannot be a litmus test for allowing a country to assume the presidency.

It is crucial to realize what is the true essence of the EU presidency. The bearer of the chairmanship essentially just outlines the overall agenda for the union for the next six months. Naturally, with the world currently fighting the most severe economic crisis in a century, no one needs to be worried that this issue would not figure high on the agenda of the next presidency term, whatever the country actually in “power.”

When the European Union’s big-bang enlargement process was completed in 2007, the European Union acknowledged that the individual countries were not only fulfilling the legal requirements of membership - the Copenhagen criteria, but were also able to perform all tasks of membership - the rotating EU presidency included. The right to hold the EU presidency is the executive zenith of the numerous duties and obligations that come with EU membership.

Were the Czech Republic indeed stripped of its treaty-based right, the European Union would both internally and externally be sending the message of a hierarchy of important and less important countries.

Not that such a scenario is remotely likely, but the very discussion that is currently occurring is already an acknowledgment of this two-tiered Europe.

Objectively, the Czech Republic is as qualified to lead the European Union from 1 January 2009 as any other EU member.

Marek Neuman is a researcher at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands.

US laissez-faire to battle European ’social market’ at G20
LEIGH PHILLIPS, The EUobserver, Brussels, November 14, 2008.

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - Ahead of the G20 meeting of the world’s leading industrialised and emerging economies this weekend, the president of the United States and the president of the European Commission have laid down their markers for what should be the solutions to save the global economy.

On Thursday, US President George W. Bush made an impassioned plea for laissez-faire capitalism and warned against turning away from free markets, while commission President Jose Manuel Barroso extolled the virtues of public intervention and the European welfare state model built at the end of World War Two.

“In the wake of the financial crisis, voices from the left and right are equating the free enterprise system with greed and exploitation and failure,” said the US leader in a speech on Friday (14 November) at the Federal Hall National Memorial.

He conceded that there had been failures, but the blame for these should be pinned on borrowers, financial firms and regulators, not capitalism.

“But the crisis was not a failure of the free market system,” he said.

“And the answer is not to try to reinvent that system. It is to fix the problems we face, make the reforms we need, and move forward with the free market principles that have delivered prosperity and hope to people all across the globe.”

Mr Barroso, himself a conservative, said that the US has had to catch up with the European lead on all major global issues and now the US is behind on what is necessary to fix the world economy.

“When our American friends now are ready to embrace a real commitment to fight climate change, this is exactly what we are been saying and promoting for some time. When our American partners are saying they want to engage more in a multilateral world, this is exactly what the EU has been saying and promoting for some time. When our American partners now are saying they should put some rules in a financially unpredictable, sometimes unregulated market, this is exactly what the EU has been supporting for some time,” he told a European Network of Foundations conference on democracy promotion in Brussels today.

“When our American friends now are saying that they should find some ways of promoting some public tools, some public systems, in terms of social security, public education, this is exactly what we Europeans have been doing at least since the end of the Second World War, with the development of our social market economy,” he said.

Global governance

European political parties, businesses, and NGOs too have all laid out what they hope to see agreed to.

The national chambers of commerce from each of the G20 countries issued a joint declaration calling on world leaders to agree to strengthened national and international supervisory structures and improve the quality of regulatory standards, but warned governments against raising tariffs and protectionism.

“The World Trade Organisation should be taken as a positive example of global governance,” the 20 chambers said in a statement.

Meanwhile, the Socialist grouping in the European Parliament on Thursday issued a five-point plan from Manchester where their MEPs had been having a strategising pow-wow, for a rebuilding of the world financial system and how to boost the economy.

Their “Manchester Declaration”, is a largely Keynesian document, calling for a European green investment package to put money in people’s pockets and make the shift to a low-carbon economy, targetting in particular vulnerable households and small businesses.

The left-of-centre MEPs call for much greater levels of intergovernmental co-ordination and public spending.

“The European Union has a key role to play in raising and channelling funds. There should be no taboo,” said French Socialist MEP Pervenche Berès, chair of the European Parliament’s economic and monetary affairs committee. “The member states should discuss the possibility of the EU issuing Eurobonds to invest in European projects.”

Priming the global pump

UK premier Gordon Brown, who is likely to play a prominent role in the G20 discusions, having been the architect of the bail-out packages adopted in part or in whole by other EU capitals that saved their banks from a complete credit crunch.

However, despite his also being a member of the Socialist political family, he is expected at the summit to emphasise the need for co-ordinated global tax cuts to prime the global economic pump, although he also supports government spending increases.

“We need to agree on the importance of co-ordination of monetary and fiscal policy,” he said before heading to Washington.

“There is a need for urgency. By acting now, we can stimulate growth in all our economies. The cost of inaction will be far greater than the cost of any action.”

The Labour prime minister has also repeatedly warned against new “over-regulation” in response to the crisis. Nevertheless, Mr Brown is also pushing for international oversight of the world’s top 30 banks by a college of supervisors.

In a curious twist of fate, French President Sarkozy, who, being of the conservative UMP party, has been perhaps the most dirigiste of EU leaders in the solutions he has embraced both at the European level and what he hopes to see the G20 endorse.

Mr Sarkozy, who currently chairs the EU’s six-month rotating presidency, will argue for the development of cross-border regulation of financial institution lending practices and investment decisions.

On Thursday he also used the opportunity of the lead-up to the summit to deliver an obituary for the US dollar as a world currency.

“I am leaving tomorrow for Washington to explain that the dollar - which after the Second World War under Bretton Woods was the only currency in the world - can no longer claim to be the only currency in the world. What was true in 1945 cannot be true today,” he said.

While Germany put up one of the main blocks to French plans for the development of a common European stimulus package at a summit of EU leaders last week, Chancellor Angela Merkel supports Mr Sarkozy’s wish to see regulation of hedge funds and an end to excessive remuneration for bank executives.

However, despite their differences, the EU leaders head to Washington u