Open Europe blog

A platform for EU protectionism

2008-10-13T12:10:00.000+01:00

One of the key arguments made in our new report on the EU's climate action and renewable proposals is that because of (probably justifiable) fears about damaged international competitiveness for key heavy industries, the mammoth package is likely to provide a platform for protectionist measures.

Nicolas Sarkozy has previously focussed most of his rhetoric on 'green' tariffs that would be placed on imports from countries that do not adopt carbon reduction policies to the satisfaction of the EU (this provision is in fact written into the proposed Directive). The British and others are opposed on the basis that such carbon tariffs would open up a Pandora's box of protectionist lobbying, and would be a logistical nightmare to implement in any case (what would the carbon footprint and resultant tariff be on an ipod manufactured in several different countries?).

Now Paris is taking a slightly different tack. The line of thinking goes that if border tariffs are a non-starter, other forms of subsidy would need to be considered. Sarkozy has therefore hatched a plan to try and get the EU to loosen up state aid rules for chosen manufacturing industries, as well as an EU aid plan which would allow these sectors to get loans at preferential rates. Sarkozy will propose "to the European Commission and to our European partners a revision of the common framework on state aid ... so that it can be harmonised with the goals we are pursuing in the context of the climate-energy package."

With EU state aid rules already being twisted into all manner of different shapes and sizes in response to the financial crisis, and given that many member states are starting to get seriously cold feet about the proposal to move to full auctioning of carbon permits in the midst of economic downturn, it's quite easy to imagine Sarko getting his way on this...

Financing the 'yes' campaign

2008-10-13T09:52:00.004+01:00

Irish MEP Kathy Sinnott has made a very good argument in a letter to the Taoiseach on the subject of the financing of the Irish referendum campaign.

A symbolic vote

2008-10-09T18:52:00.002+01:00

MEPs have today adopted the EU's anthem, flag and motto - meaning they will be flown on all European Parliament buildings and displayed in all European Parliament meeting rooms and at official events.

The anthem, based on the "Ode to Joy" from Beethoven's Ninth Symphony, will be performed at the opening ceremony after each European election and at formal European Parliament sittings where heads of state are present.

The motto, "United in diversity", will be reproduced on all Parliament's official documents.

As PA reports, in reality the vote changes little - the flag and the anthem have been the EU's symbols since 1985.

But the decision to use them all the more - despite their removal from the Lisbon Treaty - shows just how cosmetic the changes to the original EU Constitution really were.

The Government justified not holding a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty on the grounds it was "substantially different" from the original Constitution, because of the removal of references to the EU symbols. The MEPs' vote today proves the changes are absolutely meaningless in reality.

Tut tut MacShane

2008-10-08T15:48:00.004+01:00

Mark Harper's excellent idea for a Bill has been voted down. As his press release says, somehow, amid all the turmoil on the financial markets , the Government still found time to whip its MPs to oppose the bill to increase the transparency of EU legislation. In a rare break with usual practice, even Government Ministers were told to oppose the Bill.

It really is amazing that our Government is so keen to keep people in the dark about the facts. What are they hiding? But what is arguably more unbelievable, is the speech given by former Europe Minister Denis MacShane in response to the Bill in Parliament today.

Not only did he begin his speech with his usual drivel that anyone who dares suggest any kind of reform of the EU at all is part of the "Better off Out" campaign, poor confused Denis then went on to give a sound argument in favour of the bill - before voting against it.

He launched a long-winded explanation of the various different existing estimates that are out there about the proportion of national legislation that comes from the EU - (atttacking all but his own which suggests 10%) He said there were all sorts of inaccuracies and "lies" being peddled and gave a good account of the endless row over what the figure actually is.

Which is precisely what this Bill sought to resolve. To put an end once and for all to this long and boring row about how much national legislation actually originates in the EU.

It is extraordinary that somebody who accepts that there is so much confusion over the amount of legislation coming from the EU should then oppose efforts to increase transparency.

But that's not all. MacShane also made a song and dance about the 80-odd percent figure which was cited in Mark Harper's speech. He said it was a "lie", from "some anonymous German" and that nobody had ever been able to source it.

He even said the BBC (Mark Mardell in particular) have never been able to find it.

Well it took us about 10 minutes:

Former President Roman Herzog said it here (translation of original article in Welt Am Sonntag, February 14 2007)

The information he was basing his figure on is on page 15 here: (April 29, 2005, in the German Parliamentary Journal 15/5434 of May 6, 2005)

This is State Secretary Parliamentary Undersecretary Alfred Hartenbach Hartenbach saying: From 1998 until 2004 167 EU regulations and 750 directives have been passed. During the same period the German Parliament has in total 1.195 laws (as well as 3055 Rechtsverordnungen) passed.
(“Rechtsverordnungen” are a wide category of binding acts by Parliament, government, administration)

New law to encourage EU openness and transparency

2008-10-08T10:30:00.003+01:00

Conservative MP Mark Harper is introducing a new Bill in Parliament today which will require Ministers to declare, on the front of every Bill and regulation, whether it is the result of a European Union decision.

The EU (Transparency) Bill intends to make the legislative process and the role of the EU in it more transparent and accountable to the public.

The Bill should be supported by anyone in favour of more honesty at Westminster. At the moment, nobody knows exactly what proportion of UK law derives from the EU - which has led to rows in the past.

Denis MacShane, for instance, claims the proportion is only 9%, compared with an estimate from the German Justice Ministry, which put the level at 84%.

Requring ministers to be honest about the root of each new piece of legislation is the only way to begin to put an end to that row.

One for the kids

2008-10-07T18:56:00.004+01:00

We learn from PA that the EU has begun a concerted campaign to promote children's rights - and in particular the Charter of Fundamental Rights to children themselves.

As well as a quiz, children can take part in a poster competition, whose mouthwatering prize is "a tour of the city and the European institutions and to attend a European award ceremony hosted by Vice-President Barrot."

Informing kids about their rights so they can be confident about defending themselves is obviously laudable (albeit not necessarily something the EU should be getting involved in). But as with all of these types of EU youth initatives, the underlying aim is in fact the promotion of the EU itself:

As the small print (the "Teaching Kit") reads:

"This participation is also meant to be a tool for educating active European citizens by uncovering the eminent role of European institutions in the defence and protection of individuals and particularly children."

Among the objectives for children to aim for are:

"Being able to give practical examples of the importance of European decisions in the implementation of better child protection"

and

"Being able to cite and briefly describe the programmes and actions of the Council of Europe and the European Union. "

And as part of the poster-making task, the ~~teachers~~ "Educators" are instructed to ensure that the children have "properly thought about how to show the EU in some way."

EU integration under the stress test

2008-10-07T13:25:00.001+01:00

The FT's Brussels blog notes that officials in Brussels are resorting to the predictable thinking that the events of the past week can be used to catalyse a fresh integrationist dynamic in Europe:

the 1992 crisis in the European exchange mechanism appeared to deal a serious blow to the goal of creating a single European currency. But the reaction was spirited. Only seven years later, the euro was up and running.

Similarly, it took the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington in September 2001 to prompt EU leaders into agreeing, at a summit just three months later, on the principle of a European arrest warrant. This allows the swift transfer of criminal suspects for trial and detention from one EU member-state to another...

On the face of things, the financial crisis offers a perfect opportunity to push forward closer European integration.

This could be right, or could be wrong. There is a clear narrative developing that Europe faces a very stark choice between closer integration or a reversal of the current contradictory model of full monetary union and only partial political union. There are three key faultlines that have profound implications for the EU as we know it: 1) EU competition policy, and the tensions raised by unilateral declarations of deposit guarantee with state aid rules/ bank nationalisations; 2) The Stability Pact, and the implications for budget deficits of dealing with the crisis; 3) the longer term debate over a single monetary policy, and the lack of institutional capacity of the ECB or central institutions in dealing with a true banking emergency.

Larry Elliot notes succinctly:

In the long term, monetary unions do not survive without political union, and so the…conclusion is that there are pressures both for closer integration and for disintegration. The crisis could strengthen those who argue that the halfway house is inherently unstable and will remain so until there is fiscal as well as monetary union. On the other hand, the growing threat of recession may make some countries question the value of remaining in a monetary union.

It is important to note that this year has seen the process of EU integration questioned not only in terms of its economic legitimacy, but also in terms of its democratic legitimacy - through the Irish No vote, following on the heels of the rejection of the EU Constitution by voters in France and Holland.

Two of the key pillars underpinning consent for the EU as a process of irreversible centralisation are now facing a severe stress test.

Duff calls for end to fair referendum rules in Ireland

2008-10-07T10:32:00.002+01:00

Truly extraordinary:

According to the Irish Times, British MEP Andrew Duff has asked Irish Foreign Minister Micheal Martin to commit the Government to scrap the ‘fair referendum’ rules in Ireland, which set out requirements for equal broadcasting time for both sides in a campaign.

He claimed: “Several bizarre judgments of the Supreme Court have put charlatans upon the same basis of parliamentarians."

Meanwhile, Northern Irish MEP Jim Allister reportedly accused Martin of having no “sense of shame” for not respecting the No vote in Ireland, to which Martin responded - to applause from the MEPs: “You should know better coming from your part of the world that saying No forever doesn’t work. Dialogue was the key to resolving common challenges and problems.”

Martin also repeated the Irish government’s claim that people voted No due to “lack of information”. He said, "Too many people are left unaware of the EU's achievements while those who oppose often succeed in peddling half truths”.

U-turn after U-turn

2008-10-07T09:41:00.003+01:00

A press release from Nick Clegg this morning reveals he has brought back Alistair Carmichael, David Heath and Tim Farron into the Shadow Cabinet - all of whom were forced to resign from the frontbenches back in March after defying Clegg and keeping their manifesto promises by voting in favour of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The perils of EU agreements "rushed through without proper thought"

2008-10-05T14:48:00.007+01:00

In a welcome development, the Lib Dems have called on the Government to renegotiate the European Arrest Warrant, to tighten it up so that it cannot allow for people to be extradited from this country for actions which do not breach British law.

Responding to the warrant issued by Germany for the arrest of Holocaust denier Dr Toben, Home Affairs Spokesman Chris Huhne said some of the "sloppy drafting" of the agreement needed to be tightened up. He said the agreement was "rushed through without proper thought as a knee-jerk reaction to terrorist offences."

The basic problem is that EAW does not recognise the principle of 'dual criminality'. The European Court of Justice has already been challenged on this by Belgian courts, and upheld that the list of 32 areas where 'double criminality' ia abolished were all serious offences. They include 'racism and xenphobia' under which category Germany has invoked the EAW against Dr. Toben, meaning he faces extradition from Britain for Holocaust denial, which - however unpleasant that may be - is not a crime in this country.

"The case with Dr Toben exposes a problem in terms of freedom of speech and I come to this as a good, classic liberal." Huhne said. "It is a fundamental part of our system that we believe in freedom of speech... I don't think it is appropriate for a member state to be pursuing an arrest warrant when it's not in a core category like that."

There are other issues with this particular case. Dr. Toben faces extradition for actions he carried out outside Germany and using an Australian website. Huhne told the Today Programme: "I think it is a pretty dodgy case that the Germans are bringing, both in terms of German law and in terms of the reach of it, because in fact Dr Toben didn't actually commit this offence in Germany."

This is the latest in a long list of problems that have arisen with the EAW since its introduction a couple of years ago. But instead of rengotiating the terms of the agreement as Huhne suggests, the EU is more likely to use the problems to justify moves towards the establishment of EU-wide criminal procedural standards, which will be made easier by the Lisbon Treaty, as we've argued before.

Indeed the problems with the EAW should be a warning to those - such as Chris Huhne - who hope to see the Lisbon Treaty eventually implemented across the EU.

Changes to the European Arrest Warrant and other bits of JHA legislation that the UK has opted into would in future be decided by qualified majority voting - including, for instance, a decision to add to that already controversial list of 32 areas where dual criminality is abolished.

If the UK wishes to use its so-called 'safeguard' in this area, and opt out of the future developments on something like the EAW, it will be thrown out of participation in the legislation altogether. The Treaty effectively puts a gun to the head of the Government - saying it must accept changes to legislation it has already opted into, even if it objects to them - or be thrown out of participation in the legislation in its entirety.

It is highly unlikely the Government would want to give up any form of agreement wth other member states on extradition, given the security climate, which means it would be forced to go along with measures amending the EAW. Clearly some changes to the EAW rules might be welcome - but why corner ourselves in and take the risk that some will not?

Over to EU

2008-10-03T11:44:00.007+01:00

So Baroness Ashton of Upholland, the current Leader of the Lords, is to replace Peter Mandelson as the UK's EU Commissioner, apparently as a prize for helping to force the Lisbon Treaty through Parliament.

Needless to say, Baroness Ashton is firmly in the "let's-keep-saying-we-respect-the-Irish-no-vote-but-do-the-exact-opposite" camp.

But could she now be fulfilling a lifetime ambition? Earlier this year she told her peers:

"My Lords, I love Europe, but I never had the opportunity to be an MEP so I did not have the chance to go native."

Back from penance

2008-10-03T09:56:00.003+01:00

From PA:

"Peter Mandelson is to make a shock return to the Government in Gordon Brown's Cabinet reshuffle, it was reported today.

Mr Mandelson, who is currently Britain's European Commissioner, has twice resigned as a Cabinet minister under a cloud.

His return, if confirmed, would also mark the end of a feud with Mr Brown dating back more than a decade to when Mr Mandelson supported Tony Blair to become Labour leader following the death of John Smith.

Mr Mandelson's spokesman in Brussels refused to comment on the Sky News report."

According to Sky, Mandelson is to be Gordon Brown's new Business Secretary...

The voice of reason

2008-10-02T11:41:00.004+01:00

Further to our earlier post, former Europe Minister Denis MacShane is at it again, guns blazing at anyone calling for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty . He's back on the Guardian's Comment is Free raving about "xenophobic rhetoric" and a curious "giant fiesta of anti-European hate."

Eurofederalists are always complaining about the lack of 'sensible' and 'reasonable' debate in this country on the EU - perhaps they could start by persuading some of their own?

A lifelong problem with democracy

2008-10-02T11:04:00.008+01:00

According to Le Figaro today, Nicolas Sarkozy "considers that the Irish - 53.4% whom voted 'No' in June - should go to the polls once again in autumn 2009."

Presumably he feels the Irish government needs a whole year of hard ~~propaganda~~ work to turn public opinion around to the Treaty.

However, despite the general forecast that Ireland will eventually vote again sometime before spring 2010, yesterday at an Open Europe event at the Conservative Party Conference the Telegraph's excellent Brussels Correspondent Bruno Waterfield warned it was "naive" to assume that a second Irish referendum of some kind definitely won't happen until after the European elections in June.

He warned: "Don't underestimate how quickly they might find a fix", predicting an "intensive, short and sharp information campaign when the time comes."

It certainly seems wise to keep on our toes. After all, at the same time over in Brussels, former Belgian Prime Minister Jean-Luc Dehaene was busy telling a meeting of the Brussels-based European Policy Centre that the Irish parliament should simply ratify the Lisbon Treaty without a referendum before the EP elections.

He said: "Whoever thinks that a vote in parliament is less democratic then a referendum has a lifelong problem with democracy".

Take nothing for granted.

Is there anybody out there?

2008-09-29T11:32:00.006+01:00

Lib Dem MEP Bill Newton-Dunn is calling for the EU to fund the search for aliens.

He said: "It would be fun putting down an amendment in the budget and seeing if I get a majority for it or not.”

Great to see our MEPs prioritising the important things...

Adjusting to a non-European world

2008-09-26T18:38:00.005+01:00

Anand Menon has an excellent essay in European Voice dismissing the "preposterous argument" that the Lisbon Treaty would have helped Europe deal with the credit crunch or the Georgia crisis. This is his conclusion:

"...the brutal truth exposed by both crises is that the EU's soft power relies for its effectiveness on a permissive hard-power environment, on real rather than confected common purpose. The EU can bring about change, but only if no powerful state opposes it. The Europeans, quite simply, lack the power to deter, let alone coerce Russia.

Claims that Europe is one institutional reform away from global power feed into a profound sense of denial afflicting many in the ‘Old Continent'. How long is it, really, since the states of Europe, either individually or collectively, could decisively shape global politics?

The open contempt Moscow has shown for European attempts to secure its withdrawal from Georgia underscores a stark, painful truth.

Now more than ever, Europeans inhabit a non-European world. There is no choice but to adjust to that and safeguard, as quickly and soberly as we can, what is left of Europe's role in global politics and economics."

Menon touches on a key failing in the thinking of much of the European political class - the idea that Europe's rapidly declining power can be remedied by closer institutional centralisation.

Surely this notion has been tested to destruction by now?

In the broad sweep of history, Europe's period of dominance was short - 200 years at most. This ascendance was achieved as a result of complex factors that are hotly debated amongst historians. But there are two key points to note. First, Europe may be weak now, but it was relatively much weaker in the past (as recently as 1700, Qing China and Mughal India each represented a little less than 25 per cent of world GDP). Second, Europe's meteoric rise was achieved not through the centralisation of power, but through technical, fiscal, political and cultural innovation amongst diverse nation states.

Is European decline innevitable? Can it be reversed? If so, how? This subject won't be resolved in a blog post - but recent events should certainly provoke some serious thought on the issue.

EU "war on blogs" claims first victim

2008-09-25T20:08:00.002+01:00

The details are over at Gawain Towler's (now ex) blog.

They don't like to be mocked.

We hate to say told you so

2008-09-24T14:25:00.002+01:00

Every crisis is an opportunity for the those who believe in the project of "ever closer union".

So it's no surprise to see in the FT today - that the inevitable is finally starting to happen in euroland:

The crucial problem on this side of the Atlantic is that the largest European banks have become not only too big to fail, but also too big to be saved. For example, the total liabilities of Deutsche Bank (leverage ratio over 50!) amount to about €2,000bn (more than Fannie Mae) or more than 80 per cent of the gross domestic product of Germany. This is simply too much for the Bundesbank or even the German state, given that the German budget is bound by the rules of the European Union’s stability pact and the German government cannot order (unlike the US Treasury) its central bank to issue more currency. Similarly, the total liabilities of Barclays of around £1,300bn (leverage ratio 60!) are roughly equivalent to the GDP of the UK. Fortis bank has a leverage ratio of “only” 33, but its liabilities are three times the GDP of its home country of Belgium.

With banks that have outgrown their home turf, national treasuries and regulators in Europe are living on borrowed time: they cannot simply develop “road maps” (the only result of various Ecofin discussions of regulatory reform by finance ministers), but must contemplate a worst-case scenario.

Given that solutions for the largest institutions can no longer be found at the national level it is apparent that the European Central Bank will need to be put in charge as it is the only institution that can issue unlimited amounts of a global reserve currency. The authorities in the UK and Switzerland – which cannot rely on the ECB – can only pray that no accident happens to the giants they have in their own garden.

So the ECB finally gets put in charge of financial regulation/supervision. Quelle surprise.

The only weak step in the argument is the last one - about being able to print money in a "reserve currency" - what exactly are they sayingthe threshold is here?

(a) Both GPB and CHF are reserve currencies in proportion to the size of their economies - and (b) why does that even matter?

The point is to have the option not excercise it. Yes, the UK is a more open economy than the eurozone taken in aggregate. But mass "printing of money" whatever that means would still cause inflation in the Eurozone. Arguably the UK and Swiss have greater flexibility here because they have freedom of action - it is not clear under which circumstances the ECB could start "printing money" - i.e. changing its rules and targets.

The UK and the Swiss authorities at least have the option of coordinating their fiscal and monetary policies, whereas the members of the eurozone will shortly being having some "interesting" discussions as the interests and policies of different member states diverge more and more, the rules are broken further, and the ECB tries to square the circle. Good luck with that.

The EU's crisis PR - update

2008-09-24T13:25:00.008+01:00

Some more developments on Ethan Winner, the PR hit-man hired by the Commission to set up a "crisis communications" unit to promote the EU. His firm specialises in helping large organisations get round 'problems' - click here for more on his past record.

There been much debate on the US blogosphere in recent days on Winner's activities in the US Presidential election. See here, here, here and here.

Responding to original accusations made on the Jawa Report, Winner has admitted to distributing a video designed to smear Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin (the video was behind the row over Palin's alleged support for Alaskan independence).

According to Jawa, Winner's company has a past record of producing fake 'grassroot style' messages designed to look like they did not originate from an organized campaign, a practice know as “astroturfing”.

Will we see similar tactics being adopted by the pro-Treaty camp in the second Irish referendum on Lisbon? The stakes are high and they will not be pulling their punches...

There is still uncertainty (and some scepticism) over whether the Democrats were complicit in Winner's video. But whoever initiated the action, we can be certain that it was not funded by American taxpayers.

The same cannot be said for Winner's new campaign to promote the EU - you will be footing the bill whether you like it or not.

Europe, that "great sporting nation"

2008-09-24T11:05:00.004+01:00

The French EU Presidency is jumping on sport as a way to promote the EU.

Paris is organising a major public event for 5 October, during which the Champ de Mars will be transformed into a "European sports village."

According to PA:

The idea behind bringing together Europe's best athletes for a major public event is to celebrate Europe as a great sporting nation, and highlight the desire to place sport, in all its forms, at the heart of the European project.

Sport serves as a powerful vehicle for helping to promote a general sense of European belonging, particularly among young people.... As a vehicle for social, educational, cultural and environmental development, sport is undoubtedly called on to play a key role in forming a European identity and its shared values.

It's a Conspiracy! (part II)

2008-09-22T17:43:00.005+01:00

MEPs are to investigate claims that Libertas, the Irish group that campaigned successfully against the Lisbon Treaty, is some sort of CIA-backed front.

~~Nostalgic student revolutionary~~ Prominent MEP Daniel Cohn-Bendit said in a statement that if these allegations are proved correct, "this would clearly show that there are forces in the United States willing to pay people to destabilise a strong and autonomous Europe. If this can happen for the treaty vote, it raises grave concerns for interference in next year’s European elections."

Apart from wondering why shadowy forces in Washington would have much interest in 'interfering' in the European Parliament elections in the first place, it struck us that cranky conspiracy theorizing is becoming a distinct trend amongst the pro-Lisbon crowd. We were reminded of claims back in June from French Europe Minister Jean-Pierre Jouyet that the Irish no vote was masterminded by sinister American neocons:

"Europe has powerful enemies on the other side of the Atlantic, gifted with considerable financial means. The role of American neo-conservatives was very important in the victory of the No."

Commission calls in the emergency PR men

2008-09-22T16:06:00.008+01:00

Ever wondered who you would turn to if your company made the rattly bit on the Challenger space shuttle before it blew up? Or was the owner of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant (the one that suffered a meltdown in 1986)? Or perhaps if a group of pesky NGOs stopped your consortium of oil giants building a pipeline in Africa?

Answer: The same guys who are now doing "crisis communications" for the EU...

The operation is being headed up by one Ethan Winner (a great name, incidently). According to his profile:

"Presently, Mr. Winner is heading an international team in creating a Europe-wide crisis and communications campaign to promote the European Union."

Winner & Associates seem to have enjoyed past success in extricating their clients from a variety of tight spots. Will they be able to do the same for the EU following the Irish rejection of the Lisbon Treaty?

If, as seems likely, the Irish are invited to vote again, it is probable that Winner's crisis communications campaign will be on the front-line of the EU's 'public information' offensive.

Last but not least

2008-09-22T10:37:00.003+01:00

On their countdown to 'Brown's big apology' , expected tomorrow, the Conservatives have finally arrived at the PM's failure to hold the promised referendum on the ~~EU Constitution~~ Lisbon Treaty, as the last of their list of things he has to apologise for.

A good excuse to remind people that:

When Gordon Brown became Prime Minister he said: ‘the manifesto is what we put to the public. We’ve got to honour that manifesto. That is an issue of trust for me with the electorate’. Labour’s 2005 election manifesto promised a referendum on the EU Constitution. But Gordon Brown forced through the Lisbon Treaty – the renamed EU Constitution – on a three line whip without any democratic mandate from the voters to sign it.

Commenting on the relationship between the Lisbon Treaty and the EU Constitution the Spanish foreign minister, Miguel Angel Moratinos, said: ‘I believe that 98 per cent of the content … of the Constitutional Treaty, is to be found in the future EU Treaty. The wrapping has been changed, but not the content’ (El Pais, 23 July 2007). German Chancellor Angela Merkel said: ‘the substance of the Constitution is preserved. That is a fact’ (Daily Telegraph, 29 June 2007).

Not so fast Corbett (and Lord Kerr)

2008-09-19T11:48:00.002+01:00

Detached MEP Richard Corbett has found “unusual entertainment values” in a Lords report on the future of the EU’s regional policy (also known as the structural funds), for which we provided written and oral evidence. Richard is very excited about the peers’ examination of our evidence on the high admin cost of the policy and about the Committee’s conclusion that the funds are "effective and, in general, fit for purpose".

We sort of suspected that the Lords Committee wouldn't agree with us, given its fondness of everything coming from Brussels. A figure like Lord Kerr – one of the patriarchs behind the EU Constitution/Lisbon treaty – is not exactly our greatest fan.

But it’s still slightly surprising, since highlighting the heavy administrative burden of the EU’s structural funds is not particularly controversial. On the contrary, the Committee’s conclusion that the admin cost is “overstated” will surprise many. Such as Richard Corbett’s Labour Party colleague Alan Johnson who had this to say when he was in charge of the brief:

“Devolving the delivery of regional policy in support of common objectives to Member States would entail less red tape and bureaucracy…We believe that actually we could introduce huge cuts in bureaucracy and rid ourselves of the frustration of dealing with that process by having a properly structured, debated and set out method, whereby, richer European Union countries did not go through that wasted process.”

A number of mainstream reports in the UK and elsewhere echo this very point. See here, here, here, here, here, for instance. The bureaucratic burden is no doubt part of the reason why other member states, such as Sweden, the Netherlands and Denmark, want to bring back regional policy in the EU-15 to where it belongs – close to the people who are actually affected by it (subsidiarity, remember?).

That is also the reason we challenged the Lords Committee to come up with its own figure. Such a figure, we might add, should include the cost for the public sector - the EU institutions, the seven (!) Whitehall departments involved in the funds, the RDAs, the local Government Offices, etc. But also the admin and compliance cost for the recipients of the funds, similar to what has been done for the cost of the CAP to British farmers.

Given the widely documented concerns over these costs, it is puzzling that the Lords Committee brushes them aside without offering any aggregated data to support their own claim – particularly in terms of the cost to the recipients. It might serve as entertainment for Richard (which is actually rather sad come to think of it), but it does little to inform us about the most efficient way to spend regeneration cash.

Richard is also up in arms over us supposedly citing “a mere press report” to back up our numbers. He seems to be referring to a PA story which Lord Kerr didn't quite approve of, about the cost of an EU programme in Northern Ireland. Apparently, Lord Kerr had never heard of the Press Association before. In any case, on page 13 in our original report, the source in question – who happens to be Northern Ireland’s Brussels representative – is clearly and properly cited.

So enough of this nonsense. The OECD, the European Court of Auditors, the influential Sapir report for the Commission, the British Government and plenty of academic literature have highlighted serious flaws with the structural funds - including lack of “convergence” between poorer and richer regions, problems with both the measure for allocating the funds and the disbursement rules, excessive red tape, sloppy spending, mismanagement and a most troubling lack of transparency in the entire system.

Richard Corbett is obviously too busy writing misdirected blog entries and finding ways to amuse himself. But for the rest of us, these flaws matter. Revolutionary as it may sound, we care about the way our tax money is being spent. And we would like to see poorer regions catch up with richer ones – but in the real world, not only in the heads of certain MEPs and Commission officials.

Chill out Denis

2008-09-17T18:06:00.010+01:00

Former Europe Minister Denis MacShane has reacted to Stuart Wheeler’s call today for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

MacShane said a referendum would be:

"a feast for all the xenophobic and isolationist forces in British politics and be a major boost for the BNP, UKIP and those 'better off out' Tories who want Britain to quit Europe".

"David Cameron… would plunge Britain into the maelstrom of a feast of anti-Europeanism by campaigning to repudiate the decision of the Commons and Lords this year to ratify the Lisbon Treaty.”

"The BNP, UKIP and all other anti-European forces would join in to indulge in months of xenophobic and isolationist hysteria.”

Reading this in the office, it struck us that MacShane's increasingly fiery rhetoric could be a product of 'curry addict synodrome'.

As regular vindaloo-eaters will be aware, the hotter the curry, the less able you are to taste normal foods afterwards - meaning everything needs to be overspiced for you to taste anything at all. Perhaps MacShane just doesn't see anything out of the ordinary in using this sort of language - it's just his default mode of communication...