European Union (Photo credit: ana branca)

Nine Eurozone members want the Danish Presidency of the EU to speed up its work on a directive on a Financial Transaction Tax (FTT). While there is much opposition within the Eurozone and wider EU to such a tax, the nine countries intend to use the community method to allow them to use the EU institutions to set up and administer the tax and allow other countries to join while not holding them back.

The nine countries are:

• France
• Germany
• Austria
• Belgium
• Spain
• Italy
• Finland
• Greece
• Portugal

The inclusion of Greece and Portugal is interesting as they are in receipt of an IMF/ECB/EU Bailout while Italy and Spain haver been teetering on the edge for some time.

There is opposition to an EU wide tax mainly from the UK and Sweden with Poland and Ireland also voicing unease about the plans, so do not expect these countries to join up any time soon.

The letter comes at a time during the French Presidential Election where Nicolas Sarkozy has placed a lot of faith in such a tax to win votes at home and is of course implementing the tax in France with or without the other eight countries.

Taxation remains an unanimous decision at the Council of Ministers under the Treaty of Lisbon, so even if one country opposes there will not be an EU wide tax on financial transactions.

Related articles

• New study shows a Robinhood tax would boost growth (liberalconspiracy.org)
• French President To Introduce Financial Transactions Tax (thinkprogress.org)
• French president Nicolas Sarkozy to bring in 0.1pc Financial Transaction Tax in August (telegraph.co.uk)
• David Cameron: I will veto financial transaction tax (telegraph.co.uk)

Image via Wikipedia

Continuing my look through the motions ahead of Young Fine Gael National Conference in Tullamore the next motion to pique my interest is one from my own branch in UCC. The motion reads as follows:

YFG believes that a graduate tax should be introduced for all college graduates as a means of funding their education and the present entry fees should be phased out over 5 years. Households with an income of below €45,000 would be exempted

One the issues I always have with USI and FEE is that they do not suggest an alternative to University fees while protesting against them. With the state of the economy at the moment it would be impossible to countenance the continuation of the free fees policy.

A graduate tax is a sensible  approach to this issue and  viable progressive alternative to fees or loans.

This will be an interesting debate at conference especially among members in college or about to start.

The others motions that have been released

• YFG proposes that an incentive for young farmers be introduced by increasing the number of training places in agricultural colleges – Laois YFG
• YFG approves of the process of fracking as can it can prove a viable energy source in Ireland for the foreseeable future – UCD YFG
• YFG proposes that the 1989 Incitement of Hatred Act be updated to include provisions relating to social media and social networking – Kilkenny YFG
• YFG believes that a graduate tax should be introduced for all college graduates as a means of funding their education and the present entry fees should be phased out over 5 years. Households with an income of below €45,000 would be exempted – UCC YFG
• YFG believes that it is imperative that the ECB renegotiates the current promissory note structure with the Government. It is in the best interests of the Irish economy, the ECB, the Euro and the European Union that the structure of the promissory notes system is changed. Failure to do so will create an unsustainable debt burden for Ireland, causing huge barriers to job creation and restricting growth in the Irish economy – YFG National Executive

Related articles

• What the Frack? YFG to discuss Hydraulic fracturing at National Conference (stephenspillane.com)

Image via Wikipedia

A group of nine Spanish Bloggers have come together and written a Manifesto on things to improve Europe. There isn’t any political slant to this apart from trying to improve democracy within the European Union and improve the EU itself.  Some other bloggers and tweeters are getting behind this.

The Manifesto is in English below, but the Manifesto is translated into other languages on the website for the campaign.

Some good ideas in this, especially single European Seat and of course an elected Commission President. Lend your support to this campaign by signing up here

Also follow the campaign on Twitter and Facebook!

Moreurope Statement on Scribd

Image via Wikipedia

Today’s vote at UNESCO’s General Conference on full membership for Palestine gives an idea of how a United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) vote could go if the membership bid gets that far. More worrying for me is the complete split among European Union member states showing the failure of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP).

The application for membership was accepted by 107 Yes votes to 14 No votes with 52 Abstentions. The EU was split as follows;

Countries voting YES:

• Austria
• Belgium
• Cyprus
• Finland
• France
• Greece
• Ireland
• Luxembourg
• Malta
• Slovenia
• Spain

Countries voting NO:

• Czech Republic
• Germany
• Lithuania
• Netherlands
• Sweden

Countries who Abstained:

• Bulgaria
• Denmark
• Estonia
• Hungary
• Italy
• Latvia
• Poland
• Portugal
• Romania
• Slovakia
• United Kingdom

So that meant the EU split 11 Yes, 5 No and 11 Abstentions. Some Common policy there?

The question of Palestinian membership of the United Nations is going to be a long protracted one as long as the United States is threatening the use of the Veto on the UN Security Council. This is holding up a vote in the UNGA on Palestine’s membership. But at least now the Palestinians have an idea of the amount of support they have within the UN System.

Of course the fallout of this vote will not show in the EU’s CFSP and will be ignored. But the big fallout will either be the US withholding funding from UNESCO or withdrawing from the organisation completely.

For now though the idea of a Common Foreign Policy is a long way off, and today’s vote proves that.

Addendum

The applicant Countires to the EU voted as follows:

• Croatia: ABSTAINED
• FYR Macedonia: ABSTAINED
• Turkey: YES
• Iceland: YES

The potential Candidate Countries voted as follows:

• Albania: ABSTAINED
• Bosnia and Herzegovina: ABSTAINED
• Kosovo: Not a member
• Montenegro: ABSTAINED
• Serbia: YES

To see a full list of how countries voted check out the post on

The Human Province

Related articles

• Unesco grants Palestine full membership (guardian.co.uk)

Image via Wikipedia

John Dali, the European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Policy, has stated that a blanked ban on Gay and Bisexual Men giving blood is against EU law.

In an answer to Glenis Willmott (S&D) and Michael Cashman (S&D) he explained that EU law warranted the deferral of those “at high risk of acquiring severe infectious diseases” due to their “sexual behaviour”. Mr Dalli underlined that “‘sexual behaviour’ is not identical with ‘sexual orientation’”.

The Commission also noted that when implementing EU law, Member States must not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. This means a blanket ban on all gay and bisexual men would be illegal under EU law.

According to the European Parliaments Intergroup on LGBT Rights, National Authorities often cite a 2004 Directive on technical requirements for blood and blood components to justify the ban. Most member states have a de facto ban on gay men from giving blood and this includes Ireland.

Michael Cashman MEP, Co-President of the European Parliament’s Intergroup on LGBT Rights, said the Commission’s answer “makes a lot of sense. Commissioner John Dalli reminds Member States that it is individuals who are at risk—not groups. Being gay or bisexual cannot automatically pose a threat to public health; but risky sexual behaviour in men or women, gay or straight, is a real risk. I hope the British government’s announcement later today will prefer scientific evidence to prejudice.”

Further commenting the Commission’s answer, Sirpa Pietikäinen MEP, Vice-President of the LGBT Intergroup and Member of the Committee on Public Health added: “It is our highest priority to look after public health, and thus take care of the quality of donated blood. But health ministers must bear in mind that sexual orientation, ethnic background and other identity traits are fully irrelevant to a person’s health. Denying blood donation from these groups is discriminatory and goes fully against logic.”

Related articles

• Gay men set to give blood (independent.co.uk)
• If Thailand can accept Gay Blood Donors, Why Can’t Ireland? (stephenspillane.com)

Image via Wikipedia

On the 9th of May each year we mark the Anniversay of the Schuman Declaration. This declaration made by French Minister for Foreign Affairs Robert Schuman in 1950, set the basis for what would has become the European Union.

61 years later and with the EU at a crossroad due to the financial crisis and the lessening impact it has around the world, it its only right we look back at the declation which started it all and remind us of why we are here.

World peace cannot be safeguarded without the making of creative efforts proportionate to the dangers which threaten it.
The contribution which an organized and living Europe can bring to civilization is indispensable to the maintenance of peaceful relations. In taking upon herself for more than 20 years the role of champion of a united Europe, France has always had as her essential aim the service of peace. A united Europe was not achieved and we had war.

Europe will not be made all at once, or according to a single plan. It will be built through concrete achievements which first create a de facto solidarity. The coming together of the nations of Europe requires the elimination of the age-old opposition of France and Germany. Any action taken must in the first place concern these two countries.
With this aim in view, the French Government proposes that action be taken immediately on one limited but decisive point.

It proposes that Franco-German production of coal and steel as a whole be placed under a common High Authority, within the framework of an organization open to the participation of the other countries of Europe.  The pooling of coal and steel production should immediately provide for the setting up of common foundations for economic development as a first step in the federation of Europe, and will change the destinies of those regions which have long been devoted to the manufacture of munitions of war, of which they have been the most constant victims.

The solidarity in production thus established will make it plain that any war between France and Germany becomes not merely unthinkable, but materially impossible. The setting up of this powerful productive unit, open to all countries willing to take part and bound ultimately to provide all the member countries with the basic elements of industrial production on the same terms, will lay a true foundation for their economic unification.

This production will be offered to the world as a whole without distinction or exception, with the aim of contributing to raising living standards and to promoting peaceful achievements. With increased resources Europe will be able to pursue the achievement of one of its essential tasks, namely, the development of the African continent. In this way, there will be realised simply and speedily that fusion of interest which is indispensable to the establishment of a common economic system; it may be the leaven from which may grow a wider and deeper community between countries long opposed to one another by sanguinary divisions.

By pooling basic production and by instituting a new High Authority, whose decisions will bind France, Germany and other member countries, this proposal will lead to the realization of the first concrete foundation of a European federation indispensable to the preservation of peace.
To promote the realization of the objectives defined, the French Government is ready to open negotiations on the following bases.

The task with which this common High Authority will be charged will be that of securing in the shortest possible time the modernization of production and the improvement of its quality; the supply of coal and steel on identical terms to the French and German markets, as well as to the markets of other member countries; the development in common of exports to other countries; the equalization and improvement of the living conditions of workers in these industries.

To achieve these objectives, starting from the very different conditions in which the production of member countries is at present situated, it is proposed that certain transitional measures should be instituted, such as the application of a production and investment plan, the establishment of compensating machinery for equating prices, and the creation of a restructuring fund to facilitate the rationalization of production. The movement of coal and steel between member countries will immediately be freed from all customs duty, and will not be affected by differential transport rates. Conditions will gradually be created which will spontaneously provide for the more rational distribution of production at the highest level of productivity.

In contrast to international cartels, which tend to impose restrictive practices on distribution and the exploitation of national markets, and to maintain high profits, the organization will ensure the fusion of markets and the expansion of production.

The essential principles and undertakings defined above will be the subject of a treaty signed between the States and submitted for the ratification of their parliaments. The negotiations required to settle details of applications will be undertaken with the help of an arbitrator appointed by common agreement. He will be entrusted with the task of seeing that the agreements reached conform with the principles laid down, and, in the event of a deadlock, he will decide what solution is to be adopted.

The common High Authority entrusted with the management of the scheme will be composed of independent persons appointed by the governments, giving equal representation. A chairman will be chosen by common agreement between the governments. The Authority’s decisions will be enforceable in France, Germany and other member countries. Appropriate measures will be provided for means of appeal against the decisions of the Authority.
A representative of the United Nations will be accredited to the Authority, and will be instructed to make a public report to the United Nations twice yearly, giving an account of the working of the new organization, particularly as concerns the safeguarding of its objectives.

The institution of the High Authority will in no way prejudge the methods of ownership of enterprises. In the exercise of its functions, the common High Authority will take into account the powers conferred upon the International Ruhr Authority and the obligations of all kinds imposed upon Germany, so long as these remain in force.

 

Across the whole Parliament I agreed most with Kristiina OJULAND an Estonian ALDE MEP. Among the Irish MEPs Marian HARKIN (Ind, ALDE) was the MEP I agreed with most.

Before you answer the questions you can get more information on the resolution and exactly how MEPs voted. So you don’t have to know everything about EU politics to use this.

It is interesting that on the website you can see how users would have voted on the questions. It makes for an interesting analysis, when more people respond.

So who is the MEP you agree with most?

Image via Wikipedia

In the European Parliament has passed a Non-legislative resolution calling for European Political Parties to get legal statue so that they can play the role set out to them under Article 10, paragraph 4 of the Lisbon Treaty whereby political parties at European level contribute to forming European political awareness and to expressing the will of citizens of the Union.

The report by Marietta Giannakou (EPP, Greece) was passed by 560 votes in favour, 93 against and 22 abstentions. The report also called for

• the possibility of direct membership of natural persons;
• the rise of the present ceiling of €12,000 per year for donations to €25,000 per year and per donator;
• the organisational convergence of political parties at EU level with the aim of the creation in the future of a transnational party system;
• the independent resources that European political parties are required to demonstrate could be reduced to 10% of their total budget, in order to further enhance their development.

The ELDR recently launched an Associate Member scheme and this enactment of this report would be the logical next step.

If the recommendations are passed into law, something which is expected as Commissioner Šefčovič expressed a will to examine and put forward the proposal of the European legal statute of EU political parties based on EU law

if this was to become the case it would allow european parties to launch national campaigns and be involved in referendum campaigns. It could open up a whole new era of politics in Europe, but will it happen?

Image via Wikipedia

A lot of people mentioned to me that were surprised that Simon Coveney was appointed Minister for Agriculture, Marine and Food. To me it was no surprise, not only is Simon popular with farmers, in a Red C Poll for the Irish Farmers Journal Simon was the most popular candidate for Agriculture Minister, but he has European experience. The majroity of legislations, rules and payments relating to Agriculture comes from the European Union through the Common Agriculture Policy. This is where Simon will do an excellent job as Agriculture Minister. Why?
Easy, Its because he knows how the Europe Union works. Simon was an MEP from 2004 to 2007. He was a spokesperson for the European Peoples Party. He has experience with dealling with these issues in Europe. Also with CAP reform being a major issue, have a Minister with intimate knolwdege of how laws are passed by the EU and with contacts outside of the various Government, should mean that he may have a bit of sway in the EU.
Lucinda Creightons appointment as Minister for Europe was no surprise to anyone. Lucinda is a fromer board member of the Youth of European People’s Party, where she served as Vice President. Again this should work to her advantage. Lucinda will have a network of contacts within the EPP. This should help her to explain Ireland’s poistion to friendly ears and hopefullly get us a good deal. Its also more likely that she will turn up to more meetings than her preprocessor.
Here is hoping that these appointements will bear fruits for Ireland.

Related articles

• Fine Gael / Labour Cabinet (crookedtimber.org)
• Fantasy Cabinet 2011 (stephenspillane.com)

European Movement Ireland have launched a report on the campaign that they undertook in relation to the European Citizen’s Initiative. As part of this a poll was undertaken in Cork, Galway, Dublin North and Dublin South on May 7th 2010.

The findings are very interesting.

• 86% of People had not heard of the ECI
• 70% of people would consider using the ECI

The poll also found that under 18 (5%) and over 65 (4%) were least aware of the ECI. men aged 30-49 were most aware (20%) while not one woman over 65 had heard of it.

Do make sure you read the full report. Some interesting facts there for people who may wish to avail of the European Citizens Initiative procedure.