Europe: Between Isolation and Solidarity - A Reply

This is in response to an article published on The New Federalist Webzine the other day.

Amongst most pro-Europeans it is commonly held that criticism is more sharply dealt than by Euro-skeptics. This is simply on the basis that such criticisms do not follow populist, ‘sitting targets’ and generally have a deeper understanding of the interplay between the Member States, the Institutions, and the wider world.

I wish to deal in turn with each heading to show that not everything in Europe is destined to fail.

The Rise of Xenophobia

It is worrying to read that there is a rise in xenophobia anywhere in the world, what is more troubling is the clamouring by the fashionable liberal elites which views public opinion as something to be ignored. The liberal elites have for the last twenty years managed to ignore the concerns and wishes of their electorate for their own self congratulation. Tolerance works both ways, how tolerant is it to exude one ideology whilst trying to suppress another simply because you disagree with it. Like it or not, but the rise of the far Right parties in the Nordics, the UK and in the East of Europe are not unusual in times of economic strife. 

What is unusual is the consternation by more centrist politicians and commentators that such parties have no right to voice their opinions. The BNP are a repugnant party, the majority of voters accept that and vote accordingly against them in general  elections. However they do secure council seats, they have their leader in the European Parliament. That means that they have secured a legitimate democratic mandate to exercise office in some capacity or another. So why did 1 million vote for the BNP in the last election? Tolerance of the BNP is rooted in freedom of speech, and every politicians’ right to appeal to certain sections of society. Should we then look at denying people the vote simply because they did not vote Labour, Conservative or Liberal Democrat? There is a very short answer to that question, and that is No.

More troubling still is the direct example of using the US as a ‘mirror’ for how to be tolerant to all. In a society where if you are born black you are statistically more likely to end up in jail simply because of the colour of your skin - this is a disgrace and hardly indicative of tolerance. Furthermore since the tragic events of 9/11 the US has been on racial and cultural lockdown, making it more and more difficult for any nationality to enter their country with hugely draconian security measures. The US has been in two expensive (both in terms of human life and money) wars with little to show for it. Neither war was motivated for any real democratic value, and have been seen by many as deeply unpopular. 

France was slapped on the wrist by the Commission with regards to their treatment of the Roma, however as a founding Member State with more political leverage than most, the Commission was never going to win without going directly to the European Court of Justice. As an aside, no action as of yet has been taken in the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), it remains to be seen if any is taken as to what sanction would be imposed. 

The Euro Crisis

This will have been written on to death, but bear with me. To simplify the reaction of the Northern European states as Protestant versus Catholic is simply unpleasant and hugely insulting. As a Catholic from the UK, there is no place for any such sectarian vitriol. Club Med economies are many things, but the religion of the states and their respective populations has absolutely nothing to do with it. A complete failure by the financial services across the Western world along with many governments positively encouraging the amassing of cheap debt as a way to get what you want, whenever you wanted it contributed to the current crisis. This is a simplification also, but it goes someway to dealing with the difficulties facing the mindsets of both Northern and Southern Europeans. A two speed Europe may actually be a more useful tool to get out of the current mess, but if it is to be done, then it must be done a short time frame with a full integration plan agreed on with strict rules governing accession by the worst offenders.

In 2004 Germany enacted quite severe austerity measures within its own economy, the government reigned in spending and subsequently has prospered during these straightened economic times. So the German state fixed its roof whilst the sun was still shining, thus minimizing the pain that would be felt come the inevitable bust. The EU, and in particular, the ECB did very little to encourage other states with less stable economies to follow suit. Unprecedented personal wealth and economic growth seemed too good to be true - and it was. Simply put, if you borrow, you have to pay it back, and sovereign states are no different. 

Taking Greece as an example of how badly austerity has had to bite shows an endemic reliance on public sector job creation, with golden handshake pensions and quite frankly bizarre conditions for retirement. The tipping point of such a system was that fairly corrupt regimes were buying votes. If you convince your electorate that they will never go hungry, have a home and a job to keep them secure, then what better way than to provide it yourself. In essence a distrust of capitalism in a pure form bred such an explosion in public sector appointments. It was never affordable, it was never sustainable, there is no wealth generation of the type that could cover such huge costs.

The Eurozone bailout is not a free meal ticket to being made solvent. Consequences of economic mis-management must be felt by some. Unfortunately the cuts made in the Greek economy are too deep and too late. The shock treatment is not making the patient any better and there is a growing anxiety within the markets, and the other 26 Member States as to what Greece does next. Euro bonds are one way - but the German state seems dead set against this. How much longer before Germany is brought to heel by bigger forces than its ability to export? 

It was mentioned that the EU will lack democracy and an identity - this should be wholly rejected as an argument as for a 60 year old project it has plenty of identity and democratic legitimacy - in fact since Lisbon the EP has grown up and is now a much bigger, more effective force for change than ever before. It is early days, such a crisis will test even the most seasoned and stable of democratic institutions, we need not pile on more pressure just because there is no ‘silver bullet’ to solve such a complex issue. 

The Lack of Foreign Policy

This is an area that I have to agree primarily with the sentiment of, the EU looks weak and incoherent in its current set up. This has been compounded by the UN General Assembly voting down a motion for the EU to accede to its chamber. Foreign policy is an unusual creature, states prefer to keep their own interests of paramount concern, this is seen most sharply in the UN Security Council. For the EU to become a more coherent and powerful force it needs to look less at militarized interventions and more in the diplomatic sphere, being a skilled negotiator with common values, common goals, dropping the quasi-imperialistic tendencies for ‘spreading democracy’. 

France and the UK showed how decisive the EU needs to be in times of crisis with their actions in Libya. NATO was eventually convinced to bring its might to protect civilians, but there is an overwhelming sense that even NATO doesn’t have the stomach for such battles. The EU is clearly waiting for something, what that is, is firm leadership, with a vision for the future, less linked with outcomes and so-called deliverables, but more about aspirations and a feeling of solid authority. Baroness Ashton does not embody any of the above, and the rather insidious van Rompuy is not trusted much as a figure-head after several high profile gaffs.

The question of the accession of Turkey is one that has bubbled since 1963, we are no closer today than we were a decade ago. Perhaps a bit of direct democracy across the Union to gauge public opinion on the matter would give any negotiations more credibility, and perhaps go some way to assuaging the fears on both sides as to the final outcome of any accession agreement. If you want to bang on about democratic values and principles, then this is a perfect platform for the EU to ask its masters, Member States’ populations, what they want and to actually to listen to them.

Weaknesses of Leadership within the EU

An interesting statistic was brought to bear that only 28 German MPs remain since the fall of the Berlin Wall. What this is supposed to prove I am unsure. Since 20 years have passed I’m sure that many who were politically active have long since retired. Fresh blood and new ideas should not be misconstrued as an affront to the ideals of the ‘ancien regime’. If Germany lacks confidence in the EU then they should look at the role they play in the institutions. Is it more a question that Germany since reunification no longer has the money to both rebuild its own back-yard and bail out others and simply wants to see a return on its investments? If that is so, is that such a bad thing, it certainly goes hand in hand with accountability, both economic and democratic. The Commission recently acknowledged its poor practice of simply signing cheques with no reasonable follow-up to check the money had been spent wisely. It has since changed fundamentally how it dishes out the old ‘regional funds’ and has quite rightly attached more obligations to any money sent out. 

What Consequences?

From all that froth, will the EU fail? Ultimately it will fail if Member States start to split and faction off, if we have a state of play where the UK or Germany asks to leave, then we have a problem. The realities of such an occurrence are sadly muffled by the rabid Euro-skeptics such as UKIP. In a time of austerity and much pessimism, we need more active participation in the European project, roundly criticizing those who wish to put the brakes on some issues of cross border policy does not mean a rapid descent onto the slippery slope to failure. If we are to defeat elements that wish to destroy the EU, then suppression is not the way forward. Convictions and ideas are necessary, but political will is sadly lacking in the centre of European politics - the far Right and far Left have stolen a march on us all - it is time to wake up. 

Project Mobility 4X4

Having just watched the last in the current series of Top Gear (UK) I was amazed to see one of the best ideas for those brave men and women injured in the front lines of Afghanistan. Soldiers who are wounded and who have had aggressive amputation surgery have come together in a off-road rally team who hope to participate in the Dakar Rally (http://www.projectmobility4x4.org/)

Most people will bleat over the justifications of going to war, I am unashamedly not one of those people. The important point of debate is how well we as a nation care for our armed services and how much investment the Government can give to ensuring and extending that care.

This project, along with many others is a testament to the courage and spirit of our armed forces.

Stress and State Finances

A smug feeling must have pervaded through the Square Mile of London on Friday, when none of the major English banks failed the ECB stress tests. This is however only a slither of a much longer drama being played out in both the financial markets and the media. Spanish banks lead the way with their already known banking failings, yet the Spanish state seems powerless to do anything about it. The economy is much the same as Italy - it is only a matter of time before a bail-out becomes a reality. The question is not when, but how much? Personally I hope not to see Spain go 'cap in hand', it would be disasterous to the Euro-zone. Feelings in the British press seem plainly ignorant to the contagion effect such a financial meltdown would have on UK plc, and UK banks. 

Should we be worried at all by any of this? When looking at the Spanish banks, they are not universally traded, they have little or no economic power outside of Spain (http://goo.gl/IiM9A) , and it would appear that they do not hold much Greek debt. Be that is it may, it is troubling to many that Spain has allowed these same banks for years carry on without  enough sovereign reserves. At time of writing, Spain has not suffered any sort of mass sell of of banking stocks and shares. Cold comfort then for nations such as Greece, Germany and France. If the Greek government defaults then there is a dangerous after-shock waiting for some of those bigger banks in Western Europe. They hold much of Greece's sovereign debt and are exposed heavily to any default. 

Another issue that is troubling economists at the moment is the levels of capital reserves imposed by Basel III. At the current rate banks would need somewhere in the region of 41 Billion euros to keep their ratios above the agreed 7% margin. This is expected already by the financial markets, though a criticism levied at the ECB in their stress tests, is that their bar is too low: 5%. It remains to be seen as to how this will level out, in the meantime banks would be wise to 'stock up' on reserves hoping that the much mooted Greek default passes by with less of an impact than feared.(http://goo.gl/GQ8tj). I am no economist, I don't proport to understand the intricacies of the markets and how confidence can be shattered in an instant. However it seems plain to me that if banks don't have enough cash reserves for the proverbial rainy day, then it is madness to expect governments, who are already saddled with debt far exceeding their own incomes, to bail out banks yet again. 

Gordon Brown and Barak Obama were heralded as saviours of the financial world - my view is that they simply threw money they didn't have at a problem they failed to recognize and tackle to the core. A dangerous precedent has been set by governments 'paying' off banks because 'they are too big to fail'. The current reset of this capitalist cycle is not complete - it is simply on pause.

New Look & Relaunch

As you may have noticed, the blog has had a summer spruce. Just to fill you in on a couple of points, I'm now a board member of the JEF Leiden Section newly created in the Netherlands. (Young European Federalists). Don't despair as to the title, I've not gone all totally integrate or be damned just yet!

As this has taken place I should be able to 'blog' a little more on issues that arise in the JEF universe - not everything they say in Brussels I agree with, but more to the point I think their goals and aims for young Europeans are perfect. Awareness is key, and what better way than to be involved in a organization who dedicates itself to the youth of Europe.

Coke, EU and Skeptics - Europe has a bit of an image problem.

14th July 2011 - We are bombarded by images all day long, be it on TV, the internet or the simple bus-stop billboard. The most famous of all being that of Coca Cola - after reading an interesting piece in yesterday’s Euractiv (http://goo.gl/HA4BQ) on the lack of successful marketing the EU does for itself, my mind turned to a thorny issue that haunts the EU particularly in skeptical states such as the UK. 

Being a Europhilic Englishman brings its own problems, but one of the most worrying is the lack of press directed at the EU other than to tell us that our bananas are not straight enough (http://goo.gl/joqKL), or that perhaps our national football team ‘could be forced’ to wear the EU flag on their jerseys as soon as the dastardly European Commission has got its wicked way (http://goo.gl/nyNtH). As comical as these stories are, it highlights a popular problem associated with the Union. In simple terms there is not enough positive coverage, nothing adorning billboards or television to tell an electorate what good the EU actually does. Countries such as the UK who have advanced infrastructures and developed economies rarely ‘see’ returns on their European investment. This is far from the truth, as beneficiaries of the European Union Cohesion Policy will no doubt attest to, as if it needs more confirmation, universities and further education centres in the South West of England under the old South West RDA received £20 million alone from the period running 2007-2014, with nearly £20 million more committed just to ensure that the projects did not run out of money. (Source: http://goo.gl/oDMi5) 

Now, one can argue as to what efficiencies are gained from such large sums of money being committed early on, also one can discuss protective measures to ensure that the money does not go missing. But all of this misses the point. In a time when the government of the UK is perceived to be cutting higher education funding (this includes bricks and mortar) the EU is still funding projects, be they bricks and mortar or less tangible. All of the information listed earlier is readily available on the Regional Policy website of the European Commission. Problem is, I had to look quite hard for it. As a case in point I spent well over an hour looking for the amount of money spent by the EU on advertising itself (it is now an entirely online operation, with paper advertising slowly being phased out). Another difficulty I faced was that although I could tell you all about Cohesion, Competitiveness and the like, I couldn’t pin down any hard figures. Given another hour I’m sure I would have found something more appropriate, but that defeats the point. 

So what are we faced with? A flood of information is ‘easily’ available online, but the issue is how to get to it. Even Google struggles bringing up the correct financial information for the EU. Alas the Commission’s marketing strategy, though sophisticated, cutting edge and bristling with that en vogue watch word: Transparency, lacks a certain je ne sais quoi!  So what of the article I mentioned at the beginning? Well, an American educated Indian, heading the French business school INSEAD pretty much knocked the issue on the head. In his interview he focusses on how national, or rather European (not Union) pride should be pooled and exported as a marketable image. The key components of culture, longevity and a uniqueness of the society as a whole. I’m not advocating that the people of Europe package themselves and put a gaudy label on a lunchbox and ‘sell’ themselves in order to promote the EU. The EU should instead be moving towards a direction where the humble bus-stop is a chance to extol the virtues of being part of a Union. Make them region specific even - though the costs may rise, nothing makes life easier for any legislating body if it is popular because of what it does. Negative press is free and readily available from all quarters, be it in the blogosphere or senior cabinet ministers. Myth busting websites go someway to alleviating this problem, but if the population don’t know what it is you are doing to help them personally, then it remains remote at best, meaningless at worst. 

As a member of a new JEF section in the Netherlands, I feel that even in one of the most pro-EU perceived nations there is a vacuum in which many citizens don’t know what the EU is, or does for them. I enjoy telling new-comers about what we do, what the EU does and the benefits that come with membership of this exclusive club. That does not mean that I am blind to those excesses and failings that creep just around the corner, waiting to trip me up in the guise of another Euro-skeptic. Coca Cola tells us all the time that its there, whether we look or not, it is always there. (If you don’t believe me, look at the local kebab shop sign.) Saturation advertising and a pervading sense of the brand gives people something sub-consciously to recognize. If you associate Coke with a vending machine, you are more likely to purchase the product next time you go to a vending machine. If you are constantly being reminded that the EU is there as a force for good, and personal improvement, then the extreme views that strangle development of the Union will fade slowly with time. There is unfortunately no quick fix, but one must start somewhere, and where better than to be known for building a library, a school, or a wing of a hospital with ‘your money’ from investing in the EU.

It is just a thought - but when skeptical nations such as the UK start to add up Project 1 investments and their like, they will soon forget about those pesky straight bananas.

Mulling over a Cup of Coffee and the UK's perception of the EU

It has been some time since I lasted posted, but I will attempt to remedy this.

This morning I was reading the Daily Telegraph and read something interesting about how the Coalition is seeking to harmonise food labelling requirements. Now the piece itself was not particularly extraordinary. What was though was the comments underneath. It would appear that some bright spark had trawled Google to find the EU Directive on food labelling standards and promptly used it as a weapon in order to further his own ends.

Nothing very new in that. However the lack of understanding for the legislative process outside of any specialisms in academia was brought to bare in all its ignorant glory. A simple note attached to the link was that the EU has complete and utter legislative control over the UK and its competences within this area. Now although some of that is correct it rather misses the issue that a Directive is not a Regulation. For most of us this is a dull and tedious point - "who the heck cares?" Well I do. It is important to know the difference between your apples and your oranges, so why don't you know the difference between secondary legislative acts of the most powerful club politically you belong to?

Primarily the Directive is to be implemented in the best way possible with a sensitivity becoming of that particular Member State. The guidelines are set out, now follow them as closely as possible. Looking at a Regulation, you've got no choice, it is immediately entered into the Statute Books without molestation. So far so good?

It has been well documented as to the UK 'wasting' its time and precious resources (read money) on such a folly as the EU. Never is there any mention of the roads and schools and university buildings which are partly funded by the EU through its development funds. Never do we assess the say we get round in the Commission or the Council of Ministers. Does anyone in England actually understand what any of these institutions do? I suppose not.

One day I'll read something good about the Union, but I dare say it won't be from the UK press. C'est la vie!

AV in the UK: No-one really understands it

Today I read in the Daily Telegraph a blog by Ed West. I have to admit that as much as I sympathise with the sentiment of the article, I felt like the EU was given a rough ride. As a lawyer myself, I felt an acute injustice over the idea that anyone who 'knew about the institutions' of the EU would automatically be reactionary towards the leviathan.

Yet it struck more deeply on the relevancy of education of the electorate, and the future electorate. AV is a complex and 'proportionate' system of electing ones' MPs. Although I personally do not want this system, I think that such a referendum will be completely skewed by the complete and utter lack of effective campaigning by either side. The Conservatives think that by complicating our electoral system we will all suddenly explode at the voting booth when confronted with such tough choices as preferential voting. Yet the Liberal Democrats feel that we will all suddenly become enlightened and 'properly represented' with a more coherent voice in Westminster. I'm curious as to how a more convoluted system with an assured outcome that more disparate voices will be represented with a 'push me pull me' mentality in the vein of the current Coalition.

If as it seems obvious to me that two parties that disagree fundamentally are to govern a nation as a result of a hung Parliament, then how can we take seriously the very real prospect of UKIP and the BNP becoming king-makers in a similar way the Gert Wilders does in the Netherlands. Are we really serious as to allow such misinformed individuals are to be representative of the population at large? I would most certainly like to think that such parties only ever get a wafer thin foothold in Westminster. With AV there is a distinct possibility that we could see increased majorities for a standard parliamentary term, with more concessions for unrealistic, poorly understood and idiotic populist policies.

So the electorate according to Ed West is just about competent enough to follow a soap opera plot-line. Last time I watched one of those I couldn't make head nor tail of it all. Does that make me stupid, or simply that I don't follow enough television? Perhaps if we take my inability to follow Eastenders and follow the logic behind my failings, then if the electorate paid as much attention to MPs and their protestations regarding policy, then it could be assumed that they would have no problem in voting for what they, as individuals, feel is the correct option for them. Perhaps I am being too soft, but then again, I remember my Government and Politics module for my A-Levels. As my teacher explained: "There is no need to understand any of this, just so long as you can write it all down within 45 minutes." (In case you're interested, I attended a 'public school' so tells you something of education in the UK, even when you pay for it!)

The UK is nearing the bottom of all EU league tables in secondary education - a problem I'm made more acutely aware of every day I live in the Netherlands. We have a long way to go both in funding and in curricula setting. I for one have had enough of the argument that the government cuts, and the opposition will invest. What I want is to see results for the money already invested. When we start clawing our way back up the tables, then perhaps we can afford to put new resources into such an area. Until as such time, who cares whether we vote for or against AV - all that will come out of it is more idiots than now in Westminster.

In the beginning...

I'm new to the world of blogging in such a fashion, for many years I have posted on various UK newspaper websites on a wide variety of political topics. As the title of this blog explains I am a contradiction in terms, a Euro-centric Conservative. For many on the Right in British politics I have sold my soul to the devil whom lives in Brussels. Yet not everything has to be so; instead I view my own political leanings as liberal in my assessments of policy both in the UK domestically and its role in the wider world, in particular, Europe. 


Being a postgraduate reading law in a top European university allows me to see things not from the goldfish bowl of the UK and its warped mindset on Europe, but instead more of a rounded slightly philosophical view on things. 


This being the first ever post, I shall keep it tight and instead get ready for my first proper 'commentary'. Subjects here will be diverse, not everything will be political, not everything will be law, and it certainly won't all be on the UK. I love sport, I have a passion for cars and photography. You never know, I may spice things up from time to time!