It appears that the best hope for a more integrated Europe has gone. The Lisbon Treaty, already a Plan B after the failure of the Constitutional Treaty has been rejected by the voters in Ireland, the only country where a referendum was held. It is a sad day for Europe, as it appears there is no Plan C.
Populist rightwingers can continue their lies and misinformation about the European Union.
The Charter of Fundamental Rights, abolishment of the pillars and streamlining lawmaking process are now all on hold.
I do not understand who say that this was a democratic vote. It was not. 3 million Irish people decided to hold back 500 million Europeans. The No campaign was based on misrepresenting, fearmongering and unashamed populism, which muffled the Yes vote. The whole situation is absurd.
Responding to ca 30 000 petitions, here are some notable quotes from the draft document approved by the Petitions Committee of the European Parliament:
12. Emphasises that alternative gas pipeline routes, which do not disturb the marine environment, should be analysed first, and notes that it is possible to run such routes to the Russian border overland, solely through European Union Member States;
14. Supports the Swedish Government’s Decision of 12 February 2008 refusing to grant Nord Stream AG permission to build the gas pipeline due to significant procedural and substantive shortcomings and in particular the lack of an analysis of an alternative route and of the option of abandoning the construction of the pipeline;
19.Expresses its belief that routing the North European gas pipeline through EU territory would enable it to meet the strategic and economic objectives set out in Decision 1364/2006/EC whilst avoiding extensive environmental damage;
20.Calls on the Council and Commission to use every legal means at their disposal to prevent the construction of the North European gas pipeline on the scale proposed by the investor;
The Motion for a Resolution will now be considered by the European Parliament. Nord Stream has responded to the document as well, claiming that the Committee has misunderstood the environmental impact assessment study process:
The Committee has prejudged Nord Stream, without waiting for the information contained in the EIA which will address the concerns raised.
In my opinion, this project will never materialise, as there is simply no objective justification for it in light of where the EU is going. If one looks at the EU as a whole the project makes no sense as Russia could connect to EU directly by land without the need for an expensive and environmentally dangerous underwater pipeline. If the EU wants to diversify it energy supplies, then having another route to the already dominant provider is not going to help anyone.
The Nord Stream project as it is should be scrapped, and its TEN-E status removed due to change in circumstances. I am unsure how this is done procedurally, but surely there must be a way.
In Estonia the MPs expenses that they have claimed for reimbursement by the taxpayers have been a constant source of ricidule. The groceries, the “meetings with voters”, etc.
Now it seems that the UK public also finally is able to join in the “fun”: this Guardian article reveals expenses claimed by Tony Blair and other UK parliament politicians. Blair paid for a dishwasher, for example, from his £ 22 000 (ca 500 000 EEK) yearly expense allowance. Together with accusations of outrageous spending and forgery related to expense allowances in the European Parliament, is an issue that is more serious as it seems. The sums have no real impact to the taxpayers, because they are nominal compared to the total budgets, but it nevertheless angers the voters and destroys their trust in the parliamentary system.
The expense amounts should be removed, wages of MPs should be transparent and no room should be left for fraudulent or unethical behaviour. The people’s trust in democratic institutions is too precious to risk for these benefits sake.
It was announced yesterday that there are going to be changes in the accreditation of Estonian higher education institutions, mainly that institutional accreditation is going to be introduced. This means that any university which passes this will be operate with constant fear of losing some of its programmes and can focus on continuous institution-building, rather than worrying only about specific curricula. This also allows the universities to be more efficient, flexible and synergetic.
I do not really know what exactly this means for my current employer, but in any case it is much better to finally have clarity on these issues. Too long has the Estonian higher education system been in legal limbo, and it is too long that certain practices and obviously worthless institutions have been allowed to exist.
In my opinion having a competitive and efficient higher education market is a prerequisite for Estonia’s long term economic development. The stepts announced yesterday will definitely bring us closer to that, but there are also many uncertainties in the application of the quality reform. There is a threat, that could derail the reform, or not bring the desired results.
Although there has been much talk about being internationally competitive, Estonia’s higher education laws do not really allow for meaningful international cooperation to take place (joint degrees and diplomas have still not been allowed for example). This is not a problem only for Estonia, but the whole EU: in a situtation where there is a common market, common laws on commercial activities, movement of goods and provision of services, the higher education market has remained fractured. This is due to lack of coordination: even the much discussed Bologna reform remains to be completed.
Universities are still very national entities: we talk mostly about UK, Belgian, French, German, Finnish, etc universities, but not European universities. Compare this with the US, where location of a university does not really matter that much (Harvard is Harvard, regardless of its location).
For Estonia, the best option would be to be open. Open to students coming in and supportive of students going out. Open to cooperation with other universities in the strive for internationalisation of higher education. This requires a significant shift away from the current local-student-oriented approach, real competitions for staff instructors, and, in most areas, shift away from Estonian as the full language of instruction.
It also requires that universities develop its own niches where they can offer world-class education and research. Estonia is way small for everything under the sun to be taught here, locally. But we can concentrate on a few areas where we can be internationally competitive.
… and I am not referring to the magazine. This article by Ulrich Beck very clearly articulates what I have believed for a long time: that the time of the nation-state is over and that the EU is the model of a new type of governance which requires a change of paradigm.
Today is a historic date for Estonia as it joins the Schengen area. This means no more showing passports or ID cards or waiting at border crossings when going to other European Union countries (except UK and Ireland).
This event changes more than it seems to at first glance.
Enlargement of the Schengen area: achieving the European goal of free movement of persons
As of 21st December 2007, Estonia, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Hungary, Latvia, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia will become part of the Schengen area. Controls at internal land and sea borders between these countries and the current 15 member states will be lifted. This will result in a very tangible expression of the free movement ideal: this latest enlargement extends the free movement area by 4,278 km.
Commission President José Manuel Barroso said “As from today people can travel hassle-free between 24 countries of the Schengen area without internal land and sea border controls- from Portugal to Poland and from Greece to Finland. I wish to congratulate the nine new Schengen members, the Portuguese presidency and all EU Member States for their efforts. Together we have overcome border controls as man-made obstacles to peace, freedom and unity in Europe, while creating the conditions for increased security”.
Vice-President, Franco Frattini, Commissioner responsible for Freedom, Justice, and Security declared: “An area of 24 countries without internal borders is a unique and historical achievement. I feel very proud and privileged to have been involved in making it happen. Joining the Schengen space is not an easy undertaking. I give enormous credit to these Member States. All the new member countries, who have put in place significant, state of the art border security systems. Indeed, the extension of Schengen demonstrates the EU’s commitment to facilitating legitimate travelling within and into the EU whilst at the same time reinforcing the security of our external borders and thereby strengthening the safety of all EU citizens “.
Following enlargement, all citizens of the enlarged Schengen space will benefit from quicker and easier travelling. From 21 December onwards, a citizen can travel from the Iberian Peninsula to the Baltic States and from Greece to Finland without border checks. This is symbolic of a united Europe and underlines the basic right of European citizens to move freely.
It will be easier for families, relatives and friends living on different sides of a border to visit each other. Eternal queues at (busy) border crossing points will no longer exist. Border regions will develop together as it will be easier to travel from one region to the other. An increase in tourism is expected, with a positive impact on infrastructure. Evidence of previous enlargements effectively demonstrates this: for instance, at the Salzburg/Berchtesgaden border citizens take advantage of infrastructure on each side of the border, including a large commercial centre at the Austrian side of the border, and a large health and fitness centre on the German side.
Lifting internal border control is also a question of trust between the Member States. It is through a rigorous peer evaluation process that Member States have ensured each member state is equipped to guard the external borders on behalf of all other members and issue visas valid for the whole Schengen area. The new Member States have worked tirelessly to improve, their handling of external border controls, visa policy, data protection and police cooperation.
/—/
The checks on external borders remain the same as new Member States to the EU ha been applying the Schengen external border acquis since accession. The only difference will be that the new Member States will also check third country nationals in the Schengen Information System (SIS). Access to the SIS by police forces on both sides of the frontier will enhance and strengthen security at the borders.
For bona fide travellers, travels in an enlarged EU will be faster and easier. A third country national will be able to travel on the basis of one Schengen visa and will not need separate national visas.
Recent Comments