Anyway, with perhaps a little stutter, while I attempt to get everything settled (dealing with Belgian bureaucrats is not fun), the Thursday Briefing is back. I did have a chance to think about the content of the site though, and I plan to change the focus. This started out as an attempt at a hybrid Scottish-European-Green politics blog, but since I haven’t lived in Scotland for more than a year, I think it is time to change the focus to being a much more of a EU/Green blog. Not that I won’t ever write about Scotland or Scottish politics, but it only makes sense to focus on what I know, and that is the EU.

So, what started as a little experiment in CSS3 has now entered its second year of existence. Lets hope it can last to its third birthday.

“The Union shall establish an internal market … It shall promote economic, social and territorial cohesion, and solidarity among Member States. It shall respect its rich cultural and linguistic diversity, and shall ensure that Europe’s cultural heritage is safeguarded and enhanced.”

To me, these provisions suggest that a copyright licensing system that reinforces national borders and locks some truly fantastic content (naturally not just TV, but also music &c.) into the member states would be contrary to the principles on which the EU is built. I have a feeling it’ll take a tad more than an EBU workshop with Tom Dice and his guitar to make cross-border copyright work.

First off, isn’t it a bit odd to see at least one member of the European Movement as a Secretary of State in a Tory dominated cabinet? Perhaps I’m just putting too much emphasis on the European side of things. Anyway, my initial reaction to the BBC News footage of Cameron was, “could’ve been worse”, followed by noting that he’d opted for a plain microphone with no lectern (call me cynical, but was this his first theatrical step as PM?).

Policy-wise though, all I can say is that this government will be bad for Britain, and bad for Europe. Like the Irish Green’s coalition with Fianna Fáil, I think the Lib Dems will end up tarnished by their senior partner, hurting their chances in future elections, and thus removing any chance for them to show that, contrary to all evidence, they have some back-bone. The proposals for a referendum on AV are pointless; AV is pointless as an alternative, because it doesn’t do what an alternative electoral system needs to do, which is make Parliament more representative of the citizens. So, well done to the Liberals for capitulating on the one thing I wanted Liberals in government to do.

More in my sphere of concern is the impact of the new government on Britain’s place in Europe, and the effect that a Eurosceptic government in one of the big states will have. The Conservative’s insistance on calling for powers to be repatriated in some areas, and trying to put a brake on other areas will probably not hurt the EU too much. It’s a big thing, and it can comfortably withstand an uncooperative government or two. It will however hurt Britain. Enough Europeans (by which I mean people involved in Euro-politics) already complain about our intransigence, and that ill will towards the UK will probably only increase. It’ll be interesting, though perhaps uncomfortable, to watch how this affects the real world.

“I know very well that the stability pact is stupid, like all decisions that are rigid.”

Romano Prodi, 2002

Why, oh why did we not go for a stronger stability and growth pact?! If it could have been enforced properly, then Greece wouldn’t have been allowed to get into the state it is in, and the Germans wouldn’t have had one of their Euro worst-case-scenarios realised. I’m prompted to write this by the latest twist to appear in the tale, with Slovakia turning its contribution to Greece into an election issue. The Greek mess is one of the ultimate stress tests for the Eurozone. If the loans and horrible austerity being imposed on the, generally innocent, people who have been repeatedly lied to by their government about the economy work, then it will have passed the test; like the nuclear submarines that went to sea with sealed pressure valves though, the Eurozone shouldn’t be put through this again. Perhaps it’s time to revisit the Stability and Growth Pact, and come up with something that is more than a diplomatically negotiated name and a toothless policy.

I’ve posted on this before, and I’m still in a bit of a split mind about expansion of the EU. The problem which is blocking me from taking one view or the other is that I want to think of there being some form of common European identity, which can act as the bond that will keep European states together, and allow more integration. It’s clear that this is present in Iceland, but try as I might, I find it hard to extend this to Turkey. There is much in Turkish society to give it close links to Europe, but just as that may be the case, there is more to distance it from the cultural bond in music, art, language and society that is shared between people and states in ‘old’ Europe.

I said I was in a split mind though, and I’ve just given reasons why I think Iceland should be admitted to the EU, while Turkey shouldn’t. The other part of my mind wants to see Turkey in the EU, along with Iceland, to fulfil the idea of the EU being a way of spreading the values of human rights and democracy.

I still don’t know which argument I agree with more. I guess I have to choose between a tightly integrated cultural Europe, or a looser beacon of all things good Europe.

Little tiny disclaimer: I’m differing from European Greens policy quite a lot here, so even though there is a European Greens election banner at the top of the page, this post in no way reflects the view of the party. Oh, and think big, vote Green!

I’m generally in favour of Lisbon, though my understanding of exactly what it says is marred by the fact that it is an amending treaty, rather than the originally coherent constitution, and is filled with paragraphs such as:

the words ‘this Treaty’ and ‘the present Treaty’ shall be replaced by ‘the Treaties’, the verb, where applicable, shall be put in the plural and any necessary grammatical changes shall be made; this point shall not apply to the third paragraph of Article 182 and to Articles 312 and 313; 

Now clearly this makes sense, but only if you happen to have copies of the Treaty on the European Union, and the Treaty Establishing the European Community to hand, coupled with a lot of patience. To be fair, the protocols later in the treaty are more readable, but European citizens are still presented with a largely incomprehensible and highly technical document. Of course, as with most legislation, citizens themselves rarely see the raw material. But the barrier to entry on something as important as Lisbon means that the alternative way of participating in the political discourse—through the media—is vulnerable to the sort of lies and scare-mongering which was seen in the Irish ‘no’ campaign, and which will likely be seen again in June or October, and in any referendum held in the UK.

The aims of Lisbon are frequently ignored in debate on the treaty, and should it ever be fully ratified, we’ll be able to enjoy a better and more democratic Union, but I’m certain the legitimacy of the treaty will be called into doubt after so much of a muddle has been made over its implementation.

As well as the growing strength of more extreme forms of politics, as I mentioned the other day, I think that the economic woes we all currently face across Europe cause states to reconsider how strongly they value their sovereignty. The European project relies on the pooling of sovereignty for common benefit of member states. Without this, we may as well scale European integration back to the cosy intergovernmental confines of the European Free Trade Association and the Council of Europe. But naturally, pooling of sovereignty means that a number of decisions, primarily economic, are taken from the hands of national leaders, and placed in Brussel, Strasbourg and Frankfurt. When people are easily manipulated by the far-right, and member states’ governments seek an ‘anything which could save us’ approach, as many are trying to do now, distancing of decision making, in what are perceived to be the hands of foreigners, just won’t wash with a lot of the electorate.

I personally hope that something of Lisbon’s ilk, eventually passes. But I can’t see Lisbon itself being ratified. The EU should start afresh and (I shudder as I borrow a term from the Scottish National Party here) promote an ‘international conversation’ on how to proceed with the European project. Not a debate solely between national governments and policy wonks, but a debate which includes all European citizens. Discussing the facts of the matter, without recourse to plainly domestic affairs (sending messages on the popularity of the present government, and similar), or scare-mongering as was seen in the Irish referendum.

The only way forward for Europe, which will ensure a sustainable future for integration and strong partnership between member states, is for European citizens to wake up, and realise what Europe is, and what it means. What benefits it brings, and how it needs to be improved.

So what have been my political highlights of last year? I think I’d have to put following the Climate and Energy Package up there pretty highly, though in terms of what people visit this blog for, the Torpedo Amendments of the Telecoms Package are a close contender. I’m still at the top position on Google in the UK for the search on them. In domestic politics, the change at the helm of the Scottish Greens was obviously significant, and I don’t think I’ll ever see such an impressive and heartfelt farewell as was given to Robin at the party conference in September.

Personally, this year has been dominated by my discovery of European politics. Surprisingly, the first time I got involved in the Federation of Young European Greens was only February! Since then I’ve certainly experienced quite a lot, including learning how to deal with vehemently pro-European Belgians (though I’m certainly still learning that).

On last year’s end of year post, I wrote about what I wanted to see in the coming year. Proving that, despite feeling recent, the ‘credit-crunch’ has been with us for plenty of time now, I looked forward to “subdued consumerism” and the ensuing environmental benefits. Well thanks to the extensive media coverage of it all – not to mention the year to mull things over – I’ve realised that it’d be nice to have a decent economy which works for people and planet, rather than the short-term gain from the current troubles. Fortunately the Green New Deal came along with a perfect Green rescue plan, and was even picked up by the UN, albeit in a slightly watered down form. Hopefully 2009 will see the first steps of the “carbon army”.

On a different level, I’d like to see greens in the UK realise that there’s a whole continent out there, and so many opportunities to work with fellow greens, to really get our message across, and make sure that we get as many people into office as possible, giving us a chance to prove that it is possible to repair the damage to the environment, prevent future degradation, and reconnect people with both their planet, and their fellow people.

Grand words, I know, and I’m sure I’ll face accusations of forgetting the grassroots and local basis of the green movement.

2005 really was the year when green was trendy. We still had plenty of borrowed money floating around, so it was fine to conspicuously consume the Fairtrade coffee, Duchy Originals biscuits, and People Tree clothes. New Consumer magazine was in its heyday, and even scored an interview with Leonardo di’Caprio.

However, while the economic downturn has moved people from Waitrose to Lidl, and from Duchy to digestives, I’ve noticed something else start to happen. Something very heartening indeed, so long as you don’t manufacture organic hemp jeans. Green policies are slowly being picked up in the significant levels of government. The people who make the decisions are finally starting — and I emphasise ‘starting’ — to make the right decisions, not just those which look good. The Green proposed plans for universal free insulation in Scotland are a great example of this.

So, let 2009 bring copious insulation,  more elected Greens, and a rejigged Green economy.