The EU from a

Critical Perspective

A selection of articles from EUWatch

The EU from a Critical Perspective

A selection of articles from EUWatch

Editors: Klaus Heeger

Karoly Lorant

Publisher: Independence/Democracy Group in the European Parliament

Printed at European Parliament printing press, Luxembourg - 2009

ISBN: 978-92-823-2861-3

The EU from a Critical Perspective

i

CONTENT

PREFACE iv

Chapter 1 - The Future of the European Union 1

From 'cooperation' to 'centralisation' - The advent of EU supranational

policing (Kevin Ellul-Bonici) 2

Europa Quo Vadis? (Peter Henseler) 7

Political integration-the ultimate goal (Anthony Coughlan) 10

Commenting on the results of the reflection period (Klaus Heeger) 12

A proposal for a new dynamic federalism in Europe (Bruno S. Frey) 19

A more self-reliant Europe – The response to global economic and

energy insecurity (Colin Hines) 26

The future of Europe: are there alternatives? (Karoly Lorant) 30

The EU after the Irish 'NO' (Interview with Michel Rocard) 44

The European Union between 'non-statehood' and 'supra-statehood'

(Peter Henseler) 50

The constitutional implications of the Treaty of Lisbon (Anthony Coughlan) 71

Chapter 2 - Democracy 83

The next 'constitutional' Treaty - What the people should decide

(Kevin Ellul-Bonici) 85

Referendum models in the process of Europe's constitutionalisation

(Peter Henseler ) 91

A way out - towards a more democratic European Union (Bruno Kaufmann) 99

Why national politicians are so europhile (Anthony Coughlan) 103

An unsettled referendum debate (Peter Henseler) 106

The importance of monitoring members' voting in the

European Parliament (Jan A. Johansson) 112

The results of the 2005 and 2006 referenda – What do the statistics reveal?

(Endre Barcs) 120

Freedom in the "United States of Europe"

– An exercise in the suppression of dissent? (Kevin Ellul-Bonici) 131

Is the European Union "Le meilleur des mondes possibles"?

(Gawain Towler) 136

Chapter 3 - Subsidiarity 139

Subsidiarity and proportionality – a legal-economic approach

(Peter Henseler ) 140

COSAC, subsidiarity and proportionality (Interview with Sarita Kaukaoja) 153

The EU from a Critical Perspective

ii

The subsidiarity principle and the EU institutions (Markus Nyman) 158

Subsidiarity at the service of technocratic centralism

(Christophe Beaudouin) 162

The primacy of the community law (David Sehnálek) 166

Is the Committee of the Regions promoting closeness and subsidiarity?

(Markus Nyman) 175

The white horse of bureaucracy (Martina Rozsívalová) 179

Chapter 4 - The Charter of Fundamental Rights 187

Limiting fundamental rights in the interests of the market (Frank Keoghan) 188

What will remain of the French 1789 human and citizens' rights?

(Anne-Marie Le Pourhiet) 192

Fundamental rights and freedoms: The dawn of an unprecedented legal

revolution (Christophe Beaudouin) 195

The impact of the charter of fundamental rights

(Interview with Peter M. Huber) 198

Chapter 5 - The Future of the Euro 201

The Euro and the OCA: Will the Monetary Union collapse? (Peter Henseler) 203

Political Union - the end game of the Euro

(Interview with Paul De Grauwe) 205

The birth and death of the euro (Anthony Coughlan) 208

Chapter 6 - The Financial Crisis 213

Prisoner´s Dilemmas, Locomotives and the EU -

Some Considerations in Connection with the World Crisis

(Kurt W. Rothschild) 214

The financial crisis: Strengthening or weakening the EU? (Peter Henseler) 219

The EU in the turmoil of the financial crisis: The particular vulnerability

of the central and east European countries (Janos Plenter) 226

The impact of the financial crisis on the European Union

(Mogens Ove Madsen) 235

Chapter 7 - Defence 239

Finland and the militarisation of the EU's non-aligned member states

(Esko Seppänen) 241

From common market to common defence – The Common Foreign,

Security and Defense Policy of the EU after Lisbon (Franz Leidenmuehler) 244

After the Lisbon Treaty, what is our defence strategy and what kind of

foreign policy does it serve? (Claude Gaucherand) 249

The EU from a Critical Perspective

iii

France, NATO and European Defence (Thomas Valasek) 255

A call to vote NO against the militaristic Treaty of Lisbon

(Tobias Pflüger) 261

Chapter 8 - Immigration 265

Do we need solutions at EU level for the immigration problem?

(Interview with Nigel Farage and Johannes Blokland) 266

A European approach to the refugee problem is needed (Jan Harm Boiten) 270

Immigration policy: From loss of sovereignty to loss of identity?

(Christophe Beaudouin) 274

Immigration and integration problems the EU and its member states

are facing (Karoly Lorant) 283

Is there a European solution for immigration? (Klaus Heeger) 290

Chapter 9 - Energy 299

The New EU Energy Policy

(Interview with Andris Piebalgs) 300

Common energy policy: a house of cards built on shifting sands

(Nigel Farage) 305

Greenspirit - The causes of climate change

(Interview with Patrick Moore) 307

The Baltic Gas Pipeleine – Power Politics with Conflicting Interests

(Henrik Dahlsson) 309

Chapter 10 - Europe in numbers 313

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS 335

The EU from a Critical Perspective

179

THE WHITE HORSE OF BUREAUCRACY

By Martina Rozsívalová

Parkinson: Given that work (and especially paperwork) is elastic in its demands on

time, it follows that there need be little or no relationship between the work to be done

and the size of the staff to which it may be assigned. Likewise, the lack of occupation is

not necessarily revealed by manifest idleness. The task to be performed swells in

importance and complexity in direct proportion to the time allotted for the task

What do British historian Cyril Northcote Parkinson, Czech author Franz Kafka and British writer

George Orwell have in common? Although they lived in different times, they all described how

far red tape, the socalled paper tiger, or as we say in Czech, the white horse of bureaucracy, can

get in our lives’ way.

‘WORK EXPANDS SO AS TO FILL THE TIME AVAILABLE FOR ITS COMPLETION.’

‘Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.’ This was the opening sentence

of the humorous essay Professor Parkinson published in The Economist in 1955.

Parkinson did not believe that a growing civil service reflects a growing workload. The essay

proposed the contrary, based on the results of a study of the British civil service. Parkinson was

particularly qualified to make such a statement, having worked in the British civil service and

experienced first hand how bureaucracy operates. Given that work (and especially paperwork)

is elastic in its demands on time, it follows that there need be little or no relationship between

the work to be done and the size of the staff to which it may be assigned. Likewise, the lack of

occupation is not necessarily revealed by manifest idleness. The task to be performed swells in

importance and complexity in direct proportion to the time allotted for the task. The

importance of Parkinson’s Law lies in the fact that it is a law of growth based upon an analysis

of the factors by which that growth is controlled.1

George Orwell wrote ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’ in 1948. The novel, set in an imaginary totalitarian

future, made a deep impression across the globe and entered popular use with its title and

many phrases, such as ‘Big Brother is watching you’, ‘Newspeak’ and ‘Doublethink’. It tells the

story of Winston Smith, a functionary at the Ministry of Truth, whose work consists of editing

historical accounts to fit the government’s changing policies. The adjective ‘Orwellian’ alludes

to the system depicted in Nineteen Eighty- Four. It can refer to any form of government

oppression, but it is particularly used to refer to euphemistic and misleading language

originating from all-knowing government bodies with a political purpose to impose control

over its citizens (Ministry of Love, Ministry of Truth).2

The third author, Franz Kafka, a Czech-born, German-speaking writer, became famous for his

posthumously published novels describing the alienation of 20th century man. Kafka’s

nightmares of dehumanization, bureaucratic labyrinths, and totalitarian society have much in

common with the works of George Orwell (Nineteen Eighty- Four; Animal Farm). The term

‘Kafkaesque’ has become part of our modern vocabulary, describing some vague notion of a

dark, bureaucratic and hopeless world. Typically, Kafka’s stories revolve around a protagonist

who is caught up in a frustrating and sometimes fearsome web of bureaucracy, petty politics,

or other circumstances that render his life fruitless and meaningless. The protagonist is a

person like many of us, often in some professional middle class role – a doctor, a land surveyor,

The EU from a Critical Perspective

180

a senior bank clerk, or a salesman – who is confronted by faceless and nameless low level

bureaucrats who control access to the high level bureaucrats who make the critical decisions

that affect lives individually and collectively. This bureaucracy forms an impenetrable barrier

towards resolving the issues confronted by the protagonist.

A SELECTION OF EU ABSURDITIES 2005-2008, OR HOW ELASTIC THE SCOPE OF WORK OF

A FUNCTIONARY IS

So how do these wisdoms apply to the European Union’s regulatory framework?

In various ways, the EU’s propensity towards the nightmares portrayed by Orwell and Kafka is

by way of the bureaucracy detailed by Parkinson. Here are some examples of EU legislative acts

and reports adopted or dealt with by the European Parliament (EP) which are reminiscent to

the works of Parkinson, Orwell and Kafka. What characterises these bureaucratic measures is

their excessive nature, adding no value to the product, but making it more expensive and

problematic for producers.

SPECIAL MEASURES TO ENCOURAGE SILKWORM REARING

The Council Regulation (EEC) No 845/72 of 24 April 1972 laying down special measures to

encourage silkworm rearing has been substantially amended several times. Silkworm rearing is

of some importance to the economies of certain regions of the Community. This activity is a

source of additional income for farmers in those regions. Measures therefore had to be adopted

to help ensure a fair income for silkworm rearers. To that end, measures had to facilitate the

adjustment of supply to market requirements, and a European aid replacing all national

silkworm aid should be granted for silkworm rearing. The growers should make sure that aid is

granted to silkworm rearers for each box of silkworm eggs used, on conditions that the boxes

contain a minimum quantity of eggs, to be determined, and that the worms have been

successfully reared. The aid per box of silkworm eggs shall amount to EUR 133.26.

COMPULSORY ELECTRONIC SHEEP IDENTIFICATION OF OVINE AND CAPRINE ANIMALS

In December 2007 MEPs voted on a planned compulsory introduction of electronic

identification for ovine and caprine animals as amended by the Committee on agriculture and

rural development in an earlier date, i.e. on 31 December 2009.

This proposed Council regulation3 has led to severe criticism from farmers‘ groups because it is

feared that the extra cost and administration will seriously harm this particular farming sectors,

forcing many to give it up altogether. Already now, sheep farming offers low financial returns

and added financial and administrative pressure could prove to be the killer blow. Almost 10

months after the vote, MEPs woke up with a feeling that individual electronic tagging is

unnecessary and overbearing. So a cross-party group of MEPs launched a new campaign

through a written declaration to stop the compulsory electronic tagging (EID) of sheep and

goats. The declaration should prompt a European Parliamentary debate on the subject,

provided it is signed by over half the 785 MEPs. Good luck to the farmers!4

HARMONISATION CONCERNING FARM AND FORESTRY MACHINERY AND VEHICLES

The EP’s committee on legal affairs regularly supplies plenary sessions with different reports on

directives concerning harmonisation of various types of machinery and vehicles. Hinting at

The EU from a Critical Perspective

181

these examples does not intend to detract the necessity of safety devices but to demonstrate

the immense volume of EU legislation.

For example, concerning forestry tractors, member states have to comply with the following

directives (adopted by the EP during the December 2007- February 2008 plenary sessions):

- Directive on the coupling device and the reverse of wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors;5

- Driver-perceived noise level of wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors;6

- On the suppression of radio interference produced by agricultural or forestry tractors

(electromagnetic compatibility);7

- On rear registration plate lamps for motor vehicles and their trailers;8

- Installation of lighting and lightsignalling devices on wheeled agricultural and forestry

tractors.9

Another striking example is the EP’s legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive on the

retrofitting of mirrors to heavy goods vehicles registered in the Community.10

A CERAMIC SHEEP

EU regulation includes such absurd examples like the definition of ceramic sheep as an article

designed essentially for the interior decoration of homes, relating to the classification of certain

goods in the so-called Combined Nomenclature. In the Commission regulation it is literally

stated that the goods described in column 1 of the table set out in the Annex shall be classified

within the combined nomenclature under the CN code as indicated in the column: “An article,

in the form of a sheep, measuring approximately 10 cm in height. A knitted fabric, representing the

fleece, covers most of the ceramic body leaving part of the head and four hoofs visible. The fabric is

glued on the ceramic body.”11

QUALITY STANDARDS ON COMPOST

The proposed EC directive on soil protection aims at establishing harmonisation of standards

on compost. Article 10 reads as follows: “The use of compost shall be encouraged with the aim of

maintaining soil fertility, enhancing soil organic matter levels and fighting erosion. For that purpose

Member States shall adopt compost quality standards (TA)”.12 It is another way of saying that

‘since farmers are not specialists in their field, the central planners should see to the quality

standards they are missing.’

NUMBER OF SEXUAL PARTNERS

“How many sexual partners have you had?“ was a question the EU wanted to ask.

Eventually, the EP’s Committee on employment and social affairs in the European Parliament

did not approve the Commission’s proposal to collect information about women’s private lives

in the 2011 EU population census. The amending proposal was intending to include the

collection of rather personal information, including such matters as when a woman started an

intimate relationship with a partner, or if partners share/d a household. Many MEPs argued that

the EU’s line of questions was too intimate and biased, as the questions focused only on

The EU from a Critical Perspective

182

women. Eurostat argued that such information is often important for fertility statistics. Yet

collecting such information goes beyond the powers of the European and national institutions.

In effect, the final regulation on population and housing censuses did not include the

controversial amendments.13

GIVING CITIZENS A VOICE – ‘DEBATE EUROPE’

In 2008, the European Commission launched ‘Debate Europe’, an initiative under the so-called

Plan D: Dialogue, Democracy and Debate, launched in 2005 after the French and Dutch

rejection of the proposed EU constitution, and designed to increase citizens’ involvement in the

European Union‘s decision-making process or in other words, to promote active European

citizenship. 14

To enhance Plan D’s mission of promoting active European citizenship, ‘Debate Europe’ uses a

variety of communication strategies to amplify and integrate the citizen’s voice into

policymaking on any number of EU-related subjects.15

A very interesting example on how to work together on such strategy in practise is shown in a

recent speech by Margot Wallström within an exchange of views with Irish Minister for Foreign

Affairs, Micháel Martin, at the Constitutional Affairs Committee. Commissioner Wallström wants

“to pool the resources“ on a new massive campaign aiming to again try to persuade Irish voters

to vote in favour of the Treaty of Lisbon. The Irish voters, it seems, got it all wrong so they need

to vote again. The Commissioner is calling the following an effective, democratic

communication:

“...The referendum was very little related to the Lisbon Treaty. Taxation, Irish neutrality, abortion,

gay marriage and euthanasia dominated the campaign even if these issues - certainly important per

se - were not directly related to the Treaty.

The main reason for the NO vote and for the abstentions was a lack of information and

understanding of what the Treaty is about......We must not forget that today, 24 Member States have

completed political approval for the Treaty. By the end of the year, this figure is likely to rise to

26....We are solutions-oriented and willing to know on which issues Irish society requires

reassurance.

Any solution has to be respectful of the position already taken by the very large majority of the

Member States and acceptable to the Irish people. The Commission will work with the Government

of Ireland and the Presidency – as it has being doing in the past for other cases – to find solutions

that may be acceptable by all. The decision to create a Sub- Committee on Ireland’s future in the EU

is a step in the right direction. It will help shed some light on how Ireland envisages its future in the

EU and to point the way to solutions.

...A more emotional no campaign worked better than a more factual yes... Unless we pool our

resources and work together on this, we will see in the future more surveys showing that people do

not have enough information to make fair and objective judgements about the EU’s

decisions...Effective communication, I believe, plays a central part in the EU democracy...“.16

The question is whether only the no voters misunderstood the Treaty. Maybe the yes voters

misunderstood it too. So while citizens are to be given a voice, they should not disagree with

the European project, otherwise they may have misunderstood the issue. The motives of those

who voted ‘yes’ apparently did not need to be analysed, for only they understood what they

The EU from a Critical Perspective

183

were voting for. This means that the voice the EU wants to give citizens is conditional on

whether they agree with the Commission’s views.

The Commission is now focused on public relations ‘because the citizens do not realize how

much they benefit from the EU and if they were more informed about the benefits of the

internal market and the other policies of the EU and learned more about how the EU works,

they would inevitably started to love it’(!). It is certainly true that many citizens do not know

much about the EU. However, there is little evidence providing that citizens with more

information about the EU and its policies would increase popular support for the project.

Opinion polls reveal that public understanding about the EU has increased over the last decade

at the same time as public support has declined. Why is that? Maybe as people learn more

about the EU they also start to understand that economic integration benefits only some social

groups, that the beneficiaries of significant amounts from the EU budget are difficult to

identify, and that it is almost impossible for them to change the direction of EU policies.

PROMOTING EU CITIZENSHIP AND EU CONSCIOUSNESS

A new programme Europe for Citizens, in force since January 2007, has been planned for EU

citizens as an opportunity to interact in initiatives and projects with a European profile in order

to foster citizens’ participation, development of their European identity and sense of ownership

of the European project as well as to enhance tolerance and mutual understanding between

them. Through this programme, citizens ought to be involved in transnational exchanges and

cooperation activities which should contribute to “developing a sense of belonging to

common European ideals and encouraging the process of European integration”.17

The EU wants to be visible in areas where people can relate to it, so it promotes EU citizenship

in simple daily life, such as sports, the ‘milk to school‘ project, phone charges, or cultural events

such as concert festivals.

CONCLUSIONS

So was Parkinson right? Dealing with EU legislation and activism on a daily basis, we might

naturally identify ourselves with the protagonists – the heroes of the stories, who, in spite of the

frustration, persevere in their struggles. However, when thinking about our day-to-day lives, we

wonder what could be done in order not to become entirely mindless and complacent toward

acting out the minor roles in Kafka’s writings. How far can EU regulations still go?

The EU is a complex system of multilevel governance which does not function as a classical

parliamentary democracy. It comprises a system of bureaucratic experts and respective

committees‘ networks which makes it possible to enforce certain national, regional or social

interests. The procedures are often informal, dependent on contacts, yet tied with a thorough

bureaucratic baseline. As new powers have been passed to the EU during the past 20 years,

concerns about the ‘democratic deficit have intensified.18

Prof. Simon Hix believes that the main problem with democratic deficit, when producing

policies on the EU level involving a ‘notional average European citizen’, is a lack of a real

political debate and a political choice about these policies. That means that the EU is not really

a democratic polity. Democracy is, as Hix emphasizes, a competition for political office and over

the direction of the policy agenda. Yet in the EU no such competition exists. Furthermore, the

new treaty reforms are unlikely to bring the EU closer to the citizens, and may even undermine

the legitimacy of the EU further if a second attempt to ratify a new treaty is rejected. As a

The EU from a Critical Perspective

184

solution he suggests to change some of the informal practices and procedures of the EU

institutions. Hix thinks that the EU should become more politicized and gradually modify its

stiffness into a real political contest.19

Since the EU currently consists of 27 countries having different historical experiences and

political cultures and traditions, we might be careful with giving more powers to the European

Parliament and the Commission, or to support qualified majority voting as a standard

procedure in the Council. As Michael Oakeshott, British philosopher and a dominating figure of

conservative thought emphasized, the public administrative and personal life management

should better be guided by the principle of familiarity. Once we are to orientate ourselves in a

certain situation and use our skills accordingly, we need to be familiar with it.20

The values described by the British philosopher are lacking in most international organizations,

including such specific organisation like the European Union is. In fact, the real examples of

familiarities within the cope of Europe are born in the national or family background. Nobody

exactly knows what the ‘EU identity‘ is or what it should be...

The extension of qualified majority voting in the Council (which would follow the entry into

force of the Lisbon Treaty) would simplify the adoption of European regulation, effecting even

very private realms.

Given the tremendous legislative capacity of the EU - which often seeks a very detailed

regulation in all possible aspects- the life in the EU could in some time become hardly bearable

and literally Orwellian.

Only the future of currently unknown affairs will answer the question of how elastic the

evolution of EU bureaucracy can be.

NOTES:

1 C. Northcote Parkinson, Parkinson’s Law or The Pursuit of Progress (London, 1958).

http://www.berglas.org/Articles/parkinsons_law.pdf

2 Orwell, George: Nineteen Eighty-Four (London, 1949).

3 Proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 as regards the date

of introduction of electronic identification for ovine and caprine animals (COM(2007)0710)

4 European Parliament legislative resolution of 13 December 2007 on the proposal for a Council

regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 as regards the date of introduction of

electronic identification for ovine and caprine animals (COM(2007)0710 – C6-0448/2007 –

2007/0244(CNS); report Graefe zu Baringdorf (A6-0501/2007)

5 (COM(2007)0319 – C6-0175/2007 – 2007/0117(COD)); Mayer report (A6-0474/2007)

6 (COM(2007)0588 – C6-0344/2007 – 2007/0205(COD)); Speroni report (A6-0019/2008)

7 (COM(2007)0462 – C6-0256/2007 – 2007/0166(COD)); Speroni report (A6-0018/2008)

8 (COM(2007)0451 – C6-0252/2007 – 2007/0162(COD)); Mayer report (A6-0017/2008))

9 (COM(2007)0192 – C6-0108/2007 – 2007/0066(COD)); Mayer report (A6-0022/2008)

10 (COM (2006) 0570 – C6-0332/2006 – 2006/0183 (COD)); Costa report (A6-0124/2007)

11 Commission regulation concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined

Nomenclature (EC) No 1462/2006 of 2 October 2006

12Legislative resolution of 14 November 2007 on the proposal for a directive establishing a

framework for the protection of soil and amending Directive 2004/35/EC (COM(2006)0232 –

C6-0307/2006 – 2006/0086(COD)); Gutierrez-Cortinez report (A6-0410/2007)

13 Regulation on population and housing censuses (EC) No 763/2008

The EU from a Critical Perspective

185

14 COM (2005) 494 final

15Http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/wallstrom/communicating/conference/dialogue/i

ndex_en.hm

16 Reference: SPEECH/08/499 Date: 06/10/2008

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/08/499&format=HTML&

aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

17 “Europe for Citizens” http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/index_en.htm

18 Andreas Follesdal (University of Oslo) and Simon Hix (London School of Economics): Why

there is a democratic deficit in the EU: A response to Majone and Moravcsik In: Journal of

Common Market Studies, Vol.44, Issue 3, pp.533-62.

19 For instance, the Council should fully open up and thus become more transparent and the

European Parliament should have more powers granted (such as the ability to amend all

areas of the budget); hence more would be at stake in the European elections. In Simon Hix:

‘What’s Wrong with the European Union and How to Fix it‘, Polity (29 January 2008).

20 Paul Franco: The Political Philosophy of Michael Oakeshott (New Heaven, 1990). dec3:Layout

1 25/03/2009 15:44 Page 35