Much ink and newsreel has flowed in the media about the appointment of the new EU top jobs created by the Lisbon Treaty, but there has been little reaction from public opinion. Many of the comments about how the politicians were chosen - and who was picked - are barbed and spiteful, often to score political points in my opinion (see my column in the previous newsletter). The EU is well used to being misunderstood and has a duty to make things clearer, improve the way it operates and what it achieves, pointing out that Europeans have a greater influence these days on the outcome of EU policies. I do not wish to discuss this today - there will be time enough to return to the character, work and future prospects of Herman Van Rompuy and Catherine Ashton before they take office.
The important issue is not the people who have been appointed as such. I would like to talk about something else today. The new jobs are important and properly implementing the institutional changes set out in the Lisbon Treaty is key, of course, but the crucial thing for Europe and for Europeans is not the names of the people appointed to the new jobs as such. The average European has probably already forgotten the names of Van Rompuy and Ashton or does not know who they are exactly. Few Europeans would be able to tell you what the new jobs are that they have been appointed to. This is unimportant because things will gradually become clear. The most important thing at stake is what the two politicians actually say and how they negotiate on behalf of Europe because this will directly fashion the future of the European Union and the future of world as a whole. I will give two examples to explain why I do not go along with the fashionable “sneering” about Europe, but choose instead to back the laudable desire to move onwards and upwards:
a) Agreement was reached last week (after a year of tough negotiations between the EP and the Council of Ministers) about the compulsory EU energy efficiency of buildings rules. In a nutshell, buildings' energy consumption must be close to zero by 2020 (2018 for public buildings). This is a huge step forward because buildings are where most energy is wasted and the most cost-efficient energy savings can be made. Instead of giving this achievement the praise it deserves, the Greens at the European Parliament are being churlish, muttering darkly about failure and missing a window of opportunity, because no new measures were decided about existing buildings at the same time as the rules for new buildings. Factually, they are right of course because action also needs to be taken on existing buildings which can guzzle colossal amounts of energy. It is, however, simply not possible yet to set compulsory rules and deadlines for existing buildings, particularly given the nature of cities that go back centuries, if not millennia. While remembering that more needs to be done, we should hail this decision that demonstrates yet again that Europe can be in the avant-garde;
b) At the European Parliament plenary, the chair of GUE, the far left group, reaffirmed his opposition to the Lisbon Treaty because it allows three member states to opt out of the binding nature of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The facts speak for themselves. Once the treaty comes into force (in the near future), the Charter of Fundamental Rights will be binding for 24 member states; and without the Lisbon Treaty, it would be binding in not even one member state. Would the far left have preferred that? I expect the GUE Group has other reservations about the Lisbon Treaty, but I am quoting what their chair said at the European Parliament.
Europe leads the way when it comes to the big global issues. Despite sorry shortcomings in some regards, and a mismatch among its member states at times, Europe tends to be in the avant-garde when it comes to the talks on the big challenges facing the planet, like reforming the way the financial world operates; combatting climate change; saving biodiversity and the natural habitat; tackling famine around the world; and new forms of energy and adjusting the way we use existing sources of energy.
If in these areas, the EU as a whole (by which I mean Van Rompuy and Ashton working together with the other EU institutions, particularly the European Commission and the European Parliament) is able to put forward, promote and pursue some Big Ideas, then we will see that the two unknowns (to quote the most famous French newspaper's description of Van Rompuy and Ashton) will have their voices heard in Europe and around the globe. The bigwigs around the world (and public opinion to boot) will get to know their names through what they stand for. (F.R./transl.fl)