Red Dragon, White Bull

Vive la révolution!

Vive la révolution!

Time to drag Europe out of the gutter

The main goals of parties are to win votes, gain office and influence or change policy. The overwhelming number of centre-left and centre-right parties are, in general, supportive of the EU and so have no incentive to spend party resources - especially financial - in pursuit of an objective that will not render any domestic dividends. And further, as most parties 'time horizon' extends not much further than the next election, there is all the more reason for them not develop a distinctive position on Europe and communicate this alongside manifesto promises on social welfare, tax and spending, housing and so on.

The current predicament of parties is the growing gap between rising citizen demands across many policy areas now influenced by the EU and parties ability to deliver. As most mainstream parties avoid directly engaging in debates over Europe, they cede the public rostrum to anti-EU parties. But they themselves may experience internal tension over EU policy. Parties to the left of social democrats attack the neo-liberal economic orientation of the EU, careful to say they are in support of European integration in principle, but against the economic policy of liberalisation of the public sector and so on. Parties to the right of Christian democrats and conservatives attack the immigration policy of the union, a position linked to their avowed defence of their national identity - and so there is a demand to protect national sovereignty. The problem for mainstream parties is that their respective left and right-wings are sympathetic to these critiques, and to maintain party stability leaders strive to contain these internal policy disagreements so as not to undermine their electoral chances. The net result of this seemingly rational party policy is to remain silent on these pressing policy issues.

[National parties] have to publically acknowledge that there is a choice at the European level, and introduce a European dimension in national competitive politics and take seriously transnational party organising. This is the challenge for national party politics as well as for national democracy in general.

But it isn't a challenge for politicians alone. It is also a challenge for the BBC. Its duty is to provide impartial coverage of any developments affecting the lives of the public, yet apart from a weekly half hour on BBC Parliament, the European dimension is for the most part limited to those topics deemed to be controversial by the tabloid press. On these occasions eurosceptics are inevitably carted in to vent their indignation at yet another alleged loss of national sovereignty, thereby lending credibility to such beliefs and hindering the audience from forming an informed opinion on whatever the specific subject in question may be. In the case of the recent crises in the Eurozone, the BBC, by its choice of "experts", effectively promoted the notion that the Euro and by default the EU were irrevocably doomed. In this context the BBC has more closely resembled a soapbox corner for europhobes than a serious public service broadcaster.

The sooner political discourse on the European dimension is raised out of the gutter that the tabloid press dragged it into, the sooner Professor Ladrech's challenge can be met.

Time to drag Europe out of the gutter

The main goals of parties are to win votes, gain office and influence or change policy. The overwhelming number of centre-left and centre-right parties are, in general, supportive of the EU and so have no incentive to spend party resources - especially financial - in pursuit of an objective that will not render any domestic dividends. And further, as most parties 'time horizon' extends not much further than the next election, there is all the more reason for them not develop a distinctive position on Europe and communicate this alongside manifesto promises on social welfare, tax and spending, housing and so on.

The current predicament of parties is the growing gap between rising citizen demands across many policy areas now influenced by the EU and parties ability to deliver. As most mainstream parties avoid directly engaging in debates over Europe, they cede the public rostrum to anti-EU parties. But they themselves may experience internal tension over EU policy. Parties to the left of social democrats attack the neo-liberal economic orientation of the EU, careful to say they are in support of European integration in principle, but against the economic policy of liberalisation of the public sector and so on. Parties to the right of Christian democrats and conservatives attack the immigration policy of the union, a position linked to their avowed defence of their national identity - and so there is a demand to protect national sovereignty. The problem for mainstream parties is that their respective left and right-wings are sympathetic to these critiques, and to maintain party stability leaders strive to contain these internal policy disagreements so as not to undermine their electoral chances. The net result of this seemingly rational party policy is to remain silent on these pressing policy issues.

[National parties] have to publically acknowledge that there is a choice at the European level, and introduce a European dimension in national competitive politics and take seriously transnational party organising. This is the challenge for national party politics as well as for national democracy in general.

But it isn't a challenge for politicians alone. It is also a challenge for the BBC. Its duty is to provide impartial coverage of any developments affecting the lives of the public, yet apart from a weekly half hour on BBC Parliament, the European dimension is for the most part limited to those topics deemed to be controversial by the tabloid press. On these occasions eurosceptics are inevitably carted in to vent their indignation at yet another alleged loss of national sovereignty, thereby lending credibility to such beliefs and hindering the audience from forming an informed opinion on whatever the specific subject in question may be. In the case of the recent crises in the Eurozone, the BBC, by its choice of "experts", effectively promoted the notion that the Euro and by default the EU were irrevocably doomed. In this context the BBC has more closely resembled a soapbox corner for europhobes than a serious public service broadcaster.

The sooner political discourse on the European dimension is raised out of the gutter that the tabloid press dragged it into, the sooner Professor Ladrech's challenge can be met.

Welsh in name alone

In those thirteen years the Welsh electorate have not only warmed toward devolution, but acquired a taste for more. As a result, devo-sceptics in the Labour Party have fallen by the wayside, and the Conservatives have given up talk of "slippery slopes" and rebranded themselves as devo-friendly Welsh patriots.

And yet, despite their devo-friendly stance and their professed commitment to transparency and accountability within the new Welsh polity, both Labour and the Conservatives refuse to publish their accounts for Wales. The law doesn't require them to do this, as both Welsh Labour and the Welsh Conservatives are Welsh in name alone, being constitutionally little more than branches of the UK Labour and Conservative parties. But if they were truly committed to transparency and accountability, one would have thought that thirteen years was sufficient time for them to do address this glaring deficiency.

As Peter Black replied to Vaughan Roderick when asked on yesterday's Sunday Supplement whether Labour and the Tories should publish their accounts for Wales:

"We have a much different scenario nowadays than we did twenty years ago. We have a devolved settlement; we have devolved elections; although we don't have a Wales Labour Party constitutionally or even a Welsh Conservative Party as such, they effectively act in that way in the Welsh Assembly and in Welsh Assembly elections; and I think that it's quite clear that people should see that level of transparency in terms of Welsh politics."

European identity

BRUSSELS - The European Parliament is trying to cultivate a "European identity," with top officials saying that it is the only way to ensure a lasting union between member states.

"National systems have very much invested in constructing their own identity," Klaus Welle, the secretary general of the European Parliament told an audience at the Centre for European Policy Studies, a think-tank, on Thursday (29 March).

"If we want to build a lasting union of solidarity we also need to invest in European identity. We need to understand history as European history and not just as compilation of national histories."

The issue of European identity is a touchy subject. MEPs have often referred to the need for countries to make sure that European history is part of national curricula.

But the suggestion alone raises heckles about interference from Brussels. The European Commission, which has the sole right to propose laws, has no real power in education matters, which remain in the hands of member states.

As far as cultivating a European identity is concerned, education isn't where we should be looking for answers. People will only begin to feel European when being European becomes something tangible.

For many Europeans like myself who have lived and worked in various member states, fostered relationships with people from member states other than our own, learned their languages, and above all had first hand experience of practising our rights as EU citizens, a European identity is something tangible. But for those who have done none of the above, even if their national currency happens to be the Euro, there's very little to make them feel European. Or even want to.

The combination of the roles of President of the European Commission and President of the European Council would provide EU citizens with a clearly identifiable European president and change the dynamics of the EU, not least by making the commission’s legislative proposals much more tightly bound up in the political wishes of member states. But that is not enough, because ultimately European identity will only truly begin to blossom when membership of the EU has a real and positive effect on the finances and buying power of EU citizens, blue-collar and white-collar workers alike.

Time for another bonfire

Despite the consensus in the National Assembly that Wales has too many councils and too many councillors, the Welsh Government doesn't feel up to the task of reorganisation. Hence the "collaborative organisational groups" proposed last year: the Government is effectively telling local authorities to act as if they had been reorganised without actually having to go to the trouble of reorganising them at all.

Consequently, come 2016, Wales will still have too many councils and too many councillors, a situation that will have lasted twenty years.

With four more years to do something about it and a consensus for reorganisation in Cardiff Bay, the Welsh Government should do what it was elected to do and actually govern.

Once this year's ballots are cast and counted the Government should take the initiative and get the reorganisation ball rolling. If it does not, then it will be incumbent on the other parties to make the matter part of any deal the next time the Government is in need of their support.

Projects full of pre-election potential

In the case of four of the five enterprise zones, we still don't know whether the Treasury will grant them tax breaks or not. Even if tax breaks are granted, there are still questions surrounding the Welsh Government's competence in attracting significant investors following its failed bid to host the UK Government's Green Investment Bank in Cardiff, a bid that found Carwyn Jones' administration sorely wanting. The First Minister may have succeeded in  sweeping that matter under the carpet, but unless the Business Minister has managed to get her house in order, these blunders will persist, to the detriment of the Welsh economy.

The Growth Wales project is good news, although ultimately its long-term success will depend on the Welsh economy's ability to sustain the work places it generates. The 4000 training places it will create each year are only a small taste of what such projects could potentially achieve were fiscal powers and Work & Pensions devolved to Cardiff Bay.

Time to drag Europe out of the gutter

The main goals of parties are to win votes, gain office and influence or change policy. The overwhelming number of centre-left and centre-right parties are, in general, supportive of the EU and so have no incentive to spend party resources - especially financial - in pursuit of an objective that will not render any domestic dividends. And further, as most parties 'time horizon' extends not much further than the next election, there is all the more reason for them not develop a distinctive position on Europe and communicate this alongside manifesto promises on social welfare, tax and spending, housing and so on.

The current predicament of parties is the growing gap between rising citizen demands across many policy areas now influenced by the EU and parties ability to deliver. As most mainstream parties avoid directly engaging in debates over Europe, they cede the public rostrum to anti-EU parties. But they themselves may experience internal tension over EU policy. Parties to the left of social democrats attack the neo-liberal economic orientation of the EU, careful to say they are in support of European integration in principle, but against the economic policy of liberalisation of the public sector and so on. Parties to the right of Christian democrats and conservatives attack the immigration policy of the union, a position linked to their avowed defence of their national identity - and so there is a demand to protect national sovereignty. The problem for mainstream parties is that their respective left and right-wings are sympathetic to these critiques, and to maintain party stability leaders strive to contain these internal policy disagreements so as not to undermine their electoral chances. The net result of this seemingly rational party policy is to remain silent on these pressing policy issues.

[National parties] have to publically acknowledge that there is a choice at the European level, and introduce a European dimension in national competitive politics and take seriously transnational party organising. This is the challenge for national party politics as well as for national democracy in general.

But it isn't a challenge for politicians alone. It is also a challenge for the BBC. Its duty is to provide impartial coverage of any developments affecting the lives of the public, yet apart from a weekly half hour on BBC Parliament, the European dimension is for the most part limited to those topics deemed to be controversial by the tabloid press. On these occasions eurosceptics are inevitably carted in to vent their indignation at yet another alleged loss of national sovereignty, thereby lending credibility to such beliefs and hindering the audience from forming an informed opinion on whatever the specific subject in question may be. In the case of the recent crises in the Eurozone, the BBC, by its choice of "experts", effectively promoted the notion that the Euro and by default the EU were irrevocably doomed. In this context the BBC has more closely resembled a soapbox corner for europhobes than a serious public service broadcaster.

The sooner political discourse on the European dimension is raised out of the gutter that the tabloid press dragged it into, the sooner Professor Ladrech's challenge can be met.

Projects full of pre-election potential

In the case of four of the five enterprise zones, we still don't know whether the Treasury will grant them tax breaks or not. Even if tax breaks are granted, there are still questions surrounding the Welsh Government's competence in attracting significant investors following its failed bid to host the UK Government's Green Investment Bank in Cardiff, a bid that found Carwyn Jones' administration sorely wanting. The First Minister may have succeeded in  sweeping that matter under the carpet, but unless the Business Minister has managed to get her house in order, these blunders will persist, to the detriment of the Welsh economy.

The Growth Wales project is good news, although ultimately its long-term success will depend on the Welsh economy's ability to sustain the work places it generates. The 4000 training places it will create each year are only a small taste of what such projects could potentially achieve were fiscal powers and Work & Pensions devolved to Cardiff Bay.

Time to drag Europe out of the gutter

The main goals of parties are to win votes, gain office and influence or change policy. The overwhelming number of centre-left and centre-right parties are, in general, supportive of the EU and so have no incentive to spend party resources - especially financial - in pursuit of an objective that will not render any domestic dividends. And further, as most parties 'time horizon' extends not much further than the next election, there is all the more reason for them not develop a distinctive position on Europe and communicate this alongside manifesto promises on social welfare, tax and spending, housing and so on.

The current predicament of parties is the growing gap between rising citizen demands across many policy areas now influenced by the EU and parties ability to deliver. As most mainstream parties avoid directly engaging in debates over Europe, they cede the public rostrum to anti-EU parties. But they themselves may experience internal tension over EU policy. Parties to the left of social democrats attack the neo-liberal economic orientation of the EU, careful to say they are in support of European integration in principle, but against the economic policy of liberalisation of the public sector and so on. Parties to the right of Christian democrats and conservatives attack the immigration policy of the union, a position linked to their avowed defence of their national identity - and so there is a demand to protect national sovereignty. The problem for mainstream parties is that their respective left and right-wings are sympathetic to these critiques, and to maintain party stability leaders strive to contain these internal policy disagreements so as not to undermine their electoral chances. The net result of this seemingly rational party policy is to remain silent on these pressing policy issues.

[National parties] have to publically acknowledge that there is a choice at the European level, and introduce a European dimension in national competitive politics and take seriously transnational party organising. This is the challenge for national party politics as well as for national democracy in general.

But it isn't a challenge for politicians alone. It is also a challenge for the BBC. Its duty is to provide impartial coverage of any developments affecting the lives of the public, yet apart from a weekly half hour on BBC Parliament, the European dimension is for the most part limited to those topics deemed to be controversial by the tabloid press. On these occasions eurosceptics are inevitably carted in to vent their indignation at yet another alleged loss of national sovereignty, thereby lending credibility to such beliefs and hindering the audience from forming an informed opinion on whatever the specific subject in question may be. In the case of the recent crises in the Eurozone, the BBC, by its choice of "experts", effectively promoted the notion that the Euro and by default the EU were irrevocably doomed. In this context the BBC has more closely resembled a soapbox corner for europhobes than a serious public service broadcaster.

The sooner political discourse on the European dimension is raised out of the gutter that the tabloid press dragged it into, the sooner Professor Ladrech's challenge can be met.