My European Dream

Schengen maddness revised, 2012

2012-01-08T14:57:00.000-08:00

Hello and Happy New Year to everyone!

I wanted to start the new year with a positive post, but instead, it will be a short overview of the fights over the Schengen Treaty during the past year.

Many people in Western Europe probably see this issue as irrelevant and profoundly not interesting, but I claim this is just lack of perspective. Because the freedom of movement of people and goods is one of the founding principles of the EU. And the biggest harm from any mechanism for disabling this right, will be for the countries which impose it.

Why? Well, as somebody put it, in the accession contract, joining the Schengen Treaty is optional for the country that enters the Union, but not for the Union itself. The EU countries are actually obliged to accept the new country in the family so to say. Furthermore, according to the so called EU constitution, the freedom of movement of people and goods is guaranteed for all the member-states. Which means that the Schengen Treaty is in practice completely outdated and irrelevant to the current situation. Then how come countries hold on to it, like it's the most important thing in the world? How come, the only country which opened its borders for Bulgarians and Romanians in the beginning of 2012 is...Italy? How come the EU which has approximate population of 500 millions is afraid to open its borders to Romania (appox. 20 millions) and Bulgaria (approx. 7 millions), even though, most of the Bulgarian and Romanians who wanted to work abroad are employed in Spain and not planning to relocate? The only people who could look for job in the EU now are...highly educated professionals! (because everyone else is in Spain already - according to official data approx. 1 million Romanians are in Spain currently, but I would bet they are like 2 millions or even more; and the Bulgarians in Spain are around 300 000 or more)

Yet, the EU countries are desperate to convince you that opening the borders will be devastating to their economy. Because the big bad emigrants will come and eat your lunch. Oh well.

Ok, maybe it's hard to believe you're safe in your European home, but for me the question is - is this the most important thing governments must focus on? Emigration? During a huge economical crisis, in time of extremely complicated situation for Europe and the euro, are Bugaria and Romania indeed the problem? Or they are just a way to evade the real problem. Is the corruption in Bulgaria and Romania the worst thing in Europe, if 80% of the EU member states are in huge financial mess, caused precisely by corruption, bribes, crime, abuse of public money and so on and so on. Some could call it hypocrisy, but I call it very well-measured media propaganda. And this is why it is so dangerous for Europe. Because instead of dealing with the real problem, the public attention is focused on demonized third-parties like Bulgaria and Romania. If you that doesn't ring any bells for you, I'll remind you the events during the second world war. A part of the society was demonized to hide serious economical and geopolitical problems, and as a result Europe and the world were in the middle of the worst war ever.

I'm not claiming that Bulgaria and Romania will be the reason for the next big crisis in the world, I certainly hope not. The thing is that Europe has very serious problems. A lot of public money are missing. A lot of public services are being suspended. Many people are without job, and what's worst - without a perspective for new job. Tax-payers money are poured into banks, even tough those same banks are not public and they won't return those money to the public, ever. Basically, banks are telling governments how to act, which is not a lot better than governments telling banks how to act (i.e. China). We are in the middle of an extreme crisis of trust of the people toward their governments and only the holiday season and pure luck has saved us from BIG demonstrations and chaos. Yet, as you will find out reading trough the articles below, EU governments are having very busy time denying Bulgaria and Romania any fair chance of returning to normality. Of being part of the European Union. All that, in time when countries are questioning the need of the euro and the faith of the EU as a whole.

What's the point, you would say. The point is simple. Every challenge in our lives come in order to make us change, to make us grow and understand ourselves better. This crisis was the perfect chance for the EU member states to grow. But instead of growing, they chose to crouch in their little (or big) shells and stay there. They chose not to change, not to respond to the new situation. And that could cost them the EU. Which I still consider to be the greatest achievement for our continent. The problem is that the EU has grown, and European nations didn't grow with it. Everybody knows that current situation requires reforms and new vision of the EU, with much bigger economical and social integration of the nations, but nobody is doing anything about it. They know that there is a huge demographic crisis awaiting at our doors, yet instead of raising social benefits for mothers and stimulating employers to hire older people, they raise the retirement age hoping things will fix somehow. Well, they won't. They never did. No babies, no young adults, no workforce. It's as simple as that.

And instead of being creative and working on the problems together, as a union, nations are following Germany like little puppies, hoping that mama will do it right for them. Refusing to take responsibility and move on. That's what's bothering me. That's why I write all this. Not because for me it's so important that Bulgaria will be in the Schengen Treaty. For the moment, Bulgarians can travel freely and go anywhere they want, so this is not a big deal. The big deal is politicians use Bulgaria and Romania to scare their people, that they take the liberty to offend our governments, to preach on us about judicial system and corruption, when their nations are just as corrupted, only much more sophisticated. That they use this treaty, to black mail our governments and to set precedent for the whole Europe. Ultimately, they ruin the integration which is so important for the survival of the EU. And that's bad.

Anyway, read the articles and decide for yourself (the articles are many, but they are very seriously trimmed). After all, the EU is what we make it. And many people abandoned that responsibility time ago, when they decided it's all too complicated. It is complicated, but it's not impossible. When the people want it, they can shape the EU and the EC the way they want to. We just have to will it hard enough!

Today:

France, Italy call for Schengen Treaty re-write
Denmark against early Schengen enlargement too
Ministers agree on need for new EU border rules
Barroso warns Denmark on border checks
Bulgaria, Romania denied Schengen entry
Bulgaria, Romania monitoring inspires new Schengen rules
Parliament slams Commission, Council on Schengen
Germany criticises Danish border control plans
New EU members to break free from euro duty Germany opposes Commission's Schengen revamp plan
Belgium complains of 'social fraud' by Eastern workers
Italy opens up to Romanian, Bulgarian workers

03 May 2011

French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi yesterday (26 April) asked Brussels to make changes to the treaty establishing the Schengen border-free area. The proposed changes strengthen the hand of member countries and undermine the role of the European Commission.

At present, member states are only allowed to temporarily introduce such checks in the event of a serious threat to public order. The proposed text now speaks of "exceptional difficulties".
Apparently, such a text would allow France to introduce border checks in situations such as massive influxes of Tunisian refugees or Roma from Eastern Europe.
Sarkozy told journalists yesterday that Schengen must be reformed if it is to survive.
Sarkozy also appeared to reiterate France's opposition to enlarging Schengen to the EU's most recent newcomers, Bulgaria and Romania.
source

03 May 2011

Danish MEPs across party lines have asked their government to back France and Germany in their opposition to the early accession of Romania and Bulgaria to the EU's Schengen borderless area.

Four MEPs from different political groups have signed a letter to Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen, insisting that Romania and Bulgaria should not join the Schengen club before cracking down on corruption and organised crime.
Earlier this week, German MEPs Jens Rohde and Alexander Alvaro (ALDE) tabled amendments to a parliamentary report regarding Romaina and Bulgaria's Schengen accession, asking for the date 2011 to be deleted as a target date for them to join. source

Interior ministers from the 27-country bloc have agreed to change the rules of the Schengen passport-free area, seeking to clarify conditions under which national governments can reinstate border controls following a high-level spat between France and Italy.

At an extraordinary meeting in Brussels yesterday (12 May), ministers discussed the conditions under which countries should be allowed to reintroduce border controls for people travelling within the Schengen area.
The issue came to the fore after the arrival in Italy and Malta of thousands of people risking their lives to flee violence in Northern Africa.
Their arrival triggered a serious split between France and Italy after Rome issued temporary travel visas to thousands of Tunisian migrants, many of whom were heading to France. Paris responded by threatening to reintroduce checks along its south-eastern border.
source

The European Commission has strongly warned against plans by Copenhagen to introduce controls at its ports and airports, the EU executive announced.

Pia Ahrenkilde Hansen, spokesperson to Commission President José Manuel Barroso, said on 13 May that the Commission had received an assessment from its legal services over the measures announced by Denmark to re-introduce visible border controls.
The assessment raised "doubts" as to whether the move was in line with the country's legal obligations, she stressed.
There is a clear difference between the free movement of persons and movement of goods, she stressed. While the Schengen agreement allows the re-introduction of border controls under strict conditions, re-instating customs controls of the free movement of goods is not possible under EU law, she explained.
By reintroducing border controls allegedly to fight crime, the Danish government caved in to the demands of the Danish People's Party, a populist and anti-immigration party that has been holding up approval of its 2020 economic plan.
source

Published 09 June 2011 - Updated 10 June 2011

EU home affairs ministers are today (9 June) set to postpone enlarging the Schengen border-free area for an indefinite period, despite calls to the contrary from the European Parliament, which voted overwhelmingly in favour of Bulgaria and Romania's accession to the EU's passport-free zone.

France, Germany, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Belgium are opposed to Bulgaria and Romania joining the Schengen area, despite the two countries meeting the technical requirements for accession, EurActiv has learned.
Bulgaria and Romania's Schengen accession is on the agenda of meetings of EU justice and interior ministers being held in Luxembourg today and tomorrow.
But ministers are expected to postpone their decision for an indefinite period, even though the European Parliament voted yesterday (8 June) to back the two countries' Schengen accession by 487 votes in favour, 77 votes against and 29 abstentions.
In a number of statements, Paris has made clear that it directly links Romania and Bulgaria's Schengen accession to their progress in fighting corruption and organised crime.
Both the Parliament and the Commission take the view that Schengen accession is an issue unrelated to the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism and that the political considerations of individual countries should not overrule this legal base.
According to diplomats who asked not to be named, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who is standing for reelection in May 2012, will not risk making any decisions regarding Schengen which might be exploited by far-right candidate Marine Le Pen. source

EU heads of state and government adopted a political decision to reform the Schengen passport-free travel area at the conclusion of a two-day summit in Brussels today (24 June). The new rules were compared by Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte to the tough scrutiny imposed on Romania and Bulgaria after their EU accession.

Leaders attending the EU summit decided to step up "political guidance" on how the Schengen area is managed, stipulating that this should be done in accordance with "common standards and fundamental principles and norms".
Country-specific evaluations would be performed by groups made up of national experts from EU member states, European Commission officials and competent agencies, the document reads. source

Parliament slams Commission, Council on Schengen
08 July 2011
The European Parliament today (7 July) overwhelmingly rejected a push by EU countries led by France and backed by the European Commission to dilute the bloc's existing border-free area by allowing individual members to re-introduce checks on an "exceptional" basis.
MEPs gathered in Strasbourg overwhelmingly voted in favour of a 'Resolution on changes to Schengen', put forward jointly by all major political groupings: the centre-right European People's Party, the Socialists & Democrats, the liberal ALDE and the Greens/EFA groups.
The Parliament states its opinion that "any new exemptions from the current rules, such as new grounds for reintroducing border controls on an 'exceptional' basis, would definitely not reinforce the Schengen system".
Instead, MEPs take the view that the existing system is sufficiently reliable, asking the Commission to table an initiative making its application more strict.
MEPs also mention that the effectiveness of the evaluation mechanism lies in the possibility of sanctions in the event that deficiencies persist and jeopardise the overall security of the Schengen area.
The new Schengen evaluation system will also make it possible to request and obtain support for its members in the event of exceptional pressure on the EU's external borders.
The Parliament also "strongly regrets" attempts "by several member states" to reintroduce border controls.
MEPs deplore the "double standards" that have blocked the accession to the Schengen space of Bulgaria and Romania. The two EU countries have met the technical criteria, but are prevented from joining the border-free area due to obstruction mainly from the Netherlands. source

Germany criticises Danish border control plans
11 August 2011
Berlin yesterday (10 August) criticised Danish plans to build new installations on its border with Germany, saying its northern neighbour should wait for European Union clearance before starting any construction. The European Commission, which sent an inspection team to the site, said Denmark had failed to justify its new border controls and that the tighter security system currently imposed on its frontiers requires strict monitoring. source

More:
Italy 'ready to give up sovereignty' to save euro
16 September 2011
Ahead of a key eurozone meeting in Poland today (16 September), Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said Rome was ready to relinquish "all the sovereignty necessary to create a genuine European central government" and draw a line under the euro zone's debt crisis.
In a rare federalist outing, Frattini, a former European commissioner, may have given an indication of how serious the eurozone debt crisis is perceived in Rome.
"We must work seriously towards the formation of a genuine European economic government. It is no longer sufficient to lead Europe by coming together around a table at intergovernmental level," he said, referring to the numerous EU emergency summits that have been called since the debt crisis erupted.
A growing chorus of politicians – including from the ranks of the UK Conservatives – have called on eurozone leaders to take bold steps towards greater economic and fiscal union as a way out of the debt crisis. source

New EU members to break free from euro duty
13 September 2011
Seven EU members which joined the European Union between 2004 and 2007 are concerned about an obligation to adopt the euro under the terms of their accession and could stage referenda to change their accession treaties, AFP reported, quoting diplomatic sources.
Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Romania said the euro zone they thought they were going to join, a monetary union, may very well end up being a very different union entailing much closer fiscal, economic and political convergence.
Before the eurozone crisis, several new members that have been close to fulfilling the Maastricht criteria to join the euro zone, including Poland and Bulgaria, had set themselves ambitious plans to speedily join the common EU currency.
More recently, several Polish officials have stated that the country has shelved its plans for early eurozone accession, until it becomes clear what future should be expected for the common EU currency.source

Germany opposes Commission's Schengen revamp plan
13 September 2011
German Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich hit back forcefully against a draft plan to give the European Commission more say on when member states can reintroduce border controls in the passport-free Schengen travel area.
Under the draft EU legislation obtained by AFP, a country in the passport-free zone would be able to resume border patrols without asking for permission, but only for five days.
Beyond that, the country would have to ask the European Commission in Brussels for permission.
But Friedrich slammed the proposals, saying: "Security questions are a core competence of member states and we will not accept a transfer of this task to others or an undermining of this competence."
"We will not allow Brussels to dictate when we introduce controls. We control the borders if the security situation requires," Friedrich told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
"It is a matter for individual member states to assess the dangers to public safety," he added. source

Belgium complains of 'social fraud' by Eastern workers

23 December 2011

Belgium has refused to open its labour market to workers from Romania and Bulgaria on the grounds that many nationals of those countries already working there cheat the social benefits system, EurActiv has learned.

Despite earlier indications to the contrary, one of the first decisions of the newly appointed Prime Minister Elio Di Rupo has been to extend until the end of 2013 the restrictions on Bulgarian and Romanian workers in Belgium.
The announcement, made by Belgian Employment Minister Monica De Coninck, is seen as a setback for Bulgaria and Romania, which had campaigned for lifting all remaining restrictions applying to their nationals in EU countries (see background).
On 25 October, the European Parliament adopted a resolution calling for removing restrictions applying to workers from the EU's newest members. source
My comment

Italy opens up to Romanian, Bulgarian workers

04 January 2012

Crisis-struck Italy is lifting labour market restrictions for Romanians and Bulgarians while nine other EU countries are maintaining their curbs, with several citing high unemployment.

Rome decided to fully liberalise its labour market for citizens of the EU's two newest members as of 1 January, an official at the Romanian Embassy in Italy told EurActiv. The Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs officially informed Romanian and Bulgarian diplomats about its decision on 29 December. source

Spain defies Commission with Romanian worker ban - 9 July 2011 - The European Commission adopted a defensive stance yesterday (26 July), saying that Spain could introduce restrictive measures against Romanian workers "under exceptional circumstances". Last Friday, the EU executive said Spain had no legal right to impose such a ban. EurActiv Spain contributed to this article.

However, as a consequence of the crisis, Spain now has the highest unemployment rate in Europe (over 20%) and is considering imposing restrictions on its job market. As Romanian workers in Spain are more numerous, the planned restrictions do not concern Bulgaria.

Liberal MEP suggests 'second-class membership' for UK - Andrew Duff, a British Liberal MEP and leader of the Union of European Federalists, has called for a genuine 'fiscal union' and greater EU integration, explicitly saying that opt-outs should be made possible for more Eurosceptic countries like the United Kingdom.
In a political pamphlet published today (5 September), the MEP outlines his vision for a federal Europe. He suggests the creation of a "formal second-class membership" for the UK and any other country which wishes to abstain from federalist goals in the EU's 'core' member states.
Duff argues that the practice of deciding bailouts of indebted countries at European summits has been proven ineffective and allowed "Paris and Berlin to form a directoire […] the antithesis of a federal Europe".
Instead, he calls for shifting decision-making to new European institutions through the creation a bigger European budget, an EU treasury, a European Monetary Fund and sanctions for countries lacking budget discipline.
Austria says doesn’t want Turkey as EU member-

Austria would prefer forging a special partnership between the European Union and Turkey over full EU membership for Ankara, Austrian Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger said today (3 May).

Macedonia's 'warrior' monument infuriates Greece - A statue of a 'warrior on horseback' resembling Alexander the Great, currently being erected in the centre of Macedonian capital Skopje, has sparked fury in Greece, which warned that Skopje was gambling with its EU membership aspirations with such provocations. - What a surprise :)

EU's anti-corruption drive hits Bulgaria, Romania - The European Commission yesterday (6 June) unveiled its first ever proposal to address corruption at EU level. Meanwhile, pressure is growing on Bulgaria and Romania to tackle corruption and mafia crime as preconditions of their accession to the EU's Schengen borderless area.

Dutch push for Croatia post-accession monitoring - At the two-day EU summit opening today (23 June) in Brussels, EU leaders are set to agree that Croatia's accession talks be concluded before the end of the month. However, the EU hopeful is under pressure from the Netherlands to accept post-accession monitoring until it has joined the border-free Schengen space, EurActiv has learned. - Well, if Bulgaria and Romania are under scrutiny for so long, it makes some sens to monitor Croatia as well. But I must say that I'm less and less willing for Bulgaria to enter Schengen. It simply makes no sens for me anymore. Can we move freely? Yes. Then who cares if you land in the international or local part of the airports in Europe? It's like... whatever.

Debt crisis or economical war, 2011

2011-11-09T08:05:00.000-08:00

OK. This will be a quite short post, but I feel I need to write it. What provoked me was what I read in the first article on Christine Lagarde. The idea of the crisis in some peripheral European countries. Such hypocrisy drives me crazy and I simply have to comment it. The real crisis is not in Greece, which some may call peripheral EU country. What's even more, the real crisis is not in any peripheral European country, since we all make sure not to spend more than we've got and even if we run into some deficit, it's SMALL! Much much smaller than the real problem.

And the real problem is called Italy. Now, I dearly hope that Christine Lagarde didn't call Italy a peripheral country, but that's hard to find out without the full transcript of her speech. Anyway, I urge everyone reading this, who tends to underestimate Italy and Italians, the way France and Germany does, to remember one thing. Italy is the 3d Eurozone economy after Germany and France (following very close behind it, see wikipedia). Italy is not some third-world country, it's a major factor in Europe. And it's ridiculous to compare the Greek and the Italian economies. While Greece wins from tourisms and agriculture, Italy actually has a very serious industry along with the other two. And I really can't stand the way Germany and France treat Italy - like some bad, lazy and very confused kid.

Now, I haven't worked in Italy, I don't know what's the actual situation there apart from what I read. But I somehow seriously doubt that the real reason for their financial fate is Berlusconi. Quite the opposite. He might be little crazy, but he's hardly the worst leader ever. There are some external factors, however. Like the war in Libya. It's not secret Italy has serious connections with Libya. So what happened with their common projects, after France so happily attacked Libya? I don't know. Nobody tells us. Next, Italian banks are the number one debt-holder of Greece. Is it a coincidence that Italy follows Greece on the way down to a default? I think not.
Last but not least, I think it's about time someone told this. We're in an economical war. Real economical war. Even if they don't talk about it, even if they prefer to call some countries irresponsible, the truth is that all the European countries were and are irresponsible. Just like USA. What they don't tell you is that the major reason behind the crisis are the credit ratings which periodically trash the trust into European institutions, banks, countries and so on. Now, some will say that the credit rating just reflects what is happening. But that's not true. Because everybody knew that some EU countries had huge deficits. Everybody knew how they manipulated their data. With the help of Wall Street teams!!! Yeah, this is the same country where the credit agencies reside!
Read this:
"...records and interviews show that with Wall Street’s help, the nation engaged in a decade-long effort to skirt European debt limits. One deal created by Goldman Sachs helped obscure billions in debt from the budget overseers in Brussels." source
Somewhere down that article, it's said that those deals were bad for Greece. So, let's repeat. Everyone knows that Greece has problems, everyone hopes to profit from those problems. And in the end, everyone says Greeks are lazy and so on?! Come on! That Greeks have a great guilt, that's clear. But the way the financial world wanted to abuse their situation is amazing. I won't be surprised if the same happened in Italy. And after US companies made sure the mess in Greece was complete, credit agencies started lowering the credit rating, so that other players can profit too.

And note how Christine Lagard says she hopes China will help. Earlier I read somewhere how the EU hoped that China will buy infrastructure and key-industries in the indebted countries. To help them. Or to enslave them?

This is a war. We all have to admit it. The attacks on the euro can be easily be seen in the media, I traced it without even looking for them. The weapons are the credit ratings and the accompanying them increases in the cost of the banks short-term loans and so on. The European banks had to pay more and more for the money, only because the credit ratings or the so called investor-trust required them. Not because the value of the money changed. In the end, it's people who pay - with their taxes used to save yet another bank in trouble.

I call this a way. And European leaders, instead of thinking how to screw their neighbors, or those they don't want to give money to anymore, should start considering a real defense. Because they cannot save Italy. And without Italy, there's no Eurozone. And without the Eurozone, there won't be European union, nor the biggest economy/market in the world. And then, each county will be on their own. Not a good situation, no? Think about it. And stop listening to the ridiculous propaganda in the media. It's not the neighbor which is to blame, it's the WAR. And we have to fight back - not with aggression, but with wisdom. Something we obviously still lack.

Lagarde Sees ’Dark Clouds’; ”Warns of ‘Lost Decade’
IMF chief warns of a 'lost decade' for global economy
Italian borrowing costs at breaking point
From Europe, Mounting Pressure Over Greece’s Debt
Fears Rattle Big Banks in France
Crisis in Italy Deepens, as Bond Yields Hit Record Highs

IMF chief warns of a 'lost decade' for global economy

The head of the International Monetary Fund, Christine Lagarde, has warned that the global economy is at risk of being plunged into a "lost decade".

Ms Lagarde said the ongoing debt crisis in Europe has resulted in an uncertain outlook for the global economy.

Speaking in China, Ms Lagarde called upon Beijing to rebalance its economy.

"Our sense is that if we do not act boldly and if we do not act together, the economy around the world runs the risk of downward spiral of uncertainty, financial instability and potential collapse of global demand," she said.

"We could run the risk of what some commentators are already calling the
lost decade," Ms Lagarde added.

Ms Lagarde's comments come amid fears that the debt crisis in some peripheral countries may be spreading to some of the euro area's biggest economies.

On Tuesday, Italy's cost of borrowing hit the highest level since the euro was founded in 1999. The yield on Italian 10-year government bonds rose to 6.77%, raising concerns about its capacity to service its debts.

Many investors believe that Italy may have to bailed out just like Greece, the Irish Republic and Portugal.

She said that Beijing needed to allow its currency to appreciate further in order to boost demand at home. source

Lagarde Sees ’Dark Clouds’; ”Warns of ‘Lost Decade’
By Bloomberg News - Nov 9, 2011
Advanced economies have a “special responsibility” to restore confidence and lift growth, while China should boost consumption and allow its currency to rise, the IMF leader said. European leaders are looking to China as a potential source of funds as a sovereign-debt crisis threatens to engulf Italy, the third-biggest economy in the euro area.

“We are all caught in a higher debt trap,” Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker said at an event in Singapore today, in response to a question on whether the U.S. has fallen into a liquidity trap like Japan. “That’s the problem with Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal and Ireland. It’s not a very happy situation.”

European finance ministers meeting in Brussels this week pledged to roll out the bulked-up rescue fund next month after consulting investors and credit-rating companies over two options for translating the fund’s 440 billion euros ($607 billion) in guarantees into as much as 1 trillion euros of spending power. source

Italian borrowing costs at breaking point
ROME/LONDON (Reuters) - Italian 10-year bond yields shot above the 7 percent level that is widely deemed unsustainable, reflecting investors' concerns that they may not get their money back, prompting German Chancellor Angela Merkel to issue a call to arms.

Merkel called for changes in EU treaties after French President Nicolas Sarkozy advocated a two-speed Europe in which euro zone countries accelerate and deepen integration while an expanding group outside the currency bloc stayed more loosely connected -- a signal that some members may have to quit the euro if the entire structure is not to crumble.

The European Central Bank, the only effective bulwark against market attacks, wasted no time intervening to buy Italian bonds in large amounts.

Italy has replaced Greece at the center of the euro zone debt crisis and is on the cusp of requiring a bailout that Europe cannot afford to give. Unlike Greece, an Italian default would threaten the entire euro project.
While Italian bonds blew out, worries that the debt crisis could be infiltrating the core of the euro zone were reflected in the spread of 10-year French government bonds over their German equivalent blowing out to a euro era high around 140 basis points. source

Crisis in Italy Deepens, as Bond Yields Hit Record Highs

While the fundamentals of Italy’s economy are much stronger than those of Greece, the country has a public debt of 120 percent of its gross domestic product, the highest in the euro zone after Greece, and structural problems that have led to low growth.

“The problem in Italy is not primarily the real data,” Germany’s finance minister, Wolfgang Schaüble, said in Brussels on Tuesday. “The debt is high, the deficit is not — economic data are not that bad. The problem is a lack of trust from the financial markets.”

For all the relief on Tuesday, it is unclear that Mr. Berlusconi’s exit would solve Italy’s problems in the long run since any government that follows will be left to carry out tough austerity measures in a system built on political patronage.
source

From Europe, Mounting Pressure Over Greece’s Debt

By STEVEN ERLANGER September 13, 2011
In the latest sign of turmoil, Italy — the euro region’s most indebted member, after Greece — was forced to pay record-high interest rates in order to complete an auction of its five-year bonds on Tuesday, despite continuing purchases by the European Central Bank. Spain, which plans a bond sale on Thursday, could be subjected to similar investor wariness.
France, where shares of the biggest banks have plummeted recently on fears of exposure to Greece’s debt, is pressing for a stronger signal from Germany that Europe will act to resolve the Greek matter before it spreads further contagion.
Mrs. Merkel, who is working to win a ratification vote in the Parliament this month, said on Tuesday that Germany would ensure there would be no “uncontrolled default” of Greece that could pull down the euro zone. An uncontrolled default would be the equivalent of Greece’s simply walking away from its debts, whatever the consequences, rather than undergoing the equivalent of supervised bankruptcy proceedings.
For European banks, the cost to insure their debt of European banks against default remained high, but slightly off Monday’s record levels. For Société Générale, one of France’s most beleaguered banks, the credit-default rate hit a new high Tuesday, at 4.29 percent. At the end of June, it was 1.3 percent.
On Tuesday, the Italian treasury sold $5.3 billion worth of a five-year bond at an average yield of 5.6 percent — the highest interest on such bonds Italy has been forced to pay since the formation of the euro union in 1999.
Meanwhile, the yield on 10-year Italian bonds, while down slightly at 5.63 percent on Tuesday, was still uncomfortably close to the 6 percent level that is considered to be unsustainable.
source

Fears Rattle Big Banks in France

By LIZ ALDERMAN, September 12, 2011
Even as French officials proclaimed that the country’s banks were sound, shares in BNP Paribas and Société Générale, two globally connected French banks considered “too big to fail” by their home government, slid as much as 12 percent. And their cost of short-term borrowing continued to soar, making it more expensive for them to finance day-to-day operations.
If a recapitalization becomes necessary to restore investor confidence in any French bank — even if the banks do not technically require new capital — then the government will be prepared to take such action, said a senior government finance official involved in managing the situation, who was not authorized to speak publicly.
Given the need for France, along with Germany, to play a central role if the European debt crisis is to be resolved, the perceived stability of the biggest French banks is a crucial issue.
And big American banks, which do extensive business with BNP Paribas and Société Générale, want to know their French counterparts are sound. Over the last month, the French banks have found it increasingly expensive to secure short-term loans in dollars for their United States dealings, while their cost of short-term borrowing in general has soared. And the cost of insuring against default of the banks’ own bonds has spiked to record levels in recent weeks.
Société Générale announced Monday it would raise new cash by selling off assets. Société Générale and BNP Paribas, along with a third bank, Crédit Agricole, are considered integral actors in the French economy. They lend billions of euros to businesses and individuals, and the government has said it will never let any of them fail.
French banks hold fewer Greek government bonds than Italian banks do, though they hold more than German banks, which sold many of these assets early in the Greek crisis. Société Générale has only about 2 billion euros and Crédit Agricole 800 million euros worth of Greek bonds, compared with about 4 billion euros held by BNP Paribas.
source

Nuclear energy in Europe, 2011

2011-10-09T16:53:00.000-07:00

Today:

EU countries divided over nuclear stress tests
German nuclear phase-out ignites push for coal, gas
Switzerland bins nuclear reactor plans
Bulgaria law aims to cool solar, wind energy surge
Russian pipeline breaks free from EU rules
Russia-China summit seeks gas deal breakthrough
Influential MEP calls for shale gas regulation
French nuclear power plant explosion heightens safety fears

Quote of the day: I completely agree with what the Japanese diplomat said. Germany should have thought better. They didn't. Too bad. For them. And for everyone. Because the replacement of nuclear energy is not easy, nor simple.

13 May 2011

France and Britain, the two EU countries with the largest nuclear industry, strongly opposed stringent stress tests on nuclear power plants following the Fukushima disaster in Japan. Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger's proposal to introduce them was sponsored by Austria, a country without nuclear energy, and backed by Germany.

In a short statement, the European Commission announced that a meeting of the European Nuclear Safety Regulators Group (ENSREG) had ended without any results.
The Commission added that Oettinger had convened another ENSREG meeting for next week, on 19 and 20 May in Prague. Discussions will also continue at a lower level.
National experts and regulators from several EU countries with nuclear reactors objected to including terrorist attacks as part of the security review of their nuclear installations.
This is despite an agreement reached at the highest political level following the Fukushima disaster to set the "highest standards" of nuclear safety in Europe.
But the German commissioner has thus far only repeated that he would not accept any watering down of the stringent tests proposed.
There is no deadline for adopting a decision on nuclear stress tests. source
My comment: This is if you happened to believe that there will be stress-tests and that your governments are really worried about your safety. They are not. Of course, I am a firm supporter of nuclear technology (at least for now), but the thing is that there is some hypocrisy in the attitude toward nuclear plants. The nuclear plant(s) in Bulgaria are required to pass very strict tests to their safety, but the same plants in France are not required. Is this fair? What is more important - is it safe?! Because this is technology, it is prone not only to human error, but also to defects and aging. The only way to be sure is to regularly check. Unfortunately, France very well know that their plants won't pass the tests, not all of them, and so the conveniently decide to postpone the decision till they can be sure the results will be good for them. Oh, well, I understand them. But I don't understand why Bulgaria had to close the reactors of our nuclear plant, if safety is not so important after all. Especially considering the fact that on those reactors were done real stress tests and they passed them!

01 June 2011

A battle over the future shape of Germany's energy industry is looming after its pioneering decision to shut all 17 of its nuclear reactors by 2022.

The move followed a wave of anti-nuclear protests sparked by the disaster in Fukushima, Japan.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that power use would be cut 10% by 2020 and renewables such as wind and solar energy would be further expanded.
But Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk saw an opportunity for Poland's dirty coal plants.
One Japanese diplomat, speaking in a personal capacity, raised a further issue. "Germany should have taken more time to consider all the aspects of energy security involved before making a decision," he told EurActiv. source
My comment: I completely agree with what the Japanese diplomat said. Germany should have thought better. They didn't. Too bad. For them. And for everyone. Because the replacement of nuclear energy is not easy, nor simple. Especially, if you want to remain as carbon neutral as possible. Especially if carbon emissions are paid by the emitters. Unfortunately, this is what happens, when people react based on fear and not on reason.

01 June 2011

The Swiss government has voted to scrap plans to build new nuclear reactors, but said it would not shut existing plants prematurely.

The approvals process for three new nuclear power stations had been suspended in March, pending a safety review, after the Fukushima disaster shook public confidence in the industry.
There will now be no replacement for the country's oldest nuclear reactor, which is set to come offline in 2019.
She said the government would have to plug the energy gap in the transition period by increasing electricity production from fossil fuels. It also aims to expand hydropower, develop new kinds of renewables and try to cut the demand for energy.
The transition cost would be around 0.4-0.7% of gross domestic product (GDP), the government said. source
My comment: Precisely, the energy will come from fossils. Are they safer? In the short scale - maybe. In the long run, maybe not. Let's hope that this will bring some investments and thus innovation to renewables at least.
And a little bit more recent news on the issue:

Swiss to shut down nuclear power plants by 2034
30 September 2011
Swiss Parliament has approved plans to phase out nuclear power plants by 2034.
The Swiss Senate's endorsement yesterday (28 September) follows a June vote by the lower chamber to back the gradual shutdown of nuclear energy plants recommended in May by the government, which has frozen plans for a new construction programme in the wake of the Fukushima atomic plant explosion.

The Swiss government estimates that phasing out nuclear power in the Alpine country would cost up to SFr3.8 billion (€3.1 billion). source

Bulgaria law aims to cool solar, wind energy surge

Bulgaria approved a new law on renewable energy yesterday (21 April) in a bid to cool a surge in solar and wind power projects that threatens to overwhelm its ageing power grid and boost electricity prices.

The law changes the government's obligatory purchase of electricity produced from renewable energy generators at high, fixed prices, which has led to a jump in projects totalling over 6,000 megawatts - well above the country's grid capacity.
The centre-right government says that Bulgaria needs only 2,000 MW of new green energy generation to meet a target, which it committed to the European Union, of supplying 16% of its energy consumption from renewable energy sources by 2020.
The government aims to put a cap on wind and solar projects to keep electricity prices in the EU's poorest country at affordable levels and avoid public discontent. Power and heating bills eat up much of Bulgarians' incomes.
It also decreases the obligatory long-term purchase power contracts to 20 from 25 years for solar energy and to 12 from 15 for wind.
Under the new law, the energy regulator will set annual preferential feed-in tariffs, which pay per unit of electricity produced from low-carbon energy by the end of June each year.
The government said the measures would scare away speculators and also encourage investors to speed up projects and not wait for solar panels and wind turbine prices to drop. source
My comment: OK, there are two things here. First, it is obvious that the intellect of Bulgarian ruler party is about this of a dog, if one considers how one country needs only some number of MW to meet the EU target. Because after all, the point of the whole stunt is not the target, but to be energy independent. And here comes the second point - the idea to buy off the renewable energy at higher tariffs than ordinary one is absurd. Maybe 10 years ago, it made sense. But not anymore. I think it is enough the guarantee in a long-term contract to buy the energy. From there on, why should it be more expensive? Why should customers pay MORE to get energy which is essentially free, apart form the investment and running costs, part of which came from European initiatives - i.e. taxpayers money! In that, I actually applaud the idea of our government. Ok, not really, since their real problem is that they don't have enough money to pay energy oligarchs, but lets ignore this for the moment. I think that if the renewable industry is to become competitive and good for the people, it should little by little be put on equal terms with fossil fuel industry. Meaning, equal prices, but also guaranteed protection from state-run energy monopolies. This way, the owners of those solar/wind plants, will have interest into re-investing in the plants to improve technology and thus the technology will develop and eventually it will become competitive. It is funny how good deeds may come out of completely wrong motives.

15 July 2011

Both the EU-favoured Nabucco pipeline and its Gazprom-sponsored competitor South Stream will "most probably" get a derogation from the Third Energy Package, the EU's legislative framework that provides competitors with free access to pipeline networks, Bulgarian Energy Minister Traycho Traykov announced today (14 July). EurActiv's partner in Bulgaria, Dnevnik, reports.

The Bulgarian minister stressed that for the time being not a single gas pipeline project could work according to the rules of the fully-liberalised market. It is therefore necessary for new projects to postpone compliance with a requirement to offer competitors access to their planned pipeline networks, he explained.
Should Traykov's statements prove to be true, then the EU is effectively axing its rules on the liberalisation of gas markets, negotiated in 2007-2008.
Asked to comment, Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger's spokesperson Marlene Holzner evasively said that "exemption requests must be assessed on a case-by-case basis". "The [European] Commission cannot predict the outcome of the assessment by national energy regulatory authorities, neither its own assessment," she said.

Recently, the Commission asked Bulgaria to change a 2008 bilateral agreement with Russia, providing for full and unrestricted transit of Russian gas across the EU newcomer's territory.
The draft initially said South Stream shareholders would enjoy exclusive gas transportation, while a new sentence has since made that possibility conditional upon the Commission's approval. source
My comment: Not very surprising, actually. I never really understood the idea of the Energy Liberalization - if this was to make state-run monopolies sell off some of their property, it simply didn't happen. And if so many countries still do not obey this initiative, then what's the point of it at all?

01 July 2011

One of the most influential members of the European Parliament is proposing a new directive that would penalise or even ban the exploitation of shale gas, the controversial new fossil fuel that is tipped as the major energy source of the future.

Jo Leinen told the Guardian he wanted a new "energy quality directive" that would mean fuels with adverse environmental impacts – such as shale gas and oil from tar sands – were stringently regulated within the EU.
Leinen said there was likely to be support for such a legislative intervention, as many MEPs are increasingly worried about the role of shale gas in the world's energy mix.
Shale gas extraction has been linked to a wide variety of environmental problems, including pollution of the water supply, excessive use of water resources and potential seismic effects. In France, further expansion of the shale gas industry has been banned, and in the UK drilling operations have been halted after two small earthquakes near the exploration sites.
Although gas produces only half of the carbon dioxide emissions associated with coal when burned to produce electricity, one study from Cornell University has suggested that the true emissions related to shale gas could be greater than those from coal, if factors such as methane leakage during the extraction process were taken into account. source
My comment: I completely support full ban of shale gas, but I doubt it will happen. Especially, since Poland is so serious about lobbying for the questionable technology. And I can understand them - some US company, comes promising them cheap new energy, which is free of the coal-related emissions. And they believe. They don't ask what will be the ecological and health cost, because they have more serious problem right now. And because the same company, probably pays politicians and media quite well to advertise that technology. What the Commission can do is to regulate the whole business in a way that will secure no people lives or parts of Natura 2000 will be risked by the whole procedure. And to find a way to make that company PAY BIG if they lied about the safety of the procedure and harmed people.
Similar news: Parliament rejects calls for offshore oil drilling ban - The European Parliament has rejected calls for a moratorium on offshore drilling, pushing instead for Brussels to adopt new rules obliging oil majors to subscribe to insurance schemes in order to cover the potentially disastrous consequences of an oil spill.
EU faces down tar sands industry - The EU executive has defied intense pressure from governments and lobbyists to include oil from innovative but highly-polluting tar sands within Europe’s Fuel Quality Directive.
Between September 2009 and July 2011, Canadian government and oil industry representatives organised more than 110 lobby events in Brussels – over one per week – and in February, it was reported that Ottawa had threatened a trade war over the issue.
The proposal still needs approval from national governments, but should this happen, tar sands will be ascribed a greenhouse gas default value of 107 grams CO2 equivalent per megajoule (CO2eq/MJ) of fuel, as opposed to the 87.5g CO2eq/MJ average for crude oil, reflecting the greater harm it causes to the environment.
Other unconventional sources were also hit hard, with oil shale being included at a value of 131.3 CO2eq/MJ, and coal-to-liquid at 172 CO2eq/MJ. - this really is a victory!

06 July 2011

An explosion sparked a fire at a French nuclear power station on Saturday (2 July), just two days after the authorities found 32 safety concerns at the plant.

The blaze at the Tricastin plant in Drôme in the Rhône valley sent a thick cloud of black smoke into the sky. A mistral wind sent it south over a nearby motorway on one of the busiest travel days of the year as the French left for their summer holidays.
EDF, which runs the power station, said the incident took place in an electric transformer situated in the non-nuclear part of the plant and had not resulted in any radiation leak or any other contamination.
A statement issued by the French energy giant raised further concerns as it omitted to mention the explosion – only a fire – and did not give the cause of the blaze.
EDF added that the plant's number one reactor was not in operation at the time of the fire, having been "closed for its annual maintenance". Police confirmed there was no environmental contamination.
On Thursday France's nuclear safety authority, the Autorité de Sûreté Nucléaire (ASN), demanded 32 safety measures at the Tricastin number one reactor, a 900MW water pressurised reactor built in 1974 and put into operation in 1980. source
My comment: Isn't it strange that the reactor wasn't operational during the accident? Kind of too convenient! I don't believe them, at all. French nuclear plants are old (well, at least some part of them) and they need serious monitoring, to ensure that in all of them, proper measures have been taken. France haven't agreed to the stress tests yet. One could wonder why. But it is obvious.

Safety fears after explosion at French nuclear site
13 September 2011
A Green MEP has called for the Centraco nuclear waste treatment site in Marcoule to be shut down, as the French Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) begins an inquiry into a blast there yesterday (12 September) that killed one man and injured four others, one with severe burns.

A statement by the European Commission said that "since Centraco is a waste treatment facility, it has not been subject to the stress test exercise" announced by Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger in the wake of the Fukushima disaster last March.
Evangelia Petit, a spokesperson for the ASN, told EurActiv that the plant had been stress tested by the ASN and that "in the past there have been incidents" there, but gave no further details.

Marcoule is one of France's oldest nuclear sites. It was opened in 1956 to aid France's nuclear weapons industry, but in the 1990s it began recycling nuclear waste and creating mixed oxide fuel (MOX) for nuclear power stations. source
My comment: No comment, really. The conclusions are obvious.

More:

Lobby fury as MEPs trash CO2 emissions cut - A lobbying row has broken out as the European Parliament decisively rejected yesterday (5 July) increasing the EU's 2020 CO2 emissions reduction target from 20% to 30%, on 1990 levels

According to Bas Eickhout, a Dutch Green MEP and rapporteur for the Parliament's position on EU emissions reduction targets, the vote was distorted by undemocratic lobbyists.
"The German liberals did not follow the group line because of the heavy lobbying from industry," he told EurActiv.
EU traders fear Australian carbon market 'price shock' -

The Australian government's decision to set the carbon tax in its new CO2 trading scheme too high may trigger a market shock when the price free-floats in 2015, analysts warned.

Under the new scheme, companies will have to pay $23 for each tonne of Australian carbon produced - around $10 per tonne higher than equivalent prices in the EU's emissions trading scheme (ETS).
This will rise by 2.5% each year, in line with inflation, until the tax becomes a carbon trading price in three years' time.
Top scientists condemn EU land use values for biofuels - Over 100 top scientists and economists have written to the European Commission calling for indirect land use change (ILUC) to be accounted for in EU biofuels policy making. The letter, seen by EurActiv, argues that assigning biofuels a zero or "carbon neutral" emissions value – as the EU has done – “is clearly not supported by the [best available] science”.
The scientists’ letter cites peer-reviewed research over several years, some commissioned by the European Commission, which show that displaced human activity caused by converting forests and grasslands to biofuels production can result in “substantial” CO2 emissions.

My European Dream

Schengen maddness revised, 2012

France, Italy call for Schengen Treaty re-write

Denmark against early Schengen enlargement too

Ministers agree on need for new EU border rules

Barroso warns Denmark on border checks

Bulgaria, Romania denied Schengen entry

Bulgaria, Romania monitoring inspires new Schengen rules

Belgium complains of 'social fraud' by Eastern workers

Italy opens up to Romanian, Bulgarian workers

Debt crisis or economical war, 2011

IMF chief warns of a 'lost decade' for global economy

Lagarde Sees ’Dark Clouds’; ”Warns of ‘Lost Decade’

Italian borrowing costs at breaking point

Crisis in Italy Deepens, as Bond Yields Hit Record Highs

From Europe, Mounting Pressure Over Greece’s Debt

By STEVEN ERLANGER September 13, 2011

Fears Rattle Big Banks in France

By LIZ ALDERMAN, September 12, 2011

Nuclear energy in Europe, 2011

EU countries divided over nuclear stress tests

German nuclear phase-out ignites push for coal, gas

Switzerland bins nuclear reactor plans

Bulgaria law aims to cool solar, wind energy surge

Russian pipeline breaks free from EU rules

Influential MEP calls for shale gas regulation

French nuclear power plant explosion heightens safety fears