EU Commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevičius, breaks down the EU's fight against pollution
EU Commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevičius, breaks down the EU’s fight against pollution

The EU and the rest of the world are being forced to move much faster in the fight against climate change and pollution. To get some in-depth insight into how the European Union is going to do this, Euronews’ Shona Murray sat down with the EU Commissioner for the Environment, Ocean and Fisheries, Virginijus Sinkevičius.

To watch the full interview with Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius, click on the media player above.

You have some very ambitious targets when it comes to ending soil pollution, sea pollution, air pollution. How exactly are you going to implement any of these?

Virginijus Sinkevičius, EU Commissioner for the Environment, Ocean and Fisheries:

“First of all, probably the most effective way to address pollution is, of course, to make it that it doesn’t happen because then the situation gets very complicated. And this is where we are. We have premature deaths caused by pollution. We have diseases linked to pollution. We have ecosystem destruction linked with pollution. And it happens not somewhere else. It happens here in the EU. So we have to act quickly. I’m happy that the commission just recently adopted Zero Pollution Action Plan. By zero pollution we mean, first of all, bringing down pollution levels so that they do not harm our citizens’ health, that they do no harm to ecosystems. The goal is, of course, ambitious. It will take time. We plan to do it by 2050. But of course, there is lots of work to be done already by 2030. And for example, when we speak about marine pollution, microplastics, our plan is to decrease the pollution from microplastics by 30 percent, looking into different types of measures. I think this pandemic is a good wake-up call to everyone and really a moment to think that we can do business differently”.

You mentioned that the pandemic is an important opportunity because we know that there has been a reduction in carbon emissions because of industrial output and less cars on the road etc. How do we know that when this is over and we have vaccinated everyone that this is not just going to go straight back to normal?

Virginijus Sinkevičius, EU Commissioner for the Environment, Ocean and Fisheries:

“You’re absolutely right. If we do nothing, the numbers will jump back up and maybe even increase because we see that the tendency is actually increasing. So here is, as I said, you know, our horizontal zero pollution action plan, which touches upon different areas.

I would say three major areas which we are addressing are, of course, energy, transport and we’re looking at, of course, on our proposed chemicals. So these are the sectors that we are especially focusing on and for example, when we speak about transport, I think there is a variety of tools.

First of all, of course, working very closely with municipalities and their governments and, of course, their investments into the transportation system, making it more attractive to citizens, investing into micro-mobility solutions. The Commission, of course, is ready to help. But most importantly, of course, the unique opportunity comes with the public funding and especially speaking about our RRF – Recovery and Resilience Facility – where each member state will receive a solid amount of cash to be invested basically into recovery and resilience building”.

Before we move on to the recovery fund, because that’s really important, just give us an example of chemicals. Give us some examples of how industry will have to change or alter to ensure that there’s less pollution. Will there be more legislation around harmful chemicals, pesticides, and will there be legislation around how cars are manufactured and so on?

Virginijus Sinkevičius, EU Commissioner for the Environment, Ocean and Fisheries:

“So, first of all, if we speak about chemicals concretely, we’re speaking, of course, about avoiding harmful chemicals, replacing them. Unless it’s proved that in some products, they cannot be replaced. Even so, then we, of course, encourage investment into research and development to try to find a replacement.

But our goal, of course, is to replace or completely exclude harmful chemicals from our market, from the products. We still have, I would say, very unequal legislation where in some products it’s very clearly banned already for a while, and in others they are not. Those products are easily accessible to children, to women, to elderly people. So there are, of course, groups that are more vulnerable, which we, of course, need to protect as a priority. So there will be a major, of course, look at our chemical legislation. But I think we’re keeping a very close contact with the stakeholders. They also understand that change is inevitable, but also it brings a first movers advantage and an opportunity, first of all, to be the most advanced with research and development”.

There was a concern around Brexit and also the fact that the EU and the UK are competing for trade deals now. There was a concern that there will be a race to the bottom when it comes to standards, that the UK would reduce its standards in order to get more business in. Will the EU be a leader when it comes to ensuring that standards are actually maintained despite the fact that it may mean less trade?

Virginijus Sinkevičius, EU Commissioner for the Environment, Ocean and Fisheries:

“I would say that there is clear evidence that we maintain our leadership and even strengthen it. We just discussed chemicals. There is plenty of other sectors which we are looking at as well. Soon after, after the summer break, September, we’re going to introduce one of the major initiatives of ours on deforestation, for example, where we want to look fully at the supply chains, that there wouldn’t be any products associated with deforestation. So I think this is a major breakthrough, again, raising the bar high of our standards”.

You mentioned the recovery fund, obviously a huge amount of money, unprecedented. We know that the green deal obviously goes hand-in-hand with how this money is spent. But how can we ensure that member states actually use the money to fundamentally change their position when it comes to sustainable farming or sustainable production and industry, and they’re not just essentially greenwashing? Something that the EU gets accused of quite frequently from environmental NGOs.

Virginijus Sinkevičius, EU Commissioner for the Environment, Ocean and Fisheries:

“Of course, first of all, environmental NGOs and more broadly NGOs are closely watching the recovery and resilience plans, which member states are still submitting to. But the Commission also, of course, works very closely with member states. Our goal is, of course, to make sure that, first of all, our 37 percent goal for climate objective is upheld.

We have six very concrete measures, which we, of course, will be looking at in the plan. Secondly, member states also agreed on the ‘do no significant harm principle’, which is going to be applied and looked at in all of the projects which are proposed under the plans, making sure that, of course, we’re not taking a step forward and then two steps back, ensuring that those plans are coherent with our goals, with our digital and green transition”.

ESMA issues a negative opinion on an Accepted Market Practice on liquidity contracts proposed by the French AMF
ESMA issues a negative opinion on an Accepted Market Practice on liquidity contracts proposed by the French AMF

ESMA considers that the new AMP, applicable as of 1 July 2021, replacing the current AMP on liquidity contracts, applicable since 1 January 2019, is not compatible with the Market Abuse Regulation (MAR) and the relevant Implementing Regulation, and it is also diverging from ESMA’s 2017 Opinion on Points for Convergence.

In its assessment, ESMA has identified several points of concerns. Those are the absence of limits on positions and the presence of volume and resources limits which are significantly higher compared to that recommended in the 2017 ESMA Opinion on Points for Convergence.

ESMA must issue its opinion, which is not binding, within two months of the notification, which was received on 31 March 2021. Should the AMF decide to establish its AMP contrary to the ESMA Opinion, it will have to publish on its website the relevant reasons, including why the AMF believes that the AMP does not threaten market confidence.

Let the European Union spend
Let the European Union spend

Paul Taylor, a contributing editor at POLITICO, writes the “Europe At Large” column.  

PARIS — Europe’s budget discipline rules, more honored in the breach than in the observance, are outdated, over-complicated and increasingly misguided.  

The EU would do better to circumvent the Stability and Growth Pact in order to promote public investment in the green and digital economy, rather than waste energy trying to reform a complex legal framework that has always produced more good intentions than compliance. 

Intended to curtail debts and deficits, the pact had to be suspended early in the COVID-19 pandemic, to allow governments to borrow and spend massively to support households and keep businesses on life support during the crisis. An escape clause allowing that emergency spending will remain in force this year and next. 

What happens after that is up in the air. The Commission announced this month that the fiscal rules will be back in 2023. Brussels plans to hold consultations on how to reform the system later this year before making proposals to finance ministers. 

“Consultations” understates the hardball negotiations that are coming. Influential figures such as Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi, EU Economic and Monetary Affairs Commissioner Paulo Gentiloni and French Europe Minister Clement Beaune have all called for a comprehensive reworking of the rule book to support investment that raises growth, and to differentiate targets by country rather than imposing one-size-fits-all goals. 

‘Paper tiger’ 

Unfortunately, the chances we’ll see a radical reform that draws lessons from what worked during the pandemic — as well as what didn’t during the eurozone debt crisis — are close to zero. The guardians of fiscal orthodoxy in northern Europe will not countenance it. 

Anchored in the 1992 Maastricht Treaty that gave birth to the euro, the rules require governments to keep public debt below 60 percent of Gross Domestic Product and cap their budget deficit at 3 percent of GDP. The reasoning was: since the EU has a macro-economically tiny central budget, and no mechanism for redistributing wealth, each member state of the single currency must maintain sound public finances, to avoid harmful spillovers to its partners. 

The 1997 Stability Pact, adopted under German pressure before the launch of the euro, was intended to give teeth to those limits. It provided for graduated sanctions culminating in heavy fines on countries that repeatedly miss the targets. They have never been applied despite serial breaches by southern European countries and have long since lost any credibility. 

The whole debate, says economist Nicolas Veron of the Bruegel think-tank and the Peterson Institute for International Economics, is “a political theater of the absurd with no consequence. 

“The lesson of the 22 years of the euro’s existence is that sanctions will never be activated and don’t serve as a deterrent even in extreme cases. Hence, all fiscal rules are a paper tiger,” he said. 

Many economists argue that the Maastricht criteria were devised for a bygone era of climbing interest rates, inflation and growth. That’s no longer appropriate at a time when borrowing costs have shrunk, the European Central Bank is vacuuming up government bonds, inflation is durably low and growth potential has also declined. The treaty’s limits simply aren’t realistic today, with Italy’s national debt swollen from 130 to 160 percent of GDP during the pandemic, France’s and Spain’s from below 100 to 120 and Greece’s from 185 to 210 percent.  

Changing the criteria, however, would require amending the EU treaties with the unanimous agreement of every EU government and parliament — unlikely given that defenders of EU fiscal discipline are loathe to abandon the most important weapon in their arsenal. 

Irish Finance Minister Pascal Donohoe, who chairs the Eurogroup of finance ministers, has ruled out calls by experts — including former IMF chief economist Olivier Blanchard — to replace the pact with fiscal standards that set broad objectives tailored to each country, supervised by independent national fiscal boards, rather than enforced by the Commission or EU ministers. 

Austrian model 

Fortunately, there are changes that could be made without amending EU law, or painfully rewriting a treaty. For that, we can thank the Austrians. 

In the 1990s Vienna found a way around the EU debt limits by setting up a state-owned company.  Called ASFINAG, it exists to build and maintain Austrian motorways — a massive project with borrowing equivalent to about 5 percent of GDP. At the time, Austria was struggling to meet the criteria to join the euro, making any kind of spending a subject of nervous scrutiny. 

But the company’s state-guaranteed borrowing on capital markets was not counted as public debt, because it was serviced by dedicated revenue streams, from truck tolls and an annual user fee for cars. ASFINAG even pays a small annual surplus to the state. Clever. 

“It was created to circumvent the pact and allow investment,” recalls Franz Nauschnigg, the economist who helped devise the scheme. “It’s self-financing and gave us a very modern highway network much more cheaply that if you’d done it through public-private partnerships.” 

Germany’s Bundesbank, a stickler for fiscal rectitude, challenged this off-balance-sheet borrowing vehicle at the EU Statistics Office. But Eurostat upheld the Austrian model’s exemption from the “general government debt” calculation. Berlin has since adopted a similar system for German motorway construction and maintenance via a company called Autobahn GmbH. 

“You could do the same to fund public investment in smart energy grids, solar parks, trans-Mediterranean electricity cables or high-speed broadband,” said Nauschnigg, who has presented his ideas in Brussels, Paris, Berlin and Rome. “It could be done EU-wide, or by creating a system of national ASFINAGs which link together.” 

The idea of bracketing more public investment out of budget constraints has gained traction in the campaign for September’s German elections, as politicians debate whether and when to reactivate the constitutional “debt brake” that severely limits government borrowing.  

The Greens, running neck-and-neck with the conservative CDU/CSU in opinion polls, have proposed a €500 billion public investment fund for the transition to clean, renewable energy. The center-left Social Democrats, while advocating an early return to the so-called “schwarzer Null” debt limit, also want to exempt certain categories of investment from the calculation. 

All these schemes aim to avoid repeating the mistakes of the EU’s response to the euro zone crisis, when synchronized austerity caused public investment to collapse, triggering a double-dip recession, reducing growth potential and aggravating a shortfall in private sector investment. 

What’s not to like?  

Well, the changes are bound to trigger a fight over what constitutes good and bad debt. Some countries, such as France, have long advocated excluding defense equipment purchases from the debt calculation, for example. Others argue that education spending is the most growth-enhancing investment of all — and should be exempted. 

Fiscal hawks, meanwhile, warn that financial markets — the ultimate arbiters of the sustainability of a country’s debt — will not be hoodwinked for long by creative accountancy.  

As conservative German MEP Markus Ferber puts it, “Debt is debt. Of course it matters whether I borrow to pay for a nice holiday or to buy a car to get me to work. But I caution against starting a public debate on good and bad debt. We have to look at the reality of debt sustainability.”  

The fundamental problem, said Ferber, is that countries like France and Italy did not reduce their debt in good times and will struggle when interest rates rise again. That’s a fair point, and Europe will continue to need sensible rules for balancing current expenditure with revenues. But it must not prevent the EU from bypassing obsolete debt ceilings to promote vital public investment.

EU not using N Ireland to punish UK for Brexit, EC vice-president claims
EU not using N Ireland to punish UK for Brexit, EC vice-president claims

European Commission vice-president Maros Sefcovic has rejected an accusation that the European Union (EU) is using Northern Ireland to punish the United Kingdom for Brexit.

DUP leader Edwin Poots claimed the region is being used as a “plaything” by Europe, with more checks on goods from Britain at ports per week than take place in Rotterdam once grace periods end.

READ MORE: Northern Ireland Protocol: EU has ‘tin ear’ to concerns says Arlene Foster

He accused the EU of doing “demonstrable harm to every individual in Northern Ireland”, adding it is having a “devastating impact”.

Mr Poots said the UK Government has the grounds to trigger Article 16 to put the brakes on the Protocol due to “economic and societal damage”, warning about future difficulties in receiving food and medicines.

“We have violence on our streets in Northern Ireland, which hasn’t been the case for years, and that’s on the back of this Protocol,” he said.

Also appearing on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, Mr Sefcovic said they searched for four years for the “best solution to the very sensitive situation in Northern Ireland”.

He said for the EU and the UK it was “very clear” that was the Northern Ireland Protocol.

He also urged a focus on policies and politics that unite than divide and to look at the Protocol as an “opportunity” for Northern Ireland.

Mr Sefcovic said he wants to meet the Northern Ireland Executive parties before the next Joint Committee, which is expected to take place in the middle of June.

“I would like to hear from Mr Poots himself but also from other leaders of the political parties who form the Northern Ireland Executive and discuss with them what we can do better,” he said.

Mr Poots also said while the European Commission over the years “put their heart and soul into winning peace in Northern Ireland”, they currently “don’t seem to care for the peace process … that really needs to change, that attitude needs to change”.

READ MORE: UK Government urged to extend EU Settlement Scheme

“This is the European Union seeking to punish the United Kingdom. As a consequence, Northern Ireland is being used as a plaything for the European Union,” he said.

“I can assure you Northern Ireland should be nobody’s plaything, we are citizens of the United Kingdom, we were citizens of the European Union and we deserve to be treated with the same respect as everyone else.”

Combating Corruption In The EU
Combating Corruption In The EU

 Background For The Round Table June 18 2021

The European Union is under siege from populism, nationalism, corruption, nepotism and opaque links between politicians, industry, oligarchs and financial moguls, all whilst struggling with the challenges caused by the rapid changes of the world power architecture. It is now time for the European Union, its leaders and institutions to show integrity, determination and devotion to protect and fight for the common values and principles laid down in the provisions of the Treaty of the European Union.

On 18th June 2021 from 2pm to 4pm CET the CEIPA video conference – “Corruption Inside-out – Fraud, bribery, and misuse of EU funds: a call for transparency, accountability, proper scrutiny and sanctions” will take place via Zoom. A lively debate with policymakers, researchers, NGO’s and journalists about current anti-fraud schemes and the call for transparency, accountability, proper scrutiny and sanctions.

Corruption, fraud and money laundering are omnipresent in our societies on all levels. They weaken democracy, the rule of law and the public trust in European Union’s institutions. They make corrupt oligarchs richer and more powerful than ever. Corruption constitutes a threat to security, and facilitates all forms of organised crime. It adversely affects economic growth and international trade, as well as hampering the functioning of the European internal market.

So far, where there have been breaches of law and misconduct by the EU member states the standard reactions have been “diplomatically” well embedded in a number of reports of the European Commission, or countered by weak monitoring mechanisms without evident sanctions, or creation of yet more administrative committees on all levels in all EU institutions, or inconsequential individual follow up actions on highest levels (“behind closed doors”).

Corruption goes hand in hand with autocracy, a diminishing impact of judiciary and parliamentary control as well as the weakening of rule of law in general.

The latest estimates regarding the cost of corruption across the EU sets the loss to GDP somewhere between €179 billion and €950 billion each year. The European Green Party has for several years spent considerable effort collecting, analysing and disclosing data on corruption and the misuse of public funds. The most recent report based on detailed research undertaken by independent sources, as well as by EU institutions, concludes that across the EU member states €904 Billion is lost each year due to corruption, fraud and organised crime.

According to this report the major European champions in corruption are:

Romania 15,6 % of the GDP 38,6 billion € annually

Bulgaria 14% of the GDP 11 Billion € annually

Greece 14% of the GDP 34 Billion € annually

Croatia 13,5 % of the GDP 8,5 billion € annually

Italy 13 % of the GDP 237 Billion € annually

Latvia 13 % of the GDP 3,4 Billion € annually

Slovakia 13 % of the GDP 11 Billion € annually

Poland 12,6 % of the GDP 65,7 Billion € annually

Czech Republic 12 %of the GDP 26,7 Billion € annually

According to reports released by Eurobarometer and various EU sources, 76 % of the population in the EU member states believes that there is wide spread corruption in their country of residence, especially amongst the political parties, governing bodies and institutions in charge of public subsidies.

The 2017 the Eurobarometer report states:

“Corruption undermines citizens’ trust in democratic institutions and the rule of law in particular, as it negatively affects the principles of legality and legal certainty. Tackling corruption can contribute significantly to promoting growth, stimulating competition and investment, and enhancing the beneficial effects of the EU’s internal market. Fighting against corruption is one way in which to enhance mutual trust between the Member States. A strong anti-corruption effort helps to strengthen good governance and democracy and build transparent, effective and accountable institutions. At the same time, such an effort creates an environment which supports investment and boosts entrepreneurship. There is no room for complacency or inaction within the EU.  All Member States, regardless of their levels of corruption, must play an active role in this work together with the European institutions. As emphasised by the European Parliament in its resolutions, there is also a need to ensure the accountability and integrity of the EU institutions. The importance of joint efforts and responsibility in anti-corruption measures cannot be over-stated. The international community has recognised the damaging effects of corruption on economic and social development. In the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the aim is to reduce corruption and bribery substantially in all their forms.”

Subsequently, the question must arise as to the efficacy of protective and regulative measures against corruption and fraud provided by EU institutions, such as the EC representations in EU member states (especially where such blatant cases of fraud and corruption continually occur),  OLAF, EUROJUST, EUROPOL, the directorates general of the EC responsible for dispersal of funds, the Budget Control Committee of the European Parliament, the Office of the Ombudsperson and finally the newly created EU Office of the European Prosecutor.

All aforementioned structures are supposed to protect the common good and the integrity of the EU institutions, as well as prevent and fight corruption and the continual misuse of European funds. They must bear responsibility and be held accountable for cementing the systemic weakening of the EU administration by not effectively counteracting fraud, corruption and the misuse of public funds but above all for indirectly contributing to rapidly growing public mistrust in the European project. Many independent observers and insiders are expressing fears that the European Commission is on the way to becoming a secretariat, cash machine and executive agency which is steered by corrupt oligarchs and governmental structures.

The EU Council and the European Commission are well aware of the fact that taxpayers’ money has for years been used in large quantities through fraudulent claims, in order to subsidize national organisations covering activities of leading politicians and their cronies, and/or oligarchs sparking populism and anti-EU sentiments.

Subsequently a considerable number of communications, declarations and legal frameworks have been enacted to fight corruption on the EU and global level, but unfortunately without expected results.

The European Union has a general right to act, by way of setting strong fundamental principles in the field of anti-corruption policies – as defined by the provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Article 67 of the TFEU spells out the Union’s obligation to ensure a high level of security, by way of preventing and combating crime. Article 83 of the TFEU lists corruption as one of the particularly serious cross-border “euro-crime” crimes. Corruption may have adverse effects on the functioning of the internal market, on competition, and on the use of EU resources. It can also be used as a tool for developing networks of organised crime. The Commission has been given a political mandate to fight against corruption and to develop a comprehensive EU anti-corruption policy, in close cooperation with the Council of Europe.

The EU Anti-Corruption Report, published in 2014, provided an important step in drawing attention to the wide spread corruption in the European Union. In spite of the intention to publicise such reports periodically, the European Commission has since failed to publish a further report. As one EC official, informally expressed: “…the issue of corruption is too sensitive for some member states…”

The newly appointed European Commission in 2020 has declared the fight against the corruption as one of its priorities.

Commissioner for Home Affairs, Ylva Johansson, said: “Corruption is a threat to democracy and to the rule of law and it has no place in the EU institutions. By setting out our plans for an anti-corruption review at EU level, we are fulfilling our international commitments and we are strengthening the EU’s role in the global fight against corruption. I am looking forward to the active participation and cooperation of all the EU institutions in this process”.

Commissioner for Justice, Didier Reynders, said: “The fight against corruption is fundamental for upholding the rule of law. This year we presented the first annual Rule of Law report, where the fight against corruption is a key part of the evaluation. This ensures that the fight against corruption will also be a key part of the deepened rule of law dialogue that we are now having at EU and at national level. We are committed to seeing the rule of law upheld in every corner of the EU and we will continue to do the maximum we can to fight corruption.”

In spite of the above intentions and policy declarations the EU seems continually to be unable to prevent, combat and effectively sanction against corruption and the misuse of EU funds. It appears to be unable to undertake the necessary organisational, structural and political reforms that are required in order to make the EU administration effective in dealing with such serious crimes.

Public protests against government corruption and misuse of EU subsidies are frequent in different parts of the European Union. Corrupt governments are confronted with growing dissatisfaction and protests by citizens who want transparency and rule of law. Citizens of affected countries are increasingly frustrated by seemingly ineffective support from Brussels and its EU institutions.

*The European Democracy Action Plan, taken together with the new European rule of law mechanism, the new Strategy to strengthen the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, Media and Audiovisual Action Plan as well as the package of measures taken to promote and protect equality across the EU, will be a key driver for the new push for European democracy to face the challenges of the digital age. The commitment to democracy is also embedded in the EU’s external action, and a central pillar of its work with accession and neighbourhood countries.

The European Democracy Action Plans is one of the major initiatives of the Commission’s Work Programme for 2020, announced in in the Political Guidelines of President von der Leyen.

TikTok gets one month to respond to claims of EU consumer rights breaches
TikTok gets one month to respond to claims of EU consumer rights breaches
Brussels: TikTok has been given a month to respond to multiple complaints from the European Union‘s (EU) consumer groups that it allegedly violated the bloc’s consumer laws and also allegedly fail to protect children from hidden advertising and inappropriate content.Owned by China‘s ByteDance, the short-video app has seen rapid growth worldwide, particularly among teenagers. However, a number of incidents have prompted concerns about its privacy and safety policies.

The European Commission on Friday said that it had launched a formal dialogue with TikTok and national consumer groups to review the company’s commercial practices and policy. European Justice Commissioner Didier Reynders said greater digitalisation brought on by the Covid-19 pandemic has created new risks, in particular for vulnerable consumers. “In the European Union, it is prohibited to target children and minors with disguised advertising such as banners in videos,” he said in a statement.

TikTok said it would discuss with the the Irish Consumer Protection Commission and the Swedish Consumer Agency measures it recently introduced. Both bodies are leading the talks. “We have taken a number of steps to protect our younger users, including making all under-16 accounts private-by-default, and disabling their access to direct messaging,” the company said in a statement.

“Further, users under 18 cannot buy, send or receive virtual gifts, and we have strict policies prohibiting advertising directly appealing to those under the age of digital consent.”

Stay on top of technology and startup news that matters. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for the latest and must-read tech news, delivered straight to your inbox.
EU provides emergency assistance to flood victims in Sri Lanka
EU provides emergency assistance to flood victims in Sri Lanka

Following the devastating floods which struck Sri Lanka in mid-May, the European Commission is providing €80,000 (close to Rs. 19.5 million) in humanitarian funding for emergency assistance.

The aid will benefit 7,500 people in some of the most affected areas in the districts of Colombo, Galle and Gampaha.

The EU funding supports the Sri Lanka Red Cross Society in delivering emergency relief to the most affected families, including those who are currently living in temporary shelters or evacuation centres, as well as to people returning home after water levels have receded. The support focuses on providing access to clean water and sanitation, particularly through cleaning the contaminated wells. First aid and medical services will also be provided, along with hygiene awareness sessions, to avoid the spread of waterborne diseases, as well as the coronavirus. Affected people will also receive household items and kitchen sets such as bed sheets, torches, cooking pots and kitchen utensils.

The funding is part of the EU’s overall contribution to the Disaster Relief Emergency Fund (DREF) of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC).

Between 12 and 14 May, the southwest monsoon weather conditions and cyclone Tauktae caused heavy rainfall in large parts of Sri Lanka, triggering widespread flooding in nine low-lying districts in Central and North Western, Sabaragamuwa, Southern and Western provinces. The districts of Colombo, Gampaha and Galle were the worst-hit areas. According to information released by the national Disaster Management Center on 17 May, more than 43,000 people have been affected and almost 15,000 houses have been damaged, some of them destroyed. Heavy rain continues in these regions as another cyclonic storm, Yaas, has formed over the Bay of Bengal. The floods comes as Sri Lanka is struggling to cope with a third wave of the coronavirus pandemic.

The European Union together with its Member States is the world’s leading donor of humanitarian aid. Relief assistance is an expression of European solidarity towards people in need around the world. It aims to save lives, prevent and alleviate human suffering, and safeguard the integrity and human dignity of populations affected by natural disasters and man-made crises.

Through its European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO), the European Union helps over 120 million victims of conflicts and disasters every year. For more information, please visit ECHO’s website.

The European Commission has signed a €3 million humanitarian contribution agreement with the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) to support the Federation’s Disaster Relief Emergency Fund (DREF). Funds from the DREF are mainly allocated to “small-scale” disasters – those that do not give rise to a formal international appeal.

The Disaster Relief Emergency Fund was established in 1985 and is supported by contributions from donors. Each time a National Red Cross or Red Crescent Society needs immediate financial support to respond to a disaster, it can request funds from the DREF. For small-scale disasters, the IFRC allocates grants from the Fund, which can then be replenished by the donors. The contribution agreement between the IFRC and ECHO enables the latter to replenish the DREF for agreed operations (that fit in with its humanitarian mandate) up to a total of €3 million.

Why EU Report Calling for Regime Change in Russia is Last Ditch Effort to Save the Bloc's Relevance
Why EU Report Calling for Regime Change in Russia is Last Ditch Effort to Save the Bloc’s Relevance

An EU document compiled by MEP Andrius Kubilius, a former prime minister of Lithuania, declares Russia a “threat” and calls for deterring it through different means, including Russia’s expulsion from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), halting the Nord Stream 2 project, and stepping up sanctions against the country. It specifically targets the Russian government, proposing to launch international probes and trials against it as well as setting up “EU tribunals”.

On top of this, the EP draft urges the EU to be prepared “not to recognise the parliament of Russia” after the upcoming 2021 legislative elections in the country and to ask for “Russia’s suspension from international organisations with parliamentary assemblies”, based on a premise that Russia’s democracy does not correspond to European values and its election system cannot be trusted.

The document employs self-righteous, aggressive, and undiplomatic language and is calling for nothing short of regime change in Russia, deems Professor Glenn Diesen from the University of South-Eastern Norway.

Sputnik: The European Parliament has put forward a set of measures targeting the EU’s cooperation with Russia and called to halt the Nord Stream 2 project. Does the EP’s stance really reflect that of respective nations in this institution? Whose interests are really being pursued, in your opinion?

Glenn Diesen: The report does not accurately represent the EU or its main member states. It is put together by Andrius Kubilius, who is a member of the European Parliament, a former prime minister of Lithuania, and an ardent Russophobe. It would, for example, be unthinkable for the German government to refer to the “Kremlin regime” and “Putin’s war against the people of Russia”.

This is the hyperbolic and undiplomatic language of Kubilius. The brazen call for pursuing regime change in Russia by establishing EU tribunals to police Russia in cooperation with Bellingcat and open call to launch a propaganda channel is also unlikely to be the official position of major EU member states such as Germany, France, or Italy.

The main contribution of the Baltic States and Poland has always been to steer the EU towards confrontation and containment of Russia. The attempt to mobilise the EU against Russia is a risky strategy as major EU member states must increasingly deal with Russia in bilateral arrangements for pragmatic ties, which makes the EU less relevant.

© AP Photo / Mindaugas Kulbis
NATO soldiers of Croatia at the Training Range in Pabrade, Lithuania

Sputnik: The European Parliament’s draft was written ahead of Russia’s September parliamentary elections and calls upon the EU to be “prepared not to recognise the parliament of Russia and to ask for Russia’s suspension from international organisations” if elections “are recognised as fraudulent”. Based on what criteria would the EP decide whether Russia’s elections are fair or not? If Russia employed the same tactics and did not recognise the EP or that of any European country, how would the EU evaluate such actions?

Glenn Diesen: The key question is if the EU assessment of Russian parliamentary elections will be motivated by geopolitical interests or altruistic efforts to elevate liberal democratic values. The simple answer is that Brussels perceives these two objectives to be interlinked as strengthening the EU vis-à-vis Russia is believed to be good for liberal democratic values.

The language in the document indicates that they have already decided to declare the Russian parliamentary elections to be fraudulent. The purpose of doing so is also explicitly outlined in the document, which is to instigate protests within Russia and to expel Russia from international institutions.

Good arguments can be made to include democracy and human rights into the realm of international politics, which was introduced with the Helsinki Accords in 1975. However, it can also be exploited to establish an international system based on sovereign inequality.

© AP Photo / Alexander Zemlianichenko
Президент России Владимир Путин перед заседанием российского организационного комитета “Победа” в Кремле

It is implied that democracy and human rights legitimises the West to interfere in the domestic affairs of Russia, support coups, and to use military power unlawfully, while Russia has no legitimate influence beyond its own borders. Promoting democracy and human rights as a geopolitical instrument and hegemonic norm is counter-productive as Russia is increasingly signalling that democracy and human rights can no longer have a place in international security discourse.

The Helsinki Accords specified that “sovereign equality” was a key principle, which now appears to be incompatible with how democracy and human rights are used in international relations. Moscow is thus making it clear it does not need or desire EU approval for its own elections as the EU is an adversary and not a moral authority.

© AP Photo / Virginia Mayo
European Union flags flap in the wind as two gardeners work on the outside of EU headquarters in Brussels, Wednesday, Sept. 11, 2019.

Sputnik: The EP draft calls for creating “EU tribunals” and launching investigations into alleged crimes committed by the governments of Russia and Belarus. Who provided them with the legitimacy to conduct such inquiries? What political goals do they want to achieve through this initiative, in your opinion?

Glenn Diesen: There is no clause in international law that provides the EU with the authority to represent the Russian people. This is why the reference to international law is increasingly replaced with that of a “rules-based international system”, which implies exemption from international law to the extent it is legitimised by liberal democratic values.

One could argue that this is well-intentioned and in service of higher ideals, although it undeniably implies sovereign inequality. This self-assigned socialising or civilising role of the EU divides the continent into political subjects versus political objects, or an EU teacher versus a Russian student.

The document from the EU Parliament argues that these “EU tribunals” will conduct investigations with Bellingcat, which many leaks ago was exposed as a government-funded organisation that spreads disinformation to weaken NATO adversaries. However, the main point to be made is that Russia demands sovereign equality. The EU’s “external governance” over Russia is rejected as the EU would also not accept if Russia exerted similar influence in the territory of the EU.

© REUTERS / JOHANNA GERON
European Council President Charles Michel addresses the EU Parliament plenary session in Brussels, Belgium April 26, 2021.

Sputnik: In your article you noted that the EP document openly discusses nothing short of a regime change plan. What’s behind this belligerent stance and its timing? What risks is this approach fraught with for Europe and international stability in general?  

Glenn Diesen: There is currently a divide in the EU and the wider West. Some argue that the hostilities towards Russia must be scaled back, while others are arguing to stay the course. Those calling to cultivate a more benign approach to Moscow recognise that the anti-Russian sanctions have failed as it has pushed Russia to reduce its economic ties with the West and instead form a strategic partnership with China. These concerns are now openly expressed in Berlin and Paris, and it is also the reason why Biden is reaching out to Moscow.

The people calling to stay the course and pursue regime change in Russia do not necessarily believe these objectives are achievable or that even the anti-Russian policies will result in any policy change in Russia, but they consider the containment of Russia as an objective in itself and a source for reviving unity in the West.

This approach is an exercise in self-harm as it is based on wishful thinking as opposed to the realities of a new international distribution of power. Case in point, the lesson of Nord Stream 2 (and the cancelled South Stream) should be that the countries positioning themselves as a frontline with Russia will be circumvented and thus have their own relevance reduced. If the EU seeks unity under an anti-Russian policy by cancelling Nord Stream 2, then the EU itself would become less relevant as the cheap Russian gas required economic competitiveness would eventually be redirected towards China and the East. Ambitions to instigate a coup in Russia or isolate Russia economically and politically is leading to the collapse of the Helsinki Accords and Russia’s economic decoupling from Europe, which is not good for the EU or international stability.

Glenn Diesen is the author of “Russian Conservatism: Managing Change under Permanent Revolution” (2021), “Great Power Politics in the Fourth Industrial Revolution: The Geoeconomics of Technological Sovereignty” (2021), “Russia in a Changing World” (2020), “The Decay of Western Civilisation and Resurgence of Russia: Between Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft” (2018), and “Russia’s Geoeconomic Strategy for a Greater Eurasia (Rethinking Asia and International Relations)” (2017).

EU vows support for 'democratic' Belarus
EU vows support for ‘democratic’ Belarus

The EU’s top diplomat said on Friday that the European Commission stands ready to support a future democratic Belarus, as more sanctions were imposed over an international flight being forced to land in Minsk.

Eighty-eight people, including President Lukashenko, and seven legal entities have already been sanctioned with an EU travel ban and asset freeze in response to political repression in the country.

“This plan, up to €3 billion, reflects the European Union’s commitment to support Belarusian people once Belarus embarks on a democratic transition,” Josep Borrel said.

Belarus opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya also spoke with acting Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte in The Hague on Friday.

The meeting came as the international community continued to condemn the diversion of a Ryanair flight to Minsk last Sunday so that Belarusian police could arrest an opposition journalist.

“We will do everything to protect individuals in Belarus from the impact of these sanctions,” Rutte said. “But that will not always be easy. But we have to do everything to get to the regime; to Lukashenko and his people. We can only do that through targeted sanctions.”

In talks with Lukashenko on Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin played down the flight incident.

He accused the EU of “double standards”, recalling an incident in 2013 when a plane from Moscow carrying former Bolivian president Evo Morales was forced to land in Vienna.

Belarusians isolated by flight ban

Journalist Roman Protasevich and his girlfriend Sofia Sapega were arrested after the Ryanair jet’s crew was told to land by Belarusian flight controllers last Sunday, officially over a bomb threat.

The EU has denounced the incident as akin to air piracy and has since banned flights from Belarus, and on Europe-based airlines to avoid Belarusian airspace.

This, however, has also left dissident Belarusians with few options to get out of the country if they want to remain in the EU.

Belarus tightened restrictions at its land border in December. Those willing to cross must explain their reason, such as work, medical care or education, and can only do it once every six months.

“Shutting the borders turns Belarus into a can of rotting preserves,” rights group organiser Tatsiana Hatsura-Yavorska told AP. “We are being turned into hostages.”

More than 35,000 people have been arrested in Belarus after millions took part in pro-democracy protests last summer. Ms. Hatsura-Yavorska added: “The authorities have scaled up repressions in recent months to incite the atmosphere of fear.”

Thousands Rally in Ljubljana Weeks Before Slovenia Takes The EU Presidency
Thousands Rally in Ljubljana Weeks Before Slovenia Takes The EU Presidency

Thousands rallied in Slovenia’s capital Friday against right-wing Prime Minister Janez Jansa, reflecting mounting pressure on the government weeks before the country takes over the European Union’s rotating presidency.

Some 20,000 people gathered at a central Ljubljana square to demand that the government step down and early elections be held. Several workers’ unions and opposition parties joined the demonstration.

Critics accuse Jansa of assuming increasingly authoritarian ways similar to those of his ally, Hungary’s hardline Prime Minister Viktor Orban.

They claim that Jansa’s government has pressured Slovenian media and spurred hate speech, while mishandling the coronavirus crisis and curbing social dialogue in the traditionally moderate Alpine nation.

Jansa denies accusations

Jansa, a veteran politician who has served twice in the past as prime minister, has dismissed the accusations as a leftist conspiracy. Earlier this week, he survived an impeachment motion filed by the opposition in parliament.

Jansa came to power last year after the previous, liberal prime minister stepped down. He is also known for prematurely congratulating former U.S. President Donald Trump while vote count was still underway during the presidential election last November.

The protesters on Friday shouted “Elections now,” waving Slovenian and labor union flags and banners. One banner read “Death to Fascism, Freedom for all.”

Many participants wore face masks in line with pandemic rules.

‘Young people are ignored’

Pija Zorman said she came to Ljubljana for the protest from Kranj, about 25 kilometres (15 miles) away. The 29-year-old said she joined the rally because of a “lack of perspective.”

“We, the young people, are ignored,” said Zorman.

Slovenia is set to assume the presidency of the 27-member EU in July.

Jansa has come under EU scrutiny over allegations of media pressure in the country, including abolishing state funding for Slovenia’s only news agency, the STA.

This article has been adapted from its original source.

European Union set to reveal new strategy to combat antisemitism
European Union set to reveal new strategy to combat antisemitism

The European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, recently addressed the global issue of rising antisemitism, reiterating the EU’s support for combatting it, and for supporting the Jewish community.

Speaking to hundreds of Jewish community leaders from around the world, von der Leyen introduced the forthcoming EU strategy specifically designed to combat antisemitism, the first of its kind.
Von der Leyen spoke at the World Jewish Congress’s 16th Plenary Assembly which meets once every four years to address key and current issues that are affecting Jewish communities and to make policy for the years ahead.
“Sadly antisemitism is not confined to the distant past,” von der Leyen said in her speech. “It is still very present in Europe and across the world.”
She then outlined the goals of the new strategy which are to preserve the memory of the holocaust and strengthen holocaust education, strengthen the fight against antisemitism, and foster Jewish life in Europe.
The COVID-19 pandemic in particular, said von der Leyen, has shown how quickly antisemitic conspiracy myths can spread.
”The duty to protect the future of the Jewish people starts with remembering the past, but of course it does not end there. Europe can only prosper when its Jewish communities prosper too. Seventy-six years after the Holocaust, Jewish life in Europe is thriving again in synagogues, in schools, in kindergartens and in the heart of our communities. And we must continue to protect it.”

The European Commission is the politically independent executive branch of the European Union, which proposes new European legislation and implements the decisions of the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union.

European Union Regulator Authorizes Vaccine for Children 12 to 15 Years Old
European Union Regulator Authorizes Vaccine for Children 12 to 15 Years Old

The European Medicines Agency approved on Friday the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine for children aged 12 to 15, in what the drug regulator called “an important step forward in the fight against the pandemic” in a statement.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized the vaccine for that age group earlier this month after clinical trials showed it was safe.

The E.M.A.’s opinion will now be sent to the European Commission, the bloc’s administrative arm, for final approval, which it is expected to do swiftly. It will then be up to the national governments of the member countries to decide if and when to inoculate children, the regulator said.

Anticipating the vaccine’s approval, Germany announced on Thursday that it would open appointments to children in that age range starting June 7. Italy will start vaccinating people who are 16 and older next month, the commissioner in charge of vaccinations announced on Friday.

The European Union had a slow start to its vaccination campaign, with shortages of doses delaying the rollout in many member countries. The bloc’s efforts have gained pace in recent weeks, and now appear to be on track to get at least one dose to 70 percent of its adult population by the end of June.

The Pfizer vaccine has already been authorized in the bloc for those who are 16 and older. The doses for children will be the same as for adults, with two shots administered three weeks apart.

In Italy, all regions will broaden eligibility to those 16 and older starting June 3, Francesco Paolo Figliuolo, the army general in charge of Italy’s vaccination effort, told reporters on Friday.

General Figliuolo said that the country will make 20 million more doses available next month. He acknowledged that the amount isn’t enough to fully vaccinate Italy’s population of about 60 million, “but if we think about two or three months ago, we couldn’t have imagined it even in the rosiest predictions.”

For much of the year, Italy, which was severely hit by the pandemic in early 2020, has vaccinated only the elderly and the most vulnerable residents, both because of the scarcity of doses and for a number of logistical reasons. The country opened vaccinations to those 40 and older only in the last few weeks, with the exception being health care workers and teachers.

Public concern has grown about people starting to move around more, especially as summer approaches, while younger Italians have yet to receive their first shots. But not all regions have taken the same approach to vaccination: In Lazio, where Rome is situated, for example, the governor opened eligibility to all students about to take the test to receive their high school diplomas.

Italy’s Medicine Agency is also expected to authorize the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for children 12 to 15 years old next Monday, a spokeswoman said, paving the way for students to return to in-person learning in September.

According to a database maintained by the Italian government, more than 19 percent of Italians are fully vaccinated, and 37 percent of the population have received a first dose, in line with the European average.

In the statement on the Pfizer vaccine for children 12 to 15, the E.M.A. said it would continue to track very rare cases of heart inflammation reported after vaccination, mostly in people younger than 30. The agency said the vaccine’s benefits outweighed the risks, and it remained unclear whether there was any possible link between the inflammation and vaccination.

Polish Presidential Aide Dubs Nord Stream 2 'Gas Bomb Placed Under European Integration'
Polish Presidential Aide Dubs Nord Stream 2 ‘Gas Bomb Placed Under European Integration’

Krzysztof Szczerski, the head of the Polish presidential office’s international policy bureau, has stated that the White House waiving sanctions against the operator of Nord Stream 2 is “based on an erroneous assessment of reality”.

Speaking to the news network Polskie Radio, Szczerski described the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project as “a gas bomb placed under European integration”.

© Sputnik / Dmitrij Leltschuk
Piping systems and shut-off valves are pictured at the gas receiving station of the Nord Stream Baltic Sea pipeline, in Lubmin, Germany

“Indeed, this project will or can blow up the European Union”, he asserted, expressing concern over the completion of Nord Stream 2, which he said would enable Europe to receive more gas from Russia.

The Polish presidential aide claimed that the joint operation of Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 will result in “Germany’s dependence on Russian [gas] supplies, which will mean Moscow’s political influence on the EU’s foreign policy and economy”.

“Each gas pipeline has its own valve, which means that it can be closed on the Russian side. So, from the moment of the project’s completion, Western Europe or the EU will have to take into account that they may lose access to the Russian gas when they deal with decision-making”, Szczerski added.

The remarks followed the aide telling Polskie Radio last week that the White House’s recent decision not to slap sanctions on the operator of Nord Stream 2 was “not entirely consistent”.

US Scraps Sanctions Against Nord Stream 2 Operator

He spoke after the Biden administration announced that it would lift sanctions on Swiss-based Nord Stream 2 AG, the Russian-led project’s operator, and its chief executive Matthias Warnig, explaining the move was in Washington’s national interests.

© Sputnik / Dmitry Lelchuk
Pipe-laying vessel Fortuna leaves the port of Wismar to work on Nord Stream 2 construction

The White House press pool cited President Joe Biden as saying that US sanctions against Nord Stream 2 AG would be counterproductive for European relations. Shortly after, however, the US administration imposed sanctions against 13 Russian vessels and three entities linked to the construction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

The Russian-led gas project, which is currently over 90-percent complete, aims to lay a 745-mile twin pipeline to transport gas from Russia directly to Germany via the Baltic Sea, passing through the territorial waters of Denmark, Finland, and Sweden.

Washington is a vocal opponent of the project, as well as Berlin’s alleged dependence on Russian natural resources, as it seeks to export more US liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe. In 2019, the White House introduced sanctions on Nord Stream 2, forcing Swiss company Allseas to abandon it. After a year-long hiatus, construction was resumed by the Russian pipe-laying vessel Fortuna in late 2020.
Russia views the US sanctions against Nord Stream 2 as an example of unfair competition meant to boost US LNG exports, calling the pipeline a purely economic project that should not be politicised.

Greece presents EU Digital COVID Certificate – European Council President Charles in attendance (video)
Greece presents EU Digital COVID Certificate – European Council President Charles in attendance (video)

The presentation of the European digital certificate EU Digital COVID Certificate by the Minister of Digital Government, Kyriakos Pierrakakis, took place at the premises of the National Network of Technology and Research Infrastructures (EDYTE) on Friday morning with the presence of Greek PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis, the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, Vice-President for Promoting our European Way of Life Margaritis Schinas and Minister of Digital Government, Kyriakos Pierrakakis.

PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis, after thanking the attendees, said that he is proud of the work done by the Ministry of Digital Governance and as a whole. He said the pandemic was an accelerator of digital developments.

“We needed a tool for transportation since Greece relies on tourism,” said the prime minister. “We have developed the digital certificate in cooperation with the Commission. You saw the presentation is very simple and contains all the necessary elements needed for someone to move and be welcomed by each country,” he said.

The President of the European Council, Charles Michel, praised the initiatives of Kyriakos Mitsotakis for the adoption of the digital certificate, saying that after the negotiations, the EU will be able to implement it in the coming weeks.

As he said, it is a great achievement of Europe and guarantees the free movement of citizens.

The certificate is expected to be a major boost for European citizens’ travel, thus providing a major boost to tourism, which is an important source of revenue for several EU countries, including Greece.

The EU Digital Covid Certificate will be issued by the national authorities and will be available in digital or printed form for those who have been fully vaccinated, have a negative PCR test, or have a certificate of recovery from coronavirus.

European Council head says process of implementing sanctions against Belarus is launched
European Council head says process of implementing sanctions against Belarus is launched

The European Union has begun work on the introduction of new sanctions against Belarus due to the incident with the plane landing in Minsk, but it is too early to say which sectors they will cover, the head of the European Council Charles Michel told at a press conference following the EU-Japan summit.The process of implementing the sanctions has been launched. The issue of sectoral sanctions will be analyzed by the relevant structures, now it is too early to talk about a specific sector, he said, answering a question from journalists whether the restrictions will affect the potash industry.Earlier, the head of EU diplomacy, Josep Borrell, said that the foreign ministers of the 27 EU countries will discuss on Thursday in Portugal during an informal meeting of the EU Council how to implement economic and sectoral sanctions against Belarus due to the incident with the plane landing in Minsk on 23 May.

European Union's Covid-19 recovery fund gets unanimous green light
European Union’s Covid-19 recovery fund gets unanimous green light

BRUSSELS: The national parliaments of Austria and Poland approved Europe’s huge post-virus coronavirus recovery fund on Thursday, the last of the 27 EU member states, paving the way for ratification.
“With the positive votes of the Austrian and Polish parliaments today, the 27 member states finalised the parliamentary approval process,” European Budget Commissioner Johannes Hahn said on Twitter.
Officials previously said that if member states gave the go-ahead to the plan, money for the 672-billion-euro ($820-billion) package of grants and loans could “start to flow in July”.
This will be a year on from the European Union‘s historic decision to pool debt to fund the recovery package.
What once seemed like a hugely ambitious exercise, however, has been dwarfed by the United States‘ adoption of a $1.9-trillion infrastructure plan.
The US has also surged ahead with coronavirus vaccinations, meaning its economy will emerge from lockdowns faster than those in Europe.
But EU chiefs have remained upbeat and optimistic. “Our objective is to approve all the plans by the summer,” European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said earlier.
Spain and Italy are expected to see the biggest injections of funds as part of their roughly 70-billion-euro plan, followed by France with 40 billion euros.
The path to putting the plan in place has seen European Commission officials in difficult discussions with national governments on the criteria that spending plans must meet.
Each plan has had to assign at least 37 per cent of funds to measures that better the environment or fight climate change.
Another 20 per cent is supposed to finance the transition to a more digital economy.
The hope is that as European output picks up after a year of Covid and lockdown woes, it will herald a rash of spending in insulating buildings, railway transport, electric vehicle charging points and high-speed internet.
“The objective is that the funds start to be paid this summer,” Commission Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis said at a meeting in Lisbon on Saturday.
He promised that efforts would be made to try to speed up the assessment process.
“We are working as quickly as possible but these are complex evaluations,” he nevertheless warned.

EU privacy watchdog to investigate EU institutions' use of Amazon, Microsoft cloud services
EU privacy watchdog to investigate EU institutions’ use of Amazon, Microsoft cloud services

By Foo Yun Chee

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – EU privacy watchdog EDPS opened on Thursday two investigations into EU institutions’ use of cloud computing services provided by Amazon and Microsoft, concerned about the transfer of Europeans’ personal data to the United States.

The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) said one of the investigations will focus on the use of Microsoft Office 365 by the European Commission.

The EU watchdog said EU bodies were relying more and more on cloud-based software and cloud infrastructure or platform services from large U.S. ICT providers which are subject to legislation that allows disproportionate surveillance activities by the U.S. authorities.

“Following the outcome of the reporting exercise by the EU institutions and bodies, we identified certain types of contracts that require particular attention and this is why we have decided to launch these two investigations,” EDPS head Wojciech Wiewiorowski said in a statement.

Market leader Amazon, Alphabet unit Google and Microsoft dominate the realm of data storage worldwide, fuelling concerns in Europe over the risk of surveillance by the United States.

Such worries prompted Europe’s highest court last year to toss out a transatlantic data transfer deal known as the Privacy Shield following a long-running dispute between Facebook and Austrian privacy activist Max Schrems.

(Reporting by Foo Yun Chee)

Roma in Italy forced to leave, crisis calls for EU action European Union
Roma in Italy forced to leave, crisis calls for EU action European Union
On the morning of April 22, at about 8:00, some police and municipal waste managers arrived under the concrete overpass on Rome’s Eastern Ring Road and expelled 15 Roma living in temporary settlements.

Within a few hours, temporary structures, tents, mattresses and camp stoves were cleaned up, and people were ordered to leave the noisy, dirty wasteland, which they briefly called home.

The evictions were one of five evictions carried out across Italy that week, as part of the regular cleanup by the authorities of the improvised settlements inhabited by uninhabited Romani families.

These camps are what the Italian government has long called “informal nomad camps”-informal means they are not one of the official isolation camps established by the government, and nomads mean they are only owned by the Romans who still live in Italian society. Domicile refers to nomads (based on the assumption that all Roma are essentially nomads).

Since the 1960s, the Italian authorities have been placing Roma in isolation camps on the fringe of the city, away from public services or without any chance of finding a job.

However, in 2008, then Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi declared a so-called “nomadic emergency”, which intensified the abuse of the Roma in the state. The nomadic emergency defined the presence of Roma in Italy as a threat to public safety. It created the power to conduct a census of Roma settlements and closed informal camps for Roma in order to detract from laws protecting human rights.

As a result, the Roma-only refugee camp built by the government became Italy’s main solution to its imaginary “nomadic problem”. The emergency turned the Roma into a safety issue, and then related policies were formulated, laying a template for how the authorities have dealt with the Roma since then.

The Italian government officially promised to stop the construction of new Roma-only camps in 2017, but according to the latest estimates of the Italian NGO Associazione 21 Luglio, the Italian authorities are still operating at least 119 isolation camps and shelters.

Over the years, living conditions in these camps have deteriorated significantly. The number of people living in most refugee camps has soared to an unbearable level. In response, the Italian government did not provide sufficient permanent housing to camp residents, but began to issue eviction orders and drive out residents with nowhere to go.

Most people expelled from these government-built refugee camps end up in informal refugee camps elsewhere, sometimes just a stone’s throw away from where the official refugee camps were once. Authorities have moved others to other official camps, shelters or temporary housing solutions. In any case, everyone can only live on borrowed time until the cycle of eviction and re-eviction begins again.

In the past four years, there have been 187 such Roman family evictions, leaving 3156 people homeless. These figures come from a census of forced evictions published by the European Roma Rights Center (ERRC), compiled by news reports and civil society activists.

The census shows that forced evictions have been continuously carried out across Italy for many years (almost once a week). In general, these evictions constituted a large-scale human rights crisis, indicating that for the Roma, the “nomadic emergency” never really ended, but just became invisible.

Technically, many of these deportations are illegal under national and international law. They usually do so without proper negotiation, do not have a reasonable notice period, and often do not provide adequate alternative accommodation (usually only temporary accommodation).

However, the Italian authorities did not seem to lose any sleep due to the illegality of the actions taken against the Roma.

In 2018, the Roman authorities ignored the order of the European Court of Human Rights and demanded to evacuate the official camp of Camping River and expelled more than 300 Roma living there.

In the months after the eviction, only 9% of former residents found a housing solution. More than half of the Roma who were expelled ended up on the streets: under bridges, in cars or in makeshift informal camps. Another 99 people were transferred to reception centers or temporary facilities instead of comprehensive social housing.

In the past four years, most evictions recorded by the ERRC involved only a relatively small number of people, several families at a time, who were evicted from small informal camps. But the frequency of evictions is worrying. In recent months, several times a week, and even during the strict COVID-19 lockdown, evictions occurred last year.

If the evidence in the ERRC census has any misunderstandings about the reality of the Roma in Italy, it should be used as a wake-up call to the European Commission. The scale of the relocation crisis and the continued existence of the separated official camps are facing the European Commission’s decision in 2017 to block reports of the abuse of Roma in Italy and end the investigation of the issue for two years. after that.

Human rights activists have long argued that the establishment of official camps for Roma in Italy violated the European Union’s “Race Equality Directive” on the provision of housing. In addition, the ongoing eviction crisis clearly constitutes the “harassment deemed to be discriminatory” as also stipulated in the directive.

This is the enduring legacy of Berlusconi’s “nomadic emergency”. It should indicate to the European Commission that Italy still needs to respond to its treatment of Roma. Instead, the committee seemed to be convinced of the Italian government’s commitment to “overcoming the refugee camp system” and decided that the situation of the Roma in Italy does not require further action. Despite the continued existence of apartheid government camps and despite the discriminatory harassment of Roma families through repeated forced evictions, the Commission continued to postpone any action against Italy.

With regard to legal proceedings against Roma, it seems that more and more Eastern countries have a rule, while Western countries have another rule.

The European Commission has opened infringement procedures against the Roma in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and, most recently, Bulgaria, but it has not yet taken any action against stronger member states such as Italy.

The EU’s understatement proves what its Bureau of Fundamental Rights has said since 2018: The Racial Equality Directive is simply not suitable for protecting the rights of EU Roma. Many activists believe that this is not only a problem of mechanism failure, but also a fundamental transcendence of Brussels’ fundamental political will to take a hard line on racism, which goes beyond conferences and unimplemented “action plans.”

The European Commission has a moral responsibility to ensure that Italy provides equal access to social housing in order to implement its “Race Equality Directive”, not just throw Roma in isolated refugee camps or drive them away. Out of home. The longer the EU waits to take action, the stronger the message it will send to Italy and the rest of Europe to discriminate against Roma, and it will not be challenged.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Source link