European Parliamentary Research Service Blog

Written by Marcin Szczepański,

© Feodora / Shutterstock.com

The global debate on the extent to which current competition policy rules are sufficient to deal with the fast-moving digital economy has never been more pertinent. An important part of this debate concerns the market power of large high-tech companies that dominate many online markets. The main factors behind these developments are economies of scale and scope, network externalities, and the rising economic significance of data, which are a highly valuable commodity in an online economy. While being indispensable to the development of potential game changers – such as artificial intelligence – data are also a crucial input to many online services, production processes, and logistics – making it a critical element in the value chain of many different industries.

Data-dependent markets are also characterised by a high level of concentration and, according to many experts, high entry barriers relating to access to and ownership of data – which make it difficult to challenge the incumbent companies. On the other hand, the large players are generally considered to be very productive and innovative. Some studies, however, show that the diffusion of know-how and innovation between the market leaders and the rest of the economy may be affecting competiveness in general.

One possible way to correct these shortcomings is to regulate the sharing of data. While the risks of policy-making in this field are generally well-known and centre around the need to protect privacy – particularly where personal data are involved – and to prevent the collusive aspects of data sharing, there is currently no global model to follow. The European Union has taken multiple initiatives to unlock data markets through modern, user-centred laws such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the regulation on the reuse of public sector information. The global thinking seems to gradually favour more prudent oversight of the market, considering its economic heft.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Is data the new oil? Competition issues in the digital economy‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Listen to policy podcast ‘Is data the new oil? Competition issues in the digital economy’ on YouTube.

Written by Clare Ferguson,

© European Union – European Parliament

Parliament returns to work for this first plenary session of 2020 with considerable plans for the year ahead (although two major issues remain to be settled: the future multiannual financial framework and the withdrawal of the United Kingdom). While there will be no review of the outgoing Presidency, Council and European Commission statements presenting the programme of activities of the new (and first) Croatian Council Presidency are expected on Tuesday morning, and will give an indication of the main issues to be tackled in the first half of the year ahead. The priorities for the Presidency’s six-month tenure include developing European economic and social cohesion and convergence; making stronger connections between European citizens, focusing on the infrastructure that allows smooth mobility of people and goods; boosting internal security to protect citizens and tackling migration issues; and strengthening multilateralism and Europe’s influence in the world.

Included in the first of these priorities is the von der Leyen Commission’s new European Green Deal. Following the extraordinary debate held on 11 December 2019 (in a new format of ‘scrutiny session’ that Parliament may repeat in future), Members will vote on a motion for resolution on Wednesday lunchtime. The Green Deal encompasses a number of initiatives, such as legislative proposals on a European climate law, extension of the EU emissions trading system, a carbon border tax and a review of energy taxation. Among the new strategies planned on issues such as industry, sustainable foods, biodiversity and new funding plans, is an ambition to ‘lead the world’ at the 2020 Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Accordingly, Members will hear a Commission statement on the COP15 of the Convention on Biological Diversity on Wednesday afternoon. The EU post-2020 biodiversity framework to 2030 needs to be in place in time for the 15th meeting of the parties (COP15) to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in Kunming, China in October 2020. Parliament, however, is already asking questions about the – as yet unachieved – 2020 biodiversity targets, and how the Commission proposes to strengthen implementation of measures to protect biodiversity, notably by moving away from voluntary commitments and towards legally binding measures to conserve and protect nature.

The Commission has also planned for a major new initiative to build stronger connections between European citizens and the EU. Parliament has already been preparing for the planned Conference on the Future of Europe, and will set out its position following a debate on Wednesday morning. Parliament has high expectations for the conference and is eager to contribute to its conception, which requires careful design to afford maximum opportunities for citizens to contribute to the future direction of the European Union, while avoiding the pitfalls inherent in any selection. Already in late 2019, Parliament set up a working group to reflect on the structure of the proposed Conference, seeking to ensure that the aims and scope of the conference remain realistic and result in meaningful outcomes.

Returning to the final priority on the Presidency’s list, to strengthen Europe’s influence in the world, Members will debate the 2018 Annual report on the human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter on Tuesday afternoon. This comprehensive exercise takes stock of all EU actions in the area of human rights and democracy. Its publication provides Parliament with an opportunity to review EU action and make recommendations for the future, in an annual resolution adopted in response to the report. The 2018 EU report underlines the importance of the EU taking a leading global role in defence of democracy and human rights, particularly in the face of rising authoritarianism and shrinking space for democracy worldwide – a view Parliament is expected to share.

 

Written by Etienne Bassot,

© kojihirano, Eugenio Marongiu, Alfa Photo, Fotosr52, View Apart, Nicolas Economou, Angurt, FooTToo, vchal, Maridav / Shutterstock.com.

A new European Parliament and new European Commission, a new decade, and a new financial framework to adopt for the next seven years – 2020 would seem to be a year full of new beginnings. But 2020 does not start with a blank page: next to the political commitments already made and work programmes already adopted, a range of issues are already on the table, some recent, some less so, but all requiring our understanding, and each calling for action.

To help us to see where we need to focus and take action, the European Parliamentary Research Service has asked a dozen of its policy analysts to select, from myriad interesting topics, ten issues to watch in 2020. These issues concern all aspects of European policies: economic and social, European citizens and migrants, the most advanced technologies and most affected regions, budget and finances, as well as trends within our European borders and across the oceans or at the pole. Some of these issues follow directly from previous editions of this publication – such as the multiannual financial framework, migration, and the impact of US politics on transatlantic relations. Others are assessed in a new light, for example climate action and energy transition. And still others are brand new in this series of publications, such as the ‘gamification’ of EU democracy, and the Arctic.

Behind this diversity, two main themes emerge: climate and solidarity. These two themes will not come as a surprise: they were at the heart of campaigns for the European elections last year, and continue to make the headlines at both European and national levels. The December 2019 Parlemeter – the Eurobarometer survey for the European Parliament – confirms that, first and foremost, European citizens demand a greener and fairer Europe. Climate change, poverty and social exclusion are citizens’ key priorities for the European Parliament to address.

Climate and solidarity have therefore logically inspired the written contributions as well as the visual representation of the ten issues and their interaction, represented on the cover of this publication. In 2020, no issue can be presented, let alone understood, in isolation, detached from its interactions with others. As one example among many, biodiversity calls for climate action, which will affect the adoption of the multiannual financial framework, which will define the Just Transition Fund, which will influence the fight against poverty and exclusion that affect children, who interact via 5G, which enables more on-line involvement of citizens, who coordinate support to migrants using new technologies or express their concerns for the Arctic on line, and so on.

In a world in which all issues are directly or indirectly related to the others, the thinking follows this pattern. It follows that, with this publication as increasingly elsewhere, you can choose to read these issues in any order you wish. Cross-referencing will make the connections and guide you from one subject to the other.

We hope that you will enjoy reading this latest edition of ‘Ten Issues to Watch’ and that it will stimulate your reflections and ignite your curiosity as you explore the challenges and opportunities of 2020.

Read the complete in-depth analysis on ‘Ten issues to watch in 2020‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Eamonn Noonan,

wikimedia

The future is very present in discussions around and about the European Union. This spring, the European Parliament concluded its series of debates with Member State Heads of State or Government on the Future of Europe. A major European Union (EU) strategic foresight report, Global Trends to 2030: Challenges and Choices for Europe, was published not long after. A new legislative period began after the European Parliament elections, and the 2014-19 Commission has made way for a new executive, led by Ursula von der Leyen.

This edition of the Global Trendometer also looks to the future. Like its predecessors in 2016, 2017 and 2018, it identifies, tracks and analyses a selection of trends ranging across social, economic, and political subjects. It focuses on the medium- to long-term, and seeks to uncover implications for the EU. The purpose is to support the deliberations of EU decision- and lawmakers.

The opening essays in this edition cover the future of democracy and of social policy. We then provide a set of short scenarios, sketching possible – fictional – futures for several North African countries. Shorter pieces look at trends, uncertainties and disruptions on six further topics: the auditing of algorithms, China’s social credit scheme, space, life expectancy, political slogans, and collective nostalgia.

The Trendometer is part of a systematic effort to develop a strategic foresight culture within the EU. This effort has proceeded not least through the framework of the interinstitutional ESPAS initiative. The allocation of responsibility for foresight to a Vice-President of the incoming European Commission is another step towards anticipatory governance in Europe.

The ESPAS initiative aims to strengthen the EU’s collective administrative capacity for foresight. It seeks to provide informed, up-to-date analysis of medium- and long-term global trends and policy challenges, and the choices they pose for decision-makers within the participating institutions. ESPAS is a joint initiative of the European Parliament, European Commission, Council of the European Union and European External Action Service. Observer bodies are the European Committee of the Regions, European Economic and Social Committee, European Investment Bank, European Court of Auditors, and EU Institute for Security Studies.

As the saying goes, predictions are difficult, especially about the future. Human affairs are complex, and are buffeted by chance and indeed irrationality. This makes it impossible to predict outcomes with certainty. However, this does not mean it is futile to study the future. On the contrary, it is all the more reason to take a systematic approach to forward analysis.

Asking questions to which one does not know the answers is a good place to start. When examining a less than ideal situation, for example, it is worth addressing questions such as:

• Are misconceptions, oversimplifications and preconceived notions in play?
• What are the negative trends? Are they structural, accidental or attitudinal?
• How serious are the consequences of negative trends?
• What are the barriers to correcting negative trends?

Creating ‘safe spaces’ for open discussion is another critical step. A foresight process should allow the expression and consideration of professionally argued contrarian views. This improves the chances of a balanced portrait of challenges and options, and in turn paves the way for better informed decisions at critical junctures in the future. Good choices depend on having a number of carefully prepared options to choose between.

The European Union has been compared to a supertanker. The emphasis on dialogue and consensus in EU decision-making means it is not easy to change course quickly. This adds to the case for enhanced strategic foresight capacity. A shared analysis of key risks and opportunities, and a common understanding of fundamental values, interests and goals, are European public goods. As we have seen in the past decades, trying to debate from first principles once a crisis hits only complicates the search for solutions. It is time to embrace an anticipatory approach, and to routinely develop options for responding to different eventualities. To borrow a phrase from Diderot, “examining everything, without exception and without ceremony”, is a step towards identifying the correct course, even in a storm.

Read the complete study ‘Global Trendometer 2019‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Global Trendometer 2019 in a nutshell

Written by Clare Ferguson and Katarzyna Sochaka,

© European Union 2019 – Source : EP/Fred MARVAUX

The December plenary session highlights included the election of the European Ombudsman; commemoration of the 10th anniversary of the Lisbon Treaty and the Charter of Fundamental Rights becoming legally binding; and the award of the 2019 Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought. Parliament adopted positions on the rule of law in Malta, following the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia, and on public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI-free zones. It also debated statements by the Vice-President of the European Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR/VP) on the humanitarian situation of the Uyghur in China and in Venezuela and Nicaragua, on the migration and refugee crisis, and on the violent crackdown on recent protests in Iran. Debates took place, inter alia, on Commission and Council statements on: the 30th anniversary of the Romanian revolution of December 1989; the post-2020 EU disability strategy; the COP25 outcome; animal welfare conditions during transport to third countries; and the US Trade Representative’s announcement on France’s digital service tax. Parliament also voted on appointments to the Executive Board of the European Central Bank.

European Green Deal – extraordinary plenary session on 11 December

During an extraordinary December plenary session, Members debated the European Green Deal presented by Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans after its adoption by the European Commission the same day. Outlined in Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s political guidelines, the Green Deal aims to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050, while boosting industrial competitiveness and ensuring a just transition for the regions and workers affected. Key aims include preserving Europe’s natural environment, a ‘farm to fork’ strategy for sustainable food, and a new circular economy action plan.

Election of the Ombudsman

In the election of the European Ombudsman, Members chose to re-elect incumbent Emily O’Reilly, following a tight third round of votes against Julia Laffranque (320 votes against 280, out of 600 votes cast). O’Reilly’s main priority remains tackling the lack of transparency in national governments’ role in EU law-making. The Ombudsman’s office represents citizens and others who wish to lodge complaints regarding the actions of EU administrative bodies, and aims at ensuring that EU institutions respect citizens’ rights and the principles of good administration.

10th anniversary of the Lisbon Treaty

Parliament commemorated the 10th anniversary of the Lisbon Treaty and that of the Charter of Fundamental Rights becoming legally binding. With the coming into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the European Council became a formal EU institution, and the anniversary provided an occasion to review the formal and informal changes it brought about in the role of the EU institutions. The new competences added under the Treaty have yet to be fully exploited, however, and represent a rich seam of unused Treaty potential for the future.

European Council meeting of 12 and 13 December 2019

Parliament heard a report on, and debated the conclusions of, the latest meeting of the European Council, on 12 and 13 December 2019. At this first European Council meeting chaired by the new President, Charles Michel, EU leaders announced an agreement on the objective of achieving a climate-neutral EU by 2050, despite one Member State’s inability to commit to implementing this objective at this stage. No agreement was reached on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), but the European Council mandated its President to take the negotiations forward. The Council also considered the proposed Conference on the Future of Europe, and tasked the incoming Croatian Presidency with working towards defining a Council position, and to engage with the European Parliament and the Commission. EU leaders also discussed a wide range of international issues, including relations with Turkey and Russia.

Sakharov Prize 2019

Parliament awarded its 2019 Sakharov Prize to laureate Ilham Tohti. The European Parliament is committed to defending human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the award highlights those who stand up for the right to freedom of expression, safeguard minority rights or champion international law and democracy. Currently imprisoned by the Chinese government (his daughter received the prize on his behalf), Ilham Tohti is a moderate advocate of Uyghur minority rights who eschews radical separatist movements in favour of dialogue with the Han majority. Parliament’s President has urged the Chinese government to release Tohti, and called for China to respect minority population rights, particularly in the light of the ‘China-cables’ exposé of Chinese treatment of the Uyghur.

Joint debate on VAT fraud and payment service providers

Members debated, and approved by a large majority, two reports providing opinions on the proposals for a regulation and directive to better combat VAT fraud in the e-commerce sector. E-commerce is booming, and while it offers opportunities to increase cross-border sales, the EU is keen to avoid that it also allows increased tax fraud. Tackling VAT fraud related to e-commerce therefore requires robust systems for the transmission and exchange of VAT-relevant payment data (such as who is supplying the goods). Consulted on two European Commission proposals (on maintaining and exchanging electronic payment records), Parliament recommends the establishment of a common EU system for the collection of comparable statistics on intra-Community VAT fraud and the publication of national estimates of VAT revenue losses due to fraud. It also proposes to extend the period during which payment service providers are required to keep information on cross-border payment transactions, from two to three years.

CAP: Flexibility pillars for 2020 and financial discipline from 2021

While there is broad agreement that interim measures are necessary to bridge the funding gap until the MFF can be agreed, the EU still needs to put transitional provisions in place. Parliament’s Budgets and Agriculture Committees agreed that those who benefit from EU funding should not suffer harm because of the procedural delays. Consequently, no amendments were tabled to the Commission’s proposal for a regulation extending the current rules on flexibility between the pillars of the common agricultural policy (CAP) until the end of 2021, and Parliament approved its first-reading position under a simplified procedure. The stability of EU farmer income support post-2020 is now ensured, as the new regulation extends the 2015-2019 rules on flexibility between CAP pillars, i.e. moving money from national envelopes for rural development to the envelope for direct payments.

EU-Gambia Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement

Members voted in favour of concluding a new EU fisheries agreement with The Gambia, including a proposed annual EU contribution of €550 000. Half of this amount covers access rights for EU fishing vessels to Gambian waters and half should assist The Gambia to develop its fisheries sector in a sustainable manner, including preventing illegal fishing.

Read this ‘at a glance’ on ‘Plenary round-up – Strasbourg, December 2019‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Lucienne Attard (The Directorate-General for the Presidency),

INTRODUCTION

© meunierd / Shutterstock

For the first time since joining the European Union in 2013, Croatia will hold the rotating Council Presidency from 1 January to 30 June 2020. Croatia is a parliamentary, representative democratic republic, where the Prime Minister of Croatia is the head of government in a multi-party system.Executive power is exercised by the government and the President of Croatia. Legislative power is vested in the Croatian Parliament. The judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature. Parliament adopted the current Constitution of Croatia on 22 December 1990 and decided to declare independence from Yugoslavia on 25 May 1991.

The Croatian Parliament is the unicameral representative body of the citizens of the Republic of Croatia. Under the terms of the Croatian Constitution, the ‘Sabor’ represents the people and is vested with legislative power. The Sabor is composed of 151 members elected for a four-year term based on direct, universal and equal suffrage by secret ballot. Seats are allocated according to the Croatian Parliament electoral districts: 140 members of the parliament are elected in multi-seat constituencies, 8 from the minorities and 3 from the Croatian diaspora.

Since 19 October 2016, the Prime Minister of Croatia is Mr Andrej Plenković. There are four deputy prime ministers: Davor Božinović, Zdravko Marić, Damir Krstičević and Predrag Štromar. The government ministers are from the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) and the Croatian People’s Party – Liberal Democrats (HNS), with two further ministers being independent politicians. TheCroatian Democratic Union (Croatian: Hrvatska demokratska zajednica or HDZ, literally Croatian Democratic Community) is a liberal conservative political party and the main centre-right political party in Croatia. It is one of the two major contemporary political parties in Croatia, along with the centre-left Social Democratic Party (SDP). It is currently the largest party in the Sabor with 55 seats.

POLITICAL PRIORITIES OF THE CROATIAN PRESIDENCY

This note looks at the Croatian Presidency’s priorities, focusing essentially on the four core priorities, which will guide its work until June 2020. Those dossiers which figure in the Joint Declaration agreed to by the three institutions as priorities for 2018-2019 are marked with an asterisk (*). Also includedare some legislative files which the Conference of Presidents (COP) of the European Parliament endorsed in a list of ‘unfinished business’ in October 2019, and on which work between the two co-legislators has started or will resume.

The four main priority areas of the Croatian Presidency are:

• A Europe that is developing,
• A Europe that connects,
• A Europe that protects, and
• An influential Europe.

The challenges currently facing the Union are well known and include in particular Brexit and the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 (MFF) (2018/0166 APP)*, which the Croatian Presidency commits to carrying forward. Croatia also pledges to focus on disparities in economic development, climate change, migration, misinformation campaigns and growing populism.

This presidency will follow on the work of the Finnish Presidency, taking into account the priorities of the Strategic Agenda 2019-2024 endorsed by the Member States at the European Council on 20 June 2019. The Strategic Agenda covers the protection of citizens’ freedoms; developing a strong and vibrant economic base; building a climate-neutral, green, fair and social Europe; and promoting European interests and values on the global stage.

I. A EUROPE THAT IS DEVELOPING

In an effort to reduce differences between Member States, and to foster economic and social cohesion and convergence, Croatia will work towards an ambitious, balanced and sustainable MFF.During Parliament’s eighth legislature, a number of committees worked on the proposals for sectoral programmes, which will implement the overall MFF for 2021-2027. However, the actual amount of the next seven-year EU budget still needs to be established by the Council and then approved by Parliament. Agreeing the new seven-year programme has been complicated by, on the one hand, the appointment of a new Commission, and on the other hand, by time-consuming and complex issues such as Brexit.

Brexit is a major question that the Croatian Presidency will be facing, considering the deadline of 31 January 2020 for the UK to exit the EU. The general election on 12 December in the UK gave an unambiguous result, and the UK parliament can now be expected to move forward in time for the Brexit date. In the coming months there will need to be negotiations on the new relationship to be tailored with the UK, and this will most certainly dominate the political environment in the first half of 2020.

In line with Croatia’s first priority, the following legislative proposals could feature during the Croatian Presidency:

• Establishment of the Reform Support Programme (2018/0213 COD) (MFF file)*
• European Investment Stabilisation function (2018/0212 COD) (MFF file)*
• Recovery and Resolution of central counter-parties (2016/0365 COD)*
• Credit services, credit purchasers and the recovery of collateral* (2018/0063A COD)
• Accelerated extrajudicial collateral enforcement* (2018/0063B COD)
• Framework for the development of EU Sovereign Bond-backed Securities (SBBS) (2018/0171 COD)*
• European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS) (2015/0270 COD) *

On matters relating to the strengthening of competitiveness and skills, the Croatian Presidency plans to focus on digitalisation of business, competitiveness of European industry and SMEs, mobility of scientists and researchers, and modernisation of agriculture. The following are some of the pending proposals which would fall under this remit:

• Support for strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States financed by EAGF and EAFRD (2018/0216 COD) (MFF file)
• Programme for single market competitiveness of enterprises, including SMEs and European statistics 2021-2027 (2018/0231 COD) (MFF file)
• Horizon Europe framework programme for research and innovation 2021-2027 and specific programme implementing it (2018/0224 & 0225 COD) (MFF file)
• Digital Europe Programme 2021-2027 (2018/0227 COD) (MFF file)
• Common agricultural policy (CAP) 2021-2027 (2018/0218 COD) (MFF file)
• Common agricultural policy: financing, management and monitoring (2018/0217 COD) (MFF file)

With regard to the mobility of scientists and researchers, there is the pending proposal on the Entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of highly skilled employment(2016/0176 COD)*. This proposal, known as the Blue Card directive, remains blocked over the question of harmonisation vs national schemes.

In the context of a green Europe, and of sustainable economic growth and development, the following could feature prominently:

• Regulation on the framework to facilitate sustainable investment (2018/0178 COD)
• Programme for the environment and climate action (LIFE) 2021-2027 (2018/0209 COD) (MFF file)
• Minimum requirements for water reuse (2018/0169 COD)

The Croatian Presidency also intends to work towards the implementation of the Paris Agreement, with a transition to a low-carbon and circular economy, and on conservation of biodiversity, protection of the marine environment and efficient water and waste management. It is to be noted that legislative proposals on the matter are being prioritised by the European Commission. A European Green Deal has already been adopted by the College of Commissioners and presented in Parliament on 11 December 2019. New legislative proposals in this connection will be adopted and published in the coming months.

On social matters, the Croatian Presidency highlights the need to implement the European Pillar of Social rights, including work-life balance and promoting equality between women and men, as well as better opportunities for young people and promoting lifelong care for one’s health. In this regard, there is the non-evolution on the legislative proposal on Gender balance among non-executive directors of companies listed on stock exchanges (2012/0299 COD). On the other hand, there is a possibility that the proposal on the Coordination of social security systems (2016/0397 COD)* could be concluded by the Finnish Presidency before the end of its term in December 2019. This proposal affects the social rights of some 12 million citizens and their families.

II. A EUROPE THAT CONNECTS

The main areas of concern under this heading are the establishment of a single, European transport area, high quality and secure data infrastructure, an integrated energy market and stronger connections between Union citizens. To this end, the following pending legislative proposals could be negotiated during the Croatian Presidency:

• Charging of heavy goods vehicles (Eurovignette) (2017/0114 COD)*
• Use of vehicles hired without drivers for the carriage of goods by road (2017/0113 COD)*
• Combined transport of goods between Member States (2017/0290 COD)*
• Access to the international market by coach and bus services: further opening of national markets (2017/0288 COD)*

On stronger connections between Union citizens, the Croatian Presidency proposes to focus on further strengthening the mobility of students and researchers – in this context, negotiations on the Erasmus programme for education, training, youth and sport 2021-2027 (2018/0191 COD) will beessential, as well as on the Creative Europe programme 2021-2027 (2018/0190 COD). Equally important in terms of youth programmes, is the European Solidarity Corps programme 2021-2027(2018/0230 COD) (MFF file).

III. A EUROPE THAT PROTECTS

Internal security, more effective control of external borders, interoperability of IT systems and stronger resilience to external threats and malicious cyber activities, are amongst the key areas the Presidency would like to focus on. The following legislative proposals are relevant:

• European production and preservation orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters * (2018/0108 COD) (known as one of the e-evidence files)
• Appointment of legal representatives for the purposes of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings* (2018/0107 COD) (also an e-evidence file)
• Internal Security Fund 2021-2027 (2018/0250 COD)Visa Information System* (2018/0152 COD)
• Preventing the dissemination of terrorist content online* (2018/0331 COD)
• Respect for private life and the protection of personal data in electronic communications (e-privacy)* (2017/0003 COD)
• Returning illegally staying third-country nationals* (2018/0329 COD)

On the reform of the Common European Asylum system, and questions of migration, the co-legislators did not conclude the following proposals and work, it is hoped, would resume quickly:

Asylum: Member States responsible for examining an application for international protection (Dublin system)* (2016/0133 COD) – this is the key file of the asylum package and the one that held up the conclusion of most other files in the package

• European Union Agency for Asylum* (2016/0131 COD)
• Eurodac* (2016/0132 COD)
• Standards for the reception of applicants for international protection* (2016/0222 COD)
• Standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection* (2016/0223 COD)
• Common procedure for international protection in the Union* (2016/0224 COD)
• Union Resettlement Framework* (2016/0225 COD)

IV. AN INFLUENTIAL EUROPE

Strengthening multilateralism, fulfilling the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals and promoting European values and interests are amongst the key points for the EU’s external action. The Croatian Presidency considers that an effective enlargement and neighbourhood policy, including in the Western Balkans, is necessary for further economic development in Europe. To this end, an EU-Western Balkans Summit will take place in Zagreb in May 2020. Prior to this, the European Council pledged to discuss enlargement matters again after failing to approve Northern Macedonia and Albania for accession negotiations.

Equally important are the negotiations on the Instrument for pre-accession assistance (IPA III) 2021-2027 (2018/0247 COD) (MFF file).

The Croatian Presidency also considers it a priority to intensify relations with third countries and to strengthen transatlantic relations. Trade agreements with Vietnam and Mercosur are nearing completion, with consent for the first due to be given by the INTA committee in January and plenary in February 2020. Referral to Parliament of the Mercosur agreement is expected by mid-2020.

On questions of security and defence, negotiations on the European Defence Fund 2021-2027(2018/0254 COD) (MFF file) will be important in terms of the crisis-response capacity described in the Presidency priorities.

CONCLUSION

The Croatian Presidency has announced it intends to build cooperation and agreement among Member States in a spirit of consensus and mutual respect. In this light, work on the Conference on the Future of Europe is expected to intensify, at a time where the challenges facing the EU are significant, including the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU. Similarly, it is expected that a new Joint Declaration for 2020, between the three institutions, will see the light of day during the Croatian Presidency, after the new Commission has presented its annual work programme for 2020.

Read this briefing on ‘Priority dossiers under the Croatian EU Council Presidency‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

The Directorate-General for the Presidency (DG Presidency) plays a key role throughout each parliamentary procedure, from its launch until its conclusion through the adoption of an EP resolution or legislative act, in particular in ensuring the smooth running of the plenary sessions. The staff of the DG play a key coordination role across the different services of the Parliament, and support Members in a wide range of activities. The Interinstitutional Relations Unit within DG Presidency, amongst other tasks, prepares a broad range documents concerned with strategic programming, such as on activities of the Commission and the Council.

Written by Marcin Grajewski,

© Artur Szczybylo / Shutterstock.com

The European Parliament elections and formation of a new European Commission with new priorities, together with a general economic slowdown against the backdrop of the US-China trade conflict, to say nothing of Brexit, defined 2019 as a year of tough choices in the context of old and new challenges. Those include efforts to fight climate change, the defence of the rules-based international order, the advance of the digital revolution, the emerging debate over the EU’s strategic sovereignty, and the need to re-define relations with the United Kingdom post-Brexit.

This note offers links to recent selected commentaries, studies and reports from major international think tanks on the state of the EU in 2019 and its outlook in several important areas.

Commission, elections, dilemmas

The future of the European Union: Scenarios for the start of the new legislature
Istituto Affari Internazionali, November 2019

The new EU leadership: The von der Leyen Commission focuses on Europe’s geoeconomic power
Finnish Institute for International Affairs, November 2019

Can Europe learn to play power politics?
Centre for European Reform, November 2019

Moving beyond the ‘crisis’: Recommendations for the European Commission’s communication on migration
European Policy Centre, September 2019

Spitzenkandidaten poker
European Council on Foreign Relations, July 2019

Comparative trends in EU governance
Clingendael, July 2019

How to govern a fragmented EU: What Europeans said at the ballot box
European Council on Foreign Relations, June 2019

The changing global order and its implications for the EU
Finnish Institute of International Affairs, March 2019

No end in sight for the EU’s democracy and rule of law crisis
German Marshall Fund, March 2019

Joining forces: The way towards the European Defence Union
European Political Strategy Centre, February 2019

Climate

Four pillars to make or break the European Green Deal
Bruegel, November 2019

4 priorities for the COP25 climate conference in Madrid
World Resources Institute, November 2019

Financing climate change and sustainable growth
LSE, Grantham Institute on Climate Change, November 2019

Coming soon: A massive laboratory for ‘Green New Deals’
Bruegel, October 2019

Cities, climate change and chronic heat exposure
LSE, Grantham Institute on Climate Change, September 2019

The ambition call: European Union
New Climate Institute, August 2019

Planning for 2050: Shifting the focus towards long-term climate objectives
Ecologic Institute, August 2019

Europe’s clean energy transition: An economic opportunity, an environmental imperative
Friends of Europe, July 2019

A 100 percent renewable energy system in Europe is technically possible and economically rational
Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, May 2019

What is climate resilience and why does it matter?
Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, April 2019

Defence and foreign policy

Towards a European Security Council?
Centre for European Reform, November 2019

The militarization of US foreign policy: Engagement with Europe increasingly about defense
Finnish Institute of International Affairs, November 2019

The changing global order: Which role for the European Union?
Stiftung Genshagen, October 2019

Sub-surface competition in the EuroAtlantic area: The challenge to Western dominance
Institut français des relations internationales, October 2019

Mission possible? The geopolitical Commission and the partnership with Africa
European Centre for Development Policy Management, October 2019

Defend, engage, maximise: A progressive agenda for EU-China relations
Foundation for European Progressive Studies, October 2019

Democratization first: The community method in CFSP as a precondition for a European defence policy
Institut français des relations internationales, September 2019

The multilateral system under stress: Charting Europe’s path forward
Clingendael, July 2019

From plaything to player: How Europe can stand up for itself in the next five years
European Council on Foreign Relations, July 2019

Strategic autonomy for European choices: The key to Europe’s shaping power
European Policy Centre, July 2019

Trade

A trade war ceasefire is just what America’s economy needs
Peterson Institute for International Economics, December 2019

EU trade policy: Global enforcer for the European Green Deal
European Policy Centre, December 2019

The rise of economic nationalism threatens global cooperation
Peterson Institute for International Economics, September 2019

La politique de sanctions de l’Union européenne: Ambition multilatérale contre ambition de puissance
Institut français des relations internationales, October 2019

Shaping a new international trade order: Competition and co-operation among the European Union, the United States, and China
Dahrendorf Institute, October 2019

The real cost of Trump’s trade wars
Centre for European Policy Studies, August 2019

The unravelling of the Shanghai ‘Deal’: US-China trade-cum-currency conflict comes to Europe
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik, August 2019

Transatlantic trade: The emergence of an EU geo-economic strategy?
German Marshall Fund, July 2019

A reflection on the Mercosur agreement
Bruegel, July 2019

US-China trade war: Why the EU should take sides and favour the rules-based order
Istituto Affari Internazionali, July 2019

Economy and euro

Manufacturing employment, international trade, and China
Bruegel, November 2019

The single market remains the decisive power of the EU
Centre for European Policy Studies, October 2019

Beyond industrial policy: Why Europe needs a new growth strategy
Jacques Delors Institute, October 2019

The single market remains the decisive power of the EU
Centre for European Policy Studies, October 2019

Changing guard of the ECB
Institute of International and European Affairs, September 2019

New beginnings: A new approach to euro zone reform
Notre Europe, September 2019

The role of the European Central Bank
Council on Foreign Relations, August 2019

ECB monetary policy in the post-Draghi era
Peterson Institute for International Economy, June 2019

The Economic and Monetary Union: Past, present and future
Centre for Social and Economic Research, March 2019

Mapping the conflict between EU member states over reform of the euro zone
LSE Ideas, January 2019

Digital revolution

An industry action plan for a more competitive, sustainable and strategic European Union
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, November 2019

The case for platform governance
Centre for International governance innovation, November 2019

Beyond industrial policy: Why Europe needs a new growth strategy
Jacques Delors Institute, October 2019

5G: What we talk about when we talk about trust, the EU risk assessment process
European Centre for International Political Economy, October 2019

Analytical report: Preparing the armed forces for disruptive technological changes
European Policy Centre, September 2019

The end of techno-utopianism
German Marshall Fund, September 2019

Artificial Intelligence prediction and counterterrorism
Chatham House, August 2019

How to strengthen Europe’s agenda on digital connectivity
Clingendael, July 2019

Digitalisation and European welfare states
Bruegel, July 2019

Harnessing artificial intelligence
European Council on Foreign Relations, June 2019

Brexit

Path to a softer Brexit? UK PM’s win gives him leeway
Centre for European Reform, December 2019

Getting the UK ready for the next phase of Brexit negotiations
Institute for Government, December 2019

The EU should prepare for all UK post-election scenarios
European Policy Centre, December 2019

Brexit, transition and Northern Ireland
The UK in a Changing Europe, December 2019

Brexit, the democratic question in Europe, and the future of the EU
German Marshall Fund, December 2019

What does the Conservative election victory mean for Brexit?
Open Europe, December 2019

The first hundred days
Policy Exchange, December 2019

Boris Johnson’s next act: Saving the UK
Atlantic Council, December 2019

Brexit endgame: British voters back Boris and Brexit
Brookings Institution, December 2019

How economically damaging will Brexit be?
Centre for European Reform, November 2019

Just a little Brexit?
Centre for European Policy Studies, September 2019

Read this briefing on ‘2019: A year of challenges and choices‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Aidan Christie and Eulalia Claros,

The Council of the European Union – often referred to as the Council of Ministers, or simply the Council – forms one part of the legislature and the budgetary authority of the Union. The Council and European Parliament together adopt much of the EU’s legislation and the Union’s annual budget, on the basis of proposals put forward by the executive, the European Commission. The Council also takes decisions on specific areas of EU action, in particular in Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), where it seeks to coordinate Member States’ positions, and concludes – subject to the consent of the Parliament – international agreements, usually negotiated by the Commission on the basis of a mandate from the Council.

The Council of the EU is distinct from the European Council, which is now a separate institution made up of the Heads of State or Government of the Member States. The European Council is responsible for defining the general political directions and priorities for the Union, but does not have formal legislative functions.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Council of the European Union: Facts and Figures‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Cemal Karakas (1st edition),

© buffaloboy / Shutterstock.com

On 11 July 2019, the Commission presented its new legislative package on the European Institute of Innovation and Technology. The package consists of a recast of the current regulation and the new strategic innovation agenda.

Created in 2008 at the start of the seventh EU research and development framework programme, the EIT is dedicated to increasing competitiveness, sustainable economic growth and job creation by promoting knowledge triangle activities (higher education, research and innovation). It operates through eight ‘knowledge and innovation communities’ that address specific societal challenges, such as digitalisation, urban mobility, climate and raw materials and is part of Horizon 2020.

Versions

• December 2019:  ‘European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT): Regulation and new strategic innovation agenda‘ (1st edition)

a) Proposal for a regulation on the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (recast)

b) Proposal for a decision on the Strategic Innovation Agenda of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) 2021-2027: Boosting the Innovation Talent and Capacity of Europe Committee responsible: Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) COM(2019) 331
COM(2019) 330

11.7.2019 Rapporteurs: a) Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL, Portugal)
b) Maria Da Graça Carvalho (EPP, Portugal) 2019/0151(COD)
2019/0152(COD) Shadow rapporteurs: Andrius Kubilius (EPP, Lithuania), Lina Gálvez Muñoz (S&D, Spain), Susana Solís Pérez (Renew, Spain), Ijabs Ivars, (Renew, Latvia), Klaus Buchner (Greens/EFA, Germany), Robert Roos (ECR, the Netherlands), Andrea Caroppo (ID, Italy), Elena Lizzi (ID, Italy) Ordinary legislative procedure (COD) (Parliament and Council on equal footing – formerly ‘co-decision’) Next steps expected: Publication of draft reports

Written by Ralf Drachenberg and Suzana Anghel,

© European Union 2018 – Source : EP

At the first meeting chaired by the new President of the European Council, Charles Michel, EU Heads of State or Government gathered for meetings of the European Council, the European Council’s Article 50 formation and the Euro Summit. The main issues on the agenda of the European Council itself were climate change, the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), and the proposed Conference on the Future of Europe. Regarding climate change, the European Council announced an agreement on the objective of achieving a climate-neutral EU by 2050, despite the refusal of one Member State to commit to implementing this objective at this stage. On the MFF, the European Council did not reach agreement, but mandated its President to take the negotiations forward. The European Council also considered the idea of a Conference on the Future of Europe, and tasked the incoming Croatian Council Presidency to work towards defining a Council position on the matter, and on that basis, to engage with the European Parliament and the Commission. EU leaders also discussed a wide range of international issues, including relations with Turkey and Russia, notably the renewal of the economic sanctions on the latter, and the mounting terrorist activities in the Sahel. Following the general election in the United Kingdom, the European Council’s Article 50 formation called for the timely ratification and effective implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement, and confirmed its desire to establish as close as possible a future relationship with the UK. It invited the Commission to submit to the Council a draft comprehensive negotiating mandate for this process, to begin immediately after the UK’s withdrawal. The Euro Summit tasked the Eurogroup to continue working on the package of reforms to the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), and on all elements contributing to a stronger banking union. On the Budgetary Instrument for Convergence and Competitiveness (BICC), EU leaders invited the Eurogroup to swiftly provide appropriate solutions for its financing.

1. Implementation: Follow-up on previous European Council commitments

In accordance with Article 235(2) TFEU, the President of the European Parliament, David Sassoli, addressed the European Council at the start of its proceedings. The Prime Minister of Finland, Sanna Marin, President-in-Office of the Council, provided an overview on the progress made in implementing previous European Council conclusions.

Table 1: New European Council commitments and requests with a specific time schedule

Policy area Action Actor Schedule Climate change Come back to the objective of achieving a climate-neutral EU by 2050 European Council June 2020 Climate change Prepare a proposal for the EU’s long-term strategy with a view to its adoption by the Council and its submission to the UNFCCC. European Commission Early 2020 2. European Council meeting Climate change

EU leaders endorsed ‘the objective of achieving a climate-neutral EU by 2050’, although one of the Member States, Poland, could not commit to implementing this objective at this stage. Poland will not, for now, implement the objectives of the European Commission’s European Green Deal, which entail the adoption of a European Climate Law setting climate-neutrality by 2050 as a legally binding objective. EU leaders took note of the Commission communication on the European Green Deal and asks the Council ‘to take work’ forward with a view to enabling a fair, just and ‘socially balanced’ green transition, compliant with the Paris Agreement commitments. They agreed that ‘significant public and private investments’ were needed for a successful green transition and ‘welcomed’ the European Investment Bank’s intention ‘to support €1 trillion of investment’ in climate and environmental action between 2021 and 2030.

Funding clearly remains a sensitive issue. With several Member States concerned by the impact and cost of the green transition, the lack of clarity in the MFF ‘negotiating box’ put forward by the Finnish Presidency, with no indicative amount for the forthcoming Just Transition Mechanism, did not enable further progress. Prior to the meeting, the European Commission had announced its intention to mobilise €100 billion ‘targeted to the most vulnerable regions and sectors’, a proposal ‘welcomed’ by the European Council, and which could also be supported by Parliament. Moreover, EU leaders acknowledged the importance of mainstreaming climate in ‘all relevant EU legislation and policies’. They invited the Commission to propose adjustments to the existing (legislative) situation where necessary, including ‘on state aid and public procurement’.

The new European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, stated that the EU wished to remain a ‘front-runner’ in the fight against climate change and provide the world with a model, whilst the new European Council President, Charles Michel, stressed the geopolitical importance of climate diplomacy. The implementation of the Paris Agreement remains a key objective of the EU’s climate action, and the European Council reminded Member States of their obligation to submit their ‘nationally determined contributions (NDCs) for 2030 in good time before COP26’.

Main message of the EP President: The President of the European Parliament, David Sassoli, stressed that climate change is the first concern of EU citizens and therefore, rightfully so, a priority for the EU institutions’ ‘shared agenda’. He recalled that, recently the Parliament had recognised climate change as an ‘existential threat’ to humanity and welcomed the Commission’s efforts to tackle it through its newly unveiled European Green Deal. President Sassoli urged EU leaders to support more ambitious climate action and to commit to climate-neutrality by 2050.

Multiannual Financial Framework

Based on the presentation of the negotiating box with figures by the outgoing Finnish Presidency, EU leaders briefly discussed the main features of the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). Without specifying a concrete deadline, the European Council called ‘on its President to take the negotiations forward with the aim of reaching a final agreement’.

Following the European Council meeting, the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, laid out the working methods of the ‘next phase’ in agreeing the MFF, which is his responsibility in close cooperation with the Commission. He indicated that, in order to reach an agreement in the coming weeks or months, he will organise bilateral meetings at technical and political level, and then, judge when the time is right to reach the ’landing zone’ of the negotiations. Some of the most sensitive issues that need to be addressed include: the level of ambition, the question of rebates, conditionality, balance between classic priorities and new priorities (e.g. climate change) as well as own resources, which were to be discussed in close cooperation with the Parliament.

Main messages of the EP President: President Sassoli stressed the ‘need to find an agreement as quickly as possible in order to avoid delays in implementing the Union’s policies and programmes.’ As the Parliament’s position on the MFF is well known, President Sassoli expressed surprise at the latest proposal from the Finnish Presidency, which fell short of the expectations of all of the Parliament’s political groups. He pointed out that the Parliament regarded the decision on the multiannual budget as a ‘single package’, involving the introduction of a new own resources ‘basket’ as well as the increase of spending to 1.3 % of gross national income. He underlined that ‘no one should make the mistake of taking Parliament’s consent for granted without having listened to what it has to say.’

Conference on the Future of Europe

As flagged up in the EPRS Outlook, the European Council considered the idea of a Conference on the Future of Europe starting in 2020 and ending in 2022. It recalled ‘that priority should be given to implementing the Strategic Agenda agreed in June [2019], and to delivering concrete results for the benefit of our citizens’. The conference should contribute to the development of policies in the medium and long term so that we can better tackle current and future challenges. It should build on the citizens’ dialogues over the past two years and provide for broad consultation of citizens. It needs to be ‘an inclusive process, with all Member States involved equally.’ The European Council stressed that the process should ‘involve the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission, in full respect of the interinstitutional balance and their respective roles as defined in the Treaties’. It asked the Croatian Council Presidency ‘to work towards defining a Council position on the content, scope, composition and functioning of such a conference and to engage, on this basis, with the Parliament and the Commission.’ The Parliament is expected to adopt a resolution in January, in order to start discussions with the Council and the Commission early next year.

Main messages of the EP President: President Sassoli welcomed the Commission’s step of ‘proposing a conference, but [was] even more pleased that, for the first time in these 10 years, the Council/the Member States are also keen to launch a wide-ranging debate on the future of Europe and reach agreement on a shared vision of how we can improve our policy-making in order to achieve practical results and benefits for our citizens.’ He stressed that ‘Parliament, intend[s] to be a driving force in the organisation of the conference and in its proceedings.’ For President Sassoli, ‘it is vital that the Presidents of the three institutions show joint leadership by taking on a personal role in this process’.

Other Items Working methods of the European Council

Charles Michel explained how he envisaged the future work of the European Council would be carried out, and presented to European Council members an ‘indicative agenda’ for its work over the coming years. He stressed that a concerted agenda, coordinated between the institutions (Council, Commission, Parliament), was a key element in advancing the European project.

International trade

EU leaders reiterated their full support for the global rules-based international order, and expressed their concern at the paralysis of the WTO’s mechanism for settling disputes. They supported the Commission’s efforts to set up interim arrangements with third countries, as has been done so far with Canada and Norway. They called on the co-legislators to examine the Commission’s proposal to amend the EU Enforcement Regulation. This will allow the EU to enforce international trade rules in circumstances where the WTO is no longer able to deliver binding dispute-settlement decisions.

EU-Africa partnership

The European Council called on the Commission and the High Representative to provide it with the necessary basis for a strategic discussion on EU relations with Africa at its meeting in June 2020. This discussion will contribute to the preparations ahead of the African Union-EU summit, scheduled for autumn 2020, which will be a milestone in modernising and scaling up the EU’s partnership with Africa. President Michel confirmed that EU leaders have discussed the security situation in West Africa and the Sahel, including counter-terrorism aspects, and deplored the deadly terrorist attack perpetrated in Niger. The development of a comprehensive partnership with Africa is viewed as a high priority in the political agendas of both the European Council and the Commission.

External relations

The European Council once again condemned Turkey’s illegal drilling activities in the Exclusive Economic Zone of Cyprus, and stressed that Turkey’s actions are in violation of the Law of the Sea. In November 2019, the Council adopted a framework for sanctions targeted against ‘individuals or entities responsible for, or involved in, unauthorised drilling activities of hydrocarbons in the Eastern Mediterranean’. President Michel said that the EU should nevertheless pursue dialogue with Turkey as well as cooperation on certain issues, including migration, but that it needed a ‘strategic vision’, including short and long-term goals, to define its bilateral relationship with Turkey.

The French President, Emmanuel Macron, and Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel, informed their colleagues of the evolution of the situation in Ukraine, of the outcome of the recent Normandy format discussions and of the measures agreed. Considering the lack of progress in the implementation of the Minsk Agreements, EU leaders gave a green-light for the renewal, for a further six months, of the economic sanctions on Russia following its illegal annexation of Crimea.

The European Council expressed solidarity with Albania following the recent earthquake, and welcomed the European Commission’s commitment to provide humanitarian assistance.

3. Euro Summit

The Euro Summit welcomed progress achieved in the Eurogroup on deepening economic and monetary union. EU leaders tasked the Eurogroup to continue working both on the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) reforms and on all elements aimed at further strengthening banking union. They also discussed the Budgetary Instrument for Convergence and Competitiveness (BICC), and invited the Eurogroup to find solutions for its financing, to meet the Euro Summit’s ambitions for convergence and competitiveness. President Michel will discuss the BICC with Member States in the context of MFF consultations, with the aim of finalising it together with the MFF package. He also mentioned that, in parallel to the work of the Eurogroup, the development of a long-term vision for the international role of the euro, matching the Union’s global economic and financial weight, would constitute an important focus in the coming months.

4. European Council (Article50) meeting

The UK general election, held on 12 December 2019, saw the Conservative Party win a clear majority of seats in the House of Commons, paving the way for the UK to leave the EU on 31 January 2020. The European Council reiterated its commitment to an orderly withdrawal based on the Withdrawal Agreement and called for the latter’s timely ratification and effective implementation. EU leaders invited the Commission to prepare a draft comprehensive negotiating mandate for the future EU-UK relationship, with a view to its adoption by the General Affairs Council. The future relationship needs to be based on a balance of rights and obligations and ensure a level playing field.

Read this briefing on ‘Outcome of the meetings of EU leaders, 12-13 December 2019‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Lieve Van Woensel with Sophie Millar,

© Shutterstock

Life expectancy has been projected to continue to rise in industrialised countries, including in Europe, mostly due to increases in people reaching the age of 65 years and older. What if life expectancy in Europe rose further and reached 150 years? This publication approaches the concept of increased life expectancy in terms of increased adult life years, and discusses some hypothetical impacts and anticipatory policy issues.

Social, technological and healthcare system improvements have contributed to considerable longevity gains in Europe over the last 100 years, for example, improved prognosis and treatment of cancer and cardiovascular diseases, lower infant mortality rates, successful vaccination, and fewer deaths from infectious disease. A further 50 % increase in our lifespan, as seen in the last century, is unlikely to occur due to the same continued advance, but instead through progress in slowing the ageing process, which remains one of the least understood aspects of life. Advances have mostly been made at the cellular and genomic level, and a ‘cure for ageing’ (the debate on which is a topic in itself), is a long way off. One component of ageing is that our human cells undergo a finite number of replications or have a limited ‘lifespan’, with programmed cell senescence and death. Manipulation of this process, through genetics or even diet (e.g. caloric restriction) may extend longevity. However, quality of life and the extension of healthy life years are critically important, as opposed to simply extending life per se. Environmental improvements may also more immediately contribute to added life and healthy life years. Globally, 6.5 million deaths a year are attributed to air pollution alone, for example. Reducing car traffic or making cars more environmentally friendly (e.g. electric or hydrogen-fuelled cars) considerably improves air quality and can therefore extend life expectancy.

Potential impacts and developments

What if life expectancy in Europe reached 150 years? Coupled with a declining fertility rate, this would lead to a drastic change in demographics, with a considerable shift in balance towards an elderly population. Our social and physical environments would be significantly altered from a wide range of perspectives, resulting in major shifts in our framing of the education–work–retirement cycle; our household make-up; and our healthcare system, including the role of assistive technologies, for example. In this scenario, we consider an increasing elderly population on the assumption that overall population growth slows, and the impacts and policy considerations discussed below are therefore primarily focused on increasing population age, as opposed to an increasing population in number, which could also be a consequence of increased longevity.

A declining birth rate in Europe, due in part to better family planning, education, and the increasing average age of women when having their first child, is one factor in a changing working-age population. Fewer children per woman can be considered a positive in terms of environmental impact, and can lead to more women working, boosting the working-age population (a factor also determined by mortality and migration). However, an increasingly older population could nevertheless help preserve a working age population of the necessary size in the face of declining birth rates, on the premise that healthy life years, and retirement ages, are equally significantly prolonged. Maintaining a productive working population is essential to defer potential economic losses predicted from a declining birth rate and an older population. Society-wide attitudes to the education-work-retirement pattern would also need to be challenged to more adaptive thinking, including for example: gradual or ‘part-time’ retirement, career breaks, continuous upskilling and re-education, reconstruction of traditional ‘single’ path careers, and perhaps increased emphasis on voluntary and mentoring activities.

Younger generations are essential actors in the emergence of newer technologies, attitudes, and ideologies that can benefit the planet and society, with youth climate activists today providing a good example. Shifts towards continued education and methods to increase innovation, acceptance and open-mindedness may be necessary in a mainly older population. On the other hand, older people possess a valuable wealth of experience, knowledge and wisdom they can pass to subsequent generations in an educative, leadership or mentoring capacity. Social norms and age prejudice would, however, need to be tackled proactively, allowing a flow of dynamic intergenerational interaction.

The alternative scenario, where fertility rates do not decrease in line with extended life expectancy, and the global population continues to rise, would see detrimental consequences. The global burden on resources such as land, materials, energy, food and water, would be unsustainable at the current rate of consumption. Lifestyle ideologies and core values in high-income countries would need to be greatly reprogrammed to move away from materialistic preferences and to reduce consumption, waste and carbon footprints.

Diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular diseases are some of the leading causes of death worldwide, with overweight and obesity being considerable underlying factors, associated with heavy comorbidity and an economic burden. Age itself is a major risk factor for various diseases, particularly cancer and neurodegenerative diseases. If the average life expectancy were extended to 150 years, this might sharply increase the prevalence of age-related disease and disability. Frailty, bone fractures and sleep disturbance are also more common in older adults. In addition to physical health, mental health must also be taken into account in considerations of quality of life.

If the European population were to live to 150 years on average, living conditions will have to be rethought, with residential and working locations in question. Sustainably developed housing and communities would also be required, to encourage diversity, inclusion and social wellbeing for all age groups.

Anticipatory policy-making

Policies to promote healthy ageing are vital to populations that live better for longer. These could include: sustained funding for research into healthy ageing, disease prevention, and therapeutics; adaptation of the built environment and transportation systems; and assistive technologies to promote independence. Healthcare systems, including insurance and delivery of care, may need to be reimagined, with a higher emphasis perhaps placed on community settings and at-home care to relieve over-subscribed hospitals, institutions and medical staff. Increased use of volunteers and robots could help relieve or replace staff.

Continued and more drastic approaches would be needed to promote renewable energy, reduce single-use plastics and pollution, and increase incentives for a zero-waste culture and sustainable living.

The importance of mental health is not only relevant to the elderly population but throughout all stages of life, particularly as the working age range widens, with citizens potentially working for many more years. Future policies may promote a broader appreciation of the benefits of meditation and other mind-body techniques, such as yoga and tai chi, as well as of the role of healthy eating and nutrition. Linked to this is the need for sustainable food.

Another area that deserves more attention is the consideration of euthanasia and access to assisted dying. Such policies have triggered considerable ethical and legal debate and have major implications for policy.

Important policy considerations in both scenarios chiefly centre around extending healthy lifespan, shifting the education–work–retirement pattern and advancing eco-conscious lifestyles. Promotion of mental wellbeing, and research into all biological and societal aspects of healthy ageing are paramount. Finally, access to the means to live better for longer will not be sustainable unless it is equally attainable by persons from all socio-demographic groups, and must not be determined by education level, wealth, race, beliefs, gender or other prejudices. European Union legislation supporting equal access to healthcare, pensions, employment, education, and end-of-life decisions must therefore be reviewed in the light of this expected demographic change.

Read this ‘at a glance’ on ‘What if we lived up to 150 years?‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Listen to Science and Technology podcast ‘What if life expectancy reached 150 years?’ on YouTube.

Written by Rachele Rossi,

© nd3000 / Shutterstock.com

Irrigation is the provision of water to help crops grow when rainfall is not sufficient. While new farming methods and technologies allow some types of crops to be grown without soil, a certain amount of water is needed to grow any kind of crop. In today’s economy, agriculture is one of the sectors that consumes the most water resources. Irrigation is the major cause of water consumption in agriculture. It contributes to increasing crop productivity, but it is also a threat to the preservation of water resources. Therefore, the issue of water scarcity requires careful reflection on the trade-off between higher agricultural productivity and the deterioration of water resources.

A number of elements determine the amount of irrigation water used in agriculture, from the types of crop and cropping method to the characteristics of the soil and the irrigation technique, to name just a few. Therefore, agriculture itself provides opportunities for better water management and water savings, through both traditional farm practices and new farming technologies.

Irrigation has been a feature of European agriculture for thousands of years. Not surprisingly, the majority of irrigated agricultural areas are in the EU’s southern regions, in particular in Spain and Italy. However, there are areas equipped for irrigation elsewhere, especially in the Netherlands. Over 40 % of the EU’s water use is on agriculture, and most of the freshwater abstraction is for agricultural use in countries like Greece, Spain, and Cyprus.

Prolonged periods of drought in many parts of the Union, the effects of climate change and pollution, as well as competition over use add further pressure on EU waters. Ensuring food security in view of climate change requires improvement in water-management capacity, including making users (farmers) more responsible. In recent times, the environmental performance of sectoral policies, such as in the area of agriculture, is increasingly scrutinised by citizens, stakeholders, and policy-makers. Various EU policy initiatives have been launched to address the challenge of sustainable water use in agriculture, including a more integrated approach to water management, water re-use, research and innovation, and more environmental ambition in the agricultural policy. Better policy coordination between EU policies and actions is seen as key to achieving the sustainable safeguarding of EU waters.

Volume of water used for irrigation in the EU in 2010 (% of total cubic metres)

Read the complete briefing on ‘Irrigation in EU agriculture‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Listen to policy podcast ‘Irrigation in EU agriculture’ on YouTube.

Written by Marie-Laure Augère-Granier,

Red Chicken

Poultry meat is the second most produced and consumed meat in the European Union, after pig meat. The sector is known as one of the most intensive farming systems in the EU, with some farms numbering more than 100 000 birds. This intensive system features high stocking densities, indoor rearing and the use of fast-growing breeds obtained by genetic selection. It is estimated that 90 % of meat chickens are raised in such systems in the EU. However, alternative chicken production systems (free-range and organic) are on the increase in many EU countries. As regards egg production, the 400 million laying hens kept throughout the EU produce close to 7.5 million tonnes of eggs a year.

EU chicken and egg producers are supported by the common market organisation, as part of the common agricultural policy (CAP), which regulates trade, marketing standards and exceptional support measures in the event of disease outbreaks. Producers can also receive investment support from the CAP’s second pillar, through various rural development measures co-funded by the Member States. Research carried out in the poultry sector is also supported by rural development funds within the agricultural strand of the European Innovation Partnership.

The poultry and egg sectors are governed by a number of EU legislative acts. These span food safety, public and animal health, environmental protection, trade and marketing standards, and animal welfare throughout the production process, including transport and slaughter. Specific legislation lays down minimum rules and specific requirements for the protection of chickens and laying hens.

Many of the issues currently affecting the sector are linked to its large-scale and intensive production methods. While high stocking densities and fast growth impact negatively on poultry welfare, intensive production can also be detrimental to the environment and human health.

When it comes to international trade, the EU is among the top four chicken meat producers, along with the United States, Brazil and China. Its trade balance is positive in volume and the EU is expected to increase its exports as global demand is set to remain strong, particularly in Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East. The EU is also the world’s second largest producer of eggs, after China, and a net exporter of eggs and egg products.

In a recent non-legislative resolution on animal welfare, antimicrobial use and the environmental impact of industrial broiler farming, Parliament expressed its concern about the inappropriate implementation of the EU directive on the protection of broilers by some Member States and the increase in multi-drug-resistant zoonotic agents in chicken farming. It therefore called on the European Commission to draw up a roadmap to promote better chicken farming practices.

Read the complete in-depth analysis on ‘The EU poultry meat and egg sector: Main features, challenges and prospects‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Listen to policy podcast ‘What do you know about chickens and eggs?’ on YouTube.

Written by Enrique Gomez Ramirez,

The Amazon rainforest, which is the largest ecosystem of its kind on Earth and is shared by eight South American countries as well as an EU outermost region, was ravaged by fires coinciding with last summer’s dry season. However, most of these fires are set intentionally and are linked to increased human activities in the area, such as the expansion of agriculture and cattle farming, illegal logging, mining and fuel extraction.

Although a recurrent phenomenon that has been going on for decades, some governments’ recent policies appear to have contributed to the increase in the surface area burnt in 2019, in particular in Brazil and Bolivia. Worldwide media coverage of the fires, and international and domestic protests against these policies have nevertheless finally led to some initiatives to seriously tackle the fires, both at national and international level – such as the Leticia Pact for Amazonia.

Finding a viable long-term solution to end deforestation and achieve sustainable development in the region, requires that the underlying causes are addressed and further action is taken at both national and international levels. The EU is making, and can increase, its contribution by cooperating with the affected countries and by leveraging the future EU-Mercosur Association Agreement to help systematic law enforcement action against deforestation. In addition, as the environmental commitments made at the 2015 Conference of Parties (COP21) in Paris will have to be renewed in 2020, COP25 in December 2019 could help reach new commitments on forests.

Amazonian region

Read the complete briefing on ‘Amazon wildfire crisis: Need for an international response‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Listen to policy podcast ‘Threat to the Amazon rainforest needs an urgent response’ on YouTube.

Written by Marta Latek and Eric Pichon,

© United Nations

In 2015, the United Nations adopted the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), to be attained by 2030, as a follow-up to the Millennium Development Goals (2000-2015) and the Rio+20 Summit (2012). Unlike their predecessors, the SDGs commit both developed and developing countries, and embrace the economic, environmental and social aspects of development. The SDGs and the broader 2030 Agenda for sustainable development of which they form the core, are based on the findings that human activities have triggered dramatic changes in the conditions on Earth (climate change and biodiversity loss), which in turn have contributed to the deterioration of human well‑being. To reverse the trend, there is an urgent need to simultaneously address the multiple causes and consequences of environmental depletion and social inequalities, by developing synergies and managing trade-offs between the SDGs.

Challenges in pursuing the SDGs include the fact that countries do not necessarily have an equal start and, even more importantly, that regardless of their stage of development, they can no longer afford to apply the current development model, where production and consumption happen at the expense of natural resources. According to many observers, such a model creates unsolvable tensions between SDGs, notably between the safeguarding of natural resources and the aspirations for improved well-being. The structural transformation that would bring about the desired change requires a joint effort by the international community, but equally so by natural and public or private legal persons, to urgently speed up the process. The European Union has been a leader in drafting and implementing the SDGs; however, the European Parliament considers the EU could go further in devising a common SDG strategy.

Read this briefing on ‘Understanding the Sustainable Development Goals‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Marcin Grajewski,

© Daniel Berkmann / Fotolia

The European Union has been established as an area of security, stability and prosperity, in which economic competitiveness plays a key role. Although in terms of productivity some EU countries are doing well, compared to, for example, the United States, the EU is lagging behind some other world regions in reaping the fruits of the digital revolution. Analysts also point to the need to continue euro-area governance reforms, completing the Banking Union and pushing ahead with the creation of the Capital Markets Union. A debate continues about whether the EU should support the creation of EU industrial champions, which advocates claim could be well placed to compete internationally in some sectors.

This note brings together commentaries, analyses and studies by international think tanks and research institutes on EU competitiveness and related issues. Earlier papers on reforming the euro area are available in a previous issue from the series, published in December 2019.

Manufacturing employment, international trade, and China
Bruegel, November 2019

A primer on developing European public goods: A report to ministers Bruno Le Maire and Olaf Scholz
Bruegel, November 2019

The single market remains the decisive power of the EU
Centre for European Policy Studies, October 2019

A geographically fair EU industrial strategy
European Policy Centre, October 2019

Beyond industrial policy: Why Europe needs a new growth strategy
Jacques Delors Institute, October 2019

Comment combattre la prochaine récession?
Terra Nova, October 2019

The 2019 future of work index: How the world of work is changing – and how policy needs to change with it
Lisbon Council, October 2019

Labour market and social policy
Centre for European Policy Studies, October 2019

Structural change, institutions and the dynamics of labor productivity in Europe
German Marshall Fund, October 2019

Economic polarisation in Europe: Causes and options for action
Wiener Institut für Internationale Wirtschaftsvergleiche, September 2019

Holding together what belongs together: A strategy to counteract economic polarisation in Europe
Wiener Institut für Internationale Wirtschaftsvergleiche, September 2019

Tax law and the transfer of start-up losses: A European overview and categorization
ZEW, September 2019

Public investment a key prerequisite for private sector activity
Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, August 2019

Machine politics: Europe and the AI revolution
European Council on Foreign Relations, July 2019

Making the Single Market work: Launching a 2022 masterplan for Europe
European Policy Centre, July 2019

Facing the crisis: Rethinking economics for the age of environmental breakdown
Institute for Public Policy Research, July 2019

Wirtschaftliche Polarisierung in Europa: Ursachen und Handlungsoptionen
Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, July 2019

The European Union energy transition: Key priorities for the next five years
Bruegel, July 2019

Redefining Europe’s economic sovereignty
Bruegel, June 2019

Tech giants in banking: The implications of a new market power
Istituto Affari Internazionali, June 2019

Cross border services in the internal market: An important contribution to economic and social cohesion
Institut der Deutschen Wirtschaft Köln, June 2019

Assessing Europe’s space dependency and its implications
Institut français des relations internationales, June 2019

European economic democracy: A new path out of the crisis
Foundation for European Progressive Studies, June 2019

Rebranding capital markets union: A market finance action plan
Centre for European Policy Studies, June 2019

The opportunities of the modernisation fund for the energy transition in Central and Eastern Europe
Centre for European Policy Studies, June 2019

The future of work? Work of the future! On how artificial intelligence, robotics and automation are transforming jobs and the economy in Europe
European Political Strategy Centre, May 2019

EU energy system transformation: The agenda for the next Commission
E3G, May 2019

How to improve European Union cohesion policy for the next decade
Bruegel, May 2019

Europe’s sustainability puzzle: Broadening the debate
European Political Strategy Centre, May 2019

Promoting sustainable and inclusive growth and convergence in the European Union
Bruegel, April 2019

Infrastructure for growth: How to finance, develop, and protect it
Istituto per gli Studi di Politica Internazionale, April 2019

Do data policy restrictions impact the productivity performance of firms and industries?
Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute, April 2019

The impact of labour market institutions and capital accumulation on unemployment: Evidence from the OECD, 1985-2013
Wiener Institut für Internationale Wirtschaftsvergleiche, April 2019

Posted workers regulations as a cohesion test in the enlarged EU
Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Institute of Public Affairs, April 2019

EU mobile workers: A challenge to public finance?
Centre for European Policy Studies, April 2019

Strategic dimensions of the energy transition: Challenges and responses for France, Germany and the European Union
Institut français des relations internationales, April 2019

Mobilités propres: La voie européenne
Notre Europe, April 2019

Standing up for competition: Market concentration, regulation, and Europe’s quest for a new industrial policy
European Centre for International Political Economy, March 2019

EU industrial policy after Siemens-Alstom: Finding a new balance between openness and protection
European Political Strategy Centre, March 2019

Effect of public procurement regulation on competition and cost-effectiveness
Robert Schuman Centre, European University Institute, March 2019

Escaping the startup trap: Can policymakers help small companies grow to major employers?
Progressive Policy Institute, February 2019

Artificial Intelligence: Ethics, governance and policy challenges
Centre for European Policy Studies, February 2019

How are you doing, Europe? Mapping social imbalances in the EU
Jacques Delors Institute, Bertelsmann Stiftung, February 2019

European innovation partnerships: How successful have they been in promoting innovation in the EU?
Wiener Institut für Internationale Wirtschaftsvergleiche, January 2019

Science, technology and innovation diplomacy: A way forward for Europe
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Institute for European Studies, January 2019

Innovate Europe: Competing for global innovation leadership
World Economic Forum, January 2019

Vertical restraints and e-commerce
Bruegel, January 2019

The challenge of moving to a common consolidated corporate tax base in the EU
Institut der Deutschen Wirtschaft Köln, January 2019

Europe needs reforms for inclusive growth. Do Europeans agree?
LUISS School of European Political Economy, January 2019

Europe’s growth starlets: Wages and productivity in 4 export-oriented economies
Jacques Delors Institute, December 2018

Eco-innovation: Drivers, barriers and effects – A European perspective
Wiener Institut für Internationale Wirtschaftsvergleiche, December 2018

Which structural reforms does E(M)U need to function properly?
Wiener Institut für Internationale Wirtschaftsvergleiche, December 2018

Réforme de l’Union économique et monétaire: Quelle dimension sociale?
Notre Europe, February 2019

Read this briefing on ‘Enhancing EU competitiveness‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Clare Ferguson,

Parliament’s calendar has been a little unusual this year – with European elections and the delayed installation of the new European Commission. This month saw Members sitting in an extraordinary session on a subject of urgent importance: how the European Union (EU) will tackle the climate emergency, declared by Parliament on 29 November 2019. That session, on 11 December, saw the new Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, and Vice-President Frans Timmermans present their freshly adopted plans for a new European Green Deal, proposing to invest record amounts of public funds in advanced research and innovation, complemented by a strategy for green financing and a Sustainable Europe Investment Plan, all aimed at making Europe the first climate-neutral continent.

Moving on to the agenda for the main December plenary session … Parliament will award its 2019 Sakharov Prize to laureate Ilham Tohti on Wednesday lunchtime. The European Parliament is committed to defending human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the award highlights those who stand up for the right to freedom of expression, safeguard minority rights or champion international law, and democracy. Currently imprisoned by the Chinese government, Ilham Tohti is a moderate advocate of Uyghur minority rights who eschews radical separatist movements in favour of dialogue with the Han majority. Parliament’s President has urged the Chinese government to release Tohti, and called for China to respect minority population rights, particularly in the light of the ‘China-cables’ exposé of Chinese treatment of the Uyghur. The new Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the EU, former EP President Josep Borrell, will make a statement on the Uyghur situation on Wednesday afternoon. During this session, Parliament will also commemorate the 10th anniversary of the Lisbon Treaty and that of the Charter of Fundamental Rights becoming legally binding, on Wednesday morning, as well as hearing about the conclusions of the latest meeting of the European Council – an institution that has evolved considerably since the Lisbon Treaty entered into force.

Millions of European farmers stand to lose out when their EU income support ends in 2020, due to the lack of an agreement on the 2021-2027 EU budget and on the important reform of the common agricultural policy. Time is therefore pressing to ensure the stability of EU farmer income support post-2020. While there is broad agreement that interim measures are necessary, the EU still needs to put transitional provisions in place to bridge the gap. Parliament’s Budgets and Agriculture Committees agree that those who benefit from EU funding should not suffer harm because of the procedural delays, and have not proposed any amendments to the Commission’s proposal. Parliament will therefore vote on Wednesday lunchtime on its first-reading position on that proposal to agree a package of technical amendments to the regulations on EU financial discipline and flexibility between pillars and voluntary coupled support.

Parliament’s Committee on Petitions (PETI) recently held hearings of the five candidates for the position. The Ombudsman’s office represents citizens and others who wish to lodge complaints regarding the actions of EU administrative bodies, thereby ensuring that EU institutions respect citizens’ rights and the principles of good administration. Members will take part in the election of the European Ombudsman on Tuesday lunchtime, when the successful candidate needs to secure a majority of votes cast in a secret ballot (with subsequent rounds of voting planned for Wednesday if there is no clear winner).

If you’ve been doing some festive shopping lately, the chances are you have purchased gifts online, possibly in another country. E-commerce is booming, and while it offers opportunities to increase cross-border sales, the EU is keen to avoid that it also allows increased tax fraud. Tackling VAT fraud related to e-commerce therefore requires robust systems for the transmission and exchange of VAT-relevant payment data (such as who is supplying the goods). The European Parliament is consulted on two European Commission proposals (on maintaining and exchanging electronic payment records), and a joint debate on Monday afternoon will consider the corresponding Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee (ECON) reports.

An important element of maintaining biodiversity is ensuring that fisheries worldwide are sustainable. Parliament’s Committees on Fisheries (PECH) and Budgets (BUDG) are in favour of concluding a new EU fisheries agreement with The Gambia aimed at doing just this, including a proposed annual EU contribution of €550 000. Half of this amount covers access rights for EU fishing vessels to Gambian waters and half should assist The Gambia to develop its fisheries sector in a sustainable manner, including preventing illegal fishing. The file is scheduled for vote on Wednesday lunchtime.

Written by Ralf Drachenberg and Fernando Hortal Foronda

© European Union – EP, 2019

The European Council Oversight (ECOS) team from the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) recently organised an event on ‘EU institutional dynamics: Ten years after the Lisbon Treaty’ in the House of European history, in cooperation with the association of former members of the European Parliament (FMA) and Parliament’s Communications Directorate-General. Opening the event on 10 December 2019, Parliament Vice-President Mairead McGuinness (EPP, Ireland) highlighted the importance of the Lisbon Treaty for national parliaments and inter-religious dialogue and stressed the need to overcome the ‘silo mentality’ that persists between European policy areas, as well as the need to further improve interinstitutional cooperation.

The event, moderated by Jacki Davis, Senior Adviser at the European Policy Centre, took the form of two roundtable debates. In the first session – opened by EP Vice-President Othmar Karas – former EP President Enrique Barón Crespo, Secretary General of the European University Institute Vincenzo Grassi, and Danuta Hübner (EPP, Poland), discussed the evolution of the European Parliament’s power and the impact of the Lisbon Treaty on Parliament’s role as an institution. Enrique Barón Crespo recalled the significance of the Lisbon Treaty regarding the now compulsory character of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, and Danuta Hübner underlined that many areas of the Lisbon Treaty have not yet been used to their full potential, such as the ‘passerelle’ clauses.

The second round table discussed the institutional dynamics and impact to date of the European Council. Following opening remarks from former EP President Hans-Gert Pöttering, the European Council’s first President Herman van Rompuy (2009-2014) gave a keynote speech on his experience as EUCO President in the midst of the eurozone crisis. Secretary-General of the Council, Jeppe Tranholm-Mikkelsen then addressed recent and future European Council developments and notably mentioned the Bratislava Declaration, the Leaders’ Agenda and the Strategic Agenda 2019-2024. Together with the other panellists, Former Member Ana Gomes, and Desmond Dinan, Professor of Public Policy at George Mason University, the panel discussed whether the activities of the European Council had effectively had an impact on policy outcomes. All participants agreed on the importance of the planned conference on the future of Europe, while advocating that the focus should lie on concrete policy achievements, rather than on treaty revision, as the current institutional framework provides the necessary instruments to deliver on Europeans’ demands. Closing the discussion, former Member Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl recalled the spirit of the Lisbon Treaty, namely to strengthen the community method, stressing that the last 10 years have witnessed a power shift towards the European Council.

To accompany the event, EPRS European Council Oversight Unit (ECOS) Policy Analysts Suzana Elena Anghel and Ralf Drachenberg published a study on ‘The European Council under the Lisbon Treaty: How has the institution evolved since 2009?‘.

To watch the discussion: https://www.facebook.com/EuroparlFMA/

Written by Angelos Delivorias and Christian Scheinert,

© Giulio Benzina / Shutterstock

In response to the financial and economic crisis, the European Union introduced a series of changes to its institutional architecture for economic and social governance, with the aim of achieving more integrated fiscal and economic coordination. At the heart of this new architecture is the ‘European Semester’, a process of socio-economic policy coordination that lasts from November until July each year, in which Member States discuss their economic reform and budget plans before adopting them, while the European institutions monitor progress and address recommendations at specific times throughout the year.

At the centre of the European Semester are three separate processes that work in parallel: fiscal surveillance based mainly on the stability and growth pact (SGP); surveillance of macroeconomic policies, under the macroeconomic imbalance procedure (MIP); and coordination of EU countries’ economic and employment policies, based on the integrated guidelines (in other words, the broad economic policy guidelines (BEPGs), together with the employment guidelines).

The Semester officially starts every November with the publication of the Annual Growth Survey and the Alert Mechanism Report (along with other documents) by the European Commission. Another ‘milestone’ is in February, when the country reports and (when required) in-depth reviews are published for Member States. In April, the Member States publish their stability or convergence programmes. In May comes another milestone, with the publication of the country-specific recommendations.

After July, the ‘European’ Semester, is followed by a ‘National’ Semester, where Member States incorporate what has been discussed and recommended at European level into their national draft budgets, which are then debated and adopted during the autumn.

During its limited existence, the Semester has been debated and examined by academics and institutions alike. The main points of discussion relate to parliamentary involvement in the Semester (notably linked to broader issues of legitimacy and accountability of the wider framework of economic governance), the country-specific recommendations and their declining level of implementation, as well as the role that the regions could play in the context of the Semester.

This overview touches on the latest factors that could have an impact on the process: the priorities that the new European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, has addressed to Commissioners Paolo Gentiloni and Valdis Dombrovskis in her mission letters. While those priorities were articulated very succinctly, they could provide a useful idea of how the Semester might evolve over the new Commission’s term.

Read this ‘in-depth analysis’ on ‘Introduction to the European Semester: Coordinating and monitoring economic and fiscal policies in the EU‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Tambiama Madiega with Anna Meriel Nichols,

Background

© ibreakstock / Fotolia

The ‘right to be forgotten’ (or ‘dereferencing‘) refers to the fact that residents in the European Union (EU) can request that information about them, which appears when searching for their name on the internet, be delisted and therefore made inaccessible.

In the EU, the ‘right to be forgotten’ was first articulated in the 2014 Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos case brought before the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). Article 17 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), applicable since 25 May 2018, enshrines a ‘right to erasure’ in EU law, which encompasses the ‘right to be forgotten’. On this basis, people living in the EU now routinely ask search engines like Google to take down links to their personal information.

Internet users in the EU have increasingly used the right to dereferencing. Since June 2014, Google has processed more than 850 000 dereferencing requests and Google has ultimately delisted more than 1.3 million website addresses. (See Google transparency report).

However, the implementation of the ‘right to be forgotten’ has proven difficult and the territorial scope of this right has been challenged before the CJEU.

In Case 507/17 Google v CNIL, decided in September 2019, the CJEU provided some guidance on the implementation of the ‘right to be forgotten’. The Court held that, as matter of principle, search engine operators are not required to carry out a worldwide dereferencing order (i.e. on all versions of its search engine), but should implement an EU-wide dereferencing order (i.e. on all EU versions of its search engine), to ensure a consistent and high level of data protection throughout the EU. The Court also recalls that a balance must be struck between data protection and privacy rights and the right to freedom of information when making a dereferencing order, in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Search engine operators must also implement geo-blocking measures to prevent, or at least seriously discourage, internet users in Member States from gaining access to dereferenced links within the EU.

The Google v CNIL decision has provoked significant reaction from stakeholders, civil society advocacy groups and academics. As the CJEU did not completely rule out worldwide dereferencing orders, questions as to the extraterritorial application of the ‘right to be forgotten’ and the potential conflict of rules and jurisdictions have been raised, while an increasing number of countries outside the EU are embedding such a right in their national legislation. In addition, the CJEU decision has sparked debates about the use of geoblocking techniques, the need for international standards, and how to strike a balance between privacy and protection of personal data and the right to freedom of information.

This Keysource gathers key documents, analyses and stakeholders’ views to throw a light on the issues at stake. It is the bibliographic companion to the EPRS At a glance publication: European Court of Justice limits the territorial scope of the ‘right to be forgotten’ (October 2019), which outlines the legal framework and CJEU decisions on the right to be forgotten in detail.

1. General sources of information

• Court of Justice of the European Union, Press release: The operator of a search engine is not required to carry out a de-referencing on all versions of its search engine, 24 September 2019.
• European Commission, Eurobarometer Special Report: The General Data Protection Regulation, Eurobarometer, March 2019.

This survey intends to compile citizen awareness of the GDPR and more general opinions and behaviours relating to data sharing and data protection.

• European Commission, Factsheet on the Right to be Forgotten ruling, (undated).

This factsheet, which was published following the Google Spain ruling, provides some guidelines on the implementation of the right to be forgotten.

• Article 29 Working Party, guidelines on the implementation of the Court of Justice decision in the Google Spain judgment, 2014.

The Article 29 Working Party (now the European Data Protection Board), an EU advisory body on data protection, issued guidelines on the implementation of the Google Spain judgment.

2. Analysis Territorial scope and extraterritorial application of EU law

• Case C-507/17 Google v CNIL: The Territorial Scope of the Right to be Forgotten Under EU Law, European Law Blog, 29 October 2019.

This article examines the implications of the judgment for EU residents and comments on the significance of the decision as a means for testing how far the EU can expand its data protection standards beyond its territory. It also discusses how setting a ‘floor, not a ceiling’ for dereferencing obligations preserves Member State abilities to impose global dereferencing orders and the EU’s ability to position itself as the standard-bearer for data protection regulations.

• Facebook’s liability for defamatory posts: the CJEU interprets the E-Commerce Directive, Lorna Woods, EU Law Analysis, 9 October 2019.

This article compares the ‘diverging’ approaches to territorial scope in the CNIL case and Case C-18/18 Glawischnig-Piesczek v Facebook Ireland. In particular, it asks ‘to what extent is there a coherent approach to issues arising from the internet across the various legal measures that intersect with it?’

• Court of Justice in Google v CNIL sees no objection in principle to EU ‘Right to be forgotten’ leading to worldwide delisting orders, Geert Van Calster, GAVC Law, October 2019.

In this post, the author compares the outcome of the final decision with the non-binding Opinion of Advocate General Szpunar, and outlines how he sees the CJEU’s approach aligning with that of the United States Supreme Court on similar cases.

• The Global Implications of the CJEU’s Ruling in Google’s ‘Right to be Forgotten’ Case, Costanza Manavello and Laura Di Tecco, IPWatchdog 16 October 2019.

This article provides a commentary on the ‘general implications’ of the case, in particular the jurisdiction of delisting orders, and compares to the CJEU approach to the legal framework for the territorial scope of a right to be forgotten to the approach in the USA.

• Three Things to Remember from Europe’s ‘Right to be Forgotten’ Decisions, Andrew Keane Woods, LawFare Blog, 1 October 2019.

This article outlines why the outcome of the CNIL case was a ‘win’ for Google, simultaneously leaving ‘the door wide open … for future extraterritorial regulations of the internet’.

• The Judgment That Will be Forgotten, Oskar Gstrein, Verfassungsblog, 25 September 2019.

This piece argues that the CNIL judgment de facto approves geoblocking and gives rise to potential fragmentation of data protection enforcement.

• The Right Tools: Europe’s Intermediary Liability Laws and the EU 2016 General Data Protection Regulation, Daphne Keller, Berkeley Tech. L.J. 287 (2018), 4 September 2018.

This article examines ‘whether and how the right to be forgotten may apply to user-generated content hosts like Twitter or Facebook’.

• Google v CNIL: Defining the Territorial Scope of European Data Protection Law, Michele Finck, Oxford Business Law Blog, November 2018.

While this article was published before the CNIL judgment was issued, it explains the arguments on both sides regarding territoriality and the enforcement of the right to be forgotten in the case, and provides a background summary of the key points from the Google Spain decision.

• Right to Erasure (right to be forgotten) under the GDPR, EU Law Analysis, 25 May 2018.

This link provides the reader with an overview of the relevant GDPR provisions and CJEU case law pertaining to a right to be forgotten in the EU.

Balancing rights

• Do Europeans have a right to be globally delisted? Allison Davenport, Wikimedia Foundation, 24 September 2019.

This article outlines the positive and negative effects of the decision for the right to freedom of information, including the protection of access to knowledge and the matter of delisting by geography rather than language.

• The right to be forgotten: context and the problem of time, Paul Lambert, Communications Law 2019, 24(2), 74-79.

This book extract examines how the right to be forgotten’s ability to protect the privacy of individuals may change in significance over time. It also sets out how unpredictable societal change will compel organisations to realise that ‘knowing there is a RtBF provision in the GDPR is enough on its own’.

3. Stakeholder views

• Electronic Frontier Foundation, European Court’s Decision in Right To Be Forgotten Case is a Win for Free Speech, 26 September 2019.

The EFF is an advocacy group focusing on the protection of access to developing technology, and a third party to the hearings in the CNIL case. Their comments following the judgment provide an insight into the US orientation towards the protection of free speech online. A copy of the EFF’s intervention to the case can be accessed here.

• Article 19, Google win in right to be forgotten case is victory for global freedom of expression, 24 September 2019.

Article 19 is an advocacy group for freedom of expression rights, which intervened in the CJEU hearings on behalf of a coalition of free speech organisations. The group has applauded the outcome of the case, stating that ‘Courts or data regulators in the United Kingdom, France or Germany should not be able to determine the search results that internet users in America, India or Argentina get to see’.

• Computer and Communications Industry Association, EU Top Court: Europe’s ‘Right to be Forgotten’ Does Not Apply Globally, 24 September 2019.

The CCIA advocates internationally for ‘enhancing society’s access to information and communications.’ In this press release it stresses its satisfaction with the balance the court struck between freedom of information and the rights of citizens outside the EU.

• Multistakeholder Expert Group to the Commission, Report from Multistakeholder Expert Group to support the application of Regulation 2016/679, Multistakeholder Expert Group to support the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, 13 June 2019.

The Multistakeholder Expert Group was ‘established to assist the Commission in identifying the potential challenges in the application of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) from the perspective of different stakeholders, and to advise the Commission on how to address them.’ The group shares its opinions of Article 17 GDPR on pp.7-9.

• European Digital Rights, Advocate General issues two Opinions on ‘right to be forgotten’, 10 January 2019.

EDRi is an international advocacy group for digital rights. In this piece, they outline their response to the Advocate General’s opinion in the Google v CNIL case, and include links to their previous opinions on the right to be forgotten.

• Google, Defending access to lawful information in Europe’s highest court, Kent Walker, 15 November 2017.

Walker, general counsel for Google, published this post when the CJEU decision on the Google CNIL fine was pending, and provides some insight into Google’s perspective on dereferencing order litigation.

4. International outlook Doctrinal sources

The Judgment That Will be Forgotten, Oskar Gstrein, Verfassungsblog, 25 September 2019.

Part of this article argues that ‘the right to be forgotten is not a European concept‘, and that the CNIL judgment failed to consider how other countries have approached these cases. It compares the extent of developments in right to be forgotten jurisprudence in the EU to several other countries, and notes that ‘more than 25 percent of the nations on earth have already seen considerable legal developments in the area of a right to be forgotten, including regulation and court judgments.’

Article 8, the Right to be Forgotten and the Media, Hugh Tomlinson QC and Aidan Wills, International Forum for Responsible Media Blog, July 2018.

This review of the M.L. and W.W. v Germany case provides an overview of the criteria used to decide on delisting questions at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). It comments on the parallels between the ECtHR and the approach in the Google Spain case, and outlines why a dereferencing request may be more ‘powerful’ against search engine operators or internet platforms than primary publishers such as news publications.

The ‘Right to be Forgotten’ Online within G20 Statutory Data Protection Frameworks, David Erdos and Krzysztof Gartska, University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No 31/2019, September 2019.

This paper argues that the ‘basic underpinnings [of a right to be forgotten] are present in the great majority of G20 statutory frameworks. Whilst China, India, Saudi Arabia and the United States remain exceptional cases, fifteen out of nineteen (almost 80 %) of G20 countries now have fully-fledged statutory data protection laws. By default, almost all of these laws empower individuals to challenge the continued dissemination of personal data, not only when such data may be inaccurate but also on wider legitimacy grounds.’

National legislation

Argentina

The Right to Be Forgotten, Michael Kelly and David Satola, Illinois Law Review, January 2017.

The most prominent right to be forgotten case in Argentina arose in 2009, in the Virginia da Cunha case. This article gives an overview of the case and its ramifications from pp.28-31.

Australia

Data and Digital Rights: Recent Australian Developments, Goggin et al, Internet Policy Review, March 2019.

This paper explores proposals relating to data privacy rights from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC)’s Digital Platforms, and from a government-mandated creation of a Consumer Data Right.

Brazil

Non-Compliance with Judicial Requests for Content Removal, Bloqueios, January 2007.

Questions on the enforceability of dereferencing orders arose in Brazil in 2007, when one of the country’s largest fixed-line telephone operators responded to a judicial order to remove a video of model Daniela Cicarelli from Youtube, which resulted in Youtube being blocked in large parts of the country. The link above provides an overview of and analysis of the materials in English relating to the case.

Canada

Draft OPC Position on Online Reputation, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, 26 January 2018.

The Privacy Commissioner lists ‘Reputation and Privacy’ as one of its strategic priorities for 2015-2020. Its draft position includes sections dedicated to De-Indexing, Source Amendment / Takedown and Legislative Solutions.

Japan

Right to be Forgotten: A New Privacy Right in the Era of Internet, Yuriko Haga, September 2017.

This chapter outlines the history and current situation regarding a potential right to be forgotten in Japan (section 5), including the appearance of cases against search engines since 2008, and the influence of the Google Spain judgment on more recent cases.

Other countries

The Right to be Forgotten – the EU and Asia Pacific Experience (Australia, Indonesia, Japan and Singapore), Zeller et al, European Human Rights Law Review 2019 volume 1, p.23, UNSW Law Research Paper No 19-2, 23 January 2019.

The following articles and reports include further examples of countries where reference to a right to be forgotten has appeared in court judgments, statutes, or draft legislation:

• Colombia
• Chile
• Israel
• Peru, Mexico, Kenya, Russia
• Indonesia
• Singapore.