Dick Roche, ELDR Vice President

ELDR unites nearly 60 political parties from across Europe.

The ELDR is the European political party that promotes the liberal values of freedom and individual responsibility, democracy and the rule of law, respect for human rights and tolerance, a market economy and a democratic, strong and efficient European Union.

These principles led me to bring my party (Fianna Fail) into the liberal group.

The ELDR is growing in significance. It the third largest at the European level, with 8 European Commissioners and 84 MEPs in the European Parliament sitting in the ALDE Group. Parties within ELDR lead governments in four EU member states and participating in the coalition governments in many more countries.

Freedom and Solidarity is a member of the ELDR since October of 2010. Your sister Parties within the ELDR ‘family’ are proud that your successful party is a member of the European Liberal Democrats.

As many of you probably know I am a passionate supporter of European project. I subscribe, as does my country and my party to the objectives of the European Union.
It is important if our Union is to survive and to prosper that it remains true to the founding principles on which it has been built.

One of the key principles on which the Union is built is the principal Solidarity, another is the principal of subsidiarity and a third is the principle of conferral - the European Union only has those powers that the member states have given it.

The 27 member states that make up the European Union have, in their wisdom, over the years, enacted a series of treaties which enshrined these and other principles.
It is critically important that the leadership of the member states adhere to the spirit as well as the letter of those principles.

The so-called Community method has served the people of Europe well and must be preserved.

I am gravely concerned that in recent times we have seen departures from each of these principles, and departures which could in the long-term, be dangerous for the Union itself.

For many years I had been making the point of European Union and its political leaders need to put a greater effort into the manner in which they communicate with the citizens of the Union regarding policies which have been enacted and policies return intended.

Over the years I have seen, at first hand in a series of Irish referenda, the dangers which arise when the Union does not communicate with its citizens or when leaders in individual member states for domestic reasons miss-communicate the Union’s position on sensitive matters.

An unwelcome example of this is to be found in the recent efforts by the French and German leadership to force the issue of taxation back onto the agenda of the Union.

This particular matter has been discussed repeatedly over the last 20 or 25 years. It is, in my view, decidedly dangerous for political leaders in any country to unilaterally seek to put such a thorny issue on to the agenda for what are, predominantly, domestic political considerations.

That not only departs from the Community method but looks like the big member states trying to set the agenda for us all.

French policy makers have been fixated on the issue of Ireland’s 12.5% Corporation Profit Tax (CPT) for a long time. There are also signs of irritation in Berlin.
As I mentioned in a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, this is a dangerous obsession that will add to Euro scepticism, that ultimately serves no purpose and that could lead to another EU treaty setback.

A bull headed effort to force another member State to reverse a position defended for decades at a time of extreme economic pressure is a strange way of demonstrating solidarity.

It seems to me disingenuous for French or other political leadership to seek to use, as is happening at the moment, the current difficulties which my country faces to force the issue of national tax sovereignty back on the agenda. The approach which we have see in recent weeks dangerously ignores the fact that taxation is a sovereign matter which the member states have not yet - nor in my belief ever should - surrender to Brussels.

It is of course a fact that we don’t all agree on everything in Europe. Indeed we should be mature enough to realise that we will never agree on everything. But we should, for commonsense reasons, focus on those issues that we can resolve rather than on those issues that we will never resolve.

Europe has plenty of problems to solve without resurrecting issues on which there is no common agreement. We live in very challenging times. Economic recovery has been slower than it should be. There are issues in all sorts of areas that require our attention. Resurrecting the ghost of debates that have been fought and lost is not a particularly constructive way forward.

A much more constructive approach is that which we find within the ELDR group. We seek to support each other, respecting that there will always be differences. The group seeks to build the European Union by focusing on those things on which we can find common agreement rather than on focusing on those issues on which common agreement have been missing for years.

Speech by Dick Roche at the Third Congress of Freedom and Solidarity (SaS), Bratislava, Slovakia, 26 March 2011

Graham Watson MEP, ELDR Vice President

Three lessons can be learned from the popular democratic uprisings which should inform our policy from now on.

The first is that it is no good preaching the values of democracy if we arm its enemies. Having armed Gadhafi and other autocrats there is a logical case to be made for arming the protesters, particularly if we fail to live up to the ‘duty to protect’ laid down in the UN Charter: but this policy should be pursued only in extremis. Most important, however, is to stop arms sales to autocratic regimes wherever they are: democracy’s appeal is not limited to north Africa, nor the temptation to beleaguered autocrats to use arms against their own people.

Second, let us act now to devise a common EU foreign policy which denies the leaders of autocratic governments and their immediate families access to our countries for private purposes: they should not be allowed to launder their wealth through our banking systems or property markets, educate their children in our schools or take private holidays in our resorts.

Neither of the above policies would cost us more than we can easily afford.

Third, we should move rapidly to recognise transitional interim governments (or whatever victorious protesters call themselves) as legitimate (though not necessary the sole legitimate) representatives of their peoples as long as they remain committed to democracy; and we should cease to recognise their oppressors. Poland’s ‘Solidarity’ was recognised long before it had any legitimate democratic foundation. We should take active steps to make contact with the leaders of the north African popular uprisings and ensure that our diplomats keep in touch with prominent dissidents in undemocratic countries wherever they serve.

These three steps would enhance respect for democracy, send a signal to those who do not respect its rules and put us on the right side of history.

Graham Watson is a Member of the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee and Chairman of its delegation for relations with India. He is a Vice President of the European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party.

The Brussels-based Secretariat of ELDR supports the activities of the party, organises its meetings, manages its external communication, facilitates European policy development and networking amongst liberal parties. To support our growing activities, we are now seeking a:

Head of Communication

The mission:

• The Head of Communication will be responsible to develop and implement an efficient communication strategy which increases the visibility of ELDR, both internally (members) and externally (media, decision makers etc.) and raises its political impact in coherence with the global ELDR strategy;
• Collaborate actively with the party’s political unit and provide the ELDR President and Secretary General with sound advise on all communication-related issues including media;
• Spokesperson for the ELDR party with media and other external actors;
• Manage and coordinate the work of the 2/3 communication team members ensuring accuracy and coherence of messages in various communication tools and activities. (website, publications, e-newsletter, press releases and conferences, thematic campaigns, seminars etc).

Pre-requisite qualifications :

• A University degree (Political sciences, History, Economics, Law…).
• Demonstrate interest and understanding of party politics. S/He should be a member of or close to a liberal (ELDR) party.
• Several years of professional experience in Communication including internet communication tools, events, and media relation. Relevant experience acquired in other sectors is welcome.
• Fluent English and French (spoken and written).

The ideal candidate profile :

• A self-motivated person, able to demonstrate initiative and to work with autonomy;
• A strategic thinker able to drive projects and to bring them to conclusion;
• A team player with excellent interpersonal and communication skills;
• A motivating people manager, able to develop the team members;
• With some experience at European level, has a thorough understanding of European politics and the workings of the EU institutions.

We offer :

• The opportunity to build visibility in a dynamic and developing environment;
• An international job based in Brussels with some travel, mainly in Europe.
• Being part of a small team (11) of dedicated people working in a professional and friendly atmosphere;
• An interesting compensation package.

For more information see www.eldr.eu

To apply, please send a detailed curriculum vitae and a letter of motivation by 30 January 2011, by e-mail to : ELDR

Nelly GUET

Permettez moi d’apporter un éclairage européen à ce qui - une fois de plus  - ressemble à un psychodrame à la française réduisant à sa plus simple expression : «  la retraite » ce que d’autres ont ici à Helsinki intitulé «les défis du changement démographique », thème du congrès de l’ELDR, choisi par les organisateurs finlandais.

C’est en présence du premier Ministre, Madame Mari KIVINIEMI, présidente de l’un des deux partis libéraux finlandais, que la plupart des travaux ont été menés. Madame KIVINIEMI revenait juste de France où elle avait pu s’entretenir la veille avec le Président Sarkozy et tenté- nous confiera t’elle  - de le convaincre du bien-fondé des idées libérales.

Dans la notion de défi, il y a tout d’abord un aspect positif qui semble échapper au débat français. L’allongement de l’espérance de vie n’est-elle pas une des plus grandes victoires du 20^ème siècle ? Ne sommes nous pas ravis de voir nos parents à plus de 80 ans, en bonne santé, alors que leurs propres parents ont souvent  disparu dans la fleur de l’âge ? Ne sommes nous pas ravis de savoir  que nos petits enfants ont une espérance de vie qui approche 100 ans, que nous-mêmes nous pouvons espérer une vie plus longue, active et autonome ?

Eh bien, oui, il y a un prix à payer, une contrepartie, il est inutile de revenir en arrière et de comparer avec le passé, d’identifier ce changement à un fléau menaçant , une dernière calamité, après la crise, de faire redouter à tant de jeunes l’âge de la  retraite, de les interviewer  inlassablement  sur TF1 et l’A2 pour mieux entendre leur anxiété !

Comment pourrait-il en être autrement ? Au même moment, dans un article du Monde, on peut lire le constat d’un professeur  de l’INSEAD sur le système éducatif français : excellent  dans  un domaine précis, la capacité à faire perdre  confiance aux élèves !

A Helsinki, où sont  réunis du 13 au 15 octobre  550 congressistes provenant de tous les pays européens comptant un parti libéral, le champ de vision est  tout autre.

La conférence introductive de  Jack Goldstone, professeur à la George Mason School of Public Policy, USA,  permet de sortir du cadre,  de saisir quels sont les atouts spécifiques de l’Europe, comparée aux Etats Unis, de bien cerner l’enjeu : comment  appréhender la situation que nous laisserons aux générations futures ?

La réponse est optimiste à condition de conduire des politiques capables d’anticiper sur :

• la baisse de productivité liée au départ progressif des générations du baby boom
• le système de santé décalé par rapport aux besoins en soins de fin de vie
• les régimes de pension

D’ores et déjà la Finlande et l’Italie sont les premières concernées par le « réajustement » de la composition de la population active.

Les réponses élaborées par les  Libéraux tiennent dans un document de 4 pages, qui a reçu 107 amendements de la part des partis membres.  Le travail sur les résolutions a donné lieu à 3 heures de débat passionné et passionnant, dénué d’agressivité : un bel exemple de démocratie vivante… et d’efficacité!

Quelques exigences fondamentales ont été formulées :

1.    la libre circulation des personnes

2.    une économie de la connaissance

3.    un marché unique performant

4.    une  participation au travail accrue pour tous les ressortissants de chaque pays

Sauf à vouloir menacer la compétition économique, la productivité du pays, il est impossible de ne pas suivre les propositions du sommet européen de Barcelone :

• relever l’âge moyen de départ à la retraite.
• reconnaître les besoins en chefs d’entreprise et donc surmonter les facteurs qui découragent les femmes.
• ne pas compter exclusivement sur les dépenses de l’Etat pour financer les revenus des retraites.
• à la suite de la crise qui a déjà privé les pays européens de main d’oeuvre qualifiée, l’emploi de personnes âgées a un effet positif sur l’économie dans la mesure où elles dépensent et restent des consommateurs actifs, ce qui a pour effet de créer de la demande et des emplois
• abolition de l’âge de départ obligatoire à la retraitecar les personnes âgées ne sont pas un groupe collectif. La liberté individuelle de travail existe si les capacités répondent aux attentes des employeurs.
• allongement de la vie professionnelleconstituant un complément de revenu de retraite
• «blue card» administrée par chaque pays de l’UE: migration mesurée liée à des programmes d’intégrationgrâce à un apprentissage linguistique, culturel, éducationnel, permettant l’octroi de droits et le respect des devoirs. Prévoir un cadre européen pour le délai d’attente avant l’obtention de prestations sociales pour les migrants en âge de travailler.
• Développer les programmes de mobilité pour étudiants afin d’assurer également des flux migratoires vers les pays membres de l’UE.
• Faire admettre que les gens actifs ont souvent une bonne santé due à la sensation de bien-être engendrée par l’activité professionnelle.

En conclusion :

Contrairement aux solutions proposées par certains partis non libéraux consistant à utiliser la retraite anticipée comme une réponse à court terme au chômage, les partis libéraux européens réunis à Helsinki considèrent que chaque individu doit avoir le droit de déterminer lui-même la manière dont il veut vivre, qu’il soit jeune et en quête de possibilités d’éducation et de travail,  qu’il soit âgé et souhaite conserver son emploi en tant que membre actif de la société. Les Libéraux appellent à des initiatives qui promeuvent les liens intergénérationnels et les contributions des personnes âgées et des jeunes au profit de toutes les générations.

Helsinki, dimanche 17 octobre 2010

Nelly GUET

Première Conseillère d’Alternative Libérale

* to provide an opportunity to deepen knowledge of liberalism as a political and economic philosophy and a practical approach to dealing with problems and issues that confront us all in the context of a globalising world
* to provide ample opportunity to engage in political dialogue
* to impart invaluable experience of intercultural exchange.

The following link leads to interesting liberal reading material that was produced by the International Academy for Leadership.

Below you can watch a short movie on the philosophy of liberalism:

[Credits: written by Ken Schoolland, produced by Lux Lucre, www.jonathangullible.com]

Neelie Kroes, European Commissioner

Yesterday MEP Kartika Liotard asked me to do more to adapt computer technologies to the needs of people with low literacy levels. I am writing here to say that I fully support the principle, and that is why digital literacy issues form one of the seven pillars of the Digital Agenda for Europe. I want to assure you that I take digital literacy seriously. Your background, current lack of skills and other factors like a disability should not be a permanent barrier to enjoying the benefits of the digital era.

Having said that, lack of literacy often does exclude people from the digital world. The difficult question is not whether to take action, but who is best placed to address Europe’s digital literacy deficit. And how do we mobilise the resources to make real changes, and not merely nice promises?

The key in my opinion is co-ordination. An ICT policy alone will not bring an illiterate person in a small town in the Netherlands, for example, into the digital world. It takes several layers of support, including with partners like Telecentre Europe, in addition to government resources.

The core is obviously integrating digital competences more effectively into our education and training systems - so that digital literacy is seen as a part of literacy in general. Most funding of this nature comes from the EU’s member states, rather than the European Commission budget. However, we are proposing that digital literacy and competences should be a priority for the European Social Fund regulation and that digital literacy and skills are a priority of the “New skills for new jobs” programme the Commission is launching in 2010.

But there are also ways around some aspects of the literacy and ICT challenge - for example voice recognition technology. And we can’t forget that some people who are online still lack the confidence they need to really make full use of the internet. So we are also doing things like building new online consumer education tools to address these confidence problems.

Finally I will be pushing very hard for Member to implement long-term e-skills and digital literacy policies, and for the ICT industry to act responsibly in building up literacy - something that will be good for those currently excluded and which will increase opportunities for those companies.

If we get this right we will improve the chances in life of millions of Europeans, and eventually this will lead to a stronger society and economy overall.

By Neelie Kroes, Digital Agenda Commissioner

Today’s challenges deserve a coherent response from the Institutions that govern the world’s largest internal market. Euro-barometers show that voters also demand European action on climate, energy and security.

The EU is the level to address these challenges. National parties should be honest about the fact that it is at that level where solutions should be found. We believe political parties should organise themselves at the level where major political issues need to be solved.

The recent EP-elections showed a low turnout of voters. Voters have little enthusiasm for the political level that is responsible for the solution of their key problems. We believe this turnout was caused by national political parties campaigning with two struggling souls in their breast: one soul that knows that we need to Europeanise to solve today’s problems and the other soul that tries to stick to its national focus. The resulting campaigns lack a convincing message to inspire voters.

While the national political sphere is losing relevance, we see a slow development of a European public sphere matching the increasing relevance of the European Union. How can we develop a European public sphere?

The European political party system is fledging. Rather an informal grouping than a formal system of disciplined structures. We believe this is a missing link in European integration, that needs to be faced. Steps in this regard have been made, more should be made.

A major step was a reference to European political parties in the Treaty of Maastricht. A second step was the introduction of an EU Regulation on funding European political parties and foundations. National liberal parties should use this opportunity to strengthen the bonds within the European liberal family.

Europeans face hard times. They need political parties that work on solutions at the level where solutions need to be found. That is why we need to develop European parties.

European voters should be informed. Sharing of political thinking should not be held back by national boundaries. Voters deserve to be informed about liberal views. ELDR and its political foundation, the European Liberal Forum, address this deficiency by cooperating with national parties and liberal think tanks and by conveying the liberal message to voters, even in those countries where there are no liberal parties.

A next step should be introducing a trans-national list for a portion of the seats in the EP. Liberal MEP Andrew Duff will submit a proposal, which would create the possibility for all EU-citizens to vote for a European list.

Will it be possible to create a pan-European democracy in a European Union with so many languages? We believe it is! There is much more Europe than the skeptics are aware of. The internal market is already so much part of our life! Europe amazes when we notice young people studying all over Europe! In Europe, what seemed impossible, has often become possible.

European political parties should come about. If the proposal for European lists is adopted, a new impetus could come about. We campaign for pan-European political participation. Please, join our campaign and let’s create European political sphere.

By: Miguel Duarte, Lisbon; Thomas Kleininger, Bucharest; Emmanouil Manoledakis, Brussels-Athens; Roel Martens, Rotterdam; Alexander Plahr, Düsseldorf

If you’re interested in the idea of the creation of a European public sphere and/or would like to support this initiative by individual European liberals, please contact Roel Martens

Thanks to the European Commission for the use of the image

Liberal Member of the European Parliament, Sophie in ‘t Veld on equality for LGBT people.