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.

UD Leader Kyriacou with Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan and FNF's Joerg Denhert

“Political will is what is at need for the attainment of an agreement for the reunification of Cyprus and for the normalization of relations between Greece and Turkey,” said Prime Minister Papandreou during his recent visit to Cyprus.

“We also need to create conditions of trust between Greece and Turkey and between the Greek Cypriots and the Turkish Cypriots, for without trust no legal form of an agreement will survive through time.” He also emphasized that without the prospect of accession to the European Union, Turkey will have no incentive to move towards the resolution of the Cyprus problem.

Prime Minister Papandreou said that time is of the essence, since the nature of a problem gets more complicated as time progresses.

And last but not least, he emphasized that “the solution of the Cyprus problem will constitute a major achievement for world peace”, reminding us what the whole international community is indicating to us, that the reunification of Cyprus will set a bright example for the resolution of other long lasting conflicts in the world.

In a similar call for peace, on 27th February, Prime Minister Erdoğan talked to Cypriots about his vision of converting the Eastern Mediterranean into an area of peace, cooperation and stability, that will bring benefits to all.

“It is time”, he said, “to stop investing in military equipment and start investing in people”. He even found the courage to speak about withdrawing the Turkish army from Cyprus if an agreement is found, at a time when he is in direct conflict with the army at home.

He made it obvious that he would like to see the EU accession process of Turkey proceed and that he would like to see progress being achieved in the bicommunal dialogue for the solution of the Cyprus problem, on the basis of a bizonal bicommunal federation with political equality as defined in relevant UN resolutions.

These statements by the Prime Ministers of Greece and Turkey should make us aware that times are changing. And they are changing in a way that creates opportunities that have to be exploited before they pass us by.

At the meeting of the foreign minister of Turkey with the deputy foreign minister of Greece last week in Ankara, Mr. Davutoğlu reiterated what Prime Minister Erdoğan had said and he reminded us of the earthquake diplomacy of 1999, while Mr. Droutsas spoke of the peace dividend that the solution will bring.

This is indeed the message that Three Ladies first presented in their Day After report of March 2008 about the economic opportunities to follow the reunification of Cyprus. The authors, Özlem Oğuz, Fiona Mullen and Praxoula Kyriacou, had based their estimates on the picking up of external transactions between Greece and Turkey that had followed the process of normalisation of political relations between the two countries, as this normalisation was initiated by the then respective ministers of foreign affairs, Mr. George Papandreou andand the late İsmail Cem in 1999.And if a peace dividend of 12000 euro per family per year awaits the Cypriots once their country reunifies, or 33000 new jobs await the unemployed then the Cypriots need to know about it; especially at a time when economic recession is testing the whole of Cyprus. The reunification of Cyprus will in the end be also the answer to the current economic misfortunes; and no one can take this lightly.

Leaders have to come out and assume their responsibilities letting people know about the truth, in all its dimensions.

Another truth that has to be told concerns the slogan ‘’solution by the Cypriots for the Cypriots”. For such a slogan is blindfolding and can boomerang under certain very probable conditions. For indeed, how can the solution of the Cyprus problem include the withdrawal of Turkish troops, if Turkey does not form part of the negotiating picture and hence of the solution?

More: link

By the President of the United Democrats,
Praxoula Antoniadou Kyriacou

LYMEC Vice President Alexander Plahr

On 29 March, Commissioner Cecilia Malmström published proposals for a directive to block access to websites that show images of child abuse. While the fight against this cruel and loathsome crime deserves the support of every righteous individual, this recent initiative of is deeply worrying. The approach of blocking websites is counterproductive and outright dangerous.

Blocking access to these websites does not make them go away. They are still on the internet and can be accessed by anybody capable of circumventing the filters. And since circumventing the filters is as easy as entering a new DNS server in your computer, it can be done in 10-15 seconds.

The proposal of the European Commission requires the instalment of a censorship infrastructure. Experience tells us that such infrastructure can easily be misused and that it-once in place- will wet politicians’ appetite to extend it on other areas such as copyright violations, hate speech, and many more.

Even without misuse, the mechanisms employed to censor access and the technical infrastructure of the internet make it quite probable that when blocking some websites which you want to target, you also block numerous others, which are located with the same webhoster. This is what is called overblocking and which certainly is not desirable.

Blocking websites is too easy an answer to a difficult problem and not an ambitious policy goal which really would benefit the victims or prevent further crimes. Instead of easy populist answers, the policy must be to remove pictures of child abuse from the Internet and to investigate the perpetrators. Priority must go to hunt the culprits down through international cooperation of law enforcement agencies.

Sexual abuse of children is one of the few crimes that is outlawed on a global scale. Experience from leaked blocking lists indicates that most websites in question are located in the USA and Western Europe. Taking them down and getting information on who uploaded them is not black magic, but rather should be the standard.

Unlawful content should be deleted, not simply hidden by creating censorship infrastructure! Perpetrators should be investigated and jailed, not providing with shopping lists in form of leaked blacklists.

Instead of employing a useless but dangerous tool, Liberals have to make sure that European law enforcement agencies finally start cooperating in fighting these awful crimes!

By Alexander Plahr,
Vice President of LYMEC

CDL President Sean O'Curneen and ELDR Vice President Marc Guerrero

In the week-end of 21 March 2010, an interesting conference adressed the situation and future of liberalism on the Iberian peninsula. The event, which took place in the southern Spanish city of Cadiz, was organized by the European Liberal Forum (ELF), in cooperation with the German Friedrich Naumann Foundation (Germany), the Movimiento Liberal Social (Portugal) and the Catalanist and Democrat Foundation from Catalonia.

The conference represented another step forwards in order to increase the political push and strength of liberals in this part of Europe. Moderated by Portuguese liberal Miguel Cunha Duarte, representatives from a great variety of Iberian liberal parties and organizations such as the Liberal Party of Gibraltar, the Liberal Party of Andorra, the Movimiento Liberal Social (Portugal), the Catalanist and Democrat Foundation (Catalonia), Converxencia XXI (Galizia), the Partido de la Libertad Individual, Centro Democrático Liberal and Club Liberal Español (Spain) discussed the current situation of liberalism in the Iberian peninsula and proposed new activities for the upcoming months in order to improve the liberal network, promote political liberalism and liberal ideas to the citizens, and take advantage of the liberal links and the network for upcoming elections.

From these lines, I express my convinction that activities like this one will allow us to achieve our liberal objectives in this region of Europe.

By Dr. Marc Guerrero i Tarragó
ELDR Party Vice-President

Dr Gashi MP (right) and Shpend Kallaba

The importance of this topic is crucial and a challenge to any democratic regime, whether it is well-consolidated or transitional, therefore we would like to bring in mind one sensational proverb by Napoleon Bonaparte: “I fear from the newspapers more than a hundred thousand bayonets.” Apparently, in politics this concept remains prevailing even today, but in a much more sophisticated manner.

We’re pleased to share with you my views regarding the case of Kosovo, after a decade of continuous international investment in the quality of freedom of the press. Referring to the recent FreedomHouse report, Kosovo is moving from Not Free to the Partly Free rank, which is encouraging but not a sustainable reality at all. Based on the latest progress report by the European Commission, overall freedom of expression is not fully guaranteed. The relevant institutional framework is not yet operational. Cases of political intimidation call for more robust measures by the Kosovo authorities.

In this respect, the main problem in Kosovo with regards to media remain in the sense that they can’t free itself from the still very strong financial and political pressures. Distribution of the written media is still embryonic leaving a lot of space for the more influential broadcast media. The leading channel Radio Television of Kosova (RTK) continues to expand under the direct influence of the government. Its funding depends on the goodwill of the Parliament of Kosovo, which is unlikely to want to deprive itself of the leverage that comes with this situation.

Also, the access to information and to public data remains difficult and has still not been guaranteed under law. The basis of written media self-regulation has been established with the creation of the Press Council of Kosovo. This regulatory body is made up of journalists and editors and can impose a right of reply or fines on journalists who breach the code of conduct and media ethics. But like the Media Commission, the Press Council is under government influence.

There are eight national dailies in the privately owned sector, but some of them are linked to political parties or financial groups that develop in their sphere of influence. In the absence of foreign investment in the sector, these groups regularly practice “blackmail through advertising”, in which they exchange their financial backing for advantageous media coverage. The independence of editorial lines suffers hugely from this lack of financial independence. Self-censorship that undermines part of the profession is moreover aggravated by the absence of any real social status for journalists. In this context, the freedom of Kosovo is facing a trend of uncertain perspective, considering that as long as there is economical dependency, there will be press dependency too.

Freedom of press is directly linked with economic interest of a poor country such as Kosovo, thus, we are experiencing a disgraceful media model to become dependent on the government’s public agenda, in order to survive. It is our serious concern that the dependence approach from the government funds and their influential channels towards media owners, starts to be transformed into a natural category in a society, which is in the process of its democratization. The likelihood of experienced journalists to be politically implicated/affiliated with political ambitions in the daily politics could hinder the democratization process, per se. As a result, civil society along with opposition forces may lose a credible and legitimate instrument toward the government.

Finally, this media model of inter-dependency in Kosovo, remain a serious concern and a challenge for upcoming European integration processes, having in mind that despite a solid legal framework, the attitudes and relationships between politics and journalists may seriously harm and neutralize any different alternative which is outside of this group of interest.

The political party “New Kosova Alliance”, as a newly established party in the Kosova Assembly, and also in the ELDR Party as affiliated member, considers as decisive its contribution in building a Kosovo with economic prosperity, political stability, integrated in the region and in the European Union, as a democratic and multiethnic state.

We would like to express our strong belief that the friendship and cooperation between our parties integrated in ELDR, will further strengthen, to the benefit of our countries and to peace and stability in this region of Europe.

By Dr. Ibrahim Gashi MP, Vice president of AKR, and
Shpend Kallaba, Member of Presidency of AKR

ELDR Vice President Van der Laan and Commission Vice President Kallas and Finnish Europe Minister Thors

The Netherlands will have a snap general election on Wednesday June 9, following the collapse of Prime Minister Balkenende’s fourth government since 2002. Whereas changing governments on average every two years is generally not something I would applaud, the early demise of this Christian Democrat - Labour coalition (with protestant conservatives thrown in for the majority), is probably a blessing in disguise. This coalition has achieved very little in their three years in office.

While like the rest of Europe, the Netherlands has to deal with three crises - economic, ecological and social - this coalition has prided itself on blocking measures, rather than taking action. It is not even clear whether the one significant reform law that was adopted - the long overdue raising of the retirement age from 65 to 67 by 2025 - will be able to take effect now that the government has collapsed. Wouter Bos’ Labour party boasts blocking major economic reforms, like greater labour market flexibility, while Balkenende’s CDA prides itself on blocking Labour’s desired referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and a parliamentary enquiry into the Iraq war. Though the coalition agreed that 35 billion euro worth of budget cuts are needed, they have outsourced the matter to committees of civil servants without providing any direction.

So why did the government fall?

In 2007 the Dutch government had promised that the last Dutch troops would leave Uruzgan in 2010, arguing that proportionally the Dutch have already done more than their fair share of supporting NATO’s endeavors there. A small country delivering 2000 troops in one of the most dangerous Afghan provinces, compares very favorably to Germany’s 4400 in the relatively safe North or France’s 3700. Whereas Wouter Bos wanted to stick to this agreement, the Christian Democrats wanted another extension. The Parliament set a deadline of March 1st for a clear government proposal on the way ahead, forcing a showdown between the partners.

With municipal elections on March 3rd, Labour was in no mood to back down or compromise, its leader Bos having been called a “turncoat” too many times for their liking. At the same time the Christian-Democrats, who could easily have saved the coalition by agreeing to implement the existing agreement, insisted on keeping all options on the table in the full knowledge there would never be a parliamentary majority for extending the presence in Uruzgan. In short, ego’s and electoral posturing came before the economic needs of the country. It is not surprising then that polls indicate that voters feel both major parties are to blame for this collapse.

On a more positive note, it is hoped that a new coalition will be able to get to work with desperately needed measures to battle the economic crisis, lead on climate and energy issues and ensure social cohesion. I expect the voters to turn to parties that have a proven track record in this regard, which includes my own. In fact, the longest serving Balkenende government was the second one with the two liberal parties, VVD and D66. Without the liberals to provide direction, it is clear the Christian-Democrats have no idea what policy choices to make, especially in times of crisis.

By Lousewies van der Laan,

ELDR Vice President (D66, The Netherlands), former MEP