Italian Minister wants young away from the country

Giuliano Poletti is in charge for Social Policies, but he prefers not to work on social issues

Giuliano Poletti

Opinions

«I know people who went away and it is fine they stay where they are, because surely this country will not suffer from not having them around anymore». The Italian Minister of Labour and Social Policies, Giuliano Poletti, sparked critics and complaints for his statements on young people leaving Italy in search of jobs and better living conditions. He could clarify better, by saying That indeed between dealing with skillful people and bad guys, the second option is preferable and even better for the good of the national system. If this concept can be desumed by the minister's statement and perhaps even agree with him in line of principle - albeit in the controversial formulation of such a concept - it is unacceptable to listen to a member of a government speak in such a way. It's up to the government promoting policies for social inclusion. It means that when certain nationals are the kind of people they can be defined as "bad guys", it is duty of national authorities to invest on them in order to convert these people in "good guys". The blame game is an easy task, especially when it comes to escape personal responsibilities. In this case, Poletti "forgot" that he is in charge for Social Policies, so it's up to him to search and rescue the lost sheep, to tell the story in religious terms.

Not later than three weeks before of Poletti's statement, the Italian government had in place a large-scale campaign to bring all the Italians living abroad to vote at the referendum on the Constitutional reform proposal. Poletti's misstep sent a counterproductive message from the Italian government. Italians abroad only count in time of elections, after vote they come back to the general indifference or, even worst, to the general disdain of politicians. This something harmful both for the public opinion and for politics. Italians living abroad, all those who left the country in search of what their own country wasn't able to provide, will be no surprised in listening they are not welcome. In somehow, they got nothing but a confirmation of what they already knew. What is really unacceptable is a minister who prefer to blaim a part of society instead of working on it, and a government which prefer to defend such a minister instead of asking for his resignation. But that's Italy, after all.

Western Sahara reaffirmed as being no part of Morocco

The European Court of Justice confirmed what already said in September by the advocate general. EU-Morocco trade deals not applicable beyond Morocco

(click on the picture to enlarge)

by Emanuele Bonini

Western Sahara is not part of Morocco. Once again the European Court of justice (ECJ) affirmed this principle, by issuing a judgement on the EU-Morocco trade deals. Basically the ECJ made clear that the EU-Morocco trade agreements are not applicable to Western Sahara, as it is not part of Moroccan territory. Similarly, the Liberalisation Agreement «must be interpreted [...] as meaning that it does not apply to the territory of Western Sahara», read the judgement. Politically this is a strong message to the Moroccan kingdom, which has been claiming its sovereignty since the end of the Spanish colonial era.

This judgement doesn't mean any official recognition of Western Sahara a state or sovereign entity by the EU side. On the contrary, the European Court of justice ruled out such a possibility. The EU body based in Luxembourg simply recalled what is the situation of Western Sahara: despite the Sahrawi people self-proclaimed the territory as an independent State under the name of Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) in the 70's, Western Sahara is still on the list of non-self-governing territories in accordance with the UN Charter, and was clarified that it isn't possible draw the consequences of the status of Western Sahara under international law as regards the inapplicability of the Association Agreement to that territory.

«Full job integration of migrants takes two decades»

A study from the European Commission called to invest on asylum seekers asking to speed up the process despite public opposition

(click on the picture to enlarge)

by Emanuele Bonini

Bad news for the decision makers and the public opinion: a proper and full integration of a migrant into the labour market can require from 15 up to 20 years, according to a report published today. In times of anti-immigration sentiment, the latest annual review of Employment and Social Developments in Europe (ESDE) contains warnings that could be misused by those who predict the end of national traditional societies because of the foreigners. According to the report issued by the European Commission, «it takes more than 15 to 19 years in the host country for refugees to reach parity with the native-born in terms of employment rates». Having an asylum seeker completely integrated takes time, and the European Commission called the Member States to invest on migrants by promoting integration policies. It would be key for both social cohesion and security, but it is unclear whether national governments can invest more than a decade on those that the public opinion would like to see returned to their country.

Looking at what has been happening in Europe since the outbreak of the migration crisis, it is easy to guess that the difficulties related to the full integration of migrants will offer more than one argument to the far-right parties. Fences and walls are under construction everywhere in the EU, from Hungary to France. The EU-Turkey deal on migration was reached with the aim of stopping the flows of asylum seeker coming to Europe. So, investing on migrants takes time and, as a consequence, takes money. That's true especially at the beginning, when third-country nationals have to deal with the most difficult barrier: the language. «Those refugees whose language skills are low or non-existent on arrival improve their employment chances significantly by acquiring more solid host-country language skills», stressed the ESDE review. Early investment in the language skills of refugees «may actually be one of the most cost-effective instruments» to enable them to capitalise fully on their existing formal qualifications.

May still in troubles with Brexit six months after vote

Downing Street in search of a strategy and a meaning of leaving, according to the London School of Economics

by Emanuele Bonini

Everything will start in March 2017, or so it should. All the rest is nothing but an activity covered by mystery. Call it work in progress if you wish, but the substance will not change at all. Six months after the UK referendum which saw British people vote for leaving the EU, Brexit still remains a leap in the dark, according to the London School of Economics (LSE). On the occasion of the event «Britain and Europe: toward Brexit?» organized in Brussels the prestigious university put in light the great difficulties of the British administration in dealing with the practical consequences of the outcome of the referendum. According to the academic world there are at least six big issues to be addressed by Theresa May's government, and none of them still has an answer after six months.

No strategy. Julia Black, the Pro Director for Research at LSE, and Robert Saunders, associate professor responsible for EU-UK relations, admitted that after six months in London they still have not idea of what to do. «The previous government had no contingency plan» in case of a Brexit vote. David Cameron was basically betting everything in what he thought could happen but finally it didn't come out. Theresa May, current prime minister of the Unidet Kingdom, «will have not only the responsibility of negotiating Brexit, she will also have the even bigger duty of redefining the entire British strategy with the rest of the world».

No meaning for Brexit. Perhaps the main biggest issue. «If it is clear what citizens voted against, it is unclear on the contrary in favour of what citizens expressed themselves», pointed out the two academicals.  What does Brexit mean, in practice? That is the question the British government have to answer in order to understand what to ask when time of reshaping ties with all the other 31 Countries (the 27 EU Member States plus Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland) will come. Does Brexit mean more immigration? Less immigration? Just the participation to some targeted EU programmes? And which ones? That's the real rebus for Britain.

A EU large-scale profiling operation against migration

Ministers for Internal Affairs reached a controversial agreement for a revision of the Eurodac database. The draft regulation to negotiated with the Parliament

by Emanuele Bonini

Migrants like serial killers? The Council of the EU is ready to start a large-scale profiling operation as response to the migration crisis. It is only about negotiating with the European Parliament, but the controversial decision has been taken: Europe will keep files on asylum seekers arriving in EU territories. The position of the Member States was reached today during the meeting of the Justice and Home Affairs Council. Ministers agreed to recast the Eurodac database in a more comprehensive manner: in addition to fingerprints, according to the draft proposal it will made compulsory the collection of personal data such as names, surnames, nationality and pictures.

The Eurodac database, which was established in 2003, is an EU asylum fingerprint database which provides fingerprint evidence to assist in the application of the Dublin Regulation, which determines the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application made in the EU. Ministers today agreed a common approach to adapt and reinforce the Eurodac system in order to expand its scope, with a view to facilitating returns and helping tackle irregular migration. On the basis of the position of the Council, besides collecting an additional biometric data - facial image, it will also allow member states to store more alphanumeric data in Eurodac, such as names, dates of birth, nationalities, identity details or travel documents of individuals.

The decision is questionable, raising concerns as regard privacy, the storage and the treatment of the information, as well as the legal aspect of the new regime. Basically the Council of the EU is authorising nothing but a measure comparable to a criminal profiling.

Erasmus programme for workers starting in 2017

The European Commission announced the launch of ErasmusPro, the new initiative for the exchange of young apprentices

by Emanuele Bonini

Young students of work, go ahead! Starting from 2017 the European Commission will activate Erasmus Pro, the new programme for the mobility of apprentices and trainees. Finally the EU executive body will launch the real Erasmus programme for workers, an initiative sponsored already during the previous legislature by Antonio Tajani, in charge for Industry and the entrepreneurship under the Barroso Commission. The idea was to reproduce the well known EU project of student exchange in a new model thought just for the labour market. No the dream comes true.

Until today small period of apprentices abroad have been financing through Erasmus+, the14.7 billion Euro catch-all framework programme for education, training, youth and sport. Next year  the Commission will launch "ErasmusPro", a new dedicated activity within the Erasmus+ programme to support long-duration (6-12 months) placements of apprentices abroad. In addition to the current 650.000 apprentices that will benefit from mobility under Erasmus+, in the period 2017-2020 these measures will open up the possibility for 50,000 additional young people to spend at least 6 months of their learning experience in another Member State, compared to the much shorter period (1 month on average) registered so far.

The Erasmus programme for workers will be financed by the EU funds. In addition to the already EU-level financial allocations, on 14 September 2016 in the context of the mid-term review of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2014–2020, the Commission proposed to increase the budget of Erasmus+ by €200 million. These new extra money will be used for the new initiatives such as ErasmusPro

EU-US division over Cuba troubles transatlantic ties

Europe pushed for further cooperation with the island, widening the gap with the American administration, where Trump is ready to restore the embargo

by Emanuele Bonini

The European Union and the United States divided over Cuba. While the US president elected Donald Trump announced the intention of reconsidering Obama's thaw by restoring the embargo, Europe went forward in its process of political and economic normalization with the Cuban authorities. The Council of the EU gave green light yesterday to the Political Dialogue and Cooperation Agreement between the EU and Cuba, a new deal aimed to reshape the bilateral relations. Although it is an important and historic moment, the agreement could pose problems in light of the transatlantic partnership, considered at stake after Donald Trump's victory.

EU-Cuba relations
The political dialogue and cooperation agreement, the first ever agreement between the EU and Cuba, will constitute the new legal framework for EU-Cuba relations. It foresees an enhanced political dialogue, improved bilateral cooperation and the development of joint action in multilateral fora. The agreement comprises three main chapters on political dialogue, cooperation and sector policy dialogue as well as trade and trade cooperation. The agreement will be signed and concluded as a "mixed" agreement. This means that on the EU side, it must be signed by both the EU and the member states, and ratified by all relevant national and regional parliaments. The agreement will be applied on a provisional basis, pending ratification by all of the member states. Provisional application will concern the provisions of EU competence.

Let Fidel Castro to the judgement of history

Contemporary man should abstain from easy condemnations: is the alternative to the Cuban model so credible and human?

Opinions

Fidel was a dictator. The democratic United States and the free world have no dictators. They buy them. They make business with them. They put them at the government and they overthrow them according to the convenience of the moment: it is different! In a country like Cuba only one man can rule, or at least one single party can, the only one allowed. In the world of good lobby spokespersons are alternated each other. Also this is different, and it doesn’t change the fact Fidel was evil while all the other always have been good. They were so good that they condemned an entire island to starvation for decades. How can define the embargo imposed on Cuba in different way? And could we? All right, all right, Cuba is in trouble with freedoms, respect of human rights and civil rights. Maybe the world of good and freedoms is free of problems? Do black people and minorities have the same rights of other people? Do they receive equal treatment compared to the rest of the society? Are black people and minorities not discriminated? Do the poors get assistance? The electric chair was replaced by the lethal injection: in civilized countries the good kill with respect and dignity.
 
Missiles, rockets, bombs, airstrikes, tanks and contractors allowed the export of democracy: good are imperalists, never ever dictator! In Cuba minors go to school or to get in prostitution, while in the rest of the world they work in order to satisfy the false need of consumism having in return some professional skills and few money: it is called welfare, something unknown in dictatorship. Anyway, the dictator is dead. The evil is no loger there. On the contrary, Guantanamo is still there as it is Abu Ghraib, to remind us that principles and rules change according to the different colors of uniform. Be on the right side and everything will be permitted and forgiven, be on the wrong side and nothing will be tolerated. My imprisonments will be never like yours, my crimes will be never comparable with yours: that’s how it works. Fidel was a dictator and history will judge. History will do that. And us? Are we really in the position of judging?

Semaine de la bière - Beer week

(click to enlarge)

Irritated Ukraine called Europe to deliver

EU unable to give Kyiv what was agreed, criticised Poroshenko. The Ukrainian leader set the agenda: free visas to be granted immediately, no further delays in association agreement

Petro Poroshenko (left) with Jean-Claude Juncker (right)

by Emanuele Bonini

Formally the EU-Ukraine summit relaunched the strategic partnership between the two sides, in practice it showed all the Ukrainian frustration for the incapacity of Europe in keeping the promises. The EU-Ukraine Association Agreement is blocked by the Netherlands and it cannot be ratified, the free visa regime is not granted yet, in energy the Europeans keep making deals with Russia. Too little achievements for the Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko, who claimed what he believes has to be granted with no further ado. The European counterparts offered optimism and a new financial package aimed to sustain the path of the reforms in the country. Not to much, but it is all what could be offered.

Summit achievement
The 18th EU-Ukraine summit reiterated the condemnation of the illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia. EU still defends the territorial integrity of Ukraine and respects the principle of maintaining sanctions, whose imposition is linked to the full respect of the Minsk agreements. This is nothing new in the bilateral relations. The summit was also the occasion to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) for cooperation in the energy sector. This is not something of new at all, since the the MoU replaces the one signed in 2005. The two sides decided to review their cooperation extending it in a wider range of areas (research, energy efficiency, energy security, decarbonization, interconnectivity). At the Summit, a €15 million programme to fight corruption has been signed, together with a €104 million programme in support of public administration reform, and a €52.5 million programme to foster the rule of law are in the pipeline for later in the year.

EU-Turkey ties endangered after anti-Erdogan vote

The European Parliament called for a freeze of the accession process. Kurtulmuş: «They are not a reliable partner»

by Emanuele Bonini

Time of dialogue maybe is not over yet, but time for negotiations is. The European Parliament voted in favour of a temporary freeze of EU accession talks with Turkey, in a resolution approved today at large majority (479 votes to 37, with 107 abstentions). Although the resolution is not legally binding, Europe sent a strong political message to the Turkish authorities: there will be no steps forward in the EU membership negotiations until the country will be back in line with the EU values. Ankara reacted by strongly condemning the vote. MEPs criticized particularly the «disproportionate repressive measures» taken by the Turkish government since the failed coup attempt in July 2016. According to them, these measures «violate basic rights and freedoms protected by the Turkish Constitution» itself. Furthermore, the resolution rehiterated that the capital punishment is the red line not to be crossed. A re-introduction of the death penalty by the Turkish government would lead to a formal suspension of the accession process, said MEPs.

No doubts amongst groups
The three major political groups voted togetherin favour of halting the accession process. «The disproportionate repression measures taken by Erdoğan forced us to urge the Commission and Council to temporary freeze the accession talks with Turkey, because we can no longer remain silent in the face of Erdoğan's outrage and the evident breaches of the rule of law and human rights in Turkey», said the president of S&D group, Gianni Pittella. «This resolution is a clear political message to Erdoğan that should not be misinterpreted: we want Turkey to be anchored to Europe, to democracy and to rule of law». Mafred Weber, the president of EPP group, defined the decision taken by the Plenary «a strong signal for the protection of fundamental values and rule of law». The same kind oof message came from the ALDE Group leader, Guy Verhofstadt. «Turkey is an essential partner for the European Union when it comes to energy security, stabilising the region around Syria and Iraq and the fight against terrorism. However it is wrong to pretend that we can advance on any of these fields by trampling on European values and principles, by closing our eyes as President Erdogan closes down independent media outlets, jails journalists and criminalises members of his Parliament».

«Trump is a clown», said ALDE group chief

Guy Verhofstadt criticised the next US president by attacking the father of Brexit

Guy Verhofstadt

by Emanuele Bonini

The president elected of the United State is a «clown», the president of ALDE group said yesterday in Strasbourg. The European Union didn't welcome Donald Trump's victory in the US presidential election, but instead of accepting the reality by congratulating with the next occupant of the White House, offensive declarations and attacks go on. In this case it can be said Guy Verhofstadt could be justified by some Trump's statements seen as a sort of provocation for the EU. Trump suggested the prime minister of the United Kingdom to appoint Nigel Farage as next UK ambassador in the United States. Nigel Farage pushed for Brexit, and this is something not acceptable for people like Verhofstadt. «I do believe one clown in Washington is more than enough», said the ALDE leader. He was referring to Farage and the possibility of a post as ambassador, but he expressed a judgement on the upcoming US president as well.


Related articles:
- No EU relevance makes Juncker frustrated

«Our relationship with Turkey is at a crossroad because Turkey is at a crossroad».
Federica Mogherini, High Representative of EU for foreign affairs and security policy (Strasbourg, 22th of November, 2016)

Erdogan thinking to join the Shanghai Pact

Turkey tempted to redesign the global order leaving the Western block for the Eastern one

The Shanghai Pact (Click to enlarge)

by Emanuele Bonini

Turkey watches more and more east. After decades invested to find a place in the European block, it is time to reconsider policies and abandon the unfruitful relationship with the Western block. In practical terms the republic led by Recep Tayipp Erdogan got the only benefit in joining the NATO, since on the EU side never happened and nothing is supposed to happen. The accession process is still pending, and the European Parliament has announced the intention of freezing the negotiations. Turkey is now considering to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (also known as Shanghai Pact), the Eurasian political, economic, and military organisation founded in 1996 by China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, and joined by Uzbekistan in 2001. It means saying farewell to Europe and write a new chapter of the geopolitical order, considering also that the two nuclear powers India and Pakistan already applied for the membership on June this year .

The European veto to the EU membership
In order to become a member of the European Union the unanimous consensus of the Member States is required. After that it the European Parliament called to express an opinion through a vote. The European Parliament decides on enlargement and the two biggest groups - the EPP and the S&D - both decided the negotiations should be frozen in light of the breaches of the rule of law followed by the attempted coup in Turkey. Erdogan realized the free-visa regime will be never granted, as well as he understood there will be never any improvement in the negotiations. His country got less than expected, so he decided to change alliances. Erdogan knows that a part of the population wanted to join the EU. The fact he cannot guarantee it any longer put pressure on his leadership. He said he might hold a referendum, but it could be a dangerous tool in case of electoral defeat. He knows he could be forced to keep negotiating and he hopes to put pressure on Europe.

Geopolitics
«Turkey must feel at ease. It mustn't say "for me it's the European Union at all costs". That's my view», Erdogan was quoted by the Hurriyet newspaper. The Turkish alternative to the EU could be the block of countries formed by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, revealed Erdogan. «Why shouldn't Turkey be in the Shanghai Pact?» Becoming part of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) would mean reshape the geopolitical order. In such a scenario Turkey would quit the Western block to join the Eastern one and superpowers such as Russia and China could count on Turkey, the second biggest NATO member. That would be a problem for Europe, of course.

No EU relevance makes Juncker frustrated

Anti-Trump statements explained by the lack of consideration  for the European Union, which has not attribution in foreign affairs matters

by Emanuele Bonini

What is there behind the "Juncker case"? Stress, mental sickness of any kind, rudeness? Frustration. The right explanation is frustration. The European Union has no foreign policy relevance, because it is foreseen it has not to have. Let's rewind the tape and start from the beginning. Commenting Donald Trump's victory in the US presidential elections, the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, said that with the next occupant of the White House «we'll waste time for two years while Mr. Trump tours a world that he is completely unaware of». There is a motivation for such a statement. Immediately after Juncker sent a letter to the president elected to congratulate with him and to invite him to Brussels. As fas as everybody knows that letter never got an answer.  Considering the European Commission is constantly under the attack of the EU Member States, it appears clear the sense of frustration of the Commission's chief. Juncker and the body he is responsible for, got little consideration at home and none abroad.

Having said that, there is the possibility Mr. Trump knows really well the world. The impression is he's aware that in foreign policy the EU never existed. By treaties the foreign affairs are competence of the Member States.  When it comes to set strategies and take decisions, national governments are the true plenipotentiary players. Showing a pragmatic approach and a clear sense of realpolitik, it is undeniable that the fist thing to do is to deal with single European leaders. The EU is not a priority because it simply can't be. Who does Federica Mogherini represent? The EU has an external action, but not a foreign affairs office. It is true that the EU is in charge of negotiating trade agreements, but Trump seems not to have the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) in the list of his priorities. Juncker is the president of a body with limited powers. Until the European Union will have not attributions in foreign affairs policies, it can't surprise if leaders from the rest of the world will decide to bypass the EU. It is not a question of dividing Europe, it is just a question of the nature of the EU. And then, let's be honest: Europe has never been unite in foreign affairs.

Quotes

«Globalization was mismanaged».
Carlo Calenda, Italian minister of Economic Development (Brussels, 11th of November, 2016)

End of a dream

Anti-establishment players and populists swept away the myth of globalization, followed by a new season of nationalism

Opinions

Where there hadn't to be limits, there are fences; where there had to be free trade, there is protectionism; and where there was supposed to be the global village, there are nation-States. Something went wrong. The model chosen, decided and in somehow imposed, has finished to don't work: instead of globalization there is nationalism. It can't be! How is that possible? That's exactly what millions of people in Europe and worldwide thought on June 23rd after Brexit, that's exactly what millions of people in Europe and worldwide thought immediately after having watched Donald Trump becoming the 45th president of the United States of America. Unbelievable, isn't it? Nobody was ready to believe Trump could do it, but he did. It can't be! How is that possible? The answer is simple: voters were called to choose between two opponents, and they made their choice. It is called democracy. Looking at what happened in the latest American elections, somebody - and even more than somebody - is considering democracy as an epic fail. Points of view, of course. It can be said that Democrats chose the wrong candidate, it can be said that Americans are out of mind, a lot of things can be said. Considerations, opinions, analysis, are all elements which have to take into account one thing: a model has collapsed.

It failed the idea that globalization without neither rules nor ethics could bring wealth and prosperity. On the contrary, wealth and prosperity have been transferred from a country to another, as well as people. Poorest countries saw their living conditions improving, while countries once with good economic and social standards saw the deterioration of the domestic tissue. In name of competitiveness social dumping was promoted, corporations were given carte blanche, the idea of a flexible labour market was translated in precarity. No more rights and less money. Finance did the rest. While millions Dollar cannot be created with strokes of a magic wand, they can be instantly burned on the stock markets. Unreal economy forgot the real world, where the survival instinct was the answer to all of that. Incredible choices produced unpredictable results. The rise of uncompromising and populist movements is nothing but the result of a system which has become no longer sustainable. Marine Le Pen, Beppe Grillo, Geert Wilders, they are all the expression of the general discontent. In time of uncertainty, economic crisis, weakness, they offered (well, they promised to do so) the alternative to the contemporary world. Asking for no Europe, no free trade agreements, no immigrants and no foreigners, isn't perhaps a clear call for putting an end to the globalisation? The one which was offered is a national recipe rather than global.

About the USA and the 45th president

(Obama back to be a citizen just like any other)

«Brain drain harms Italy's competitiveness»

The European Commission's warning in the 2016 report on Education

by Emanuele Bonini

Italy should care of national high-skill workers, since the migration of professionally valid people risks to harshly hit the country in terms of loss of competitiveness, the European Commission warned today. In its 2016 edition of the Education and Training Monitor report, the EU body stressed that in Italy «transition from education to work is difficult, even for highly qualified people» and «this is causing a "brain drain"». National authorities have not to underestimate the impact of such a phenomenon, but it appears the country is not putting in place neither measures nor wider policies to address the matter. In other terms the Italian education system is a good one, but completely incapable of keeping those who are ready for the labour market.

Problem with no solutions
The number of Italian citizens with a tertiary education degree leaving the country has been rapidly increasing since 2010. «This has not been compensated by inflows of equally well qualified Italians returning to the country». This means governments couldn't react, and not only that. There is not only a lack of political action. As the European Commission observed, the increasing emigration reflects better job opportunities and conditions abroad. As underlined in the report, survey data show that compared with their peers working in Italy, young Italian graduates working abroad earn higher and more rapidly increasing salaries, work more frequently under open-ended contracts and consider their formal qualification more appropriate for their job. Furthermore, Italians with a doctoral degree working abroad report having both better job opportunities and significantly higher earnings. «This may explain why highly qualified Italian workers have very little inclination to return to their home country. The emigration of highly qualified Italian workers therefore does not qualify as "brain circulation"» (i.e. when people temporarily go abroad to study or work, but then go back to their home country).

FACT SHEET/ Clinton's-Trump's programme

Click to enlarge.
Source: metro Belgique. Click here to read the original copy

Migrants, refugees, asylum seekers: who they are

Differences between people moving from their place to another

by Emanuele Bonini

Migrants are not all the same. When it comes to migration flows, words and definitions need to be accurate, because a refugee is not an asylum seekers and not all migrants are refugees. Sometimes these people are mixed up, but generalizations or inaccuracies are not allowed, as depending on the category of persons their legal status changes as well as their legal treatment. This is right the way national governments focus their attention on migration and their decisions on accepting foreign people. Here's a distinctions of categories, realized after a little reworking of the one realized by Amnesty International.

- Refugee. A refugee is a person who has fled from their own country because they have a well-founded fear of persecution and their government cannot or will not protect them. Under international law, being a refugee is a fact-based status, and arises before the official, legal grant of asylum. Asylum procedures are designed to determine whether someone meets the legal definition of a refugee. When a country recognizes someone as a refugee, it gives them international protection as a substitute for the protection of their country of origin. Refugee is generally a person with a legal status of protection recognised by governments, and he is entitled to remain in the country.

- Asylum seeker. An asylum-seeker is someone who has left their country seeking protection but has yet to be recognized as a refugee. Not all the asylum-seekers are refugees, but they all are entitled to stay temporarily in another country until their requests are not assessed. During the time that their asylum claim is being examined, the asylum-seeker must not be forced to return to their country of origin.

FACT SHEET/ MFF contributions for migration

(click to enlarge)

Europe in economic troubles with migrants

Not enough in the EU budget to deal with the current crisis. Adding money not an easy task

by Emanuele Bonini

Migration is not only a matter of political approach and will, it is also a matter of money. Despite the different political ideas, the European Union need resources which are not there. The EU in the sense of the Member States should revise the common budget in order to put new, fresh money with the aim of better addressing a situation otherwise impossible to solve. This is the only way out, and of course it is not an easy one. Far-right populist movements are rising up all across Europe, the European Union opted for strict fiscal rules, and amongst the governments there are those who neither can't nor don't want to invest on migration. There is still the possibility of changing the current Multi-annual Financial Framework (MFF), the single EU budget for the 2014-2020 period, but it is unclear how such a possibility will be used by the Member States.

Resources made available
The EU can spend for migration €9,26 billion, which are the resources foreseen in the heading 3 («Security and Citizenship»). These money are mainly channelled through the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF, €3,1 billion), the Internal Security Fund (ISF, €3,8 billion) and the main EU Home Affairs agencies involved (Frontex, Easo, Europol, that got €2,36 billion). In addition, under humanitarian aid and development cooperation, the EU budget and EU Trust Funds, as well as, outside the EU budget, the European Development Fund (EDF), address migration and asylum both geographically and thematically. As a new element at the end of 2015, the €3 billion Refugee Facility for Turkey was set up under the EU-Turkey deal on migration, with €1 billion coming from the EU budget.

To beer or not to beer? The UK dilemma after Brexit

Beer operators asked Theresa May to keep the free movement principle alive in name of hops

by Emanuele Bonini

To beer or not to beer? That is the question. In time of Hamlet doubts every interrogative point is allowed, even for drinking. And when the national beer industry alone is worth £ 22 billion (about € 24,6 billion), the question is more than legitimate. Brexit poses a lot of challenges and even more interrogative points? To be or not be part of Europe? That was the question the British people answered the 23rd of June, 2016. Now, the future is totally uncertain and unpredictable except for one thing: the beer is endangered. With the United Kingdom out of the EU, malts and hops will be out of the single market. What to do, then? According to the British Beer and Pub Association, at least for beer the single market has to be preserved. In its The beer and pub manifesto, the association set out a political programme for the prime minister, who will have to negotiate the new relationships with the EU Member States. In name of the free movement of pints.

Four freedoms
The European single market is based on the so-called "four freedoms", the freedom of movement of goods, people, services and capital over borders. UK government said no concessions will be granted when it will come the moment of redefining the place of the United Kingdom in Europe. A political move related to the immigration issue. London would control people entering Britain, something against the idea of the economic area. The British Beer and Pub Association called the prime minister for «no changes to the rights of existing overseas workers in the industry and within the supply chain» and for «any quota system to take account of  the service sector and areas of  staff  shortages». At the same time an explicit request was made for «greater support for promotion of  British goods in the UK and overseas market» together with «a free trade deal with the EU as a priority with no tariffs or additional paperwork for beer exports». Isn't this a proposal for maintaining the freedom of movement of goods, people, services and capital over borders?

Immigrants are a resource, revealed data

EU statistical office showed children of asylum seekers perform better in school and in work

by Emanuele Bonini

Surprise! Immigrants are not a problem. On the contrary, they are a resource. Even precious, according to the latest figures released by Eurostat.  Second generation immigrants in the EU are generally well integrated into the labour market and have high educational attainment, even higher compared to the peers of the "hosting nation". That means people whose origins come from another country are more qualified and more skilful and, for such a reason, more competitive.

Criminal nature of immigrants is more and more used in internal political debates, making foreigners one of main social issues in most of the European countries. The United Kingdom linked the Brexit referendum to migration policies, and far-right parties all across the EU are acting against people from outside the EU and even from non-nationals.

In 2014, 82.4% (or 251.7 million individuals) of the EU population aged 15-64 were native born with native background, 11.5% (36.5 million) were foreign-born and 6.1% (18.4 million) were considered as second generation immigrants, as 4.4% (13.3 million) had at least one parent born in the EU and 1.7% (5.1 million) had both parents born outside the EU. Among the EU Member States for which data are available the highest proportions of second generation immigrants in the total resident population were registered in Estonia (21.4%), Latvia (19.1%), Luxembourg (16.2%), France (14.3%), Sweden (11.2%), Belgium (11.0%), Slovenia (10.6%) and Croatia (10.3%).

No time for back to Schengen, said Europe

The Europen Commission prolonged internal border controls for further three months. No restoration of free movement before 2017

by Emanuele Bonini

There will be no «Back to Schengen» for Europe by the end of the year, as originally planned. The European Commission gave green light to the extension of the internal boder controls reintroduced in some Member States as a consequence of the migration crisis. Temporary checks were re-established in Sweden until the 11th of November, and in Germany, Austria and Denmark until the 12th of November. These countries are now allowed to keep their borders closed in derogation to the EU free movements rules for further three months. This means internal borders will be kept closed until mid-February 2017, against the European Commission forecasts. As decided in its migration roadmap, December 2016 was supposed to be «the target date for bringing to an end the exceptional safeguard measures taken, if the overall situations allows». Cleary it is not the case.

The European Union therefore experienced a new failure in the migration policy. The idea of come back to the normal situation by the end of the year was swept away by the European Commission college meeting. Vice president Frans Timmermans recognized the insuccess. «The Schengen area without internal borders is a historical achievement which we must preserve. We are working hard to return to a normal functioning Schengen area as soon as possible, and we have made significant progress. But we are not there yet». The European Commissioner for Migration, Home Affairs, and Citizenship, Dimitris Avramopoulos, expressed the change of political line by no setting new deadline for the restoration of normal conditions. «We have one clear priority and determination: to safeguard Schengen and to restore a normally functioning Schengen area as soon as the conditions allow for it».

EU at stake since there's no wish of Europe

From trade to migration, Member States are breaking ranks in the whole common rules

by Emanuele Bonini

It is not only about migration. The era of the European Union is over because no Member State recognise any longer what have been common rules until today. From fiscal policies to trade issues, passing through the Brexit, everything has been put in question. And once everything is put in question, anything can neither work nor, consequently, deliver. What is going on with CETA is just one a major proof of the implosion of the single project. Article 3, paragraph 1, of the treaty of the EU states that «the Union shall have exclusive competence» in common commercial policy, which means the EU-Canada free trade agreement (CETA) has been signed in respect of EU laws and with a full regular negotiating mandate received by the Member States. Now a regional Parliament in Belgium decided to block the ratification, posing a legal issue over the credibility of the European Union.

Trade
What is happening with CETA is not a first, isolated case. Even with TTIP, the free trade agreement that the EU is negotiation with the United States, Member States changed their mind declaring the dossier as «dead». This is another clear example of how national governments are delegitimizing to the European Commission, the EU body originally thought to replace nation States for acting on their behalf. Without legitimacy the European Commission is weaken, as well as the EU itself. In case of a failure of the EU-Canada free trade agreement, how the EU could negotiate the next commercial deal with third countries?

bLOGBOOK - The ox

A special section dedicated to special people and special memories. A book might not be enough, but collecting some words doesn't hurts

Chapter 3: Davide

Don't call him Davide. He is and he always will "the ox". Once a nickname is given, it is forever, and Davide doesn't make exception. Most of the people believe "the ox" comes from Davide's body size, not properly a thin one. It was Davide himself to explain the origin of his nickname: it come from the Chicago Bulls sweatshirt he was used to wear at the highschool. Apparently one day the gym teacher told him "you!, you with that ox, come here!" From that moment on, he became "the ox". And he still is "the ox".

When I met him he was already known for his nickname, of course. He introduced himself by his name just because customs and habits require so, but it was clear since the beginning such a name would never have been used. "ox-box, it rhymes" became soon the main way to refer to Davide and his capacity of drinking. He was able to assume huge quantities of alcohol. He could empty boxes of beer alone. That's why "ox-box". His origins don't lie: the inhabitants of the region he comes from are famous to be inveterate drinkers. With the right people reach the bottom is not a problem. On the contrary, it is the only possible option on the table. In each sense.

He has always been a great drinking buddy, this is undeniable. As well is undeniable that he was always with me in every important moment of my life. Considering we met when we both were university students, the important moments have been nothing but bloody stupid things, the kind of things you do when you are 20 years old and totally absorbed by the lightness of being. That kind of things you share with the people you know you will conserve for the rest of life. It was the age of irresponsibility, to put it other and simpler words, and Davide was there. He was comfortable in that world that he always acted with the declared goal of not having responsibilities. So he became the first (and perhaps) Chief non-Executive Officer in the world. Yes, a unique boss in leaving to other people the burden of taking decisions.

bLOGBOOK - Impressions from a sea town

 Back to Oostende


Sea towns are always magical. No matter where the urban centres are: although seas are never the same, they always create a unique atmosphere. That is true even for Oostende, certainly not one of the best cities in Belgium. 
Modern, perhaps too modern for the eyes. And empty. "For sale" and "for rent" notices are put up and down the town. Where are the people in Oostende? Seamen spend most of their time far from the mainland, but they make port, soon or late. So what? Maybe once demolitions and constructions will be over, the place will finally have its face. For the time being, Oostende appears to visitors as a huge construction site. In the harbour, in the city centre, in suburbs, along the seafront: works are everywhere in progress. Cranes and modern buildings make Oostende unattractive, compared to the rest of the country. But here the city opted for a different choice, compared to the rest of the kingdom.

Like the whole Belgium, Oostende was harshly hit during the II world war. It was hit even more harshly than other parts, as the town was razed to the ground. It paid the price of the strategic position on the North Sea coast and its advantages as a harbour. Like all strategic economic centres, Oostende became since the beginning of the hostilities a priority target. Instead of restoring the original town, it was decided to create a new one to symbolise a new life for Oostende. Now the new Oostende is still in search for an identity, but the waves, the saltiness, and seagalls with their chirps are still there. Oostende was and still is a sea town.

No full control in EU Commission spending, warned ECA

The European Court of Auditors found breaches in the governance of the Berlaymont. «The Commission diverges from, or does not fully adhere to, international best practice»

by Emanuele Bonini

There is a lack of control in spending activity of the European Commission, according to the latest report from the European Court of Auditors (ECA) published today. New rules have not been implemented, marking a difference between the actions foreseen on paper and those effectively in place. After the resignation of the Santer Commission, in March 2000 the Commission approved the «Reforming the Commission» White Paper, with the aim of modernising the governance of the Commission. After more than a decade improvements are still missing, as pointed out by the ECA. The Commission abolished the financial controller function in order to make the directors-general responsible for the legality and regularity of spending by their Directorate-Generals (DGs). DGs report annually on their management via the annual activity report. But «mechanisms to hold individuals to account for their contribution to internal control are relatively undeveloped». In other words, The Commission «has not put in place staff evaluation criteria linked to this objective». In practice all this means the European Commission «has not established a basis to determine whether the declarations made within annual activity reports are well-founded, or established a benchmark against which to hold DGs accountable». The European Commission expenditure is thus out of control.

Who is responsible for what?
New rules make difficult to establish who is responsible for what can happen in governing the European Commission, revealed the European Court of Auditors in the same report. In fact the distinction made between the political responsibility of commissioners and the operational responsibility of directors-general means that «it has not always been made clear whether ‘political responsibility’ encompasses responsibility for the directorates-general, or is distinct from it». Recent organisational reforms «are beginning» to address some of the risks of a silo culture, the typical mindset that occurs in organisations, which is inward looking and resists sharing information and resources with other people or departments within the same organisation. According to ECA in order to continue to address key risks, the Commission will need to further strengthen the governance structure across the institution.

Is the Youth European Initiative a success or not?

In the Euro area 66.400 jobs created per year with a budget of over six billion. Time to take stock of the situation. And ask questions.

by Emanuele Bonini

According to the European Commissioner for Employment and social affairs, Marianne Thyssen, Europe «is on the right track». Despite the official declarations, is the Youth European Initiative (YEI) a real success or a true failure? Of course those whose idea is YEI is the answer to youth unemployment strongly defend the scheme. On the contrary, those who believe the programme is nothing but much ado for nothing continue to talk in Shakespeare's language. It is not an easy task to understand whether the Youth European Initiative has delivered of not; something has been achieved, but is that enough? Numbers are the real problem behind the debate. Politicians from all parties considered them as positive, public opinion as negative, talking about a flop.

Figures
The European Member States decided to take stock of the situation after three of the launch of YEI. In the Eurozone alone youth unemployment has dropped from a peak of 24.4 % in the first quarter of 2013 (when YEI was created) to 18.9 % in the second quarter of 2016. It means a decrease of 5.5% of people out of job. In absolute terms, this -5,5% means 199.320 people less. Considering that in April 2013 there were 3.624.000 young people without a job, on average Eurozone countries have been able to attract just 66.400 people per year. It doesn't sound really good, even because such trends «should be seen in the context of cyclical factors», admitted the European Commission. Which means people got a job because of the mild recovery experienced by the EU during the last years. So, the Youth Guarantee played a role in inverting trends, but it is unclear in which measure. Furthermore, only 1,4 million people out of the 14 million people who participated to the programme got supported actions. Only the 10% of applicants had a work experience.

Today world more complex, warned US State secretary

John Kerry underlined the differences between the cold war era and contemporary times, calling for more unity and more cooperation

John Kerry

by Emanuele Bonini

Modern times pose more threats to peace and stability compared with past. Nowadays the situation is more complicated than the global geopolitic order was until the end of the cold war. In other words things were better when times were harder, said the US Secretary of State, John Kerry today in Brussels. Participating at a debate on the Future of Transatlantic Relations organised by the German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF), Kerry remembered his experience in East Berlin, and the era of a world divided in two blocks. «World in those days was definitely simpler». The world at that time «was bipolar, a sort of boxing match, with two super power rivals in each of the two opposing corners, preparing the slogan out round after round». It was basically easier to understand where to focus all the attentions, who were the actors to deal with. «Everybody's fears and hopes were concentrated in the hands of few powerful men». Today the situation has changed radically, and the world order is much more out of control.

The great difference between now and the past, stressed Kerry, is that «today the world is less hierarchical, and power is more broadly shared», and there unconventional habits mining stability and prosperity. The US Secretary of State didn't mention nothing in clear way, but of course terrorism was his main thought when he warned about the presence of «non-State actors are playing an increasing role on the global stage». But it is not just about terrorism. A wider range of threats put everybody at risk. «The ghosts of conflicts past, virulent nationalism, authoritarianism, prejudices, sectarian divide, have reappeared in modern but not less vicious guise».

Low wages an opportunity, said Renzi's government

«Invest in Italy» official brochure calls investors to the country, insisting in the chance of having less costs for employees' contracts

by Emanuele Bonini

Can the low level of wage be a reason to feel satisfied? Yes, if you are the chief of the Italian government. Instead of inverting trends giving citizens more economic power, in Italy low salaries are something to be proud of. Something to promote, according to the prime minister Matteo Renzi, whose secretary for Economic development issued an official brochure where the general poverty is described as an attractive business model for investors. «Italy offers a competitive wage level (that grows less than in the rest of EU) and a highly skilled workforce» points out the official brochure. In absolute figures, an engineer in Italy earns an average annual salary of 38,500€, while in other European countries the same profile earns on average over 48,500€ per year. Something to don't miss, according to the Italian authorities, whose aim is to attract investors in the hope of generating new jobs.

The national administration led by Matteo Renzi is at work in order to «make Italy a much better place to do business», stressed the Secretary of State for the Economic development, Ivan Scalfarotto. The Italian Trade Promotion Agency (ITA) offices in Italy and abroad «are able to provide support to investors throughout the project life cycle: from obtaining all relevant authorizations, to identifying any suitable incentive package». According to the Italian authorities a low index in salaries is good incentive to make business in the country.
a series of charts and tables shows the least cost of the Italian national workers compared to other countries of Europe. In case of problem in reading the chats, the official brochure explains that «Italy’s labour costs are well below other peer economies, like Germany and France». In addiction, it is well specified that labour cost growth rates registered in Italy between 2012 and 2014) «are lower than those recorded by Eurozone countries (+1.2% vs. +1.7%)».

Figures revealed the failure of the EU migration agenda

One after the strategy defined to manage the refugee crisis is well far to be implemented

by Emanuele Bonini

The European agenda for migration didn't work. Doesn't work. One year after, migrants are still in Italy and in Greece waiting to be relocated among the other EU Member States. Despite all the efforts of the European Commission, national governments didn't deliver. Despite what the European Commission can state, latest figures show an epic fail in dealing with migration crisis. As of 26 September 2016, just 1,196 out of 39,600 people have been relocated from Italy to the rest of the EU, while just 4,399 out of 66,400 refugees have been relocated from Greece.  In total, in a year 5,595 persons were transferred inside Europe, namely the 5,2% of the 106,000 migrants that Member States promised to take care. A clear sign of how national governments are committed in finding a solution and put an end to the crisis.

The 22nd of September, 2015, the European Council agreed to put in place a relocation system allowing the redistribution of all migrants arrived in in Italy and Greece. The Members of the European Union should welcome 120,000 migrants in two years, but looking at the rhythm of the relocations made until now, it seems unlikely that final goal could be achieved. The special formula behind the relocation scheme, which is mandatory on a voluntary basis, is the main reason of such a delay. Member States simply don't want to act.

The European Commission tried to defend its own strategy. «Our measures work», stated the EU Commissioner in charge for Migration, Dimitris Avramopoulos. Unfortunately reality suggests it is not true. If anything worked, it didn't properly. According to Avramopoulos «considerable progress have been made as a Union on the refugee crisis», but figures are there to contradict him. Of course 5,595 relocations are a great achievement compared to none, but they are a failure compared to what it is the final goal.

Draghi called States for delivering and respecting rules

«Monetary policy alone is not enough», said the president of the European Central Bank. «Trust is essential». Warnings to Italy

by Emiliano Biaggio

Rules have to be respected. This means structural reforms have to be delayed, new additional deficit is not allowed. This means also Italy has to deliver rather than complain. The president of the ECB, Mario Draghi, stressed yesterday national government have to do more, in the respect of the existing framework. All the instruments to boost economy are there, according to the chief of the European Central Bank. On the contrary, political will is still lagging behind. And a change in this sense is needed.

Member States have to act
«The monetary policy of the ECB served to limit the negative effects of the shock, but monetary policy alone is not enough to deliver growth», pointed out Draghi in the European Parliament. «Other policy actors need to do their part, with growth-friendly fiscal and structural policies which will contribute to a self-sustaining recovery and increase the economic growth potential». It is not the first time Draghi calls the EU Member States to do more. He has been repeating it since he took office, in 2011. Once again, Member States have been invited to act.

Respecting the rules
«It's important rules are respected». Draghi made clear neither deviations nor derogation from current legal framework are possible. He recalled that «for further European integration to be feasible and acceptable, trust among its nations and people is essential». As a consequence, «to bolster such trust, it is important that agreed rules are respected». In this sense, according to the ECB chief is good to keep in mind that «in the existing rules there's many flexibility». A clear warning to Italy, even though he didn't do any explicit reference.

Quotes

«Global migration will accompany us in the future».
(Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, 19th of September 2016)

China ban EU delegates after Dalai Lama's official visit

The PRC government deleted diplomatic missions from the European Parliament as response to the invitation of the Tibetan leader in Strasbourg

by Emanuele Bonini

The People's Republic of China cancelled external mission of the European Parliament in return of yesterday Dalai Lama's official visit to the EU institution. Tibet's spiritual leader has always been considered by Chinese authorities as the leader of Tibet independence movement, so a problem for the integrity of Chinese territory. The XIV Dalai Lama was invited by the president of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz. The decision itself made the PRC upset, but in Beijing censured what the Dalai Lama said yesterday in Strasbourg. «Some constructive criticism is sometime necessary», he said. A statement that forced China to «postpone» the missions from the European Parliament in the Asian country, originally foreseen next week. Two delegations from the Economic Affairs and Industry Committees were supposed to travel to China next week, but they won't do it any longer since China deleted the meetings.

The European Parliament preferred not to comment. It has been taken note of the decision of the Chinese authorities, and delegations will not be sent to the country. Sources confirmed that everything happened because of the official visit of the Dalai Lama in Strasbourg, without adding further details. There is an ongoing diplomatic crisis between the EU and the PRC, and what has just happened is nothing but a new chapter in a never-ending story. The political agenda of the European Union is in contrast with the strategic interests of the Chinese partner, as shows the single strategy on China.

FACT SHEET/ The Western Sahara issue

«Western Sahara is not part of Morocco»

From the European Court of Justice comes a clear opinion over a long-lasting issue

by Emanuele Bonini

The European Union doesn't recognise the ruling rights of Morocco over Western Sahara. This was reaffirmed by Melchior Wathelet, advocat general at the European Court of Justice, in his personal opinion made public today. Called to decide whether the bilateral trade agreements between EU and Morocco are applicable to the Western Sahara, the advocat general ruled it out. In his opinion Western Sahara «is not part of Moroccan territory and, therefore, neither the EU-Morocco Association Agreement, nor the Liberalisation Agreement on the liberalisation of trade in agricultural and fishery products are applicable to it». These considerations are not new in Europe, and they create both a political and judicial problem. On the institutional side the European Union exclude any sovereignty of Morocco over Western Sahara. In giving his opinion, Melchior Wathelet recalled that the largest part of Western Sahara is controlled by the central government of Rabat, which «considers itself as having sovereignty over that territory». This doesn't mean they have it. In fact, the advocate general emphasises that «the European Union and its Member States have never recognised that Western Sahara is  part of Morocco, or that the latter has sovereignty over that territory». Something won't be welcomed by Moroccan authorities, always claiming the Western Sahara as part of the country. It is already possible to expect formal reactions from Rabat and a diplomatic case to be managed.