Time for rules against fake news on the web, said PACE

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted recommendations calling governments to act properly. Traceability amongst the measures proposed

by Emanuele Bonini

National governments should update domestic legislations on press and publishing in order to guarantee the accountability of the on-line content and tackle the fake-news phenomenon, the Council of Europe said today in a recommendation passed by 127 votes to 2 with 5 abstentions. The international organization based in Strasbourg called to act against the misinformation produced through new media channels, since the line between what could be considered a legitimate attempt to express own views seeking to persuade and what is disinformation and manipulation «is frequently crossed». Facebook, twitter, individual blogs, non-journalistic platforms: the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) noted, «with concern, the number of on-line media campaigns designed to misguide sectors of the public through intentionally biased or false information, of hate campaigns against individuals and also of personal attacks, often in a political context, with the objective of harming democratic political processes». A practice which oblige to initiate, «both at the national level and within the Council of Europe», discussions on norms and mechanisms required for preventing the risk of information distortion and manipulation of public opinion.

Stop with deregulation
According to the PACE there is a situation of substantial deregulation. Today it has become difficult to control the use and sharing of information on the internet, namely (but not only) because of the increasing presence of fake profiles flooding the internet, with anonymous posts and comments using the platforms of different media outlets. That's why rules are needed, and the Council of Europe asked in particular to «ensure the traceability by law-enforcement authorities of users of online media when they violate the law». A measure that can be explained by the fact that on-line media «must not become a lawless zone through the anonymity of users». Furthermore, governments are requested to set up alert mechanisms against people who regularly post insulting or inflammatory text (the so-called «trolls»), which empower users to complain about them, with a view of excluding such people from their fora.

EU for a minimum wage for all (but they can't promise)

Amongst the first centre-right men, European Commission president became the last of leftists by proposing the idea of basic salary for every job category

by Emanuele Bonini

It's time for Europe to introduce basic salary standards, said the president of the European Commission yesterday. According to Jean-Claude Juncker, «we need a minimum wage for every job, in every Member State», and that's what the executive body of the EU has the intention to do in March, when the college of commissioners will have to approve the new social package. Juncker didn't entered into details, but speaking during a conference in Bruxelles, he underlined the importance to have a measure like the one he mentioned. «If everybody had a minimum wage, we could fight the phenomenon of social dumping, which is eroding our societies», stressed Juncker. Despite the best intentions, it is unclear how the European Commission could be able to introduce a minimum wage (that - it has to be specified - should be fixed at different levels taking into account the different realities of the Member States). The European Commission has in fact limited power on this, since by treaties the competence on social policies is shared with the Member States.

 The European Commission has the duty of promoting social policies. It has foreseen that «in defining and implementing its policies and activities, the Union shall take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of education, training and protection of human health» (article 9 of the treaty of the EU). Nevertheless, when it comes to employment and social inclusion, most of the actions are left in the hands of governments. It's up to the national authorities to define and set out reforms in labour market. The EU Commission can just «encourage cooperation between the Member States and facilitate the coordination of their action in all social policy fields under this Chapter, particularly in matters relating to employment, labour law and working conditions, social security». (art. 156 of the Treaty on the functioning of the EU).

«Corruption in Italy a question of culture»

Italians have no the habit of honesty, according to the Council of Europe. A long term approach is needed more than laws

by Emanuele Bonini

Honesty is an optional in Italy. In the country the principle of legality is missing, but it's principles themselves which are not there. Instead of the rule of law, in Italy there is the rule of non-law. And this is because ethics don't belong to the Italian nature, according to the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) of the Council of Europe. The latest evaluation report on corruption prevention in Italy put on paper a national problem which is not just or simply legal, but above all cultural. Italians have the culture of bribery. In such a context, bills or legislative acts will never be enough. «Combating corruption has to become a matter of culture and not only rules», underlined the report. «This requires a long term approach, continuing education throughout all sectors of society as an indispensable component of the anti-corruption strategy and sustained political commitment».

Italians need to be educated to be honest and fair, that's the real challenge. Can Italy succeed? Sentence waits posterity. Of course, premises are not really encouraging since those who are supposed to act don't seem to be in the position to do it. It's up to the decision makers to promote the change, to push for a new way of thinking. It's duty of politicians to give the country that long term approach required to stop corruptions once and for all, but they are the first people to be considered part of the problem. Italy has no schemes in place for MEPs, and GRECO asked that «clear and enforceable conflict of interest rules be adopted for parliamentarians, including through a systematisation of the currently dispersed ineligibility and incompatibility regime». Furthermore, the formal recommendation for «a robust set of restrictions concerning donations, gifts, hospitality, favours and other benefits for parliamentarians» means that Italian MEPs are exposed to the risk of being bribed.  A code of conduct should be issued and applied to both branches of the Italian Parliament. Since there is a cultural problem, according to GRECO this measure could facilitate the change. «Although a code in itself does not guarantee ethical behaviour it does help to foster a climate of integrity and to endorse the intention of the current legislature to abide by a culture of ethics». The problem of Italy is not that the country is corrupted. The problem of Italy is that Italians have no the habit of legality.

Theresa May at work for a new British Empire

UK prime minister considers Brexit the opportunity «to build a more Global Britain»

by Emanuele Bonini

Theresa May wants to restore the ancient, old, glorious British empire. That's the sense of the speech she gave today in London, where the prime minister of the United Kingdom not only traced the route of Brexit but also that one for bringing back the country on the roof of the world. Freedom to decide alone the destiny of the nation, together with the restoration of the role of main character worldwide: that's what Theresa May wants to work on. Keep the presence in Europe - and not just because of geography - and play an active role in the rest of the globe is the near future that Theresa May sees for its people. That's why Brexit will have to be completed by the early of 2019, in order to start a new era in which Britannia can rules the waves again.

«I want us to be a truly Global Britain», stressed the British prime minister. This means the United Kingdom from now on - or, well from Brexit on - will must be «a country that reaches beyond the borders of Europe too». Is history to claim Britain or is Britain to claim history? For sure the Union Jack is here to stay, ready to flutter more vigorously across the world. Brexit is not a tragedy. On the contrary, it is a chance, an opportunity «to make Britain stronger, to make Britain fairer, and to build a more Global Britain too». For such a reason «we do not approach these negotiations expecting failure, but anticipating success». Here we have Brexit as explained by Theresa May's in the speech at Lancaster House. Nothing but the will of return to the past.

Too much security is killing rights

Basic freedoms wiped out by counter-terrorism, denounced Amnesty International

by Emanuele Bonini

In name of security forget about basic freedoms. In name of security Europe has been selling off civil rights. It's happening now, and nothing suggests the process neither will stop nor will be reversed. Terrorism gave carte blanche to national governments, which are responding with authoritarianism, according to the latest report published by Amnesty International. «Individual EU states and regional bodies have responded to the attacks by proposing, adopting and implementing wave after wave of counter-terrorism measures that have eroded the rule of law, enhanced executive powers, peeled away judicial controls, restricted freedom of expression and exposed everyone to government surveillance». That is true for all the 14 countries assessed (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Spain, and the United Kingdom). Overall, the situation is deteriorated. The answer to the terrorist threat has been «dangerously disproportionate», as read the title of the report. There Amnesty International found that instead of strengthening the European human rights system, the measures adopted «have been steadily dismantling it, putting hard won rights at risk». John Dalhuisen, Amnesty International’s Director for Europe, has no doubts: «Taken alone these individual counter-terrorism measures are worrying enough, but when seen together, a disturbing picture emerges in which unchecked powers are trampling freedoms that have long been taken for granted».

Introduction of martial law. According to Amnesty International, «one of the most alarming» developments across the EU is the effort by states to make it easier to invoke and prolong a “state of emergency” as a response to terrorism or the threat of violent attacks. In a number of states, emergency measures that are supposed to be temporary have become embedded in ordinary criminal law. In name of national security, the threshold for the triggering and extension of emergency measures has been lowered – and runs the risk of being reduced even further in coming years. While international human rights law is clear that exceptional measures should only be applied in genuinely exceptional circumstances - namely «in time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation» - the disturbing idea that Europe faces a perpetual emergency is beginning to take hold.

Happy new (complicated) year, Europe!

2017 will be politcally challenging for the EU, whose future has not to be given for granted. Euroskepticism in France, Brexit and Trump could shout down the single project

by Emanuele Bonini

The year just begun could be one of the most challenging in the recent contemporary history of Europe. A lot of sensitive dossiers are still in search for an adoption, and new question marks will come from the various national elections that will be held all across Europe, as well as from the political choices taken outside the continent, above all on the other side of the Atlantic. The new US administration will be not an easy task for the EU, whose future is more unpredictable in light of the raise of euroskepticism. France and the Netherlands, amongst the six nations who promoted the European integration, could choose the national option, giving the coup de grâce to Europe already in troubles after the British farewell. Here we have the 2017 political calendar of the EU, with all the key dates already scheduled:

January the 1st. The first ever Maltese rotating presidency of the Council of the EU begins. There are those who consider a small country like Malta exposed to the pressure of bigger countries, with all the possible consequences for the European dossiers. We will see.

January the 17th. The European Parliament is expected to elect the new president. In pole positions are Gianni Pittella (S&D) and Antonio Tajani (EPP), both Italians.

January the 20th. Donal Trump will officially assume the presidency of the United States of America. The EU was scared about Trump's personal attitude in dealing with European affairs and the transatlantic relations. Starting from this day, everything will start to become clear.

March the 15th. General elections are held in the Netherlands. This is perhaps the first political test for the future of the European Union, since one of the EU founder Member States is exposed to the risk of a victory by a euroskeptic party. Geert Wilders' Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid – PVV) could control the national parliament or influence its activity. A problem, considering that international agreements as well as EU agreements need the approval and the ratification of national Parliaments.

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.