20 Most Recent Stories From RSS

Wed 16th Jun 2010:

Right to interpretation a leap forward for European justice.

Liberal Democrat European justice and human rights spokeswoman Sarah Ludford MEP (London) has hailed as a "leap forward for European justice" today's European Parliament vote to give all EU citizens rights to interpretation and translations when they are questioned by police or tried in another EU country where they do not speak the language. Ludford, the European Parliament's rapporteur who conducted the negotiations with the rotating EU presidency, currently held by Spain, said:  "These measures will deliver real justice to some of our most vulnerable citizens. "There are too many cases where people find themselves accused of a crime abroad, but are unable to understand the details of the accusation or the proceedings that are applied against them. "When people need clarity most, they can feel faced by an Alice in Wonderland justice system where nothing feels certain or makes real sense. "What the Parliament voted for today is effective, efficient and transparent justice. "Now it is for member states to make it happen."   ENDS.   NOTES TO EDITORS The rights to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings directive can now pass into EU law, having been approved by EU governments in the Council of Ministers and now the European Parliament: it is the first EU criminal justice legislation to be negotiated under co-decision with MEPs rather than decided by national parliaments alone. The UK (and Ireland) are both choosing to opt in to this measure, which this has the support of the full complement of 26 EU states (Denmark does not take part in any EU criminal justice initiatives). The Directive will mean that when a suspect is arrested or taken to court in an EU country where he does not speak the local language he will for the first time under EU law have the right to good quality interpretation in all questioning, hearings and key meeting with lawyers and to translation of all essential documents. Sarah Ludford, a patron of legal NGO Fair Trials International, has been active over the last decade on many cases of denial of proper defence and trial rights, including failures to provide proper language services. Sarah has long campaigned on improving London’s bad air quality. In February of this year she and her London Liberal Democrat colleagues Ed Davey MP and Mike Tuffrey AM sent incoming environment commissioner Janez Potočnik a letter demanding that he make enforcing the EU’s strict air quality standards in London the first item on his ‘to-do list’. She has also been active in the campaign against the 3rd Heathrow runway and expansion of London City Airport, highlighting how this would only worsen London’s air quality problem.    

Tue 15th Jun 2010:

Italian decision to drop Arapi extradition claim due to mistaken identity.

Today’s decision by the Italian authorities to drop an extradition case against Leek resident Edmond Arapi due to overwhelming alibi evidence is welcome but should have come much earlier, says Mr Arapi’s Euro MP Liz Lynne. Mr Arapi, originally from Albania, a chef legally resident in the UK, was given a 16 year jail term by an Italian court for a murder carried out in Genoa in October 2004, on a day he can prove he was working at a café in Trentham in Staffordshire.   His fight against extradition ended today at an appeal hearing in the High Court when a lawyer representing the Italian authorities announced they were dropping the case. Backed by Liz Lynne MEP and Fair Trials International, Mr Arapi had been fighting extradition claim since being arrested in 2009, despite overwhelming evidence that he was the victim of a case of mistaken identity. Liz Lynne said: “I am delighted to hear that this terrible ordeal for Mr Arapi and his wife and family is over at last. There was overwhelming evidence that Mr Arapi was in Staffordshire on the day of the crime and that he never left the UK between 2002 and his marriage in 2006. “It is good news that the Italian prosecutors have dropped the case but why did it take them so long to check the finger print evidence which even more clearly than his alibi proved they were chasing the wrong man? “The real killer, who apparently confessed to the crime and used the name Arapi – is still at large.” A handwriting expert had earlier authenticated Mr Arapi’s signature on a delivery note received at the café in Trentham on October 26 2004, the day of the murder in Genoa. Liz Lynne raised concerns about the case with the British Home and Foreign Secretaries and with Italian authorities as well as with fellow Liberal and Democrat MEPs from Italy. She added: “It is somewhat startling that Mr Arapi was totally unaware that he had been accused and tried in absentia for this crime and then had the decision considered by an Italian appeal court. “The basis of European Human Rights Law is that everyone is entitled to know if they are accused of an offence and given a full and fair trial. In this case, it is quite clear that Mr Arapi was never involved and that basic fingerprinting evidence which would have cleared him was not considered. “This kind of case unfortunately undermines the principle of the European Arrest Warrant, which is a good one and has led to many international criminals being arrested and convicted. “I am grateful to the hard work of Fair Trials International who took up this case.”    

Thu 3rd Jun 2010:

Commission cracks down on dirty London air.

The European Commission has today cracked down on the UK’s failure to comply with EU clean air standards in London for pollution from diesel vehicles, power plants and factories. This could lead to a European Court judgement and a fine.   London Liberal Democrat MEP Sarah Ludford, a long-time campaigner for cleaner air in the capital, said:   “This is a legacy of 13 years of Labour government as well as Labour and Tory Mayors. They have jointly failed to take effective action to reduce dangerous airborne particles, and this lax attitude to a health emergency has been a betrayal of Londoners.” “These nasty particles can cause asthma, heart disease and lung cancer. Recent research revealed that poor air quality in London could be responsible for up to 8,000 premature deaths a year." “I heartily welcome the new LibDem-Conservative coalition government’s pledge to work towards full compliance with European air quality standards. No one wants money down the drain on European court fines, so let’s get to work to clean up London’s air!"   Sarah has long campaigned on improving London’s bad air quality. In February of this year she and her London Liberal Democrat colleagues Ed Davey MP and Mike Tuffrey AM sent incoming environment commissioner Janez Potočnik a letter demanding that he make enforcing the EU’s strict air quality standards in London the first item on his ‘to-do list’. She has also been active in the campaign against the 3rd Heathrow runway and expansion of London City Airport, highlighting how this would only worsen London’s air quality problem.    

Tue 18th May 2010:

Building standards will cut energy bills and emissions.

  Fiona Hall (North East of England), Leader of the UK Liberal Democrat MEPs and member of the Industry, Research and Energy Committee has welcomed the European Parliament's backing for cost optimal standards of energy efficiency for all renovated buildings. Also agreed was a tight, "nearly zero" energy efficiency requirement for all new buildings in Europe from 2021.   Ms Hall said:   "These new energy saving standards will cut energy bills for families and businesses in the UK and throughout Europe. They will also help tackle fuel poverty at source. "What we have passed in the European Parliament is in line with the UK coalition government's agreement to invest in energy efficiency and promote the development of new green jobs. "Energy saving in buildings is crucial to meeting our UK and EU agreed targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and boosting our energy security. "I look forward to working with the Government on the implementation of these new measures."      

Sun 16th May 2010:

European Parliament signals cross party support for electoral reform.

Parliament today formally declared its intention to draw up proposals for the election of MEPs by direct universal suffrage in accordance with a uniform procedure in all Member States.   Parliament has the power and the responsibility under the Treaty to initiate a proposal for electoral reform of its members.   The strong signal from MEPs came in the context of reservations about the appointment of two French MEPs from the Assemblée Nationale as part of the contingent of 18 additional MEPs following the changes brought about by the Lisbon Treaty. Parliamentarians from across the House expressed unease at the precedent this creates and in the breach of primary law stipulating that MEPs be directly elected. However Parliament decided against challenging the decision of the European Council in June 2009 and instead focused on the wider issue of establishing common rules across the EU from 2014 for the election of MEPs. Andrew Duff (UK, Lib Dem) has just tabled his report on the subject in the Constitutional Affairs committee. This proposes, inter alia, that a transnational constituency to elect an additional 25 MEPs should be created in time for the 2014 election. "We have expressed our serious misgivings about the French proposals to appoint two MEPs from the ranks of French national politicians but will not go to the wire to block this temporary and exceptional digression from a Treaty requirement. The episode has, at least, highlighted the need for radical reform of the electoral procedure for the European Parliament in the longer term."    

Wed 24th Mar 2010:

Europe’s future foreign policy at risk.

Before Catherine Ashton can become an effective actor on the global stage, the European Union’s new foreign policy chief needs to have in place the diplomatic service, ordained by the Lisbon treaty. The job of the European External Action Service is to “assist” Lady Ashton in her multitude of tasks as high representative for foreign and security policy, vice-president of the European Commission and chair of the Council of foreign ministers. Drawing officials from the Commission, the Council secretariat and national foreign ministries, the EAS is not a new EU institution or agency but a service at the command of both Commission and Council, with Lady Ashton, who belongs to both institutions, in charge.   Inevitably, perhaps, tensions have arisen between the Commission and Council as to which of them should have the lion’s share of the EAS. The squabble now threatens to get out of control, putting at risk the EU’s future foreign policy. The deadline originally set for the establishment of the service – the end of April – is unlikely to be met. Countries outside Europe must already be wondering what the EU is playing at after so many years of constitutional wrangling. It would be best to implement the Lisbon treaty scrupulously and in full. Unhappily, some are tempted to adorn the treaty blueprint with extra provisions while others are being selective in choosing which of its clauses they prefer. President José Manuel Barroso, for example, is intent on defending the prerogatives that the Commission has acquired over the years in managing the EU’s external relations in fields other than foreign and security policy. The member states, in particular France and the UK, want to resist Commission incursion via the EAS into areas they consider precious to national sovereignty. Both sides downplay the treaty’s injunction that each institution must respect the distinct functions of the other. The row over the EAS exacerbates other tensions flowing from the Lisbon treaty. Mr Barroso’s toes are being trod upon by Herman Van Rompuy who, defying expectation, is proving to be a quietly determined full-time president of the European Council. Mr Van Rompuy has decided not to limit himself to his main function, which is representing the EU at summit level in the field of foreign and security policy, but also to take up issues of economic governance that are traditionally the Commission’s domain. Meanwhile, foreign ministers are having to come to terms with a reduced role in EU affairs, in effect no longer “chefs de la diplomatie”, presided over in the Council by Lady Ashton and excluded from meetings of the European Council. It will be disastrous if the EAS is taken hostage in these turf wars. The EAS will enable the EU to do things together that were previously, because of a lack of cohesion, done separately or, because of a lack of means, not done at all. To justify its existence, the EAS needs a wide scope. France and the UK have agreed that the security and military apparatus now in the Council will join the new service. This is a major concession that now deserves from the Commission a reciprocal gesture in terms of pooling overseas development policy. Indeed, the EAS process is a golden opportunity to reform and strengthen the EU’s development policy, making it more responsive to the needs of third countries, less incoherent and more cost efficient. There is no need for the Commission to pine after the old ways of doing things. It is high time to disconnect EU development policy from post-colonial attitudes, to integrate it better with foreign and security policy imperatives, and to prepare to bring development finance under the EU federal budget in 2014. A good decision, which still needs consolidating, is to gather all geographical desks in the EAS. Yet if development policy is kept outside the EAS, so will be African policy, making a nonsense of the effort to streamline policy making and avoid duplication. And although the programming side of external policies will be within the EAS there will still be commissioners for development policy (Andris Piebalgs), humanitarian aid (Kristalina Georgieva) and neighbourhood policy (Stefan Fule), who will form a powerful cluster around Lady Ashton, and will often deputise for her. Draft organigrammes of the EAS are circulating around Brussels like confetti. The treaty is silent on whether Lady Ashton needs official deputies. Events suggest she does. These three or four deputies will act for the high representative where a junior ministerial presence is required. This includes speaking to the European and national parliaments. In short, these deputies need to be as “double-hatted” as Lady Ashton is herself, high officials who are also political “special representatives”, according to the treaty, nominated by the high representative and appointed by the Council. The European parliament is playing an active part in these negotiations, as it is wont to do when Council and Commission are divided. MEPs have to give their opinion on the setting up of the EAS and also have to agree any revision of the financial and staff regulations needed to get the Service up and running. Parliament, therefore, has effective powers of co-decision over the whole apparatus. Its aim, of course, is to build in as much democratic and budgetary accountability as possible. For this reason, and for efficient administration, the EAS must be linked organically to the relevant services of the Commission. Lady Ashton will have to get her annual draft budget through the parliament. Recruitment to the EAS will be managed according to regular EU procedures. The Commission’s overseas delegations – now 136 of them – will become part of the EAS, reporting in the first instance to Lady Ashton, who will also be responsible for senior appointments. For this purpose, she needs to be fuelled with nominations of credible candidates by a selection board representative of the Commission and Council. Mr Barroso’s recent controversial appointment of his former chef de cabinet, João Vale de Almeida, to the EU’s Washington mission will never be allowed to happen in quite that way again. Mr Barroso is too clever to succumb to pique at the loss of direct authority. He knows that it will be self-defeating to hobble the EAS at birth. Unless she has the means, Ms Ashton will be unable to fulfil the vital task of improving co-ordination of external policies both within the college of commissioners and between the Commission and Council. She needs to be well-informed. For this the EAS has to be large, capable of liaising professionally with the Commission in all manner of international affairs such as energy security, climate change, immigration and crime busting. The Commission, although it will lose its classical external relations and development policy people to the EAS, will retain trade and enlargement in full. The Lisbon treaty does not eviscerate the power of the Commission. Lady Ashton is not a Council cuckoo in the Commission nest. It is good for Europe that the Commission vice-president takes over the Council of foreign ministers and that she, supported by her Commission colleagues, has the power to propose common foreign and security policies to that Council which, in many cases, may act by qualified majority vote. Over time the new system will foster a common culture of diplomacy and more federal policies with which the world can engage and our own citizens identify.  

Wed 10th Mar 2010:

Commissioner will look to close cheque loophole.

Sharon Bowles MEP (South East of England), Chair of the European Parliament's Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee, has won an assurance from the European Commissioner for the Internal Market that he will look into options for closing a loophole in cheque-cashing policy that has led to Britons abroad being defrauded to the tune of millions of pounds. In several EU countries it is still possible for individuals to cash a cheque into their personal account when it has been made out to a business. They can do this by simply signing the back of the cheque. Although this practice was banned in the UK in 2006, there are no common European rules.   Ms Bowles welcomed Commissioner Barnier's assurance: "Whether it is British citizens abroad or foreign nationals who are suffering from cheque fraud, the situation is unacceptable. "The UK has shown that this loophole can be closed. "Now we must do it across the whole of the EU. "This might be possible through a Commission directive or by coordinated action by individual member states - and Commissioner Barnier has agreed to look at all the options. "I am delighted that Commissioner Barnier shares my concerns and I look forward to working with him in future to safeguard citizens' money." NOTES TO EDITORS The issue of cheque loophole fraud was highlighted last year with the imprisonment of a British national in France. Graham Templeton was convicted of defrauding a group of British citizens living in the Dordogne in France (the total sum of the fraud was two million euros). Templeton persauded his victims to make out cheques to the Societe Generale bank, but he then signed the back and paid them into his personal account. To hear Sharon speaking to the BBC about this issue, please follow this link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00pr5bb      

Welcome cut to red tape for Britain's small businesses.

Diana Wallis MEP (Yorkshire and the Humber) Liberal Democrat Spokeswoman on Legal Affairs, has welcomed today's European Parliament vote in favour of exempting struggling small businesses from producing onerous annual accounts.   The objective of the proposal is to reduce the bureaucratic burden on micro-entities in order to enhance their competitiveness in the wake of the financial crisis. Micro-entities are defined as businesses where two of the following three criteria apply: - 1. The balance sheet does not exceed €500.000; 2. The net turnover does not exceed € 1,000,000 and; 3. The average number of employees during the financial year is 10 or less.   Ms Wallis said: "This is a ray of light for small businesses at a very difficult time. "There are around two million businesses in the UK that have nine employees or less. "We can therefore be very confident that this proposal would allow many small British businesses the breathing space they need in a tough economic environment. "Under this measure small businesses must still keep records that show the company's business transactions and their financial situation. That is important to ensure good practice. "But they would no longer have to keep the same reporting rules as the big companies that have the time and money to produce annual accounts with ease. "EU governments now have the opportunity to endorse this proposal and give a helping hand to small businesses. I hope our Government will do its best to support it and seize this opportunity to lighten the bureaucratic burden". NOTE TO EDITORS Please find attached the European Parliament's report amending Council Directive 78/660/EEC on the annual accounts of certain types of companies as regards micro-entities.          

Tue 9th Mar 2010:

Commission right to bring 30% emissions cut one big step close.

Chris Davies MEP (North West of England) has welcomed today's decision by the European Commission to change the requirements for the EU to increase its 2020 carbon emissions reduction goals from 20 to 30%.     The Commission's new document International climate policy post-Copenhagen has replaced the EU's commitment to cut emissions by 30% in the event of an international agreement being reached, and instead said that this should happen "if the conditions are right".   Replying to a question from Chris Davies, European Commissioner for Climate Action Connie Hedegaard confirmed that this is a substantive change on the part of the Commission. Davies said: "The failure at Copenhagen to secure an international agreement meant that the EU's requirement for revising its target could not be met "The Commission has today changed the rules and they are right to do so for two reasons. "First, we are never going to develop a green economy with new jobs unless we take action now: and if we don't, we will only slip further behind China in that race. "Second, due to the recession, a 30% cut in carbon emissions now costs the same as a 20% cut before the downturn. "The Commission's change of position is therefore very welcome"      

Sun 7th Mar 2010:

Icelanders' 'no' is not their last word.

Responding to the resounding 'No' vote Icelanders delivered in the referendum on the proposed deal to repay Britain and the Netherlands outstanding debts from the failed Icelandic bank Icesave, European Parliament Vice President Diana Wallis MEP said: 'The Icelandic people needed an opportunity to have their say.   "The result is no surprise. But what really matters is that the Icelanders, the Dutch and the British have kept negotiating in search of a lasting solution. Although there is no new agreement yet, they have moved on from the untenable package rejected by the Icelandic people. "The referendum result should be respected, but we are not a million miles from reaching a different and acceptable settlement. That would be the best answer to the referendum outcome.' NOTE TO EDITORS: Diana Wallis MEP is the European Parliament Vice President responsible for the Arctic and Nordic matters. She was recently in Iceland to deliver a key note lecture at the University of Iceland and to meet the Icelandic Prime Minister.          

Tue 2nd Mar 2010:

Farage: from stamping his feet to thumbing his nose.

Graham Watson MEP (South West of England and Gibraltar) has slammed anti-European MEP Nigel Farage for his refusal to apologise for insulting Herman Van Rompuy and the Belgian people.   Watson said:   "Farage has gone from stamping his feet to thumbing his nose. "The Parliament's President asked only for a simple apology. By refusing, Farage has added insult to injury. "His actions bring shame on himself and embarrassment to Britain". NOTES TO EDITORS Today, Jerzy Buzek - the European Parliament President - formally asked Farage for an apology for comments made in the European Parliament chamber last week. Farage has refused. Mr Buzek is now reportedly considering which alternative sanction to impose.    

Thu 25th Feb 2010:

Who is Herman Van Rompuy? .

With Europe’s economic and monetary union in a spin, it is a good time to ask what the new Lisbon treaty can do to help. In institutional terms, the most relevant innovation is the creation of the post of standing presidency of the European Council and the appointment to it of Herman van Rompuy.   In contrast to its detailed specification of Catherine Ashton’s job as foreign minister, the treaty is relatively vague about the role of the president of the European Council. Mr Van Rompuy, who has no vote, is to chair the institution and “drive forward its work”. He will “ensure the preparation and continuity” of its work, and “endeavour to facilitate cohesion and consensus”. In the field of foreign and security policy, he is to “ensure the external representation” of the EU “at his level and in that capacity”. Clearly, much of the detail was left, and was intended to be left by the drafters of the treaty, to be filled out by the first post-holder.   So who is Herman van Rompuy and what has he been up to so far? As a former Belgian prime minister he is perforce a federalist. He is a Flemish social Christian, aged 62, of modest demeanour. Born in Etterbeek, Brussels, he has degrees from Leuven Catholic University in philosophy and applied economics; he has a wife and four children. As speaker of the lower house of the Belgian parliament and then prime minister, Mr Van Rompuy brought welcome stability. He is known to be very diplomatic and a master of compromise. Of his new job, he says: “I will consider everyone’s interests and sensitivities. Even if our unity is our strength, our diversity remains our wealth. Every country should emerge victorious from negotiations. A negotiation that ends with a defeated party is never a good negotiation”. Mr Van Rompuy will not be the first Belgian to deploy the art of compromise on behalf of the European Union – although one recalls the remark of another former Belgian prime minister, Guy Verhofstadt, that a true Belgian compromise is a compromise which nobody can understand. Less than two months into the job, Mr Van Rompuy has already confounded those who said he would be weak. He has crisscrossed the EU, meeting each head of government. In a number of carefully calibrated public statements, the president of the European Council has spelled out how he plans to develop the role. It is clear he does not intend to be a mere non-executive chairman of the board. Nor will he confine himself to foreign policy. Instead, he initiated the informal European Council at the Bibliothèque Solvay, a 19th-century Brussels library, to tackle the economic crisis and the risk of a Greek default. Mr Van Rompuy advanced a seven point plan designed to deliver economic recovery. Here he trod boldly and directly into the sphere of economic policymaking which the president of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, might once have considered as his own preserve. Mr Van Rompuy and Mr Barroso are polite about each other but not effusive. There is no Blairite familiarity between them. How their relationship pans out will be the major factor in determining whether or not the experiment of a permanent presidency of the European Council is a success. They will be seeing a lot of each other. AIready they breakfast every week. Their pairing will be under particular scrutiny on their foreign travels, and especially at the next G20 summit in June in Toronto, where Mr Van Rompuy looks determined to be prominent. Mr Van Rompuy seeks to demarcate his work as follows: whereas the Commission president will be responsible for proposing the content of the Europe 2020 strategy for sustainable growth and jobs, he will be in charge of ‘governance’ issues. In other words, faithful to his brief of driving forward the work of the European Council, Mr Van Rompuy wants to shift the focus from what has to be done to how on earth to do it. “In the past,” he says, “there has been a lack of ownership, of monitoring, and of enforcement. There has also been a lack of focus. That must change.” Under the Van Rompuy doctrine, the European Council can give guidance to the Commission and Council of Ministers, but it remains itself ultimately responsible for the success or failure of the strategy. It will assess the performance of national economic policies as well as looking at the scope for concrete, quantifiable measures at the EU level. In seeking to get individual heads of government to take collective responsibility for the decisions of the European Council, Mr Van Rompuy is dead on target. The Lisbon treaty turns the European Council into an EU institution like any other. As such it must learn to abide by the rules of the game and the general principles of EU law. It must practice sincere co-operation with the classic trio of Commission, parliament and Council of Ministers. Expressly forbidden by the treaty from playing a legislative role, the European Council has got to get down to the job of providing consensual political leadership. Mr Van Rompuy has ambitions for his new baby. He astounded his colleagues on February 11 by proposing that from now on they meet each month. This upgrading of activity will quickly turn the European Council into acting, and feeling, like Europe’s cabinet government. Such a transformation would benefit a situation in which the EU played a part in running the Greek economy and where, in the foreign field, there are continually urgent issues of international security to be addressed at the EU level. The increased regularity of meetings at the top level will be especially welcome to the member states of the eurozone. It will be interesting to note how soon absenteeism creeps into the behaviour of certain prime ministers of nationalist bent from countries yet to adopt the single currency. The European parliament watches these developments with some amazement. Mr Van Rompuy is obliged to report to the parliament after the four formal annual meetings of the European Council as prescribed by the treaty. (His first appearance will be in April.) But he has said bluntly that he is not accountable to the parliament, and he has declined, with a disarming touch of arrogance, to answer written parliamentary questions from individual MEPs. No enhanced role is foreseen for the president of the parliament at meetings of the European Council. Yet most really hangs on how Mr Van Rompuy and Mr Barroso learn to get on. Get on they must if the Lisbon arrangements are to work. If they do not, we can already be fairly certain that in 2014 the successor to Herman van Rompuy as president of the European Council will be one and the same person who succeeds José Manuel Barroso as president of the European Commission. Andrew Duff MEP (Liberal Democrat/UK) is president of the Union of European Federalists.      

Iceland and the EU.

Commenting on the European Commission opinion on Iceland's bid to join the EU published today, Diana Wallis MEP, the European Parliament Vice President responsible for Arctic and the Nordic region, said in Brussels today:   "I am concerned that some in Iceland see joining the EU and in turn the Euro as a quick fix to sort out the country's economic problems. This may be true to some extent but I think Iceland needs to join for a whole range of reasons. I am hopeful therefore that the publication of the communication today starts a process which allows for a greater understanding and perhaps greater honesty on both sides. "Of course, Icesave is an issue that must be addressed but we cannot let one specific bilateral (with the UK and the Netherlands) issue derail Iceland's European future. "The application process should proceed at a respectful speed to allow both sides but, most importantly, the Icelandic people who have been through tough times to be at ease with this final decision." Diana Wallis, who was in Iceland last week, amongst other things, delivering a keynote lecture at the University of Iceland and meeting the Icelandic Prime Minister, continued: "I strongly believe that both sides have to be honest about what Iceland's membership means. This means the EU too saying why they would welcome Iceland as a member. All new member states bring something unique to the EU. Iceland has a lot to offer on fisheries, the very unique contribution in terms of sustainable energy resources and its strategic position as an Arctic nation. Iceland should be confident about what it can offer to the EU and the EU in turn needs to be positive in its approach to Iceland."        

Thu 11th Feb 2010:

EU on brink of new laws to tackle needlestick injuries .

The European Parliament today voted in favour of a resolution from Liberal Democrat European Employment and Social Affairs Spokesperson Liz Lynne MEP calling for the immediate adoption of binding legislation to tackle needle stick injuries in the workplace.   The resolution follows a 6 year long campaign from Liz Lynne MEP, alongside the Nurses groups and others, for legislation at EU level to tackle the problem.   Speaking after the vote Liz said: "There are over 1 million preventable needlestick injuries across the EU each year and many of those who are injured and their families face an agonising wait to find out whether they have contracted a blood borne infection such as HIV or Hepatitis C. "Healthcare workers dedicate their lives to saving others and it is unacceptable they are being exposed to life threatening risks on a daily basis just by doing their job. "This European Parliament resolution takes us one step closer to safer working practices and the mandatory use of medical devices that incorporate needle protection, changes I have campaigned to achieve for many years. Notes to Editors: For further information, comment or to book an interview, please contact Liz Lynne on 0032 2284 7521 or 07764 452725 Liz Lynne is Vice President of the European Parliament's Employment and Social Affairs Committee, which is responsible for Health and Safety in the Workplace. Liz has campaigned for 6 years for an amendment to existing EU legislation on Biological Agents to ensure mandatory standards in the workplace to better protect healthcare workers and ancillary workers, including a ban on re-sheathing. Background to the legislation In 2006 the European Parliament adopted a resolution on protecting European healthcare workers from blood-borne infections due to needle-stick injuries. The resolution requested the Commission ‘to submit to EP within three months of the date of adoption of the resolution, a legislative proposal for amending Directive 2000/54/EC on biological agents’. This did not happen. After years of pressure from the Parliament, the Commission did eventually draft an amendment to the biological agents directive last year, via a proposal for a directive, however this was dropped because the social partners (hospital employers and health worker unions) decided to enter formal negotiations, which they had no intention of doing until they knew that we had succeeded in getting the proposal through Parliament. The social partners adopted an agreement last year and Liz Lynne's report is giving the Parliament's support for this. Once this is adopted by Member States, they will then have 2 years to bring in the changes.  

Victory for Liz Lynne after resolution to stop horse cruelty adopted by European Parliament.

Liz Lynne MEP has welcomed news that her campaign to end the cruelty suffered by horses being transported long distance for slaughter has been adopted by the European Parliament at Strasbourg this morning. Her written declaration calling for action was signed by more than 369 Euro MPs from all over Europe, a majority of MEPs, by the deadline this morning, so it has now been adopted by Parliament. The declaration, supported by World Horse Welfare, was launched before Christmas to highlight the scandalous suffering endured by many horses as they are moved in lorries and trailers. Speaking at the Parliament in Strasbourg this morning, Liz said: "This is very good news for everyone campaigning to stop animal cruelty in Europe. The European Parliament has agreed with a petition signed by 120,000 citizens to demand action to end this appalling and unnecessary suffering of horses. "Euro MPs from all parties have looked at the evidence uncovered by charities that EU rules meant to protect the welfare of horses during long distance transport are being flouted, resulting in appalling cruelty." “Now that so many MEPs have signed up, the issue must now go forward to be debated in the Parliament so action can be taken. I would like to thank all the campaigners from the charity World Horse Welfare for their hard work.” Over 100,000 horses are transported long distance across the continent to slaughter every year, many of them in inhumane conditions, causing exhaustion, dehydration, injury and death. The abuse has been uncovered by a number of charities including World Horse Welfare. Late last year Liz hosted a reception in the European Parliament at which the World Horse Welfare petition, signed by over 120,000 EU citizens, was handed over to the European Commission calling for action to correctly implement EU animal welfare rules in this area. Among the abuses uncovered were examples of horses being denied rest stops, packed like sardines into steel lorries where temperatures can be above 40 degrees and not being properly fed and watered. Some of the horses suffer terrible injury or are dead on arrival at their destination. ENDS For photographs of Liz celebrating the result with campaigners, please see attached For further information, comment or an interview, contact Liz Lynne on 0776 445 2725

Wed 10th Feb 2010:

EU urges more shelters for trafficking victims.

The European Parliament today adopted a resolution co tabled by Liberal Democrat MEP Liz Lynne, which includes an amendment by Liz calling for more measures to support the victims of trafficking, including among other things the provision of accommodation and specialist support services. Currently there are only 54 beds available nationally for the victims of trafficking and none outside of London, Cardiff and Sheffield.       Speaking after the vote Liz said:     "The Government must do much more to treat trafficked people as victims of a horrific crime. All too often they are treated as criminals or illegal immigrants.     "It is a disgrace that we have so few specialist shelters for the victims of trafficking in this country. In the UK we only have 54 specialist spaces for victims. In the West Midlands, where we have seen many horrific cases of trafficking, we have none.   "This is in stark contrast to some of our European neighbours such as Sweden.     "My hope is the resolution we adopted today will send a clear message that we need better facilities in place to help the victims and we need to do that now.     "There are credible estimates that between 600 000 to 800 000 men, women and children are trafficked across international borders each year and this is only set to increase.     ENDS     For further information, comment or an interview, contact Liz Lynne on 0776 445 2725     Liz Lynne has campaigned against human trafficking for many years, as shadow rapporteur for a European Parliament report, the author of written declaration and parliamentary questions on the issue.   It is estimated that 4000 women, children and men are trafficked into the UK each year. The Poppy project in the UK is the only specialist charity currently providing 54 beds for the victims of trafficking in London , Cardiff and Sheffield .   Liz Lynne's amendment to the trafficking resolution (amended text is in bold)   Victims' protection, support and assistance         Calls for victims' protection and support to be· a priority in EU action in this field and to ensure that victims receive the maximum help as possible since the very first moment they are identified as victims including: o     the access to a temporary residence permit independently of the victim's willingness to cooperate in proceedings, o       access to appropriate and secure accommodation and specialist support services including the provision of a food/subsistence allowance, access to  emergency medical treatment, access to counselling services, translation and interpretation where appropriate, help contacting family and friends and access to education for children.  o       a facilitated access to the labour market to be implemented also through training and other forms of skills enhancement, o       a facilitated policy of family reunification,         Draws the attention to particularly vulnerable· victims such as children and women and calls for specific assistance and protection programmes for them;           Stresses that victims of trafficking should· receive the widest protection, support and assistance also in case they have not been trafficked in or to the EU but outside the EU;           Bearing in mind that victims have no financial· means and therefore would not have the resources to pay, calls for victims to get a professional help, including legal aid for free, which is essential in order to escape the forced situation in which victims are;    

Tue 9th Feb 2010:

We need this Commission to Succeed.

"With Parliament's approval, the new Commission will now take office, and the Parliament will use its new powers to hold it to account. "The challenges are great, and the stakes are high.  We need the new Commission - and its British High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Catherine Ashton - to succeed."

EU governments “headless chickens” over bank account access SWIFT agreement.

The European Parliament's justice & civil liberties committee is expected this afternoon to reject the interim agreement concluded by EU states with the US, to allow US authorities access to mass information on financial transactions of Europeans and routed through Europe.   The European Parliament is scheduled to vote on Thursday on whether to reject the interim agreement. Without substantive assurances on a timetable for negotiation for a long-term agreement and on stricter safeguards, MEPs are likely to confirm the committee-level rejection of last week.   Liberal Democrat European justice & human rights spokeswoman and London MEP Sarah Ludford, who is also vice chair of the European Parliament delegation to the US, said: “This US-EU bank access deal is a bad one for Europeans, a sellout of our privacy. The legitimate hunt for terrorists must not be an excuse to throw data protection to the winds. If the European Parliament has to show the red card, this will be because EU governments are proving unable to protect our citizens' human rights." "If a long-term SWIFT agreement is allowed to be formulated on the current basis, we will have sold the pass for ever on standards of privacy for transatlantic data-sharing." “EU ministers are acting like headless chickens. They can still prevent a train crash, but only if they convince us that genuinely better safeguards will follow soon in the planned long-term agreement and that they will treat us as a genuine partner in negotiations. The secrecy, delays and ineptness in the EU Council contrasts with much smarter footwork by the Americans." "Piecemeal US information demands and endless Washington-Brussels discussions on data protection must end. The urgent need is for a single comprehensive accord bracketing the targeted sharing of information for security and law enforcement with real reassurance that personal data will not be abused." ENDS Note to Editors The ‘SWIFT’ or ‘Terrorist Financing Tracking Programme’ agreement was signed by EU governments with the US authorities on 30 November 2009 and entered into force provisionally at the beginning of February for 9 months. It replaces an informal and until 2006 unknown arrangement whereby the US just issued administrative subpoenas to SWIFT, a private company that processes worldwide including European financial transactions. But the removal of a server to Europe, away from US territory and jurisdiction, necessitated a new legal agreement. Under the Lisbon treaty the agreement needs MEP consent in order to be formally 'concluded'; a rejection vote would terminate it. MEPs want EU governments to involve them in discussions for the mandate for the planned long-term agreement, not just give the Parliament a 'take-it-or-leave-it' role as now. The EU Council of Ministers waited until the end of January to reply to a series of letters going back to mid-December from European Parliament President Buzek; they have had 2 meetings in the last week but have been unable to agree on how to respond to MEPs' threat to torpedo the interim agreement.  

Thu 4th Feb 2010:

MEPs set to reject banking access agreement SWIFT.

The European Parliament's justice & civil liberties committee is expected this afternoon to reject the interim agreement concluded by EU states with the US, to allow US authorities access to mass information on financial transactions of Europeans and routed through Europe. This is the so-called 'SWIFT' agreement named after the name of the company which manages the flow, and otherwise called the 'TFTP' agreeement after the name of the US Treasury's Terrorist Finance Tracking Programme. It has been provisionally applied but needs MEP consent to stay in force. Liberal Democrat European justice & human rights spokeswoman Sarah Ludford MEP (UK Liberal Democrat, London) said: "The essential fight against terrorism can and must be conducted without unduly compromising respect for privacy. Major data protection weaknesses in the accord - such as the volume of information transferred, length of storage time, potential transfer to other agencies and third countries, and lack of rights to be informed or compensated for wrongful use - make it a bad deal for EU citizens." "If the committee votes for these reasons to reject the agreement, the  EU Commission and Council should act with speed to involve MEPs in negotiating guidelines for a long-term agreement which has better civil liberties safeguards. If they respond in this way, there is a chance that the Parliament could postpone its plenary vote and allow the interim agreement to remain in force." "In any case, security need not be compromised as US and EU authorities can use bilateral channels under legal assistance arrangements to secure information vital to counter-terrorism investigations, as the US ambassador has acknowledged."

Sun 31st Jan 2010:

Making body scanners safe.

Full-body scanners are coming to UK airports – but how can we safeguard privacy during the capture of 'naked' images? The attempted bombing of Northwest Airlines flight 253 over Detroit, for which Osama bin Laden has claimed responsibility, has caused governments on both sides of the Atlantic to scramble to increase airport security. Full-body scanners — or "digital strip-search" machines — are being introduced at Heathrow and other UK and European airports shortly, anticipating a possible EU regulation. But the debate on what safeguards are needed to ensure respect for privacy and civil liberties in the capture of "naked" images – including both the right to refuse naked body scanners and what happens to any resulting passenger images – must go on, in Brussels and national parliaments. As my colleague, Liberal Democrat shadow home secretary Chris Huhne, said on liberty central recently: "Safeguards must also be put in place to prevent staff members from copying or putting on the internet pictures of children, celebrities or those with strange body shapes. These assurances should be enshrined in a statutory code, rather than a mere code of conduct." The home secretary, Alan Johnson, told MPs that all images would be destroyed immediately after screening. But despite similar assurances in the US, the American data protection organisation Epic (Electronic Privacy Information Centre) has, through use of freedom of information laws, discovered that the US government has stipulated the need for body scanners to have storage and transfer capacity. The Transportation Security Administration, a division of the US Department for Homeland Security, reassures us that body scanners "cannot store, print, transmit or save the image... in fact, all machines are delivered to airports with these functions disabled". Epic's scrutiny of the TSA's private procurement and operational specifications for the equipment produces, however, a somewhat different picture. The TSA tender document obliges the installation of disc storage and "a high-capacity read/write drive... to permit uploads and downloads". Downloading of images to a – readily available – USB key would be possible. The image must be exportable in "raw" (presumably meaning without the computerised blurring of face and genitalia) as well as blurred form. An unknown number of users – among employees and outside contractors as well as law enforcement and intelligence personnel – will be able to send images having disabled privacy/modesty filters such as the obscuring of identity and detail. TSA maintains that these functions will only be used for training and evaluation. But how will this be policed and what happens if there is a breach? In the UK, there is not a great record on stopping and punishing data theft. Manufacturer Rapiscan has confirmed that their Secure 1000 body scanners delivered to airports across the UK have the data storage and transmission facilities disabled. But if the machines still have a network- and internet-friendly configuration, this does not rule out quite simple software changes being made to allow data to be retained and transferred. The capability for these scanners to store and export data is unnecessary in view of pledges of non-retention given on both sides of the Atlantic. Even if a possible suspect is detected, there is still no argument for picture storage, since the purpose is to identify those to be stopped and manually searched, not to provide evidence. So the Westminster parliament and European Union lawmakers (including MEPs) must not only guarantee to the travelling public that their images will be deleted. They must also ensure that body scanners will not be physically capable of storage and transmission. This seems the only way to guarantee that the state will not try to further invade our privacy in future, and that images of celebrities, children or others will not find their way onto the internet and TV. Our fundamental human right to a private life demands no less. guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 26 January 2010 17.00 GMT

Earlier Stories

Complete archive on the official site.