European Union

On 15 December, the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and AFET/SEDE committees will hold a joint meeting to have a first exchange of views on the text of the draft report 'Constitutional, legal and institutional implications of a common security and defence policy: possibilities offered by the Lisbon Treaty'. The report examines the legal possibilities offered by the Lisbon Treaty as well as the necessary institutional set-up to make CSDP more operational.
Further information
Draft agenda and meeting documents
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/5fbe47e2-7bf5-11e5-8327-bc764e083742_344.33_thumb_169_1479830204_1479830204_129_97shar_c1.jpg

EU Ministers of Foreign and European Affairs meet in Brussels on 13 December 2016 to finalise preparations for the December European Council, adopt conclusions on enlargement and be informed on the state of play of the mid-term review of the multi-annual financial framework 2014-2020.

Download this video here.

Andrea Gideon

The main activities of higher education institutions (HEIs), teaching and research, have in recent years started to be influenced by EU law. For example, Austria and Belgium had to make changes in the past to their free and open access to higher education policies,[1] the German study grant Bafög had been subject to various EU cases[2] and a Dutch university’s spin-off activities have been scrutinised under state aid law.[3] Yet, the EU has only limited competences in these policy areas. Indeed, the cases which partly required significant changes to national HEI policies did not arise from EU higher education or research policy, but from individuals relying on their rights in other, seemingly unrelated areas of law. What does this mean for HEIs in Europe? Will it pose a threat to the traditional European understanding of what a university is? Why is there not a coherent policy at EU level instead and would that be preferable? These are questions which are investigated in my forthcoming book ‘Higher Education Institutions in the EU: Between Competition and Public Service’ (TMC Asser / Springer, 2017).

The book aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of the impact that EU law and policy have on HEIs in EU Member States with a particular focus on the impact of EU competition law on research in universities. While the impact of other areas of EU law has received some attention in the past,[4] EU competition law is a largely unexplored area which made this a particularly interesting field for investigation. Furthermore, research on how EU law impacts on HEIs has thus far focused on higher education rather than on research activities of HEIs. In the book I try to redress this imbalance. On the following I will provide a short overview of the book.

 

The mission of European universities and why it may be influenced by EU law

The first chapter, after setting out the research questions and structure of the book, investigates what the mission (in the sense of an idea or goal rather than a mission statement) of European HEIs is. In a short historical analysis it will be seen that traditionally European HEIs were research intensive, national universities with a high degree of academic freedom and autonomy which taught and conducted research for knowledge’s sake rather than towards a particular, commercially exploitable aim and were funded mainly by the state. However, more recently, they have become more economic in nature.

Employing approaches from European integration theory, it will then be seen that this ‘commodification’ of HEIs can increase the likeliness that seemingly unrelated EU law can become applicable to HEIs/HEI policy. The law is then applied to cases by judges mainly when individuals attempt to rely on their rights arising from EU law. The ‘spill-over’ of EU law just happens in a piece meal approach rather than as a coherent policy. Furthermore, the application of economic law can lead to further commodification than may have been intended.

 

EU law and policy on HEIs

The second chapter investigates the competences the EU actually has to draft policies on higher education and research. It will be seen that these competences are rather limited, especially in the area of higher education. Yet, the Member States (and other countries in Europe) seem to have felt it was desirable to coordinate policies beyond what would have been (allegedly)[5] possible under the EU competences. They therefore opted for EU soft law mechanisms under the Open method of coordination as part of the Lisbon/ Europe 2020 Strategy as well as for the Bologna Process (which goes beyond the EU). However, as many have investigated these mechanisms are not entirely unproblematic.[6] More, importantly, for our purposes, they do not prevent ‘spill-over’ from other provisions of EU law. Therefore, the second part of chapter 2 provides an overview of potential impacts of EU Citizenship law, the free movement provisions (free movement of goods, workers, services, establishment and capital) and competition and state aid law on HEIs in the EU.

 

Competition law and HEIs

Chapter 3 continues in this vein by studying in more detail the area of EU competition law. EU competition law is only applicable to ‘undertakings’ and it provides an exemption for services of general economic interest (SGEIs). The two concepts are therefore, first, introduced and it is analysed in how far they apply to HEIs and thus in how far HEIs fall under EU competition law. It will be shown that this becomes increasing likely the more commercial elements an HEI system adopts. The second part of chapter 3 then conducts an in-depth legal-doctrinal analysis of potential constraints on HEIs arising from competition and state aid law. Here it is shown that competition law can occasionally help to vend of exploitative practices by HEIs (e.g. price fixing at a high level). However, it will also be shown that there can be a variety of situations where the application of the competition rules might have a detrimental social effect (e.g. when tuition fees are fixed at a low level to allow broader access and this is being challenged).

 

Competitition law and research universities in England, the Netherlands and Germany

Chapter 4 and 5 conduct an in-depth empirical study of potential competition law effects on research in universities in England, the Netherlands and Germany. These Member States have been chosen as they all started to experiment with more commercial elements in their HEI systems, but at a different pace with England being furthest on the path towards commodification, followed by the Netherlands and then Germany. Chapter 4 introduces the research systems of these three Member States and provides an initial competition law analysis. It will be seen that, if an activity does fall under competition law, potential tensions between competition law and national research policies may arise in all three systems. However, the more economically oriented the system, the more frequently this may happen.

Chapter 5 then contains the empirical study itself. After setting out the methodology employed, a subchapter on each country discusses the economic constraints in the relevant systems, the awareness of key officers in universities of and the potential constraints arising from EU competition law. In all three countries interviewees expected the commodification tendencies to continue and there was some criticism for this development. Yet, the more detailed sentiments about the research systems as well as the awareness of competition law of the interviewees differed between the countries in correspondence with the general character of the research systems. On the basis of the information received from the interviewees, a more in depth appreciation than in chapter 4 of the question in how far competition law becomes applicable and in how far it may lead to potential tensions is then provided in chapter 5. While some potential tensions with competition law discussed in previous chapters do not seem to materialise in the three Member States, some could indeed cause concerns and others have been detected. Of course, there may still be the possibility of the application of exemptions, but these might not capture every situation and, in any case, might make the conduct of HEIs increasingly complicated from a legal/administrative perspective. Given the current situation, HEIs are thus advised to pay increasing attention to EU competition law.

 

Conclusions

Chapter 6 connects the results of all chapters and contextualises them in the wider debate on commodification of HEIs and the concerns related to this development. In more recent Commission legislation it appears that the Commission has made some attempts to align EU research policy with competition and state aid. The chapter therefore discusses these attempts critically and concludes that this equally poses some concerns because they are partly overly complicated, are decided upon entirely by the Commission and do not appear to necessarily reflect the views of the general public or stakeholders in HEIs. Therefore, an outlook is given of potential alternative strategies, as unlikely as their realisation in the current Eurosceptic climate may be, for a more coherent EU level policy on HEIs which moves away from the current tendency towards commodification and truly clarifies the legal position of HEIs under EU law, though the details of such approaches will have to be left to future research.

 

Andrea Gideon is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Centre for Law & Business (National University of Singapore) for which she has suspended her position as Lecturer in Law at the University of Liverpool. In her current project she is investigating the application of competition law to public services in ASEAN. Her previous research concerned tensions between the economic and the social in the EU with a focus on EU competition law, in which research area she earned her PhD at the University of Leeds in 2014.

[1] C-147/03 Commission vs Austria, C-65/03 Commission vs Belgium.

[2] C-11-12/06 Morgan and Bucher, C-523-585/11 Prinz and Seeberger, C-220/12 Thiele and C-275/12 Elrick.

[3] T-488/11 Sarc.

[4] For example, Dougan M, ‘Cross-border educational mobility and the exportation of student financial assistance’ (2008) 5 European Law Review 723, Garben S, EU Higher Education Law – The Bologna Process and Harmonization by Stealth (Kluwer 2011), Damjanovic D, ‘“Reserved areas” of the Member States and the ECJ: The case of higher education’ in Micklitz H-W and De Witte B (eds), The European Court of Justice and the Autonomy of the Member States (Intersentia 2012).

[5] Garben (n 4) questions if that was really as impossible as commonly held. For a shortened version see also Garben S, ‘The Bologna Process: From a European Law Perspective’ (2010) 16 ELJ 186.

[6] See, for example, Nóvoa A, ‘Ways of thinking about education in Europe’ in Nóvoa A and Lawn M (eds), Fabricating Europe – The formation of an education space (Kluwer 2002), Neave G and Maassen P, ‘The Bologna Process: an intergovernmental policy perspective’ in Maassen P and Olsen J (eds), University dynamics and European integration (Springer 2007), Garben (n 5), Corbett A, ‘Education and the Lisbon Strategy’ in Copeland P and Papadimitriou D (eds), The EU’s Lisbon Strategy: evaluating success, understanding failure (Palgrave MacMillan 2012).

The post Higher education institutions under EU law constraints? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/dd42d664-b8a9-11e6-9a5d-bc764e093073_45.61_thumb_169_1481038650_1481038649_129_97shar_c1.jpg

Here you can find some illustrations of the new home of the European Council and the Council of the European Union. Copyright: Photo: @European Union Building: Philippe Samyn and Partners architects and engineers -lead and design partner Studio Valle Progettazioni architects Buro Happold engineers. Colour compositions by Georges Meurant.

Download this video here.

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/dd42d664-b8a9-11e6-9a5d-bc764e093073_45.61_thumb_169_1481038650_1481038649_129_97shar_c1.jpg

Here you can find some illustrations of the new home of the European Council and the Council of the European Union. Copyright: Photo: @European Union Building: Philippe Samyn and Partners architects and engineers -lead and design partner Studio Valle Progettazioni architects Buro Happold engineers. Colour compositions by Georges Meurant.

Download this video here.

To receive the Brussels Briefing in your inbox every morning, register for a free FT account here and then sign up here.

Such were the first comments of Paolo Gentiloni, after being asked on Sunday by Italy’s president to become the country’s new prime minister.

Read more

The MSc International Public Administration & Politics programme (IPAP) at Roskilde University offers the students to come on a study tour to Brussels to visit the EU institutions and other organisations. This year the study tour took place 28-30 November, where 19 students and two lecturers – Sevasti Chatzopoulou and Helene Dyrhauge – visited NATO, EFTA, the European Parliament and the European Commission. During the three days the students met policy-makers, diplomats and politicians (MEPs), and they discussed a broad range of policy topics ranging from migration, BREXIT to railway and food safety.

The aim of the study tour was to give the students an opportunity to actively apply the knowledge they have gained from the courses and to give them an opportunity to talk to policy experts about topics we had covered in class, also to give the students ideas for future career directions.

The students had all taken three courses this autumn; Institutions & Actors, Civil Servants and International Public Economics. The courses are theoretical driven. The institutions and actors course discusses the role of actors and ideas within institutional structure where it focuses on different governance levels. The civil servant course focuses on the different roles civil servants have, especially in areas where policy problems often cross territorial, administrative and sectoral boundaries.  The International Public Economics courses explores the causes and consequences of differences governments’ alternative approaches to fundamental public policy issues. All the courses discuss the impact of the EU and globalization on national government policies. Some of the topics covered in the courses range from food safety, labour markets and climate change.

The students had to prepare for the study tour. The students had been given a reading list for each policy topic, which contained a journal article and a policy document. Two students were assigned one policy topic and had to prepare questions for the specific presentation. This aim was to ensure that at least two students asked questions to each presenter. In the end there were generally two to five students asking questions to each presenter. Overall, the students not only listened to the policy experts’ presentations they actively engaged in dialogues with the policy experts, thereby using their knowledge from their courses. Indeed one EU administrator left the meeting saying; “this is the most difficult group, I’ve met”. As two of the core lecturers on the IPAP programme both Sevasti and I were proud of our students for asking challenging questions to the policy experts.

During the three days, I had several conversations with the students about the policy presentations, especially about how the students could see the link between the courses  and the actual policies, but also how the students could use their knowledge after graduations in their future careers. Indeed one student got lots of new ideas for her MSc dissertation and another decided to change his flight so he could stay for the final presentation on ‘circular economy’ and a third student is thinking about doing an internship in one of the EU institutions.

Organising the tour was hard and took lots of time, but the reward of seeing how the students used their knowledge from the courses, how they actively engaged in discussions with policy experts and discovered the practical relevance of the MSc IPAP programme was a delight. The students have already asked when we are organising a new study tour … but I think I need a break and eat some of the lovely Belgian chocolate the students gave me before going on another study tour. However, we are visiting the European Environmental Agency tomorrow, Tuesday, which luckily only is a short train ride away from Roskilde University, and I look forward to the students once again asking challenging questions to two policy experts talking about climate change.

IPAP group photo from the visit to the European Commission

The post A jam-packed study tour to Brussels & students asking challenging questions to policy-makers appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

The Monthly Highlights publication provides an overview, at a glance, of the on-going work of the policy departments, including a selection of the latest and forthcoming publications, and a list of future events.
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

The Monthly Highlights publication provides an overview, at a glance, of the on-going work of the policy departments, including a selection of the latest and forthcoming publications, and a list of future events.
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Britain has more job vacancies than can be filled by the native workforce. That, in a nutshell, is why we need migrants.

The country has a chronic skills shortage and without migrants helping to fill that gap, Britain – and Britons – would be poorer.

Britain now has more people at work than ever before. We also have a record number of job openings – around 755,000 vacancies this autumn alone. It’s no wonder that in line with that, immigration from the rest of Europe is also at a record high.

Why? Because migrants mostly come to Britain for jobs, and if there were not so many jobs, there would be little reason to come here, and therefore, not so many migrants.

Of course, none of this is any consolation to the 1.6 million people currently unemployed. But unfortunately, many of the unemployed do not have the skills now needed by employers. Britain, of course, should be spending billions in upskilling our workers, and especially the unemployed.

Similarly, we shouldn’t blame migrants that parts of the country lack sufficient schools, hospitals, homes, or that many are struggling on zero-hour contracts. For that, we should blame our political masters.

It’s too easy for the government to scapegoat migrants for our problems, when the fact is that without migrants, the country would be poorer. If all migrants went home, we wouldn’t have more schools, hospitals and homes. We would simply have a bigger shortage of teachers, doctors, nurses and builders.

In the meantime, British businesses are hungry for more skilled workers. Without them, our economy would stagnate and die. That, actually, is one way to stem the flow of migration to Britain – to trash our economy. But who would seriously advocate such a policy?

Whilst still a member of the European Union, Britain has record numbers at work, record numbers of vacancies, and unemployment at an 11-year-low of 4.8%. Helping to propel that recovery are EU migrants, most of whom are in gainful employment, working hard, paying taxes and spending most of their earnings here, in Britain.

And yet, Britain still doesn’t have enough workers to fill the profound skills gap the country is facing.

Yes, of course, we should be training more people.

But in the meantime, the government has compiled a long list of skills the country needs – now, urgently. It’s called the UK Shortage Occupation List. We need, for example:

Scientists, such as geologists; nuclear medicine experts; mechanical engineers, such as for the oil and gas industries; electronic engineers for the motoring industry; software developers for 2D/3D animation; contaminated land specialists; medical practitioners, such as psychiatrists, anaesthetics and radiographers; specialist intensive care nurses; maths and science teachers; social workers; contemporary dancers; orchestral musicians; overhead lines workers; skilled chefs..

..And the list goes on and on. Skilled workers that the country needs now.

In addition, many farms, catering establishments, hotels, care homes and builders categorically state that they simply could not survive, let alone thrive, without EU migrants. Not because they are cheaper (can you really find a cheap Polish plumber these days?). No. It’s because these establishments have more vacancies to fill than British people either can or want to fill.

Eurosceptics say they are not against migration, but want the country to have fewer migrants, and to be able to choose who can come here, based on the skills needed. And they don’t want EU migrants to come here unless they have a job in advance.

But that just creates another bureaucratic barrier to EU migrants coming here at all. And in any event, the country already does choose which migrants to employ – the decision is made by British businesses, who want the right to choose their workforce from across our continent.

If an EU migrant can’t come here without having a job first, then chances are they will go to another country, and help their economy instead. That will be our loss.

EU regulations state that any EU citizen can move to another EU country to seek a job, so long as they have the means to look after themselves and don’t become a burden to the state. And what’s wrong with that? If they come here and don’t find a job, they usually go back home.

It’s a Daily Mail myth that migrants can simply come here and immediately start claiming benefits. It simply isn’t true.

The fact is that most migrants here have jobs; jobs that British businesses desperately need them to do. Britons shouldn’t complain – especially since more Britons are now in work than ever before. Migrants are not taking the jobs our unemployed could do. Migrants are coming here mostly to do the jobs that Britons can’t all do.

According to research published this week by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, as a result of Brexit, migration to the UK could fall by well over half from now to 2020. That would mean net EU migration falling by more than 100,000.

Such a drop in EU migration would also lead to a significant reduction in GDP per capita – up to 3.4% over the period to 2030, the NIESR has calculated. That would represent an economic downfall for Britain.

Britain needs EU migrants. They are not a threat; they are a boon. Our message to them should be, “Welcome, and thank you.”

___________________________________________________

Other stories by Jon Danzig:

• Brexit Secretary, David Davis, gets 5 stars for double standards
• 10 ways to stop Brexit
• The best EU trade deal? We already have it
• List of the latest articles by Jon Danzig

To follow my stories please like my Facebook page: Jon Danzig Writes

___________________________________________________

• The Reasons2Remain Facebook Community continues to support the case for Britain’s membership of the EU, and now, the actual impact of the Brexit vote. Join us!

• Join and share the discussion about this article on Facebook and Twitter:

 

Britain has more vacancies than Britons to fill them. That’s why we need EU migrants. Share @Jon_Danzig’s report: https://t.co/ndo8vFWDx7 pic.twitter.com/dhamKas1cB

— Reasons2Remain (@Reasons2Remain) 10 December 2016

 

 

The post Britain has more vacancies than Britons to fill them appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

DRAFT REPORT on Constitutional, legal and institutional implications of a common security and defence policy: possibilities offered by the Lisbon Treaty
Committee on Foreign Affairs, Committee on Constitutional Affairs
Michael Gahler, Esteban González Pons

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : Iraqi Yazidi Islamic State survivors and activists Nadia Murad and Lamiya Aji Bashar receive Parliament’s 2016 Sakharov Prize during a ceremony in Strasbourg on Tuesday 13 December. After escaping sexual enslavement by Islamic State they both became spokespeople for women affected by the terrorist group's campaign of sexual violence and for the persecuted Yazidi minority. Find out more about their fight by watching our video and follow the ceremony live online.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plenary sessions : Iraqi Yazidi Islamic State survivors and activists Nadia Murad and Lamiya Aji Bashar receive Parliament’s 2016 Sakharov Prize during a ceremony in Strasbourg on Tuesday 13 December. After escaping sexual enslavement by Islamic State they both became spokespeople for women affected by the terrorist group's campaign of sexual violence and for the persecuted Yazidi minority. Find out more about their fight by watching our video and follow the ceremony live online.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

New rules empowering shareholders to vote on directors’ pay, so as to tie it more closely to their performance, were informally agreed on Thursday. These rules also aim to foster shareholder commitment to companies’ long-run success.
Committee on Legal Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

New rules empowering shareholders to vote on directors’ pay, so as to tie it more closely to their performance, were informally agreed on Thursday. These rules also aim to foster shareholder commitment to companies’ long-run success.
Committee on Legal Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP