This is the Thursday edition of our Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.
Mr Orban announcing Hungary's migration referendum in Budapest on Wednesday
Now it’s Hungary’s turn. Viktor Orban, the polarising Hungarian premier, announced yesterday that his country would be holding a referendum on whether it should be forced to take in refugees as part of EU policies to relieve Greece and other overwhelmed frontier countries suffering the biggest influxes of migrants from the war-torn Middle East. By our count, that would make five countries holding referenda on EU policies in the course of about a year: Greece’s “oxi” on a the terms of a third eurozone bailout; Denmark’s “no” on opting-in to EU policing and judicial policies; an upcoming April Dutch referendum on the EU integration deal with Ukraine; Britain’s June plebiscite on EU membership; and now Mr Orban’s migration poll.
Throw in two more referenda – an Italian one in October on a non-EU domestic reform issue, and the always referendum-happy (but non-EU member) Switzerland – and you have a continent that seems to have gone delirious for direct democracy. As Tom Nuttall, the Economist’s Brussels-based Charlemagne columnist, pointed out in January, it’s not as if referenda are a new phenomenon. But when political leaders begin applying it to EU policies – which are always the product of multilateral horse-trading in Brussels – it could grind the already slow-moving European legislative machine-work to a halt.
In some ways, the rash of referenda is a bit of birds coming home to roost. Founders of the European project were overtly elitist about how they went about integration. “I thought it wrong to consult the peoples of Europe about the structure of a community of which they had no practical experience,” Jean Monnet, the intellectual godfather of the EU, once famously said. In more recent times, referenda results were either worked around – after France and the Netherlands rejected the EU’s “constitutional treaty” in 2005 it was largely rebranded the “Lisbon treaty” with tweaks that made plebiscites unnecessary – or re-run. Ireland voted twice on both the Nice and Lisbon treaties after rejecting them the first time around.
Read moreDespite its undoubted transformative potential, there still exists large swathes of people in the Brussels Bubble who just ‘don’t get’ Twitter. As a social strategist I sometimes find that pretty frustrating; there are so many great things which industries, associations and individuals could be doing, but there is just such little appetite for them. The challenge is to demonstrate to the bubble just how easy, accessible and effective Twitter is.
Although everybody knows that Twitter should be part of a successful public affairs strategy, many just don’t know how. To understand, we need to stop viewing it as this newfangled, modern tool and realize that it’s the same as other broadcasting platforms which we’ve been using for years. To explain, here are 3 similarities between Twitter and radio which demonstrate just how easy it is to build a successful social media strategy for your clients.
In Radio, the most popular stations are often those with a clear and accessible offering. Popular stations are successful in part because they are synonymous with certain values, messages and content and they are consistent in the way they communicate all of these things. The same is true for Twitter. Too many accounts are run without a clear objective and so don’t stand out. Users who have a clear “brand” are typically successful and that’s because they have identified what works for them and have repeated it.
Having a clear direction is the starting point, but it is increasingly not enough. In radio, there are a plethora of stations which occupy the same space, playing the same music and interviewing the same artists. Popular stations have to find a way to stand out. Twitter users are faced with the same problem. As I mentioned in my last post (and as our team constantly say to clients) in 2016 it’s not enough to just write tweets. Just like the best radio stations use quizzes, phone-ins and features to stand out, so Twitter users need to be bolder and more creative when it comes to communicating.
The best radio stations are those that develop content which speaks to their own niche audience. If a station which specialized in classical music suddenly started playing Kanye West, their audience would quickly lose interest- no matter how good Ye’s songs may be. As I’m sure you’ve guessed by now, this also applies for Twitter. Interaction with an audience is useless unless it’s targeted and tailored to suit their needs. Otherwise they won’t be interested in what you say and if they’re not interested in what you say then you may as well not be tweeting to them at all.
As you can see, the similarities are as simple as they are obvious. Despite this, the majority of Twitter accounts in Brussels lack direction, produce little to no cutting edge content and fail to target their audience.
So, next time you’re typing out a tweet, think about how you can learn from your favourite radio station. If you do, you’re more likely to achieve your objective- and that’s always a good thing.
Business minister, Anna Soubry, the most enthusiastic pro-EU member of the government’s cabinet, has sent a letter to UKIP leader, Nigel Farage, with three vital questions.
She posed the questions after Mr Farage made clear that he didn’t want Britain to remain in the Single Market of Europe if the referendum resulted in a ‘leave’ decision. Instead, said Mr Farage, he wanted Britain to be “a fully independent country” (although it’s not quite clear what that means).
Subsequently, Ms Soubry sent these three questions to Mr Farage:
1. Was he happy that his policy would increase the costs for business because the UK would face the EU’s common external tariff, which stands at 10% for cars and 15% for food?
2. How long would it take for the UK to renegotiate trade deals with more than 50 countries with whom the UK trades on the basis of EU deals?
3. Did Farage accept that the UK would have to accept many EU regulations, in order to trade with the EU, while having no say over how they were drawn up?
Ms Soubry also asked Mr Farage:
“I suspect you will claim that these consequences are avoidable by our negotiating a new ‘free trade deal’ with the EU. If so, can you set out precisely the terms you would expect and any evidence that they are credible and achievable? If not, your response will be taken as a sign that you want only to cover up the serious consequences of Britain leaving Europe.”
An answer is awaited from Mr Farage.
Footnote: What interests me is why any answers from Mr Farage should be taken seriously? He is not in power. He is not a Member of Parliament. He is not in government. His party only has one MP who most often disagrees with Mr Farage on Britain’s possible Brexit terms.
If Britain decides on 23 June to leave the EU, Mr Farage still won’t be in power. What difference will his answers make (assuming he can answer at all)?
* Join the discussion about this article on Facebook.
___________________________________________________
Other stories by Jon Danzig:To follow my stories please like my Facebook page: Jon Danzig Writes
_________________________________________________
• Comments are welcome – but please read: ‘Debate, don’t hate’
• Share and join the discussions about this article on Twitter:
#EUReferendum 3 questions for @Nigel_Farage by #UKgov minister @Anna_Soubry See my Facebook: https://t.co/mL8IUSA513 pic.twitter.com/cFXwJ92wS2
— Jon Danzig (@Jon_Danzig) February 24, 2016
The post Three questions for Nigel Farage appeared first on Ideas on Europe.
On Wednesday, Vienna hosted nine countries – and 18 ministers – to discuss the migration crisis in the western Balkans. Despite the size of the diplomatic shindig, a few names were left off the list.
To the surprise and annoyance of Athens and Berlin, neither Germany (the main destination) nor Greece (the main entrance) were asked to come along. The European Commission, which has attempted to marshal the EU’s response, was not asked either.
Read moreEU Ministers of Justice and Home Affairs meet in Brussels on 25 February 2016 to discuss migration, the reinforcement of checks against relevant databases at external borders and the European border and coast guard proposal.
Welcome to Wednesday’s edition of our new Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.
There are 20 European ministers in Vienna today for one of the most extraordinary meetings of the migration crisis – and there have been some pretty extraordinary meetings.
Austria has convened nine countries along the so-called western Balkans migration route. That sounds reasonable enough. Foreign and interior ministers will be present from Albania, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Kosovo, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Slovenia. Missing from the guestlist, though, is the main migrant entry-point (Greece) and the main destination-point (Germany). That is either a rather big oversight – or an act of mutiny.
It caps a week where the dominoes have begun to fall in south-eastern Europe. Austria’s renegade policy – imposing asylum caps while waving through Germany-bound migrants – has triggered other national responses down the line. Vienna is even considering deploying troops to the Macedonia border. It is shaping facts on the ground that are fast eclipsing the prospects for a “European solution”, if ever it were possible.
Read more