European Union

Novartis Farma
Approximation of laws
The reimbursement by a national healthcare insurance system of a medicinal product for a use not covered by its marketing authorisation (off-label use) is not contrary to EU law

Associação Peço a Palavra and Others
Freedom of establishment
Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona proposes that the Court of Justice declare that the requirements of the Portuguese Government in relation to the reprivatisation of TAP constitute a justified restriction on the freedom of establishment, with the exception of the obligation to maintain and develop the national hub

Length of video : 167'
You may manually download this video in WMV (1.4Gb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

Like an irritating parrot, the Prime Minister Theresa May keeps repeating that she’s delivering the ‘people’s will’ and ‘there won’t be a people’s vote’.

The two phrases are incompatible. They oppose each other.

The irritating parrot may as well say, “Welcome to my home” and “Get out of my house”. Or, “I believe in democracy” and “Shut up! You’re not allowed another say.”

Theresa May may be described as a tough bird, but as far as facing up to us, the people, she’s a chicken.

She daren’t ask us what we now think about Brexit, because she knows the likely answer will be, “Get stuffed. We don’t want Brexit.”

Nobody knew what Brexit meant in the referendum, and in that referendum Mrs May herself advised the country that staying in the EU was in our best interests.

Parrot or chicken, she’s got some neck.

• Telling us on the one side of June 2016 that Brexit will harm the country, our trade, our economy, our security and the cohesion of the United Kingdom.
• Then on the other side of June 2016, telling us that she’s the one who’ll deliver all the things she told the country not to do.

Ever since then she’s been squawking what Brexit means. It means Brexit. It’s red white and blue. But her phrases meant nothing to no one. It was for the birds.

But now, over two years after that fateful day on 23 June 2016, Mrs May has delivered over 500 pages of what Brexit means (or at least, what the divorce settlement means – we still don’t know what our future relationship with Europe will mean).

And what do you know? Nobody wants it. Remainers don’t want it. Brexiters don’t want it.

Several of her Brexit ministers, their feathers ruffled by a Brexit that was not in their image, have flown the nest.

They’re now roosting in a furtive corner, plotting ways to oust Mrs May and re-arrange the pecking order of the government.

The rest of the government are in a flap, running around like headless chickens. They’re hoping to get their Brexit plan through on a wing and a prayer.

Of course, it’s doomed. Brexit is one big bad egg.

Last Thursday, Mrs May went to the House of Commons to explain her recipe for Brexit. But she was in for a roasting. MP after MP stood up to say they didn’t want it. Her Brexit plan, they said, was as dead as a dodo.

Oh yes, Mrs May certainly looked as sick as a parrot.

But she was defiant too. She’d see Brexit through. She was delivering the will of the people. And no, you can’t have a people’s vote. Parrot, parrot, parrot.

Ever since Mrs May started on the road to Brexit (a road she previously told us not to travel) she has wanted to thwart democracy.

No, Parliament couldn’t have a say on triggering Article 50, she said. The decision was made by the referendum.

But she lost that argument in the courts.

Both the High and Supreme Courts confirmed that the referendum was advisory only. Only Parliament has sovereignty in the UK, the courts ruled, and Parliament must have the final say.

Last year, when the government produced impact assessments on Brexit, Mrs May and her government refused to reveal what they were. Parliament had to force the government to reveal them.

And it’s been the same this week.

Mrs May’s government didn’t want to show Parliamentarians the government’s detailed assessments of her Brexit plan, agreed last week with the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier.

Jo Johnson, a transport minister in Mrs May’s government, who resigned last week because he couldn’t support that plan, has turned out to be quite a wise owl.

During the Commons debate on this issue last night he said:

“If we have learned anything from the chaos of the past 30 months, it is that facts are sacred. This debate has been characterised by falsehoods and misinformation from day one.

“It is extraordinary that we have now had to force the Government, at this relatively late stage, to publish the vital information necessary for an informed public debate. Some may say that this horse has long bolted, but I say it is better late than never.”

That’s a feather in your cap, Mr Johnson (Jo, not Boris).

Today, Mrs May lost yet another attempt to thwart democracy and justice.

The Supreme Court ruled against a government attempt to stop the European Court of Justice from ruling on whether the Article 50 notice could be unilaterally revoked by the UK.

A cross-party group of MPs, MEPs and MSPs, along with Jolyon Maugham QC, the director of the Good Law Project, had asked the Scottish courts to rule that the case should be referred to the European court in Luxembourg for an urgent ruling.

So, despite Mrs May’s attempt to stop the course of justice, the European Court of Justice will now hear the case on 27 November.

At every awkward step of Theresa May towards her cloud-cuckoo Brexit, she has tried to circumvent both democracy and justice.

To pass Brexit, she has attempted to bypass Parliament, and spent millions of pounds of our money on legal fees in what turned out to be a futile, and time consuming, journey through the courts.

To pretend that her Brexit was democratic, she has had to keep referring to ‘the will of the people’:

• despite the fact that the referendum is now over two years old;
• despite the fact that the win for Leave was wafer thin;
• despite the fact that Leave only won with a pack of lies;
• despite the fact that only a minority of registered voters voted for Leave (just 37%);
• despite the fact that the referendum has now been entirely discredited, with irregularities so serious that the referendum result cannot be considered safe,
• and, despite the fact that poll after poll now show that most people in the country want another vote on Brexit, and that in a new vote, Remain would win.

So, it’s clear that Brexit is not now the ‘will of the people’ (and probably never was – nobody really knew what it meant).

Mrs May thinks that those who are calling for a new vote are ‘the enemies of democracy’. But this is what psychologists call ‘projection’.

Psychological projection involves someone denying the existence of bad qualities in themselves while attributing them to others. (For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude.)

This is what Mrs May is doing every day. She is attempting to project on to us her crimes, so that we are blamed.

But it is her that is guilty. She is the enemy of democracy. She is the enemy of justice. She is the enemy of the people.

Her Brexit plan is bird-brained. Both Brexiters and Remainers want to kick it into the dust. The chances of it getting through Parliament are close to zero. It’s a dead duck.

Brexit is out of control. The Prime Minister can’t fix it. Parliament can’t fix it.

It’s time for us, the people, to come to the rescue. Ask us. Find out what is today’s will of the people, then act on that. Don’t chicken out.

 

• Follow my journalism page on Facebook: Jon Danzig writes
• Follow my Stop Brexit campaign on Facebook: Reasons2Remain

________________________________________________________

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

The post Theresa May is the enemy of democracy appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Length of video : 183'
You may manually download this video in WMV (1.6Gb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

Committee meetings, Brussels

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

Commission v Council (AMP Antarctique)
Law governing the institutions
Decisions adopted in the context of the international treaties relating to the preservation and conservation of living resources in Antarctica must be adopted jointly by the EU and the Member States who are parties to those treaties

Length of video : 163'
You may manually download this video in WMV (1.4Gb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

DRAFT OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017, Section III - Commission and executive agencies
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Neena Gill

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

DRAFT OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017, Section X – European External Action Service
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Neena Gill

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

AMENDMENTS 4 - 159 - Draft opinion Establishing, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the instrument for financial support for border management and visa
Committee on Foreign Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

AMENDMENTS 10 - 189 - Draft opinion Establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund
Committee on Foreign Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

Further information
Programme
Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

The European Intervention Initiative (Initiative européenne d'intervention, EI2/IEI) was first proposed by French President Emmanuel Macron in his Sorbonne keynote in September 2017 and nine members signed a Letter of Intent (LoI) to begin work on 25 June 2018. France's motivation to establish this, and other European military projects, is to support its operations in the Sahel which it is struggling to maintain alone.

The ultimate aim of the EI2 is a shared strategic culture that would enhance the ability of its members to act together on missions as part of NATO, the EU, UN or other ad-hoc coalitions. The project is intented to be resource neutral and makes use of existing assets and other joint forces available to members. EI2 seeks for enhanced interaction on intelligence sharing, scenario planning, support operations and doctrine.

Launch
The starting point of the EI2 is the speech on Europe delivered on September 26, 2017 at the Sorbonne by President Macron during which in the field of defense, he "proposes now to try to build this culture. in common, by proposing a European intervention initiative aimed at developing this shared strategic culture. [...] At the beginning of the next decade, Europe will have to have a common intervention force, a common defense budget and a common doctrine to act ". The French will was to constitute a "hard core" ready to act very quickly in case of need as was the case in Mali where France mounted Operation Serval. in a few days. Not all IEI Member States will necessarily participate in each operation.

It is not a matter of creating a new rapid response force prepositioned as it already exists in the framework of NATO (with the NRF) or the CSDP (with the Battlegroups), or bilaterally for example between France and the United Kingdom (with CJEF (in). The means provided will be composed to specifically meet the needs of a crisis.
According to the LoI, the initiative will focus on enhanced interaction in four key areas: strategic foresight and intelligence sharing, scenario development and planning, operations support, and fourth. feedback and doctrine. To this end, the armed forces of the signatory countries will notably carry out exchanges of officers, joint exercises of anticipation and planning, the sharing of doctrines and the writing of joint scenarios of intervention.

The French Armed Forces Staff is responsible for organizing the effective launch of the IEI by holding the first Military European Strategic Talks (MEST) and developing a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) here the end of the year 2018.

Ambitions
France's long-term ambition is to create a "common strategic culture". The French Minister of the Armed Forces, Florence Parly, specifies that it is about "developing between countries at the same time militarily capable and politically voluntary" habits "to work together, to be able to prepare, if necessary to be in capacity to intervene, where they decide, at the moment of their decision, on extremely varied scenarios ". German Federal Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen adds that "the aim is to create a forum, with like-minded states, who will analyze situations, who will have discussions early, when crises will manifest themselves in a region, and which, together, will be able to develop a political will".

Participating States
The signatory states on June 25, 2018 of the letter of intent are Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom. Germany is initially reluctant for fear that this new initiative will weaken those taken since 2016 under the CSDP (notably the European Defense Action Plan and Permanent Structured Cooperation). The meeting of the Franco-German Council of Ministers on 19 June at Meseberg Castle, near Berlin, offers a positive response.

Italy participated in the preparatory meetings but the new government formed on 1 June 2018 asked for a reflection period. The participation of the United Kingdom, in the process of withdrawal from the European Union, illustrates the willingness of the British to remain leading partners in European security. Their participation, like that of Danes who are not part of the CSDP, is made possible by the fact that the EI2 is outside the institutional framework of the European Union. Finland confirmed, during the visit of French President Emmanuel Macron in Helsinki on 30 August 2018, its decision taken a few days earlier to join the European intervention initiative and its accession was validated on 7 November 2018 by the nine defense ministers of IEI member countries.

Relationship with PeSCo
The EI2 is the creation of a set of European states as prerequisites for joint operational commitments in various predefined military intervention scenarios. EI2 operationally complements Permanent Structured Cooperation (CSP or PeSCo) focused on the capability area. Based on Article 42.6 and Protocol 10 of the Treaty on European Union, PeSCp was introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009, and first initiated in 2017.

EI2 seeks some synergies with the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) that has newly been established within the European Union's (EU) Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), and PESCO projects are intended to be integrated into the EI2 where feasible. France's concern is that developing the EI2 within PESCO would result in lengthy decision times or watered down ambition. This led to some tensions regarding the project between France and Germany, with the latter concerned that it would harm the EU's political cohesion. Including the EI2 within PESCO is also seen as problematic as it prevents the participation of the UK and Denmark.

The minimum number of participating states for cooperation under PESCO, according to the Lisbon Treaty, is nine. As the IEI does not fit within the institutional framework of the CSDP the number of participants is not limited.

Comments
NATO does not need such a structure anymore. Moreover it is very anacronistic at the moment or by the BREXIT one of the most powerful European armies will leave the Union. The participation of states, member of the EU but not member of the CSDP (Denmark) shows how this initiative can be considered serious.
The need for the establishment of the EI2 is highly questionable. One more idea of the political leaders (especially French) who instead of realizing and ensuring the conditions sine qua non of the programs already launched, the strengthening and modernization of the army. Everyone tinkers with his own new initiative, promises roaring never or little done. Why the battle groups do not work have never engaged? Instead of meeting this challenge rather another program with very nebulous goals, confused with lots of bullshits.
"A common doctrine to act" should be preceded by a "common strategy", but that of the EU is far from being a real strategy.

Tag: European Intervention InitiativeEI2Initiative européenne d'interventionIEIMEST

The fantastic Brexit offered to the nation in 2016 was a mirage. It doesn’t exist. It never did. It can’t be delivered. It was a con-trick.

The ‘alternative’ Brexit now being fobbed off to the nation would never have won approval in the referendum. We don’t want it. Even Brexiters don’t want it. Nobody, absolutely nobody, voted for it.

So, said the Prime Minister Theresa May, it’s her Brexit deal, or no deal, or no Brexit.

Put that on a ballot paper, Prime Minister, and let us have a real choice on this, for the very first time.

(Article continues after 5-minute video).

This is our country. It’s our lives, and our futures, at stake.

How dare you, Prime Minister; how dare you government; how dare you opposition, for not allowing us, ‘the people’, the final say on this.

We demand a new vote. A new vote is entirely democratic. Another vote means more democracy, not less.

As I assert in my 5-minute video(above), in a true democracy, voters are allowed to change their minds.

Put your deal, or no deal, or no Brexit, to the country. Let us decide. Put your trust in the people.

If you don’t, this matter will never be settled. It will sit, like festering, fetid, faeces, smouldering forever in the pit of the nation’s stomach, never to be expelled.

You cannot do this to us.

Relieve yourself of the burden of responsibility for this entire mountain of shit that you and your lot have created.

Put the choice back to us, the people. Only dictators would do otherwise. Restore democracy to Britain. Give us a new vote on Brexit. And do it now.

*Latest polling shows that a majority of Britons now want another vote on Brexit, and don’t want Brexit.

• Follow my journalism page on Facebook: Jon Danzig writes
• Follow my Stop Brexit campaign on Facebook: Reasons2Remain

________________________________________________________

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

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = 'https://connect.facebook.net/en_GB/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v3.2'; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

We demand a new vote

→ Britain demands a new vote on Brexit – Please shareVOTERS ARE ALLOWED TO CHANGE THEIR MINDS – 5-min videoThe fantastic Brexit offered to the nation in 2016 was a mirage. It doesn’t exist. It never did. It can’t be delivered. It was a con-trick. The ‘alternative’ Brexit now being fobbed off to the nation would never have won approval in the referendum. We don’t want it. Even Brexiters don’t want it. Nobody, absolutely nobody, voted for it.So, said the Prime Minister Theresa May yesterday, it’s her Brexit deal, or no deal, or no Brexit. Put that on a ballot paper, Prime Minister, and let us have a real choice on this, for the very first time.This is our country. It’s our lives, and our futures, at stake. How dare you, Prime Minister; how dare you government; how dare you opposition, for not allowing us, ‘the people’, the final say on this. We demand a new vote. A new vote is entirely democratic. Another vote means more democracy, not less. As Jon Danzig asserts in his 5-minute video, in a true democracy, voters are allowed to change their minds. Put your deal, or no deal, or no Brexit, to the country. Let us decide. Put your trust in the people. If you don’t, this matter will never be settled. It will sit, like festering, fetid, faeces, smouldering forever in the pit of the nation’s stomach, never to be expelled. You cannot do this to us. Relieve yourself of the burden of responsibility for this entire mountain of shit that you and your lot have created. Put the choice back to us, the people. Only dictators would do otherwise. Restore democracy to Britain. Give us a new vote on Brexit. And do it now.• Words and 5-minute video by Jon Danzig. Please share to the nation – before it’s too late.* Latest polling shows that a majority in Britain now want another vote on Brexit, and don't want Brexit. news.sky.com/story/majority-of-brits-now-against-brexit-and-back-second-eu-referendum-sky-data-poll-11555078• Please re-Tweet, and follow Reasons2Remain on Twitter:twitter.com/Reasons2Remain/status/1063342664601530369

Posted by Reasons2Remain on Thursday, 15 November 2018

 

The post Britain demands a new vote on Brexit appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

DRAFT REPORT containing a motion for a non-legislative resolution on the draft Council decision on the conclusion on behalf of the Union of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Singapore, of the other part
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Antonio López-Istúriz White

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

DRAFT REPORT on the 2018 Commission Report on Turkey
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Kati Piri

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

DRAFT OPINION on the implementation of the GSP Regulation (EU) No 978/2012
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Pier Antonio Panzeri

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP

Source : © European Union, 2018 - EP