The EU’s communication strategy has been under the spotlight since the French and Dutch “No”s to the EU’s Constitutional Treaty. The new ‘Reform Treaty‘ in the offing and the European Parliament elections scheduled for Spring 2009 will be major political debates.

On June 5th and 6th, AEGEE-Europe hosted a 2 days event in the European Parliament, where different Belgian and European NGOs had the opportunity to discuss the possibilities for Co-Management in the European institutions, together with representatives from the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Council of Europe and its Advisory Council on Youth, and the European Youth Forum. The event was hosted by the MEP Hannes Swoboda, who is also President of the S&D Group in the European Parliament and financed through the Youth in Action Grant. AEGEE-Brussels was organising the conference together with AEGEE-Europe.

What is exactly the Co-Management that we are proposing? We want more than just being consulted in the EU decision-making process. Young people should be involved in the three phases: consultation, decision and monitoring. Co-management is a unique model where governments and youth representatives sit together to decide on the political and strategic priorities of the youth sector, including the budget allocations in accordance with these priorities, and to monitor the sector’s annual or pluriannual programmes. We have seen that this scheme works in the Council of Europe and we want to put it into practice in the European Union.

On the first morning, we had two panels moderated by Marco Grdosic, former president of AEGEE-Europe, where we could get a lot of input.

In the first panel there were interventions from Marian Harkin, MEP from the ALDE group; Pascal Lejeune, head of Youth Unit of the European Commission; André Jaques-Dodin,  Head of the Intergovernmental Division of the youth department of the Council of Europe; Maria Paschou, Chair of the Advisory Council on Youth of the CoE; Peter Matjaši?, President of the European Youth Forum (YFJ); and Luca Scarpiello, Secretary of the Youth Intergroup of the European Parliament. They debated the current structure of the Council of Europe as an example of best practices, and explored the benefits of having a similar system for the European Institutions.

The second panel counted on the participation of Giuseppe Porcaro, Secretary General of the European Youth Forum; Kaisu Suopanki from Allianssi, the Finnish Youth Council, which has already implemented a co-management scheme; Ivailo Kalfin, MEP from the S&D Group; and André-Jacques Dodin. They were discussing the different possibilities of implementing the co-management in the EU institutions.

During the afternoon session on Wednesday, two parallel sessions were scheduled to discuss in depth and work in small groups. On one workshop, the focus was on the possible structure for a youth co-management scheme in the EU and the fields where the co-management would be needed; on the second workshop, the discussion was focused on legitimacy and representation of the European youth in this new structure.

On Thursday, the  participants presented the results of the previous day work to MEP Hannes Swoboda, president of the S&D Group in the EP. After that, they prepared the follow-up of the conference. This process was just initiated and has a long way ahead, but we young Europeans want to play a bigger role in the EU!

We would like to thank all participants for their active contribution, their ideas and their involvement in the whole process. Without them, and the expertise from their organizations in many cases, we could never have achieved such a big outcome. Thanks also to the European Parliament for hosting us, specially MEP Hannes Swoboda, his office and the S&D group of the EP for their support.

With this event, we wanted to take the lead in proposing a greater involvement of young people inside the European Institutions, because we believe that we need to involve them when the discussions are taken, in order to make young people more aware and more interested of what European Politics is about. The co-management system is a very open and transparent system for youth and in the current context, where young people’s need are being one priority of decision-makers, we think that it is very important to take into account the input of young people. We hope that in the future there would be a body of young people representing European youth who could sit equally with the European Commission when making decisions about youth issues.

 

Social media is a term used to indicate on-line technologies and practices for sharing information and opinions; building relationships and promoting discussions. They created a new age in communications and increased the role and responsibility of communication professionals.

EU institutions are aware of the growing influence of digital and social media on citizens and organisations. They use social media to reach out and connect with citizens and stakeholders in addition to the communication which takes place via more traditional channels such as written press, broadcast media and EU publications and websites.

An interesting site of the European Commission worth to visit is Waltzing Matilda: http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/waltzing_matilda/ . It is a blog created by teams working in web and social media for the European Commission, to share new ideas, challenges and progress in being digital as an institution.

The institutions are increasingly making progress in the use of interactive media, but with different rhythms and nuanced strategic approaches. The Commission for example distinguishes social media use for the following purposes:

• communication on political priorities
• stakeholder and campaign communication
• use of social media in staff members’ own capacity

At member-states level we can see that some governments are fully engaged with social media initiatives such as e-voting, monitoring and analysing social media but others are still hesitating in using interactive tools.

What are the benefits:

Creating an account on Facebook, LinkedIn or Twitter can be an added value to increase engagement with target audiences and improve the accessibility of communication. People want to see that there is a face behind an organisation like commissioners, spokespersons, officials etc. Social media can also enable public authorities to: be more active in their interaction with stakeholders and the public; be fast to adjust communication and messages; reach specific audiences.

Have a plan:

It is essential to have a plan about how to use social media and accept that you may loose some control. An interactive communication means that you should listen carefully to stakeholders and citizens and maybe be forced to follow them in what they are interested in. That is not necessarily what you think that is of importance.

Basic principles:

1. Be specific: Before you start using social media you should answer the following questions:

· Do we have a good message to communicate?

· Do we offer something new to talk about?

· Do we invite stakeholders to participate?

· Do we offer some added value?

· Do we remind the people to spread the word?

· Who is the target audience?

2.  Be credible: it is important to keep you credibility intact. You should be clear and transparent. Say you do not know if you don’t and never pretend you know. If your organisation makes a mistake you should admit it. Apologize while also communicating how you can resolve issues and do better next time. Operate your social media strategy in alignment with the overall strategic vision of your firm.

Do not let your intern handle your social media. You may be busy as Managing Director, but you can’t afford not to know what is being said about your organisation. The challenge is to have enough managers with social media training knowing how to react to be accepted within social media.

3. Be responsive: A lot of organisations fail with social media because they are only talking to people, instead of listening. So, listen and join conversations and demonstrate your passion for what you do. One of the most important things you can do within your social profiles is to respond to any direct messages you receive from followers or stakeholders.

What is important about social media interactions is that they represent people who made an effort to engage with your brand/organisation/association on a higher level than simply observing your content. While these interactions may be positive or negative, it is important that you respond to them out of respect for the initiative people have shown.

4. Be consistent: encourage constructive criticism and deliberation. Remain cordial, honest and professional at all times. Do not post anything you wouldn’t want your stakeholders or colleagues to read and associate with you. Do not say negative things about your competitors. Do not get in fights with angry clients online. Be very careful and diplomatic when communicating on topics such as religion and politics.

5. Let your followers tell your story: Build a great product or service and let your stakeholders use it and share their experiences over social media. Make sure your content is good. The secret of making things viral is not in the communication plan. People get excited when you make stimulating and interesting things.

Conclusions

Every minute of the day approx. 100.000 tweets are sent; 684.480 pieces of content are shared on Facebook; 2 million search queries are made on Google and 48 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube. Social media is an indispensable communication channel and are essential to all organisations. Each organisation should learn how to implement this digital communication tool and how to capitalise its full functionality and advantage. Have a plan about how you want to use social media and stay professional at all times. Be authentic, be passionate and share the personality behind your social brand that you are trying to build. Don’t post your best stuff during major international or national disasters, crises or breaking news stories… and do not take it personally if you get criticised!

- EU prepares plans for a common European telecom market by 2015 -

In a speech on Thursday, EU Commissioner Neelie Kroes called for a thorough reform of telecom regulations and the creation of a pan-European telecom market. The new reform proposals are expected to be agreed in April 2014 and should make it easier for operators to create European cross-border networks.

The EU already reduced the prices for using mobile phones and tablets abroad over the last years, thanks to the pressure of “Europeans for Fair Roaming”, parliamentarians and other groups. Commissioner Kroes now wants to strike one last time before the upcoming European elections next year and completely re-organise the European telecom market. But the reforms must truly benefit the consumers, warns the consumers’ group “Europeans for Fair Roaming”.

The regulation package is expected to make cross-border mergers and network sharing easier and Europeanise telecom regulation. But the consumer group “Europeans for Fair Roaming” which also accomplished the latest cuts to roaming charges in the EU last year warned that the new rules must keep consumers in mind.

The coordinator of the FairRoaming.org campaign, Bengt Beier, said: “The newest plans of the EU might help to make the telecom market more European. However, the EU must ensure that this benefits consumers and not just the telecom providers. The prices for roaming and for all cross-borders phone calls must go down significantly. We call on the European Commission to make concrete proposals for achieving lower prices for all cross-border phone calls. The best way would be to introduce price caps for all international phone calls within the EU in a similar way like this is already done for roaming.”

For more information about our campaign, please visit www.fairroaming.org.

Commonality, the technique of manufacturing a perception that we all agree on something, allows activists to design evidence light, communications rich campaigns. Some recent victories by anti-chemicals activists show that you don't need facts or evidence to change policies in Brussels.

In the years before the arrival of the Euro (2002), a campaign of institutional advertising was assuring that ” the Euro makes us stronger “. For some years (2002-2007) the above mentioned slogan seemed to turn into axiom.

The happened between 2007 and 2013 does not deserve, as it seems to our celebrated political class, no explanation. To push and point. We do not interest these politicians as citizens but as taxable cigars.

Now, on the occasion of the celebration of the ” 2013 European Year of the citizens ” (and of step to be preparing the area for a few tricky elections to the European Parliament in 2014) the following advertising campaign appears us.

Read more

Vital in any campaign, a political party cannot exist without its activists. It is necessary that the majority of the party members (the activists) understand the importance of each campaign – whether the elections are local, regional, national or European. They want to and need to be involved, as well as to be treated with [...]

Blog series of Gabriella Lovász

****

“It is the paradise of rational people” (Aldous Huxley).

Dutch people are brave, confident and strong-minded. They face their own problems and they face together the problems of the country.

“The geography of the European part of Netherlands is in that much of its land has been reclaimed from the sea and is below sea level, protected by dikes.” (Wikipedia) Dutch people have been continuously fighting with the elements, which explains their need and appreciation for the clean environment.

“Another factor that has influenced its physical appearance is that the country is among the most densely populated on Earth.” (Wikipedia) No matter how many different religions, society blocks exist in the country, they can live in peace together, but also, their thinking is stiff because the closeness of these blocks (more in the past than nowadays).

They are not really individualists, independent; Freedom of the individuals is highly appreciated of course, but they will not be the main initiators in a project. Collectivism, team-work is more their approach, they are very family-oriented and generally holding together. They use the word gezelligheid “which, depending on context, can be translated as convivial, cosy, fun, quaint, or nice atmosphere, but can also connote belonging, time spent with loved ones, the fact of seeing a friend after a long absence, or general togetherness”. (Wikipedia)

Dutch people are tolerant, trustworthy and have strong moral principles that sometimes they can turn into dogmatism. As a Dutch psychologist said, “we think it is important to help people, but only when people do not help us”.

Or “We like to indoctrinate and educate others in topics, which are none of our businesses” (said by a Dutch person). Dutch are highly qualified, well educated, their confidence also derives from this fact. Normally they are less flexible, more bureaucratic.

It is a small  country, surrounded by big nations, they have no strong political of physical power. So they convince others with arguments. Belgians are creative, Dutch are rational.

They have a strong ego (individual and collective as well), which, if linked strongly with their feeling of superiority and dogmatism, it can be annoying. This is more visible in stressful situations, which may happen often in EU projects. They may seem overbearing in such cases.

On a meeting, typical Dutch people would accept external support and would appreciate it. So money saving does not mean that they are not willing to invest into quality. Their general cautiousness with money could result in a tight control over the budget spending, but they are also excellent gamblers and they can be creative when needed. Between these two facts there is no conflict. They are not always keeping the rules and following all the words of the written agreement, you can count on their creative solutions in doing the job from less money.

 

In summary:

• Dutch are very direct, they will speak clearly, with no extreme emotions, there is no need for small-talks with them

Tip: this style shows honesty and openness, but your partners may see it as a rude style. Make sure all your partners understand the communication style positively.

• Their decisions will be based more on facts, and their arguments will be also relying on facts and numbers

Tip: Would you need to turn the discussion from emotions to facts, you may ask the Dutch partner to do a pro-con list, or a summary e.g.

• You can negotiate and achieve open consensus with Dutch partners, but in stressful situations their style might be too overbearing

Tip: When there is a need for a consensus, it might be a good idea to appoint the Dutch partner as the mediator/moderator of the discussion

• Dutch people are very good team-workers

Tip: Would you compliment the work done by the Dutch partner, always address the whole group of people, not just the representative attending the meeting (to be noted as such in the minutes of the meeting)

Source: Richard Hill, We Europeans (1997)

Do you have any experience? What do you think about cultural differences in EU projects? Share your opinion with us!

 

Gabriella Lovász

 

 

 

 

 

 

Salary: None Experience: None necessary

Similar to writing an essay, swiftly putting together a first draft of the project proposal and later revising and improving it gradually is usually a good approach (provided that you have enough time!). However, as we mentioned in our previous blog post, it is important to establish a clear outline of the proposal as a first step. Likewise, you would need to gather a critical amount of necessary technical content before proceeding with compiling that first draft of the proposal. So, it is essential to allow for some time for gathering the “ingredients” of the proposal by conducting research and digging into various types of relevant documents and data as needed. Already at this stage, the partners’ contribution comes handy; so, push them to provide you with useful input!

Once you feel that you have sufficient material to fill in the different sections of the proposal, go ahead and start typing in the forms. You will then have the basis of the proposal, most probably with some missing links. Next steps will be to fill these missing links and to check and re-check if everything is properly fitting and the proposal design is appropriate. As we pointed out in Part 4 of this blog series, perhaps the most typical feature of this process is that it is “iterative”. So, do return back to various sections of the proposal to refine, rectify and adjust certain things until perfection.

 

 

While completing the forms and finalising your proposal, the following tips may be helpful:

• As you continue shaping and updating your proposal, regularly refer back to the call text (work programme topic) to ensure that you are still fully in line with the call requirements and expectations;
• Allow enough time to put together a well thought-out Gantt chart and PERT diagram as opposed to preparing them hastily and risking ending up with generic diagrams and figures, which would be harshly commented by the evaluators;
• Clearly demonstrate the complementarity of the partners that you have brought together – show how they are well suited to take care of the specific tasks they are assigned with, while at the same time contributing to other collaborative/joint tasks;
• Think carefully on every kind of resource that is necessary for realising the the activities you have planned;
• In view of the resources needed, make a careful estimation of the project budget (do not underestimate!) and provide detailed explanation and justification of the individual budget items.

 

While finalising your proposal, be ready for surprises and challenges, hence to improvise and act pragmatically. For instance, even after several requests, you may have partners not providing information/data (e.g. partner description, budget related information, etc.), which you might end up having to find out and/or create on your own. Be ready to spend longer hours in the office (or to continue working at home or elsewhere) and/or to work at the weekends. In most cases, preparation of the proposal will come as an additional task to your day-to-day activities at work.

 

If you proceed according to your plan, hopefully you will manage to have a final draft of your proposal a few days prior to the submission deadline, which will allow you to double-check and cross-check everything. Another piece of advice here would be to ask a colleague or friend, who has not been involved in the preparation of the proposal, to have a look at the final draft of the proposal with fresh eyes and give you an honest feedback. It would even be better if this colleague or friend could assess the proposal against the official evaluation criteria.

 

 

Finally, leave enough time to do a proper formatting and editing of the proposal and its language. The proposal will be the only tool trying to express your project concept and ideas to the evaluators. Therefore, you’d better ensure that it communicates in the best way! Make sure to avoid any spelling errors and grammar mistakes, acronyms or abbreviations not spelled out, too small fonts, long and merged paragraphs, etc. Do include graphics, tables or other illustrative elements to avoid just plain text and make the reader’s life easier. Repeating certain good arguments and strong ideas throughout the proposal and highlighting them appropriately would also be a good idea so that they are not overlooked.

If you worked hard on the proposal and believe that you have done your best, your efforts will most likely pay off. Submit your proposal by the deadline and wish for the best!

 

Ömer

 

By Dan Luca and Nienke van Leeuwaarden ‘Accountability’ has several meanings, depending on the situation it is used in. In his article “Analysing and Assessing Public Accountability – A Conceptual Framework”, Mark Bovens claims that accountability for the European Commission for example is not only synonym for ‘clarity’, ‘transparency’, and maybe most importantly: ‘responsibility’, but that [...]

Last week some AEGEEans participated in the first World Forum for Democracy. In his opening speech of Jean Claude Mignon, president of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe described it as the Davos of Democracy. It was preceded by the Youth Assembly, where nearly 150 young people (Europe and beyond) discussed on the topic “Youth and Democracy, the young generation sacrificed?” for three days. With such a topic, the Youth Assembly held sessions and worked hard to share opinions and reach an agreement on one final document, which can be found here. This document was supposed to be presented to the World Forum, but the previous night they got noticed that this was some “misunderstanding” and that the young people were “not required” to address the plenary at the Opening Ceremony. On October 8th, the young representatives went to attend the Opening Ceremony, willing to do everything possible to address the World Forum on behalf of the young people of Europe and the World. First obstacle, not all the young delegates were allowed to come into the hemicycle, the other ones had to follow the streaming in a “video room”. After that, the delegates went to find Mr. Mignon to ask for a change and to be finally allowed to speak. He explained he was not responsible deciding on who should speak there and that he wasn’t authorized to talk there even as a parliamentary representative. Amandine from AEGEE, Costas from PAFOS, and Mr Connarty (a member of the UK parliament who supports youth issues) tried again, this time talking with the Liaison Office of the Secretary General (Mr Jagland’s). The fact that young people did not want to play the bureaucracy game of meeting in an office while the session was about to start (to sweep the issue under the rug) made them react quite aggressively and the security staff threatened to get our representatives out. In the end things calmed down but we were told that they would not grant us even 2 minutes. Our only hope to address the forum was if someone gave us part of their time, and that we should ask Mr Mignon to let us speak. The official reason was lack of time. Guess what? The plenary started 20 minutes late, 10 speeches worth. Therefore the young representatives in the hemicycle decided that after the second speaker, during the opening session, they will put tape on their mouths, stand up and hold hands. They didn’t say anything or make any noise, they just stood to denounce the silencing of youth voice. The other action the “action group” worked on was distributing flyers : “Missing democracy, when found, please bring it back to youth” was the message. Even when they were not forcing people to take them, immediately a security guy started to collect them all, even from the people that accepted them. He even started chasing one of the youth delegates to tell her to sit down and took all of her papers so she could not distribute them anymore. The security was already surrounding the youth delegation from the moment when they put the tape on their mouths. Finally it was Mr Mignon who offered 2 minutes of his time of speech so we could be heard. Unfortunately, it was after the closing of the opening plenary and after a break, so most of the media had already left and the room was half empty. In the afternoon, Jean Claude Mignon invited us to his office for one hour so we could talk with him, young members gave him some feedback on what they thought about the Youth Assembly. On the following days of the World Forum, even though still some difficulties were faced, good networking could be done, and the message of the Youth Assembly was carried out in the different panels organized.

Un peu de prospective : Quelles son les principales tendances qui vont marquer l’évolution de la vie des entreprises dans les années qui viennent ? Thomas Frey, un futurologue américain, s’est prêté, comme d’autres à l’exercice. Le blog Smart Company a reprise quelques unes des plus saillantes de ses prédictions. Si certaines sont prévisibles, d’autres montrent que le terrain se prépare dès aujourd’hui. Florilège de quelques unes de ces tendances émergentes marquantes :

1. Ne dites plus « quel est mon emploi », mais « quel est mon projet »

Dans les pays industrialisés, il n’est plus rare, aujourd’hui, que les personnes de plus de trente ans aient déjà exercé une dizaine d’emplois différents. Mais d’ici une dizaine d’années, selon Frey, il est possible que nous ne parlions plus de l’emploi que nous exerçons mais du projet sur lequel nous sommes actifs. En 2022, un trentenaire pourra déjà avoir cumulé près de 200 projets différents… L’économie moderne évolue vers un modèle basé sur la mise sur pied de projets. Le lien contractuel avec un employeur spécifique, même sur une courte période, perdra encore de sa pertinence. Internet permetra d’aligner en temps réel les besoins des entreprises avec l’offre de talents individuels spécifiques. Plutôt que d’engager un employé à plein temps, il sera beaucoup plus aisé de le mobiliser sur des projets spécifiques, qu’ils soient de deux heures, deux jours, deux semaines, par exemple. De leur côté, les employés constitueront par eux-mêmes des pools de compétences disponibles pour intervenir sur les projets. Cette évolution est déjà facilitée aujourd’hui par la volonté d’une part croissante de la nouvelle génération de s’éloigner du modèle professionnel vécu par ses parents : carrière de longue durée dans la même entreprise et la difficulté de se remettre en route quand un licenciement survient.

2. Des colonies d’entreprises

Dans dix ans, nous parlerons moins d’un lieu de travail centralisé. Pour Thomas Frey, nous pourrions assister à l’émergence de « colonies d’entreprises« . Pour le futurologue, ces colonies seront une évolution des espaces de Coworking que nous connaissons aujourd’hui. Elles permettront aux entreprises classiques d’adopter le mode de fonctionnement de l’industrie du cinéma, par exemple, avec des actions et des équipes constituées ponctuellement. Certaines de ces colonies d’entreprises et/ou de professionnels seront parfois virtuelles. D’autres seront centrées sur une discipline précise, telle que les nanotechnologie, l’agro-alimentaire ou le développement de jeux vidéo. Les grandes entreprises placeront des project managers dans ces colonies.

3. L’essor et l’impact des imprimantes 3D

Les imprimantes tridimensionnelles (3D) se multiplient partout. A l’avenir, il devrait être possible de fabriquer n’importe quel objet dans une infinité de matériaux possibles, estime Thomas Frey. Les vêtements ou les chaussures, par exemple, pourront être manufacturés à l’unité, à partir de plans sous format digital.

« Imaginez que vous entriez dans un magasin de vêtements. Vous avancez jusqu’à l’appareil qui scanne votre corps puis vous attendez qu’une imprimante vous fabrique le vêtement choisi sur mesure…, illustre Thomas Frey. Vous pourrez aussi scanner vos pieds, avant de faire fabriquer sur place votre paire de chaussures ».

Il est possible d’envisager la même chose, à terme, en médecine, avec des tissus humains (peau, os…), des aliments ou des médicaments… Bref, dans toute l’industrie.

4. La voiture sans chauffeur

Google a déjà diffusé plusieurs exemples de son prototype de voiture sans chauffeur. La firme californienne espère ainsi pouvoir développer, à termes, le système opérationnel qui gèrera les voitures sans chauffeur du futur. Google n’est toutefois pas la seule active sur ce terrain. De grandes percées sont à attendre dans les années qui viennent chez les constructeurs automobiles traditionnels. Le groupe Mercedes, par exemple, est l’auteur de plusieurs initiatives dans ce sens. Ces nouveaux véhicules et la technologie qu’ils incorporent auront un gros impact sur des centaines de métiers différents nécessitant occasionnellement ou de façon permanentes l’utilisation d’un véhicule. Sans compter le gain de productivité dû au temps d’attention regagner sur les temps de trajets.

5. L’enseignement sans professeur

Il s’agit bien sûr d’une rupture majeure par rapport au modèle historique d’éducation. Mais à l’heure où des étudiants du monde entier peuvent, à distance, assister au cours d’une professeur d’université à l’autre bout de la planète, cette évolution n’est que naturelle. Nous entrons dans une ère d’apprentissage et de ré-apprentissage permanent. Le besoin est tellement grand pour tout le monde que le nombre d’enseignants risque, à un moment d’être trop limité, pour répondre à l’immense demande de formation des jeunes et… des seniors. Dans le monde, dit Frey, il manquerait aujourd’hui déjà près de 8 millions d’enseignants. L’enseignement digital sans professeur pourrait donc s’avérer, à terme, une nécessité, y compris pour les formateurs professionnels dans les entreprises.

So, on Sunday, July 1, media all over Europe told us that making calls, surfing the web or checking e-mails while on holiday has once again become cheaper, thanks to the newest EU roaming regulation. Accordingly, prices for using mobiles phones abroad have been lowered to 29ct/min for calls and 70ct/MB for internet access in July 2012 and will keep going down to 19ct/min for calls and 20ct/MB for internet access by 2014. In addition, users will be allowed to choose a different operator for roaming which should bring about more competition. We have seen that most operators are already starting to offer roaming packages for travellers in reaction to the new law.

A success for citizens

For us, the citizen-led campaign “Europeans for Fair Roaming” (FairRoaming.org), this is the success of our work. We campaigned for further lowering of roaming charges and managed to unite 20 associations, 14 Members of the European Parliament and 150000 people behind this goal. Thanks to those efforts, FairRoaming.org managed to halve the prices for internet roaming, compared to the original EU proposals. Just like the new European Citizens’ Initiatives or the campaigns against ACTA, this shows a trend of growing influence of citizens on European politics.

Over the last two years, we managed to show European politicians that mobile phone users demand an end to unfair roaming prices. And the EU listened to most of our concerns. The EU Commission originally proposed prices of 50ct per MB in 2014. Together with the European Parliament, we managed to get them down to 20ct per MB! This shows that determined citizens can have a real influence on European politics.

But does this mean “Mission accomplished” for us?

Well, in fact, we are not sure. There are still many uncertainties and gaps that need to be filled: It was our goal (and the stated goal of the Commission) to bring prices down to the same level as domestic. Wether or not the new legislation will deliver on this goal will only be clear two years from now. Only in 2014 will there be a competitive market for roaming services, allowing you as a consumer to choose a different operator for roaming services. While we hope that this will lead to massive price reductions, this is far from clear. This now also depends on how this will work in detail. We hope that this will be done in a consumer-friendly way.

Furthermore, the EU roaming regulation only applies when you use your mobile phone in another EU country. But once you leave the EU, you still have to pay exorbitant prices. There have been proposals to extend the European roaming rules to third countries by way of an international treaty. We call on the EU to seriously explore this idea.

Lastly, when you stay at home and call to another EU state (basically, just any normal international call), the price caps of the regulation also do not apply. This leads to prices that are many times higher than those for domestic calls (and even roaming calls). It is absurd that currently, it is cheaper to call to another EU state when you are travelling than when you are at home. This is a hindrance to the internal market and should be in the focus of the EU next.

So, dear EU, there is still a lot to do…

 

On Friday June 22 there was a football (soccer) match between the national teams of Germany and Greece, for the UEFA Euro 2012 championship. The game received special attention from all the established media, who presented it as the match of “the bailout”, referring of course to the economic situation in the eurozone, whereby Greece has thus far been receiving bailout funds to prevent it from defaulting on its debt obligations, while Germany is the largest contributor to all these (and all other) funds by virtue of being the largest economy in the eurozone.