after lisbon

8/8/2019 After Lisbon

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/after-lisbon 1/13

LIBERTAS

new

New Libertas is a publication of European Liberal Youth Issue no.9, year 2010.

Liberal economy

Too much intervention is deregulation

Igor Caldeira

Europe after the Lisbon Treaty Vedrana Gujic

Defending the common currencyAlexander Plahr



www.newlibertas.eu issue no.9 year 2010.02

Dear friends,

the institutional struggle is nallyover, the European Union has new le-gal foundations! Since December 1stthe Treaty of Lisbon is into effect, giv-ing the Parliament a say in almost allpolicy areas now. And a say it almostimmediately had!

In the beginning of February, Parlia-ment vetoed the dangerous SWIFTdata sharing deal with the UnitedStates of America, which would havegiven away the privacy of 500 mil-lion citizens. Of course the victory isnot nal, we have to remain vigilantbecause the Commission already isworking on a new proposal. But this

vote showed better then all theoreti-cal explanations about the ReformTreaty what has changed fundamen-tally with its introduction: The EUnow is much closer to being an actual,transparent, legitimized and workingdemocracy then it ever was before.

Therefore, the European Union willno longer be “political secondaryspace” but instead will become themost important layer in the set-up ofthe political system of member states.It will be our task to ght for ourideas and visions in this new politicalset-up.

issue no.9. year 2010. 03

Issue no. 9

Liberal economy

02 EditorialAlexander Plahr

03. Content

04. An economic government for Europe, really?Aloys Rigaut, President of LYMEC

05. Lilliputian banks not the solutionSophie in ‘t Veld & Ivo Thijssen

06. Too much intervention is deregulationIgor Caldeira

08. Economic freedoms in Europe and CroatiaMarijana Milić

10. Call for an European ArmyDr. Guido Westerwelle

LYMEC President

Aloys Rigaut

Article

European Army

Article

Liberals in SlovakiaArticle

Lisbon Treaty

04 10 14 16

13. The raising stars of the Western BalkansVedrana Gujić, HNS Croatia

14. Young Liberals involved in the emergenceof a new liberal party in SlovakiaRichard Švihura, President of Young Liberals

16. Lisbon treaty Vedrana Gujic, HNS Croatia

18. Defending the common currencyAlexander Plahr, Vice President of LYMEC

20. When people miss liberalismMartina Monti and Ermanno Martignetti

20. News from member organisations

22. LYMEC statements

Editorial

ew LibertasMPRESSUM

ew Libertas is a publication ofuropean Liberal Youth - LYMEC.he magazine issues four times perear.

he board of editors

lexander Plahrhief editor

aven Klobučaranaging editor and art direction

ajda Zeherovićditor

edrana Gujićditor

uropean Liberal Youth - LYMECue Montoyer 311000 Brussels

: +32.2.237.0146: +32.2.231.1907: [email protected]

W : www.newlibertas.euW : www.lymec.eu

uropean Liberal Youth is support-e of the ALDE Group (Alliance ofberals and Democrats for Europe)

the European Parliament.

YMEC is the youth organisationthe European Liberal and Demo-ats Party - ELDR.

YMEC is kindly supported by theouth in Action program.

For example, currently a proposalis prepared to regulate the Citizens’Initiative introduced with the Lis-bon Treaty. It foresees a 2% thresh-old per member state when collect-ing signatures for the initiative, andeven the establishment of a proce-dure to lter the legal nature of theinitiative before allowing to collectthe signatures.

Clearly, such high thresholds willmake it nearly impossible to suc-cessfully start European Citizens’Initiatives and therefore we shoulddo all we can to let the Commissionand the Spanish Presidency know

what we think of this. For we do notwant as few as possible Citizens’Initiatives, but instead should en-courage them.

Alexander PlahrChief-editor of New LibertasVice President of LYMEC

P.S. We have a special goodie foryou in this issue: A chart that nicelyshows how the Union works afterall the changes that occurred. Checkit out!

SEND USYOUR

CAMPAIGNS

An important part of LYMEC is to facilitate the exchange of ideas andbest practices among our members. Therefore, we ask you to send usyour recent and best-running campaigns!

We will present the most interesting ones in one of the upcomingissues of New Libertas, so the rest of liberal Europe can have a lookand marvel at them.

Whether a thematic campaign or an electoral one, just send uswhatever material you have in digital form (PDFs, pictures, etc.) [email protected] with a short English explanation / translationwhat the campaign is about and what impact it had. Maybe you alsohave some pictures of the material being distributed on the streets? Just send us all the stuff you have!



issue no.9 year 2010.

Intervention

I g o r C a l d e i r a

Too much intervention is deregulationArticle by Igor Caldeira

There are many reasonsfor State intervention,

natural monopolies,externalities, etc. In thenancial market, such

rationales nd very dif-cult grounds. So whyshould we ask for State

intervention?“

With the new nancial crisis many voices wereheard: it is now! This is the nal proof that capi-talism is wrong, that capitalism is ill and that,shortly, capitalism will be dead. Marx was right!Such enthusiasm should be a little bit refrained.As the Marxist or post-marxist authors belong-ing to the French théorie de la régulation knowonly too well, the success of capitalism has beenthe ability to answer all of its crisis and thus sur-vive. Something that socialism was, not surpris-ingly, unable to do. Simultaneously, and that istrue, when there is a crisis, something must havegone wrong.

The common answer to this is that the marketswere too deregulated. Banks could do whateverthey wanted because there is no really work-ing supervising institutions. At the same time,a broad catch-all coalition says that now that thedeed is done, we must x it – meaning, the State,meaning, taxpayers – must either nationalizebanks (Northern Rock, Fortis, etc.) or lend im-mense sums of money that will in any case hav edramatic consequences on governmental (moreand more decitary) budgets.

This presents two very problematic issues. One

is a quite obvious one. More expenditure, moredecit – and of course, future generations willhave to pay for the present folly. It is the otherone I would like to approach. Both commoncitizens and politicians, in times like these, needscapegoats. They did not nd strange for manyyears that companies could have ever-increas-ing results in stockmarkets independently fromlong-term value creation, nor did they avoid in-vesting in nancial products with suspiciouslyhigh return rates.

In the end, the fault belongs to “neoliberals”,always allied with the greedy managers. Nev-ertheless, going back to authors such as Hayekor Friedman, I nd nothing that can supportsuch connection between liberalism and whatGalbraith, in The New Industrial State called the“technostructure”. As this economist tells us, themanager is in fact, in our contemporary power

arrangement within companies, one of the capi-talist’s worse enemies. I will not develop Gal-braith’s argument, but I would like to discussa problem that Hayek considered vital: “theapathy and lack of inuence of the stockholderis largely the result of an in stitutional set-upwhich we have come to regard as the obviousor only possible one” (part IV of the article “TheCorporation in a Democratic Society”).

Instead of blaming the market for nancial cri -sis, what people should be thinking is if the mar-ket is really working. Can a market work if noconsequences follow a misdeed? Can anything,for that matter, work? What interventionists aresaying is that companies, managers and inves-tors have been acting in a socially irresponsibleway. And so, we must pay for their actions. Ind this quite surprising. Does throwing mon-ey into a re put it away, or fuel it? In the end,blaming liberalism for such a spiral of economicirresponsibility and public debt is even moresurprising. After all, liberalism stands, on eco-nomical grounds, rst of all for a well function-ing market.

There are many reasons for State intervention,

natural monopolies, externalities, etc. In the -nancial market, such rationales nd very dif -cult grounds. So why should we ask for Stateintervention? We are not facing a market-absentenvironment. We have multiple players; compe-tition can in fact be rather violent in it (good forthe consumer!). Instead of thinking what morecan the State do to regulate nancial markets,we should be asking ourselves if State interven-tion is not deregulating markets. Surprisinglyit may seem for some statist minds, markets dohave rules.

When a company is not good enough to stay inthe market, it dies.Good managers and good in-vestors, without the ever-present taxpayer prizefor incompetence, will win, the others will loose.After making errors, people tend to learn and soto improve their future performance. They willcertainly be more cautious.

Where is the problem in that? Some point out theholistic effects of nancial institutions’ bankrupt-cy. But why nationalize banks? If there is debt,convert that to equity. Banks will get immediateliquidity and the taxpayer will be spared an ad-ditional burden. Of course, that means that a lotof market players (unwary investors, incautiousmanagers) may suffer severe losses. That is good.That is how markets regulate themselves. Thoseare its checks and balances.

In our present conditions, we don’t need State reg-ulation. What we miss dearly is ma rket regulation;and yes, markets are too deregulated, but not bythe absence of rules, but by its excess.

The role of a liberal, well-ordered State is layingdown general laws that harness markets and al-lows them to work for the benet of all.

It is not multiplying legislation and governmen-tal measures to avoid this or that bank from goinginto bankruptcy. If we keep following this suicidalpath, by the next nancial crisis we will still bepaying the debts of the present one.

“When a company isnot good enough tostay in the market, itdies.Good managersand good investors,without the ever-present taxpayer prizefor incompetence, willwin, the others willloose. “

In some European countries there are no liberal youth organisations that could provideyoung liberally minded people the access to LYMEC. Also, some European idealists alsowould like to work directly on the level o European politics even i they are alreadymembers o their national liberal youth organisations. To those people the IndividualMembers’ Section (IMS) is a great opportunity to get direct access to LYMEC and its events.

Individual members, together with the Member organizations orm the backbone o liberalyouth politics in Europe. They elect their delegates to the congress via an online electionin advance to the congress. All individual members that have paid their membership eecan vote at this election o the IMS-delegates to the LYMEC congress. The amount o IMS-delegates depends on the membership gures o the IMS.



issue no.9 year 2010. issue no.9 year 2010. 11

EuropeanArmy

D r . G u i d o W e s t e r w e l l e

Call for an European ArmyArticle by Dr. Guido Westerwelle, German Foreign Minister

‘’Wherever problemsbecome more global,

esponsibility also has toe spread more globally.This is the only way to

prevent the intercon-nectedness which has

volved due to globaliza-tion from becoming a

threat to our security. “

The world in which we formulate our policies ismarked by globalization. Globalization is a fact.It is not something we can ignore or opt out of.We still tend to focus on the economic aspects ofthis globalization. That’s half the truth at best.Values and knowledge are globalizing. Insightsand views. Lifestyles are globalizing, and cer-tainly not always to our own liking. For oftenenough, this process also entails cultural losses.

The balance in international politics is shifting.That has happened time and again in history.However, it has never happened before at suchspeed.

Globalization is thus also altering the frame-work for our national and international security.Many people in this country are perhaps notquite sure where to nd Afghanistan or Yemenon a map. However, developments there have adirect impact on us. Responsible foreign policymust address these conicts.

Wherever problems become more global, re-sponsibility also has to be spread more globally.This is the only way to prevent the intercon-nectedness which has evolved due to globaliza-tion from becoming a threat to our security. Wetherefore have to nd common answers to therisks created by the proliferation of weapons ofmass destruction, to radical, fundamental ideol-ogies, to terrorism, fanaticism and failing states.

Globalization makes these problems both morevisible and more difcult to comprehend. Aclear compass as well as jointly agreed and bind-ing rules are therefore more necessary than everfor a far sighted foreign and security policy. I’dlike to comment on three aspects of Germany’scompass.

Foreign policy based on values

This is evident from the institutional foundationof Germany’s foreign and security policy. TheEuropean Union and the North Atlantic Alli-ance have provided such a reliable foundation

for German policy for decades because they aremore than clubs whose members have similarinterests. First and foremost, the EU and NATOare alliances based on values.

The transatlantic friendship and partnershipare part of the rm ground on which we stand.We have created an area of shared fundamentalvalues across the Atlantic. What unites us is thespecial importance we attach to the freedom ofthe individual.

Germany’s commitment to the universality ofhuman rights is part of this. However, this is nota policy of moral admonition. The principle ofthe inviolability of human dignity enshrined inour Basic Law is proof that we’ve learned thelessons of our own history. Protecting humandignity is the duty of all state authority. Persist-ing in our efforts to promote it and championingit all over the world is and will remain an obli-gation of Germany’s foreign policy.

I consider the development of new partnershipsbased on our solid foundation of values to bethe key to a successful foreign and security pol-icy in the age of globalization.

I’m delighted that my colleague Yang Jiechicame to Munich yesterday, thus becoming therst ever Chinese Foreign Minister to attend thisConference. And I’m also pleased to have mycolleague Sergey Lavrov next to me today. Thestrategic partnership with Russia is not only oneof the keys to European security but also vitalfor resolving global problems. We want thispartnership and we want to develop it furtherin those areas where we have common interests.This includes a substantive discussion on theproposals on European security put forward byPresident Medvedev.

With other emerging powers such as Brazil, In-dia or South Africa, we are linked by commoninterests and challenges, from which we have toforge stable partnerships. In London last week,we reached agreement with the Gulf States on

common strategies to stabilize Yemen. The newapproach in the international community’s en-gagement in Afghanistan was decided amongmore than 70 delegations.

Germany is participating in the stabilization ofAfghanistan and many other peace missions onthe basis of a UN mandate. The UN can only beas strong as its member states allow it to be. Forus, however, it provides an essential, overarchingframework for international security. Germany re-mains just as committed to the ideals of the UN asit does to providing concrete support in masteringthe challenges named by the Secretary-General.

EU needs a common army to becomea global player

European integration was the lesson we learnedfrom the catastrophe brought on us by national-ism, from the self-destruction of our continentwhich Germany caused. We helped to shape thiscooperation model, and it has shaped us. How-

ever, its success is not a given. When it comes toEurope, many talk about the cost. We should talkmore about what it is worth to us. United Europewill only be secure if my generation, which hasnever experienced war, suffering or hunger, isstrongly committed to European integration. Andmy generation has a chance to extend this c ooper-ation model far beyond Western Europe, perhapseven to the whole of the European continent.

The Lisbon Treaty opened a new chapter. The Eu-ropean Union has become more democratic andparliamentary. Lisbon is not the end but, rather,the beginning.

For instance, the Treaty outlines a common secu-rity and defence policy. The German Governmentwants to advance along this path. The long-termgoal is the establishment of a European armyunder full parliamentary control. The EuropeanUnion must live up to its political role as a globalplayer. It must be able to manage crises indepen-dently. It must be able to respond quickly, exiblyand to take a united stand.

To achieve this, however, it must also be able topool resources, set priorities and distribute re-sponsibility – even in times of ever scarcer means.

The “permanent structured cooperation” instru-ment envisaged in the Lisbon Treaty provides theoption of moving ahead together with individualEU member states in order to further develop Eu-rope’s vision. The EU Common Security and De-fence Policy project will act as a motor f or greaterEuropean integration. We want strong Europeancrisis management. This is not intended to replaceother security structures. More Europe is not astrategy directed against anyone. No one has anyreason to fear Europe, but everyone should beable to depend on Europe.The Common Securityand Defence Policy is Europe’s answer to global-ization. It is our contribution to the Euro-Atlanticsecurity partnership.

NATO, too, is searching for new answers to glo-balization. We support its work on a new Strate-gic Concept that views security within a compre-

hensive political context. This will also bolster theEuro-Atlantic security partnership.

Peace policy

Today the uncontrolled proliferation of nuclearweapons is probably the most serious threat to oursecurity. The signing of the nuclear Non-Prolifera-tion Treaty in the 1960s was an act that aimed

at more than just codifying the status quo. Todayit still contains a reciprocal promise: the commit-ment to non-proliferation, matched by the nuclearpowers’ commitment to disarmament. One com-mitment aims to prevent the proliferation of thecapability to produce nuclear weapons, the otheraims to reduce existing arsenals of these weapons.

That is why the controversy over the Iraniannuclear programme is not just a regional matter,but rather an issue with global repercussions.Iran has a treaty-based right to the peaceful use ofnuclear energy. The E3+3 group has even off eredIran extensive support in this eld if, in return, it

“The Lisbon Treatyopened a new chapter.The European Unionhas become moredemocratic and parlia-mentary. Lisbon is notthe end but, rather, thebeginning.. “




‘’The last remainingnuclear weapons in

Germany are a relic ofthe Cold War. They nolonger serve a militarypurpose. That is why,

through talks with ourpartners and allies, we,

the German Government,are working to create

the conditions for theirremoval. “

provides proof of the exclusively peaceful na-ture of its nuclear programme. Our hand re-mains outstretched, but it has not been taken upso far. If there is to a new cooperative approach,Iran has to follow up its words with concreteactions. An agreement with the InternationalAtomic Energy Agency in Vienna on the issueof the Tehran Research Reactor would be a con-dence building step.

It would not be a substitute, however, for ne-gotiations to ensure the civilian character ofthe Iranian nuclear program. A nuclear armedIran is unacceptable for us. Such a developmentcould lead to the destabilization of the entire re-gion and to a potentially fatal impairment of thenon-proliferation regime.

The other side of the coin is reducing existingarsenals of nuclear weapons. We therefore sup-port the current US-Russian negotiations onstrategic arms reduction. Success on this issuewill also have a positive effect on the upcoming

review of the Non-Proliferation Treaty in May.Disarmament is not an unrealistic dream; inthe context of globalization it is a necessity. Justa few days ago, we had a discussion in Berlinwith Hans-Dietrich Genscher, Helmut Schmidt,Richard von Weizsäcker – unfortunately EgonBahr was not able to attend due to illness – andtheir American counterparts Henry Kissinger,Sam Nunn, William Perry and George Shultz onhow, as a next step, not only the number, butalso the military importance of nuclear weaponscould be reduced. With this, we hope to openthe window of opportunity even wider.

At the political level, we also aim to achieve a“peace dividend” for Germany in the contextof such a strategy. The last remaining nuclearweapons in Germany are a relic of the Cold War.They no longer serve a military purpose. That iswhy, through talks with our partners and allies,we, the German Government, are working tocreate the conditions for their removal. As partof this process, we also want to discuss con -dence building measures with Russia as well asa reduction of its weapons.

We must take care, however, to ensure thatnuclear disarmament does not re-open the pos-sibility of conventional wars.

Anyone who is serious about a world free ofnuclear weapons, about “global zero”, mustalso take conventional arms control and dis-armament into account. We will actively workto prevent an erosion of the Treaty on conven-tional armed forces in Europe (CFE Treaty). Fornuclear and conventional disarmament must gohand in hand.

Vision for the future

Many people may regard the vision of a worldwithout nuclear weapons as naïve. But it is in-sistence on the status quo and overlooking thenew risks that it produces that is irresponsible– not disarmament. Of course disarmament willnot happen overnight, but why shouldn’t it bepossible?

I was born in 1961. At that time, the Wall wasbeing built right through the centre of Berlinand Germany. Some people had long given upall hope of reunication.

And yet before I turned 30, the determination ofmillions of people to achieve freedom broughtthe Wall tumbling down. Visions are not policy,but it is impossible to shape policy without vi-sion.

We nd ourselves at the start of a new decade.The German Government will do all it can to en-sure that it becomes a decade of disarmament.

Shortened speech by Federal Minister Dr. GuidoWesterwelle at the 46th Munich Conference on Se-curity Policy 06.02.2010. Courtesy of Auswärtiges

Amt – Federal Foreign Ofce of Germany. Title andsubtitles by the editors.

B a l k a n s t a r s

V e d r a n a G u j i ć

The rising stars of the Western BalkansArticle by Vedrana Gujić, HNS Croatia

‘’The membershipapplications of

Montenegro, Albaniaand Serbia, taking

place in a politicallysensible year for the EU,proved there is still high

attractiveness of theintegration concept and

highly expected positiveeffects of the integrationon the new applicants.”

Looking back on what we’ve done in 2009,there is nothing much to be proud at. It was thepeak of economic crisis, recession and politicalturmoil. The EU was in a period of transitionfrom one mandate of the European parliamentand Commission to another, from one Treatyto a new Lisbon Treaty, nally in force. Whilewe were busy saving our economies and nego-tiating the names of our future leaders, almostunnoticed alterations happened in our neigh-bourhood. Just a glance at current enlargementmap shows that the Western Balkans made ashy, but important step towards EU. In the verysame year of 2009, the majority of the countriesof the Western Balkans led applications for theEU membership. Montenegro was the rst one,applying in December 2008. It was followed byAlbanian application in April 2009, while Serbiadid the same at the end of the Swedish presi-dency in late December. Three important appli-cations immediately changed the colour of the“black hole” of Europe. With Croatia and Mace-donia already holding the status of candidatecountries and Montenegro, Albania and Serbiaas applicants, the future of the Western Balkanslooks much brighter.

The membership applications of Montenegro,Albania and Serbia, taking place in a politicallysensible year for the EU, proved there is stillhigh attractiveness of the integration conceptand highly expected positive effects of the inte-gration on the new applicants. Montenegro ap-plied for EU membership in December 2008 andthe Commission is currently preparing an Opin-ion as requested by the Council. Albania ledan application in April, but the Commission’sOpinion will be drafted following the stabilisa-tion of political situation in the country. Mainchallenges ahead of both countries are con-solidation of the rule of law, stabilisation of thestate institutions (especially judiciary) and ghtagainst corruption. Serbia has clearly demon-strated its intention to move closer to the EU byapplying for its membership in December 2009.Even though the Stabilisation and Association

agreement has not yet been ratied, due toDutch veto bound by Serbian inability to arrestrefugee general Mladić, Serbian self-determi-nation to take a path in a direction of a full EUmembership should be preserved as a positivesignal. Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo,even though the furthest from the full member-ship, also enjoy the European perspective. Bos-nia and Herzegovina urgently needs to speedup key reforms and determine its constitutionalsettlement to meet the conditions for applicantstatus, whilst Kosovo is still challenged by po-litical and security instabilities and lack of rec-ognition of its status by several member states.While Croatian accession negotiations are nal-ly entering its nal phase, enabled by the nali-sation of bilateral agreement with neighbouringSlovenia on the handling of the border issue, wecan soon expect the opening of Macedonian ac-cession negotiation, due to recent positive rec-ommendation by the Commission to start thenegotiation talks with Skopje. However, thename dispute is still a big diplomatic obstaclein front of Macedonian EU and NATO member-ship. Following the membership applications ofthe Western Balkan’s countries, the EU recipro-cally decided to open its doors for their citizens

from 1.1.2010. The barriers for Macedonia, Mon-tenegro and Serbia are lifted from the beginningof 2010, while the Commission will table pro-posals for Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovinaby mid-2010, provided these countries meet thenecessary conditions. Visa liberalisation for theWestern Balkans is a major step forward for theregion and an additional encouragement forthe countries to intensify their efforts to reachthe EU criteria. Latest positive developments inthe Western Balkans are a success story for boththe EU and the region. The applying countriesformed a group for the next big South-easternenlargement and have clearly set their reformpaths towards meeting the European standards.On the other side, the EU revived its attractive-ness and enforced its role of a drive of a changeand progress in its neighbourhood. The EU isstill the universe our Balkan stars are striving at.



R i c h a r d Š v i h u r a

Young Liberals involved in the emergence of anew liberal party in SlovakiaArticle by Richard Švihura, President of Young Liberals

Over the years we haveorganised a series of ac-tivities and commented

on social and politicaldevelopments in Slova-ia. Last year we and ourforeign colleagues have

organised an interna-onal workshop on Civil

liberties. “

The main objective of Young Liberals is togetherwith its partners to be strongly involved in cre-ating liberal thinking and a long liberal traditionin Slovakia. Young Liberals were born in spring2002, that time as the Liberal Youth of Slovakia.In 2006 we transformed into its current form oforganisation with more than 200 member net-work of young liberals in all regions. In par-ticular we cooperate with the German FriedrichNaumann Foundation and Slovak think-tank F.A. Hayek Foundation and Liberal Society Foun-dation, as well as with right-wing youth organi-sations.

In Slovakia we founded Liberal clubs, informaldiscussion groups for the dissemination of liber-al ideas in various regions. After the recent left-ist and populistic government got to power, webecame the largest youth advocates of pensionsaving (e.g. „Save the pensions“ initiative, „2ndpillar Youth Forum“ with José Piñera).

In addition to our basic objectives it is our ambi-tion to provide forum for young liberal-mindedpeople, who want to actively engage in politics

and professionaly shape themselves at speciceconomic and social problems and pressing is-sues. Thus giving the opportunity to earn ex-perience from the high politics and municipialpolicies and work in their professional growth.

Over the years we have organised a series of ac-tivities and commented on social and politicaldevelopments in Slovakia. Last year we and ourforeign colleagues have organised an interna-tional workshop on Civil liberties. We organisedessay competition with the topic: „Separation ofchurch and state separation from church law“.

Few of us attended the „Academy of right-wingpolitics“, „Summer school of Economics“, „Lib-eral weekend“, projects organised jointly withour partner F.A. Hayek Foundation. We assistedin organising the international seminar „Free-dom and Civil Society“. Young Liberals becamepart of the European Liberal Forum (ELF) via

LYMEC. For the past few years we were able tostrenghten our relations with the domestic andforeign youth organisations, increase the num-ber of our members and supporters and estab-lish a cooperation with the new political partyFreedom and Solidarity (Sloboda a Solidarita– SaS).

Political reality for a Liberal party in Slovakiafrom a long-term perspective was ingenerous.Until now the liberal parties survived only oneterm. They have gradually vanished, as theywere rather entities created for a special pur-pose. After a long considerations about a furtherexistence of liberal politics, we have decided inthe spirit of strenghtening the organised liberal-ism in Slovakia a year and a half ago to coop-erate closely with the reformer Richard Sulik infounding the political party SaS.

We knew that if a serious subject is to be found-ed, it must be associated with an author of a attax, which brought positive changes in Slovakia.We were with him in a constant contact since2004, when he publicly presented his proposals

on the „Contribution bonus“. Like the at tax,retirement savings, as well as the Slovak versionof the negative tax was a concept, which we sup-ported from the beginning. After the 2006 elec-tions our goal was to be a serious platform notonly for young people, but for all liberals sincewe thought a liberal political party did not existin Slovakia.

We have noticed that there is a last chance inthe forthcoming parliamentary elections to es-tablish a consistant liberal party. Second chanceto establish a liberal subject would be only aftera few years, when the society and the economywould necessarily need responsible solutions,after another post-election socialist devastation.Given the current negative trends in the society,political rudeness and cynicism, populism andnationalism, a series of non-liberal governmentmeasures and the continuous deteriorationof business environment, we will continue to

respond to the events in our society and politics.We will together with the non-prot sector seek tohamper the efforts to develop our country back tosocialism. We will do all our efforts, so that envyand fear will not win, but freedom and responsi-bility overcomes them. We want our country tostay free and for our generations unencumbered.We will encourage especially the young peopleto attend the elections and stop these negativetrends.

Slovakia has nally obtained a serious liberal par-ty. It is supported by the liberal think-tank and hasits own youth organisation as well – the YoungLiberals. Our greatest wish is our partner partySaS to become a parliamentary party and part ofthe ELDR group. Public opinion suggests it willbe so.

At this year’s congress of our organisation a gen-erational exchange in the presidency will occurand some of us will give place to our most activemembers. F.A. Hayek Foundation will preparenext year Summer School of Economics and withtheir projects they will contribute to the improv-ment of economic education in Slovakia.

Some of us will take part at the „Intellectual Entre-preneurs“, prepared by the F.A. Hayek Founda -tion and the Atlac Economic Research Foundation.

‘’Slovakia has nallyobtained a serious liberalparty. It is supportedby the liberal think-tankand has its own youthorganisation as well – theYoung Liberals. “


The Slovak Republic is a landlocked country in Central Europe with a population of over ve million and an area of about 49000square kilometres (19,000 sq mi). Slovakia borders the Czech Republic and Austria to the west, Poland to the north, Ukraine tothe east and Hungary to the south. The largest city is its capital, Bratislava. The second largest city is Košice. Slovakia is a mem-ber state of the European Union, NATO, UN, OECD, WTO, UNESCO and other international organizations.

The Slavs arrived in the territory of present day Slovakia in the fth and sixth centuries AD during the Migration Period. In thecourse of history, various parts of today’s Slovakia belonged to Samo’s Empire (the rst known political unit of Slavs), GreatMoravia, Kingdom of Hungary, the Austro-Hungarian Empire or Habsburg Empire, and Czechoslovakia. An independent Slo-vak state briey existed during World War II, during which Slovakia was a dependency of the Nazi Germany 1939–1944. From1945 Slovakia once again became a part of Czechoslovakia. The present-day Slovakia became an independent state on January1, 1993 after the peaceful dissolution of its federation with the Czech Republic.

Slovakia is a high-income advanced economy with one of the fastest growth rates in the EU and OECD. The country joined theEuropean Union in 2004 and the Eurozone on January 1, 2009. As of 2010, Slovakia together with Slovenia are the only formerCommunist nations to be part of European Union, Eurozone, Schengen Area and NATO simultaneously.The Slovak head ofstate is the president (currently Ivan Gašparovič), elected by direct popular vote for a ve-year term. Most executive power lieswith the head of government, the prime minister (currently Robert Fico), who is usually the leader of the winning party, buthe/she needs to form a majority coalition in the parliament. The prime minister is appointed by the president. The remainderof the cabinet is appointed by the president on the recommendation of the prime minister.

Slovakia’s highest legislative body is the 150-seat unicameral National Council of the Slovak Republic (Národná rada Slovenskejrepubliky). Delegates are elected for a four-year term on the basis of proportional representation. Slovakia’s highest judicialbody is the Constitutional Court of Slovakia (Ústavný súd), which rules on constitutional issues. The 13 members of this courtare appointed by the president from a slate of candidates nominated by parliament.

Slovakia




EUROPEANCOMMISSIONEUROPEAN

COMMISSIONPRESIDENT

José Manuel Barroso

EUROPEANPARLIAMENT

EUROPEANPARLIAMENT PRESIDENT

Jerzy Buzek

EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS EUROPEAN

COUNCIL

EUROPEANCOUNCILPRESIDENT Herman Van Rompuy

EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE

HIGH REPRESENTATIVEFOR FOREIGN AFFAIRSCatherine Ashton

COUNCIL OF MINISTERS

27 commissioners, appointed by theMember States with the consent o theEuropean Parliament

Promotes the general interest o the Union

Proposes directives and regulations toboth legislative bodies

Ensures the implementation o the Treatiesand common policies

Executes the budget

NOTE: Newly created post o HighRepresentative o the Union or Foreign

Aairs and Security Policy serves as oneo the Commission’s Vice-President andchairs the General Aairs and ExternalRelations Council.

Legislative body rallying the Ministers o the Member States in specialised confgurations. From 1 November 2014, the Council will take decisions on the basis o a double majority (55 % o the Council, at least 15Members States and representing 65% o the popula-tion o the Union)

Legislative body o 751 MEPs elected by universal surage or 5 years

Represents the citizens and approvesthe “laws” and the European budgettogether with the Council o Ministers

Approves o the President o theCommission and the College o Commissioners

Meetings o Heads o State and Government twice a year with the President o the European Commission and withthe participation o the High Representative o the Union or Foreign Aairs and Security Policy.

Defnes o the general political directions and priorities o theUnion

NOTE: European Council is chaired by the newly created post o the President, elected or two and a hal years, renewable once




g

A l e x a n d e r P l a h r

Defending the common currencyArticle by Alexander Plahr, Vice President of LYMEC

‘’The Greek decit isprojected to exceed 300billion Euros (or morethan 27000 Euros per

Greek citizen), roughly121 percent of gross

domestic product (GDP)in 2010. “

Strikes in Greece! Unions block the entrances tothe Athens stock exchange and claim that „thecapital markets take Greece hostage“! The aus-terity package by the government would putmarkets before people!

But is this the truth? Is it the markets’ fault thatGreece has to cut its budget? What is behindthose stories?

Sadly enough, Greece in recent times never hada history of surplus budgets. Quite to the con-trary, Greece politicians wanted to spend muchmore then the state ever collected in taxes. Everyresponsible private citizen does not spend moremoney then he owns. The same goes for respon-sible politicians and the state budget.

The trouble is that –unlike most private citizens-states can quite easily borrow money. And theGreek state did! They did spend so much moremoney every year then they collected taxes, thatthey had a hard time fullling the rules of theStability and Growth Pact in order to be able to

join the Euro. We today know that back thenthe Greek government did not full the require-ments at all but cheated their way in by deliber-ately reporting wrong numbers.

And during the following years, Greece kept onspending and spending, every year accumulat-ing more debts. But like every private citizenwho takes up credit, it is becoming more andmore of a problem to nd people who are actu -ally willing to lend money.

That is the core of the Greek dilemma: The Hel-lenic Republic has over-spend so much it has topay huge premiums to investors in order thatthey even consider lending their money to aborrower who might not be able to pay back.The risk of Greece going bankrupt is so huge, itbecomes more and more difcult for the Greekgovernment to borrow as much money as theyintend.

The Greek decit is projected to exceed 300 bil-lion Euros (or more than 27000 Euros per Greekcitizen), roughly 121 percent of gross domesticproduct (GDP) in 2010. Greece has to nance adebt of about 53 billion Euros in 2010, of whichit only has already nanced around 8 billion Eu -ros at the end of February.

The government will have to raise approximate-ly 45 billion Euros during the rest of t he year.However, investors will only give their moneyif they see indications that there is an end to thisspiral of over-spending und unsustainable -nancial irresponsibility.

Therefore, the Greek government has an-nounced austerity measures, which are thecause for the Unions’ protests. What thosepeople protesting fail to comprehend: There isno alternative to massively cutting back on theover-spending, selling off government property(unlike most other European countries, Greecehas seen nearly no privatizations of state com-panies, many of which still are de-facto monop-olies)- bringing down labour costs and revital-izing the economy.

In a classic example of socialist stupidity, manyof Europe’s socialists now call for “solidaritywith Greece”. If the capital markets don’t lendany more money to Greece because it alreadyhas way too much debts, they are evil! In thatcase, why do not other states take up the mon-ey on the capital markets and then give it toGreece? Why not a bailout for Greece?

The answer is quite simple: Because then everydebt offender would continue going on with hisspending frenzy, free riding on the taxpayers’money of the other Eurozone member states.Responsible behaviour would then be discour-aged, irresponsible behaviour encouraged!Because in fact, Greece is not the only countryspending much, much more then it should, ac-cumulating an unproportional and dangerously

high amount of debts. Italy, Portugal and Irelandfollow hot on its heels! Out of those four countrieshighly endangered by state bankruptcy, only Ire-land has really taken steps to better the situation.So what signal would it send to other countries ifGreece would get a free ride? Exactly the wrongone!

1680 Euros / secondSpeed of Greek decit growth

Luckily, the treaties establishing the Eurozone ex-plicitly forbid the bailout of members. This rulehas to be upheld, otherwise we that risk memberswho are in urgent need to do so will not reformtheir budgets. Even more important: The trust inthe Euro is based on clear rules that dene howthe Eurozone works. Undermining the rules en-shrined in the treaties would mean betraying whathas been promised to citizens when they gave uptheir national currencies. Not abiding to thoserules would undermine the trust in, and therefore,the stability of our common currency.

Therefore, the stability of the Euro will have tobe defended in Greece, Portugal, Italy and Spain:Governments need to withstand the pressure ofsocialists, populists and trade unions and reformtheir budget. Because a common currency notonly means benets for all, but a lso responsibilityfor all. A private citizen can not base his living oncredit in the long run, neither can countries. Thiscrucial reality has to be understood. Budget defcit 2010 in selected Eurozone countries

The economy of Greece is the twenty-seventh largest economy in the world by nominal gross domestic product (GDP) and thethirty-third largest by purchasing power parity, according to the data given by the International Monetary Fund for the year2008. Its GDP per capita is the twenty-seventh highest in the world, while its GDP PPP per capita is the twenty-sixth highest.Greece is a member of the OECD, the World Trade Organization, the Black Sea Economic Cooperation, the European Union andthe Eurozone. The Greek economy is a developed economy with the public sector accounting for about 40% of GDP. The servicesector contributes 75.7% of the total GDP, industry 20.6% and agriculture 3.7%. By the end of 2009, as a result of a combinationof international (nancial crisis) and local (uncontrolled spending prior to the October 2009 national elections) factors, the Greekeconomy faced its most severe crisis after 1993, with the highest budget decit (although close to those of Ireland and the UK) aswell as the second highest debt to GDP ratio in the EU. The 2009 budget decit stood at 12.7% of GDP. This, and rising debt levels(113% of GDP in 200 9) lead to rising borrowing costs, resulting in a severe economic crisis. Greece tried to cover up the extent ofits massive budget decit in the wake of global nancial crisis.

Greek economy



issue no.9 year 2010.

M a r t i n a M o n t i & E r m a n n o M a r t i g n e t t i

When people miss liberalismArticle by Martina Monti and Ermanno Martignetti

‘’When there’s noliberalism, people

trongly feel its absence,and even if they don’t

know the philosophicalor political theory, theyunconsciously look forits own principles andsome of them ght for

freedom of individual.“

Some people, when explaining the meaning ofliberalism, generally start from the idea of ‘’lib-eral’’, from the philosophic theory and from itsmain characteristics.

But what is liberalism in its practical meaning?What happens when there’s no liberalism?

In most EU countries, people feel liberal ideasas the basis of their own life and as the founda-tion of everyone’s society; they often don’t real-ize how their individuality is being respected,mainly because they are used to freedom.

When I use the term ‘’freedom’’ I mean freedomof information, freedom of love, freedom of re-search, freedom of religion, respect of differentideas, etc.

When there’s no liberalism, people strongly feelits absence, and even if they don’t know thephilosophical or political theory, they uncon-sciously look for its own principles and some ofthem ght for freedom of individual.

In Italy, the leading party of the country claimsitself as a liberal party, the party that preservesfreedom and respect. Taking care of that, I shoulddeduce that is the reason why in Italy law for-bids marriage to a couple of the same sex; thatis the reason why in Italy, when you read dif-ferent newspapers, you read different informa-tion about the same topic and you don’t knowwhat is real and what is fake (keeping in mindthat in Italy, the main newspaper headlines andthe main tv channels are owned by politicians);that is the reason why in Italy, after the rati-cation of ‘’law 40’’, when two people want tohave a baby with articial insemination becauseof personal problems of fertility, they face somany problems that the most of couples have toput themselves into the hands of a f oreign clinic.The real problem is that Italian politics are builtaround the personality of charismatic leaders,and it is hard to say that today political ideasin general could interest voters, accustomed to

see themselves more as consumers than as citi-zens. In other words people, even feeling thelack of personal freedom, are still not interestedin political matters and do not contribute to thenecessary change in the society. This fact hasrelevant consequences on the style of politicalcommunication as well on the contents of thecommunication itself, that becomes no more anexpression of values, but is just marketing andentertainment.

Taking care of all that, what does it mean to beliberal and to offer liberal strategies to an ill so-ciety like the Italian one?

The history teaches us that usually liberalism isrst of all a constitutional theory about powerand ways to limit it – the famous Locke’s for -mula of checks and balances – and about thecitizenship. That theory was incorporated inthe Italian Constitution, but it more and moreshowed all the inconveniences that every con-cretization of abstract systems presents.

That is the reason why liberalism sometimes has

to leave its theoretical level to be put into prac-tice in an easy and immediate way to be well un-derstood by people who are not used to politicalterms. In this way, and only with people’s ef-forts to spread the concept of personal freedom,opening minds that were previously blurredby television shows and fake information, thechange will be possible.

Italy is just an example, and surely is not theonly case of a society in a difcult situation, sothis ideas should be extended to each realitythat needs more freedom, more liberalism andmore tolerance.

Netherlands: Early elections on June 9 after government collapse

After the country’s coalition government collapsed mid-February due to sharp differences over extending the military missionin Afghanistan, a snap general election has been called for June 9.

NATO had asked the Netherlands to extend its four-year-old Afghanistan mission by one year to August 2011, though in adifferent form - a request two of the governing parties, Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) and Christian Union (CU), hadwanted to discuss. But the third one, PvdA Labour Party, said it would not support an extension under any circumstances,

resulting in a public coalition spat as the party was accused of abusing the issue for political gain ahead of March 3 municipalelections.

LYMEC wishes both our member organizations in the Netherlands, JOVD and JD, best of luck in supporting the liberal causeduring the upcoming election campaign!

JuLis Austria: Street action against videosurveillance

On the rst weekend of February, the state branch Vienna suc-cessfully raised the problematic issue of video surveillance inpublic spaces. Some JuLis discussed with passers-by whileothers “lmed” the scene with dummy CCTV cameras, thusmaking people object to it and thereby starting a process ofreection in the minds of many citizens.

LHG elects new board

On their 43rd federal congress (22nd-24th January) theGerman Federal Association of Liberal Students Groups(LHG) elected their new board. As in the previous year,

Johannes Knewitz (27) will lead the liberal as well as sec-ond biggest -in absolute numbers- student organizationof Germany. Sonja Worch was conrmed as treasurer.Further board members are Kristina Kämpfer, BenjaminBlumenthal and Berthold Haustein.

They will be supported by cooptations Sahba Afradiand Kai Kreisköther. The new board has expressed thatit wants to focus on developing and support the localuniversity structures of the LHG and t o strenghten theirposition in the public debate about the vehemently dis-cussed process of Bologna. For their congress in Göttin-gen, LHG could welcome over 80 students from almost40 universities.



LYMEC STATEMENTS

E u r o p e a n P a r l i a m e n t S W I F T

On 11th February the European Parliament voted 378-196 to reject the SWIFT bank data sharing deal with theUnited States. Members o European Parliament resisted pressure rom the US to continue a nine-month in-terim agreement allowing the United States o America access to nancial transaction data rom SWIFT, aninternational banking transer system.

Aloys Rigaut, President o the European Liberal Youth (LYMEC) reacted to the news o the vote: “The EuropeanParliament or the rst time exercised its new powers under the Treaty o Lisbon, rejecting this scandalousagreement which would have given away the privacy o the very citizens they represent.

We applaud the Parliamentarians who across party line opposed this dubious proposal. We are especiallyproud o the role liberals played in shaping this broad majority, not least based on the critical report o liberalrapporteur Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert.”

LYMEC Vice President Alexander Plahr added: “This is a great development! For the next months, Europeanbanking data will be secure again. However, we must remain vigilant, since a permanent agreement will beproposed by the Commission later this year.

It is highly doubtul that such a deal is necessary, since there already today is excellent judicial cooperationbetween the EU and the US. Any uture agreements in the area o law enorcement must thereore continue tobe based on the presumption o innocence, reciprocity, strict data protection and recourse to the courts.”

N e w E u r o p e a n C o m m i s s i o n

In the beginning o February the new European Commissionwas conrmed by the European Parliament. Mr Barroso and his26-member cabinet received 488 yes votes, 137 against and 72abstentions.

Reacting to the news, Aloys Rigaut, President o the EuropeanLiberal Youth LYMEC stated: “We are happy that now nally thetime o standstill is over - the Treaty o Lisbon is in orce andthe European Commission is complete. We liberals now expectrom the College o Commissioners to immediately start tack-

ling the Union’s challenges. It has been several months o in-stitutional wrangle and it is now high time to get back to work:too many dossiers are on hold, citizens expect actions aterlast year’s EP elections.”

LYMEC Vice President Alexander Plahr adds: ‘The compositiono the Commission is a good one or liberals! With eight Com-missioners we have nearly a third o the Commission comingrom our camp – as many as never beore. In the uture liberalswill determine the course o the Union in such important areasas economy, currency, research and home aairs.

Furthermore, MEPs voted on the so-called interinstitutionalagreement, which or the rst time opens the door or a trueright o initiative o Parliament, something liberals and havebeen demanding or decades. This means more democracy orall o us!’

T o d a y ’ s S t a t e d e b t s

The European Liberal Youth (LYMEC) expresses deep worries about the drastically rising State debt in EurozoneMember States. In Greece, this year’s decit will soar to 12.7 percent o GDP, more than twice the previousgovernment’s projection. Thirteen out o the sixteen Eurozone members currently violate the budget disciplinecriteria, accumulating ever more debts. Some Member States are even said to be driting in the direction o State bankruptcy.

LYMEC President Aloys Rigaut stated: ‘The Stability and Growth Pact’s rules o a maximum decit o 3% o GDPand a national debt below 60% GDP are there or a good reason. This discipline is necessary or the stability o the Euro, or low interest rates, or the credibility o our economic policy, and the ree-riding o certain MemberStates is in this respect totally irresponsible.

Who will pay or this spending renzy? Yes us, the young generation. Demographic ageing is already a sucientburden; let’s not add a new one to that. Today’s debts are tomorrow’s taxes.’

Vice President Alexander Plahr added: ‘We welcome that nance ministers at the last ECOFIN meeting outlined atimetable or budget cuts. However, we call on Member States to be more ambitious! Every additional Euro debtover the three percent maximum is hurting the credibility o our common currency.

And every single cent is a heavy burden on coming generations, which will have to repay all that debts by theirtaxes. We thereore call or more intergenerational airness and more seriousness when dealing with the stabil-ity o our currency. This rising State debt is a time bomb that needs to be deused ast. Politicians will nally

have to learn to say no to calls or subsidies or company rescue packages in order to consolidate their budgets.’

L Y M E C t h e p r o g r a m m a t i c f o r c e o f

E L D R

Recently, the European Liberal, Democrat and Reorm Party (ELDR) assembled in Barcelona to hold its 30th Con-gress. The European Liberal Youth (LYMEC) attended the Congress with ten delegates as well as having manyactive LYMEC members in the other party delegations active in Barcelona. Congress reelected Annemie Neyts(OpenVLD) as President o the ELDR Party or her third mandate. David Griths (LibDems) has been re-electedas Treasurer or the second time. The Congress also elected 4 Vice Presidents: Markus Löning (FDP), Lousewies

Van Der Laan (D66), Marc Guerrero (CDC) and Leoluca Orlando (IdV).

LYMEC President Aloys Rigaut commented: “We would like to congratulate very warmly all those elected andwish them every success. With the entry into orce o the Lisbon treaty, democratic control and strong Europeanparties are now more needed than ever. The main challenge or the ELDR will be to continue transorming itsel rom an European umbrella organization into a true political party, directed towards gaining infuence on thedecision-making in order to implement its policies.” Besides the Bureau elections, it was the programmaticdebate that dominated the Congress in Barcelona. LYMEC proved to be a strong orce or political debate withinELDR while discussing the theme resolution “Liberal Answers For A New Prosperity”.

LYMEC Vice President and delegation leader Alexander Plahr commented: “We managed to improve the themeresolution urther, making it an excellent document dealing with liberal economy. We can also be extremelyproud that we managed to convince ELDR delegates o LYMEC policies in many other areas: ELDR now ociallyopposes automatic transer o SWIFT banking data to th e United States o America, is in avour o geneticallymodied crops and calls or a stronger commitment towards European Citizenship. LYMEC has proved that it isthe programmatic orce o ELDR. We now look orward to our mother party implementing those policies in theirstatements and events.”

after lisbon

Documents