Aileen McLeod SNP EU

Hustings speech

2009-03-02T00:35:00.000-08:00

We had the last of our hustings yesterday evening in Partick Burgh Hall in Glasgow and much as it has been hard work I've relished every moment of it. If you weren't able to catch us below is a copy of the speech I have been making up and down the country:

"I’m Dr Aileen McLeod. I’m here today because I want to be returned as an SNP MEP in this June’s Euro-elections.

For almost five years now I’ve worked in the EP as Head of Policy for Alyn Smith. In that time I have come to understand how the EP works, and, more importantly how we – SNP MEPs – can best make the EU work in the interests of the people of Scotland.

I want to be elected as an MEP because I want to put my experience and knowledge to work for the party and for the people of Scotland. European policy affects their lives. As an MEP my job is to ensure that EU rules and regulations reflect our national interests – the interests of the SNP Government and the interests of the people of Scotland.

Ultimately that can only fully be done by being an independent member of the EU and taking our place at Europe’s top table. In the coming campaign I want to take that message to the people of Scotland. For them to realise that the SNP is on their side in Europe.

And to tell them that Only the SNP can speak for Scotland because the SNP speaks only for Scotland.

The SNP has made a difference in Europe. Since May 2007 more and more MEPs have come to realise that Scotland is not one of Europe’s regions. They recognise that Scotland is a member state in waiting.

The SNP is rightly proud of the contribution its MEPs have made in the past. Dr Winnie Ewing, Dr Allan Macartney and Professor Neil MacCormick left a rich legacy of achievements. Ian and Alyn have built on these. And I want to take that legacy forward. I believe I can. I know how this European Parliament works. I know how to use the Parliament, and our position in it, to shape European Union policies.

EU policy is about more than the European Parliament. It is about tapping into the Commission and the delegations of member states that share our policy goals. It is about using networks of influence and building coalitions of support around our objectives. It is hard work. It is about defending our corner and pushing SNP policies. That is what I have been doing since I’ve been in Brussels. That is the work I now want to take forward as an MEP.

From my perspective Europe can be an opportunity for Scotland; but we have to work hard to maximise the opportunities.

Just look at the headline policies that the EU will legislate on in the near future:

Energy policy
Climate change policy
Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and the CFP
Re-regulation of the banking and financial services sector.

Each policy will affect Scotland in a significant way. Scotland’s voice has to be heard in the Brussels corridors of power, in the European Parliament.

We have to make sure that the EU legislation reflects Scotland’s interests where necessary. And we have to be ready to make our case. That is the attitude other countries take, and this is the job that I will relish as an MEP.

Scotland is well placed to gain from many EU policies.

We are Europe’s centre of renewable energy – we can export green technology as well as green energy; we have one of the EU’s largest financial services sectors – a sector that has been a victim of mismanagement by the London Government; we have a farming sector keen to be at the heart of discussions about the future of the CAP; and we have the world’s most ambitious Government when it comes to tackling the causes of global climate change as is now recognised by the EU.

Of course there are downsides – we only have to look at the disastrous Common Fisheries Policy – but as an independent Member State with a veto that would never happen again. Only as an independent country can we make sure that never happens again.

I want to see an Independent Scotland in the EU as a constructive member, but one that is not prepared to be pushed around.

As an MEP I want to listen to the Party at home and make sure that I represent all our interests in Brussels. I want to hear from our Branches, our CAs, our local councillors, our local MSPs and local MPs about their issues and concerns regarding EU policy and legislation. When I'm in Brussels I'm not dealing with foreign affairs issues, I'm dealing with domestic issues. I'm just dealing with them in a different place.

I want to make Europe work better in Scotland and that means that as MEPs we need to listen to our membership.

In conclusion, I have the experience, the expertise, the commitment, the passion and the know-how to make Europe work for Scotland, and to make an Independent Scotland work in Europe. What I need now is your support to let me get on with the job".

Vote Aileen McLeod for SNP MEP candidate statement

2009-02-21T08:08:00.000-08:00

Like our other European election candidates I have written a statement to all party members setting out why I want to be elected as an SNP MEP in this June’s European elections. My statement says:

It Matters
There’s turmoil in the world’s economy and Scotland is not immune, we’ll be bruised like any other country and we have to know why the European election matters. What Scotland does in Europe matters – cooperation across the EU will help Scotland recover when we have the chance. The European Parliament matters.

Making Europe work for Scotland
Scotland can be better and can have better international relations. Scotland needs MEPs who will make sure that Europe works for Scotland and that Europe works in Scotland. Alyn Smith and Ian Hudghton have been doing that and I hope to join them so we can do even more. With the performance of our Scottish Government, the high reputation of our MEPs, and the good, hard campaigning of our activists, we can win three seats.

From Dr Winnie Ewing through the tenures of Dr Allan Macartney and Professor Neil MacCormick to our two current MEPs we have done well in Europe. Our commitment to getting the best for Scotland is embedded in our work with our European partners.

Knowing how it works
The European institutions often seem complicated. The team we have in Brussels knows its way around and we’ve worked hard to bring European benefits to Scotland. We’ve brought Commissioners to Scotland and taken campaigners to Brussels – we work across the spectrum to deliver benefits for Scotland. We can make Europe work for Scotland.

The Future
We have to prepare Europe for Scotland’s Independence – we already have friends, but we must make sure Europe knows where Scotland is coming from and where we want Scotland to be going. We have to work with our European partners, and fight Scotland’s corner, taking Scotland’s cause forward and making Europe work for Scotland.

A Little About Me
Grew up in East Kilbride and now live in Lanark and Brussels.

MA Hons European Community Studies and German – (Edinburgh University 1993), Erasmus year – Germany; Robert Schuman Scholarship- European Parliament Office, London; EuroInfo Centre Ltd., Glasgow (1999 - 2001), Jean Monnet Centre of European Excellence – Glasgow University; PhD (2004) on UK media and European Parliament; Senior Research Specialist, Europe - Scottish Parliament research department (2001-04); Head of Policy for Alyn Smith MEP in Brussels and Edinburgh (2004-present) – advising and developing party policy on EU issues; Campaigned across Scotland.

What can we win?
I’m confident that our two sitting MEPs will be returned to Parliament, but we can win three with some hard work. I hope to be that third MEP, join our current Members and serve Scotland and the cause of Independence in Europe.

Vote Aileen McLeod.

European election candidate hustings

2009-02-21T08:06:00.000-08:00

The hustings to rank the SNP’s candidates for the European elections this June got underway today with our first one in Eden Court theatre in Inverness this afternoon. Although this is the first time I have stood for election, it was great to be there and to get the chance to speak with members and answer their questions. We have an excellent array of candidates and I’m looking forward to the opportunity to meeting with as many of our members as possible up and down the country over the next couple of days.

Photo: Here's me outside Eden Court Theatre

after the hustings

The postal ballots have gone out and these are to be returned by midday on 10 March using the enclosed pre-paid envelope to the Electoral Reform Society. If you would like to hear and meet the candidates we will be at the following locations:

21 February: The MacLean Room, Eden Court Theatre, Inverness 13h00

22 February: Function Room, Huntly Arms Hotel, Aboyne 12h00

22 February: Green Hotel, Kinross 17h00

28 February: County Hall, County Buildings, Ayr, 11h00

28 February: Town Hall, Johnstone 16h00

28 February: Cornerstone House, South Road, Cumbernauld 19h00

1 March: Arts Centre, Dalkeith 14h00

1 March: Partick Burgh Hall, Glasgow 18h00

New front opens on Scotland's offshore wind

2009-02-16T06:33:00.000-08:00

Alex Salmond opened the doors today to Seaenergy renewables based in Aberdeen following the announcement today by the Crown Estate that SeaEnergy has been given the green light to explore and develop the Beatrice offshore wind farm site in the Moray Firth and the Inch Cape for offshore wind. If operating at maximum capacity, these sites would have the potential to generate a massive 6GW of offshore windpower. This equates to

Scotland

's peak electricity consumption.

The Crown Estate announced a number of other exclusive agreements for companies to survey areas of the seabed to develop offshore wind and other types of marine renewables. The shores around the Highlands and Islands are laden with enormous green energy potential just waiting to be tapped into. The oil fabrication yard at Nigg could become a hub for the engineering and construction of renewable energy developments (deep water offshore wind turbines, tidal and wave turbines), putting it right at the cutting edge of such developments and making it not only good for the local economy but for Scotland as a whole also. The Scottish Government has already revealed that there could be 16,000 Scottish jobs in green energy by 2020 by progressing its action across energy generation, energy efficiency and transport, tackling climate change and at the same time saving people and businesses alike money.

I am delighted at the news today. With Jim Murphy in Edinburgh selling his soul to the nuclear lobbyists in his grand plan to convince Scots of their need for a nuclear future, today's announcement underlines the extent to which Scotland's energy companies are leading the way in the development of clean, green energy and the boost this will bring to Scotland's economy by way of increased investment, more jobs and opportunities.

I had the chance to spend some time with SeaEnergy last August when I was up at their offices in the outskirts of Aberdeen to meet with the team and find out what the company was seeking to do in terms of helping Scotland to take full advantage of the massive offshore wind potential that is sitting out in the Moray Firth in particular.

I've already put in a call to congratulate them and look forward to having the chance to meet with them soon to discuss their plans.

NO TO LISBON

2009-01-09T08:25:00.000-08:00

If you have ever wondered what UKIP do in the EP then the photos from my office might explain:

Happy New Year!

2009-01-03T07:43:00.000-08:00

I'm up in Port Appin, Argyll for the weekend with some friends of ours before heading back to Brussels next week and if you've never been to Port Appin, it is worth a visit. We were up here last New Year for a week and this time we are up to see our friends get married on the shores of Loch Linnhe. For me its a great place to gather my thoughts before the onslaught of Brussels begins again, not least with the European election campaign ahead of us.

We were staying in the Pierhouse hotel - a great place if you love seafood. The scenery up here is stunning with Castle Stalker sitting out there on Loch Linnhe and the Morvern mountains behind. Today we went across to the island of Lismore and had a walk round the island. There is a great community spirit there and if you fancy a trip across there you could try and time it so that you are there for Lismore's own Homecoming celebrations which it is planning to mark from 8 - 14 August, and apparently there is the chance to enjoy a glass of Lismore malt whisky at its opening reception.

Photo above: Looking across to the Morvern mountains

Photo above: Port Appin

Photo above: With the "Lismore" boat across to the island of Lismore

Photo above: The island of Lismore

Photo above: Looking across from Lismore to Morvern

Photo above: Still on Lismore with Port Appin behind me

Photo above: Winter sky from the beach at Lismore

Montenegro applies to join the EU

2008-12-19T06:02:00.000-08:00

Montenegro's Prime Minister, Milo Djukanovi, was in Paris this week to submit an application from Montenegro to join the EU. The Prime Minister met with the President-in-Office of the European Council, Nicolas Sarkozy, to whom Montenegro's EU application was submitted. This will be sent to the European Commission which will then assess whether Montenegro meets the conditions of membership and make its recommendation to the Council as to whether or not Montenegro should become a candidate country. It is then for the European Council to vote unanimously on the Commission's recommendation and in doing so open formal negotiations.

Having achieved its independence on 3 June 2006 and now two and a half years later has lodged an application to join the EU. I wish Montenegro well in its application and look forward to the day when an Independent Scotland joins Montenegro at the top table not only in Brussels but also in the UN in New York and in other international organisations and is able to have its own distinctive voice, take its own decisions and work together with the international community in addressing such key global challenges as international development, climate change, economic governance.

I've met with the Montenegrin Ambassador to the EU on a number of occasions in Brussels to find out how Montenegro is faring since achieving its independence and have also helped Montenegro mark its national day on 13 July by holding out a hand of friendship from Scotland.

EU's major boost for Scotland's climate change effort

2008-12-17T06:06:00.000-08:00

The European Parliament finally adopted the EU climate change package today - I watched the vote from the office in Brussels. There was a sense of achievement when the climate change package went through and from the Parliament's side all those who worked on the details of the deal should be commended for the effort that went in. Out of all the legislation, MEPs passed today the most crucial one for Scotland was the adoption of the renewables package. With the setting of a 20% renewables target by 2020 the boost this will bring to Scotland's renewables industry will be massive. It will see increased EU funding and research resources for energy infrastructure projects, including the North Sea supergrid, cut red tape for renewables and ensure there is priority access for connecting renewables to the grid.

The carbon capture and storage package is also key for Scotland not least because of the support it will provide to the CCS industry in Scotland in terms of giving the industry legal certainty for investments. Once again, the EU's support for carbon capture and storage in Scotland is well recognised which is in complete contrast to the attitude in London which pulled the plug on Scotland's opportunity to lead on CCS technology through the Peterhead power station project. Scottish Power's Longannet coal fired power plant is currently bidding to win the UK's CCS pilot competition- I hope this time round all parties will back Scotland's bid to lead in this area.

Tougher EU action on climate change?

2008-12-12T06:03:00.000-08:00

So EU leaders finally reached a deal on climate change. I did wonder if the EU leaders would manage it with Italy and Poland having earlier in the negotiations threatened to veto the package but the stakes were too high if the EU had failed - what signal would this have sent out to the US, China, India and the developing countries if the EU hadn't been able to reach a deal. For one thing it would have certainly weakened the EU's hand and its position in leading the world in the run-up to the negotiations for a new international climate change agreement in Copenhagen next December.

While the 20/20/20 targets by 2020 remain intact and while there are significant improvements, the compromise deal has been seriously weakened with the winners heavy industry (supported by Germany, Poland and others) in that some industrial sectors will be exempt from the full auctioning of emissions permits and able to receive up to 100% of allowances free from 2013 until a new international agreement on climate change is concluded. A review is scheduled in 2018. This applies to those industries most at risk from "carbon leakage" concerns - i.e. that manufacturing industry could pull out of the EU and relocate to countries where their polluting laws are less stringent. Sectors exposed to carbon leakage are to be identified by the Commission by the end of December 2009.

Free allowances will be allocated on the basis of best-in-class technology benchmarks. The Commission has estimated that more than 90% of manufacturing emissions would qualify.

The number of emission allowances will be capped in order to deliver a 21% cut in industrial emissions during the whole period 2013 to 2020 compared with 2005. During the trading period EU allowances will increasingly have to be auctioned rather than being distributed free-of-charge.

The power sector will have to buy 100% of allowances from 2013. But Poland and some other eastern states managed to win concessions enabling some of their power stations to receive up to 70% of allowances free in 2013, declining to zero in 2020. Eligible plants will be those poorly integrated into the European electricity grid or those that individually provide more than 30% of national electricity in countries with relatively low GDP.

For those industries not at risk of carbon leakage, the auctioning rate to be reached in 2020 is set at 70% with a view to reaching 100% in 2027, bearing in mind that the initial level in 2013 is set at 20%. Germany and Italy were calling for 80% of free quotas right the way through. A deadline for the introduction of 100% of paid quotas has been set as 2025, five years later than what the Commission had originally proposed.

There is to be a financial solidarity mechanism. 88% of the total allowances to be auctioned each year will be distributed among the 27 EU Member States with the revenue from the remaining 10% of carbon allowances auctioned by EU Member States being allocated to many of the central and east European countries to help them modernise their energy infrastructure. An additional 2% would be distributed among those that had reduced their greenhouse gas emissions by 20% in 2005 relative to 1990 levels.

Between 2013 and 2016, Member States will be authorised to use money raised at auction to provide up to 15% of the investment costs of building high performance electric power stations.

Pre-allocation of part of auctioning revenues: The European Council notes the will of Member States to devote at least half of all auctioning revenues to finance climate mitigation and adaptation efforts in Europe and the developing world, but without a binding commitment. So there is only a voluntary earmarking of 50% auction revenues for climate purpose with it left very much up to the Member States to decide.

A greater number of smaller industrial installations will be excluded from the EU ETS under the compromise text where the threshold for exclusion has been raised from 10,000 tonnes CO2 emissions per year to 25,000.

The Commission must propose including shipping in the scheme from 2013 if there is no international climate agreement by the end of 2011.

Allowances will be allocated centrally by the European Commission, rather than by Member States through national allocation plans.

When it comes to funding for carbon capture and storage EU leaders agreed that up to 300 million allowances in a new entrants reserve (the European Parliament was calling for 350 million) can be used to fund CCS measures until the end of 2015. Plants fitted with CCS will be regarded as not emitting any greenhouse gases.

We are all now looking to the European Parliament to keep the pressure on for ensuring there is tough EU climate change action and that the 20/20/20 deal stays on course during next week's crucial vote. Scotland of course is already leading Europe and the rest of the world with the publication last week of the Scottish Government's ambitious climate change bill.

Ireland made to vote again

2008-12-11T08:17:00.000-08:00

EU leaders are in town today for the end of term European Council meeting - the constant hovering of helicopters outside the office window and blaring of police sirens is always a sure tell tale sign of their arrival and movement across Brussels.

On the agenda is some hefty dossiers - the climate change package which we need to see a deal reached on and the EU's response to the economic crisis with its economic recovery plan. But before that there is the issue of Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty in a referendum last June to sort out. I genuinely feel for Ireland - being made to find a way out of the impasse when its people have already said, in a democratic vote, to the government, no we don't fancy this Treaty.

I'm not going to say much on this as we already know that Ireland has been given a number of legal guarantees on those issues of concern expressed by the Irish, i.e. neutrality, tax policy, social, ethical and family issues. There was also agreement about each Member State being able to keep its own Commissioner in future European Commissions. These are to be written into a protocol together with Croatia's accession treaty to the EU in 2010 or 2011.With these guarantees Ireland can now proceed to asking its people again to vote in another referendum on the Lisbon Treaty before November 2009. This is no way to do business in the EU and is frankly disappointing.

EU renewables boost for Scotland

2008-12-09T05:15:00.000-08:00

The EP and Council are still in the midst of negotiating the EU's climate change deal and from what we are hearing and seeing the negotiations are proving to be ever more difficult with the financial crisis being seemingly used by many member states to 'backtrack' on commitments they made previously. The deal comprises a number of legislative proposals including the revised Emissions Trading Scheme, sharing effort in reducing greenhouse gases with developing countries and carbon capture but for the moment concerns remain over the issue of carbon leakage (i.e. where there is some concern that polluting industries could relocate to other countries that have less stringent emissions regulations), the redistribution of revenues of auctions, solidarity and funding of carbon capture and storage pilot projects.

However, the EP did manage to get a compromise on the renewables package, which contains a number of key points crucial for Scotland and our renewable industry:

Mandatory renewable energy targets: the 20% binding target for EU energy consumption to be produced by 2020 has been retained and there is to be interim targets fixed for each Member State but these will be non-binding. The EP did manage to strengthen the requirements around the National Renewable Energy Action Plans that each Member State has to submit to the Commission by 30 June 2010. Member States are obliged to submit an amended action plan if they miss the interim or 2020 targets. The Commission can also initiate infringement proceedings if a Member State fails to introduce "appropriate measures" to meet its interim targets or if its national action plan is judged to be inadequate. This is supposed to ensure Member States do actually deliver their targets on time. Measures for improving energy efficiency are to be included in the action plans. Progress reports are to be submitted to the Commission every two years detailing their shares of renewable energy, support schemes and progress on tackling administrative and grid barriers.

Flexibility and cooperation mechanisms whereby Member States work together under such mechanisms enabling them to help each other meet their national targets. Such cooperation could entail the statistical transfer of renewable energy between countries or taking part in joint renewables projects. National support schemes for renewables can also be joined up between various Member States to help achieve targets. The European Parliament managed to strengthen transparency requirements for "green electricity" with an online transparency platform for Member States to access and exchange information on the new renewables directive. EU countries can also meet their targets by importing electricity from non-EU countries under certain conditions, i.e. that the electricity must be consumed in the EU.

When it comes to the use of renewables in buildings Member States will have to introduce measures to increase the uptake of renewables in the building sector.

The Parliament was also successful in cutting the red tape and reducing the administrative burdens for investment in renewables and in ensuring legal guarantees for priority access of renewables to the electricity and gas grid with the importance of developing central district heating and cooling systems using renewables highlighted.
Not all of the deal is good - on biofuels the position retains the 10% target for renewable fuels in road transport by 2020. Although disappointed, it has at least been watered down and made more flexible. One third of the target will be made up through electric cars and trains, not biofuels, and the target will be reviewed in 2014. The Commission will bring forward proposals in 2010 to limit indirect land-use change, and biofuels from non-food sources will be promoted with a "double bonus" scheme.

On the whole I think this compromise is probably as good a compromise as we are going to get and we now await to see the outcome of the ongoing wrangling with the other climate change dossiers. With the mini session last week in Parliament, MEPs had the opportunity to hear from the EU Energy and Environment Commissioners and the French EU Presidency about the state of play with the rest of the negotiations. EU Energy ministers met yesterday in Brussels and the EP is supposed to vote on the whole package on 17 December, so we can only hope a deal is reached at the European Council in Brussels next week.

If the EU is to be taken as a serious global player in the UN climate change negotiations in Copenhagen next December then it needs as strong and united a position as possible.

Opening of Fionna Carlisle’s energy exhibition

2008-12-08T08:41:00.000-08:00

Scotland’s Minister for Europe and Culture, Linda Fabiani MSP formally launched Fionna Carlisle’s North Sea oil portraits exhibition this evening at a reception hosted by Alyn, the Scottish Government EU Office, the Scottish National Portrait Gallery and Highland Council.

I had gone down to the exhibition earlier in the day to see what the portraits looked like hanging up as a collection. With EU energy ministers having met on Friday and EU environment ministers meeting today to continue negotiations on the EU climate change package and EU leaders meeting at the end of the week the timing of the exhibition could not have been better. Combining Scotland’s unique culture with our energy industry worked extremely well and being able to help showcase a Scottish artist right at the heart of Europe was certainly well worth doing, exposing EU officials from 27 Member States, Ambassadors and other visitors to the EP to the significance of Scotland's oil and gas industry.

Of course the recent publication of the McCrone report (1975) under the 30 year rule showed the lengths successive UK governments went to to deprive Scotland of access to our own North Sea resources and Scotland's independence. According to the McCrone report, an Independent Scotland with her oil and gas reserves would move from being Europe's 10th wealthiest nation to Europe's third wealthiest nation.

It is scandalous as it is outrageous to think what the people of Scotland have been denied after 30 years of lies and deceit by successive UK governments. For a copy of the McCrone report and the truth about Scotland's oil rich economy have a look at the following website: www.oilforscotland.org

Above: With Linda Fabiani MSP and the First Minister

Above: With the artist, Fionna Carlisle

Scottish Trad Awards, Glasgow’s Old Fruitmarket

2008-12-07T08:40:00.000-08:00

Having got back from Brussels late on Friday night it was straight to Perth yesterday morning for National Council. A number of motions were passed not least on trade justice and on the ongoing and worsening humanitarian crisis in Palestine, especially Gaza. I’m pleased to say that MEPs earlier this week had voted to postpone voting on the EU-Israel Association Agreement (essentially the Memorandum of Understanding on Israel’s increased involvement in EU funding programmes) given the escalation of the crisis. Our Group in the Parliament had requested it be removed from the agenda for the time being along with the Socialists and the Group of the United European Left.

At the end of National Council I took part in the European hustings with our other candidates for the EP elections next June chaired by Angus Robertson MP. With the party’s hustings not til February this was a good opportunity for members to see who we all are and to hear from each of us.

Thereafter it was straight down the road to Glasgow with Rob Gibson MSP to the 6^th Scottish Traditional music awards taking place that evening in Glasgow’s Old Fruitmarket for the first time. Once again it was a fabulous night – this was my third Trad awards with the last two years held in Fort William’s Nevis Centre. Tonight was being televised by MG Alba for the first time. Rob had booked a table for us all.

It was great to see and hear so much of Scotland’s own talent and to be part of this cultural experience. The music was as ever just stunning. Tonight was opened by Capercaillie with performances from Lau, Karine Polwart, Session A9, Breabach and Jeana Leslie and Siobhan Miller. The Trad Awards was where I first heard our Gaelic Ambassador, Julie Fowlis, and it certainly opened my mind to learning more about my own cultural heritage which is played out in so many of the Gaelic songs which are just simply beautiful.

Already I am looking forward to 7^th annual awards in Dumfries in November 2009 which will also conclude the Scottish Homecoming celebrations in 2009.

Above: With Linda Fabiani at the Trad Awards after a fantastic evening of music.

Scotland’s North Sea energy portraits in Brussels

2008-12-05T08:38:00.000-08:00

I was in early this morning to meet Will Mulholland of Art Link who was delivering a collection of 25 paintings by the distinguished Scottish artist, Fionna Carlise to the European Parliament. This was her Energy: North Sea oil portraits exhibition which has previously been shown in The Scottish National Portrait Gallery in Edinburgh, Duff House, Shetland Museum, La Defense in Paris and now for the first time in Brussels and the first time in the European Parliament.

The collection focuses on the vital role played by Scotland’s oil industry with portraits of various individuals who have played their part in the history of our oil industry, from oil-rig builders, helicopter pilots to the technical and service staff on the rigs themselves. It also includes a painting of Alex Salmond before he became First Minister of Scotland.

Alyn was sponsoring the exhibition which opens in the EP on Monday for a week. We had booked the Yehudi Menuhin space last December so it has taken us a year to be able to bring such a collection to Brussels – such is the pressure on space in the EP and believe me it is no easy feat. With 27 Member States plus all their different regions wanting to showcase their cultural heritage in the EP (and what a great place to do it in), you need to book key space at least a year in advance.

The exhibition had been organised as a real collaborative effort with the Scottish National Portrait Gallery, Highland Council and the Scottish Government EU Office.

The works on display are a striking and dramatic interpretation of Scotland's energy resources and provide an interesting cultural landscape to the current debate on the EU's proposed Energy Package.

More information about the artist and her work can be found on her website at www.fionnacarlisle.com

As the office of the MEP sponsoring the exhibition I had to be there in the EP’s garage to meet them and ensure there were no problems with security. Standing at 8.30 in the morning in the freezing cold in a place the size of an airport hangar and where I’d never been before I had a real sense of anticipation as I waited for a collection of Scottish art to arrive from home. After weeks of preparation it was finally here.

I had first met Fionna Carlisle, who comes from Wick, in June when she came across to Brussels with Julie Lawson of the Scottish National Portrait Gallery to see for herself the space we had booked for her collection. One of the things that is great about this collection is that Fionna actually went offshore and spent some time on the oil platforms to enable her to get a better understanding of Scotland's oil and gas industry - but it is a fantastic collection.

Ironically, this exhibition has arrived in Brussels just as the Scottish Government published its climate change bill which if passed will ensure Scotland has the most ambitious climate change legislation anywhere in the world with all six Greenhouse gases and emissions from international aviation and shipping included within the ambitious 80% target by 2050. This should put Scotland at the forefront of global and European efforts to tackle climate change.

Here are some of the paintings from the collections on display inthe European Parliament this week:

Labour's carping on marine renewables

2008-12-02T03:12:00.000-08:00

Glad to read this morning the supportive comments from the EU's energy commissioner, Andris Piebalgs about the Scottish Government's 'strong leadership' in developing the Saltire Prize. The EU's recognition of the Scottish Government's commitment to advancing marine renewable technology (wave and tidal power) by launching a world-wide competition with its £10 million Saltire Prize shows how far Scotland's relations with Europe have come since the SNP took power in Scotland last May. It also stands in complete contrast to the bizarre and negative carping from the Scottish Labour leader, Iain Gray (as reported in today's Herald, "Salmond urged to do more on energy front").

This Scottish Government has done far more on the renewable energy front than Labour ever did in its 8 years of power where nothing was done to encourage or incentivise the massive potential sitting on Scotland's doorstep, around its shores.
Scotland has massive marine renewable potential with the Pentland Firth very much the Saudia Arabia of marine power. With 25% of Europe's tidal power and 10% of wave power, the potential for further investment, jobs and opportunities not to mention for Scotland as a whole in leading the world in developing renewables in this area is enormous. Scotland has waited a long time for this potential to be finally realised.

SNP quiz night in Forth

2008-11-29T07:59:00.000-08:00

I was up in Forth last night at the Royal British Legion Club for a quiz night organised by my own local branch, the Wallace Branch, and assisted by Carluke. I met up with Aileen Campbell MSP and other members of the Clydesdale CA and although my team didn't win, we still managed to raise £240 for election funds. It was a good night so a big thanks to all those who helped organise it.

The EU's economic stimulus package - will it work?

2008-11-26T08:02:00.000-08:00

With the worsening economic and financial crisis the EU finally published its response today with its European economic recovery plan. I've not yet had the chance to go through all the details of what the Commission is proposing but its clear that this is not a one size fits all- it couldn't possibly be given the differences between Member States in terms of their budgetary and economic situations and outlook and their exposure to the current economic and financial crisis.

Top line is the fiscal stimulus of 200 billion euro (1.5% EU GDP). Most of the money will come from national budgets, with EU Member States asked to contribute 170 billion euro (1.2% of EU's GDP). The rest -around 30 billion euro or 0.3% of EU GDP would come from the EU's own budget and the European Investment Bank.

The recovery plan is based on short-term measures to boost demand, protect jobs and restore consumer and business confidence. It aims to drive a coordinated EU response to the economic crisis and builds on the coordinated EU response to the financial crisis.

The Recovery Plan combines coordinated national action with a number of EU policy measures that have already been adopted by some national governments. There are 10 priority initiative measures:
(1) increased support for the unemployed and the poorest households, which have been hit hardest by the economic slowdown, by launching an employment support initiative through the European Social Fund and the Globalisation Adjustment Fund, increasing efforts to develop skills.
(2) Creating demand for labour by adopting temporary VAT cuts across the whole economy and lowering taxes on labour, in particular VAT on 'labour-intensive' sectors such as hairdressers and restaurants. There are also suggestions for reduced social charges on lower incomes to promote the employability of lower skilled workers but since taxation is a matter for member states the Commission makes it clear that it is up to Member States to decide whether or not they wish to take up any of these suggestions.
3) Improving access to finance for business (e.g. the European Investment Bank has already significantly increased its loans of 30 billion euro to SMEs and the Commission is planning a simplification package to speed up its decision-making on state aid, as well as temporarily, giving member states greater room for manoeuvre in granting companies loans)
4) Reducing administrative burdens and promoting entrepreneurship (including by removing the requirement on micro-enterprises to prepare annual accounts, facilitating access to public contracts and ensuring that public authorities pay invoices within one month);
5) Increasing investment to modernise Europe's infrastructure (in particular, an additional 5 billion euro in funding for trans-European energy interconnections and networks and broadband infrastructure projects, as well as the launch of a 500 million euro call for proposals for trans-European transport (TEN-T) projects)
6) Improving energy efficiency in buildings;
7) Promoting the rapid take up of “green products” (the Commission will propose reduced VAT rates for green products and services, related in particular to the building sector)
8) Increasing investment in R&D, innovation and education;
9) Developing clean technologies for cars and construction (through public-private partnerships for green cars - with total funding of at least €5 billion - energy efficient buildings - the estimated funding for this partnership is €1 billion - and “factories of the future” - with funding of €1.2 billion); and
10) Developing high speed internet for all.

Member States are also to be given greater flexibility in managing their budget deficits with the temporary relaxation of the stability and growth pact's 3% of GDP ceiling on budget deficits. The pact is supposed to ensure fiscal discipline is maintained and enforced across the eurozone and non-eurozone countries. But key to this economic recovery plan is that it is very much an attempt by the EU to get Member States to coordinate the various actions they are taking to combat the economic downturn and stimulate the EU economy. Ensuring there is a coordinated European response is all pretty much what the Commission can do given that most of the policy levers for dealing with the economic and financial crisis remain the competence of national governments.

The plan is a step in the right direction. Indeed, many of the EU policy measures suggested will be of benefit to Scotland and I will be interested to see further details about this additional 5 billion euro for funding energy and broadband infrastructure. However, first we have to see the reaction of EU finance ministers, then the EU leaders when they meet in Brussels on 11-12 December. Then we will have to how it will be implemented by the Member States and the extent to which it can help Europe's economies get back on track in terms of long-term growth and ensure Europe retains its competitiveness vis-a-vis the rest of the world.

CAP2020

2008-11-24T05:11:00.000-08:00

If you are interested in following any of the discussions that are now underway on the future shape of Europe's agriculture, it is worth logging on to a new website that has just been launched by the Institute for European Environment Policy called "CAP 2020". This is providing various policy briefings and other info setting out what the thinking is on the future of the CAP in the Agriculture ministries of each of the 27 EU Member States.

http://www.cap2020.ieep.eu/

A good result for Scotland

2008-11-20T08:38:00.000-08:00

With the EP having sent its view to the Council yesterday it was now the turn of EU farm ministers meeting in Brussels today to reach a final political agreement on the CAP health check.

The deal finally reached was welcomed by Scotland’s Rural Affairs Cabinet Secretary, Richard Lochhead MSP who was at the talks. In a press release he stated that this was a good deal for Scottish agriculture because “on key issues our voice has been heard loud and clear given that we have retained the freedom to deliver policies tailored to our needs. "It is in Scotland's interests to have a European farming policy that supports sustainable production rather than over-production and in that context the CAP Health Check moves in the right direction". The deal was also supported by Scotland's National Farmers Union with key issues resolved concerning the continued operation of the Scottish beef calf scheme and the disparity between Scottish and EU rates of modulation being significantly reduced.

In a press release on the DEFRA website the UK Government states that it could not support the final Health check deal because “it allows unused funding from the Single Farm Payment budget to be used to fund payments coupled to production, rather than being returned to the Member States, and because it creates short-term competitive distortions and uncertainity in the dairy sector from a range of measures, particularly through different increases in milk quotas for some Member States and unnecessary reviews of the phase-out process”.

London was also “disappointed that the Health Check was unable to go further in reforming the CAP, and we are concerned about the market distortions created by the increased flexibility in the use of `national envelopes’ which allow Member States to reintroduce production-coupled payments to support specific farming sectors”.

The UK government has already set out its stall on the future CAP reform backing a position that wants to see the phasing out of spending in pillar 1 with payments under a reshaped pillar 2 of CAP focusing on delivering environmental benefits that the market wouldn’t otherwise deliver.

Detailed implementing regulations will be drawn up by the Commission in 2009 with most of the provisions entering into force as of 2010. While the implementation of the CAP health check now passes back home, the discussions for the real reform of the CAP post-2013 are getting underway and we need to ensure that Scotland's farming and rural interests are very much central to any future shape of the European agricultural model and that is something which we will be working hard to do.

Outcome of EP vote on CAP health check

2008-11-19T08:37:00.000-08:00

MEPs today gave their backing to the CAP health check. While the SNP backed the compromise deal that was eventually reached by the Parliament’s political groups, it was very much a “lukewarm thumbs up” from us.

All our amendments which passed the Agriculture Committee vote last month got through today and were incorporated into the Parliament’s position. These concern provisions on voluntary modulation, which will provide some clarity to how modulation will impact on Scotland’s farmers, making set aside a normal entitlement, including sheep, beef and goat payments in a single payment scheme by 2010 and establishing the principle that no adjustments in modulation must lead to lower general rural development funding. However, all our amendments on decoupling for sheep and beef and on deleting progressive modulation, as well as on retaining cross compliance as a tool against wildlife crime were lost.

So what was agreed by the EP?

Modulation: the Commission is proposing to amend the modulation rate from its current 5% to 13% by 2013. The EP wants the rate to increase to only 7% by 2013. MEPs want farmers who receive subsidies of less than 10,000 euro per annum to be exempt from modulation, which currently applies to all farmers who receive more than 5,000 euro. MEPs also want to see the extra funding that is released from the increase in modulation be used to finance more challenges than those identified by the Commission (climate change, renewable energy, water management and biodiversity) and that this money shouldn’t be co-financed by national budgets as is currently the case for rural development programmes.

Dairy: The Commission is proposing to increase Member States’ milk quotas by 1% per marketing year until 2013-2014. Ceilings are to be abolished completely in 2015. The EP agreed to a 1% annual increase in quotas until 2013-2014, but asked the Commission if the situation could be reviewed in 2010 and for new proposals to be made before the end of the quotas if necessary, i.e. before they are abolished. MEPs also called for the creation of a milk fund to help restructure the sector.

Decoupling: EP amendments mean that coupled aid (linked to production) will be retained until the end of 2012 in sectors such as fodder, protein, flax as well as sheep and beef sectors and the tobacco sector.

Support for hard-hit sectors, insurance and market intervention: Other amendments adopted would allow Member States to use up to 15% of Community funding they receive to support hard-hit sectors such as livestock and dairy farming and to contribute to insurance and mutual schemes (Article 68 support).

Iceland to apply for EU membership in 2009?

2008-11-17T08:36:00.000-08:00

With the collapse of the Icelandic banking system there has been much discussion in the Icelandic press as well as our own as to whether the Icelandic government will lodge a formal application next year to join the EU possibly in 2011 and adopt the euro. Many Icelanders believe that that the financial crisis could at least have been alleviated had Iceland been in the EU and part of the eurozone. A survey published at the end of October showed that 68.8% of Iceland’s population would like to see their country joining the EU (compared with 55.1% in February). A previous poll carried out just before the start of the financial crisis showed that 49% of Iceland’s population supported EU membership with 27% against and 24% undecided.

At the end of last week the Icelandic Prime Minister Geir Haarde, who leads the centre-right Independence party which is opposed to EU membership, announced he was setting up a special commission to investigate the benefits of Iceland joining the EU. It will report back to the party’s annual congress which has been brought forward from October 2009 to January 2009 and it will then be for the Prime Minister to take a decision.

While this commission will undoubtedly be looking at the implications of different EU policy areas for Iceland such as fisheries, regional policy, energy, the single biggest stumbling block to Iceland’s membership of the EU remains the common fisheries policy as presently constituted.

Reform of the CFP is due to get underway early next year with the Commission’s publication of a public consultation (Green paper) in February and a legislative proposal on the reform of the common organization of the market is expected in October 2009.

The Commission is already making supportive noises saying that it would warmly welcome such a move and noting that Iceland has already implemented perhaps two-thirds of the acquis communitaire as a member of the European Economic Area. However, with the possibility of Iceland seeking to join the EU the need for the CFP to be radically reformed becomes all the more urgent.

What will be interesting to see is whether any possible EU membership application from Iceland encourages Norway to consider joining Iceland in applying for membership? If that happens, what then will become of the EEA?

Europe's energy security and what it means for Scotland

2008-11-14T08:34:00.000-08:00

Implications for Scotland

Green Paper on Energy Networks

Of particular interest to Scotland is the publication of a Green Paper on Energy Networks. This sets out 6 priority infrastructure projects for the EU, including a Blueprint for a North Sea Offshore Grid to interconnect national electricity grids in northwest Europe and planned offshore renewables projects. This will be issued in 2009 with steps and timetables for interconnecting the various planned offshore projects.

It also proposes a future European Supergrid of which the North Sea Grid would form a key building block.

A number of other proposals are made for the development of EU-wide energy networks, building on the existing Trans-European Energy Networks (TEN-E) approach and increasing funding and leverage through the role of the EIB, Structural Funds, and the new Energy Security and Infrastructure Instrument, which is to replace the current TEN-E budget and is limited at only 22 million euro per year.

It recognises the 'significant role' of offshore wind in delivering renewable energy targets, as well as improving security of supply and solidarity.

The paper also suggests that the EU needs to consider how it will promote investment in EU-wide transportation and storage infrastructure for CO2 as part of CCS, possibly through widening the scope of TEN-E.

The paper highlights the important role of research, planning and coordination in delivering the infrastructure at the EU level, and reinforces the role of the EU offshore wind Grid Coordinator, the EU Industrial Initiative on Electricity Grids, and the forthcoming Knowledge and Innovation Communities for sustainable energy.

Finally, it calls for a new approach to planning, suggesting that EU priority projects could be included in national strategic plans and in the future priorities of regulators such as Ofgem and system operators. The public consultation is open for views until 31 March 2009.

Communication on Offshore Wind Energy

This sets out the significant potential for the development of offshore wind resources to meet the EU's 2020 targets, and points out some of the barriers to its development (including grid integration). The paper recognises that there is significant capacity for expansion of offshore wind in the North Sea. It suggests that offshore wind could represent more than 30% of electricity production from renewable sources by 2020.

It sets out the Commission's view of the way forward, including on research, where greater significance will be given to offshore wind in the Strategic Energy Technology Plan, FP7 and Intelligent Energy Europe.

It also calls on Member States with offshore resources to adopt National Action Plans that would spell out the expected contribution of offshore wind to the 2020 target and to implement maritime spatial planning, including proper designation of marine protected areas under the Birds and Habitats directives.

Finally, it says that the large scale integration of offshore wind in the electricity grids should be one of the key issues for follow-up to the green paper on networks.

View of the Scottish Government

The Scottish Government has also welcomed the publication of the Commission's Strategic Energy Review which identifies a North Sea Offshore Grid as an infrastructure priority. The Energy Review is of great importance and significance to Scotland with our potential to generate up to 25 per cent of wave, wind and tidal power for the whole of Europe. What this shows is that Scotland is well placed to play a key role in ensuring the security of Europe's energy supplies in future.

The European Parliament's powerful Energy Committee, on which Alyn sits as an alternate member, is currently considering its response to the Commission's Second Strategic Energy Review. The Parliament's view is being drafted in the Energy Committee by the French Liberal MEP Anne Laperrouze with opinions from the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Environment Committee also expected. The Energy Committee is scheduled to adopt its report on 20 January with all MEPs voting on the final resolution in plenary in Strasbourg on 18 February. Undoubtedly we will try to put down some amendments and ensure that Scotland's energy interests are foerfront in the discussions here.

Ensuring Europe's energy security

2008-11-14T08:30:00.000-08:00

Yesterday the European Commission published its Second Strategic Energy Review which forms the basis of the EU's second energy action plan (2010-2012). Given the implications this has for Scotland’s energy interests, I prepared a briefing note on what is in the Energy Review and what it means for Scotland which I have set out in this blog and the next one:

The energy security package is part of the EU's energy policy, which is based on three pillars: sustainability, competitiveness and security of supply. Each of these 3 pillars has been taken forward by three separate proposed legislative packages.

(1) Internal energy market for electricity and gas - in September 2007 the Commission proposed the third package on the internal market with the focus on opening up Europe's energy markets to greater competition and investment and ensuring effective regulation. Member State governments in the Council agreed their position in June 2008 with the EP adopting its position in July. A final agreement is expected early next year when the Czech Republic assumes the EU Council Presidency.

(2) On 23 January 2008 the Commission came forward with concrete legislative proposals for tackling climate change (20/20/20 targets by 2020) with its green energy package. This comprised legislative proposals for a new approach to actively promoting the use of renewables, updating the EU's Emissions Trading Scheme and the sharing of effort among the Member States, new rules to stimulate carbon capture and new state aid rules on the environment.

(3) This current package sets out an overall strategy for improving energy security and the need for solidarity among the member states with the focus very much on security of supply and developing the external aspects of the EU's energy policy.

The strategy is based on 5 pillars: external energy relations, requirements in terms of infrastructure and the diversification of energy supply sources, oil and gas stocks and crisis response mechanisms, better use of local resources and enhanced energy efficiency policy for buildings and products.

It charts the policy priorities for the next Commission, due to take office in September 2009.

Second Strategic Energy Review

The Commission's proposed energy security strategy is accompanied by:

the adoption of a new EU Energy Security and Solidarity Action Plan

the launch of a consultation (Green Paper) on Energy Networks for the promotion of new infrastructure to ensure EU energy security. Key is the need for member states to be better connected and linked up to the European Grid.

a proposed revision of the EU emergency oil stocks legislation so as to improve coherence with the International Energy Agency system, increase reliability and transparency of available oil and gas stocks. The Commission will also start consulting with a view to proposing in 2009 a revised Directive on security of gas supply. The Commission wants to see improved EU crisis response coordination as well as finding a more suitable threshold for triggering EU action.

a Communication on Offshore Wind – the Commission already supports the setting up of a working group to prepare a project for a North Sea offshore network;

a Communication in 2010 on overcoming barriers to renewable energy in the EU, focusing on practical issues such as grid constraints that could limit the 2020 target.

a new co-ordinated approach on improving and diversifying energy supply from outside the EU with the development of stronger relations with Norway (especially in terms of joint offshore wind projects in the North Sea), energy dialogue with Russia and speeding up negotiations for Ukraine, Moldova and Turkey joining the Energy Community.

the creation of an EU Energy Fund by December 2008, supported by the European Investment Bank (EIB), to mobilise large-scale funding from capital markets to invest in new low carbon technologies and energy efficiency.

A new Energy Efficiency Package to speed progress towards the 20% target - a Communication on the implementation of national energy efficiency action plans, a revised draft directive on buildings, a revised draft directive on the labelling of consumer products, a proposal on tyre labelling as well as combined heat and power guidelines and communication;

There will be a Communication on the financing of the Strategic Energy Technology Plan in 2009. This will also examine various additional measures to make 12 EU Carbon Capture demonstration plants a reality, including Community-level funding; Preparation of a Roadmap for a 2030-2050 Energy Policy for Europe to be published in 2010.

Scottish journalists in Brussels

2008-11-13T00:12:00.000-08:00

Much of today has been taken up with a group of Scottish journalists which we brought across to Brussels for a one day training session. The group came across yesterday with many of them journalist students studying journalism at various universities across Scotland and wanting to learn and see for themselves how the EU works. Also among the group were a number of journalists from Scotland’s local newspapers. We had organised their visit with the main aim being for the journalists to gain a better insight into the EU and its institutions, what it does, how to follow its work and the relevance of Europe to Scotland and why it matters so it was a full day with back-to-back meetings arranged for them.

Hopefully we managed to introduce them to some pretty useful folk here who they can be in touch with when it comes to reporting any EU stories with a local relevance.
The journalists had the chance to meet with the other Scottish MEPs once they had toured round the Parliament, seeing the chamber and where the committees meet. They also met with civil servants in Scotland House to find out more about the work of the Scottish Government and what its EU priorities are and how they work with other national delegations as well as with Scotland Europa to see how Scotland’s interests are represented in the different EU institutions. The group also met with some of the press team in the European Parliament and the European Commission, as well as with journalists working for The Parliament Magazine in Brussels and Cosla’s European officer who took them through the role of local authorities and the various issues surrounding EU funding.

I had invited Ireland’s Ambassador to the EU, Geraldine Byrne-Nason to speak with the group about Ireland’s experience in the EU and was delighted when she was able to make it along given how busy her schedule was with the Member States still trying to reach an agreement on the climate change package. Chairing this last session I found it heartening to hear the extent to which Ireland has become a model example for other small countries, especially the Baltic states, in its dealings with the EU and how Ireland has managed to use its resources and strategic alliances with other European countries, whether large or small, to influence EU policy. I also asked the Ambassador about Ireland’s experience in setting up a National Forum on Europe as one way in which to increase public debate and awareness as to what is going on in the EU, something which I am very supportive of and would like to see established in Scotland as I have already written and spoken about.

Photos: With the Irish Ambassador to the EU in Scotland House.

Preparing for the CAP health check vote

2008-11-10T08:25:00.000-08:00

This week is pretty much about preparing for next week’s crucial vote in Strasbourg on the CAP health check. As per usual hundreds of amendments have gone down to the Santos reports that were adopted by the Agriculture Committee last month for plenary - all of which we need to sift through to enable us to put together a voting list and to make sure we vote against anything that could hamper Scotland’s farmers, our farming industry and our rural communities.

We’ve resubmitted a number of our amendments that didn’t get through the Agriculture Committee and been working closely with Scottish Government civil servants in Scotland House in Brussels and in Edinburgh to ensure the Scottish Government’s vision of agricultural reform is supported by the EP in the vote next week.

Our amendments largely concern proposals to delete progressive modulation as well as those deleting decoupling for sheep and beef payments and retaining the current cross compliance regime as a tool in the fight against wildlife crime by including it in the Wild Birds Directive and the Flora and Fauna Directive, which was of particular concern to the Scottish Government.

With the amount of amendments compromises will undoubtedly have to be sought among the political groups so I await with interest to see what the final compromise package will look like before next week’s vote.

Regardless of the outcome of next week, its clear that the health check debate has moved on and the focus of discussions is very much on the future shape of European agriculture post-2013 where everything will be on the negotiating table.

One of Brussels’s many think tanks, Notre Europe, has published its contribution to the post-2013 debate with its “CAP reform beyond 2013: An idea for a longer view”. It defines a number of general principles such as defining targeting instruments on clear objectives and guaranteeing social return for public money and replacing assistance by incentives. Among its many suggestions it recommends the need to make agriculture more competitive by adapting instruments and regulations to that purpose, replacing the current complex and cost burden payment schemes with a simplified and smaller one in which payments are strictly linked to three basic levels of service – basic husbandry of the countryside preserving farming landscapes, territorial services, environmental sensitive measures – maintaining public intervention to guarantee a floor price (or “safety net”) restricted to exceptional circumstances , which should be WTO compatible as well as sharing financial responsibility between the EU and Member States according to the subsidiarity principle and limiting the EU’s domain of competence to the provision of European public goods.

Over the coming weeks and months we will be working closely with Scotland’s farming and rural interests as well as the Scottish Government to work out Scotland’s contribution to this vital debate and the kind of future European agricultural policy that Scotland would like to see. Scotland has a key role to play in shaping Europe’s future agriculture policy and at the same time ensure that Scotland’s vision of agriculture is at the very heart of the discussions now beginning to get underway in Brussels.

Biography

2008-10-26T10:46:00.000-07:00

Born Bellshill 1971, grew up East Kilbride, now Edinburgh and Brussels.
Became more actively involved when I joined the SNP in 2004, previously secretary of Brussels Branch and then Vice Convener. Recently moved to Lanark and now a member of the Wallace Branch.
Actively campaigned across Scotland in urban and rural constituencies through leafleting, street stalls, canvassing on doorsteps, etc during a number of campaigns, including Westminster 2005, Local Government and Scottish Parliament 2007.

In Glenrothes with Clydesdale CA

2008-10-25T07:06:00.000-07:00

Having just got back from Brussels last night I was up against first thing this morning to go to Glenrothes. Clydesdale CA had organised a minibus to take a large group of us there including Aileen Campbell MSP and we were all meeting in a very windswept, cold and wet car park outside the library at Carluke at 09.00.

Despite the weather our spirits on the bus were high as we headed to Glenrothes whereupon we spent the day leafleting. The rooms were busy with buses from Glasgow also turning up. Our first run took us up to Glenrothes itself though afterwards it was great to get back to the rooms and to get some hot soup down us before the next run.

While the wind blew like a hoollie and the rain, gawd it rained, I had a great time and enjoyed the criac. Regardless of our battling against the elements we were in all this together tramping the streets and determined to get our message across to the people of Fife - to vote for Cllr Peter Grant as their new SNP MP for Glenrothes and send a clear message to Downing Street. For me it was also just nice to spend some time with Clydesdale and getting to know everyone having not long moved into the constituency.

I should also say again a big thank you to Euan Ferguson for getting us all back down the road safely that night as it certainly couldn’t have been the easiest of drives coming along the M8 with all the surface water, torrential rain and gales.

Photo: Aileen with SNP Candidate Cllr Peter Grant

Gordon's economic policies - a failure of financial deregulation

2008-10-18T07:05:00.000-07:00

This afternoon at conference was dominated by Nicola’s speech and once again her performance and her delivery was inspirational. After days of hearing about Gordon Brown as Europe’s conquering hero and how he had come to save both Europe and the world from the brink of complete financial collapse, I cheered with delight when Nicola said, “It’s not Scottish policies that have led to rising unemployment, the highest inflation in a generation, massive hikes in public borrowing and almost certain recession – that’s down to Gordon Brown and his economic policies”.

“The real lesson of the economic crisis is not that Scotland can’t be independent. It’s that we should never let London run our economy in the first place.

“And let us never forget – even though Gordon Brown desperately wants us to – that it was New Labour that helped create the climate for the banking crisis”.

Absolutely...

After Nicola’s speech – how could anyone follow that? – it was time for the debate on the motion brought forward by the Brussels Branch on the future of Europe. The debate turned out to be a good opportunity for delegates to hear from each of the party’s seven European candidates as we all got up on the stage one by one.

I started by saying that the forthcoming European election campaign provides us with an opportunity to demonstrate once again that we are the only party ready to have a frank and honest discussion with the people of Scotland about the types of policies that we, and they, want to see coming out of the EU. None of the other parties in Scotland want – or are able – to have this debate, required as they are to follow the lead set by their London-based leaderships.

I reminded delegates that the European Parliament is one of the most powerful legislators in the world, and the task of Scotland’s MEPs is to stand up for Scotland’s interests in that Parliament, to make sure that EU legislation is fit-for-purpose in Scotland. Only this party, the SNP, can do that. That is the message we need to get across to the people of Scotland in the run-up to the European elections in June.

We cannot under-estimate the importance of EU legislation to Scotland and to ordinary Scots. The turmoil on the world’s financial markets over the past few weeks has demonstrated once again the degree of interdependence that exists between the world’s economies. The root cause of that turmoil has been the glaring inadequacies of the regulatory regime that oversees the global financial services sector. Scotland is a victim of that regulatory failure.

Once the dust has settled there will be a need to reform the regulations governing how the banks and the finance houses ply their trade. And part – probably a large part – of that regulatory response will come from the EU. The integration of the EU financial markets will make a common, EU-wide, response a necessity.

As those regulatory reforms are being discussed in Brussels, and the associated legislation debated, it is vital to this country that our voice is heard, and that our collective interests are properly represented. Only the SNP can deliver Scotland’s message, because only the SNP has Scotland’s interests – and only Scotland’s interests – as its sole concern.

It is true that the future of Europe is shaped by Treaties, and the failure of the London Labour Government to deliver on their promise to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty is deplorable. But we also should not forget that in a real sense the future of Europe is debated and determined day and daily in the corridors of power in Brussels in the form of the legislation that the Council and the Parliament enact.

We need to have an on-going conversation with Scotland’s peoples on those matters – the future of the CAP, on climate change, on regulation of the financial services industries and all the rest of the important policies over which the EU has competence to make laws that affect Scotland’s vital interests.

In closing I made the point that it was up to all of us to take to the voters of Scotland that only a vote for the SNP in next June’s election will ensure that their interests in EU policies will be properly represented. And that the only way we can have real influence and a real voice in Brussels is with real independence.

You can watch the speech I gave below:

Aileen McLeod - SNP EU Candidate from Daibhi Anseo on Vimeo.

Meeting the stone man in Markinch

2008-10-17T07:03:00.000-07:00

After this afternoon’s debate I headed across to Glenrothes in the minibus where we were warmly welcomed by Tricia Marwick MSP, Cllr John Beare and the rest of the campaign team and were promptly sent out to canvass in Coaltown of Balgonie. This was the first place I campaigned in with Tricia during the Holyrood campaign last year so it was good to be back. A group of us were driven there this time by the very same man who had driven from Glasgow to London and back again to return the Stone of Destiny to the people of Scotland. After a couple of hours canvassing we returned to the rooms in Markinch where I spent some time stuffing envelopes with Ian Hamilton and had the chance to chat with him about his book and about one of the most remarkable feats in Scottish history.

Photo: Aileen with some of the team at the Glenrothes campaign rooms in Markinch - Ian Hamilton

Speech at Conference on tackling climate change

2008-10-17T06:55:00.000-07:00

While top of the agenda is how to respond to the global financial crisis, alongside it sits the key issue of how to tackle climate change. This afternoon I had the chance to remind Conference of the leading role Scotland and our Scottish Government are playing in this regard and to reemphasise the point that much more needs to be done through an internationally coordinated effort.

In moving the topical resolution on behalf of the Cromarty Firth Branch, I underlined the extent to which the EU stance on climate is and has to remain an ambitious and far reaching programme within which the Scottish Government’s ambitions for an 80% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050 fit comfortably. I also welcomed yesterday’s announcement that London has decided to follow Scotland’s lead in matching our Government’s commitment to an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

Last week there was a lot of talk about leadership in the face of global crisis, however its important to recognise that on climate change policy and renewable energy it is Scotland that is taking the leading international role in addressing the greatest challenge that we have ever faced.

The EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) is the largest emissions trading scheme in the world and is a pillar of the EU’s climate policy. It covers more than 10,000 installations in the energy and industrial sectors and is collectively responsible for close to half of the EU’s emissions of carbon dioxide and 40% of its total greenhouse gas emissions.

Climate change can’t successfully be tackled unless there is an internationally coordinated effort. From my perspective in Brussels the role of the EU in setting and enforcing tough climate change legislation is vital. There must be no backsliding on this on the part of EU member states.

The role of the European Parliament here is crucial since it is the EP that will wield significant influence over the final shape of EU climate change legislation. I believe it is vital for Scotland’s MEPs work to make that legislation reflect our ambitions and our commitments for effective action on climate change. It is also for Scotland’s MEPs to guard against attempts to water down this legislation from any source – corporations, countries, and governments.

Next June’s European elections offer an opportunity for Scotland to once again take a lead in tackling the causes of climate change by voting SNP. We have to make it clear to Scotland’s voters that only by voting SNP in that election can they be assured that their commitment to tackling climate change at the EU level will be heard in Brussels.

Since May 2007 our party, and our Government, has demonstrated a commitment and a leadership in tackling climate change that has no equal anywhere in the EU. Our commitment to tough emissions targets is matched by our investment in renewable energy and investment in the green technologies that will be the basis of sustainable economic growth in the future.

Scotland is the green energy powerhouse of the EU and this is recognized in the EU. Indeed the EU is looking to us to take a lead so we have nothing to fear from climate change legislation and everything to gain. Not only will our actions directly lead to better climate change legislation both in the UK and the EU but our scientists, our researchers and our industries are world leaders in the new technologies that will become an integral part of a greener future for the world.

All of this means that the SNP Government is shaping a better future for the people of Scotland and beyond. Our Government, Scotland’s Government is showing real leadership on a truly global scale. Indeed, I was also glad to hear the announcement this morning from our Cabinet Secretary for Finance, John Swinney, MSP for all international air travel and shipping to be included in the ETS as well as all six greenhouse gases and that “Scotland will have a Climate Change Bill able to lead international action”.

As John Swinney also said, “we face immediate economic challenges but we face a massive generational challenge of reducing our impact on the environment. We accept the responsibility to do that and we will put in place the legal framework to live up to that responsibility”.

With this in mind, delegates backed the Cromarty Firth resolution on climate change:

“Conference backs the tough action proposed by Scottish, UK and European Governments that sets an example to the rest of the world in tackling climate change.

Conference demands that the European Commission resists and all pressures placed upon it to compromise the EU Carbon Trading Scheme (ETS), a policy that is absolutely vital if we are successfully to tackle climate change. In particular the EU institutions must stand firm in the face of pressure from industries faced with meeting the compliance costs of this policy and who wish to weaken the prospective EU legislation in this crucial area.

Conference calls on our SNP Government and parliamentarians to campaign for an increased pace in the development of renewable energy delivery which is needed to make early progress towards a target of 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and introduce energy efficiency measures to climate proof Scottish homes whilst opposing the dilution of climate change plans that must be agreed in full by the European Union to maintain a world lead in tackling global warming”.

Switchover to Digital TV

2008-10-17T03:43:00.000-07:00

I had the opportunity to stop by the Digital UK exhibition stand at party conference to find out how the switchover to Digital TV is progressing and to ensure the switchover message reaches every household in Scotland.

With the upcoming switch to digital TV here's me with Digital UK's robot mascot, Digit Al.

SNP Conference - becoming Europe's green energy powerhouse

2008-10-16T06:48:00.000-07:00

With the ongoing discussions in Brussels about the EU’s climate change package I decided this evening to go along to a fringe event that was organised by the Carbon Trust and was discussing how innovation will help Scotland exploit its natural resources to become Europe’s green energy powerhouse. There was much agreement that Scotland has the opportunity to lead the world in terms of the technologies it is developing and the legislation it is bringing forward for tackling climate change.

The resources we have around our shores, especially the Pentland Firth offers Scotland huge opportunities for the development of a low carbon economy which is now all the more urgent. For a low carbon economy we need to do much more with regard to energy efficiency and make much less use of our energy and we need to have clean energy supplies (renewables). Scotland also has a huge opportunity to export low carbon technologies to new markets, which will enable us to achieve our economic objectives by creating high quality jobs as well as those of sustainability and at the same time ensure sustainable economic growth.

Among the various sepakers was Graham Bibby from AWS, Ocean Energy which is based in Alness, Rosshire and deals largely with developing marine energy technology for the wave and tidal sector. AWS was set up in 2004 and is looking to commercialise the Archimedes Wave Swing (AWS) wave power system. They plan to deploy a 250kW demonstrator in 2009 with commercial roll-out by 2011. To reach target of 1300 MW marine energy he reckoned they would need to create at least 2,000 high quality jobs with a further 2,000 in the supply chain. I hope in the near future to be able to get the chance to visit Alness and to see for myself the AWS wave power system - but this is exactly where Scotland needs to be by way of pioneering the cutting edge technology that is going to help us build a low carbon economy that will provide the high quality jobs necessary for Scotland's sustainable future.

Photo: Aileen with Rob Gibson MSP and Graham Biddy of AWS Ocean Energy

An agreement of sorts...until December

2008-10-16T06:43:00.000-07:00

Having unpacked my case from Brussels late last night I’ve now repacked the case and headed to Perth via Edinburgh. But first of all I needed to see what had been agreed at the European Council. We had already been sent a copy of the draft conclusions so I knew roughly what was likely to be agreed regarding an EU-wide response to the banking crisis.

With the climate change package, in the end EU leaders confirmed the EU’s climate change objectives and agreed their determination to sign the climate change package at the European Council meeting in December 2008. The conclusions state that the European Council in December will “decide on appropriate responses to the challenge of applying that package in a rigorously established cost effective manner to all sectors of the European economy and all Member States, having regard to each Member State’s specific situation”.

How far the rules will be watered down to enable concessions to be made remains to be seen but it is up to us to resist any pressure for the EU ETS to be weakened further, and it is this point that I hope to make tomorrow with the topical resolution that has been submitted by the Cromarty Firth Branch.

The Parliament is also set to vote on the climate change package in December so there will be a flurry between now and then to ensure the strong positions adopted by both the Energy Committee and the Environment Committee are maintained in the negotiations with EU ministers in the Council.

If you want to read a post-Summit analysis which deals more on the financial rescue package which the European Council managed to reach an agreement on, its worth having a look at the 4 page brief put together by the European Policy Centre in Brussels.

EU leaders try to agree on green energy

2008-10-15T06:35:00.000-07:00

EU leaders are meeting in Brussels later this evening. The agenda was supposed to be all about the green energy/climate change package which the French Presidency is trying to get an agreement reached by the end of the year. But with the worsening economic crisis much of their discussion focused on agreeing a financial rescue package. At the same time, however, it has also brought to the fore the growing disunity over the climate change package with all sorts of splits and disagreements emerging as to the economic costs of meeting the EU’s climate change targets – cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, boosting renewables and energy efficiency by 20% and all by 2020 - and the impact this could have on the competitiveness of European industry.

Underlying these splits remains the key issue of how to reconcile competing economic goals with those of the environment and at the same time ensuring sustainable economic growth.

Germany, Poland, Italy and some of the other member states are concerned about the actual distribution of the emissions targets among EU countries within the ETS and want to see greater flexibility. Italy and Poland want to see the power sector buying the right to emit greenhouse gases by auction from 2020 and not 2013 as proposed by the Commission. Poland, together with Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Estonia, Hungary and Slovakia also think their targets are unfair and unrealistic to meet since 2005 is used as the baseline year for setting new emissions targets and they would rather those from 1990, which underpin the Kyoto Protocol, were used instead.

The French Presidency has already proposed a compromise under which the member states would agree next year on how to determine which energy intensive industries could receive free C02 emissions allowances within the EU ETS to protect them from competition by producers operating in other countries where there are no measures for tackling climate change (the so-called issue of carbon leakage). The Commission had originally said it would draw up a list of criteria for identifying those sectors that could benefit from 100% free EU ETS allowances depending on whether their competitiveness is at risk or not only after an international agreement had been reached in Copenhagen. Both the Commission and the Parliament do not want this list to be finalised until after the international climate change agreement is reached next December given the need to ensure a strong EU negotiating mandate.

With Poland and Italy now threatening to veto the climate change package and others trying to water down the package, the trouble is the kind of signal this sends out to the rest of the world, especially in the run-up to the UN climate change negotiations for a new international agreement in Copenhagen in December 2009 where the credibility of the EU could be at stake if it cannot reach a joint negotiating position beforehand or maintain its leadership role.

Of course if Scotland was independent not only would we be sitting at the top table able to support the need for strong and concerted action in tackling climate change (with our own target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050) but Scotland, like Denmark, would also be ideally placed to host the next UN international climate change conference – leading the way by example.

Our Annual Party Conference begins in Perth tomorrow so I’m heading back tonight from Brussels.

Rescuing Europe's banks

2008-10-13T09:29:00.000-07:00

On the back of yesterday’s meeting of Eurozone ministers and the UK in Paris I did up a short briefing setting out what actions the EU has taken in the context of the current global financial crisis. I thought an overview of what is happening in Brussels might be helpful.

Role of the EU in the current financial crisis
The EU position remains one of encouraging and brokering inter-governmental coordination in the face of the crisis. While the European Central Bank (ECB) has a role to play in injecting liquidity into the EU financial markets, it has a limited role to play in managing the crisis. The ECB has no role in national measures designed to nationalise (or otherwise bail-out) domestic banks and other financial institutions (mortgage companies).

Nonetheless what has been striking so far has been the lack of any co-ordinated European response to a Europe-wide failure of financial deregulation.

Euro area summit, Paris
Leaders of the eurozone and the UK meeting in Paris agreed a joint European action plan to rescue Europe’s banks. The action plan simply asserts the existence of a shared concern and the need for member states to work together in the context of this financial crisis.

The action plan outlines guiding principles for government intervention through a number of national measures, which are aimed at:
- Ensuring sufficient liquidity for financial institutions (banks and lenders)
- Facilitating the financing of banks ("which is currently constrained") whereby until the end of next year national governments can offer guarantees for new inter-bank loans of up to 5 years. The form of the guarantee may vary from country to country.
- Providing the financial institutions with capital resources so that they can appropriately finance the economy
- Providing a sufficient recapitalisation of distressed banks
- Ensuring enough flexibility in the implementation of the accounting rules in the current exceptional circumstances
- Enhancing cooperation procedures between European countries.

The rescue plan, which all eurozone members are to implement according to their own national conditions and needs, will only apply until 31 December 2009

European Council, 15-16 October 2008
It is expected that EU leaders will reaffirm the co-ordinated approach to tackling the financial crisis that was agreed at the Eurozone summit in Paris.

The draft conclusions of the European Council of 15 and 16 October express the resolve of the heads of state and government "to take concerted and integrated action to protect the European financial system".

The European Council notes that national decisions must take account of their impact on other member states and be in keeping with the common principles laid down by the European Council. The heads of state insist that "measures to support banks in difficulty should go hand in hand with measures to protect tax payers, to secure accountability on the part of executives and shareholders and to protect the legitimate interests of other market players".

Due to the "exceptional circumstances," the EU rules must be enforced swiftly and flexibly. Financial establishments must implement "recommendations on the transparency of their commitments and risks" in a credible way.

EU Finance ministers meeting 7 October 2008
EU Finance Ministers agreed at their meeting in Luxembourg to "take all necessary measures to enhance the soundness and stability of our banking system and to protect the deposits of individual savers”. The Finance Ministers concluded that "public intervention has to be decided at national level in a coordinated framework”.

They agreed on seven principles of government action in bank rescues:
(1) any support given should be timely,(2) temporary taxpayers’ interests must be protected, (3) existing shareholders should bear the consequences of government intervention, (4) governments must be free to change bank managements, if necessary, (5)governments must have the power to change banks’ remuneration policies, (6) EU state aid rules must be respected to ensure a level playing field for competitors and (7) there must be no negative spillover effects on other EU countries

EU Financial Action taken by the European Commission

Publication of Commission Communication on state aid guidelines 13 October
The Commission published guidance on how member states can best support their financial institutions in the current financial crisis while respecting EU state aid rules and avoiding excessive distortion of competition, e.g. by discriminating against financial institutions based in other Member States or allowing beneficiary banks to unfairly attract new additional business solely as a result of government support. The measures must be limited in time and foresee adequate contributions from the private sector.

The Commission relaxed its state aid rules to enable member states support their financial institutions through their various proposed bail-out schemes.

However, the Commission is clear that while seeking to approve rescue measures for banks very quickly (within 24 hours if possible) "such measures may not result in unnecessary distortions of competition between financial institutions operating in the market or negative spillover effects on other member states".

The Commission guaranteed that national rescue plans would be given the go-ahead within 24 hours if they meet the requirements outlined in its new state aid guidelines.

Appearing before the European Parliament's Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee on 6 October, EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes stated that EU competition rules were "part of the solution" to the banking crisis.

The restructuring and recovery plan for banks had to respect state aid rules. These rules "are a means of ensuring a common framework, even when governments must act at national level," she said. Unilateral action was not the way forward. Ignoring state aid rules would tempt governments into a subsidy race, with healthy companies being put out of business just because their competitors received unfair state subsidies".

Governments will have to ensure that every bank active on their territory will gain access to the rescue measures, regardless of nationality. This was one of the main arguments raised by the Commission against Ireland's rescue scheme presented two weeks ago.

In its original plan, Ireland issued a blanket guarantee for all deposits in six Irish banks, but the scheme excluded other institutions operating in the country, favouring a massive reallocation of funds towards the protected banks, mainly from UK financial institutions. The Commission was particularly concerned about the discriminatory potential this could cause within the Irish market as well as its effect on other EU countries' banks.

The revised Irish plan does not include such discrimination and was formally approved by the Commission on Monday.

The Commission has already approved plans by some Member States to restore liquidity and confidence within 24 hours of their notification - e.g. the UK and Ireland on 13 October, which were found to be compatible with EC state aid rules under Article 87.3(b).

Proposal for increasing minimum protection for bank deposits
The Commission published a proposal on Wednesday 15 October to increase the minimum amount of state-guaranteed savings in any one bank from €20,000 to €50,000. This is supposed to reassure us that our savings in European banks are safe and to discourage people taking money out of their accounts to put it in banks in countries they think offer better protection. The Commission may decide to increase this to €100,000 before the end of the year. Belgium, Cyprus, Spain, Lithuania and Portugal have already increased their national guaranteed savings to €100,000. Other Member States, like Germany, Austria and Slovakia, have pledged to guarantee all savings.

Capital Requirements for banks
At the beginning of October, the Commission presented proposals for reviewing the capital requirements for banks, which included plans for more coordinated European supervision based on colleges of supervisors. Under these proposals all multinational groups will have ad hoc colleges of supervisors, put together from the authorities of the countries in which the company operates, but it remains unclear how the power will be shared.

Speaking at the College of Europe in Bruges

2008-10-10T01:26:00.000-07:00

Just as EU energy ministers were meeting in Luxembourg to agree the internal energy market package I was up at the College of Europe in Bruges taking part in a lecture with the students there on EU energy policy. I was there to give them a perspective from Brussels on the external aspects of EU energy policy and having come through the various votes in the Parliament’s Energy and Environment Committees on the green energy package as well as earlier votes on the internal energy market package there was much to discuss with them. I was invited two years ago to speak with the students not long after the Commission had published its consultation (‘green’) paper on a new European energy strategy. So I was delighted to be invited back.

There was much interest in the Commission’s forthcoming proposals for the third and last element of the EU energy package with the long awaited publication on 13 November of its Second Strategic Energy Review. This will form the basis of the second energy action plan (2010-2012) which EU leaders are due to adopt at the meeting of the European Council in March 2010.

The EU’s Second Strategic Energy Review will focus on the whole issue of security of supply and developing the external aspects of the EU’s energy policy and will be accompanied by an action plan on external energy security to consider the challenges the EU is likely to face between 2020 and 2050, the launch of a consultation (Green Paper) on Trans-European Energy Networks, a Communication on Offshore Wind, where the Commission supports the setting up a working group to prepare a project for a North Sea offshore network, as well as legislation on energy efficiency, transparency and use of emergency oil stocks and gas security of supply through the setting up of a solidarity mechanism.

To speed up the implementation of the strategic energy technologies plan (SET-plan), the Commission will also be publishing shortly a Communication on funding low carbon intensity technologies.

There is much here that is likely to be of great interest to Scotland not least EU plans to give greater support to offshore wind. With the EU looking for alternatives and at ways in which Europe can connect up its energy supplies through an internal energy market and better cross-border links and storage facilities inside the EU, creating a European offshore supergrid linking up the west coast of Scotland, the north and east coasts of Northern Ireland, the Irish Sea and the west coast of the Republic of Ireland offers massive potential for exporting clean, green energy to the rest of mainland Europe.

President Barroso in a speech in Brussels yesterday made it clear that he wanted to see a real collective approach to upgrade key infrastructure that is essential to maintaining uninterrupted supplies and which would enable a more diversified energy supply to be brought into the EU.

This comes in the wake of a report published by the International Energy Agency last month on the EU energy policy which underlined the need for the EU to better coordinate its external relations with the world’s key suppliers and producers so it can use its full weight on the international stage.

Ultimate authority over national energy policies and national energy resources has to remain in the hands of the appropriate domestic authorities. Certainly, I want to see an Independent Scotland able to control its own energy future but where cooperation and coordination with our European partners makes sense and could be beneficial then we should examine it.

Back to Strasbourg....

2008-10-09T05:44:00.000-07:00

Just to finish this week off we heard from the Parliament's authorities that the building work to repair the collapsed ceiling in Strasbourg was finished and had been given the okay clearance, so it looks like the EP will be back in Strasbourg come our next session on 20 October. I say this every time but this is just such a complete waste of taxpayers' money. I'm lucky that I don't have to endure the monthly trek as I simply stay put in my office in Brussels but it is just the fact that I have Alyn down there, along with our group advisor, committee secretariat staff, the Commissioners and their staff when it just would be so much easier to have everyone in one place in Brussels.

Having the last two sessions in Brussels has underlined how much more effective and productive the EP is and how much more we are relaxed because folk aren't having to endure being away from home and being away from what they are familiar with in Brussels.

The UN and the issue of Kosova's independence

2008-10-09T05:33:00.000-07:00

Just as Kosova is getting on with the business of building its nation following its declaration of independence in February, the UN General Assembly backed the request from the Serbian government for an advisory opinion from the international Court of Justice on the question of Kosova’s independence.

The text of the UN resolution is below:

United Nations Sixty-third session

Agenda item 71

Request for an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on whether the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo is in accordance with international law
Draft resolution submitted by Serbia

Request for an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on whether the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo is in accordance with international law

The General Assembly,
Mindful of the purposes and principles of the United Nations,
Bearing in mind its functions and powers under the Charter of the United Nations,
Recalling that on 17 February 2008 the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo declared independence from Serbia,
Aware that this act has been received with varied reactions by the Members of the United Nations as to its compatibility with the existing international legal order,
Decides, in accordance with Article 96 of the Charter of the United Nations to request the International Court of Justice, pursuant to Article 65 of the Statute of the Court to render an advisory opinion on the following question:
“Is the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo in accordance with international law?”.

77 countries supported the UN decision with 6 against, 74 abstentions and 35 which didn’t participate. The UK’s Ambassador to the UN, John Sawers submitted a letter in defence of Kosova’s declaration of independence stating that this was done in accordance with international law and that the an advisory opinion is not essential - a view which I also share. The UK wants the ICJ to also take into account the broader context of Kosova’s declaration of independence and has stressed that Kosova must be allowed to take part in the proceedings and argue its case. The only advantage in this opinion is the extent to which it should give greater legal certainty.

I was fortunate to have spent 3 days in Pristina earlier in February just before Kosova declared its independence and met with representatives from both the EU and UN missions, as well as some of the NGOs and representatives from across the political and ethnic spectrum. Everyone we spoke with underlined to us that Kosova could not go back to where it was before 1999 and had to keep going forwards and the only way to do that was through independence no matter how hard that road would be – there was no other option.

Since then I have kept a close eye on developments in Pristina and seen how Kosova has been able to move forward and slowly begin to take its place in the world – despite the continual resistance and opposition from Serbia and Russia both of which have refused to recognise Kosova’s declaration of independence.

In July an international donors conference was held in Brussels where the international community pledged 1.2 billion euros to rebuild Kosova such is the extent of support for Kosova and the understanding that much more needs to be done in order to secure stability in the Western Balkans.

Kosova’s independence is now recognised by 51 countries including most recently Albania, Montenegro and Macedonia, and is recognised by a majority of EU countries – 22 out of 27 with the exception of Spain, Greece, Cyprus, Romania, and Slovakia. As part of the wider recognition process, Kosova is already opening up a number of embassies across the world not least in Brussels where there will be a representative of the new Kosovan government in the Belgian Embassy. I’m looking forward to meeting with him in due course and to re-establish our initial contact with him from our time in Pristina back in February.

Tackling climate change through carbon capture

2008-10-08T05:58:00.000-07:00

The last bit of the green energy package to be voted through the Environment Committee was a report drafted by the UK Lib Dem MEP, Chris Davies on the Commission’s plans for developing carbon capture technology and ensuring there is a legal framework for its proper and safe deployment.

The report adopted wants to see all new coal-fired power stations built from 2015 onwards to be equipped with the new carbon capture and storage technology (CCS). MEPs on the Environment Committee backed an amendment that introduces an “emission performance standard” which would require member states to set limits on the C02 performance of new power stations with a capacity of more than 300 Mega Watts. After 2015, the emissions of large power plants cannot exceed 500 Kg of CO2 per kilowatt hour (Kwh) on an annual average basis.

Any new coal plants must be built with environmental protection – that is fundamental.
New coal plants with carbon capture and storage facilities have the potential to make important emissions savings while providing a secure supply of energy. This is likely to be of significant benefit for Scotland, especially since Scotland is widely recognised as being among the countries best placed in the world to fully exploit the clean carbon potential of carbon capture schemes. The Longannet coal fired power station is already investing in cleaner carbon based technologies. Scottish power stations burning clean, 'green' coal would bring huge economic benefits to Scotland with the creation of more jobs in Scotland’s energy industry at the same time as greatly reducing emissions. Scotland has huge coal reserves which together with our renewables would help to meet Scotland’s electricity needs without the need for nuclear for many years to come.

The Commission plans to help Europe build up to 12 large scale demonstration carbon capture projects by 2015 and we certainly welcome EU support in this regard, not least after what happened with the carbon capture and storage project at the Peterhead power station where Scotland already had a world-leading proposal for a demonstrator site.

Because of political uncertainty caused entirely by the London Government not making it a priority and not giving it the backing it needed, the project did go ahead but instead of on our own doorstep in Scotland it went to California. This project was one of the most advanced of any in the EU and offered a real opportunity for not just Scotland and the UK but also the EU to lead the world in advancing and using this technology by 2010. While the European Commission supported it, once again London’s failure ensured Scotland lost out.

Of course a key issue was that of how to finance these demonstration projects with opinion divided over whether this should be for member states or private sector. In his draft opinion to the Environment Committee, the rapporteur Christian Ehler (German Christian Democrat MEP) for the Energy Committee wants to see CCS funded from the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) for research and development as well as by allowances from the EU’s ETS. But to kick-start CCS during the initial planning and construction phases, funding needs to come before 2013 and this could be done by using 500 million euro from the Risk Sharing Finance Facility that was held back until the mid-term review of FP7. With co-financing by the European Investment Bank this could provide 1 billion euros. So again we have to wait and see what will come out of the ongoing negotiations between the parliament, the member states and the Commission before December.

Tackling climate change by sharing the burden of effort

2008-10-08T05:54:00.000-07:00

Report number 2 voted on by the Parliament's Environment Committee concerned the whole issue of effort sharing by the Member States. The report drafted by the Finnish Green MEP Satu Hassi was in the end adopted by 65 votes in favour with one abstention.

It considerably strengthened the Commission's original proposal by calling for Member States to face strict fines and sanctions if they fail to meet national reduction targets for greenhouse gas emissions from sources that are not covered by the EU ETS, e.g. road and sea transport, buildings, services and farming and smaller industrial installations.

Any Member State that fails to meet its target must pay an "excess emissions penalty" equivalent to the fines paid under the ETS - i.e. €100 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent emitted. Should a Member State fail to pay this penalty, then the excess emissions will be deducted from the ETS allowances to be auctioned by that Member State. The Commission would auction these allowances instead.

Auctioning revenues and fines will then be invested in a Community fund dedicated to research, development and use of renewable energy and increased energy efficiency and conservation in the EU.

The report by Satu Hassi backs the binding national targets proposed by the Commission for each Member State to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions from non-ETS sources. It is proposed that the UK reduces its emissions by 16%.

It also sets new EU long term (post-2020) greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets of at least 50% by 2035 and of 60% to 80% by 2050 compared to 1990 levels.

A Member State whose greenhouse gas emissions are below its limit should be able to transfer, sell or lend part of its entitlement to another Member State, to help it meet its target. The transfer revenues should then be invested in energy efficiency, renewable energy or climate-friendly modes of transport.

Until an international agreement is reached Member States will be allowed to "offset" emissions i.e. invest in greenhouse gas reduction projects in developing countries under the UN's Clean Development Mechanism as a means to cut their greenhouse gas emissions. Member States may use such external project credits to account only for up to 8% of their 2005 emissions over 2013-2020. The Commission had originally proposed to allow Member States to "offset" their emissions by up to 3% per year.

Despite much oppostition from other political groups, our group (the Greens/EFA in which the SNP sits) managed to see off atempts to undermine the automatic increase of the EU's target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 from 20% to 30% in the event that an international climate change deal is reached in Copenhagen. Our group also backed long term emissions reductions targets – 50% by 2035 and 60-80% by 2050. This is absolutely crucial if the EU is play a leading role in the negotiations for a new international climate change agreement in Copenhagen next December.

Upon the conclusion of an international agreement, Member States should finance greenhouse gas emission reductions, such as projects to prevent or remedy deforestation in developing and transition countries that have ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The EU should provide grant-based financial assistance for developing countries to help them adapt to climate change. This assistance should increase from €5 billion in 2013 to at least €10 billion in 2020.

Tackling climate change through the EU ETS

2008-10-08T05:46:00.000-07:00

The rest of the climate change package was voted through the Parliament's Environment Committee yesterday in what was referred to in the press as "Super Tuesday".

The Environment Committee backed the rest of the Commission's climate change proposals in a series of votes on three separate reports:
(1) reviewing and updating the EU emissions trading scheme (ETS),
(2) effort sharing among the member states to meet the EU’s greenhouse gas reduction commitment in sectors not covered by the EU ETS (such as transport, buildings, services, smaller industrial installations, agriculture and waste) and agriculture and waste) with specific, binding national targets
(3) stimulating the uptake of CO2 carbon capture and storage.

EU Emissions Trading Scheme
The EU ETS was launched in January 2005 as a "cap and trade" system: it caps the overall level of emissions allowed but, within that limit, allows participants to buy and sell allowances as they require in order to cut emissions cost-effectively. It currently covers over 10,000 installations in the energy and industrial sectors

The report, drafted by the Irish Fianna Gael MEP Avril Doyle, was adopted by 44 votes in favour, 20 against and one abstention.

The Committee endorsed the Commission's plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2020 and by 30% if a new international agreement is reached at the UN Climate Change conference in Copenhagen in December 2009. The SNP fully supports the EU’s sustainable energy targets though if anything we believe the EU should be more ambitious given the Scottish Government’s target for cutting greenhouse gas reductions by 80% by 2050.

Key amendments adopted include:
The power sector should be obliged to obtain 100% of CO2 permits at auction after 2013.

Energy-intensive industries should be required to obtain 15% of emissions permits at auction in 2013, with a gradual phase-in towards 100% auctioning by 2020 (a 5% decrease compared to the Commission's initial proposal for a 20% auctioning requirement). Sectors eligible for 100% free emissions allowances should be identified only after the conclusion of international climate talks in Copenhagen in December 2009.

500 million spare emissions allowances, normally reserved for new entrants into the EU ETS scheme, should be made available as an incentive/financing measure for large-scale commercial carbon capture and storage (CCS) demonstration plants.

The Commission should ensure that contracts for the construction of 12 large-scale demonstration plants are let before the UN meeting in Copenhagen in December 2009.

The threshold for installations affected by the EU ETS should be raised from 10,000 to 25,000 tonnes of annual CO2 emissions.

100% of Member States' auction revenues should be set aside or 'ring fenced' for climate-related purposes, whereby half of the money should be earmarked for developing countries. The remaining auction revenues would be used to fund clean energy technologies and other climate change-related investments inside the EU, thereby helping Member States to adapt to climate change or to fund research and development.

Installations should be able to achieve at least 40% of their targets through the financing of emissions reductions projects in developing countries under the Kyoto Protocol's Joint Implementation and Clean Development Mechanisms (JI/CDM), but stricter rules on the validity of CDM projects would need to be respected.

Support for the extension of the scope of the current ETS (which covers for example power stations, oil refineries and factories making cement, glass, lime, bricks, ceramics, and pulp) to include new industries (e.g. aluminium and ammonia producers and petrochemicals) and two further gases (nitrous oxide and perfluorocarbons).

Up to 5% of emissions reductions could be obtained through the preservation of forests in developing countries under the condition that an international climate deal is in place.

This report ran into all sorts of difficulties with the EPP group (European People’s Party – comprises the Christian Democrats and the Tories) split over the issue of companies having to buy permits to pollute from 2013. There was a lot of pressure from the industry lobby concerning the Commission’s proposals which were being endorsed in the draft Doyle report with concerns raised by the German and Polish delegations of the need to support giving companies “free allowances” in the ETS – the argument being that this was necessary to protect them from competition by producers operating in countries where pollution is cheaper. I was glad to see in the end that the Environment Committee rejected attempts to water down the ETS. If we are to be serious about tackling climate change then Europe needs to lead by example in ensuring there is as strong a scheme as possible.

There were also questions over what should happen with auction revenues. The Commission’s position, which was supported by the rapporteur, Avril Doyle, is that these revenues should be invested back into the national coffers of the member states. While our group supported proposals to keep 50% of revenues from auctioning in a dedicated fund to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including helping the least developed countries mitigate and adapt to climate change, we also backed the earmarking of the other revenues for investing in climate change measures such as promoting renewable energy technologies.

With the French Presidency determined to get an agreement on the whole climate change package under its watch, it means intensive negotiations on the Parliament's side to ensure as much of the Parliament's position as possible remains intact and that will all depend on what happens during the debate and vote in Strasbourg later in December.

A disappointing result for CAP reform vote

2008-10-07T11:00:00.000-07:00

So, after three and a half hours of voting through over 700 amendments and compromises MEPs on the Agriculture Committee this afternoon finally adopted their position on the Commission's proposed CAP health check. This was the report drafted by the Portuguese Socialist MEP Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos.

We lost many of our amendments and to be honest I was disappointed with the result not least because of all the efforts that had gone in from our side and the fact that this package of reforms was supposed to be about tidying up the 2003 reforms and making things much simpler for our farmers when the Committee seemed to go in the opposite direction in voting something through that actually complicates things more.

A number of our ideas were taken up and these include the decoupling of farm payments in the sheep, goat and beef sectors as a way in which to try and eliminate distortions of competition and to simplify the single payment scheme for farmers by including them in this scheme . We also sought to ensure that as compulsory modulation across the EU increases, voluntary modulation must be reduced so as to ensure a level playing field for Scotland’s farmers and that they are not at a competitive disadvantage compared to our European counterparts. And at the same time the level of rural development funding must not be lowered as a result.

Our amendments to make set aside a normal entitlement, thereby allowing farmers to produce for the market, got through as did our attempt to reduce the administrative and financial burden of cross compliance.

In the end all we could do was to give the Santos report a yellow card. We’ll have another chance at the report when it comes before the plenary in November so a lot can happen between now and then.

Scotland's sheep farmers before the European Parliament

2008-10-06T10:50:00.000-07:00

Today we brought a high level delegation across to Brussels from Scotland's NFU, the National Sheep Association and the Scottish Farmer to present their case against the Commission's plans to introduce compulsory electronic identification for sheep to the Parliament's Agriculture Committee. To be honest, it was an immensely proud moment to see and listen to our farmers outlining their concerns to the Committee this afternoon and they did a grand job of it.

I'd spent most of the week before working with the British Agricultural Bureau office in Brussels in trying to bring together the various farming delegations from Wales, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland and England who also wanted to be part of the presentation to the Agriculture Committee and show as united a common front as possible to MEPs on the Committee.

The NFU and the National Sheep Association reiterated that electronically tagging all of Scotland's seven million sheep, including the ones in hilly, mountainous areas would be completely impractical and the technology is still unproven. We understand the aims of what the Commission is trying to do regarding compulsory EID but continue to believe that they will not achieve what they are supposed to and will add more costs at a time when our sheep farmers are already hitting hard times with the credit crunch and are just not practical.

I was glad to see that there was much support among Committee members for what our delegation was telling them and certainly Neil Parish, the Committee Chair made it absolutely clear that he would be pushing very hard for the scheme to be introduced on an opt-in, voluntary basis. Also at the Committee meeting were representatives from the Commission who continued to argue that from 1 January 2011 it will be compulsory for Europe's sheep to require electronic identification and they will have their movements individually recorded.

At the moment our cross-party, cross-nationality written declaration on compulsory EID is still live and we are trying to get as many MEPs as possible to sign it. The Scottish National Sheep Association presented us with the rest of its compulsory EID petition, which was presented to the European Parliament's Petitions Committee back in July and which now totals over 8,000. It is vital that we continue to keep the pressure on the Commission and we are certainly doing everything we can to safeguard Scotland's sheep farming interests by supporting EID to be done on a voluntary/opt-in basis.

Scotland and Europe's energy future

2008-10-03T10:48:00.000-07:00

With me being back in Edinburgh this week I was invited by the University of Edinburgh's Europa Institute to take part in a seminar last night on Scotland and EU energy policy that was also organised in association with the Scottish Government. The seminar in itself is timely given the current inquiry of the Scottish Parliament's Energy Committee which is looking at delivering and determining Scotland's energy future. Since there is much overlap with the energy debate in Brussels about Europe's energy future and where Scotland's energy future fits within that debate I'm working closely with our SNP colleagues on the Committee to ensure they are fully up to speed with what is going on out here.

Such a seminar was an initial attempt to bring together a number of key stakeholders in Scotland's energy sector with policy makers in the Scottish Government and academics who have an interest in this area to discuss the challenges they consider are posed to Scotland as the EU's action in the area of energy policy develops. Essentially this was a good opportunity for me to hear from stakeholders how they think EU energy policy should best be developed to advance Scotland's interests.

The implications for Scotland are clear. Europe is looking for alternatives and Scotland has the glittering prize with its vast renewable energy potential. Scotland remains one of the EU’s leading nations in developing green energy technologies and is Europe’s green energy powerhouse. As an important provider and supplier of energy, there is much Scotland can and should contribute to EU-level discussions to ensure a sustainable energy future that is good for Scotland and good for the EU in the long term. Any future EU energy policy must be suitable to Scotland's distinctive energy interests and our unique energy resources. Given the global interdependency of Scotland’s energy market, the development of a European energy policy is of key strategic importance to Scotland. We have to ensure that any proposed European legislation in this area is appropriate for Scotland’s commercial, scientific and energy interests

Much of my discussion focused on where the EU energy package is in Brussels, what the legislative process within the Parliament involves and what the opportunities are for engaging with the EP and its Energy and Environment Committees.

By way of example I showed what was possible to achieve when we have a clear Scottish interest at stake - the issue being the implications the Commission's plans for splitting energy producers from their distribution network ("ownership unbundling") will have for Scotland's energy market model - and how this was pushed in both the Council and the EP to protect Scotland's key interests in this regard even in an area like energy regulation which is a reserved matter for London.

I tried to emphasise the point that regardless of what the outcome is in the Parliament, if you don’t put your case, no one will know. We need to know from back home how draft European legislation could potentially affect Scottish interests as then makes it much easier for us to know exactly what the problem is and to then do something about it. Even if we don’t always win the argument in the EP, that’s not to say we can’t win it elsewhere and we have to use all avenues of influence to build the necessary support behind our position. But the real crux is that Scotland needs to have a view and then convey that view to Brussels and London.

As Europe's green energy powerhouse it is absolutely vital that Scotland's distinctive energy challenges and opportunities are recognised within the energy discussions across here.

Campaigning in Markinch

2008-09-27T10:46:00.000-07:00

Having come back from Brussels yesterday I spent the day back up in Markinch helping the Glenrothes by-election team. The rooms were a hive of activity and I was promptly sent out with group to canvass at the back of Markinch.

It was interesting to hear the varied views on the doorsteps with a couple of folk telling me how much they see the SNP as Scotland's party and one of the best things the SNP government has done was to get rid of the tolls on the Forth Bridge and how this had been seen over the years as an unfair tax on the people of Fife and their local economy.

The thing that still encourages me is the extent to which people do want to talk to you on the doorstep and the opportunity for me to be able to get out from behind my desk in Brussels and be back at home talking with folk is something which I enjoy immensely.

All in all I think it was a good day's worth of canvassing as I headed back to Lanark via Edinburgh.

Making the CAP work better for Scotland

2008-09-24T10:44:00.000-07:00

Discussions on the future of the Common Agricultural Policy after 2013 are now beginning to get underway across in Brussels with some countries already setting out their stalls and looking for common ground with others.

EU farming ministers met in Annecy yesterday for an informal meeting for a broad discussion on how best to prepare for the CAP for the future. The French are keen to get this debate going not least since according to their Farm Minister, Michel Barnier, "there is no shared vision" among the 27 EU countries and with discussions underway about the future funding priorities of the EU's budget for 2013-2020 (not least in terms of the size of the future CAP budget) strategic reflection on the future shape and direction of Europe's agricultural policy is fundamental.

The paper produced by the French Presidency sets out the broad outlines for such a discussion. It recognises that European agriculture will have to meet a number of challenges, such as high prices of certain raw agricultural products especially cereals, oilseeds, butter and milk powder which not only raises issues for consumers by putting pressure on food prices but also makes it more expensive for farmers to raise livestock. Other challenges for the future include sustainable food production and ensuring the food security of the EU as well as food safety which is linked to rising health risks, maintaining the diversity of European agriculture and rural life and encouraging farmers to innovate and adopt more new environmentally friendly production techniques to help tackle the challenges of climate change.

From these initial discussions, it's clear where the dividing lines are already beginning to emerge. Countries such as the UK, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands want to see the market at the centre of the CAP with greater priority given to pillar 2 - rural development. While Spain, France, Italy and Belgium want to see a strong CAP maintained with a strong first pillar - direct payments for farmers. The new member states were extremely clear in their demands for a fairer system for the distribution and allocation of direct support (pillar 1 funds) as from 2014. This essentially concerns the single farm payment which involves a flat rate per hectare payment for all farmers.

While discussions will continue under the Czech Presidency the real debate on the CAP future will however come after the EP elections next June and the appointment of a new Commission and a new Farming Commissioner in November 2009. The SNP's team in Brussels has been working extremely hard alongside the Scottish Government and Scotland's farming communities to safeguard Scotland's farming interests within the CAP health check and beyond.

Unlike the UK government which wants to see an end to payments for farmers, the SNP wants to make the CAP work better for Scotland’s farming and rural needs. Already it is clear that the views of the Scottish Government are finding much support with many of our European partners.

Boosting Scotland's green energy potential in Europe

2008-09-10T10:38:00.000-07:00

Between now and the end of the year we are set for a bit of an energy tastic time as the negotiations between the Parliament and the Council on the Commission's proposed energy and climate change package reach a critical point - the French Presidency is pushing for a deal to be done by Christmas, primarily because it wants the cudos of having such a key dossier agreed under its watch so it is all a bit gung-ho.

First off the starting block from the Parliament's side was today's vote in the Energy Committee on the report drafted by the Luxembourg Green MEP Claude Turmes on a proposed new EU-wide legal framework for actively promoting renewables targets - 20%
There were over 1100 amendments plus compromises

Altogether the end result was a good one for us with a number of our amendments, which sought to strengthen Scotland's renewable energy potential, adopted.

Scotland's Gains:

- the inclusion of a North Sea marine energy grid as a "project of European interest", which will mean priority for funding. Scotland stands to benefit massively from the increased capacity for renewables this grid will enable. Developing cross-border super grids will enable Scotland to become a major exporter of clean, green energy to Europe.

- encouraging priority access to the grid for renewables and seeking to ensure that the non-discriminatory nature of Ofgem’s transmission charges for remote renewables connecting to the grid is now made “mandatory". The Commission is also now mandated to investigate such abuses and act on them.

- encouraging the exchange of best practice in the development and deployment of green energy and pushing for extra funding for cutting edge research to develop the next generation of clean energy technologies.

- seeking to ensure Scotland is at the heart of the EU’s research efforts into renewables by requiring the Commission to produce a plan by 2010 to co-ordinate funding and support for renewable energy and energy efficient technology research centres, particularly those that cooperate with Universities and enterprises in applied and innovative research to commercialise research quickly. This will have positive implications for our Marine Energy Research Centre in Orkney.

Other key amendments adopted include a compromise on the 10% binding biofuels target on transport: the 10% target for 2020 remains, but 40% of the 10% must come from "acceptable" sources of renewable energy, like fuels made from waste, residues, or electricity from renewable sources. This target is to be reviewed in 2014 based on an impact assessment.

The target is supported by stringent sustainability criteria for biofuels that wish to be included in the scheme. These biofuels must achieve a 45% greenhouse gas emissions saving, and at least 60% from 2015. Other criteria include no biofuels production on high carbon stock land (peat) and adherence to water and soil management criteria as well as social sustainability criteria (respect for the land rights of local communities and the fair remuneration of workers).

The Committee also backed amendments which called for energy efficiency in transport to be improved by at least 20% compared to 2005. Various other energy efficiency measures were adopted not least retrofitting old building stock and making public buildings have an energy surplus as well as biomass based heating and cooling systems.

With Member States required to adopt national renewable energy action plans setting out their national targets for their share of renewables in transport, electricity, heating and cooling, the Committee did introduce greater flexibility mechanisms in how these EU targets are to be achieved.

Once again what this shows is how the SNP in Europe have sought to ensure Scotland's energy interests are central to the ongoing discussions in Brussels and that renewables are firmly at the heart of the energy debate in Europe and in Scotland. With many of the SNP's objectives for a greener Scotland taken on board, this will do much to realise the SNP's vision for Scotland as Europe's green energy powerhouse.

MEPs will vote on the Turmes report in Strasbourg on 16 December so we will be working between now and then to ensure there are no attempts to water down what has been achieved thus far.

Euro Hustings in Biggar

2008-09-07T10:36:00.000-07:00

This afternoon Clydesdale CA had organized a Euro hustings for all the European candidates in the Gillespie Centre in Biggar. It was a good opportunity to spend some time there and get to know some of the members in the CA, not least because I am just about to move to Lanark from Edinburgh having recently bought a house there with my partner. I’m very much looking forward to becoming an active member of the Wallace Branch and getting out and about campaigning whenever I’m home and am already looking forward to being in Lanark for next year's annual William Wallace parade which will be of particular resonance with 2009 earmarked by our Scottish Government as the Year of Homecoming Scotland.

Back in Glenrothes

2008-09-06T09:44:00.000-07:00

Having just got back from Brussels I headed up to Markinch to offer my help and ended up spending the afternoon with a couple of our members from Edinburgh West, one of whom had just recently joined the party. I was delighted to spend some time with them campaigning around one of Fife's many former coal mining villages, Coaltown of Weymss. The miners' cottages are still there along Plantation Row and now form part of a conservation area. It certainly was a village with a history on every door.

With Scotland playing Macedonia that afternoon there were few folk around with the one exception of a woman in her 60s who came to her door as I was putting one of the latest leaflets from our candidate, Cllr. Peter Grant, through her letterbox, to tell me of her disappointment with Labour and how she had voted SNP at the Holyrood election last May for the first time. There was much chat about the unfair Council tax and our plans for introducing a local income tax before she started telling me what could have happened in Scotland had we had our share of the oil revenue. I left her doorstep feeling that even if she was the only person I spoke with it was definitely worth it in the hope that she would speak with her friends and neighbours.

Strasbourg in Brussels

2008-09-04T09:27:00.000-07:00

With the Parliament almost through its so-called "exceptional" plenary in Brussels this week the news came through this afternoon from the Secretary General that there are further safety concerns down in Strasbourg to the extent that the session scheduled for the week of 22 September will now also take place in Brussels.

As I have said on a previous blog on this website the SNP has campaigned long and hard for the European Parliament to have its seat in Brussels and for the Strasbourg building to be ditched. This week's session in Brussels has shown how much more effective the EP is when it meets in Brussels - the Commission and the Council are just up the road. To be honest in all the fours years I have spent working in the European Parliament in Brussels I have never seen the Parliament quite like this. Everyone just seems much more relaxed and happy with staff not spending two days travelling back and forth to Strasbourg on a 5 hour train journey and trying to cram 5 days work into 3 days.

Being in Brussels is definitely more cost effective than the 200 million euros it costs the taxpayer each year for a wasted journey no one wants to make. This week the chamber in Brussels has shown it is more than capable of withstanding the pressure of a plenary session and with the necessary infrastructure put in place Brussels can well cope. If elected to represent the SNP and the people of Scotland in the European Parliament next year this is one issue I will continue to campaign for - to bring the EP back to Brussels.

As I have said before the EP is the only parliament in the world that cannot decide for itself where its seat should be. That decision rests with the Member State governments and it requires a unanimous decision of all the national governments in the Council of Ministers to agree. The French government remains against any such move to Brussels so it is ironic that the collapse of the ceiling should happen under their Presidency.

Campaigning against compulsory sheep EID

2008-09-02T09:25:00.000-07:00

Our campaign against the Commission's plans for compulsory electronic identification of sheep (EID) continued today with the launch of a cross-party and cross-national written declaration. Over the past while we have been working together with 3 other MEPs - Mairead McGuinness (Fianna Gael), Jim Nicholson (Ulster Unionist), Neil Parish (Conservatives and chair of the Agriculture Committee) and Jill Evans (Plaid) in putting together the written declaration which calls on the Commission to halt its plans for compulsory EID.

With the publication of the written declaration this means we now have until 4 December to gather as much support as possible from other MEPs across the EU in backing our campaign. If the written declaration is adopted by a majority of MEPs it becomes the official policy of the EP and the declaration is forwarded to the Commission, the Council and to the governments and parliaments of the 27 EU Member States.

The written declaration follows a delegation Alyn invited from Scotland's National Sheep Association and the National Farmer's Union of Scotland to Brussels to present a 7,000 signatures petition to the EP's Petitions Committee. Next month the NSA and NFUS are back in Brussels this time to give evidence to the EP's Agriculture Committee on the implications of the Commission's sheep EID proposals on Scotland's sheep sector.

Below is the text of the written declaration on electronic sheep identification scheme.

0068/2008
Written declaration on the electronic identification system for sheep (EID)
The European Parliament,
– having regard to Rule 116 of its Rules of Procedure,
A. whereas sheep and goat farming is important to the social, environmental and economic fabric of the EU,
B. whereas the sheep sector is in decline owing to lack of prosperity; whereas the next generation is reluctant to enter sheep production; and whereas, if this is left to continue, the skills base will be lost,
1. Calls on the Commission to recognise that batch recording and movement standstills of sheep are more cost-effective forms of protection from disease spread than EID and individual movement recording;
2. Calls on the Commission to recognise that producer incomes in the sheep sector are characteristically low and that the implementation of EID will result in a significant cost to a sector that can ill afford a further regulatory burden;
3. Calls on the Commission to make sheep EID voluntary but not mandatory;
4. Calls on the Commission to recognise that the implementation of EID and individual recording of sheep will affect the competitiveness of the EU sheep sector on the world market;
5. Calls on the Commission to recognise that there are significant practical problems that prevent the effective operation of EID in extensive livestock systems and within climatic conditions commonly experienced in northern Europe;
6. Instructs its President to forward this declaration, together with the names of the signatories, to the Council, the Commission and the parliaments and governments of the Member States.

Collapse of the European Parliament's ceiling in Strasbourg

2008-08-28T09:23:00.000-07:00

Of course the best news today was the realisation that next week's Strasbourg session is in Brussels.

At the beginning of the month we were all notified by the Parliament's Secretary-General the grave news that part of the ceiling in the chamber in Strasbourg had collapsed. Despite best efforts to repair the damage the Strasbourg chamber will not be ready in time for next's first session back and while everyone is glad that no one was hurt when the ceiling collapsed there has been much rejoicing at the prospect at not having to head down the road for a trip that costs taxpayers millions of euros. I also now don't need to remember to pack Alyn's canteen and put it outside the office.

Ensuring Scotland's voice heard on reforming the EU's CAP

2008-08-27T09:18:00.000-07:00

I’m now back in Brussels this week after our summer recess for what is likely to be an extremely busy time in the European Parliament as we head for the European elections next June. Already the first thing on my desk is to sort out our amendments to the report drafted by the Portuguese Socialist MEP Luis Capoulas Santos on the Common Agricultural Policy Health Check.

Before the summer we worked closely with the Scottish Government, Scotland’s NFU and other Scottish farming organisations to ensure Scotland’s farming and rural interests are central to the EP’s deliberations on this important issue. We submitted over 20 amendments which sought to strengthen Santos report not least by calling for example for all livestock payments to be decoupled as a way in which to simplify the single payment system for farmers and at the same time eliminate any distortions of competition which could prevent a level playing field for Scotland's farmers.

On the issue of modulation we sought the deletion of the Commission's proposals on progressive modulation which would seek to punish farms just because of their size. Modulation refers to the transfer of CAP funds from direct payments to farmers (pillar 1 of the CAP) to rural development measures (pillar 2 of the CAP)

While we want Member States to reduce voluntary modulation as compulsory modulation is raised to ensure Scotland's farmers are not placed at a major competitive disadvantage compared to their European counterparts, rural development money must not be lowered as a result. All modulated money should stay within the country that generated it so as to ensure there is maximum compensation for farmers whose income was reduced by modulation.

On cross compliance issues we want to see less administrative burdens being placed on farmers with greater emphasis on local decision-making via devolved governments and regional bodies. Our other amendments focused on issues such as abolishing payments for tobacco aid. Back in May the EP took the crazy decision to vote in favour of maintaining more than £200 million in EU subsidies for tobacco production. Given the amount of money the EU ploughs into public awareness campaigns about the dangers to public health from smoking this for me was a bad day for the Parliament and a bitter irony.

We'll be looking for as much support as possible for our amendments when the Agriculture Committee comes to vote on the draft Santos report on 7 October after which it will go to plenary for further debate and vote on 18 November.

Glenrothes by-election

2008-08-23T00:52:00.000-07:00

I returned to Markinch this afternoon to help out doing whatever was asked of me. I spent a lot of time in the Glenrothes constituency during the Holyrood campaign last year working alongside Tricia Marwick MSP and her team. I have to say I had a fantastic experience in Tricia's campaign and enjoyed every minute of it. The sheer hard work that was put into that campaign to get Tricia elected as the constituency MSP for Central Fife and to get as many Councillors elected as we did to enable the SNP to take control of Fife Council was astounding and greatly impressed me. I learnt a great deal and was certainly made to feel extremely welcome.

During this time I also had the opportunity to campaign alongside our candidate (who was selected last night), Cllr Peter Grant who has worked diligently across his ward and as the leader of Fife Council.

It was great to be back campaigning in Markinch as I spent most of the afternoon with David from Edinburgh leafleting. Out on the streets this afternoon there was a good feeling with people coming over to say hello and asking about the campaign. The Central Fife team have certainly worked extremely hard since last year's election delivering for the people of Central Fife and continuing to build our credibility in the constituency.

With the start of the autumn session in the EP looming I have to go back to Brussels on Monday. Our in-tray is full right now with a wealth of issues that we will be working on over the coming weeks and months - pesticides, CAP health check, animal by-products, food security, renewable energy targets and energy security, biofuels and climate change, etc. This is going to be an extremely hectic time as we approach the European elections and the end of the EP's current mandate. However, that won't stop me from coming back to Markinch and I'll certainly be there just as much as I can.

Seeing Scotland's offshore wind potential

2008-08-15T06:43:00.000-07:00

When we return to Brussels at the end of this month one of the key issues we will have to deal with in the Parliament’s Energy Committee is the Commission’s proposed energy and climate change package. The Parliament’s Energy Committee is set to vote on the Commission’s proposals for promoting and increasing the use of renewable energy across the EU and we have been working closely with Scotland’s energy industry back home to ensure that Scotland’s distinctive approaches to energy challenges and opportunities are recognised in European policy.

Back in July 2006 we brought Europe’s Energy Commissioner, Andris Piebalgs to Scotland to see for himself how we are pioneering green energy technology. The Commissioner went offshore to the Beatrice oil platform and then to Nigg to see the offshore wind turbines that were being built as part of the Downvind Beatrice wind farm demonstration project part funded by the EU and the UK and Scottish Governments. This project saw the development of Europe’s largest-scale offshore wind farm development. The two demonstrator wind turbines are adjacent to the Beatrice oil field.

I also had the opportunity to see the turbines when I was at Nigg with the Commissioner and when I was up North last week I managed to see the two Beatrice offshore wind turbines sitting out in the Moray Firth, 25km from shore.

Beatrice showed what was possible to achieve by taking the technologies and various methods and practices developed already for offshore oil and gas and applying them to deep water offshore wind farm development. The old and the new, the dirty and the clean industries working together.

Since then the team that worked to develop the Downvind project have gone on to become “Seaenergy renewables”, one of the newest companies in Scotland to focus specifically on offshore wind developments and to be at the forefront of the offshore wind industry not just in Europe but across the world.

I travelled up to Aberdeen yesterday to meet the team, whom I had first met back in 2006, and after being briefed we headed up and across to Buckie for me to be given a chance to go out in one of the boats that Sea energy is looking to use when it comes to doing any repairs on the wind turbines.

Below is the wind cat work boat I went out into the Moray Firth on (its the yellow one in the middle)– this is a series 7 wind cat, which can do a top speed of 28 knots and a cruising speed of 25 knots.

Aileen, Kay (Seaenergy renewables), Florian and Chris in our survival gear

The opportunity for Scotland to lead the way in offshore wind is immense. Many lessons have been learnt from the Beatrice Downvind project in terms of developing the technology and while many skills have been transferred from the oil and gas industry, the one thing that struck me was the need for skills from the fishing industry. If you have a deep water offshore wind farm development out in the middle of the sea they will need to be repaired and that requires people who have an understanding of the sea to be able to cope with difficult weather conditions out at sea along with people who have a head for heights to climb inside the turbine to do the necessary repairs. When we were out in the Moray Firth, the waters were fairly calm though the swell was fairly strong and the boat which can do a top speed of 25 knots was certainly bouncing along at 22 knots. In the distance I could see the Beatrice wind turbines but the strong swell was certainly doing nothing for my stomach and we returned to the harbour.

This is an industry waiting to take off and I was glad to have the opportunity to meet with the team who are working extremely hard to make this a reality and to experience for myself some of the issues that such an industry will have to address. Gaining a better insight in to the development of the offshore wind industry is something I greatly appreciate and look forward to taking this back with me to Brussels the week after next.

The Assynt Higland Games at Lochinver

2008-08-08T06:41:00.000-07:00

I spent today across in Lochinver for the Assynt Highland Games. The Sutherland Branch had a stall there right next to the Strawberries and cream van, which was ideal and the weather was perfect.

This is me with the Chieftain of the Assynt Highland Games, Alex Dickson.

After watching some of the Highland Games, we headed to Culkein via Clachtoll where Rob went to visit one of his constituents before heading back to Evanton via Ullapool and dinner at the Ceilidh Place.

The Black Isle Show

2008-08-07T06:39:00.000-07:00

This is me at the Black Isle show helping out at the SNP stall. This was a great location en route to the food market, so it was going like a fayre most of the time and was glad to give them a hand.

At the show I also had the opportunity to chat with the Scottish Crofting Foundation about many of the issues facing Scotland’s crofters not least the Schucksmith report, which is the result of an inquiry into the future of crafting by a committee led by Professor Mark Schucksmith. At the NFUS stall there was much discussion about the Commission’s proposals for reforming the current EU pesticides legislation as well as the future shape of Europe’s agricultural policy beyond 2013 – all of which I will be taking back with me to Brussels.

The Highland food market was a good opportunity to stock up with some local produce like Connage cheese and to chat with the Highlands and Islands Local Food Network to find out more about what they do and how they do it.

Seeing the North of Scotland's energy potential

2008-08-05T06:34:00.000-07:00

This morning Rob’s assistant Niall drove us up from Evanton to Wick. Rob was holding one of his surgeries in his office in Pultney, Wick so having never yet made this far up the East coast of Scotland I decided to join them.

Here’s me outside Rob’s office with Rob and one of his members of staff Gail:

The journey up took two hours driving across the Dornoch Firth towards Golspie, Brora and Helmsdale. While the hills and the greenery of the woods were stunning, the one bit of the landscape that struck me the most was the looming statute of the Duke of Sutherland, which towers over Golspie. You can’t actually miss this guy – 30ft statute sitting on top of a 70ft plinth, 1300ft up at the summit of Ben Bhraggie. It was erected in 1834 in honour of the laird who owned the lands of Sutherland and who played a major part in clearing the families who lived on these lands to make way for giant sheep farms. In 1994 a plan to have this 30ft statute removed from the top of Ben Bhraggie led to an intense and long overdue debate about the Sutherland clearances.

While many books have been written about the Highland clearances over the years I can certainly recommend Rob Gibson’s book “Toppling the Duke – Outrage on Ben Bhraggie?” for anyone who is interested in reading a historical overview and insight into the campaign, which he had also been a part of, in trying to obtain permission to knock down the Duke of Sutherland statute.

This is me at Lybster, which is just off the Caithness coast.

Behind us is Scotland’s first onshore oil drilling rig. Drilling started here at the beginning of July and as I understand it is expected to produce between 500 and 1000 barrels of oil a day. The rig itself is 170ft and the opportunity for the North of Scotland’s energy potential is immense. When it comes to transferring the oil there is certainly a case for the main railway line up to Wick to be upgraded

Rob's second surgery was back down in Helmsdale which gave me the opportunity to visit the memorial to the Highland clearances, which was unveiled last July by our First Minister, Alex Salmond.

The statue was created by the sculptor Gerald Laign, who is based in the Black Isle.

The plaque on the statue's plinth reads:

"The Emigrants

Commemorates the people of the Highlands and Islands of Scotland who, in the face of great adversity, sought freedom, hope and jusice beyond these shores. They and their descendants went forth and explored continents, built great countries and cities and gave their enterprise and culture to the world. This is their legacy.

Their voices will echo forever through the empty straths and glens of their homeland".

A Highland jaunt...

2008-08-04T04:22:00.000-07:00

With Brussels now in summer recess I’ve headed North to spend a couple of days with Rob Gibson MSP and his partner Eleanor Scott at their home in Evanton, Rosshire. I was up there a few months ago for the Andrew de Moray walk in Avoch. While the landscape and the countryside round that part of Scotland is pretty spectacular, that’s not the only reason why I decided to spend some of my summer holidays here.

Essentially my Highland jaunt in sunny Sutherland is about my learning and understanding more about Scotland in the sense of finding out who we are as a people and how we got to where we are today, economically, socially and culturally. Any Scottish history I was taught at school comprised solely of Robert the Bruce, Mary Queen of Scots and William Wallace and that was it. History at school was about the Romans, the Egyptians, 1066 and English Kings and Queens, Shakespeare and the wars. The extent to which the history of our nation was ignored at school was and remains scandalous and is something which I am glad to see the SNP Government is striving to correct by way of working towards the teaching of Scotland’s history and our culture is part and parcel of the school curriculum

Understanding who we are and where we came from is central to our identity and to the future of our nation. And for me this week there is no better way to understand Scotland’s place in the world than going out and about and experiencing our culture, our landscape, and being able to feel it.

The collapse of the WTO trade talks

2008-07-31T05:00:00.000-07:00

The failure on Tuesday (29) to secure agreement on the Doha Round of world trade talks is rightly being presented as yet another missed opportunity for improving the trading opportunities for all countries, including the world’s poorest. Back in 2001 when this trade round was launched it was presented as a round that would focus on the needs of the world’s poorer nations. Failure to get an agreement will damage those countries most of all.

Economists are famously unable to agree on almost anything, yet the one proposition that does unite them is that liberalising international trade from national protective controls will generate gains for all – rich and poor countries alike. Of course the problem with that proposition is that removing controls on imports – be this for agricultural or manufacturing products or services – is not painless. Domestic suppliers inevitably will face tougher competition and some local producers may be forced out of business. This is particularly the case where trade concessions are granted for products that can be produced ‘abroad’ much more cheaply than at home. On the plus side, of course, domestic consumers will gain from access to lower priced products as new export opportunities are made available to suppliers from other countries – very often the world’s poorest nations. And as these countries benefit from new exports, and their economies grow, all countries stand to gain from the rising trading opportunities that result.

What happened last week was that a few of the world’s key trading countries (the US, China, India) were unable to agree on how to manage the transition to freer trade in agricultural and manufacturing products. No agreement could be reached on how to spread the “pains and gains” between themselves.

This is far from a new problem. This trade round, as others before it, has been beset by this very issue really since it began in 2001. Much of the dispute centred around a specific issue, i.e. the special safeguard measures (SSM) to be applied by developing countries. Countries such as India and China supported a more flexible SSM to protect subsistence farmers from large amounts of imports from highly competitive agricultural exports. However, on the other side the United States backed by some of the major developing exporter countries in South America (e.g. Brazil) wanted to see a stricter SSM that would enable them to access these markets.

It should be stressed that the EU was not involved in this dispute and in this respect cannot be blamed this time for the collapse of this round of Doha trade talks. Nevertheless, substantial progress was made in a number of other areas, where agreement was reached on duty-free quota-free market access for least developed countries, aid for trade and the “enhanced integrated framework” of assistance to least-developed countries.

What makes last week’s failure especially worrying, however, is that it occurred against a backdrop of what is increasingly looking like an imminent and possibly global economic recession within the richer countries – driven by rising fuel and commodity prices – which is not an environment conducive to trade liberalisation. And there is the not trivial matter of the forthcoming US presidential elections to consider. It was the intransigience of recession-worried US negotiators last week that was partly responsible for the failure to reach agreement. Given that, it is probably expecting too much for either of the presidential candidates to come out at this moment to champion a resumption of global trade talks to get the Doha Round back on track.

But the challenges lie not only across the Atlantic, or indeed in India or China. The EU has to look to its own position. Agricultural policy – or agricultural protectionism – continues to be the main sticking point in these discussions. Since the mid-1960s the EU’s agricultural policy and reform agenda has been largely driven by ‘domestic’ (i.e. intra-EU) political considerations. With France currently holding the EU Presidency, and given its history of staunch opposition to the liberalisation of the EU’s farm policy – itself much criticised by the developing countries – it is difficult to expect Brussels to take on a leadership role in unblocking the stalled negotiations for at least the next 6 months. After that, of course, the EU goes into election mode as the campaign for the June 2009 elections to the European Parliament gets underway and the Commission – and EU trade Commissioner Mandelson – readies itself for the change in personnel that will follow. And that isn’t even to begin to look at elections that are imminent in some of the other main countries involved in the Doha Round, including India.

Notwithstanding this latest crisis, there is a sense that most participants are keen to see this trade round brought to a successful conclusion. The question is to what extent they are prepared to make the short term sacrifices necessary in the interests of securing what will be the very real long term gains.

The timing of the current failure is dire, coinciding as it is with a global economic downturn. There is a real risk that the world’s poorer nations will suffer a double-whammy – first from the immediate effects of declining economic activity and so demand in the richer (and recession-prone) countries and second from a significant lowering of their longer term prospects for raising their levels of exports and so economic growth.

Certainly it is fair to say that the deal on the WTO trade talks table would have had some serious implications for some parts of Scotland’s farming sector, not least beef, pig and poultry meat.

On the other hand, its failure could have a considerably more serious longer term consequence for the multilateral trading order as we know it today. If the Doha Round fails, then serious questions will be raised about the continued role of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The sole remit of the WTO is to manage global trading relations on a multilateral basis – that is by including all 153 countries who have been admitted to its ranks in the negotiations, including of course many less developed countries. If it cannot perform this function then there is a very real likelihood that the WTO will be overtaken by direct negotiations between the world’s largest trading blocs such as the US, the EU, China, India, Brazil, and Japan. In that scenario the vast majority of WTO countries will be left out of the very negotiations that will determine their trade prospects, and they will be faced with the option of simply accepting or not the terms of trade decided by the powerful trading nations. This has to be avoided, arguably at any cost, especially given the difficulties we have already seen with the negotiation of Economic Partnership Agreements.

Globalisation has been, and can continue to be, a positive force for all trading nations. It can lead to rising prosperity and greater opportunities in all countries, including the poorest. But that will only be assured if world trade talks are open to all trading nations: that is are truly multilateral. The WTO is the only guarantor of multilateralism, and in that role is absolutely central to ensuring that the poor as well as the rich countries are able to enjoy the much needed gains from freer international trade.

Victory in Glasgow East!

2008-07-25T05:41:00.000-07:00

It’s the morning after the night before and the europhoria of what had been achieved in Glasgow East in the early hours was still very much alive. What a victory, what a result and hats off to the entire campaign team, to John our newest MP for Glasgow East and to the party for pulling off what none of the journalists, election pundits and others thought was achievable – to overturn more than a 13,000 majority and take Labour’s third safest seat by 365 votes.

I spent most of today out ‘knocking up’ with Stewart Stevenson and Alyn in Carmyle, Swinton, Mount Vernon and then latterly in and around off Shettleston road. After a slowish morning, there was a definite sea change in the afternoon and especially late afternoon when folk were arriving back from work and our sheets started to fill up with voted SNP. I knew it was going to be very close but on the doorsteps it was so positive towards us that I began to really realise that we had done it and certainly by 8.30pm I knew. These are exactly the kind of areas that we need to be winning in and to start making the inroads in the once Labour heartlands

Out on the streets I saw a couple of Tory activists who wished us good luck with the Labour cars driving past – shouting vote Labour to save the union. One battered old car drove past us which had previously been a private hire car and they had just written Labour on it – what a shambles.

I went up to the Barrachnie Inn for a while and then headed back to Edinburgh and when it finally happened after the recount, unbelievable, the earthquake had happened and I was glad to be there when it did - a stunning victory and one that will be repeated across the board come the Westminster election. Everything is to play for now. Glasgow East is the first of many victories to come and should send a clear signal to Gordon Brown and London Labour that no Labour seat in

Scotland

is safe now.

Back in Glasgow East

2008-07-20T05:05:00.000-07:00

Having just got back from Brussels late on Friday night I was across in Glasgow East most of the weekend to do whatever I was asked to do. I spent most of my time getting John Mason’s latest leaflet through as many doors as I possibly could manage – this time though the sun was out and on the streets in the areas that we were in we were certainly being warmly received. I had a guy stop me in his car to ask how things were going and to tell me he was voting for John because he was a local and wanted to see the back of Labour – for too long Labour had taken them for granted and it was now time for a change, for someone else to come in and actually do something for the people of Glasgow’s East End.

Another door I leafleted a woman in her 60s was out in her garden and told me she was planning to vote for the SNP on Thursday for the first time because she was just so fed up with Gordon Brown and fed up being ignored by the Labour party who were doing nothing for them.

The atmosphere at the SNP party rooms on Baillieston Road was fantastic and as I have said elsewhere on this site it was like being at national conference. Everyone mucking in, each doing their bit to win this seat to deliver a better and more prosperous future for the people of Glasgow East and for Scotland. Roll on Thursday.....

Responding to Ireland's No vote

2008-07-18T05:17:00.000-07:00

Last night I went along to a discussion organised by the Brussels Branch of the Irish Institute of International and European Affairs on “Responding to the No vote on the Lisbon Treaty”. Speaking at it was Ireland’s Minister for Europe, Dick Roche and Brendan Halligan, the Chair of the Irish Institute.

Dick Roche began by saying that “there were no instant solutions” to Ireland’s no vote and that the Irish government was looking at producing a very detailed analysis to understand better the result of Ireland’s recent referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. The Irish government will not be bringing forward any solutions at the European Council meeting in October but instead would be presenting a wide progress report. He acknowledged that the issues were very complex and that it was going to take some time to do a very detailed analysis.

It was underlined that the Irish government does not have a “pre-cooked solution” and that the first response is to respect the fact that the Irish people have spoken, and to understand and listen to what the Irish people are saying.

For the Minister, communicating the EU to the people is a problem for the whole of the EU and not just an Irish problem. In this respect Europe has a huge challenge and one which I believe cannot be left to the EU institutions themselves when it comes to communicating Europe’s relevancy. There is a job here to be done by all levels of government. Europe has to move away from its constant institutional navel gazing and focus on delivering on the issues that people are looking to the EU to try and resolve.

In the Irish context as Dick Roche pointed out there is a need to make the EU relevant to the Irish people in a creative way. Right now there is very clearly something wrong with the way in which Europe is not being communicated and there is a need to get away from the idea of blaming Europe when things go wrong and governments taking the credit from the EU when things go right. As Dick Roche said during the referendum campaign there was no discussion about how best to promote Irish interests through the Lisbon treaty. The Minister also spoke of the ramifications if no solution is found before the next European elections but emphasised again that the best way to find a solution was through detailed analysis and the Irish government would take as much time as it was necessary to take.

The Irish Institute has set up a task force on the post Lisbon situation to help the government in its analysis. It will be producing a number of papers on the referendum campaign itself and the various issues as well as the different scenarios if Lisbon doesn’t come into force with two reports planned in time for the European Councils in October and December.

Sitting there in the audience I got the distinct impression that there was a feeling of guilt but there was also a sense that the current situation could not be resolved with timetables and agendas being imposed by external pressure and this was clearly not the role of the French presidency.

I’ve asked a number of my Irish pals how they think this will all pan out and there are many who say they cannot envisage that there won’t be a rerun of a referendum, though this won’t happen before the European elections next June. Indeed, there are murmurings about October 2009 once concessions have been worked out on issues such as abortion, each member state retaining its own EU Commissioner.

But why should the Irish be made to vote again? The people of Ireland have spoken and their democratic decision should be accepted . The Lisbon Treaty has been rejected and should now be put to bed. Its time for Europe to move on and to focus the issues that are relevant to people and which matter the most to them.

Scotland's sheep farmers come to Brussels

2008-07-17T02:21:00.000-07:00

Yesterday we brought a delegation across to Brussels from Scotland’s NFU, the National Sheep Association and the Scottish Farmer to present a petition to the Parliament’s powerful Petitions Committee. The petition calls on the European Commission to scrap plans to individually identify sheep and their movements, that any future sheep ID and movement recording system must be on a batch basis and to review the cost effectiveness of electronic ID prior to its planned implementation at the end of 2009. The petition has already collected 7000 signatures from Scotland’s sheep farmers.

We had also organised for the delegation to meet directly with the cabinet of the European Health Commissioner Androula Vassiliou who is responsible for the Commission’s proposals for the tagging electronically of individual sheep together with officials from the Commission’s Health Department (DG Sanco), as well as with the other Scottish MEPs and some of the MEPs from the Parliament’s Agriculture Committee. I was also pleased when the delegation had the chance to meet with the French Agriculture Minister, Michel Barnier, who made it clear that the future of Europe’s sheep industry was a clear priority for the French EU Presidency.

At the Petitions Committee there was much support for the issues raised by Scotland’s sheep farmers in the petition by other MEPs, and in particular the French, the Irish and the Polish Chairman of the Committee. Certainly the petition was well received with the realisation that this wasn’t purely a Scottish issue but was a European one which will impact on sheep farmers across Europe. Later on I spoke with the clerk of the Petitions Committee who said that given the level of support shown towards the petition and how well it had been received that this would now be raised with the chair of the Parliament’s Agriculture Committee, which is set to discuss the Commission’s proposals on electronic sheep tagging at its meeting in October.

Once again, here we find another issue that had been agreed to by the London government and which our farmers in Scotland now find themselves in difficulty with. This is why we need our own independent voice in Brussels and why we need to be sitting at the big table ourselves standing up for our own distinct interests and not having to rely on London.

Is Belgium on the verge of another political crisis?

2008-07-15T07:31:00.000-07:00

Just to add to the miserable summer here in Brussels it looks like Belgium's government is on the verge of collapse after only four months in office. Yves Leterme, the Belgian Prime Minister handed in his resignation to the King late last night following his failure to reach a deal on constitutional reforms that would see greater powers devolved to Flanders and Wallonia. Back in March when the new government finally took office, the Prime Minister set himself the deadline of 15 July for reaching agreement on such reforms.

The Flemish political parties want more power over transport, health, jobs and justice as well as greater control over tax and social security. The French-speaking parties think this will lead to Belgium splitting up and are opposed. A recent opinion poll cites 49.7% of the Flemish people who support Flanders becoming an independent state.

There is also a dispute over the redrawing of electoral boundaries around the area of Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde. Halle-Vilvoorde is largely Flemish but it allows French-speakers in this area to vote for franco-phone candidates outwith this electoral district. The Flemish parties want to end this while the French-speaking parties do not. Usually in Belgium, Dutch speakers must vote for Flemish political parties and French-speakers for Walloon parties hence why the situation in Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde is slightly unique.

Much of the current crisis has been ongoing since Belgium’s elections last June when it took another nine months to form a government and even then it was only on an interim government under the previous Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt until the elected Prime Minister Yves Leterme could get a coalition together.

There was much discussion then as to whether Belgium would finally split such is the cultural and linguistic divide between the 6.5 million Dutch speakers in Flanders (north part of Belgium) and the 4 million French speakers in the south – Wallonia. Brussels exists as a sort of francophone enclave within Flanders. The problem is compounded by the fact that there are no national political parties, no national newspapers or media. For example, Belgium has French Socialists, Flemish Socialists, French Christian Democrats, Flemish Christian Democrats, French Liberals and Flemish Liberals with their own policies. It is also difficult to define what it means to be “Belgian”.

Last time round peoples’ views across Brussels were made clear by the number of flags that were hung out over their balconies and whether they chose to fly the Flemish national flag or the Belgian national flag. I stay in Ixelles, near Place Flagey and the “Des Etangs d’Ixelles” and all around this area was awash with black, gold and red Belgian flags including the house of my landlord who lives next door to me and who told me that they were flying the Belgian national flag out of frustration at the failure of the political parties to form a government as well as loyalty to the King and their national country and did not wish to see Belgium split.

Brussels is a fairly easy city to live in –its bilingual and while I speak mainly French when I’m out and about, increasingly I am having to pull on my year’s Dutch I did many years ago. Certainly if you are in towns like Ghent or Leuven it is better to speak Dutch. Administratively it is chaotic with the three different regions of Flanders, Wallonia and Brussels-Capital, plus three different language communities – the French community, the Flemish community and the German-speaking community, not to mention the different provinces and communes. Within Brussels the French speaking and Flemish communities have their own areas of competence as regards institutions which depends on the language. But the divide between the Dutch-speakers in Flanders and the French-speakers in Wallonia does seem to be getting wider.

To be honest I’d be amazed if the Belgian King accepts Leterme’s resignation this time given the coalition government is only 4 months old and does not try for the government to reach some kind of compromise deal. But I’d be even more amazed if Belgium hasn’t split within the next 20 years.

Sustainable biofuels from animal fat

2008-07-11T00:32:00.000-07:00

The debate on the issue of bio-energy continued following the adoption this week by the European Parliament of a resolution supporting the European Strategic Energy Technology (SET) Plan proposed by the Commission at the end of last year. The EP report calls for biofuels research to be intensified under the programme so the overall environmental impact of the production of those fuels can be determined, and for energy efficiency to feature more prominently as "it is the area with the most potential for cost effective emission reductions in the medium term".

This report followed closely on the UK "Gallagher" review of the indirect effects of bio-fuels production published on 7 July which calls for a strengthening of mandatory sustainability criteria within the EU Renewable Energy Directive and a slowing down of EU targets for bio-fuel to ensure that more consideration is given to sustainable feed stock for bio-fuels. One company in Scotland that has an interest in all this is Argent Energy (which is a bio-diesel processing plant based in Motherwell) since they make bio-diesel from a very sustainable source i.e. used cooking oil and tallow (animal fat). They have been to see us in Brussels recently in relation to a Commission proposal for revised legislation for Animal By-Products which came out on 10 June. With Alyn the rapporteur for the Agriculture Committee's opinion (for the Environment Committee as the lead Committee) on the Commission's proposal, this is an issue which we will be working on over the coming weeks and months.

Time to stop misleading flight ads

2008-07-09T02:44:00.000-07:00

Scottish consumers and especially holidaymakers are set to benefit from a decision taken by the Parliament today which obliges airlines to indicate all clearly applicable taxes and charges when advertising air fares. This also includes surcharges or fees, such as those relating to security taxes levied by national governments and fuel taxes. These measures are set to be implemented across the EU by the end of this year.

The Parliament's decision to prohibit airlines from advertising air fares without including the additional costs will enable people to see the true price they are actually paying for a flight. How many times have we all thought we were getting a bargain when you saw a flight advertised in the newspaper or on the internet for £1, only to find the actual final cost was much higher than was advertised because the price did not include taxes and other charges?

Consumers have the right to know exactly what it is that they are paying for, so the Parliament's approval today is a welcome one.

Discussions around the future shape of Europe's agriculture get underway in the Parliament

2008-07-08T05:33:00.000-07:00

I'm back in Brussels this week not least because we're really busy as the parliament tries to get legislation through the plenary and reports through the committees before the institutions shut down for summer recess. Landing on my desk yesterday came the 4 reports that have been drafted by the Portuguese Socialist MEP (and former Portuguese Agriculture Minister), Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos for the Agriculture Committee's opinion on the Commission's proposals on the CAP health check. The deadline for amending the draft reports is not until the end of August so there is time for us to feed in the views from back home and ensure Scotland's farming and rural interests are to the fore of the Parliament's discussions. Last month the Scottish Government launched its own consultation on the CAP health check as has Scotland's NFU and certainly look forward to seeing their views.

Capoulas Santos has also published a working document to accompany his four draft report, which provides his explanatory statement to proposals. These include for example proposing much smaller rates of compulsory modulation and to compensate for the reduction in the transfer of financial resources to the second pillar of the CAP (measures for supporting rural development and agri environment schemes) Capoulas Santos foresees capping the allocation of direct CAP payments to farmers at 500 000 euro as well as using Article 68 under which Member States would have the option to transfer unused amounts relating to Article 68 measures to the second pillar. These could then be used to support rural development programmes without any national co-financing.

On compulsory modulation Capoulos Santos proposes not to change the modulation rate for payments between €5,000 and €10,000. For payments above €10,000-99,999 the proposed rate would be increased by 1%, payments between €100,000 and €200,000, the rate would be increased by 2%, payments from €200,000 - €300,000, an increase of 3% and above €300,000, the proposed rate would be 4%.

Other proposals include in the area of minimum payments where Capoulas Santos recommends rejecting the Commission's proposal for establishing a minimum limit of 250 euro per year of one hectare and replacing it with the setting up of a 'simplified voluntary support scheme for farmers' that would allow farmers receiving less than 500 euro to be paid in a single lump sum every two years. This alternative is seen as greatly reducing and simplifying administrative burdens.

Interestingly, though Capoulas Santos also took the opportunity in his working document to criticise the Commission's health check proposals with his comments that:

"the Health Check could (and, in the rapporteur's view should) have dwelt more on the debate concerning the drawing up of an agricultural-policy model for the post-2013 period. The waste of such an opportunity is to be regretted.

The boundary which the commission wished to place around the debate on the 'health check' (leaving out in particular topics such as the legitimacy of aid and the setting of parameters for as common a model as possible of decoupled payments, the degree of management flexibility which should be granted to the Member States, modulation vs co-financing, the possibility of a ‘single pillar’ and the role of market regulation within the new CAP) will complicate the debate and the decisions concerning the 2013 reform, discussions on which will have to begin in 2010/2011.”

I'm guessing this is aimed at the forthcoming discussions on reforming the EU's budget that will be gathering speed come 2009 and not to mention the latest WTO Doha development round of negotiations where crucial ministerial talks are scheduled to take place in Geneva on 21 July to discuss the latest negotiating documents on agricultural trade issues.

The Parliament's Agriculture Committee will have its first chance to not only discuss the draft report next Monday (14 July) when it meets in Brussels but it will also have the chance to hear from the French Farming Minister, Michel Barmier when he comes to present the agricultural priorities of the French EU Presidency.

Environment Committee rejects 10% EU biofuels target

2008-07-08T00:14:00.000-07:00

The Parliament's Environment Committee met last night to vote on its opinion for the report that is currently being drafted in the Energy Committee by the Luxembourg Green MEP Claude Turmes on the Commission's proposals for increasing the use of renewables by 20% by 2020. The Turmes report was supposed to be voted on in the Energy Committee next week but with over 1100 amendments tabled, the vote has been postponed until early September.

With all the growing disquiet about the potential impact of biofuels on rising food prices (with the growing competition between crops for fuel or food), accelerating mass deforestation and water shortages and the extent to which it can actually deliver the required reductions in CO2 emissions, the Environment Committee voted to reject the Commission's proposed mandatory target of getting at least 10% of road transport fuels from biofuels by 2020.

In the end, the Committee voted through a number of compromise amendments which supported a target of at least 4% of road transport fuels from renewable sources by 2015. Out of this, at least 20% should be met by the use of electricity or hydrogen from renewable sources, biogas or transport fuels from ligno-cellulosic biomass and algae. A new 8-10% could be set for 2020 out of which 40-50% is met by the use of electricity or hydrogen from renewable sources, biogas or transport fuels from ligno-cellulosic biomass and algae. The exact target for 2020 is to be decided in 2015 subject to "a major review of the overall experience of the policy for renewable energy for transport – with a special focus on the eventual negative consequences for food security and biodiversity as well as the commercial availability of transport fuels from lingo-cellulosic biomass and/or algae, biogas and the use of electricity or hydrogen from renewable sources".

These compromise amendments had cross-party support and were also backed by Claude Turmes but we will still have to wait and see whether they are taken on board by the Parliament's Energy Committee in September. A number of the Parliament's other committees have already backed the 10% mandatory biofuels target including Agriculture, Regional Development and Transport.

The Environment Committee report also outlines a number of environmental and social sustainability criteria for the usage of biofuels, which are certainly more stringent than those outlined by the Commission. For example, new criteria were added such as changes in water quality, water consumption, air pollution and soil quality, as well as for land owners, respect for local communities and native peoples. MEPs also voted to opt for a two-stage approach, under which biofuels that fail to deliver life-cycle CO2 savings of at least 45% compared to fossil fuels would be banned from the start, while those delivering less than 60% savings would be excluded as of 2015.

Our colleagues in the Green Group had also put down amendments for the land used for food and feed production not to be converted for the production of transport fuels and that transport fuels from biomass should be limited to production from idle, marginal or degraded land without high biodiversity value where the direct land use conversion results in a net carbon benefit and that there are no significant negative environmental or other impacts.

The Environment Committee also wants to encourage the development of alternatives such as electric cars and hydrogen, based on renewables and biogas, which would play a role alongside biofuels (provided the latter is accompanied by strict criteria) in curbing greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector.

Yesterday’s vote comes at a time when the EU's Energy and Environment Ministers are also backing away from the EU's proposed 10% binding biofuels target - a position that was reinforced with the publication of a report for the UK government by the independent UK Renewable Fuels Agency ("Gallagher" report) which has called for the slowing down of the introduction of biofuels until there is more evidence of its impact on land use and climate change.

Proposals by Claude Turmes in his draft report to scrap the 10% binding target are to be welcomed not leastbecause a fixed binding target would not allow any flexibility to use renewable energy sources where they would be most efficient. Also to be welcomed are proposals for creating a clear hierarchy for uses of biomass for energy, with "go" areas (like biomass from waste streams and residue from agriculture), and "no go" areas like agrofuels and biodiverse landscapes.

Farming land has to be used first and foremost for the production of food. While there is a clear need to ensure that strict and binding sustainability criteria are developed to enable the sustainable production of biofuels, there is also a need for greater support for the research and development of more efficient energy use in the transport sector and at the same time investing in research into second generation biofuels. We have to look at ways in which our own energy use can be reduced.

Scotland has for example a number of innovative projects for developing biofuels (biogas, large scale digesters for municipal solid waste, marine biomass, algae and seaweed, abbatoir by-products and animal manure) from various non-food crops and waste, not least the Scottish Association for Marine Science in Oban which is looking at the potential of seaweed for biomass and biofuel production. Napier University has also recently opened a biofuels research centre for developing second generation biofuels. Such research is crucial to see how the development of these technologies can best be utilised to enable the sustainable development of biofuels, which in the long run can help tackle climate change.

Reforming Europe's budget

2008-07-07T02:13:00.000-07:00

One of the issues set to dominate the EU policy agenda during the 2009-2014 EP is how to reform Europe's budget. I was closely involved last time round with the 2007-2013 EU budget through our work both on the Parliament's Temporary Committee that was set up to enable MEPs to agree its opinion on what the future EU budget should consist of and the Regional Development Committee which was discussing the detail of the Commission's proposals on European Structural Funding. So, I could pretty much see at first hand at least from the Parliament's side what was going on and what we needed to do to ensure Scotland's funding interests were protected – insofar as that can be achieved when not being an independent member state.

The process for every budget negotiation is more or less the same. Last time round the Commission brought forward its original proposals in 2004 for a new financial framework for funding the EU's policy activities over the seven year period 2007-2013. The key issues largely revolved around (a) the size of the budget, (b) spending priorities and (c) the system of revenue, i.e. how much each Member State wants to contribute to the budget. So, our starting position is always the Commission's proposal which, back in 2004, was for a budget set at 1.26% of the EU's Gross National Income (GNI) – equivalent to an overall total of 1025bn euro. Sounds a lot I know, but bear in mind that the UK budget is about 40% of UK Gross National Income!

The UK government's position was clear. Not only was the British rebate non negotiable, the UK wanted the EU budget cut to a maximum of 1% of the EU's GNI (as did France, the Netherlands, Germany, Austria and Germany), with spending on cohesion policy in the UK – and the other ‘old’ member states – more or less cut to zero. This implied no more EU funding for Scotland, and in particular for the Highlands and Islands. That in turn would involve major cuts over a wide range of key programmes that had supported vital economic development programmes in the Highlands and Islands including research and development, social inclusion, rural development, and cross-border programmes. To put this in perspective, from 2000 - 2006 Scotland had received £1.1bn in European funding – money that had been absolutely crucial in improving the economy of the north of Scotland. As far as London was concerned this should not continue. Needless to say London's position was supported by the previous Scottish Labour/Lib Dem Executive in Edinburgh who sat back, said nothing and did nothing to fight Scotland's corner and protect Scottish interests at stake.

The London government had assured Scotland (and the regions in England and Wales) by vague promises that any loss of EU structural funds would be made good by money from the UK government. Trouble was we were never given any delivery mechanism whereby this would be done! So it was another case of “trust us – we’re the British government”. Aye, right! But there was a second problem, and one that had to do with the then Executive in Edinburgh. Even if they had received additional money from the UK government to compensate for the loss of EU funds, could we be sure they’d spend it in the Highlands and Islands? After all, the block grant is at the disposal of the Scottish Government, and there was widespread concern that the Labour/Liberal coalition would have been much keener to spend any extra money it got in areas where its political support was highest – i.e. not in the Highlands and Islands! The point is that when a country receives monies under the EU structural funds it is obliged to spend that money in the designated region. In other words, EU economic development support monies are ring-fenced.

With Blair as Prime Minister, and with pressure on the UK to give up the generous budget rebate that dated back to 1984, the 2006-2013 budget round became embroiled in controversy. The UK position was that the rebate would only be put on the table if the French were prepared to put a root-and-branch reform of the CAP on the same negotiating table. For the former French President Chirac, this was a non-starter. And for the rest – well, they had just concluded a tortuous round of CAP-reform discussions (whereby CAP spending would be frozen in real terms 2007-2013) and there was no appetite to re-open that hornet’s nest. So the UK rebate stayed. The weakness of London's budgetary strategy – slash structural fund spending all over the place but let’s keep the British rebate – won the UK no friends, especially in Scotland. And that turned out to be crucial. A member state that advances a negotiating position that has no support at home stands a much lesser chance of carrying the day in Brussels. An important lesson as long as Scotland is dependent on the UK to represent its interests at EU level.With the support of many of the funding bodies and organisations back home we fought hard to ensure the continuation of EU funding for Scotland and I was glad when we were backed in this by the European Parliament.

After months of wrangling, EU leaders finally reached a deal at the European Council meeting in Brussels in December 2005 under the UK Presidency. I spent much of that evening sitting in my office in the Parliament waiting for something to happen so that I could then work out what the outcome meant for Scotland. It finally did in the early hours of the next morning. Once again the final stage of the budget negotiation was a shambles, with late night wranglings behind closed doors as financial sweeteners were dished out to all and sundry to ensure that every member state could return home claiming victory! This is no way to run a budget round, and that it succeeded at all was due in large measure to the negotiating tactics of the new German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, who showed real leadership of the EU while the UK was left isolated in both the EP and the Council.

The deal set an EU budget of 862.36bn euro (1.045% of EU GNI) for the period 2007-2013. Built into the agreement was a mandate for the Commission to undertake a "full and wide ranging" review covering all aspects of the EU budget – including all spending policies, the UK rebate and the way in which the budget was funded (currently three-quarters of which comes via direct national contributions) and which would report in 2008/09. In effect that report – which is eagerly awaited – will sound the starting gun for the post-2013 budget negotiations.

Although Scotland's funding was saved under the current budget round, this was not thanks to pressure from London. Instead it was due to pressure from some of the smaller Member States, such as Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, who sought to retain EU regional economic support albeit at a reduced level. Each time the UK came forward with a new proposal to cut regional economic development support it was politely told to think again.

But even this victory could not mask the fact that the overall budget deal was a disappointment. The UK line – which essentially stated that the EU’s richer member states were seeking a significant reduction in their net contributions to the EU budget – was endorsed by the other net contributing countries. The result was a budget that sought major cuts in the EU's funding programmes – including structural funds, research and development, education, health, culture. This was not the result of any analysis regarding where efficiency savings could be made, or where monies could be used more effectively. Instead the spending cuts were largely indiscriminate and MEPs were quick to make the rather obvious point that this would leave the EU unable to implement many of the policies to which it was committed. This is not a trivial issue. The result can easily be an EU that loses credibility in those member states badly affected by spending cuts, and that can lead to a sense of dis-connection between EU citizens and the EU itself. In more extreme cases it can result in member state governments losing confidence in the EU and being less willing to adhere to EU rules over other matters. Sure we do not want an EU that ‘spends, spends, spends’. But nor do we want an EU that solely benefits the rich member states – and the rich areas within the rich member states – and ignores the rest.

It was in the light of these considerations that, on 18 January 2006, MEPs voted overwhelmingly to reject the budget deal. After deliberation, the Parliament managed to secure an extra 4 billion euro for the total budget, with 2 billion allocated for spending on research and development and competitiveness as well as life long learning – areas that are of benefit to Scotland. That closed what was an extraordinary and troubled budgetary negotiation.

In this blog I’ve tried to set out how the EU budget procedure works – or at least the politics of the process. It is clear that it is member states that are in the driving seat – particularly the richer, net contributing member states – and not the EU institutions as such. Sure the Parliament has some powers over the final shape of the budget, but to be honest it can really only affect the budget at the outer margins. One thing is clear – it is the member states that run the show. They are in complete charge of their destiny in this aspect of EU business, as in so many others. Only as an independent member state can Scotland begin to advance its interests and to ensure not only that the EU budget is ‘good for Scotland’, but more importantly that the EU budget reflects those priorities that Scotland wants to see championed at the EU level such as climate change, food security and energy policy.

In subsequent blogs I will return to this budget issue and ask what lessons can we learn from the experience of the discussions leading up to the 2007-2013 budget agreement as we approach the beginning of the discussions that will determine the shape of the post-2013 budget. Just what should we be wanting from the next EU budget? To be continued…

Labour meltdown in Glasgow East

2008-07-05T03:17:00.000-07:00

I couldn't believe it when I woke this morning to the news that Labour had failed to select their candidate, George Ryan, for Glasgow East after he had failed to show up at a hustings meeting last night - you just can't make this sort of stuff up with Labour clearly in their own meltdown. What a non-way to start their by election campaign.

In complete contrast, I was back in Glasgow East today and what a fantastic day its been despite the pouring rain. I heard there were over 300 activists out today along with our candidate, Cllr John Mason and First Minister Alex Salmond, our MPs and MSPs and to be honest it was great to be there doing what I could to help. In all the campaigns I've been involved in I've never quite seen anything like this. I heard someone say it was like being at our Annual National Conference except everyone was outside campaigning, meeting the voters, and talking to the locals about the issues that matter the most to them. Every street I was in was blanketed by us. With SNP brollies, cars, posters, leafleters and canvassers out across the whole constituency it was certainly a sight to see.

If you can help, there are various ways in which you can do so by clicking on this link to the by election campaign page on the SNP website. This also gives details of the Glasgow East campaign headquarters, opening hours, map and directions, etc.

With a heavy legislative agenda next week in Brussels, I have to head back to hold the fort there but I'll be back in Glasgow East for the last push before polling day.
With our candidate for Glasgow East Cllr John Mason outside the party rooms on Baillieston Road.

Glasgow East By Election

2008-07-03T03:16:00.000-07:00

With me being back in Scotland for a couple of days I went across to Glasgow East this afternoon to help out in the by-election.

There was a squad of activists already out and about across the constituency, leafleting and canvassing. I had the opportunity to meet with John Mason, who is going forward as one of our three candidates at a constituency meeting this evening. John's been a local Councillor for the past ten years and worked extremely hard on behalf of his constituents. He was in fine form when I met him and with his experience he is certainly on the side of the people of Glasgow East.

France at the helm of the EU

2008-07-01T02:08:00.000-07:00

The glamour and the glitter of France's six month Presidency of the EU officially begins today. When the French President, Nicholas Sarkozy, outlined his vision for the French EU Presidency on the same day as the start of Slovenia's EU Council Presidency it was all too clear that this was going to be an ambitious policy agenda - much of which is more about France regaining the initiative and its leadership role in Europe: to ensure France's place is at the heart of Europe.

With its slogan, "a more protective Europe", what can Scotland look forward to being achieved between now and the end of December? In an ambitious programme, Sarkozy has listed energy and climate change, security and defence, immigration, and the CAP health check as its top priorities. Beyond this Sarkozy has plans to reinvigorate the EU's relations with its Mediterranean neighbours through his Union of the Mediterranean. Key issues for Scotland are reaching a political agreement on the Commission's legislative plans for cutting carbon emissions and increasing the use of renewables, and reforming the CAP. Trouble is this needs to happen for sure by the end of the French Presidency – the European Parliamentary elections next June mean that the Parliament will pack up earlier that normal thus cutting short (by a couple of months) the time it has to enact legislation. It is also all the more imperative given the EU needs to have its negotiating position agreed before the world climate change conference in Copenhagen in December 2009.

Of course the French had hoped that in addition to its ambitious EU policy programme, its Presidency would be crowned by its success in preparing for the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty – and overseeing the appointment of the ‘new’ top jobs, President of the European Council and the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. This has all been torn to shreds with Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty. Instead the French Presidency will be dogged by trying to resolve the so-called ‘crisis’ created by the Irish doing no more than exercising their democratic rights!! If there is a crisis then it is one that will be triggered by the ill-advised line coming out of Paris insisting that if there is no Lisbon Treaty there will be no further enlargement. Let’s be honest – had Gordon Brown not welched on his commitment to hold a referendum in the UK over the Lisbon Treaty then Ireland would not be alone in the veto corner!

At the recent European Council EU leaders agreed to give the Irish government more time to come up with some proposals on how next to proceed, reporting back at the next meeting of EU leaders in October. Before that though Sarkozy will be in Dublin to hear Ireland's concerns and one can only hope that he will listen. Threatening to block further EU enlargement and using it to push for Lisbon's ratification is not the answer Europe is looking for, nor what it wants.

Slovenia: So long, farewell...

2008-06-27T06:57:00.000-07:00

Slovenia's six month presidency of the EU comes to an end today. Certainly there is a general perception here in Brussels that Slovenia's leadership of the EU, despite the ongoing difficulties with the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, has shown once again that a ‘small’ country can successfully take on the EU Presidency and manage it just as effectively – if not more so – than, say, Germany, France or the UK.

By chance I stumbled across a report in today's Deutsche Welle with the headline - "Slovenia's strong EU Presidency sets the stage for small countries".

It's hard to believe that its less than 17 years since Slovenia achieved its independence and now, a full EU member state, Slovenia is handing over the EU presidency baton to France.

As the first of the countries that joined the EU in 2004 to host the rotating EU Presidency, there is recognition of the need to "put an end to the artificial distinction between the ‘new Member States’ and the former ones" as stated by the French Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner at the end of last week, before he went on to congratulate Slovenia on the success with which it had managed the EU Presidency.

As one of its last Presidency tasks, this week the Slovenian Presidency was at the Parliament where Slovenian Ministers appeared before each of the Parliament's Committees to outline what they had achieved in their respective portfolios. Although this happens at the end of every presidency, just ahead of the next lot arriving to outline their plans for the next six months, it is a useful stock-taking exercise and one that sets out the sometimes surprising number of achievements recorded by the out-going presidency. Or not, as the case might be!

This week Janez Jansa, Slovenia's Prime Minister (and current President of the European Council) came to the European Parliament and did just that. For the record, Slovenia should be remembered for the following:

(1) bringing the Western Balkans closer to Europe and ensuring their future lies within the EU. Slovenia's experience and expertise in the Western Balkans ensured the EU played a key role in providing unity and stability to Kosovo following its declaration of independence in February. And this despite the various delays and difficulties surrounding the establishment in Kosovo of the EU’s new law and order mission (EULEX). In addition, pre-accession agreements were signed with Bosnia and Serbia putting them firmly on the path for eventual EU membership.

(2) On the energy and climate change package, Slovenia reached a compromise on the proposals for opening up Europe's gas and electricity markets to competition, something which many of us in the Parliament thought would end up being kicked into the French Presidency with no agreement possible.

(3) Also resolved under the Slovenian Presidency was a 4 year dispute over the 48 hour maximum working week, which saw the UK government retain its opt-out from the Working Time Directive, and an agreement for temporary workers to have the same rights as permanent employees

Other achievements included agreeing a mandate for the Commission to negotiate a long-term partnership agreement with Russia, enlarging the eurozone to Cyprus and Malta, and overseeing the entry of Slovakia to the eurozone on 1 January 2009.

It is worth reflecting that back in 2006 in a piece for the Guardian, Timothy Garton Ash wrote that Europe's future was increasingly becoming one of ‘small’ countries that no longer could be made to work by a directorate of the 3 largest states, Germany, France and the UK. Memorably he stated that what a large Europe needed was for the small countries to think big. I think over the past 6 months that Slovenia with a population of 2 million has done just that. I'm sure when it comes the turn of an independent Scotland to assume its turn in the Presidency hot seat it too will approach that task with a high degree of confidence and eager anticipation.

Cutting EU red tape

2008-06-26T07:48:00.000-07:00

The Commission this week finally published its long-awaited proposals for cutting red tape and minimising the costs and burdens of EU legislation for Europe’s SMEs via its Small Business Act. This follows a wide public consultation earlier in the year.

According to the Commission’s press release, the Small Business Act aims to promote and encourage entrepreneurship, make legislation more SME friendly by way of ensuring that all new EU proposals are subjected to an “SME” test in order to assess their implications for SMEs. These are part and parcel of 10 common principles and essentially its about ensuring SMEs can compete within the EU on a level playing field.

The Small Business Act outlines the need for EU and national-level action in a number of policy areas, which should make it easier for Scotland’s small businesses to access the single market as well as finance. Included in the package is a proposal during 2009 to revise the late payments directive so that SMEs can be paid within 30 days. This is a welcome move. The issue about collecting late payments from customers in another EU country is one which has been raised with us and which we subsequently raised with the Commission to see whether any action had been taken or would be taken to develop more streamlined methods for helping companies collect payments from both EU clients and non EU clients.

Also of some interest will be the proposal providing member states with the option of applying lower VAT rates for locally supplied goods and services. Public procurement accounts for some 1800 billion euros within the EU (16% of EU GDP) so being able to source goods and services locally can only be good for Scotland’s economy and its environment.

Other proposals include a new General Block Exemption Regulation on state aids which will increase the aid intesity for SMEs and make it easier for SMEs to benefit from state aid for training, R&D, environmental protection and other types of aid as well as a new single statute for a European Private Company allowing a "Société privée européenne" (SPE) to be created and which would operate according to the same uniform principles in all Member States. I think on the latter proposal lets wait and see what the Commission actually brings forward.

There is much in the package that is good for Scotland’s small businesses and while the Small Business Act is set to be adopted by EU leaders meeting in the European Council in December 2008 the real challenge is to ensure what is being proposed actually happens.

French Senate votes to scrap referendum on EU accession

2008-06-24T04:50:00.000-07:00

The French Senate today voted to remove the constitutional requirement from France’s Constitution that any further enlargement of the EU following the entry of a new country would be put to a referendum in France.

The new law is expected to be voted on 7 July when both houses of the French parliament meet in a joint Congress just as France takes over the EU Council Presidency for the next six months until the end of December. A three fifths majority is needed to approve the law.

Article 88-5 of the French Constitution states that “Any Government Bill authorising the ratification of a Treaty pertaining to the accession of a State to the European Union and to the European Communities shall be submitted to referendum by the President of the Republic”. This was introduced in 2005 by the former French President, Jacques Chirac in an attempt to reassure French public opinion about their concerns over any further EU enlargement (and in particular the possibility of Turkey joining the EU) in the run-up to the French referendum on the EU Constitution, which in the end was still rejected.

The vote in the French Senate is part of a broader package of constitutional reforms put forward by the French government in April. The draft bill on institutional reform contains an article deleting all references to the requirement that referenda must be held each time a new country joins the EU. At the end of May the French National Assembly voted to retain this measure.

I was chatting the other day with one of the officials in the French National Assembly about this requirement who told me that this was aimed at any candidate country whose population exceeds 5% of the total EU population. Indeed, this was specifically, if not overtly, targeted at Turkey and to a much lesser extent Ukraine. Since Scotland falls far short of the 5% population limit, he said we would be spared the referendum.

Whenever I’ve been in France, as soon as I mention I’m Scottish that’s it, the response is usually how much they like the Scots, Scotland and the tartan army even when we managed to beat France during the Euro 2008 qualifiers last autumn.

The future of the EU cannot be answered in simple 'yes' or 'no' terms

2008-06-19T06:43:00.001-07:00

I wrote the letter below in response to Ian Bell's article that appeared in yesterday's Herald on "The EU is determined to prove it won't listen". This was published in today's Herald.

Not for the first time Ian Bell has captured almost precisely the dilemma confronting those who wish to see, and who support, further European integration but who have considerable reservations about the democratic basis on which the EU conducts its activities.

On the one hand the EU faces global challenges that require a collective response (energy security, climate change, food security) but on the other hand it is unable to deliver the institutional reforms needed to make such a collective response workable while at the same time ensuring it respects the principles of democratic control and accountability. Mind you the same might be said of elements of UK politics (and how many in Scotland today could name their MP after 9 years of devolution?).

However, people across the EU today are fundamentally sceptical about the ambitions of the “Brussels elite” and are increasingly resistant to further powers being transferred to the EU. It is likely that the referendum result in Ireland would have been repeated in a number of EU countries, including the UK, had the people been consulted.

But what is the appropriate response for those who recognise that the EU has a positive role to play, albeit one that does not involve it meddling needlessly in domestic policies? It must not be to try and railroad through the Lisbon Treaty as that will violate the foundational EU principle that all member states must ratify any treaty reform before it can be enacted in any member state. Instead EU politics has to be better mainstreamed into domestic politics.

This is not a plea to launch yet another pro-EU campaign. Rather it is to ask domestic politicians from all “levels” within the political spectrum to acknowledge the importance of EU issues to their own activities – be these local, national, or on a UK-wide basis – and to treat the EU seriously.

The important questions about the future of the EU and the contribution it can continue to make to improving our lives cannot be answered in simple “yes” or “no” terms. If people across the EU are to engage in EU issues then the principal route for that to occur is through a better engagement of these policy issues via domestic politics.

EU support for Scotland's renewables

2008-06-18T07:11:00.000-07:00

The Parliament backed full ownership unbundling today, rejecting the compromise reached by Europe's energy ministers on 6 June for an "independent transmission operator" - believe me when I say this has to have been one of the most technical dossiers to have crossed my desk.

But in amongst all the technicality there was actually some good stuff in the report, not least the requirement that electricity grid operators should provide priority access to renewable energy and combined heat and power generation. Governments may also require operators to invest revenues from domestic electricity consumers in energy efficiency projects.

Scotland has huge renewable potential, the energy from which can be exported to the energy markets of the rest of mainland Europe, if only Scotland's renewable energy producers were not penalised by the UK's energy regulator, Ofgem, by the extortionate prices they are charged for connecting to the electricity grid. The irony of the current situation Scotland finds itself in still staggers me with Europe currently looking at ways in which the use of renewable energy can be promoted further so that the EU's share of renewables can be increased to meet its 20% target by 2020.

Article 14.7 of the Commission's proposal on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources requires Member States to ensure that the charging of transmission and distribution fees does not discriminate against electricity from renewable energy sources, including in particular electricity from renewable energy produced in peripheral regions, such as island regions and regions of low population density. This is presently the case under Article 7.6 of the 2001 renewable electricity Directive.

The problem remains with the national energy regulatory authorities but we also need to see greater action from the Commission to help deal with this problem.

With the Parliament having now delivered its opinion at first reading this dossier now bounces back to the EU Energy Ministers and into the hands of the French EU Presidency, which takes over the running of the EU from 1 July. If ever there was an energy battle to watch, this is the one.

Ireland's red card to the Lisbon Treaty

2008-06-13T06:31:00.000-07:00

So, Ireland has voted to reject the Lisbon Treaty and given it a red card.

On a 53% turnout, 53.4% voted against the treaty. This result should not come as any great surprise. The simple fact is that people aren't interested in continual discussions about the reform of the EU's institutions. The EU has spent the past seven years trying to look at ways in which the EU institutions can be brought closer to the people of Europe. Back in December 2001 the Member States adopted the "Laeken Declaration", which while it paved the way for the setting up of the European Convention, it also recognised that the biggest challenge facing the EU is the widening gap between the European institutions and the citizens. The perception of the EU as being remote, too bureaucratic and incomprehensible remains.

The trouble is while France and the Netherlands rejected the EU Constitutional Treaty by referendum back in 2005 and Luxembourg and Spain voted yes in their referendums the Lisbon Treaty was rehashed as the plan B. 18 Member States have since ratified the Lisbon Treaty but before it can be implemented and enter into force it has to be ratified by all 27 Member States - one of the guiding principles of the EU is that all countries have to ratify treaties and it would be highly ironic if the EU violated its own constitutional practice and railroaded the treaty through.

At least the Irish people have had a chance to have their say. The people of Scotland and the UK were denied a say on the treaty following Gordon Brown's decision not to keep his government's promise of a referendum.

The SNP decided that the Lisbon Treaty was not the way forward for the EU. For one thing, the conservation of marine biological resources under the Common Fisheries Policy was to have been made an exclusive competence of the EU. This was a red line issue for the Scottish Government and despite our concerns as well as those of Scotland's fishing communities, London chose to ignore and refused to seek any further changes.

It is now for EU leaders meeting in Brussels next week to listen to the concerns of the people of Ireland and to rethink where Europe goes from here.

EU response to high fuel prices

2008-06-11T02:16:00.000-07:00

Rising fuel and food prices are set to be discussed by EU leaders at their European Council meeting in Brussels on 19-20 June. As oil prices head towards $136 a barrel and fuel protests spread across Europe - last week we saw Europe's fishermen protesting against the high cost of fuel outside the Commission building on Rue de la Loi - the Commission today put out a press release calling on the EU 27 Member States to adopt the EU's energy and climate change package which it sees as the "best coordinated response to rising oil prices" and to reducing their impact on business and consumers.

The Commission is expected to present a Communication to EU leaders at their summit in Brussels which will set out a series of short, medium and long term policy measures the Commission is looking to introduce. These include:
- a report on the functioning of the oil and petroleum markets in the forthcoming strategic energy review,
- the publication of proposals later this year to revise the energy taxation directive and the Eurovignette system for taxing heavy goods vehicles,
- a report in the autumn on the possible use of tax incentives, including reduced VAT rates to encourage energy savings - this comes on the back of calls from France and the UK last autumn for lower VAT rates on energy efficient products such as light bulbs;
- supporting the organisation of a global fuel summit on oil markets between main oil producing and consuming countries and strengthening existing regional and bilateral dialogues in order to achieve better market access and transparency;

The Commission also admits that Member States could provide targeted support when justified to those experiencing the most serious impact of high oil prices, though any measures taken to alleviate the impact of high oil prices must be temporary, non-distorting and shouldn't prevent longer term adjustment to higher prices

There is at least some good news in that the Commission is proposing to revise EU rules on energy taxation. Current EU rules state that the VAT rate on fuel cannot be lower than 15%. Member States cannot apply a VAT rate of less than 15% unless they have the full backing of both the Commission and the Council. There is also a minimum EU-wide rate for excise duty which is set at 330 euros per 1,000 litres of diesel, again which Member States cannot go below. But the Commission has already made it clear that cutting taxes would send the wrong signal to oil-producing countries

President Sarkozy recently urged the EU to cap VAT on fuel when oil prices become too high at the European level and for the creation of a new fund from revenues generated by oil taxes to help those most in need. But the difficulty with such a proposal is that Sarkozy needs the backing of the other 26 EU Member States in order to do this and a number of other countries have already voiced their opposition (Germany, Spain). Italy has proposed the idea of a "Robin Hood" tax - paid by oil companies to those most affected.

However, fuel prices remain the highest in the UK. The SNP wants to see a fuel duty regulator, an idea which is already backed by the Road Haulage Association, and which has been rejected by the UK government. Of course the problem in Scotland is compounded further by the gaulling fact that despite being one of Europe's key oil and gas producers, the revenues generated from Scotland's oil wealth are ploughed back into the coffers of the UK Treasury.

Indeed, in the 2008 Budget the UK Treasury forecast that revenues from the North Sea would contribute £9.9bn to the UK Exchequer in 2008/09 (based on an oil price of $83.8 per barrel. The Scottish Government estimates that North Sea revenues are set to be over £4bn higher than the UK Treasury forecast based on the average 2008/09 oil and gas prices.

The forecast of over £14bn in oil revenues this year comes on top of revenues since North Sea was discovered in the 1970s of £250bn in real terms. A report published recently by the accountancy firm, Grant Thornton shows that at current oil prices Scotland would have a budget surplus of between £4.4 bn and just over £6bn.

The Scottish government is also pushing London for a 10% share of the £4.4bn windfall tax so that it can be reinvested in the people of Scotland through the setting up of an oil fund. Experts believe that between 25 and 30bn barrel of oils can still be recovered from the North Sea over the next 40 years but if we are to set up an oil fund we need to do it now.

While Norway invested its oil wealth in an oil fund 12 years ago and which is now worth £186 bn the people of Scotland have missed out of their oil wealth over the past 30 years. The Scottish government has announced that it is to commission a study to look into the benefits of an oil fund for Scotland, after it was revealed that an oil fund for the UK had been considered by the Treasury back in the 1970s.

If we are to be able to tackle properly the problems of fuel poverty and alleviate the high fuel costs facing our hauliers, farmers, fishermen and motorists, especially in the more remoter and rural parts of Scotland then Scotland needs to have access to North Sea oil and gas revenues and greater control over fuel prices

It is generally agreed that we all want to see greater action being taken to bring fuel prices under control, not least with increasing concerns about high inflation and predictions of lower economic growth. Once again the London government is not prepared to work in Scotland's interests.

The future of Europe' s agriculture must fit the purpose for Scotland

2008-06-06T07:06:00.000-07:00

With the CAP health check one of the key dossiers sitting on my desk right now I went along this morning to the Commission to be briefed by the Commission officials in the Agriculture Department that wrote the proposals. Given the significance of these proposals for Scotland’s farmers, our crofters and the farming/rural community its important for me to be able to discuss with the Commission officials what their thinking was behind these proposals and to establish how they came to the conclusions they did – and for me then to put these into the specific context of their potential implications for Scotland’s farming sector. Not least because much of the discussion on the side of the European Parliament will go on in the Agriculture Committee, on which Alyn is Scotland’s only full member.

Much of the discussion this morning in DG Agri focused on the Commission’s impact assessment on the health check. For anyone who wants to read their assessment of 158 pages, click here to access it.

Over the next six months there will be much discussion about Europe’s model of agriculture and what I want to ensure is that whatever is finally agreed by EU farming ministers fits the purpose for Scotland’s agricultural sector. The Scottish Government has already announced it is consulting on the Commission’s proposals as is Scotland’s National Farmers Union. At the end of May the Scottish Parliament held its first debate on the health check proposals and adopted the motion below:

That the Parliament, noting the European Commission's legislative proposals for the health check of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform, welcomes the Scottish Government's commitment to consult on these proposals, and on the longer-term implementation of CAP in Scotland, in order that agriculture remains a dynamic and competitive industry playing its full part in ensuring the long-term viability of our rural communities and enabling farmers to play their part in achieving the Scottish Government's purpose of sustainable economic growth through food production, high standards of animal welfare and the environmental management of our agricultural land but, in so doing, notes the importance of consulting on the potential impact of progressive modulation on Scottish farms and affirms that any increases in European Union-wide modulation should be matched by a corresponding deduction in levels of voluntary modulation; considers that any increase in compulsory modulation must be offset by a corresponding reduction in voluntary modulation to ensure that Scottish producers are not put at a competitive disadvantage within the European Union; further considers that Scotland, with its high proportion of large farm units, must not be disadvantaged by proposals for progressive modulation or capping; believes that, in light of rapidly escalating food and fuel costs, the Scottish Rural Development Programme should be reviewed, with the production of food and food security considered as a key priority, and recognises the correlation between economic activity on the ground and delivery of environmental benefits for all".

Slovakia set to join the euro

2008-06-03T07:22:00.000-07:00

Slovakia is set to swap its currency - the koruna - for the euro on 1 January 2009. The European Parliament's Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee backed Slovakia's bid to adopt the euro with the agreement that Slovakia makes further efforts to keep its inflation rate down and continues with structural reforms to its labour, services and products market. The parliament will vote as a whole on Slovakia's euro membership at its plenary session in Strasbourg next month before it then goes to EU leaders who will discuss it at their meeting in the European Council in Brussels on 19-20 June. Pending final approval by EU Finance Ministers in July Slovakia will become the 16th country to join the euro, following Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta.

The Danish Prime Minister has also indicated recently that he intends to hold a referendum on Denmark's current opt-out from the euro in the autumn with latest opinion polls showing last month that 52% of Danes wanted to join the eurozone.

Working as I do between Brussels and Edinburgh I use the euro all the time and hope to see an Independent Scotland join the euro.

It has been 10 years since the euro was first introduced for business (1998) and then later for consumers in 2002 but despite the doomsayers it has shown to be a success and that it works. Indeed the IMF earlier this week commented that "eurozone growth has been unexpectedly resilient" despite slowing global economy and raised its estimate for growth in the eurozone this year from 1.4% to 1.75%.

EU renewables support - good for Scotland

2008-06-02T05:05:00.000-07:00

Discussions on proposals by the European Commission to increase the use of renewable energy by setting the target of a 20% share of the EU energy mix for renewables by 2020 are now under way in the Parliament’s Energy Committee. The Luxembourg Green MEP Claude Turmes, who has been charged with drafting the Parliament’s opinion on these ambitious proposals, brought forward his draft report. From a Scottish perspective there is much to be welcomed in Turmes report and indeed many of his suggestions are likely to boost Scotland’s renewable energy potential given the huge opportunities it could provide for our renewable industry.

For example, one thing Turmes wants to see which will benefit Scotland is for the Commission to present at the latest in 2009 and “analysis and plan” for a coordinated approach by the Commission and the Member States to the development of offshore wind and marine energies in the North Sea. According to Turmes a key challenge here will be one of coordination to use existing electricity cables for linking the Norwegian, Dutch and UK markets so as to be able to plug into wind and sea energy production. This would be a priority project in the Trans-European Energy Initiative.

Linked to this of course are the Scottish Government’s plans for the development of a North Sea electricity supergrid, which would allow the vast quantities of electricity that can be generated from wind, tidal and wave power off the coasts of Scotland and Norway to be exported direct to the energy markets of mainland Europe through an underwater power cable connecting Scotland and Norway via Denmark.

Back in February the Scottish Government announced it was exploring sub-sea grid options through two offshore transmission studies to see how such a scheme could work. These being, firstly Irish Scottish Links on Energy Study (ISLES) looking at the Atlantic coasts of Scotland, Ireland and Northern Ireland, and the Irish Sea in an attempt to see how best our natural energy resources could be maximised to generate energy from offshore wind. Secondly, a detailed feasibility study on the North Sea Energy Grid, which will explore potential links between the north and east coasts of Scotland, and the coast of northern mainland Europe. Scotland has vast renewable energy potential with one of the most viable resource bases in Europe, if not the world and there is much that can be done to harness that resource especially when it comes to wave, tidal and offshore wind.

While there is much Scotland can contribute towards helping the EU meet the strategic challenge of a Europe increasingly dependent on energy imports and looking for alternatives to carbon generation and in helping the EU and the UK achieve the renewables and climate change targets there is much the EU can do by way of helping Scotland to develop its renewables potential further.

For example, the Scottish Government is looking to create a green energy research centre in Aberdeen, building on the expertise that exists in our current offshore energy sector and the huge renewable energy potential around our shores. The development of renewable energy and energy efficient technology could be supported further by better coordinated targeting of EU and national funding and any other forms of available support for research centres that cooperate with Universities and business (especially SMEs) in applied and innovative research.

Meantime there is much that member states can do to encourage and support Europe’s farmers becoming net producers of energy by processing animal fats and crops into biodiesel, woody crops for biomass as well as second generation biofuels.

However, a key issue which remains to be resolved is that of the UK’s electricity transmission charging scheme. The transmission ‘locational’ charges agreed by the UK energy regulator, Ofgem, continue to penalise Scotland’s renewable energy sector and work against the sector. The scheme is based on proximity to population centres rather than generating potential, with the result that generators in remote parts of Scotland are charged more than producers in the South of England. For example, a power station in central Scotland pays £25m for transmission more than a similar station in Yorkshire and more than in London.

In its current renewables proposal the Commission restates its original position (as outlined in the 2001 renewable electricity EU Directive) that “Member States shall ensure that the charging of transmission and distribution fees does not discriminate against electricity from renewable energy sources, including in particular electricity from renewable energy sources produced in peripheral regions, such as island regions and in regions of low population density”.

Certainly in Brussels we have raised the problem Scotland’s renewable energy producers face with Ofgem’s discriminatory transmission charges at every opportunity within the Commission and the Parliament. And we will be looking to put down some amendments which strengthen Turmes report to make it mandatory on national regulatory authorities that they ensure there is no discriminatory transmission and distribution charging fees aimed at those renewable energy producers in remote and peripheral regions.

Also to be welcomed from a Scottish perspective are Turmes' proposals for ensuring there is greater flexibility given in how the EU's renewables targets are to be achieved by the member states and in his proposal for scrapping the 10% binding biofuels target.

Scotland needs a fast train link to Europe

2008-06-01T11:50:00.000-07:00

I was interested to read this morning that Stewart Stevenson, the Scottish Government's transport minister had met with the UK rail minister, Tom Harris about putting in place a high speed cross-border train link between Scotland and London. Such a high speed rail link is long overdue. It is incredible that in this day and age when most other European countries are opening up their rail networks with their own high speed cross-border train services, we are still struggling to have our own fast train link and to cut the current journey time of four and a half/ five hours from London to Edinburgh/Glasgow to three hours.

At the moment I can go from Brussels to Paris on the fast Thalys train in less than 90 minutes, to Frankfurt on the ICE train in three and a half hours and the TGV down to the South of France in just under five hours via Paris. In February Spain launched its bullet train from Madrid to Barcelona (a distance of 410 miles) in just over two and a half hours and with the added bonus that passengers get a full refund if the train is 30 minutes late.

Scotland badly needs such a fast train link connecting us in a sustainable way with the rest of mainland Europe via the Eurostar link between London St Pancreas and Paris and Brussels. Having taken the Eurostar from Brussels to London on numerous occasions I'm a big fan for how easy and smooth a journey it is not to mention its being more efficient in terms of CO2 production. The trouble is once you hit London the missing link north of the border to Scotland remains.

This being Green Week in Brussels there is much discussion about making more sustainable use of our resources. Greater sustainable mobility has to be encouraged but we also need to ensure the networks and services for supporting fast trains are in place to encourage more people to switch from their dependency on flying and/or driving to greener travelling by train.

Last summer some of Europe's key high speed rail operators in 7 different countries (Eurostar in London, France, Switzerland, Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, and Austria linked their high speed rail networks together in an attempt to make cross-border travel in Europe much easier and much cheaper. The scheme is called "Railteam" and in addition to providing a central point for information on timetables and prices it will eventually for the first time allow people to book their rail tickets through to Switzerland, the Netherlands, France, Germany, Belgium and Austria with one payment via a single website: www.railteam.eu. Even if you miss your next train because there was a delay to the first "railteam" train you were travelling on, you can catch the next "railteam" train without having to change your ticket or get a new reservation. The network is also looking to include the Spanish and Italian high-speed rail links in the future.

At the moment the "railteam" service stops at London. I look forward to the day when that link is extended to Scotland and we see both Edinburgh and Glasgow as well as for example Aberdeen, Inverness on the "railteam" map as part of the Scotland - Europe via London fast train service.

Gordon's policy u-turn on cluster bombs

2008-05-28T09:49:00.000-07:00

The Guardian is reporting this morning that the UK government is about to sign the international treaty that is being negotiated in Dublin to ban cluster munitions. Gordon Brown’s policy u-turn is long overdue and one I welcome. Cluster bombs remain immoral but what we now need to see is their removal from US bases in the UK.