“Austrian Platform” Study Trip Report

By Delia Elena Lazar

2011 Day 1 – October 3rd 2011

1. Blandine Bauniol – Policy Coherence for Development (PCD) - CONCORD

PCD – uses and interpretations of the concept:

currently embedded in the Lisbon Treaty („any EU policies likely to have impact on other countries should take into account the development objectives‟); interpretation: must do not harm at least European Commission has attributed a special unit in DG DEVCO to PCD: officers are screening most relevant EU policies and proposals to see if there is any negative impact on development)  see DEVCO A3: Coherence of EU policies for development, EU aid effectiveness However, some principles of the PCD were laid in previous treaties OECD also uses this concept to measure the impact of other policies on development Increasing awareness and capacity on PCD would mean increasing the political will, which should stand at the core Conclusion: PCD is a nice, wide concept, which needs to be better clarified

Work on PCD in CONCORD: PCD is a new topic and area of work CONCORD has been previously focusing on development policies and aid but since 2009 PCD has been included and became a priority for the next ten years CONCORD publication in 2009: Spotlight on Policy Coherence (http://www.dochas.ie/Shared/Files/4/spotlight_on_policy_coherence.pdf) Every two years, the Commission issues a report on PCD (next to appear in Nov-Dec 2011) and how Member States have applied the PCD principles // CONCORD tries to prepare an alternative report on this topic (counter-report); next to be launched on November 7th 2011, with chapters including: agriculture, migration, natural resources and human security. CONCORD also prepares a special website dedicated to PCD, for more awareness and raising visibility on the concept

Other PCD-related initiatives:

Special rapporteur on PCD in the European Parliament (EP): Birgit SCHNIEBER- JASTRAM, EVP Germany Commission‟s proposals are now issued with the impact assessments (which include PCD question/request about negative impact on development policies) CONCORD tries to lobby so that PCD is guaranteed each time when internal policies have external impacts.

2. Meagan Baldwin, Head of Policy, CONCORD – “Future of EU development policy”

CONCORD policy work is made around two main strains: (a) EU development policy; (b) identity policy (organization, CSOs etc.). The most recent development includes bringing them together in one expanded unit. - CONCORD is divided in several working groups (e.g. food security group, reference group on Trade; task force on climate change etc.) sharing between them the resources; it is a member-led organization - 3-4 main priorities are set for the year; for 2011 these include: MFF process (getting an EU budget; how much does development get?) Food security, agriculture within PCD Aid effectiveness (CSO effect, aid effect etc.) - CONCORD role: try to impact, to influence policies

Questions and Answers: a. Possible 2012 priorities: post MDG agenda, MFF (headings will be known, discussion on instruments will follow), citizen mobilization (bottom-up perspective). b. There is a disconnection between Brussels and the rest of the world which needs to be challenged; organizations outside Brussels should understand that Member States are the one deciding (cannot influence Council‟s conclusions); however, it is mainly Brussels- based organizations that understand the decision-making process and it is here where organizations like CONCORD should intervene c. Since the creation of the EEAS, the role of presidencies has changed: there is a shift from the power of presidencies in deciding the agenda to the power of the HR/VP. It is C. Ashton who currently leads the agenda and has the overall responsibility for PCD. d. Legal instruments for development: - Lisbon Treaty – binding for Member States; - EU consensus on development – politically (not legally) binding - Legislation consistent with the Treaty - Ombudsman in EP – for PCD.

3. Zdenka Dobiasova – DG DEVCO, A3, Policy Coherence for Development Viktor Sukup – DG DEVCO, R7 Seconded National Expert (SCN) on Aid effectiveness and Austrian affairs

Short introduction: before June 2011, there were two DGs dealing with development: AidCo (funds) and Dev (thematic and strategic planning)  they have merged and formed DG DEVCO. Zdenka Dobiasova is responsible with PCD in DG DEVCO: external impact of EU internal policies (side effects on third countries).

PCD agenda: - European Commission (EC) prepares legal text – the Communication on PCD, which may be adopted or not in the Council; major policy initiatives are made in co-decision process (EC proposes and decision is taken by EC + EP) - PCD concept is relatively new; complicated subject in policy making; EC is active in following the recommendations of OECD - The basics are laid in Lisbon Treaty: „take into account‟, which is rather vague; interpretation given: in the policy-making process, the EC has to take into account evidence of no side effects on third countries (or limited effect). - From 12 policy areas that affect developing countries, EC has established five main challenges is currently working on: 1. Trade and finance (CSR, taxes, IPS – intellectual property system, aid for trade etc.) Main responsible are DG TRADE and DG DEVCO; planned documents: Reform of Trade policy; Trade and development Communication. 2. Food Security – CAP reform, fisheries, agrofuels, biodiversity, effects of climate change, water issues etc. 3. Climate change – mitigation & adoption; energy, transport, energy trade systems (ETS) 4. Migration – brain drain, remittances, diaspora dialogue 5. Security – shift from humanitarian aid to sustainable development process ; natural disasters.

PCD reading materials: - European Consensus on Development: http://ec.europa.eu/development/icenter/repository/eu_consensus_en.pdf - Consultations: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/public-consultations/index_en.htm - Council Conclusions of 17 November 2009 on PCD : http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st16/st16079.en09.pdf - PCD Programme 2007-2013: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/policy-coherence/index_en.htm - EU 2009 Report of PCD:

http://ec.europa.eu/development/icenter/repository/SEC_PDF_2009_1137_F_ACTE_PC D_EN.pdf - MEP Franziska Keller report, 2009: “EU PCD and Official Development Assistance plus concept”: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=- //EP//NONSGML+REPORT+A7-2010-0140+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&language=EN

Decision-making procedure in the EU institutions: 1) First phase: how to know what other people are doing and invite them to meetings and negociate? You are helped by the EC work programme 2012 (list of initiatives planned for next year)  screening to see where to intervene  preparation meetings for each policy (in the service – internal; then public documents for public consultations on the website: http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/index_en.htm. See the role of NGOs here: it is now that they can have their first intervention, they can get an item on the agenda; it is here the EC needs NGOs input; afterwards, the EC has to publish the results of the public consultation. 2) Second phase – Regulatory Impact Assessment is a compulsory, analytical document (problem, objective, options to address, evidences of possible consequences etc.) elaborated on the basis of Impact Assessment Guidelines (to see the standards the EC has to use). This is the phase of the inter-service working groups (various DGs in EC interested in the topic)  the result is a „position paper‟ for the „internal cuisine‟ if passed by the jury, it is published. If the Impact Assessment passes, it then goes to inter- service consultation (last stage before the adoption of the Communication)  then to the College of the EC (Commissioners) for political approval  if they adopt it, it is published as 3 documents: Communication/Directive, Impact Assessment and Opinions of the Board. 3) All package goes to the Council and the EP and here the civil society can intervene as well: sensitizing the MEPs and national governments 4) Evaluation of policies: Impact Assessment is an ex-ante evaluation; have to be more active on post-policy evaluation and here the window is open again for external input. Mechanisms providing feedback: EUDELs, NGOs (can come with studies, written feedback etc.). EC tries to do studies, but better use materials from think-tanks, NGOs etc.

Role of civil society, NGOs:

- Create the demand (with the MEPs, consultations with national governments); - Raise the issue with EU institutions (send letter to the Commissioner); - Insist in the prioritization of issues (via YourvoiceinEurope) - Screen the new arising issues - Tell the story of the EU negative policies impact (getting the stories out in the media, academia etc.).

Day 2 – October 4th 2011

1. Elise Vanormelingen, Policy coordinator for MFF at CONCORD, on Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF)

MFFs, previously called Financial Perspectives, are 7 year budgets. Currently, the one for 2014- 2020 is being negotiated; it shows priorities of EU action.

When discussing MFF, we discuss three levels: 1) How much to spend? 2) What for? Priorities are defined in budget headings (currently 5) Current headings: (1) Cohesion policy – 45% - for less developed EU regions (2) Agricultural and rural development – 42% (3) Citizenship – 1% (4) External action – 6% - includes development, CSP, military, EU as a global partner etc. (5) Total administration – 6%. 3) How it will be managed? Financial instruments + regulations under each heading Several DGs manage the budget for the EUMS 27. DEVCO manages H4. For MFF 2014-2020, the big architecture is going to stay the same.

Current EU external action instruments: 1) Geographic : Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA), European Neighbourhood Policy Instrument (ENPI; for 17 neighbours from South and East), European Development Fund (EDF; covers mainly ACP countries; it is currently outside the budget, but it will be budgetised), Instrument for Development and Cooperation (DCI; for Asia and Latin America); 2) Thematic : Instrument for Stability (IfS) ; European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) 3) Thematic ensuing from DCI covering DCI, ENPI, EDF: Food security, Investing in people, Migration and asylum, Non-state actors and local authorities, Environment and natural resources. Apart from IfS, all instruments (funds) are opened to NGOs and CSOs (especially thematic ones). The three biggest instruments are: EDF (outside of the budget; EUMS want to have control over it), IPA and DCI. Main EC proposals to the general EU budget: - Total EU budget = EUR 1, 025 bn (1, 05% of GNI) - Reduce heading 2 – CAP from 42% to 37% - Spend items outside EU budget: EDF, fund for climate change

- Proposals for heading 4: increase from 5,7% to 6,8%; 0,7% GNI for ODA; thematic programmes to be reduced from 5 to 2; biggest increase for ENPI (11%  16%)

Official negociations for MFF 2014-2020 started on June 29th 2011 under Polish presidency; a letter with CONCORD positions will be issued end of October.

Influencing MFF can only be done through EUMS, at national level (government, parliament); lobby at the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, MEPs

Further reading: CONCORD extra net – Working groups – task force MFF – EC proposals and CONCORD positions (login: [email protected] password: extranet)

2. Ana Biurrun – DEEEP, Communications Officer, on Development Education

Presentation of DEEEP - Developing Europeans‟ Engagement for the Eradication of Global Poverty

DEEEP is a programme initiated by the Development Awareness Raising and Education (DARE) Forum of CONCORD that aims at strengthening capacities of NGDOs to raise awareness, educate and mobilise the European public for world-wide poverty eradication and social inclusion. DEEEP is co-funded by the European Union.

Main areas of work: capacity building, advocacy and networking.

Further reading: http://www.deeep.org/

3. Meeting with MEPs Ulrike Lunacek and Ska Keller

Taking part in the public hearing on “Food Security in Developing Countries: The Challenge to Feed the People” of the DEVE Committee; third round table on “Investments for Land Grabbing”; presentations by Ambassador of Malawi and Lorenzo Cotula, Senior Researcher at IED (see www.iied.org) – The global land rush and Foreign Investment in Farmland.

Foreign land investment is a controversial issue. Is Africa taking any action to ensure this investment addresses food security and its food needs? Governments are taking actions to make Africa “the food basket” of the world. A key factor is investing into lands. But will this resolve the problems of malnutrition and food security?

Much investor interest is focused on best lands, where the irrigation potential is concentrated. Long-term leases on state-owned land have been preferentially made in Ethiopia, Sudan and Mozambique. The major players are China and the Gulf countries, intra-regional and national investors, as well as the EU. The law makes local people vulnerable (it is governments that

7 make land available, with no transparency). Guidelines are being developed by FAO to address the issues of accountability and transparency. The focus should be on attracting investments as a means, not as an end (quality of investments, not quantity).

4. Mirjam Rinderer, Austrian Permanent Representation to the EU

Counsellor, Head of Visitors‟ and Information Services, Relations with ACP countries

Presentation on “The role of the Permanent Representation of Austria to the EU and its interaction with the EU institutions”

Who we are? Head of Mission: Ambassador Walter Grahammer 1. All Austrian Federal ministries 2. Office of the Federal Chancellor 3. Social partners (chambers, unions etc.) 4. National Bank 5. Industrial associations 6. Focal point for Länder, Communities and Cities All in the same building  facilitates networking, gives unity of the Austrian action and representation

What is AU Permanent Representation doing?

1. Represent Austria at different fora, e.g. going to the Council meetings on behalf of Austria – ACP working group meets once per week in the Council, report has to be written the same day. ACP working group is a particularly difficult one because different Member States support different ACP countries (due to colonial background); ACP dossiers are not always on the agenda of COREPER1 (at present, the agenda is set not only by the rotating presidencies, but by HR/VP C. Ashton who has an important word to say on Foreign Affairs Council (COREPER II); 2. Networking activities with the EU institutions; 3. Information tasks – reports, policy analysis and send them back to Austria (good work for national parliaments and ministries); 4. Press, PR and public diplomacy – pass EU messages at national level and vice-versa.

Seating order in the Council:

11 COREPER I includes the technical ministries: Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Protection, Competitiveness, Transport, Telecommunications and Energy, Agriculture and Fisheries, Environment, Education, Youth, Culture and Sports. COREPER II includes Foreign Affairs: General Affairs and External Relations, Economy and Finances, Justice and Home Affairs.

By “trio Presidencies” with an 18 months programme with common priorities; interesting for strategic planning, as Presidencies show their main interests: e.g. French Presidency – the Union for the Mediterranean, Hungarian Presidency – the Danube strategy; Polish Presidency – the Eastern Partnership etc. The AU Presidency trio includes Romania and Finland.

Presentation by Barbara Grosse, AU Perm Rep

5. Presentation by Andreas Fischer-Barnicol – European External Action Service

Day 3 - October 5th 2011

1. DG TRADE 1.1.Paolo Salvia on “Trade and Development Communication”

DG DEVCO and TRADE are launching a joint communication, which is not simple as priorities are different. The last Communication was not a bad one, but due to current world changes, a new communication is needed to reinforce policy (coherence with the new reality). Objective of the Communication: What can the EU do for the most in need?  Emphasis on development. We are currently at the phase of the public consultation (http://trade.ec.europa.eu/consultations/?consul_id=156) – which is now mandatory for all EU Communications and where all shareholders are invited to express their opinion. Opinions will be fed in the text of the Communication and the final report will be public and available on the EC (DG TRADE) website. Parts of the Communication: (a) Differentiation: Developing countries have changed, they are not a homogenous group anymore  therefore need is felt to adapt policies to their different needs. Special attention will be given to LEDCs (less economically developed countries), to the most fragile and vulnerable. Secondly, we would need to see how to deal with the BRICS and how to work with them in the favour of LEDCs. EC adopts no-size-fits-all strategy and is getting involved into different negotiations. (b) Tools used: no new methodology, but adds on the results due to differentiation (c) Aid for trade program – chapter on trade ends and environmental considerations

1.2. Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs)

EPA = trade protocol where aid for development is included (“Economic Partnership Agreements between the EU and African, Caribbean and Pacific group of countries are aimed at

9 promoting trade between the two groupings – and through trade development, sustainable growth and poverty reduction”).

At the end of the „90s, the ACP group (78 countries) decided to launch Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), based on the assumption they are not “normal” (aggressive) FTAs, but EU would give them everything so that they would open their markets and receive development support. Cotonou Agreement (trade chapter) reflects the new trade relationship and the expiry of preferences at the end of XX century (focus on sectors like services and not the traditional ones). It reaffirms the role of the Economic Partnership Agreements to boost economic development and integration into the world economy, underlining the importance of trade adaptation strategies and aid for trade.

However negotiations went on, with derogations from WTO until 2007, date since all FTAs have to be WTO compliant. This was impossible and interim agreements appeared. 36 countries are implied in the negotiations, with 2 countries having ratified the FTAs, with no interruption.

Currently, many of the EU‟s ACP trading partners already have duty-free and quota-free access to the EU market under the "Everything but Arms" (EBA) scheme for the world‟s least- developed countries (LEDCs). The non-LEDCs have to decide whether: (a) taking steps to ratify 2007 WTO compliance standard; (b) concluding regional agreements; (c) opting out completely. EC is trying to streamline the process and push forward agreements.

Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) scheme: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/wider- agenda/development/generalised-system-of-preferences/ - the proposal for a revised scheme will enter into force on January 1st 2014. A GSP+ scheme will be introduced as an incentive scheme for the respect of labour, human, environmental and good governance rights and rules. However, EC will not monitor their compliance – it rather depends on UN and ILO reporting mechanisms. It would also be the role of NGOs to think of programmes monitoring if the signed conventions are respected locally.

Further reading on EPAs: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/wider-agenda/development/economic- partnerships/

1.3.Civil society dialogue – Ramona Samson

- 15 years, ongoing - Platform for information sharing around trade policy - Not-for-profit organizations are part of the dialogue - Structured around regular meetings (e.g. on Trade policy and South Mediterranean countries), sometimes at EC level, sometimes at organizations‟ level

- Results of such dialogues: allow civil society to involve in matters related to environment in negotiating FTAs - Register in ETI (European Transparency Initiative: http://europa.eu/transparency- register/index_en.htm) and see the meeting reports, take part in the dialogue etc.

2. European Parliament

2.1. Bettina de Souza Guillerme – Briefing on the work of DEVE Committee Secretariat 2.2. Discussion with MEP Richard Seeber 2.3. Assisting works of Committee of Foreign Affairs (AFET):

Presentation of nominations for Sakharov Prize (to be awarded December 15th in Strasbourg): focus on Arab spring „heros‟ – if awarded the prize, EU would show appreciation of their efforts towards democracy; other nominees from Belarus, Slovenia, Columbia, Palestinian Authority. Discussion with Anthony Lake, Executive Director of UNICEF: How can UNICEF work with its partners, and mainly EP, since they share values and are determined to achieve results? Core of the discussions: concept of equity – development is not sustainable if not equitable and if does not cover all people. Status-quo of the problems: soldier-children, hunger, vulnerable children, malnutrition, children work. Some of the problems are consequences of policy choices (“pillotage of resources”)  a more political vision is necessary, not only a humanitarian one; UNICEF should be more involved in political fora (MEP view). UNICEF Director‟s answer: UNICEF is the only EU agency which goes to Somalia, Afghanistan and in countries no one can go (Zimbabwe), therefore it is important to maintain its status of being perceived as non-political. But is looks forward to working with EEAS and EUDELs on the ground for monitoring, taking positions etc.

Day 4 – October 6th 2011

1. Pierfranco Alloa, DG DEVCO, Unit D2 Civil society and local authorities – on Civil society active in development - Civil society is facing big changes: the „Arab spring‟ will bring changes that cannot be underestimated (similarities with to the fall of the Berlin wall) - We are entering a totally new historical phase which brings real legitimacy to civil society; before this, South civil society represented a minority from the percentage of those applying for EU calls for proposals - the South will be another important interlocutor for main actors like EU, US, China - all these changes have to be translated into practice on the background of the major financial crisis - EU is in the process to revise the legal and financial instruments for 2014-2020 and finding ways to respond to the new changes

- another recurring topic is India emerging as a donor to other LEDCs (by setting up Overseas Development Agency)  we are no longer in a post-colonial era; we have to adjust to new conditions - all these recurring topics are indicators of the need of transformation, which civil society having the key role to play.

2. Renate Hahlen – DG DEVCO, Unit A3 – Coherence of EU policies for development, EU Aid Effectiveness – on Financing for Development

3. Thorsten Muench – DG ECHO, Unit A2 – Information and Communication – on DG ECHO work

CONTACTS FOR STUDY VISIT

CONCORD, 10 square Ambiorix:

Meagen Baldwin: [email protected] Blandine Bauniol: [email protected] Elise Vanormelingen: [email protected], 32 (0) 2 743 87 93 Ana Biurrun: [email protected], +32 (0) 2 743.87.85

Zdenka Dobiasova, European Commission: [email protected], +(32) 2 2964501

Caroline Ausserer, European Parliament (Assistant of MEP Ulrike Lunacek): [email protected], +32 479 075 504

Tina Obermoser, Austrian Permanent Representation (in charge of visit to PermRep – meeting with Barbara Grosse and Mirjam Rinderer): [email protected], +32-2-2345-243

Andreas Fischer-Barnicol, External Action Service: Andreas.FISCHER- [email protected], Tel.: +32 (0) 2 281. 3684

Paolo Salvia, European Commission, DG TRADE: [email protected]

Richard Seeber, Austrian MEP: [email protected], +32 2 28 45 468

Bettina DE SOUZA GUILHERME (DEVE Secretariat, European Parliament): [email protected], 02/284 2153

Pierfranco Alloa, European Commission: [email protected], +(32) 2 2992545

Renate Hahlen, European Commision: ph: + 32 2 296 69 13, [email protected]

Thorsten Muench, European Commision DG ECHO: [email protected], +(32) 2 2961063

List of participants to the study trip:

Name

1 Doris Berghammer [email protected]

2 Almir Kovacevic [email protected]

3 Magdalena Kern [email protected]

4 Michael Stern [email protected]

5 Heike Welz [email protected]

6 Stefan Bartusch [email protected]

7 Kurt Wachter [email protected]

8 Sigrun Zwanzger [email protected]

9 Petra Navara-Unterluggauer [email protected]

10 Delia Lazar [email protected]

Studienbesuch Globale Verantwortung, Brüssel, 3. bis 6. Oktober 2011 Begleitung: Delia Lazar, +32 (0)499 42 71 64, [email protected] Bitte immer pünktlich sein und Reisepass oder Personalausweis immer dabei haben (für Sicherheitskontrollen bei Institutionen)! Montag, 3.10. Dienstag, 4.10. Mittwoch, 5.10. Donnerstag, 6.10. 11:30: Ankunft am Flughafen in Brüssel und 9:00-10:00: Einführung in 9:00-10:30: EU Aussenhandelspolitik und 9:30-10:30: Wie die Europäische Kommission gemeinsame Fahrt in das CONCORD Büro die Arbeit von CONCORD Entwicklungszuammenarbeit mit der Zivilgesellschaft zusammenarbeitet (MFF, Development Didier Bloch, Europäische Kommission, DG Pierfranco Alloa, Europäische Kommision, DG Education) TRADE DevCo EuropeAid, Unit D2 Elise Vanormelingen Rue de la Loi 170 Rue de la Science 15 (A031, 7th floor) (CONCORD) und Ana Biurrun (DEEEP) Grosser CONCORD Sitzungssaal (Tiefparterre) 10:30-13:00: Teilnahme 14:00-14:30: Treffen mit MEP Richard 11:30-13:00: Financing for Development an einer Sitzung des DEVE Seeber (ÖVP) Renate Hahlen, Europäische Kommission, DG 13:30-15:30: Einführung in das Programm Committee im Europäisches Parlament, Eingang Altiero DevCo EuropeAid, Unit A3 und in die Arbeit von CONCORD (PCD, Future Europäischen Parlament, Spinelli Gebäude, Rue Wiertz 60 (Ankunft of EU Development Policy) kurzes Treffen mit MEPs Rue de la Science 15 bereits um 13:45) Meagen Baldwin und Colin Kampschoer, Ulrike Lunacek (Die 14:00-15:30: Die Arbeit der Kommission im CONCORD Grünen) und Ska Keller (Die Grünen, Bereich Humanitäre Hilfe und Zivilschutz Grosser CONCORD Sitzungssaal Deutschland) Thorsten Muench, Europäische Kommission, DG (Tiefparterre), Square Ambiorix 10 Caroline Ausserer, ECHO, Unit A2 Assistentin von MEP Kleiner CONCORD Sitzungssaal (Tiefparterre) Ulrike Lunacek Europäisches Parlament, Eingang Altiero Spinelli Gebäude, Rue Wiertz 60 16:00-17:30: Policy Coherence for 13:30-15:00: Ständige 14:30-15:00: Einführung in die Arbeit des Ende des Programms und Rückreise nach Development Vertretung Österreichs entwicklungspolitischen Ausschusses des Österreich bei der EU EP Zdenka Dobiasova, Europäische Kommission, DG DevCo EuropeAid, Unit A3 Mirjam Rinderer und Bettina de Souza Guilherme, DEVE Barbara Grosse, Ständige Sekretariat, Europäisches Parlament Viktor Sukup, Europäische Kommission, DG Vertretung Österreichs DevCo, Unit R7 15:00-16:00: Sakharov-Preis des bei den EU Institutionen Europäischen Parlaments (Vorstellung der Rue de la Science 15 Avenue de Cortenbergh Teilnehmer in den Ausschüssen) 30

19:00: Gemeinsames Abendessen im 16:00-17:30: Die Rolle 16:15-17:30: Diskussion mit Anthony Lake, äthiopischen Restaurant KOKOB Rue des des European External Executive Director, UNICEF, zum Thema Grands Carmes 10 (vorher Check-in im Hotel Action Service in der EZA ‘Equity’ (im Parlamentsausschuss) Mozart) Andreas Fischer-Barnicol, EEAS Grosser CONCORD Sitzungssaal (Tiefparterre)