DOCSLIB.ORG

The Treaty of Lisbon

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Treaty of Lisbon The Treaty of Lisbon Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community Type of treaty Amender of previous treaties Signed 13 December 2007 Location Lisbon , Portugal Sealed 18 December 2007 Effective 1 December 2009 Signatories EU Member States Depositary Government of Italy Languages 23 EU languages The long process of ratification This investigation provides a short introduction to the long process of ratification and all the obstacles that the Union had to face before the Lisbon Treaty, signed on 13 December 2007, rejected by Ireland in 2008 1 and finally approved on 2 October 2009, could finally come into force; 1 In Italy the Senate had already approved the Lisbon Treaty on 24 July 2008 (288 votes in favour) and on 31 July 2008 the Chamber of Deputies unanimously approved its ratification. In the UK the parliamentary ratification was held on 11 March in the House of Commons: 346 votes in favour, 206 against, and on 18 June 2008 in the House of Lords (by an undetailed oral vote). 1 it provides also a reference to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (2004), hereafter called the EU Constitution for the sake of convenience, rejected by France and the Netherlands in 2005 2. The two new figures that the Treaty creates are here introduced. The Treaties usually take their name after the city where they were signed: a few years usually elapse between this date and the date of ratification (if any). Under current law, unanimity is required for these documents to be ratified, therefore the process is usually long. For the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, for example, the process proved to be extremely arduous: it entered into force on 1 December 2009 but it was signed on 13 December 2007 in Lisbon (as Portugal held the EU Council’s Presidency at the time), and was planned to have been ratified in all member States by the end of 2008, so that it could come into force before the 2009 European elections. 26 member States voted “Yes”, albeit in different periods 3, but for several reasons 4 the Irish electorate on 12 June 2008 voted against it (the proposal was defeated by 53.4% of votes to 46.6%, with a turnout of 53.1%). Abstention was high, and it is usually divided into two categories: voluntary and circumstantial. Voluntary abstention is the main reason for not voting: the main element of this was a lack of knowledge or understanding of the Treaty. Some people, when asked why they did not go to the polls, replied “Even if you want to inform yourself and try and get educated on it, you’d still need a dictionary to try and explain some of the words in it”. Admittedly, the language of the Lisbon Treaty, just like any other European document, is unreadable for the average person and appears to be written more for a handful of civil servants rather than Europe’s 500 million citizens (Hari 2005). One criticism frequently made of the EU Constitution, for example, was that it is “unreadable”, with disparaging remarks across the political spectrum: “A Constitution should be readable and accessible to the population. It should not be a document of 480 pages, with some 400 more pages of appendixes and declarations. That’s really crazy” (Argentieri 2005). The EU Constitution was supposed to simplify and synthesize previous treaties within a single, ‘clear’, foundational document for the EU. President Delors urged Commission staff “to write with a lighter pen” and President Santer’s dictum was that we should do “less but better”. In an interview from The Economist in 2002, Jack Straw, Britain’s Foreign Secretary, declared: “The Constitution of the world's most complex international organization — the United Nations — fits easily into my jacket pocket. The Constitution of one of the world's oldest and most successful democracies — the United States — would fit neatly into the other pocket. I do not have a pocket big enough for what passes as the Constitution — “the consolidated Treaties” — of the European Union. Size is important. The smaller the better when it comes to Constitutions. The best bits in both Constitutions are their Preambles, in ringing declaratory prose. The UN’s covers a small page; the 2 When the Constitution was rejected in the French and Dutch referenda (respectively on 29 May and 1 June), 18 member states had already ratified the Treaty, either by parliamentary procedures or by referendum. The Italian Chamber of Deputies (436 Yes, 28 No, 5 abstentions) and the Italian Senate (217 Yes, 16 No) had already approved it, on 25 January and on 6 April 2005. In the United Kingdom plans to organize a referendum were suspended, and ratification in Ireland, which would have also been subject to a referendum, was postponed. Bulgaria and Romania, which entered the EU in January 2007, already ratified the Constitution before accession. 3 Dates of ratification: Austria: 13 May 2008, Belgium: 15 October 2008, Bulgaria: 28 April 2008, Cyprus: 26 August 2008, Denmark: 29 May 2008 , Estonia: 23 September 2008, Finland: 30 September 2008, France: 14 February 2008, Greece: 12 August 2008, Hungary: 6 February 2008, Italy: 8 August 2008, Latvia: 16 June 2008, Lithuania: 26 August 2008, Luxembourg:, 21 July 2008, Malta: 6 February 2008, Netherlands: 11 September 2008, Portugal: 17 June 2008, Romania: 11 March 2008, Slovakia: 24 June 2008, Slovenia: 24 April 2008, Spain: 8 October 2008, Sweden: 10, December 2008, United Kingdom: 16 July 2008. 4 A week later Eurobarometer conducted hours after the Irish vote was released, indicating why the electorate voted as they did. Those respondents who voted "no" in the referendum were asked to give the reasons why they voted "no" to the treaty, most said that they did not know enough about the Treaty and would not want to vote for something they were not familiar with, and that their negative vote aimed at protecting Irish identity. 2 US Constitution’s Preamble covers just four lines. With the European Constitution Mr. Giscard D’Estaing’s original plan was to come up with something as inspiring and memorable as the Preamble of the American Constitution. Yet, its Preamble counted 244 words, and the whole text counted 66,647 words. The Lisbon Treaty is indeed even longer, in that if we consider both the first and second part, the protocols, the annexes and the declarations the total words amount to 123,000 words, almost twice the size of the failed Constitution. The two treaties alone count approximately 65,000 words, leaving out the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which in the Treaty of Lisbon is made legally binding. Indeed, Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union (the first part of the Lisbon Treaty) reads as follows: Article 6 (ex Article 6 TEU) 1. The Union recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, as adapted at Strasbourg, on 12 December 2007, which shall have the same legal value as the Treaties. The provisions of the Charter shall not extend in any way the competences of the Union as defined in the Treaties. The rights, freedoms and principles in the Charter shall be interpreted in accordance with the general provisions in Title VII of the Charter governing its interpretation and application and with due regard to the explanations referred to in the Charter, that set out the sources of those provisions. 2. The Union shall accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Such accession shall not affect the Union's competences as defined in the Treaties. 3. Fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, shall constitute general principles of the Union's law. The three texts, TEC, TFEU and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, have equal legal value and combined constitute the European Union’s legal basis. The Irish are the only people in the EU who were offered a referendum on Lisbon, in addition to a parliamentary vote, in that the Irish Constitution requires a vote on any treaty that transfers any power at all to the European level. There were unsuccessful calls to governments to hold referendums in some other member States, and it is generally assumed that referendums would have been lost in many other countries had their people been given a say. Ratification of the Treaty in all other member States was decided upon by the states’ national parliaments. The UK had already ratified the Treaty on 16 June 2008, but it cannot be denied the knock-on effect that the Irish referendum had on the anti-EU sentiment in the UK, which was further strengthened by the negative result of the Irish electorate. The Conservative Party would have liked to sabotage the treaty, but they wisely dropped the promise of a referendum, because the leader of the party, David Cameron, had great ambitions and was wise enough to avoid a row that could have wrecked his government. In fact, in the general elections held in May 2010, the Labour Party lost the elections, and after ten years of Tony Blair and five years of Gordon Brown, the Tories have now won the elections. The great change is the new coalition between the Conservative David Cameron and the Liberal Democrat Nick Clegg: as Conservative prime minister and Liberal Democrat deputy prime minister, they now run the first coalition government that Britain has seen since 1945.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The New Eu Foreign Policy Architecture
    THE NEW EU FOREIGN POLICY ARCHITECTURE REVIEWING THE FIRST TWO YEARS OF THE EEAS NIKLAS HELWIG PAUL IVAN HRANT KOSTANYAN CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN POLICY STUDIES (CEPS) BRUSSELS The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) is an independent policy research institute in Brussels. Its mission is to produce sound policy research leading to constructive solutions to the challenges facing Europe. The views expressed in this book are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed to CEPS or any other institution with which they are associated or to the European Union. Niklas Helwig is a Marie Curie Researcher of the EXACT network at the University of Edinburgh and Cologne and focuses on the institutional development of EU foreign policy. He worked for the Centre for European Policy Studies and the Finnish Institute of International Affairs. Paul Ivan is a Romanian diplomat. Previously, he worked as a researcher for the Centre for European Policy Studies, where he focused on EU political and institutional issues and the European External Action Service. Hrant Kostanyan is an associate research fellow at CEPS and a PhD candidate at the Centre for EU Studies at Ghent University. He worked as an external expert for International Alert, based in London, in the Eastern Europe and South Caucasus research project. He also worked as an expert on a European Commission-funded project on the EU’s relations with Russia and the Eastern Partnership at the EU Neighbourhood Info Centre. The authors thank Piotr Maciej Kaczyński for his comments on an earlier draft. ISBN 978-94-6138-262-7 © Copyright 2013, Centre for European Policy Studies and the authors.
    [Show full text]
  • The Negotiation of the European External Action Service: Theoretical and Policy Implications
    The Negotiation of the European External Action Service: Theoretical and Policy Implications MPP Professional Paper In Partial Fulfillment of the Master of Public Policy Degree Requirements The Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs The University of Minnesota Matthew Stenberg May 6, 2011 Signature below of Paper Supervisor certifies successful completion of oral presentation and completion of final written version: _______________________________ ____________________ ___________________ Robert Kudrle, Paper Supervisor Date, presentation Date, paper completion Orville and Jane Freeman Professor of International Trade and Investment Policy ________________________________________ ___________________ Sherry Gray, Coordinator and Lecturer, Global Policy ` Date Signature of Second Committee Member, certifying successful completion of professional paper ________________________________________ ___________________ Steve Andreasen, Lecturer ` Date Signature of Third Committee Member, certifying successful completion of professional paper Stenberg 1 Abstract Supranationalist and intergovernmentalist scholars have long debated the driving forces behind European integration. The creation of the European External Action Service (EEAS) forces an examination of this debate in a different way. Many of those countries pushing for the EEAS foresaw it as an intergovernmentalist institution during the Lisbon Treaty Negotiations. Indeed, its provisions upon implementation look strikingly intergovernmental. Despite its current form, the negotiating process between the European Commission and European Parliament during 2010 was sweepingly supranational in nature, as the EP asserted its influence as a democratically elected, pan- European body to demand changes to the final form of the EEAS as well as a greater oversight role. Though the present form of the EEAS is intergovernmental, the negotiating process has indicated that a more assertive Parliament may result in greater long-term, supranational developments.
    [Show full text]
  • Facilitating Peaceful Protests
    ACADEMY BRIEFING No. 5 Facilitating Peaceful Protests January 2014 Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Geneva Académie de droit international humanitaire et de droits humains à Genève Academ The Academy, a joint centre of ISBN: 978-2-9700866-3-5 © Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, January 2014. Acknowledgements This Academy Briefing was written by Milena Costas Trascasas, Research Fellow, and Stuart Casey-Maslen, Head of Research, at the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights (Geneva Academy). The Academy would like to thank all those who commented on an earlier draft of this briefing, in particular Anja Bienart and Brian Wood of Amnesty International, and Neil Corney of Omega Research Foundation. The Geneva Academy would also like to thank the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (DFAE) for its support to the Academy’s work on facilitating peaceful protests, especially the Human Security Division for its funding of the publication of this Briefing. Editing, design, and layout by Plain Sense, Geneva. Disclaimer This Academy Briefing is the work of the authors. The views expressed in it do not necessarily reflect those of the project’s supporters or of anyone who provided input to, or commented on, a draft of this Briefing. The designation of states or territories does not imply any judgement by the Geneva Academy, the DFAE, or any other body or individual, regarding the legal status of such states or territories, or their authorities and institutions, or the delimitation of their boundaries, or the status of any states or territories that border them.
    [Show full text]
  • Department for Constitutional Affairs Resource Accounts for the Year
    Resource Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2006 Department for Constitutional Affairs Resource Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2006 Presented pursuant to the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000, Chapter 20, Section 6 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 12th October 2006 HC 1605 LONDON: The Stationery Office £13.85 © Crown Copyright 2006 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and departmental logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing that it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Any enquiries relating to the copyright in this document should be addressed to The Licensing Division, HMSO, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich, NR3 1BQ. Fax: 01603 723000 or e-mail: [email protected] Department for Constitutional Affairs Resource Accounts 2005-06 Contents Annual Report 1 Management Commentary 5 Remuneration Report 13 Statement of Accounting Officers’ Responsibilities 24 Statement on Internal Control 25 Certificate and Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General to the House of Commons 31 The Accounting Schedules: Statement of Parliamentary Supply 33 Operating Cost Statement 34 Balance Sheet 36 Cash Flow Statement 37 Consolidated Statement of Operating Costs by Departmental Aims and Objectives 37 Notes to the Accounts 40 Department for Constitutional Affairs Resource Accounts 2005-06 Annual Report The Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) For purposes of the Department’s Resource is the Government department responsible for Accounts, the ‘Consolidated’ accounts upholding justice, rights and democracy.
    [Show full text]
  • Profile Catherine Ashton
    profile Catherine Ashton European Commissioner for Trade Catherine Ashton was born in Upholland in Lancashire, from where she takes her title, Baroness Ashton of Upholland. From 1983-89 she was Director of Business in the Community, and established the Employers' Forum on Disability, Opportunity Now, and the Windsor Fellowship. Catherine Ashton chaired the Health Authority in Hertfordshire from 1998 to 2001, and became a Vice President of the National Council for One Parent Families. In 1999 Catherine Ashton became a life peer. She was made Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State in the Department for Education and Skills in 2001, and then Parliamentary Under-Secretary in the Department for Constitutional Affairs and subsequently Ministry of Justice with responsibilities for human rights, freedom of information and equalities. She became a Privy Councillor in May 2006. Catherine Ashton was appointed Leader of the House of Lords and Lord President of the Council in Gordon Brown’s first Cabinet in June 2007. As well as Leader of the Lords, she took responsibility in the House of Lords for equalities issues. In 2005 Catherine Ashton was voted House Magazine Minister of the Year and Channel 4 Peer of the Year. In 2006, she was voted Stonewall Politician of the Year. Catherine Ashton brings with her significant European experience, including steering the Lisbon Treaty through the UK's upper chamber and dealing with EU justice and home affairs issues in her previous positions. During her time as Director of Business in the Community, Catherine Ashton worked together with companies and communities on creating effective business strategies, while ensuring equality and diversity in the workforce.
    [Show full text]
  • P R E S S EN EU High Representative Catherine Ashton Chairs Middle
    EUROPEAN UNION Brussels, 4 February 2011 A 044/11 EU High Representative Catherine Ashton chairs Middle East Quartet Ministerial meeting in Munich Catherine Ashton, European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, will chair the first meeting of the Middle East Quartet principles of 2011 on Saturday, February 5. She will be joined in the meeting -- which takes place in the margins of the Munich Security Conference -- by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Quartet Envoy Tony Blair. Catherine Ashton said ahead of the meeting: "This meeting comes at a crucial time when we are witnessing significant events in the Middle East region. It is therefore extremely important that we stay the course in the Middle East Peace Process. We must remain focused on making progress on a negotiated peace agreement between Israel and Palestine -- a key component in bringing about peace and stability in the wider region." During her time in Munich, Catherine Ashton will also hold a number of bilateral discussions, including with Secretary of State Clinton on EU-US relations, Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai and Ban Ki-moon ahead of her upcoming trip to New York (Feb 6-9). Catherine Ashton will hold a press conference at approximately 1600 hours, following the Quartet meeting. This will be followed by remarks to the Munich Security Council on the wider Middle East. Video footage will be provided by EBS. ____________________ P R E S S FOR FURTHER DETAILS: Maja Kocijancic +32 498 984 425 - +32 2 298 65 70 - [email protected] Darren Ennis +32 498 963 293 - +32 2 296 32 93 - [email protected] [email protected] www.eeas.europa.eu EN .
    [Show full text]
  • First President of the European Council European Union Center of North Carolina EU Briefings, March 2010
    Policy Area: First President of the European Council European Union Center of North Carolina EU Briefings, March 2010 The First President of the European Council Years of soul-searching and institutional introspection preceded the Lisbon Treaty’s coming into force. The new EU structure was expected to resolve the decade-long question: “who do you call when you want to speak with Europe?” For candidates who could pick up that imaginary EU phone, Lisbon created two new top jobs: a High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and a President of the European Council. While another brief in this series (www.unc.edu/depts/europe/business_media/busbrief1004-high-rep.htm) focuses on Europe's first High Representative, this paper zeros in on the first EU Council President. The election by the EU Heads of State and Government of the little-known Belgian Herman van Rompuy for that post generated surprise and skepticism. But when taking into account the lingering practical institutional challenges that have to be addressed, or when aiming for coordination rather than initiative, Van Rompuy could be considered a successful pick. This brief assesses how the EU came to his election and touches upon what is to be expected of the new EU Council President. On December 1, 2009, the long-awaited Lisbon Treaty came into force. For the EU Council – the EU Heads of State and Government – this means that it has become an official EU institution. And while the rotating six-month country-presidency remains in existence, the Council will now also have a permanent president.
    [Show full text]
  • Foundation Stage Profile Handbook 1 Introduction Recording Children’S Development
    Early years Investing in our future Early years Foundation Stage Profile practitioners Handbook Settings in receipt of government funding to provide early years education and schools with nursery and reception aged children Date of issue: 01/03 Ref: QCA/03/1006 First published in 2003. © Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2003. Reproduction, storage, adaptation or translation, in any form or by any means, of this publication is prohibited without the prior written permission of the publisher, unless within the terms of licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Excerpts may be reproduced for the purpose of research, private study, criticism or review, or by educational institutions solely for educational purposes, without permission, providing full acknowledgement is given. Printed in Great Britain. The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority is an exempt charity under Schedule 2 of the Charities Act 1993. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 83 Piccadilly London W1J 8QA www.qca.org.uk Foreword by Baroness Catherine Ashton Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Sure Start, Early Years and Childcare The introduction of the foundation stage in September 2000 was widely welcomed by early years practitioners. It gave this very important stage of education a distinct identity. The early learning goals set high expectations for the end of the foundation stage, but expectations that are achievable for most children who have followed a relevant curriculum. We published Curriculum guidance for the foundation stage to help practitioners understand what the goals mean for children aged three to five throughout the foundation stage. The guidance shows what practitioners need to do to help children make good progress towards, and where appropriate beyond, the goals.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lisbon Treaty: Choosing a High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
    The Lisbon Treaty: choosing a High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Standard Note: SN/IA/5223 Last updated: 18 November 2009 Author: Vaughne Miller Section International Affairs and Defence Section This Note looks at the role of the new High Representative for EU foreign affairs and security policy, the method of appointment and possible candidates for the job. It does not consider the new European External Action Service. This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. It should not be relied upon as being up to date; the law or policies may have changed since it was last updated; and it should not be relied upon as legal or professional advice or as a substitute for it. A suitably qualified professional should be consulted if specific advice or information is required. This information is provided subject to our general terms and conditions which are available online or may be provided on request in hard copy. Authors are available to discuss the content of this briefing with Members and their staff, but not with the general public. Contents 1 The High Representative 2 1.1 Method of appointment 2 1.2 Role of High Representative 4 1.3 Voting procedures 4 1.4 Comment on the post 5 2 Possible candidates 11 David Miliband, UK Foreign Secretary 11 Massimo D’Alema, former Italian Prime Minister 12 Olli Rehn, Finnish EU enlargement Commissioner 12 Ursula Plassnik, former Austrian foreign minister 12 Jaap de Hoop Scheffer 12 Frank-Walter Steinmeier, former German SPD foreign minister 12 Miguel Ángel Moratinos, Spanish foreign minister since 2004 13 Elisabeth Guigou, French parliamentarian and EU affairs minister 1990 to 199313 Alfred Gusenbauer, Chancellor of Austria 2007-2008 13 Carl Bildt, Swedish foreign minister 13 Toomas Hendrik Ilves, Estonian President.
    [Show full text]
  • A Conversation with Baroness Catherine Ashton Mr
    Brussels Forum March 22, 2014 A Conversation with Baroness Catherine Ashton Mr. Craig Kennedy: Grab a seat. Okay, welcome back, everybody. Shhh. Great. And don't worry, we're going to get the air-conditioning going full blast and bring out the fans and everything. Welcome back. Now, it is a very great pleasure for me to introduce to the Brussels Forum, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the Vice President of the European Commission, Catherine Ashton. Please allow me to first thank her for all of the things that she's done for GMF. She's been to every one of the forums since she had this post. She's always been an extremely active participant. And we've really- -you've really improved the quality of this event because of your participation. Thank you. So the conversation with her will be moderated by GMF Senior Vice President Ivan Vejvoda. Ivan, please. Mr. Ivan Vejvoda: Thank you, Craig. And welcome, Lady Ashton, Cathy, if I may. As Craig said, you've been an avid and stalwart participant of all of our meetings. And I think that makes this conversation easier for me, because I think I take this as a bit of a fireside chat, as you're in your fifth year in this role. In European parlance, you're the Minister of 1 Foreign Affairs of Europe; or in American parlance, you're the Czar of Foreign Policy, or Czarina, to be more precise. And apparently you do have a telephone number where viewers can reach you.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil-Military Capacities for European Security
    Clingendael Report Civil-Military Capacities for European Security Margriet Drent Kees Homan Dick Zandee Civil-Military Capacities for European Security Civil-Military Capacities for European Security Margriet Drent Kees Homan Dick Zandee © Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright holders. Image rights: Drone, Binary Code: © Shutterstock.com Search and Rescue squadron: © David Fowler / Shutterstock.com Design: Textcetera, The Hague Print: Gildeprint, Enschede Clingendael Institute P.O. Box 93080 2509 AB The Hague The Netherlands Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.clingendael.nl/ Content Executive summary 7 Introduction 11 1 The external-internal security gap 13 2 Case study maritime security 25 3 Case study border security 39 4 Case study cyber security 53 5 Conclusions and recommendations 64 List of acronyms 70 5 Executive summary In the last two decades the European Union has created separated policies, institutions and capacities for external and internal security. In the meantime the world’s security environment has changed fundamentally. Today, it is no longer possible to make a clear distinction between security outside and within Europe. Conflicts elsewhere in the world often have direct spill-over effects, not primarily in terms of military threats but by challenges posed by illegal immigration, terrorism, international crime and illegal trade. Lampedusa has become a synonym for tragedy. Crises and instability in Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere in the world provide breeding grounds for extremism, weapons smuggling, drugs trafficking or kidnapping.
    [Show full text]
  • Top Margin 1
    CLDR/11/3 Bruxelles, le 21 janvier 2011 CALENDRIER du 24 au 30 janvier 2011 (susceptible de modifications en cours de semaine) Activités des Institutions Déplacements et visites Lundi 24 janvier Mr José Manuel Durão BARROSO receives Mr. Islam KARIMOV, President of the Republic of Uzbekistan Mr Siim KALLAS receives Mrs Catharina ELMSÄTER-SVÄRD, Swedish Minister for Infrastructure Vice-President Siim KALLAS receives Mr Uldi AUGULIS, Latvian Minister of Transport Mr Janez POTOČNIK receives Mrs Joke SCHAUVLIEGE, Belgian Minister for Environment Mr Andris PIEBALGS on official visit in Rome M. Michel BARNIER et Mme Androulla VASSILIOU reçoivent Mme Chantal JOUANNO, Secrétaire d'Etat Française aux Sports M. Michel BARNIER participe à la réunion annuelle de la Fédération Néerlandaise des Fonds de Pension (Avenue de Cortenberg 4-10) M. Michel BARNIER reçoit les représentants de la Fédération Européenne des Journalistes Ms Androulla VASSILIOU receives Mr. Yannis VARDAKASTANIS, President of European Disability Forum Ms Androulla VASSILIOU receives Ms Myriam DIOCARETZ, Secretary General of the European Writers' Council Ms Androulla VASSILIOU receives Mr Alexis GALANOS, Mayor of Ammochostos, Cyprus Mr John DALLI receives the Romanian Minister of Agriculture, Mr Valeriu TABARA Mr John DALLI delivers a speech at the opening of the World Veterinary Year, in Versailles (France) Mrs Máire GEOGHEGAN-QUINN receives Minister Radovan FUCHS, Croatian Minister for Science, Education and Sport Mrs Máire GEOGHEGAN-QUINN addresses the European Business Network
    [Show full text]