DOCSLIB.ORG

Should the EU Limit the Juncker Plan Interventions Aiming at Promoting Growth? the Vote of the Meps

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Should the EU limit the Juncker Plan interventions aiming at promoting growth? The vote of the MEPs The European Fund for Strategic Investments was set up by the European Commission to implement the Juncker’s Plan, one of the main flagships project of the current President. Despite the innovative nature of the instrument, some MEPs criticized it, raising concerns about the financing of projects whose economic, social and environmental sustainability is questionable. However, most MEPs rallied behind President Juncker in defending the instrument and a critical amendment tabled by EFDD was rejected by more than 70% of MEPs. Centrist groups ALDE, S&D, the EPP and ECR strongly defended Juncker’s initiative, whereas, EFDD and ENF both voted against the European Fund for Strategic Investments. Interestingly, the majority of MEPs from Greens/EFA and a substantial amount of representatives from GUE-NGL decided to abstain. As for French MEPs specifically, they DISTRIBUTION OF FRENCH POLITICAL PARTIES IN THE EUROPEAN tended to follow the general trend of the PARLIAMENT IN 2016 Non-Inscrits : Front national, List "Les Français political groups in the plenary, with all European United Left-Nordic Green libres" Socialists, Centrists, and Republicans Left: Front de gauche, List "union rallying behind Juncker’s Plan. Likewise, pour les Outre-Mer" Europe of Freedom and Direct all members of the French Ecology Democracy: one non-affiliated The Greens - member Europe Party followed their group’s line European Free and abstained on the instrument. Alliance: Europe Europe des nations et Ecologie des libertés : Front Interestingly, the fund was also supported national, Progressive Alliance by some MEPs of the National Front: Rassemblement bleu of Socialists and Gilles Lebreton and Bernard Monot Marine Democrats: Parti voted against the critical amendment, socialiste, Parti radical de gauche whereas Nicolas Bay did not vote. Apart from the National Front, only far-left European People's Party: MEPs joined the criticism against the Les Républicains, one non- Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe: European Fund for Strategic Investments, affiliated member Union des Démocrates et Indépendants, List "Génération citoyens", Modem, Parti radical with the exception of Patrick Le Hyaric who did not vote. Should the EU limit the Juncker Plan interventions aiming at promoting growth? The vote of MEPs elected in France* For Marie-Christine Marie-Christine Mireille Edouard Jean-Francois Joëlle BERGERON Louis ALIOT ARNAUTU Dominique BILDE BOUTONNET Steeve BRIOIS D'ORNANO FERRAND Sylvie GODDYN JALKH National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front EFDD ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF Jean-Luc Younous Dominique Florian Mylène Jean-Luc Marine LE PEN Philippe LOISEAU Joëlle MÉLIN Sophie MONTEL SCHAFFHAUSER OMARJEE MARTIN PHILIPPOT Bleu Marine TROSZCZYNSKI MÉLENCHON The Union for National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front Mouvement National Front Left Front Overseas Territories ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF GUE/NGL GUE/NGL Marie-Christine VERGIAT Bruno GOLLNISCH Left Front National Front GUE/NGL NI Against Marielle DE Nathalie Jean ARTHUIS Jean-Marie Sylvie GOULARD Dominique Michèle SARNEZ GRIESBECK Gilles LEBRETON Bernard MONOT Alain CADEC Union of Democrats CAVADA Democratic Democratic Democratic RIQUET ALLIOT-MARIE and Independants Citizens' Generation Movement Movement Movement Radical Party - UDI National Front National Front The Republicans The Republicans ALDE ALDE ALDE ALDE ALDE ALDE ENF ENF EPP EPP Angélique Françoise Alain Jérôme Arnaud DANJEAN Michel DANTIN Rachida DATI DELAHAYE GROSSETÊTE Brice HORTEFEUX Marc JOULAUD Philippe JUVIN LAMASSOURE LAVRILLEUX The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP Constance LE Elisabeth MORIN- Renaud Aymeric GRIP Nadine MORANO CHARTIER MUSELIER Maurice PONGA Franck PROUST Tokia SAIFI Anne SANDER CHAUPRADE Eric ANDRIEU The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Free French Socialist Party EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP NI S&D Christine REVAULT Jean-Paul Louis-Joseph Emmanuel Guillaume BALAS Pervenche BERÈS Sylvie GUILLAUME Edouard MARTIN Gilles PARGNEAUX Vincent PEILLON D'ALLONNES DENANOT MANSCOUR MAUREL BONNEFOY Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party S&D S&D S&D S&D S&D S&D S&D S&D S&D S&D Virginie ROZIÈRE Isabelle THOMAS Left Radical Party Socialist Party S&D S&D Abstain José BOVÉ Karima DELLI Pascal DURAND Yannick JADOT Eva JOLY Michèle RIVASI Europe Ecology -The Europe Ecology -The Europe Ecology -The Europe Ecology -The Europe Ecology -The Europe Ecology -The Greens Greens Greens Greens Greens Greens Greens/EFA Greens/EFA Greens/EFA Greens/EFA Greens/EFA Greens/EFA Didn't vote Nicolas BAY Patrick LE HYARIC National Front Left Front ENF GUE/NGL Documented absence Robert ROCHEFORT Jean-Marie LE Democratic PEN Movement National Front ALDE NI *Source : Jacques Delors Institute / Data : www.votewatch.eu Should Employers to ban specific kinds of symbols that are claimed to be of a religious nature? The vote of the MEPs Two months after the Nice attacks, the MEPs voted on an amendment defending the rights of the employers to ban religious symbols on the workplace whenever these symbols violate the rights of women or can lead to security problems. This vote is quite important given the French context: France had already banned women to wear headscarves in public schools, as well as the burka and the niqab (the veils that cover women’s faces). In the case of the European Parliament, the vote on this amendment was pretty tight. The amendment was rejected by a slim margin of 5%. The amendment was supported by EPP and ENF, whereas ALDE, S&D, the Greens and GUE-NGL opposed the ban. Interestingly, ECR and EFDD were split, although a majority of their MEPs voted against the proposal. Also in this case, the position of French MEPs is drastically different from the ones of their colleagues from other countries, as a large majority of them supported the ban. The ban on religious symbols at the workplace was opposed by the French Greens, Jean Arthuis from the Union of Democrats and Independents and Younous Omarjee from the Alliance of the Overseas. DISTRIBUTION OF FRENCH POLITICAL PARTIES IN THE EUROPEAN All the other MEPs voted in favor of PARLIAMENT IN 2016 the ban, with some few exception Non-Inscrits : Front national, List "Les Français European United Left-Nordic Green within the political parties: the libres" Left: Front de gauche, List "union Republicans Nadine Morano, Patrick Europe of Freedom and Direct pour les Outre-Mer" Le Hyaric from the Left Front and 3 Democracy: one non-affiliated The Greens - member MEPs from the Socialist Party (Gilles European Free Alliance: Europe Pargneaux, Isabelle Thomas and Europe des nations et Ecologie Vincent Peillon). All these 5 “rebels” des libertés : Front voted against the ban. national, Progressive Alliance Rassemblement bleu of Socialists and Marine Democrats: Parti socialiste, Parti radical de gauche European People's Party: Les Républicains, one non- Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe: affiliated member Union des Démocrates et Indépendants, List "Génération citoyens", Modem, Parti radical The vote of MEPs elected in France* For Marielle DE Nathalie Jean-Marie Dominique Marie-Christine Marie-Christine Mireille SARNEZ GRIESBECK Joëlle BERGERON Nicolas BAY Dominique BILDE CAVADA Democratic Democratic RIQUET ARNAUTU BOUTONNET D'ORNANO Citizens' Generation Movement Movement Radical Party - UDI National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front ALDE ALDE ALDE ALDE EFDD ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF Edouard Jean-Francois Dominique Florian FERRAND Sylvie GODDYN JALKH Gilles LEBRETON Philippe LOISEAU MARTIN Joëlle MÉLIN Bernard MONOT Sophie MONTEL PHILIPPOT National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front National Front ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF ENF Jean-Luc Mylène Michèle Angélique Françoise Alain SCHAFFHAUSER Arnaud DANJEAN Rachida DATI Brice HORTEFEUX Philippe JUVIN Bleu Marine TROSZCZYNSKI ALLIOT-MARIE DELAHAYE GROSSETÊTE LAMASSOURE Mouvement National Front The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans ENF ENF EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP Jérôme Constance LE Elisabeth MORIN- Renaud Jean-Luc Aymeric LAVRILLEUX GRIP CHARTIER MUSELIER Maurice PONGA Franck PROUST Tokia SAIFI Anne SANDER MÉLENCHON CHAUPRADE The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans The Republicans Left Front The Free French EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP EPP GUE/NGL NI Christine REVAULT Jean-Paul Emmanuel Bruno GOLLNISCH Eric ANDRIEU Guillaume BALAS Pervenche BERÈS Sylvie GUILLAUME D'ALLONNES Virginie ROZIÈRE DENANOT MAUREL BONNEFOY Left Radical Party National Front Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party Socialist Party NI S&D S&D S&D S&D S&D S&D S&D S&D Against Younous Jean ARTHUIS Nadine MORANO José BOVÉ Karima DELLI Pascal
Recommended publications
  • En En Report

    En En Report

    European Parliament 2019-2024 Plenary sitting A9-0169/2021 21.5.2021 REPORT on the situation of sexual and reproductive health and rights in the EU, in the frame of women’s health (2020/2215(INI)) Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality Rapporteur: Predrag Fred Matić RR\1233997EN.docx PE660.070v03-00 EN United in diversityEN PR_INI CONTENTS Page MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION.............................................3 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT ............................................................................................25 MINORITY POSITION ...........................................................................................................29 OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT .....................................................30 INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE.................................38 FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE ....................................39 PE660.070v03-00 2/39 RR\1233997EN.docx EN MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION on the situation of sexual and reproductive health and rights in the EU, in the frame of women’s health (2020/2215(INI)) The European Parliament, – having regard to Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), – having regard to Articles 5, 6 and 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, – having regard to the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) held in Cairo, its Programme of Action and the outcomes of its review conferences, – having regard to the Nairobi
  • European Parliament Elections 2019 - Forecast

    European Parliament Elections 2019 - Forecast

    Briefing May 2019 European Parliament Elections 2019 - Forecast Austria – 18 MEPs Staff lead: Nick Dornheim PARTIES (EP group) Freedom Party of Austria The Greens – The Green Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) (EPP) Social Democratic Party of Austria NEOS – The New (FPÖ) (Salvini’s Alliance) – Alternative (Greens/EFA) – 6 seats (SPÖ) (S&D) - 5 seats Austria (ALDE) 1 seat 5 seats 1 seat 1. Othmar Karas* Andreas Schieder Harald Vilimsky* Werner Kogler Claudia Gamon 2. Karoline Edtstadler Evelyn Regner* Georg Mayer* Sarah Wiener Karin Feldinger 3. Angelika Winzig Günther Sidl Petra Steger Monika Vana* Stefan Windberger 4. Simone Schmiedtbauer Bettina Vollath Roman Haider Thomas Waitz* Stefan Zotti 5. Lukas Mandl* Hannes Heide Vesna Schuster Olga Voglauer Nini Tsiklauri 6. Wolfram Pirchner Julia Elisabeth Herr Elisabeth Dieringer-Granza Thomas Schobesberger Johannes Margreiter 7. Christian Sagartz Christian Alexander Dax Josef Graf Teresa Reiter 8. Barbara Thaler Stefanie Mösl Maximilian Kurz Isak Schneider 9. Christian Zoll Luca Peter Marco Kaiser Andrea Kerbleder Peter Berry 10. Claudia Wolf-Schöffmann Theresa Muigg Karin Berger Julia Reichenhauser NB 1: Only the parties reaching the 4% electoral threshold are mentioned in the table. Likely to be elected Unlikely to be elected or *: Incumbent Member of the NB 2: 18 seats are allocated to Austria, same as in the previous election. and/or take seat to take seat, if elected European Parliament ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• www.eurocommerce.eu Belgium – 21 MEPs Staff lead: Stefania Moise PARTIES (EP group) DUTCH SPEAKING CONSITUENCY FRENCH SPEAKING CONSITUENCY GERMAN SPEAKING CONSTITUENCY 1. Geert Bourgeois 1. Paul Magnette 1. Pascal Arimont* 2. Assita Kanko 2. Maria Arena* 2.
  • Identit〠E Democrazia

    Identit〠E Democrazia

    Identità e Democrazia Da Wikipedia, l'enciclopedia libera. Identità e Democrazia (in inglese: Identity and Identità e Democrazia Democracy, ID) è un gruppo politico del Parlamento Europeo di destra, fondato nel 2019 dopo le elezioni (EN) Identity and Democracy europee del 2019. Il gruppo è il successore del gruppo Presidente Marco Zanni fondato nel 2015 Europa delle Nazioni e della Libertà. (Lega) Vicepresidente Nicolas Bay (RN) Jörg Meuthen Indice (AfD) Storia Stato Unione Obiettivi politici europea Composizione Abbreviazione ID Note Fondazione 13 giugno 2019 Voci correlate Ideologia Nazionalismo Conservatorismo Storia nazionale Populismo di Il 12 giugno 2019 è stato annunciato che il gruppo destra successore a Europa delle Nazioni e delle Libertà si Identitarismo sarebbe chiamato "Identità e Democrazia" e avrebbe Sovranismo incluso partiti come la Lega Nord (Italia), Anti-immigrazione Raggruppamento Nazionale (Francia) e Alternativa per la Collocazione Destra [1] Germania (Germania)[2]. Il leghista Marco Zanni è stato Partito europeo AEPN nominato Presidente[3]. Il 13 giugno 2019 il gruppo, composto da 73 europarlamentari, è stato lanciato a Seggi 73 / 751 Bruxelles da Marine Le Pen[4]. Europarlamento Obiettivi politici I principali obiettivi politici del gruppo sono bloccare una maggiore integrazione europea ed ottenere maggiore autonomia nelle politiche di spesa, ovvero la possibilità di fare maggiore deficit e debito senza incorrere in penalità da parte della Commissione Europea.[5] Composizione Identità e Democrazia è formato da
  • Hon. Mr President of the European Parliament, Dear David Sassoli

    Hon. Mr President of the European Parliament, Dear David Sassoli

    Hon. Mr President of the European Parliament, Dear David Sassoli, Since March, when the outbreak of COVID-19 intensified in Europe, the functioning of the European Parliament (EP) has changed dramatically, due to the sanitary measures applied. We understand the inevitability of the contingency plan, taking into account the need to prevent infection and the spread of the virus and to protect the health and lives of people. Six months later, the functioning of the EP is gradually returning to normal. However, there are services whose unavailability seriously impairs parliamentary work, namely the interpretation service. The European Union (EU) has 24 official languages and all deserve the same respect and treatment. We recognize that the number of languages available in committee meeting rooms has been increasing, but even so, more than half of the languages still have no interpretation. Multilingualism is a right enshrined in the Treaties that allows Members to express themselves in their own language. Now, that is not happening and we are concerned that the situation will continue, even taking into account the expected workflow in the commissions after these atypical six months. In this sense, we appeal, once again, to you, the President of the EP for the application of the letter and the spirit of the principle of multilingualism, finding solutions that respect this principle and that allow the use of any of the 24 official languages of the EU. The expression of each deputy in her/his own language is a priority so that there can be conditions to fully exercise the mandate for which she/he was elected and a condition of respect for the citizens who elected her/him.
  • Priority Question for Written Answer

    Priority Question for Written Answer

    Priority question for written answer P-002058/2020 to the Commission Rule 138 Julie Lechanteux (ID), Mathilde Androuët (ID), Jordan Bardella (ID), Aurelia Beigneux (ID), Dominique Bilde (ID), Annika Bruna (ID), Gilbert Collard (ID), Jean-Paul Garraud (ID), Catherine Griset (ID), Jean-François Jalkh (ID), France Jamet (ID), Virginie Joron (ID), Herve Juvin (ID), Jean-Lin Lacapelle (ID), Hélène Laporte (ID), Gilles Lebreton (ID), Thierry Mariani (ID), André Rougé (ID), Nicolas Bay (ID), Maxette Pirbakas (ID) Subject: Legal basis for geo-tracking and the sharing of personal data during the coronavirus outbreak On 24 March 2020, the Commission revealed that it had held talks with telecommunications operators about joining forces to tackle the coronavirus outbreak. Thierry Breton, the Internal Market Commissioner, held a videoconference with the heads of Europe’s telecommunications companies and the GSMA (Global System for Mobile Communications) to explore options for sharing geolocation metadata in order to map and forecast the spread of the virus. The Commission claims that such a move would be fully in line with the General Data Protection Regulation and e-privacy legislation. How does the Commission intend to guarantee EU citizens full anonymisation of their personal data? How exactly does the Commission envisage using such data? Not content with surveillance and quarantine enforcement, Israel and a number of Asian countries have adopted a proactive AI-based approach that alerts individuals if they have been in contact with a virus carrier. How do the Commission’s plans compare, and what logistical support will it provide the Member States which opt for this approach? PE650.848v01-00.
  • Europe Emergency, Europe Hope

    Europe Emergency, Europe Hope

    COLLOQUIUM Thursday 18th March Thursday 18th March Friday 19th March 9.00 am Europe Emergency, 2:30 pm - 6:45 pm 9.00 am - 1.00 pm Opening of the colloquium - Sabine THILLAYE, Chairwoman of the European Affairs THE NEW CHALLENGES: REGALIAN TIME TOWARDS THE CONFERENCE ON THE FUTURE Europe Hope Committee of the National Assembly OF EUROPE: AN AGENDA FOR TWO YEARS 2.30 pm – 3.50 pm FIRST ROUND TABLE Opening of the morning 9.15 am 18-19 MARCH 2021 DEFENDING EUROPE? THE IMPASSES OF - Enrico LETTA, President of the Jacques Delors Institute, former President of the Italian Council Welcome address PACIFISM, THE LIMITS OF ATLANTICISM - Richard FERRAND, President of the National Assembly President 9.15 am - 10.50 am FIRST ROUND TABLE - Jean-Dominique GIULIANI, President of the Robert Schuman 9.30 am -12.30 pm Foundation THINKING THE INSTITUTIONAL MODEL THE EUROPEAN UNION AT THE TIME OF THE Debate President COPERNICAN REVOLUTION - Franziska BRANTNER, German MP - Pierre VIMONT, Ambassador of France, former Executive - Arnaud DANJEAN, Member of the European Parliament Secretary General of the European External Action Service (EEAS) 9.30 am - 10.50 am FIRST ROUND TABLE - Nicole GNESOTTO, Professor at the Conservatoire national des arts et métiers Debate IS EUROPE GEOPOLITICALLY MARGINALISED? - Claude-France ARNOULD, former Director of the European - Jean-Louis BOURLANGES, Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Defence Agency Committee of the National Assembly - Luuk VAN MIDDELAAR, academic, former adviser to Herman van Chairman Rompuy, President of the European
  • European Commission

    European Commission

    EUROPEAN COMMISSION MEMO Brussels, 26 June 2013 Commissioner Michel Barnier welcomes agreement on new rules for the award of concession contracts I congratulate the European Parliament and the Council on having reached agreement on a new Directive on the award of concession contracts. This is not only about ensuring transparency and equal treatment in the single market. It's about providing a flexible framework for partnerships between public and private that will boost much needed investments in infrastructure and services, and ultimately contribute to better quality works and services for citizens at a better price. These new rules will greatly improve legal security for public authorities and economic operators across Europe when cooperating on infrastructure projects such as roads or ports or the provision of services to the citizens. The draft Directive confirms the autonomy of contracting authorities across Europe to decide on the best way to provide public services. When they have recourse to concessions, the new rules will give them flexibility as to the choice of the award procedures and the choice of the most appropriate, non-discriminatory award criteria. The new rules will also provide for a well-functioning internal market in concessions, by ensuring EU-wide transparency and competition as concession notices will be published in the Official Journal of the EU. This means not only more opportunities for contracting authorities but also for EU companies, including SMEs, and consequently increased economic growth and more jobs. The draft Directive further clarifies the cases in which contracts concluded between contracting authorities are not subject to the application of concession award rules.
  • 5.2.2020 A9-0017/14 Amendment 14 Emmanuel Maurel, Mick Wallace

    5.2.2020 A9-0017/14 Amendment 14 Emmanuel Maurel, Mick Wallace

    5.2.2020 A9-0017/14 Amendment 14 Emmanuel Maurel, Mick Wallace, Clare Daly, Leila Chaibi, Manon Aubry, Manuel Bompard, Anne-Sophie Pelletier, Malin Björk, Nikolaj Villumsen on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group Report A9-0017/2020 Geert Bourgeois Conclusion of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam (Resolution) (2018/0356M(NLE)) Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) Motion for a resolution Amendment 21a. Considers that the absence of enforceable mechanisms to implement the TSD chapter does not guarantee respect for commitments on the strengthening of labour rights and environmental standards; Or. en AM\1198250EN.docx PE647.522v01-00 EN United in diversityEN 5.2.2020 A9-0017/15 Amendment 15 Emmanuel Maurel, Mick Wallace, Clare Daly, Leila Chaibi, Manon Aubry, Manuel Bompard, Anne-Sophie Pelletier on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group Report A9-0017/2020 Geert Bourgeois Conclusion of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam (Resolution) (2018/0356M(NLE)) Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 b (new) Motion for a resolution Amendment 21b. Expresses its concern about the risk of relocation for EU industries and its consequences for job losses for workers in the EU; Or. en AM\1198250EN.docx PE647.522v01-00 EN United in diversityEN 5.2.2020 A9-0017/16 Amendment 16 Emmanuel Maurel, Mick Wallace, Clare Daly, Leila Chaibi, Manon Aubry, Manuel Bompard, Anne-Sophie Pelletier, Malin Björk, Nikolaj Villumsen on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group Report A9-0017/2020 Geert Bourgeois Conclusion of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam (Resolution) (2018/0356M(NLE)) Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 c (new) Motion for a resolution Amendment 21c.
  • FRANCE: a HOTBED of OPPOSITION to the TTIP? Elvire Fabry | Senior Research Fellow at the Jacques Delors Institute

    FRANCE: a HOTBED of OPPOSITION to the TTIP? Elvire Fabry | Senior Research Fellow at the Jacques Delors Institute

    POLICY PAPER 136 10 JUNE 2015 FRANCE: A HOTBED OF OPPOSITION TO THE TTIP? Elvire Fabry | senior research fellow at the Jacques Delors Institute SUMMARY Two years after the start of negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) in July 2013, the evolution of French public opinion is intriguing. THE EVOLUTION OF FRENCH PUBLIC OPINION It was expected that opposition to TTIP would come primarily from France, IS INTRIGUING” where public opinion is traditionally wary of trade liberalisation. But in November 2014, when 59% of Europeans and 25 of 28 member states said they were in favour of TTIP, 50% of French held a favourable opinion while the Germans had become the leading opponents of TTIP. The shift in German public opinion in spring 2014 had not been anticipated, considering that the German econ- omy has turned towards exports and that the German government itself was active in supporting the launch of negotiations. Public debate over TTIP has only truly manifested in France during the European election campaigns of May 2014, when the minor parties opposed to negotiations put the spotlight on the sanitary, phytosanitary, and environmental issues of the negotiations. The two major political groups adopted a more cautious and even evasive approach, waiting until autumn 2014 to clearly state their positions. In summer 2014, meanwhile, the inclusion of a mechanism to resolve disputes between investor and state has imposed itself as a source of more mobilising fears and has united a cross-partisan opposition which has con- tributed to growing doubts over the benefits of the agreement.
  • Marine Le Pen and the 'New' FN: a Change of Style Or of Substance?

    Marine Le Pen and the 'New' FN: a Change of Style Or of Substance?

    Parliamentary Affairs (2013) 66, 179–196 doi:10.1093/pa/gss076 Marine Le Pen and the ‘New’ FN: A Change of Style or of Substance? James Shields* School of Languages and Social Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham B4 7ET, UK Downloaded from *Correspondence: [email protected] The electoral challenge of the far right is an enduringly problematic feature of con- temporary French politics. In the first rounds of the 2012 presidential and parlia- mentary elections, the Front National (FN) under new leader Marine Le Pen http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/ attracted a combined total of ten million votes, bringing its ultra-nationalist pol- icies to the centre of national political debate. This article examines the FN’s impact on these elections and its implications for French politics. Drawing on of- ficial FN programmes, detailed election results and a range of opinion polling data, it assesses the strength of support for Le Pen and her party and seeks to explain their electoral appeal. In particular, it subjects to analysis the claim that the new leader has ‘de-demonised’ the FN, transforming it from perennial outsider by guest on December 15, 2012 to normal participant in mainstream French politics; and it reflects on the strategic dilemma posed for the centre-right by this newly invigorated far-right challenge. 1. Introduction The first round of the presidential election on 22 April 2012 set a new high point for the far right in France. With 17.9% of the vote, Marine Le Pen finished behind the Socialist candidate Franc¸ois Hollande (28.6%) and the outgoing centre-right president Nicolas Sarkozy (27.2%).
  • Au Congrès De Strasbourg, Le Front National Se Dit Capable De Conquérir Le Pouvoir

    Au Congrès De Strasbourg, Le Front National Se Dit Capable De Conquérir Le Pouvoir

    LeMonde Job: WMQ2903--0001-0 WAS LMQ2903-1 Op.: XX Rev.: 28-03-97 T.: 11:28 S.: 111,06-Cmp.:28,11, Base : LMQPAG 39Fap:99 No:0450 Lcp: 196 CMYK RETRAITE ET PRÉVOYANCE a La révolution des fonds de pension (pages 17 à 21) CINQUANTE-TROISIÈME ANNÉE – No 16228 – 7 F SAMEDI 29 MARS 1997 FONDATEUR : HUBERT BEUVE-MÉRY – DIRECTEUR : JEAN-MARIE COLOMBANI a Chômage : léger Au congrès de Strasbourg, le Front national Mise en garde recul en février Le nombre de chômeurs a légèrement de l’Académie reculé en février mais le marché du tra- se dit capable de conquérir le pouvoir vail reste atone. p. 36 Des dizaines de milliers de personnes s’apprêtent à manifester contre l’extrême droite des sciences a Des mercenaires LA RÉUNION du congrès du listes de tous bords. L’écrivain Sal- sur la toxicité Front national à Strasbourg, du 29 man Rushdie, qui est menacé de américains au Zaïre au 31 mars, donne lieu à une in- mort par les intégristes iraniens, a tense mobilisation locale, régio- pris pris la parole pour défendre la du cannabis Deux « conseillers » américains auprès nale et nationale contre l’extrême libre expression, en expliquant de la rébellion zaïroise ont trouvé la droite. Les assises du parti lepé- qu’« il faut permettre à M. Le Pen DANS UN RAPPORT publié mort dans l’est du pays. p. 4 niste semblent ainsi devoir être d’exprimer ses opinions néfastes » et jeudi 27 mars, l’Académie des éclipsées par la protestation des « aux écrivains de les critiquer ».
  • Annual Report 2011

    Annual Report 2011

    The French Institute of International Relations Annual Report 2011 27 rue de la Procession - 75740 Paris Cedex 15 Phone: 33 (0) 1 40 61 60 00 - Fax : 33 (0) 1 40 61 60 60 Rue Marie-Thérèse, 21 - 1000 - Bruxelles Phone: 32 (2) 238 51 10 - Fax : 32 (2) 238 51 15 www.ifri.org Knowledge for action Contents Message from the President 2 Ifri, a Leading French Think Tank on International Questions 4 2011: An Intense Year on All Fronts 6 In 2011, Ifri Notably Hosted… 10 Ifri’s 2011 Publications 12 Two Flagship Publications: Politique étrangère and RAMSES 13 Ifri’s Business Partners 14 Ifri and the Media: An Ongoing Dialogue 18 The 4th World Policy Conference 19 The Team 20 Research 21 Regional Programs 22 Cross-cutting Programs 37 Publications 45 Conferences and Debates 48 Board of Directors and Advisory Board 50 Financial Appendix 51 Annual Report 2011 • 1 Message from the President rom revolutions in the Arab world, crises in Europe and catastrophic events in Japan, to the intervention in Libya and the announcements of withdrawal from Afghanistan, F2011 did not lack turmoil, nor is there a shortage of questions to be asked. Even more than previous years, 2011 certainly confirmed the need for a broad view of the world in order to support political and economic decision-makers working under the pressure of events that are becoming more and more difficult to control. Such wide vision allows for analytical distance to be introduced into decision-making processes. As a unique think tank in France, and through the range of subjects it covers (international and otherwise), its long history of bringing experience and successful metho- dologies to light, and the networks it has built with partners throughout the world, Ifri seeks to promote this kind of perspective.