DE:
#424 | Ania am 27-01-2010 12:09
Where the Pope is right, he's right … But did he consider the long-term consequences out of it? I'm not quite sure!
I imagine right now, how the people will meet in front of the PC every Sunday and listen to the priest, who preach via web cam to them. Strange, somehow …
“Church closed. The next mass on www........com”

I am proud of be Polish, when I read such articles! Thank you The Economist for a positive criticism of Poland! (Polish translation is available at onet.pl, I paste it already in the Polish division of European Roommates)

Poland's strong economy
Horse power to horsepower
Economic growth and a strong, stable government to boot: time to rethink old notions about Poland

OUTSIDERS often have fixed ideas of Poland: a big, poor country with shambolic governments, dreadful roads and eccentric habits. Old stereotypes die hard, but the facts paint an increasingly different picture. By the grim standards of recent centuries, Poland has never been more secure, richer or better-run.

It was the only country in the European Union to register economic growth last year, at 1.2%. As Jacek Rostowski, Poland’s finance minister, likes to point out, GDP per head rose from 50% to 56% of the EU average in 2009—a record jump. By the same (somewhat flattering) measure, which adjusts for the greater purchasing power arising from lower prices, Poland now has Europe’s sixth-biggest economy.

Foreign investors like what they see. Whereas supposedly “west” European countries such as Greece flounder, ex-communist Poland is borrowing cheaply, for example with a $4.3 billion (€3 billion) Eurobond issue this month. Lenders’ generosity allowed the government to run a budget deficit of 7% of GDP in 2009 (though officials promise that a new public-finance law will cut spending growth sharply in the years ahead).

These good results owe much to luck. Poland’s stodgy banks came late to the wild foreign-currency lending that proved so disastrous in such countries as Latvia and Hungary. Poland’s big internal market has cushioned demand. Stimulus measures in Germany have spilled across the border. But the country has also benefited from some canny political leadership. Poland has something rare in the EU and all but unique in its ex-communist east: a sensible centre-right government with a majority in parliament.

Many criticise the government for its caution, and more recently for sleaze (a scandal about lobbying by the gambling industry is outraging Poland’s puritanical media). Some long-term problems are unsolved, such as a low rate of participation in the workforce and patchy public services. As many as 2m Poles have voted with their feet by working abroad.

Even so, by the standards of Poland’s governments in the past, and of the rest of Europe now, the present lot look pretty good. The government has made inroads into some of Poland’s worst problems, notably with a tough, if partial, pension reform. It has belatedly started a programme to modernise roads and railways (2,000km of new fast roads will be built by 2012, when Poland and Ukraine co-host the European football championships).

It has also made some badly needed changes in the country’s stifling bureaucracy. Poland ranks low on most indices for friendliness towards business. A recent study by the World Bank put the Polish tax system at 151st out of the 183 countries it surveyed. But some improvements are under way, including online tax filing and faster customs clearance. A new law has liberalised the housing market, allowing short-hold tenancies. That should encourage Poland’s workers to move within the country in search of work, rather than emigrating. It can be easier to make a weekly commute to Britain by air than between Polish cities by road.

A big symbolic and practical change is that citizens can increasingly use a simple signed declaration (an oswiadczenia) instead of a costly, time-consuming notarised one (a zaswiadczenia) in their dealings with the state. “We assume that citizens are telling the truth unless there is evidence to the contrary. In the past, the reverse applied,” says Mr Rostowski. Sceptical Poles, scarred by their dealings with suspicious, nit-picking bureaucrats, may take some convincing of this.

A new Polish foreign policy has been a success, after a spell when the aim seemed to be to lose friends and alienate people. Under Radek Sikorski as foreign minister, Poland has managed to improve relations with all its neighbours and, despite some hiccups, won a favourable security deal from America under Barack Obama. After much haggling, a battery of American Patriot missiles will arrive in Poland in March.

Germany now claims that it wants its relations with Poland to be as close as they are with France. Guido Westerwelle, Germany’s new foreign minister, chose Warsaw for his first foreign visit. Poland’s relations with Russia, once equally neurotic, have calmed down. Even the unearthing of a Russian spy, who had been living for many years under a false identity in Poland, has caused only a ripple.

Some talk of Mr Sikorski as a future president. If he ran this autumn, it would solve a problem for the prime minister, Donald Tusk. Until he ruled himself out on January 28th, Mr Tusk had been dithering about whether to run himself against the incumbent, Lech Kaczynski.

Mr Kaczynski’s record is dire (his popularity rises only when he makes no public statements). His main role has been destructive, vetoing laws and blocking appointments. He is widely believed not to want a second term, but to have been pushed into it by his bossy twin brother, Jaroslaw, who leads the main opposition party, Law and Justice.

Mr Tusk wants to unseat Mr Kaczynski as part of a long-term plan to break up Law and Justice and absorb bits of it into his own Civic Platform party. But he was uneasy about relinquishing the prime minister’s job, especially as he hopes to trim the president’s power in future. Mr Sikorski is electable. He is Poland’s most popular politician and also something of an outsider (he was educated at Oxford; his wife is American; he has worked at a Washington think-tank). So he is no threat to Mr Tusk. As president, he might even help to dispel more of those tiresome stereotypes.


Source: Jan 28th 2010 | The Economist print edition
http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15394158

I don't agree that Mr. Sikorski is a good candidate, he is a bad foreign minister, but presently it doesn't matter so much - pretty much everyone can win against Mr. Kaczynski. It will be a very dirty election time, even for Polish standards. The hard, populist and nationalist right-wing parties with Kaczynski will use these campaigns against every politician. Sikorski is in danger, because he deserted them (some insults published in the media 2009) and also because his wife is an American Jew (and Jews are not so media-friendly, even in Poland). Other candidates will be attacked because of their communistic political origin. There is no leader in Poland, it's rather a fight against and pro Kaczynski as you already could see in the article from the front page. The hazard affair won't help either the Prime Minister Tusk nor Kaczynski. Maybe the left-wing parties will use this situation and unite them.

Polish economy is still having problems, f.e. with the Electricity Supply. The business environment in the Republic of Poland is generally good. The Polish power generation system is the largest in Central and Eastern Europe in terms of capacity. The power system is very fragmented, with nearly 400 power plants. Poland is currently working toward privatizing their energy sector. So far, the process has produced four energy groups: Enea, Tauron, Energa, and PGE Polska Grupa Energetyczna. The PGE Polska Grupa Energetyczna is the largest energy group, accounting for almost 40 percent of the total energy production. The privatization process takes place from 2008-2011 (Warsaw Voice, 2009). As Poland is part of the European Union, they are to comply with the renewable energy targets set by the Heads of State or Governments. Poland’s renewable energy target is 15 percent renewable energy consumption by 2020. A majority of the renewable energy production will likely come from biomass resources.

#

Estimated GDP in the I quarter of 2007: 7%
#

Inflation rate in February: 1,9%
#

Main interest rate of the National Bank of Poland: 4,00%.
#

Annual minimum wage: 936 PLN
#

Average salary in 2006: 2477.23 PLN
#

Consumer optimism index (February 2007): 94.86 p.

Moreover, I agree with a lost Englishman found in Poland, who wrote at his blog:
http://datblog.wordpress.com/2008/01/19/polands-economy-needs-careful-attention/

Poland’s electricity comes predominantly from coal, the infrastructure is old and in need of upgrade and greenhouse gas emissions will need to be offset by purchasing the so called green gas tax from a neighbouring country, most likely Germany which will be expensive.

But what about the cost of replacing old power stations? Poland also needs to move away from coal but currently has not given the go-ahead to build any nuclear station, although they will likely participate in the Lithuanian station being built and bring fuel in from there, but that is not guaranteed, nor is the measy amount of energy from there adequate to meet Poland’s growing needs. Modern Nuclear stations are safer than the relic in Chernobyl and thankfully the Polish people recognise this having voted in favour in 2006, yet there is still no definite plan for a Nuclear station – this should be acted on sooner rather than later as Poland’s energy requirements are set to increase by up to 90% by 2025 according to forecasts. Investing into the new energy infrastructure costs and it needs to be borne from somewhere – this somewhere will be ultimately the consumer.

The biggest worry about energy in Poland is not carbon but the Nord Stream pipeline, which is due to pump Russian gas directly to Germany under the Baltic Sea, bypassing Poland. Polish objections are not, as in Sweden, about the environmental risks; rather, the Poles fear Russia may exploit its direct access to Germany to divide Europe. All Polish politicians oppose the project – this is the wrong focus.

Unfortunately Poland’s topographic nature does not lend itself well to Hydro power, like Norway for example, the climate is not best suited for Solar and Wind farms are not the answer to meet the growing need so Nuclear seems the most sensible way forward.

If this sounds bleak I am sorry, but I am, as always an optimist and think that the Polish people should start raising their voices sooner rather than later and ensure that the Energy and economy policies are brought back high on the agenda – they should also ask the Government to bring back Balcerowicz, he could sort it out!

I advice:
European Commission, “Poland Renewable Energy Fact Sheet,” January 2008.
UDI, “World Electric Power Plant Database,” 2009
Warsaw Voice, “Privatization of the Energy Sector,” 2008. Available online: www.warsawvoice.pl.

Germany's economy grew 1.3 percent in 2008, about half of what it was in 2007. According to Bundesbank (Federal German Bank), German economy will stagnate through 2010. It's Europe's largest economy and it is expected to shrink by approx. 6 percent. "The German economy is currently in a sharp recession," said the Bundesbank. Economic activity is expected to remain at a subdued level now. It is forecasting a return to growth in 2010 but at a modest rate of 0.5 percent. More job cuts and a faster rise in unemployment may be expected in the coming quarters," the Bundesbank report said. Their numbers for the future projected unemplyment to rise to 10.5 in 2010. Europe faces a deeper and longer recession than previously predicted. Some 8.5 million jobs will disappear in the EU in 2010, more than wiping out the new jobs created in recent years. Unemployment will reach 11.5 percent by the end of next year, the EC said. The commission now forecasts that the EU economies will shrink another 0.1 percent in 2010. From today's perspective, I don't expect positive growth rates before the second half of 2010.

DE
#428 | Kerstin am 05-02-2010 19:00

After more than 61 years the electricity monopoly was abolished in 1998. Officially the gas market was opened at that time as well, monopolies and oligopolies should went down, competition for customers should started. In fact at the beginning Germany pursued this aims only ineffectually. With the noticeable effects of the regulation rises the number of new suppliers: AT that time, there are 13 bne-members [bne = Bundesverband Neuer Energieanbieter – MS] nationwide, that provide electricity to their customers. The entry to the gas market was organized so complicated over the years, that it was nearly impossible for competitors. But there were some changes at the beginning of the gas-year 2008: at least there is one bne-member that is able to provide gas to their customs nationwide.

The liberalisation of the German electricity market began in 1998 at the instigation the EU: The domestic market directive ordered the EU member states to open their energy internal markets. The way of realizing was up to the several countries.

Despite the second amendment of the Energiewirtschaftsgesetzes [EnWG: a German law, which includes the basic regulations for the right of the grid-bound energy -> wikipedia – MS] in the year 2003 the competition intesity in Germany stayed low. The way of the debated access wasn't enough. With the extensive revision of the EnWG in the summer of 2005 the rules for the market access were composed more concrete and an regulation office was established: Federal Network Agency (BNetzA), equipped with extensive authorisations for permission of network fees and for arrangement of the regulations for the market access. These authorisations of the BnetzA were further codified by the Stromnetzentgeltverordnung (StromNEV) as well as by the Stromnetzzugangsverordnung (StromNZV) from 25th of July 2005. But for the establishment of a competitive market the existing regulations are not enough.

The opening of the gas market happened only formal as well. Three years after the introdution of a regulation office (Bundesnetzagentur – BnetzA) the competition on the gas market only gather momentum very slow.

The actual problems of new suppliers are going far behind the real access: net fees, possible grid competition, defile management, data formats and not least the compensation of the market area – all these topics have to be tackled by the BnetzA. First with the solution of these problemareas it will be possible for new suppliers to offer competitive and comparable supplies in the entire federal territory.

Within the framework of the current discussions around the concept of changing the law against the restraint of competition – GWB – the Bundesverband Neuer Energieanbieter e.V. (bne) demands primarilly an upgraded investment climat for the building of new electricity stations. A competitive, investment friendly market environment – if possible without federal intereference – is first task of the government. A law for the divestiture market dominating electricity producer is at the most a subordinated task. There will be no power station built by new suppliers by the divestiture of the existing structures.

But even after the statement of the Federal Court of Justice in November 2008, that the market is dominated by Duopol Eon and RWE, it didn't change much. The law proposal of the FDP-Bundestagsfraktion from January 2007 and March 2008 failed; the law initative of the former Hessian CDU-Minister of Economic Affairs Alois Rhiel is put on hold up to now.

The results of an in January 2010 puplized RWE-study to the European electricity wholesale markets seems to divert from the actual problems: "Even if the integration of these markets should acutal be more advanced than presumed so far, Eon and RWE still dominate the German electricity producer market", the bne-executive said. The consideration of the authors of this study to take another market definision as basi than this one of the Federal Court of Justice did, seems to be more a manipulation here.



For further enquiries:
Bundesverband Neuer Energieanbieter e.V. (bne)
Annette Solzin
030 400 548 13
presse@bne-online.de

Interview with the S&D's Party President Martin Schulz


Since 1994, Martin Schulz (54) is a member of the European Parliament and since 2004 chief of the social democratic fraction (until 2009 SPE, now S&D). In 2003 in the EP, the former Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, compared Schulz indirectly with a concentration camp supervisor (Capo) and ensured with that an international scandal. In the interview for EOL, the literature enthused EU-professional explained, what he expects from the Barroso-II commission and when you might trust your president.



Maria von Stern: : During the hearing by the European Parliament, some commission's candidates seemed to dependent on President José Barroso very much. You spoke to Barroso about it. How did he react?

Schulz: As every time reluctantly and deprecatingly in a typical fighting mood: that tenor is “don't interfere”. However, José Manuel Barroso is an intelligent man, who recovers mostly from such a reaction within 24 hours.



Maria von Stern: : So, Europe has a new commission. Are you satisfied with their formation?

Schulz: From the social democratic party's point of view, we had a good result. 488 against 163 was the allocation of votes in the parliament, without us Barroso would not reached the majority that he know. Already during the hearing, he learned, but also at the day of acclamation.



The end with Everybody’s Darling



Maria von Stern: : Still, the authorities of the commissioners’ clash; in most of the member states the candidates aren't classified as heavy weights and Barroso’s' influence was clear. Will that be a weak commission?

Schulz: The commission is not only composed of lightweights. Oli Rehn, László Andor, Jaoquín Almunia are having their second term, Viviane Reding even her third, you won't mess around with them that easily. Catherine Ashton is an independent personality. Michel Barnier was French minister of environment, minister for European affairs and foreign secretary. Besides, he was the EU regional commissioner, so he is a political heavy weight. If Barroso is able to bound them in a good team, he will be able to vote against the European Council of Ministers. If he has basement in the strong parliament, the commission will be more than the extended arm of the capital cities. However, he shouldn't play everybody’s darling any more.



Maria von Stern: : You know Barroso for a while already. What do you expect from him?

Schulz: Even if we don't have many political similarities, personally, I esteem Barroso as polyglot and a very smart man. We share a great literary interest and often, we recognize that we read the same books. Now, it is “Little comments” by José Saramago.



Maria von Stern: : He writes in Portuguese in original ….

Schulz: … and I’m reading it in a German translation.



Maria von Stern: : How do you rate the political Barroso?

Schulz: In the political business, I learned that you principally know at the end of a project, if somebody keeps his initial promises. Barroso is a flexible politician and a wet piece of soap is - compared to him - inflexible. However, the basic conditions – the Treaty of Lisbon and the interinstitutional treaty – allow in the theory an influential EU.



Maria von Stern: : Shortly before the rubber-stamp of the new commission Daniel Cohn-Bendit undulated. He said your party might be “a coalition of shammers”, because they voted despite the scepticism for the new commission. Does the EU need more of such stars and cranks?

Schulz: Daniel is an intelligent, silver-tongued, eternal anarchist. He loves grand entrances, but a functional Europe is living on detailed, basic work. It is a delicate business that leads every time to compromises at the end. You can’t only keep a clean record with that. Danny is an adorable slob, with that you can argue as with the tinkerer, but that is not enough.



Challenges for the next years



Maria von Stern: : Which challenges – in your opinion - will come up to the commissioners?

Schulz: There are three concrete points. The control of the capital markets has to succeed at least in Europe. Only if we put a leash on the adventurer, we could rewin the trust of the people. In the case of the climate change, Europe has to speak with one voice, with the commission as de facto government. What we experienced in Copenhagen was embarrassing: everybody had different opinions, Germany and France were doing just their own stuff in any case. Europe in bi-polarism won't hold its ground between the USA and China.



Maria von Stern: : And the third task?

Schulz: The European internal market has to be completed by a social element, and there has to be a social following estimation for every decision. It is a condition for the acceptance of the EU. The European Union is the longest lasting peace project of this continent, but that alone mean nothing. Now, most of the people are having the impression, that we aren't interested in their fortune. However, what do the citizens expect? A roof over their head, eating them fills, go on holiday once a year and educational perspectives for their children. Nobody expects to become a millionaire, but that he/she is reasonably secured by their work.



Questioning the system



Maria von Stern: : This final speech reminds on the European election campaign in 2009, which was – to say the least - a debacle. How do you explain this result?

Schulz: Over years, we didn't manage to promote exactly these three points in a reliable way. We didn't counter as the end of the bi-polar world was declared as the victory of the capitalism. That was wrong. Especially in Germany, it wasn't the right way to put the system into question, rather sharing the enormous profits equitably. It went good as long we gained profits, but now we experienced the crisis. We hand over the red downwards; taxes were used to rescue banks.



Maria von Stern: : Angela Merkel arranged a party in the chancellery because of the birthday of Josef Ackermann . What do you think about managers like Ackermann?

Schulz: He might be successful, but he is a cynical representative of a cynical system.



Maria von Stern: Germany's commissioner Günter Oettinger was classified as the third choice. How do you estimate him?

Schulz: He managed the negotiations very good. However, his activities in the department of energy are very limited. It isn’t easy to him.


Would you like to commet this article? Write to us at europa @ scholar-online.eu, and we will set your comment online at

Good wishes that don't change anything: from the President of the European Parliament for us and from us for Jerzy Buzek


We got a letter last week from the President of the European Parliament and we would like to present another step in the correspondence that begun in July last year:


OPEN LETTER TO JERZY BUZEK
NEW PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

Open Letter to Jerzy Buzek was deleted without being read

Prof. Jerzy Buzek, President of the European Parliament answers our Open Letter



After many comments and advises from the guests of the portal Scholar Online Europe, we wrote to Mr. Jerzy Buzek again and asked for non-financial help (among all presenting Jerzy Buzek in the Gallery of Europeans and political support) as well as for the financial help for the project.


The answer to our letter from August 2009 came with the date 5th March 2010 and was written by Maciej Popowski:


„Many thanks for your letter to Mr. Jerzy Buzek, where you presented the work of your organisation and at the same time, you asked after financial support for the project and the patronage of the President of the European Parliament. (…) Unfortunately, we have to inform you that we can't give you any financial support for the project. Moreover, a patronage is foreseen for specific events and no continuous activities as websites according to the regulations of the European Parliament. We advice you to write an application, when such projects will be advertised for support. Still, we would like to use the possibility to wish you and your organisation all the best in the future.”


The non-beneficiary requests were completely put aside, among all presenting Jerzy Buzek in the Gallery of the Europeans and political support for the project. Therefore, we answered it in the following way:


Dear Mister Popowski!

Many thanks for your answer related to the project Scholar Online Europe, although we waited for it almost a half a year.

Many thanks for your further compliments, that don't bring anything, and for advices that don't bring anything, either.

The European Union and its institutions disappoint us, because nobody feels responsible for specific activities and the person, who raises questions, is sent from one compiler to another until there is no strength to ask the same question by a new processor. The last year learnt us much in this area.

In our letter, we asked not only for a financial support, but mostly for political support as f.e. presenting Jerzy Buzek in the Gallery of Europeans next to prof. Bartoszewski. It doesn't cost anything and it would be a nice gesture to us.

The President Jerzy Buzek has still ca. 1.5 year of his mandate in front of him and he stays a nice Polish accent on the list of the Presidents of the European Parliament. For us, he will stay another public official that wished us all the best on our way and we can just wish him all the best, too. Repeatedly, it looks that ideas with sense and support of Europeans has a state “swatting the European integration for the EU” as one of the MEP said. We are wondering why politicians can be surprised that so few people are interested in politics, if politicians themselves force people to loose the interest in politics by their actions (or missing actions)-

Kind regards,
Anna Brakoniecka

Project Scholar Online Europe




Comment at the forum Scholar Online Europe:
Please, send your comment at europa @ scholar-online.eu

PL
#482 | Anna Brakoniecka dnia 28.03.2010 21:02

Comments to the article Good wishes that don't change anything: from the President of the European Parliament for us and from us for Jerzy Buzek


Ola:
Shame on Buzek! Shame!


Anka:
SHAME LIKE HELL!!!!! Buzek didn't show anything. Anna, write about it, don't let you go down with it. Write it here, so that Buzek is ashamed in front of others!


PoTomek:
Dear Anna, what do you expect? Buzek is busy with his divorce and sharing his property instead of carrying over Solidarity's values. These values were current as the whole world was admiring Poland and now, it's just a one big shame. The neighbour is thinking about the whole election thing [in the coming months, Poland expects presidential, communal and Parliament's elections – AB]. She has an ironic plan to vote for PiS so that everything will be destroyed, so that you could build up everything new afterwards. With the Post-Solidarnosc in form of PiS or PO or Buzek, Poland won't be achieving much. Indeed, Tusk is just the smaller evil, but he is not the one that Poland really needs. Moreover, authority movements are growing in Poland. Where's the land with milk and honey? Where's the promised wonderland or at least the land of normality, without tricks, spin-doctors and other suspicious persons?