Will the European Parliament please stand up ?

The European Parliament is supposedly tasked with scrutiny of EU activities and at last it seems like some MEPs have started demanding answers on the expenditure and the paid promotion of the Conference on the Future of Europe.

Over 20 parliamentarians led by Swedish MEP Charlie Weimers (ECR) have asked the Commission to come clean on the expenditure of the Conference. Together they write:

Last year the European Parliament offered funding opportunities for activities linked to the Conference on the Future of Europe(1)(2). Social media campaigns indicate that taxpayers’ money is being used to generate youth and civil society engagement as well as media coverage of the conference(3).

A majority of Parliament voted to reject a ‘commitment to full transparency’ relating to the funding of the conference(4). EU institutions use separate budgets to finance the conference, and no information pertaining to the financing or grants awarded in connection with the conference is available on the official conference website.

Considering that transparency and openness of decision-making procedures are foundational values of the EU and essential to a system under the rule of law:

1. Can the Commission account for the total budgetary impact of the conference, and what is the breakdown of the expenditure per type of activity funded?

2. Can the Commission provide a list of all calls for proposals and tenders, and all grants awarded in relation to the conference?

3. Will it show its commitment to transparency by ensuring relevant financial information is easily accessible, for example on the ‘about’ page of the official conference website?

Four German MEPs from the ID group have asked the Commission about the official conference platform.

On 19 April 2021, the multilingual digital platform for the Conference on the Future of Europe was launched. Could the Commission please answer the following questions on this platform:

1. How much is the Commission planning to spend on visibility and communication campaigns to promote this digital platform to EU citizens?

2. Given the low initial participation rates, is there a minimum number of participants required to validate this digital platform as being a fair representation of the views of all EU citizens?

3. Online democracy platforms face a significant risk of manipulation through fake accounts and bots, which have the potential to distort the popularity of the ideas and initiatives proposed on this platform. What measures are in place to ensure that the reliability of this platform is not affected by malicious users?

Let’s hope the Commission decides to live up to all the talk of transparency and sunshine and comes clean with regard to the financing of the Conference. In the meantime we await the 30th of June publication by the European Parliament of the 2020 grant recipients.

Follow the Money – Part one: The European Parliament

MILLIONS of taxpayers money will be spent by the EU parliament (EP) in order to generate engagement for the “Conference on the Future of Europe”.

This blog can EXCLUSIVELY report on two “calls for proposals” that were made by the EP last Summer. The “calls for proposals” are an invitation for those desiring to get some EP cash to then generate engagement for “CoFoE”.

Are you interested in receiving some EP money? Sorry, too late. The deadline has already passed.

AMAZINGLY, the calls were not published on the website of the “Conference on the Future of Europe” itself. They were only published in some dark corner of the European Parliament’s website, which is possibly even more of an impenetrable maze than the European Parliament’s buildings.

This raises very serious questions.

Who was able to get their hands on the money? Were they tipped off that money would be available?

Social media activity indicates that only EU-fanatic pressure groups are engaging with this event. Were they the only ones receiving EP cash to generate engagement?

Screenshot of call for proposal published by the European Parliament

Only by the 30th of June, we’ll be able to discover who has won these EP grants. That’s two full months after the Conference platform to engage has opened up to the public. That’s if the European Parliament, which is not known to be overly respectful of these kind of deadlines, complies with the rules;

IF IT APPEARS that only EU-funded groups that incessantly promote more power for the EU were the ones able to get their hands on the EP cash, that would mean that the “Conference on the Future of Europe” would have been compromised as FUNDAMENTALLY BIASED from its very start.

How much EU-funding all kinds of EU groups receive to generate engagement and participation is something which should be disclosed in the spirit of full transparency.

Perhaps, it is no wonder that MEPs have voted AGAINST financial transparency for the Conference, as we also disclosed.

On top of all this, taxpayers will also need to pay for what the EU Commission and the EU Council plan to spend to promote the Conference. This is still unclear as well. A qualified guess would be that it would amount to 1 or 2 times the amount the European Parliament spends. One EU insider thinks the Conference could in the end cost Europeans “an estimated €200m”.

It is bad enough that hard pressed European taxpayers need to pay for this, but it would be even more scandalous if the money would be diverted to groups promoting ever more power for the EU.

Call for proposals COMM/SUBV/2020/M for the co-financing of media actions under the multi-annual work programme for grants in the area of communication 2020-2021

Call for proposals COMM/SUBV/2020/E for the co-financing of citizens’ engagement actions under the multi-annual work programme for grants in the area of communication 2020-2021

OUR MISSION – Scrutinising the Conference on the Future of Europe

A real Conference on the Future of the European Union would seek to honestly discover, through debate and dialogue, which direction Member State citizens’ wish to take the EU in. It would explore the hypothesis that the voters don’t want an EU foreign policy or harmonized social- and tax regulations or that the next generation might not want wealth transfers or a health union. It would accept and respect the possibility that Europeans may not want an ever-closer union and that voters may wish to scale back integration i.e. less Europe, not more.

The European Union is at a crossroads and we are served a charade instead of a real examination and thorough evaluation of the EU’s mission and means.

The “Conference on the Future of the European Union” will consist of countless lengthy meetings, discussions and debates. It will publish legions of reports and release multitudes of statements. It will contain many proposals for reforms and suggestions for change. It will be enough to cause indigestion even for those with an appetite for this kind of dish.

Only a tiny fraction of EU citizens will ever have any part in the Conference’s proceedings and most will never even know of its existence. But one thing this blog can claim for sure is that, most Europeans do not want their country, kingdom, republic or duchy to be subsumed into a union and their nation to perish from the earth.

This blog will provide timely information and accurate analysis on what is being said, by whom, and explain what this conference is really about, to provide those beyond the Brussels bubble that have not learned the local lingo and that do not have the time, tools or tenacity to get engaged and protest.

Our mission is to advocate for the idea to entrust the right path forward for Europe to member state democracies. A real conference would put each of the current competencies and proposed powers to the test in a series of national referendums and/or elections.

The “Conference on the Future of Europe” is a project of the elites, by the elites and for the elites. The purpose of this year-long charade is not to find what the citizens of the various states want, but to orchestrate the perception that the establishment has the backing of the peoples to endorse a predetermined outcome in a vain attempt to legitimize the next push towards a European federal state.

The only legitimate foundation for proposals for further EU integration is to command the support of a majority in all member states of the Union.