AGM Report 2003-2004

This report is presented to TEAM’s Eight Annual General Meeting, Copenhagen, Denmark, February 28-29, 2004, following the AGM in Tallinn, Estonia, March 29-30, 2003, and the meeting of the TEAM Board in Brussels October 11-12, 2003.

The number of TEAM affiliates increases

TEAM at present has 53 affiliated organisations in 20 countries across Europe: Austria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Norway, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.

At the AGM in Tallinn the following new affiliates were agreed to. As TEAM Members: Heimssýn (Iceland), Equal in Europe (Ireland), Movement for Independence (Latvia), Europa Nostra 2000 (Slovakia) and Young 4 FUN (Switzerland). As TEAM Observers: Research Centre Free Europe (Estonia), Polish Alliance (Poland) and Agora (Slovakia).

On 23 April the Board recommended unanimously to TEAM’s current affiliates that the European Foundation, a leading UK-based think-tank, should be admitted into affiliation as an observer organisation with TEAM. This recommendation was accepted by TEAM’s affiliates without objection.

Five of TEAM’s affiliates are represented in the European Parliament. The Green Party of England and Wales and the Green Party of Sweden belong to the Green Group. The UK Independence Party and the June Movement, Denmark, belong to the EDD (Europe of Democracies and Diversities) Group. The People’s Movement against the EU, Denmark, belongs to the European United Left/Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL).

Change of TEAM Coordinator

Sharon Ellul Bonici (Malta) was elected TEAM Coordinator at the AGM in Tallinn 2003. Due to the circumstances of her candidacy for the Malta Labour Party in the European Parliament elections, she felt compelled to resign as Coordinator. On 26 November the Board elected John Boyd as Acting Coordinator in her place. Full members of the Board have been: Jean-Paul Bled (France) as Treasurer, Hans Lindqvist (Sweden), Gorazd Drevensek (Slovenia), Helle Hagenau (Norway), Sharon Bonici (Malta) and Uno Silberg (Estonia). Substitute members have been: Alberto Carosa (Italy), Pelle Geertsen (Denmark) and Normunds Grostins (Latvia).

TEAM Board Meetings

The Board had its first meeting on Sunday March 30, 2003, after the AGM. Since then the Board has had 12 meetings in all, ten of which have been phone conferences. A face-to-face meeting was held in Brussels on October 11-12, 2003, when the draft EU Constitution and TEAM’s campaign against it were discussed.

Unfair accession referendums

Seven EU accession referendums were held from April to September 2003:

Country ————— Date ———— In favour ——- Against ———- Turnout
Hungary ———- 12 April ———— 83.76 % —- 16.24 % ———— 45.62 %
Lithuania ——— 10-11May ——- 91.04 % —— 8.96 % ————- 63.3 %
Slovakia ———— 16-17 May —— 92.46 % ——- 6.20% ————- 52.15 %
Poland —————- 7-8 June ———- 77.45 % —- 22.25 % ———— 58.85 %
Czech Rep. —— 13-14 June —— 77.33 % —- 22.67 % ———- 55.21 %
Estonia ————— 14 Sept ————- 66.92 % —- 33.08 % ———— 64.0 %
Latvia —————— 20 Sept ————- 67.0 % ——- 32.20 % ———- 72.53 %

The figures shows that Estonia, Latvia, Czech Republic and Poland have the largest EU-scepticism among its populations. Malta, which was mentioned in the AGM report 2002-2003, had the strongest No-vote among the accession countries. On 8 March 46.35 % voted against EU membership, 53.65 in favour, on a turnout of 91 %. The referendum in Slovenia on 23 March had a different character: 89.91 % in favour, 10.39 % against, on a turnout of 60,29 %.

Voter turnouts were generally low in the accession referendums, but the members of the electorate who did vote generally cast a Yes-ballot. The No-campaigners in the Accession countries not only had to fight against voter apathy and disillusionment, but also against the Yes-side’s huge resources in terms of finances and political backing from parties and media. In some countries also there was significant interference by the EU Commission, by office-holders of the European Parliament, which some legal opinion considers in breach of EU law, and by foreign governments. For these reasons most of the EU Accession referendums cannot be considered to have been fair and democratic.

TEAM questioned the Commission’s financial involvement in the accession referendums, and argued that this was in breach of the relevant Accession treaties, for the Commission is not a party to the treaties and therefore has no proper role in ratifying them. Complaints were sent to the EU Ombudsman, the Commission and the European Parliament. The latter two institutions claimed that no violations had occurred, and that the EU only disseminated “information” in the accession referendum campaigns. Such “information”, financed by EU taxpayers’ money, inevitably affected voter choices and was designed to do so. TEAM’s expressions of concern got good press coverage in the Brussels media.

The TEAM Board has continued the advance the demand for free and fair referendums, based on the criteria which it adopted in early 2003. TEAM took part in initiating and developing the “Referendum Monitoring Project”, which is run by the Initiative and Referendum Institute, Amsterdam. The EU accession referendums were monitored at workshops in Bratislava, Slovakia, in June 2003, and in Tartu, Estonia, in September 2003, in which TEAM Board Members and some of TEAM’s affiliated organisations participated. A “TEAM Referendum Monitoring Report”, which analyses the ten EU referendums during 2003, based on the criteria for fair referendums, was presented at these workshops.

Overwhelming Swedish No to the euro

On 14 September the Swedes electorate voted “Nej” (“No”) to scrapping the krona and adopting the euro by a strong majority: 55.9 % No, 42 % Yes and 2 % blank votes. Voter turnout was high at 82.6 %. This result shows that the Swedes made up their mind independently of the heavy imbalance of propaganda from the major parties, the trade unions, big business and their lobbyists on behalf of a Yes vote. The voters took an informed and rational decision in a dramatic and traumatic moment in Swedish politics. Foreign Minister Anna Lindh had been brutally assassinated just three days before the referendum, which led to a suspension of active campaigning in that time coming up to the poll.

The No-victory was achieved by a politically broad alliance ranging from left to right, which was coordinated in a loose way. The two main reasons for the No-result was that the Social Democratic Party failed to convince their own voters, among whom women constituted a key group. Neither did the centre-right parties manage to convince their voters that the euro was needed to boost economic growth in Sweden or for that country to be a “full” member of the EU. Many of these voters had voted Yes to EU-membership in 1994.

The Swedish “Nej” to the euro reveals an increase in the opposition to the centralising structures of the EU, and a reaction against the notion that an EU Member State has to accept all aspects of EU integration. A further indication of growing EU-critical sentiment in Sweden has been the emergence of a new party, The June List, which will stand for elections in the European Parliament on 13 June 2004. TEAM supported the Swedish No-campaign in various ways. Its Swedish affiliates were very active during the campaign. They were also supported by activists from TEAM affiliates in other countries, such as Denmark, Norway and Ireland.

TEAM’s campaign against an EU Constitution

The Summit meeting in Thessaloniki in June 2003 concluded that “the Draft Constitutional Treaty is a good basis for starting in the Intergovernmental Conference”. But it did not prove to be such a “good basis” for further discussions. Quite soon it became clear that Spain and Poland did not want to lose the voting strength in the Council which the Nice Treaty had guaranteed them. Consequently, the Summit in Brussels in December failed to reach an agreement on the Constitution. In media reports Poland and Spain were blamed for the Summit’s failure, but France’s objections to the Constitution - which shifts voting strength in the EU against Paris and towards Berlin may also have been a factor.

The conference “Visions for a Democratic Europe” in Brussels 11-12 December 2003, was organised by the TEAM secretariat together with several other European NGOs (Europe 2020 in Paris, IRI Europe in Amsterdam, European Referendum Campaign in Frankfurt and More Democracy in Berlin). At a press conference at this event TEAM’s campaign against the EU Constitution was launched. The campaign slogan “No to the EU State Constitution - Yes to Democracy” was presented, along with a campaign folder outlining the main arguments against the Draft EU Constitution. The TEAM website has been rearranged and redesigned since to fit in with this campaign.

The TEAM secretariat will continue to produce campaign material on the EU Constitution. A number of factsheets drawing on research by various legal experts and other authorities have been produced on particular key issues. Two major TEAM Working Papers on the Constitution have been written and are available on the website: “The shaping of a new EU State Constitution - with alternatives for a “Europe of Democracies”, by Jens-Peter Bonde MEP, and “A critical analysis of the EU draft Constitution”, by Anthony Coughlan.

The draft Constitution reveals the true nature of the EU-integration project: it lays the constitutional basis for a highly centralised and undemocratic “EU State” under the political hegemony of the bigger EU members. This fact has sparked a growing EU-critique across Europe in both old and new EU Member States. Independently of political colour or view of the EU-project, many parties and NGOs agree that the Constitution cannot be the basis for an equal and democratic European cooperation. This growing opposition will be visible in the upcoming referendums on the EU Constitution, assuming that this is agreed by the 25 Member State governments.

At present it is clear that Denmark, Ireland, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain and the Czech Republic will hold referendums for purposes of ratifying the EU Constitution, once that is signed. More countries are likely to follow. The growing opposition against the “EU State” or “State-in-the-making” and the number of referendums on the EU Constitution, create new possibilities for the EU-critical movement across Europe. TEAM and its affiliated organisations will use this momentum to defend the principles of democracy and argue that the people should have a say on the future of Europe.

The TEAM Board would like to thank all TEAM members, observers and supporters for a fruitful cooperation during the past year. We hope for a significant expansion in the number of organisations affiliated to TEAM during the coming year and for a politically successful 2004-2005 in our struggle to defend democracy in face of the EU.

Henrik Dahlsson Secretary General TEAM