Plan D comes from Ireland

I believe the EU will work better with the Lisbon treaty. It helps to make the institutions, voting and power sharing more transparent and manageable. Ratifying the Lisbon treaty also finishes the institutional navel gazing and creates room for doing real stuff. From my perspective, the EU needs even simpler, transparent and democratic rules which would probably move it further towards a federal structure. This would be fine with me. Having said that, I agree that a second Irish referendum is not the most democratic way out of the problem. I have argued straight after the first Irish referendum that one should ditch the Lisbon treaty and gradually reform the EU step-by-step, as it has happened so far.

Of course, ideally we should have a more efficient and democratic European Union. But from my perspective this can only be achieved through more federalism.

From what I understand Libertas will be a pan-European party which stands for more democracy in Europe. There is nothing to argue about. I could undersign this.
But the single focus of Libertas on fighting the Lisbon treaty weakens it, I think. If you stand for more democracy, why not propose to have a pan-European referendum about the Lisbon treaty on the same day with the referendum passing with 50% of the European electorate. This would then also be consistent with the direct election of the EU President as proposed by Libertas. I am all for this. Together with the EP elections in June this would be the best communications campaign for Europe, a real political discussion about Europe’s future. This would be a real Plan D, not a buraucratic Plan D of funding information campaigns.

In this way, the creation of Libertas as a pan-European party with a united election platform is a good thing and puts the mainstream parties under pressure to think and campaign more European. If that happens we will have a real European Parliament election campaign in 2009, with real debate and political competition. If Libertas can act as the catalyst for this, Libertas will be thanked by pro-Europeans all over Europe.

A first concrete US contribution to climate change

The Obama administration should not waste its energy and money on saving the 3 big US car makers, but rather use their market failure as a first concrete contribution to a new climate policy.

The economic state of GM, Ford and Chrysler is a reflection of the fact that they have missed the turn to defining mobility in the 21st century. Instead they were lost in a time bubble projecting past and current consumer patters into the future and building ineffient monsters believing their own advertising strategies.

Not many people knew that the end would come so quickly, but the signs were on the wall, with climbing oil prices and government CO2 regulations. While oil prices have dropped dramatically, government CO2 regulation has increased and consumer behaviour is changing, partly due to current recession fears.

Why should the US, or any other government, spent tax payers money on saving inefficient and polluting industries? Any government investment in these industries now will only prolonge their agony and waste another $ 50-100 billion (or credit which US taxpayers will have to pay back for many years). In addition, a government bail out will make it possible for the car makers to continue building inefficient and polluting cars which will be forced on US consumers under the 'Buy American' slogan. This will make for a bad start of US climate change policy when the main thing the US needs now is credibility.

Of course, it's all about jobs and this is important. But given the choice, should the government not invest in jobs for the future rather than jobs of the past? Can the US government asked China to close down coal power plants when it keeps subsidiesing its ineffienct and polluting car monsters?

I propose that the US government puts together a stimulus package for the car makers, the people who build the cars. They should receive a one-off payment helping them to make a new start in life. The car companies can get subsidies only for business plans based on new mobility ideas.

This way the collapse of the car industry in the US can create opportunities for new enterpreneurship and help to reduce the US and global CO2 targets at the same time.