- More than 10 posts have already been published by activists on YourSpace.

- Nils, from the PES secretariat, created a Facebook group.

- Aleksander, from Paris, posted photos on Flickr. And so did Francisco and the PES Secretariat

. You can also find photos on Emilio's Picasa web albums.

- Paula, from Brussels, posted photos on Facebook. And so did Alice, Cécilia, Aleksander, Thierry and Kim.

- Some of the presentations made during the Forum are also online. These are the cases for José Reis Santos, Rikke Skovgaard Andersen, Aidan O'Sullivan and Jon Worth.

- A press article has been published in the weekly magazine of the French PS.

- Three blogs have been published about the Forum. One by the Mouvement des Jeunes Socialistes,other by Loja de Ideias and a third one by Emilio.

If you are communicating on Vienna, please send also a short message to contact@pes.org and we will post it here!

Video presented in Vienna during the first PES activists Forum. Read other posts on the Forum submited by participants here and leave us your contribution!

The PES manifesto consultation has ended – after over 300,000 visits to Yourspace and more than 600 contributions posted! But our dialogue on ‘Yourspace’ goes on! We will continue to debate the hot issues that will shape the European elections – migration, climate change, rising food and energy prices, jobs, equality, the EU treaty – as well as getting ready for the elections: presenting PES candidates from different countries, discussing campaign activities, hearing about your events, exposing opposition parties and candidates, drawing the dividing lines between the PES and the other European parties, and keeping you informed about the preparation of the PES manifesto.

We will kick off the post-consultation dialogue with a debate on migration – kicked off by Portuguese socialist and former European Commissioner Antonio Vitorino – as well as reports from the PES activists forum in Vienna on July 4-5 (the final event of the manifesto consultation) and a focus on mobilizing the votes of the millions of EU citizens living and working in other EU countries.

http://manifesto2009.pes.org/ - it’s still your space…

The biggest problem for Bulgaria is the corruption and control of European funds to reach their purposes.

Now let me present some other ideas for the manifesto...

Women’s rights:

Let me show you two exemples of countries where no one would say that women occupy important posts: in Iran (Islamic Republic) half of the board of directors or financial directors in State-owned companies are women and in Bulgaria (the poorest EU member) women have the same or better salaries.

Women should have more rights especially during their maternity.

Education and information!

Everybody should have access to good quality, state sponsored education. The processes in the world of education are terrible - we have less and less people that have real information about what is happening and knowledge on how to process it.

And it becomes to be like in old Egypt: two persons will know when there will be a solar eclipse and then they will manipulate a population of 20 million…

Peace means Peace

Socialism means peace, not war.

However it seems hard for EU politicians to admit it. Here are some facts:

90% of Bulgarian people were against Serbia bombing in 1994 but officially Bulgaria helped bombing and killing people.

I believe 80 to 90% of Europeans are against Iraq occupation or military presence in Afghanistan – what are we doing there?

In a way Bo was right, it was a beautiful week-end, nice and sunny in Vienna and there we were, a bunch of some 300 people sitting in a room with no windows, listening to other speakers talk, at times fighting against sleep, raising our hands to get a chance to say a word when instead we should have been pick-nicking in a park with friends or family. And, to make matters worse, we had to put our hands deep into our pockets to get those Euros out that paid for our trip to Vienna. And there was fatigue too. I had a General Assembly of my PS section and got home late on Thursday night, still having to pack, try to get a few hours of sleep before starting off and finding my way to the airport. Helène worked late on Friday, but I convinced her to go to because I was confident that she would love the experience. And she did, in spite of fatigue.

The Vienna forum was really worth it, and sorry Bo, but I wouldn't have traded it for the best pick-nick in the nicest park or field of the Union with the best possible company; company we had, and the best too! And if you, my fellow activist, missed the Vienna Forum, don't miss Madrid this winter!

"The PES treated us as kings"  

We in France had non-stop elections for the last two years. What's worse, we have our party's National Congress coming in November. Every one is getting busy on it, trying to come out in the best position for him or herself and their friends. And we all have the European elections in June. As I get more and more involved in political activism, the more I want and the more I am frustrated because I feel we didn't do enough, or that we didn't get the chance to do more. On the contrary, I left the Vienna Forum with the impression that there was a lot we could do, that the PES is giving us the chance to act and giving us clues of how to campaign.

Comparing with Porto, we were many more grass-roots activists present and from a much wider array of countries. I do not pretend here to give a complete overview of what went on, just the impressions I got and one or two conclusions I made which I want to share with you.

The PES treated us as kings. We were lodged in a very good hotel and food was excellent, not to say about drink which was good and plenty. We even got a town tour! In that sense, we could not expect more. Or could we? We had to pay for our own trip, and thinking about it, maybe it was probably better that way. Normally the cost of the flight would have been a deterrent for me to join the Forum, but I wonder if it was not better that way because, had the PES sent a limousine to pick me up at my doorstep and then put me on a first class flight to Vienna, would I have been invited or the guests would have only been those who had the right contacts? I believe this is one of the most important aspects we have to take into account: keep activism for dedicated activists and avoid it being coopted by party hierarchy. This of course I say from my limited point of view, and if you don't agree, please speak-up and let’s find the best way to have as may PES members as possible in the next EU parliament.

It was a pleasure to see the Spanish delegation, active and well represented. There were basically two groups, one from Barcelona and another from Madrid. Whereas in Porto there were only a few individuals. Speaking with Francisco Polo who made the presentation of how they campaigned for their election of Zapatero, it became clear to me that the Spanish PES activists have their place because the PSOE leadership does not control it. I don't know how it is with your own MEPs, but I know a little of how it is in France. We have some very good, competent hard working MEPs, but we also have some that are there just there to cash their paychecks and have "Member of European Parliament" printed on their cards. Europe and the PES deserve better. Other delegations were present too, mentioning the Spanish one does not mean that it was the only one.

Exchanging good practices 

Since Poul Nyrup Rasmussen was elected our president, the PES is going through a very important change, mutating from a club of leaders into a real political party made out of leaders as well as of activists. A door was slightly opened for us, lets all get in through it and not let it close behind.

Diversity is our advantage and we should use it as one of our trump cards. In one of the workshops Aidan O'Sullivan shared with us his Irish campaigning experience and how they managed to take advantage of activists that went to Ireland to help; Francisco showed us how they took advantage of the PES in the Zapatero campaign; Jose Reis Santos gave us an insight of the way they draw-up the manifesto in Portugal and Aleksander Glogowsky told us about what the Parisian group did to boost the PES. Out of all this it is clear to me that we have to exchange amongst PES activists as much as possible and share our experiences in order to gain in efficiency.

There is the manifesto2009 all right, a very good idea for next year's election. But the manifesto can't get us the votes all by itself, and the Vienna Forum helped me to see better on how we could organize our campaign. On one side the experience that others shared, my own experience in national and municipal campaigns and the expert advise we got from Bo Krogwig.

We have to exchange amongst activists throughout Europe. Meetings such as this one in Vienna are very good, but we can't have them every week. The PES puts forward some tools for us to use: Yourspace, for instance. Nevertheless, maybe because I don't know how to use it, or for some other reason, I think there is something still missing. Could we have a mailing group? It could be a good way to keep in touch. What do you think? One thing seems clear, let's stay abnormal! Let’s keep things moving!

In May 2007, we invited activists from all over Europe to come help in the Irish General Election campaign.

The initiative was a fantastic success! We knocked on doors together, we leafleted target areas together, we shared ideas and stories and we formed new cross-European political relationships!

This is how PES Activists works....activist to activist co-operation, building the New Social Europe from the grassroots level upward.

Check out the short presentation on our experience!

So far, more than 3000 young people joined the Network and are active in the fight against right wing extremism.

We as SJOE offer several things: concerts (rock against racism), seminars, workshops, exhibitions, meetings with contemporary witnesses, excursions and many materials. We consider that it is absolutely necessary to share our experiences with other organizations as many countries face similar problems.

Through this exchange we can have a look at “best practices”, but also discuss things that may have not worked as good as we expected. This communication forms the base for developing new strategies for campaigning and should therefore be in the center of the PES preparation of the upcoming European election campaigns.

Today four sessions took place on "Campaigning" and on the "Manifesto" issues. The participation was high with very positive outcome!

Drop by our Flickr channel and check some of the photos!

The opening session of the Forum is scheduled for this afternoon. Tomorrow, four parallel sessions will take place on both “Manifesto” and “Campaigning” themes.

During the day, participants will discuss not only the four consultation themes – “Save our World, “New Social Europe”, “Europe in the World” and “European democracy and diversity” – but also other transversal issues such as “Experience in Europe – Cross-border campaign exchanges”, “Strike back on ultraconservative speech”, “Social networking over Internet or “A European dimension in European election campaigns”.

The Forum, organised together with the SPÖ, the Renner Institute and the Foundation for European Progressive Studies (FEPS), will close the PES manifesto consultation.

I admit that this was a digression from the topic that I actually wanted to address in this post! The reason why I brought up the PES Group in the Committee of the Regions is that the group has its own PES manifesto consultation - and in this consultation there's a fifth point of discussion, in addition to the four 'traditional' themes - namely the gender dimension.

I agree very much with the view-point of the PES Group - that there's a significant gender aspect to all four manifesto themes - and I hope the 'pervasiveness' of gender issues will be taken into consideration when the PES manifesto is drafted over the coming months. Women's rights and gender issues are relevant to all themes - not just a few of them. Allow me to give some examples:

Save our planet

In most European families women are those who decide which food and household products to buy - and, hence, impact the environment with their choices. Since women are often the primary carers of children they also play an important role in stimulating 'eco-awareness' among younger generations. Further, women are more frequent users of public transport (statistics tell that when a family owns a car, it's more often the man who uses it for transport to work) and as we know public transport has a huge 'green element'.

New Social Europe

For this theme the gender dimension has already been debated extensively on Yourspace: Child care as a public service, men's right to parental leave, equal pay for women and men, etc. The gender dimension seems to be particularly visible for New Social Europe - but, in my view, this shouldn't lead to gender issues going unnoticed within other themes.

European democracy and diversity

As in the case of New Social Europe gender issues have received a lot of attention here - women's representation in politics (which I've also written about earlier on), discrimination based on gender, media stereotypes and much more. Again, the visibility within European democracy and diversity should not result in the gender aspect being 'overlooked' in other thematic debates.

EU in the world

Improving women's rights world wide - certainly an important socialist issue in my view! Every day many women's fundamental rights are violated; trafficking of women and children from the developing world, systematic rape of women and children in war (this is certainly a terrifying fact that is far from receiving as much attention from media and decision-makers as it should!) and female genital mutilation (often referred to as female circumcision, even though the very grave and painful procedure cannot be compared to male circumcision. For more information about FGM, please see the 'Respect everyone!' website. It's my hope that the final PES manifesto will explicitly address women's rights and gender issues in its section on EU in the world. As socialists we cannot ignore these violations.

This was a long story, but bear with me for another 10 lines. Here are my conclusions - comments are appreciated, let me know if you agree:

Firstly, and for now, it would be very interesting to see a stocktaking of the overall Yourspace debate on gender issues. Not just as part of the accounts within each theme, but rather as a 'trans-theme' barometer where all the small debates on women's rights and gender are brought together to form 'the big picture'.

And secondly, in the long run, I encourage the PES - and its member parties and activists - to consider the gender dimension in relation to all themes, in future debates and manifesto writing. In other words: listen to the local and regional social democrats who have already suggested this before me :-)

Those interested can read the conclusions from the debate on the gender dimension in the PES Group in the Committee of the Regions right here.

The CCCTB would mean reducing the cost of working with 27 different national tax systems as they would be able to compute their aggregate profits to a single set of tax rules. The total EU profit would be then apportioned among the countries where the firm is active.

It has established a Working Group to consider first its technical definition and later details of the profit apportioning mechanism. Commissioner Kovacs had plans to bring forward proposals before the end of 2008, but this is now postponed due to the Lisbon Treaty vote in Ireland. The CCCTB will be optional and the Commission will propose its adoption under the enhanced cooperation mechanism failing unanimous agreement.

The Case for CCCTB

The Commission believes that reform of EU corporate taxation is crucial for achieving the goals of the Lisbon agenda and that an efficient, transparent and simplified tax regime will improve the functioning of the Internal Market. It believes CCCTB will contribute to the international competitiveness of EU businesses, achieving the following goals:

– avoid unnecessary or high compliance costs to cross-border economic activity

– create level-playing field for all EU companies

– substantially help SMEs who are hit hardest by tax costs

– ensure tax considerations distort as little as possible economic decisions

– resolve existing 'transfer pricing' problems

– allow cross-border offsetting of profits and losses

– help to avoid 'double taxation' problem

– increase transparency in tax rate competition

– tackle “harmful or economically undesirable forms” of tax competition

The Commission's plans are supported by the majority of EU states, the EU Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee (whose members include MEP Gay Michell and MEP Eoin Ryan), the qualified support of the European business community and noteworthy from Ireland's point of view, also from the American Chamber of Commerce to the EU.

The Case against CCCTB

The opponents of CCCTB are obviously the countries currently benefiting from lower corporation taxes in relation to their EU neighbours: Ireland, the UK, Slovenia and the Baltic states. They see it as a 'back door' to full corporation tax harmonization. Opponents argue:

– that corporation tax rates are only one side of the effective tax rate equation, and that tax base harmonization is in effect tax harmonization, which hinders tax competition

– such tax harmonization moves would lead to investment flowing to the more established economies at the center of Europe, which have infrastructure and economies of scale competitive advantages

– such proposals avoid the real issue hindering the Lisbon agenda which is lack of domestic reforms in the major Eurozone economies

Irish economic commentators add that CCCTB has the potential to severely affect Ireland's economic future by undermining the main competitive advantage upon which the Celtic Tiger was build - our low corporation tax regime. Most of the major multinationals operating in Ireland today use this regime to significantly lower their tax costs for operating throughout Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

For example Google, IBM, Microsoft as well as many of the financial companies operating here have low-profile companies, alongside their high-profile operations, which act as low-tax gateways through which billions of Euro flow. The Irish Exchequer takes a 12.5% slice of these funds. Irish opponents of CCCTB such as IBEC argue that due to the 'proportional distribution' aspect of CCCTB, Ireland could lose much of its advantage as a low-tax location.

For simple illustration, DEFRA Bank plc is a large German bank located in the IFSC, which generates most of its revenue in Germany, however pays Irish corporation tax. If under CCCTB, it has to pay a large proportion of its tax bill to the German Finanzamt at the higher German rates, it makes less sense to continue operating in Ireland, where it does little or no business.

Conclusion

In an increasingly globalised world, where the economic playing field is being flattened, where telecommunications and digitization have made location less important, where multinationals continue to see tax as a cost rather than investment, winners and losers change places quickly. Ireland has been an outstanding winner in the globalization game recently. The specific CCCTB proposals are not yet drafted or agreed, however the potential implications for Ireland going forward are clear.

Ireland's corporation tax rate has risen above purely an economic strategic decision to almost 'sacred cow' status among the general populace. Any hint of changing this policy would have severe economic and domestic political implications. The Labour Party has correctly taken the position it will not change the 12.5% (which Ruairi Quinn secured as Minister for Finance).

However, the Labour party is a strongly pro-European party which believes in supporting fully the implementation of the Lisbon strategy and boosting the functioning of the Internal Market, to the benefit of all Europeans. The essence of modern social democracy means that co-operation is often better than competition. Over the longer term, our future lies in Europe, and our economic wellbeing depends on European economies working well together, as we compete with emerging giants like China and India. Longer term, Labour needs to examine the following questions regarding Ireland's future economic strategy:

– It looks increasingly likely CCCTB will proceed, if albeit under the enhanced co-operation mechanism. If only a small number of countries stay outside and the CCCTB becomes the defector standard across the EU, as IBEC points out, many large multinationals will have a tough choice of whether to re-locate to cut compliance costs. Does our planning take account of this risk?

– Ireland has played its diplomatic cards very well over the years in Europe and in the US (until the vote on Lisbon of course!). Much of that success was based on goodwill toward Ireland and the relative Irish economic underdevelopment. Billions of Deutschmarks and Dollars were invested in Ireland. Much of the money was given in the name of solidarity. Today, as a rich country, is Ireland happy to undercut its neighbours in tax-revenue terms? Will this policy undermine future diplomatic and economic relations?

– With widely published concerns about lost tax revenue to Ireland from the US Treasury, from certain European capitals and even the UK's Inland Revenue, can a small country indefinitely maintain such a low-tax policy?

– The Celtic Tiger was build largely upon an export economy (albeit mainly FDI sourced). Today, the construction and consumer sectors are the drivers of the Irish economy. Are these the sustainable foundations of a real knowledge-based economy?

Aidan O'Sullivan (PES Activists Dublin)

* This paper is NOT Labour Party policy, and not PES Activists Dublin opinion but a solely a personal analysis.

A couple of days ago (on 26th June), Eurostat published very interesting and useful analysis to draw some comparisons between the different taxations in Europe. Thanks to this survey, we discovered that Ireland had now the highest implicit tax rate on capital amongst the 27 European countries: 42.5% in 2006, compared to 27.1% in 1996. In France for instance, this implicit tax rate on capital is “only” 41.5%... This proved once again that we, French people, should sometimes be more open minded and work at revamping our “idées préconçues”.

The survey also shows large spreads between taxation rates in Europe: on capital, the range of implicit taxation is between 8.4% in Estonia, and 42.5% in Ireland. On labour, it is between 21.5% in Malta and 44.2% in Sweden.

We strongly believe that to be efficient in the world, Europe should be able to speak one voice, whether it is for diplomacy or for environmental challenges. Let us take an example: the euro for 15 of us. Having , a common currency and so a common monetary policy has helped us to be less affected - so far - by the financial crisis, compared to what we would have been if we still had 15 different monetary policies.

Click to access Eurostat survey

We are far away from living in a perfect world and sometimes it can be difficult to imagine that thousands or millions of people are starving, getting incurable diseases, people who don’t have access to the basic survival needs, not to talk about the lack of education.

Europe is far from having resolved its own problems but the power of our political (social and economic) Union resides in the value of solidarity. Countries and regions have been reconstructed based on this solidarity, people have known prosperity and wealth, the living conditions have improved and no one can say otherwise. People from countries like Ireland, Greece, Spain, and Portugal know what I’m talking about… Solidarity is difficult when this means giving a bite of your wealth but you always have to remember that this is what EU is all about: mutual help when you are facing a bad economic situation.

The current economic situation that is getting generally worst is not due to the EU but to the politicians of the PPE – European People’s Party and European Democrats - leading Europe and most of the European countries. It is due to their lack of perspectives regarding the future of this world in areas like environment, fuel, energy, recycling, social benefits or guaranties. If you want to change something CHANGE them, trust us and push us to change this world into a better place.

The scientific yet political approach of the foundations to the most important issues on the European agenda undoubtedly represents a unique enrichment to the consultation process. Having done extensive analytical research, ENSoF also presented a number of concrete proposals on “Europe in the world”, “European Democracy and Diversity”, “Save our Planet” and “New Social Europe”. Here is just a small selection:

• Disarmament policy: commit to a strengthening of international agreements on arms control and non-proliferation; make the largely ineffective EU Code of Conduct on weapons exports more restrictive and more transparent.
• Elect the President of the European Commission by the European Parliament from among the nominees of the European Political Parties for the office of the President of the Commission, before the European elections.
• Create a green tax proportionate to the carbon weight produced by each agent. This green tax will be redistributed as an investment aid for small businesses and individuals, in inverse proportion to their financing capacity and in a way that guarantees the neutrality of the tax.
• Guarantee equal access to education for everyone, independently of personal origin, implement a school system based on compulsory education up to the tenth grade, bring about high quality professional training for young people and lifelong learning for adults.

The full contribution is available here.

What do you think of these proposals, and what would be your most important recommendations for the Manifesto 2009? You can still offer suggestions (“red roses”), that you would like to see us campaigning for!

Rikke Skovgaard Andersen is a young journalist from Denmark and PES activist. Currently she is working with international higher education in Copenhagen. Rikke is a member of the Danish Social Democratic Party and the Danish Social Democratic Youth.

Victor Negrescu is the National Coordinator of PES activists in Romania and he works on several campaigning issues for PSD Romania. Victor worked as a journalist for important media in the country.

Aleksander Glogowski is in charge for communications at the Fédération du Parti Socialiste in Paris, where he also promotes European issues. He worked for the Socialist Group at the European Parliament and in 2004 was a candidate for the European elections.

Francisco Polo is the Coordinator of the Spanish activists and he works as a legal, political and communications advisor for companies and political movements. He is also the author of an influential political blog in Spain: www.FranciscoPolo.com

Je vous propose un texte rédigé par Antonio Carmelo Scifo et Renato Sallustio, militants PSE de Charleroi.

Par ailleurs, je vous invite à découvrir la contribution rédigée par leur groupe pour le manifeste.

La chute du mur de Berlin qui symbolisait la division de la planète en deux camps adverses a fait naitre un espoir de communication et de compréhension réciproque. Cet évènement pouvait même être perçu comme l'occasion de réaliser sur le plan économie et sociale ce que certains intellectuels nommaient une "troisième" voie qui serait en quelque sorte une synthèse, selon l'acception hégélienne du terme, dans laquelle se résoudrait la relation dialectique entretenue par les deux anciens systèmes. Cette synthèse aurait pu réunir les préoccupations relatives aux droits sociaux de l'un des systèmes et l'attention aux libertés individuelles propre à l'autre camp.

Cette troisième voie n'a cependant pas eu lieu car l'effondrement du système soviétique a donné naissance à une pensée unique qui a consenti l'exacerbation de certains aspects négatifs du modèle libéral occidental qui est devenu l'unique formule existante et qui a même été adopté par les ennemis d'hier. D'une certaine manière le modèle occidental s'est déshumanisé suite à l'effondrement du modèle antagoniste qui jouait le rôle d'épouvantails incitant les occidentaux à rester attentifs à la dimension sociale de l'économie.

Rentabilité, productivité et croissance économique sont devenu les uniques repères au niveau de l'organisation économique et politique. Cette absence d'alternative engendre un sentiment d'inéluctabilité qui érode l'autonomie politique et programmatique des états-nations. La voix et les raisons des gouvernements nationaux et des citoyens s'estompent alors que celles des lobbyistes et des entreprises multinationales gagnent en force. Ces dernières qui par définitions transcendent les frontières sont bien adaptées à un monde globalisé, alors que les institutions censées relayer les besoins et intérêts de la société civile peinent à s'organiser de façon efficace au niveau supranational.

Les multinationales sont devenues des entités oligarchiques qui détiennent le pouvoir économique mais qui pèsent également sur le processus décisionnel politique et qui détermine les conditions de vie de la population mondiale, ils sont devenus le nouveau maître d'un monde en voie de reféodalisation. Pire encore ces détenteurs des leviers économiques au niveau mondial orientent les valeurs auxquels doivent adhérer les citoyens modelant ainsi les consciences individuelles à leur convenance. La nouvelle religion inculque à l'homme qu'il doit vivre pour travailler et non le contraire, l'argent, dieux de cette nouvelle religion, incite à l'avidité élevant certains biens matériels accessoires au rang des biens indispensables. La logique consumériste régit de façon de plus en plus évidente nos vie elle se résume à travailler pour consommer, produire pour consommer reléguant au second plan tout autre objectif existentiel faisant de nous des humains et non des machines.

Nous vivons, à présent, dans le monde de l'urgence ou la seule perspective est celle du maintenant, dans lequel le long et même le moyen terme ne sont plus considéré : un monde de survie au jour le jour dans lequel il devient de plus en plus difficile de faire des projets à long terme ( acquérir une maison , se marier...).outre cet appauvrissement téléologique ce consumérisme effréné pousse à des activités peu respectueuses de l'environnement, des réserves naturelles et des droits de l'homme. Nous en sommes arrivé à un système absurde dans lequel les lois du marché encouragent à jeter le pain plutôt qu'à le vendre à des prix trop bas. Au nom de la liberté de marché et d'entreprise on décourage la consommation des biens et denrées locale, poussant les gens à consommer des produits provenant de contrées lointaines au détriment de la production locale. Sans parler de l’hypocrisie ambiante relative à la protection de l’environnement puisqu’ à une époque ou politiciens et industriels se prétendent comme les défenseurs de l’environnement on tente de développer l’activité nucléaire là où elle est présente voir de l’initialiser là où elle n’existait pas éludant les problèmes de la dangerosité des déchets.

L’Union Européenne pourrait, dans ce contexte, contribuer à diminuer les aspects négatifs de la mondialisation libérale. D’ailleurs l'Europe a déjà réussi par le passé certains paris difficiles. Souvenons-nous que l'Europe vue par Jean Monnet, celle qui visait à mettre un terme aux conflits intra-européens par la mise en commun des richesses des états européens, la libre circulation des marchandises l'ouverture des frontières, à porté ses fruits. Il faudrait à présent donner à l'Union Européenne les possibilités d'affronter les défis du monde en réformant le processus décisionnel, notamment la règle de l'unanimité qui permet aux égoïsmes nationaux de s'exprimer et de freiner la construction d'une Europe politique dont la nécessité se fait sentir de façon pressante. On pourrait, par exemple, pour y parvenir, envisager une Europe à plusieurs vitesses dans laquelle le groupe de pays disposés à aller au delà des égoïsmes nationaux pourrait constituer un pôle d'attraction pour les autres états.

Cela permettrait de doter les différents états européens de règles communes qui comme nous le savons ne sont pas forcément une prison mais qui au contraire ne peuvent, si elles sont partagées, qu'apporter stabilité, bien-être et protection de tous et en particulier des plus faibles.

La construction d'une Europe politique et sociale respectueuse des plus faibles devrait être la principale préoccupation de tout parti socialiste européen qui se respecte.

Le modèle que tout socialiste devrait soutenir est celui d’une répartition plus équitable des richesses, une compétition basée sur le rapport qualité/prix plutôt que celui préconisant les délocalisations, les contrats précaires, le faible coût de la main d'œuvre, l'exploitation, le non respect des droits de l'homme et de la nature.

Une grande partie de ces 60 milliards, ainsi que d’autres revenus qui échappent à l’impôt, se retrouvent dans des institutions financières situées dans des paradis fiscaux.

Selon l’OCDE, un paradis fiscal (bancaire ou judiciaire) est caractérisé par :

- une taxation quasi inexistante ;

- un manque de transparence ;

- l’absence d’échanges d’informations entre le territoire concerné et le fisc du pays de résidence du contribuable ;

- la possibilité d’élire une résidence fiscale dans ces pays sans avoir de véritable activité économique.

En résumé, les paradis fiscaux permettent d’échapper à l’impôt mais également de réaliser des opérations financières douteuses. Ils sont un vecteur majeur pour le blanchiment de l’argent de la drogue, de la prostitution, du trafic d’armes, de la corruption …

Dans la perspective d’un démantèlement des paradis fiscaux et autres centres off shore, les partis membres du PSE devraient s’engager à :

- lutter activement pour la suppression des zones à fiscalité privilégiée qui se trouvent au sein de l’Union européenne ou dans des territoires qui lui sont associés ;

- défendre l’abolition des entraves quant à l’échange d’informations entre les administrations fiscales des états membres (fin du secret bancaire) ;

- soutenir la création d’un organisme public de contrôle des sociétés de clearing (chambre de compensation financière) et de routage financier.

Aujourd’hui, les principales règles européennes sur la fiscalité visent à :

- harmoniser les taux de TVA ;

- éviter la double imposition des sociétés, notamment pour des entreprises mères et filiales basées dans plusieurs Etats membres;

- harmoniser la fiscalité de l'épargne, les citoyens européens étant désormais libres de placer leur argent dans tout pays de l'UE ;

- établir une coopération européenne dans la lutte contre les fraudes fiscales.

Globalement, notamment du fait de la règle de l'unanimité, l'harmonisation en matière de fiscalité reste limitée.

L’absence d’une véritable politique fiscale commune en Europe favorise la concurrence entre les états membres, chacun voulant attirer chez lui capitaux et/ou entreprises. De plus la rigidité des règles en matière de TVA ne permet pas aux états de répondre à certains défis sociaux (application de taux réduits sur des produits « sensibles » - alimentation, chauffage) ou environnementaux (soutien aux « produits verts » et/ou pénalisation des produits nocifs)

En conséquence, le PSE devrait intégrer les revendications suivantes dans son manifeste électoral de 2009 :

· En ce qui concerne la fiscalité sur les entreprises :

- réclamer une harmonisation de l’impôt sur les sociétés tant sur l’assiette que sur le taux ;

- instaurer un taux minimum et/ou mettre en place un « serpent fiscal » européen afin d’éviter que certains états membres ne se trouvent privés de recettes fiscales importantes.

- mettre fin aux pratiques fiscales dommageables (centre de coordination, intérêts notionnels, …)

· En matière fiscalité de l’épargne et des capitaux, la directive « épargne » devrait être étendue à d’autres produits de placement que ceux actuellement visés et également être d’application pour les personnes morales.

· En matière de fiscalité environnementale, soutenir la proposition de TVA réduite pour les produits à « valeur ajoutée environnementale ».

· En matière de fiscalité indirecte, faciliter les dérogations pour :

- l’extension du taux réduit de TVA sur les produits dont la hausse pénaliserait fortement le pouvoir d’achat des citoyens.

- mettre en place des taux de TVA majorés spécifiques aux produits de luxe et aux produits nuisibles à l’environnement.

“We should do a European campaign rather than a national or a campaign based in Brussels. Citizens should be our priority and we should be right next to them”, he said.

Philip Cordery, PES Secretary-General, and Mathieu Cahn, First Secretary of the Strasbourg Federation, also participated on the meeting.

According to Philip Cordery, the PES manifesto can be an important step to fill the gap between Europe and its citizens as it is offering grassroots the possibility to actively define a common campaigning agenda.

In its contribution, the Strasbourg Federation outlines that the social Europe should be structured through the exercise of political rights by EU citizens outside the framework of national States. One of the solutions to achieve it is through a truly European party, the PES, with the participation of both its leaders and its supporters.

The Strasbourg contribution is structured in three parts: “Pour l’Europe fédérale et la puissance publique européenne », « Pour la République sociale européene » and « Pour l’Economie sociale et écologique »

Click here to read the contribution submitted by the Strasbourg Federation.

Desmond O’Toole, member of the Irish Labour Party, was blogging last week on the Irish referendum! Thank you Desmond for your insight views!

Joël Cordier’s our new blogger of the week. Joel was International Secretary of the Mouvement des Jeunes Socialistes and member of ECOSY in the 90s.

He was candidate on the list of the Parti Socialiste during the European election campaign 2004.

As from 2007, he is member of the executive committee of the Parti Socialiste (PS) in Namur and of the Federal Committee of the same region.

In 2008, Joel started working at Artisans de l’Europe, an initiative undertaken by the Belgium Parti Socialiste and developed under the framework of Artisans du Progrès, a project aimed at debating the manifesto2009.

Welcome to Yourspace, Joël!