I ended the week this evening as I began it – watching a 1970s science fiction film starring Charlton Heston. The Omega Man (1971, directed by Boris Sagal and based on Richard Matheson’s 1954 novel, I Am Legend) is so much better than the 2007 Will Smith re-make, I Am Legend (I see from this 2009 post).  The latter got smug on its special effects and put the emphasis on the horror. The 1971 film played down the vampire and zombie themes in favour of the love interest (Rosalind Cash, sporting a great afro and engaging, with Charlton Heston, in one of the first inter-racial kisses on screen) and, behind that, the inter-ethnic relations between the albino mutants (surving victims of a plague who have re-established a primitive mediaeval society known as ‘The Family’) and the original human race (Heston, at first alone) who brought the plague upon the world through biological warfare. Heston, as scientist Robert Neville, portrays a half-crazed, trigger-happy, macho loner. The Family, on the other hand, have foregone guns, together with all other machines, and are trying to re-build a society, no matter how regressive and repressive. It might be surprising to find Charlton Heston and the word ‘subtle’ in the same sentence, but the 1971 film is far more subtle and balanced than the 2007 remake.

Later this morning I co-chaired (together with CoR SG Gerhard Stahl) the 14th bi-monthly meeting between the Secretaries-General of the EESC and the Committee of the Regions together with the Directors of the Joint Services and their respective Directors of Administration and Finance. As I never tire of pointing out, the two Committees set a good example to the other institutions by pooling their resources in a series of Joint Service (translation, logistics, IT…), thus saving the taxpayer considerable amounts of money through economies of scale. This arrangement requires a series of joint governance mechanisms, today’s meeting being one of them. As usual, we discussed a series of budgetary and other resource-related issues and, as usual, we were happy to note that the cooperation between our two institutions continues to work well – thanks in no small measure to the good will on all sides.

Jean Monnet liked to go for a walk in the morning, before getting down to work, and there is indeed a lot to be said for getting some exercise and fresh air before knuckling down to things. Most days I have to make do with the cycle ride to work. But early on Friday mornings, when I can, I like to get out into the countryside around Leuven. The photograph shows why. This heavenly pastoral scene is some fifteen minutes away from the city centre. After an intense week (and with meetings still to come), a brisk walk in such scenery, and especially in such glorious weather, works wonders. By the time I get into the office I have put everything in its proper perspective again…

Once again, and thanks in no small part to President Staffan Nilsson’s adroit chairmanship, the plenary session got through its complete agenda literally with minutes to spare. Getting the timing right is so important because provision of a full team of interpreters is, understandably, very expensive. In the good old bad old days, the Committee would have booked the team for the day, thereby giving itself flexibility if the plenary’s agenda ran over into the afternoon. But in order to enhance efficiency we now plan things much more tightly. Today, we had no alternative but to finish at 13.00. Of course, we have some tricks up our sleeves to help us (which I shan’t reveal), but the President’s sense of humour is a considerable advantage. Today, for example, there was a misunderstanding over whether an amendment had been adopted or not. The President, quite rightly, believed that it had been adopted but to ease the plenary forward and defuse the situation he said, on mike, ‘Have I made a mistake? Please don’t tell anyone.’  By the time we had stopped laughing he had moved smoothly on to the next amendment…

A second potentially controversial opinion on this morning’s plenary session agenda further illustrated the Committee’s inate capacity to build consensus. The opinion was in response to a European Commission proposal for a renewed 2011-2014 strategy for corporate social responsibility. The rapporteur was Madi Sharma (in the picture, Employers’ Group, United Kingdom) and the Co-rapporteur Sir Stuart Etherington (Various Interests’ Group, United Kingdom). The EESC opinion supports the voluntary nature of CSR, but criticises the lack of plans to encourage and help enterprises to take responsibility for their impact on society. The Committee proposes that companies that make CSR a central feature of their organisation should report on their social and environmental impact using transparent methods. The same should be done by public administrations and large civil society organisations. The EESC also calls for specific measures for SMEs and greater attention to the sector of social enterprise, which has been neglected in the CSR policy initiative. Once again, the opinion was adopted by a large majority.

Nothing could better sum up the European Economic and Social Committee’s inate tendency to build the broadest possible consensus than the picture accompanying this post. It shows the rapporteur of the Committee’s opinion on the EU’s next multi-annual financial framework, Stefano Palmieri (Employees’ Group, Italy), and the co-rapporteur, Jacek Krawczyk (Employers’ Group, Poland). The two, despite their very different origins and organisations, were in complete agreement, arguing that ‘the ambitious challenges facing the EU make it not only desirable but also necessary to increase the size of the EU budget so as to revitalise economic growth and employment… The Committee endorses the message that more (and better) Europe is needed – not less.’ The rapporteur and co-rapporteur further argue that the EU should return to ‘the original spirit of the Treaty of Rome and thus give the EU proper financial autonomy.’ Moreover, ‘a euro spent at EU level is more effective than one spent at national level.’  What I also find impressive and convincing is that the Committee’s position on such issues has been consistent over a very long period.

The plenary session got under way this morning with a debate and vote on an opinion on increasing the impact of EU development policy: the future approach to EU budget support to third countries (rapporteur = Anne Le Nouail, Employees’ Group, France). Understandably, the opinion calls strongly for the fullest possible involvement of civil society organisations. The opinion argues that such non-state organisations are of particular importance in countries where corruption is rife. Indeed, the opinion points out that the potential for corruption can be limited by boosting the direct involvement of civil society. A sticky point in the debate revolved around the relationship between and coordination of public and private aid but the opinion itself was adopted by a large majority.

This evening, with the day’s session safely out of the way, I happily joined the UK members of the European Economic and Social Committee in a central Brussels restaurant. I had received a kind invitation to join them to celebrate the 70th birthday of David Sears (Employers’ Group, United Kingdom). The EESC does not, in a formal sense, have ‘national delegations’, but it obviously does have loose groupings of members from the same Member State. With great efficiency and diplomacy, David acts as the coordinator for the 24 UK members, liaising both with them all and between them and the British permanent representation. As the picture shows, a good time was had by one and all, but I have my doubts about that first digit. Seventy? It is difficult to believe. (Thanks to Brenda for the photograph.)

Something truly lovely happened in this afternoon’s plenary session. Our plenaries simply couldn’t function without our ushers. They make sure our members have all the papers that they need – amendments, opinions, travel forms… They also pamper us all, bringing rapporteurs their voting machines when they forget them, bringing coffee or tea for the flagging President and Secretary General, replacing nameplates, and so on. They are also very modest and retiring. At one point this afternoon two ushers were on the Presidential podium and our President, Staffan Nilsson, spontaneously called for a round of applause for all of the ushers. The members enthusiastically responded with a round of applause that surely lasted close to two minutes. The ushers didn’t know what to do with themselves but, truly, the applause was richly deserved.  It was a real feel good moment. The picture with this post sums up the relationship. A rapporteur (Richard Adams, Various Interests, UK) is being ‘pampered’ by one of our faithful ushers, Mohammed Achab. The smiles say it all.

Faithful readers of this blog will know that the European Economic and Social Committee’s members span all ages, from idealistic youth to wise age. The proud father in the picture is Andris Gobins, President of the Latvian European Movement and a member of the Committee’s Various Interests Group. Mum was busy and the baby sitter cried off at the last moment, so Gobins Jr. came to the plenary to keep us all company. President Staffan Nilsson welcomed him and, frankly, he was very well behaved.