Across to London early this morning for the funeral of my paternal uncle, Daniel (to us always ‘Danny’) Burgess, who was felled by a heart attack two Tuesdays ago at the age of 83. The funeral was held in Morden, which is to where my father’s family moved, bombed out, in 1940. There is a north- and south-of-the-river divide in London. Danny, who married my father’s sister, Janice, was born and remained a south London man, whereas my father married a north London girl and moved to the north of the city. Once London’s arteries began to fur up with heavy traffic, and before the M25 simplified matters, this meant that we saw less of Danny, Janice and their boys, Robert, Alan and Gary, than we would have wanted. We were fond of him because he was the archetypal chirpy cockney sparrow, always laughing and joking and joshing and with never a mean word for anybody or anything. He was also, in his own modest way, something of a hero. Just after he had finished his military service he was struck by tuberculosis and for two-and-a-half years he fought against the disease. By the end, he had just one third of each lung and a damaged arm left. Yet if you saw him wrestling with his boys or fixing something (he was always fixing something) you would never have believed it and he never, ever complained, though he had constant breathing difficulties. Later in life he developed a sailing bug but to get his licence he needed to swim and with so little of his lungs left he couldn’t float. He learned nevertheless with a group of handicapped children and a specialised teacher. Despite modest income and physical disabilities, Danny and Janice were globetrotters: camping in France, Italy and Spain when the boys were young, America, South America and the Caribbean when they were older. His sons each spoke at the ceremony and did him proud. As Gary, the youngest, so aptly put it, ‘He had such a big heart, and with that he was rich.’  At the reception afterwards the Westlake clan, now a diaspora stretching to Canada, Ireland, the Czech Republic, France and Belgium, was briefly and sadly reunited. Before I got my train back, my late father’s brother, Malcolm, showed me the Morden house to which he and my father had moved in 1940 (picture). Back home I have a picture of my father standing in front of the same house as a thirteen year-old. Malcolm’s son, Mark, and I remembered playing in the abandoned bomb shelter in the back garden. It really doesn’t seem to have changed very much, but of course so much else has.

This morning the Committee debated and adopted a potentially controversial opinion (rapporteur: Thomas Janson, Group II, Sweden – to the right in the picture) on the posting of workers. In an excellent demonstration of the Committee’s consensus-building tradition at work, the opinion was adopted by a very large majority (219 votes in favour, 8 against). Although generally supportive of the Commission’s proposal, the opinion poses some questions and lays down some conditions for the success of the proposal, particularly in such areas as equal minimum conditions of employment and provisions on joint and several liability.

The opening of the exhibition was followed by a Cyprus cultural evening, with our President, Staffan Nilsson, welcoming the Permanent Representative, Kornelios Korneliou and Androulla Vassiliou, the (Cypriot) European Commissioner for Education, Culture, Multilingualism, Youth and Sport, who delivered a warm keynote speech. The speeches were followed by a dancing display and regional food and drink (including an excellent Cypriot white wine). We have a small but very active group of members from Cyprus (in the picture) and it was great for their island member state, a furthest point east and a bridge between Europe and Asia and the north and the south (as Vassiliou described it), to take on the responsibility of the Presidency of the Council of Ministers for the first time. It was great also to have a taste (also literally) of their culture.

This evening, back at the EESC’s Jacques Delors headquarters building, an art exhibition, Envision Cyprus – Memories Alive, was opened by the Committee’s Vice-President, Anna Maria Darmanin, and the Permanent Representative of Cyprus to the European Union, Kornelios Korneliou. Two female artists, Efi Savvides and Kyriaki Costa, present a taste of the contradictions and challenges of modern life, juxtaposed with the views of the elderly (Savvides, in particularly, generated her work through regular visits to an old people’s home). As she puts it ‘In our current dynamic, highly technological world of fast-changing social and personal values, the act of returning to the past often offers comfort and a sense of security to an alienated and fragmented identity. Anonymous immigrants, deserted elederly people in care homes, and neglected individuals who feel trapped in their memories of the past, unable to cope with the demands of modern life, remind us of the fragility of human nature and invite our attention.’ This intriguing joint exhibition sets out to explore those themes. Well worth a visit.

This afternoon’s plenary saw the debate and adoption of a keynote Committee opinion on the cost of non-Europe. The chairman of the study group that produced the opinion was Henri Malosse, the President of the Employers’ Group. The rapporteur of the opinion was Georges Dassis, the President of the Employees’ Group, and the co-rapporter was Luca Jahier, the President of the Various Interests Group (the latter two are in the picture). That high-level composition of the study group already says something about the importance the Committee attaches to this theme. It might seem counterintuitive at a moment when Euro-scepticism is on the rise but, argue Dassis and Jahier, it shouldn’t be. ‘Europe’ should not allow itself to be portrayed constantly as an imposition of additional costs. Rather, by providing economies of scale and strength in numbers and by facilitating rationalisation and creating a large home market, Europe represents a potential for considerable gain. Hence, the absence of ‘Europe’ can be seen as a cost. The opinion identifies a number of areas in which that cost is all too evident and could be empirically proven, in the same way that the old Cecchini report was able to quantify the cost of the absence of a single market.

Hard on the heels of the debate with European Commissioner for Trade, Karel De Gucht, the Committee welcomed three distinguished guests for a debate on the theme of ‘organised civil society and global governance.’ The three guests were: Laurence Parisot, President of the French Confederation of Business Enterprises (MEDEF); John Evans, General Secretary of the Trade Union Advisory Committee to the OECD (TUAC); and Jean Saldanha, representing the European Confederation for Relief and Development (CONCORD). In an impassioned opening speech Parisot first recounted how the parallel organisation B 20 had come into existence before insisting that we need to ‘get out of the technicalities of Europe and talk about the dream. We (pro-Europeans) must stop being anonymous.’ Following on from her, Evans recounted the development of another parallel organisation, L 20, pointing out that the G 20 itself (in its current incarnation) had grown out of a narrow composition of ministers of finance and economics. Saldanha spoke about the paradoxical challenge of creating an inclusive governance that does not feel like either co-option or symbolic involvement. If the world’s leaders fail this test then inevitably civil society organisations would seek alternative outlets for their opinions. It was a rich and fascinating debate. Afterwards, Parisot had to race to get her train and so had booked a motorbike taxi. The picture shows Parisot, like a feisty sprite, racing away.

This afternoon the EESC’s plenary session hosted European Commissioner for Trade Karel De Gucht for a debate on trade growth and development and on the role of civil society in that context. At the beginning of his speech, the text of which is available here, Mr De Gucht argued that the Committee ‘symbolises the participation of civil society in European policy making. This interaction is an important manifestation of public accountability. Without consultation with EU citizens, we are unlikely to respond to challenges in a fully relevant way. Indeed, the organised civil society organisations that you represent are a valued connection to what people are feeling on the ground. This is particularly important for trade policy given that so many people are affected by our choices – both in Europe and around the world. For that reason I take the objective of stakeholder involvement very seriously. I am very proud of our civil society dialogue, which for 12 years has been providing us with valuable input on our negotiations and diplomacy.’ The Commissioner went on to provide an overview of the Commission’s trade policy strategy. In the ensuing exchange EESC members emphasised the growing importance of the civil society aspects of the EU’s trade relations and, in his response, the Commissioner acknowledged this.

The EESC President, Staffan Nilsson, delightedly welcomed a group of Croatian observers to our plenary session for the first time. Between now and next July, when Croatia will officially become the 28th member state of the European Union, Croatian observers will be regularly following the work of the Committee, getting a feel for its working methods and culture. If, as they say, you never get a second chance to make a first impression then this was a good first plenary session for them to attend: a rich discussion with a Commissioner; a thematic debate with a strong panel of visiting speakers; a keynote opinion on the cost of non-Europe; a good example, in the opinion on the posting of workers, of the Committee’s concensus-building working methods at their best; and an exhibition and evening event to mark the Cyprus Presidency of the EU Council of Ministers. Our guests had pride of place at the front of the assembly and, when he felt it appropriate, Staffan took trouble to explain to them how a particular procedure worked. Soon, nine Croatian members will take their place on the Committee’s benches and very soon it will feel as if they have always been there – which is just how it should be.

At 14.30 this afternoon the European Economic and Social Committee’s 483rd plenary session got under way in the Charlemagne Building of the European Commission. I always count my blessings at this moment. The machine clicks into place and starts to operate smoothly. The interpreting teams are in their cabins (including Croatian language interpreters this time), the voting machines and displays work, the 344 members’ places are clearly indicated, their documents are available at the distribution counter. The sessions service is in place and ready for the off. The EESC doesn’t have to travel to another city to hold its plenary sessions but, just like its sister consultative body, the Committee of the Regions, it does have to borrow meeting rooms to hold its plenary sessions (and thus saves the taxpayer a lot of money). And that means that everything I have mentioned above has to be organised and temporarily installed and removed again once the plenary session is over. That it all works is down in no small part to the backroom logistical teams that have installed and tested everything long before we arrive to benefit from their good work. So, as the session gets under way, I think gratefully of all the colleagues who have made sure that this can happen. The sessions always begin with a statement by the President and on this occasion Staffan Nilsson took the opportunity to comment further on the declarations made last week by José Manuel Barroso and Herman Van Rompuy about the future of Europe. Staffan concluded that ‘The EESC is determined to do all it can to contribute to the debate launched by the Presidents of the European institutions, and to put forward substantive proposals from civil society for this decisive pact for Europe. The nest stop will be the 10 October meeting of the ‘enlarged enlarged presidency’, where the President, Vice-Presidents and Group Presidents will discuss next steps with the Section Presidents…

Today, Monday, saw meetings in the Committee that more traditionally take place on a Tuesday, since our plenary week had to be advanced by one day this time. Early this morning the Committee’s enlarged Presidency (the President, Vice-Presidents and Group Presidents, together with the Secretary General and his Deputy) met to prepare the agendas of the Bureau and the Committee’s plenary session. The enlarged Presidency also debated the Committee’s response to European Commission President José Manuel Barroso’s State of the Union speech. The President has already released a very supportive declaration and the Committee will now look to see how it can provide further support in the policy areas and initiatives set out in the speech. This afternoon the Bureau itself met. All went well, and we are now looking forward to an interesting plenary session tomorrow.