Enhancing public support for the EU-Ukrainian Association Agreement – FCO Report

Today I have very little to say, as I want to draw attention to the work of chaps at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office together with HM Embassy Kyiv under the imaginatively titled “A blueprint for enhancing understanding of and support for the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement including DCFTA in Ukraine“

It is also available in Ukrainian - Угода про асоціацію ЄС – Україна: дослідження обізнаності цільових груп та стратегія комунікаційної кампанії - a title just as lengthy as in English!

It is a very interesting read that will go a long way to questioning the predispositions of some relating to the Ukrainian public desire to head West (or East).

I could go on and on but I won’t – have a read, it will be worth it.

Italy to open Consulate in Odessa soon

A very short and sweet entry today.

Yet another diplomatic mission will soon open in Odessa – this time Italian - which will please the good woman if it has the ability to produce Visas, as Italy is a nation that particularly attracts her for reasons of history, architecture, food and of course fashion.

Very good.  That makes half a dozen Consulates opened in Odessa in as many years and leaves Odessa housing close to 20 diplomatic missions.

Naturally the UK isn’t one of them – not even an Honorary Consul, despite an ever growing and vibrant local diplomatic community – but I have come to expect nothing less.

Regional Development Funding – Ukraine

This entry was inspired by a UK MEP named Arlene McCarthy who represents the north-west of England in the European Parliament – although what she said has nothing to do with Ukraine – directly.

Indirectly, her words undoubtedly fit Ukraine – as well as many other EU nations and nations that receive EU regional funds.

One can hardly draw any other inference from her words other than that she believes that central government (in this case Whitehall and the UK government) siphon off large quantities of EU funding meant for regional development.

I do wonder why the funds  are going through Whitehall and not directly to the regions?  Should they not be on a project by project basis as submitted for EU financing directly from local government to EU, without the need to involve central government at all?  At most a cursory informing of Whitehall?

Perhaps the MEP should also concern herself with the funds that do reach the regions and are then siphoned off by the regional and local government in the UK too – either for nefarious purposes or to support otherwise unsustainable pet projects?

Anyway, Liverpool, Arlene McCarthy, Whitehall and the EU can bicker amongst themselves as generally I write about Ukraine (and occasionally the neighbourhood).

Nevertheless, never one to look a gift horse in the mouth when it comes to an easy topic introduction – Ms McCarthy’s words come at the same time that the EU announced Euro 31 million to boost Ukraine’s regional development.

Here it seems the EU is prepared to directly finance the local government and regions rather than send funds via central government.  Insuring it seems, that the projects it supports do run parallel to the national action plan for Ukraine wherever possible.  Very good.

One level of corruption and/or funding miss-allocation removed in the case of Ukraine when going direct to regional/local government.  Naturally not the elimination of corruption and/or miss-allocation of funding.  That is simply not possible no matter how rigorous any process is.  Just as any security expert worthy of the name will state there can never be 100% security, there can never be a system that is absolutely corruption-proof.

After all, the lowest tender in any procurement model is not necessarily the best value for money when other issues from a bidding  entity are considered.  Cost alone simply does not and should not decide the winner of any tender.  Contractor ability, contractor experience, contractor cash flow etc., are all considerations alongside any tender bid.  In short the contractor awarded a contract should have the ability to provide a quality outcome and the cash flow to avoid folding mid-contract.

Having now discounted the lowest tender as always being the best tender – even in the most transparent of circumstances – there are obvious methods now presenting themselves even to the most naive of readers for corruption, cronyism and kick-backs to occur.  And they do.  Daily.  In Ukraine and everywhere else on the planet.

The fact the finance comes from the EU, an entity riddled with accounting “issues” for so long I can’t even remember the last time auditors signed off the EU accounts in their entirety – (15+ years I suspect) – really doesn’t help.

I am reminded of a very caustic letter from a gentleman who managed to account very well in far more trying times than those faced by the EU accountants:

Gentlemen,

Whilst marching from Portugal to a position which commands the approach to Madrid and the French forces, my officers have been diligently complying with your requests which have been sent by H.M. ship from London to Lisbon and thence by dispatch to our headquarters.

We have enumerated our saddles, bridles, tents and tent poles, and all manner of sundry items for which His Majesty’s Government holds me accountable. I have dispatched reports on the character, wit, and spleen of every officer. Each item and every farthing has been accounted for, with two regrettable exceptions for which I beg your indulgence.

Unfortunately the sum of one shilling and ninepence remains unaccounted for in one infantry battalion’s petty cash and there has been a hideous confusion as the the number of jars of raspberry jam issued to one cavalry regiment during a sandstorm in western Spain. This reprehensible carelessness may be related to the pressure of circumstance, since we are war with France, a fact which may come as a bit of a surprise to you gentlemen in Whitehall.

This brings me to my present purpose, which is to request elucidation of my instructions from His Majesty’s Government so that I may better understand why I am dragging an army over these barren plains. I construe that perforce it must be one of two alternative duties, as given below. I shall pursue either one with the best of my ability, but I cannot do both:

1. To train an army of uniformed British clerks in Spain for the benefit of the accountants and copy-boys in London or perchance.

2. To see to it that the forces of Napoleon are driven out of Spain.

Your most obedient servant,

Wellington

So much for progress in our electronic data capable world eh?

However, knowing there to be no perfect model or model that cannot be manipulated, and knowing there are so very few in Ukrainian politics – be they local or national – that are entirely upright and solid citizens of Ukraine, with such integrity that they would never take anything more than the pitiful public servant salary for their time and effort in office, one has to suppose that even when cutting out the Ukrainian central government, the regional fiefdoms will carry out the same nefarious funding function – one way or another – even with projects with a maximum value of Euro 2 million.

Nevertheless, a need for regional development there certainly is.  A regional interface there needs to be – and local/regional government is the most appropriate, no matter how nefarious.  A rigorous auditing model would minimize the opportunities for corruption although it could never eradicate them, but together with the EU producing the invoices they are asked to pay/given as audit evidence for public scrutiny would keep “very generous profit margins” to a more reasonable level.

Most importantly of course is that development of the region occurs – and for those citizens who actually benefit from the development of the region and feel the effects in their daily lives – well do they really care how many Euros it costs or get nefariously appropriated along the way to get what they need?  Of course not!

Perhaps they have a point too.   Accepting there is no perfect method – why do we expect a perfect outcome?

Cyprus, Leveson and direction – Ukraine

Not that long ago in Ukraine, a very unwise MP called for a 25% tax on savings to assist Ukraine in its current financial and economic plight.

That MP was castrated publicly and immediately by the current prime minister, numerous business and bank leaders, NGOs both foreign and domestic, and several media outlets – Quite rightly.

Hardly a plan that would inspire confidence in either the current government or the banking system – not withstanding the morality and possible illegalities of such a proposal.

Naturally there are some differences between the circumstances of Ukraine and Cyprus when we consider the external factors and entities relating to the Cypriot decision, and the simply moronic thoughts of a RADA MP with no clue about the concept of casual effect.

However, Ukraine is not renowned for the intelligence of the vast majority of its parliamentary representatives.  As such, we can expect a large amount of folly – and indeed we get it – though fortunately much of that folly does not get adopted as social or economic policy.

However, the fact that Ukraine – given all its political and internal problems, and no small number of self-interested dullards sitting as MPs – immediately pooh-poohed the suggestion of a tax  (or if you are a Cypriot, a “levy”) on savings, would seem to show a far greater awareness for causal effect than that of the supposedly very clever EU “troika” and their original “deal” with Cyprus.

One is reminded of Albert Pike’s Morals and Dogma (1871) – in which he writes “Even the fool will sometimes hit the mark……..The finger even of the idiot may point to the great highway.”

Well, even the fools running Ukraine immediately shot down the idea of taxing savings and had the ability to recognise what the reaction of society would be if they even momentarily entertained – let alone carried out – such a proposal.

Now the EU “troika” has gone far beyond momentarily entertaining the idea – and have been roundly rebuffed by the Cypriot Parliament who have rejected the plan categorically – so we will now see just how far the causal effects will run if not necessarily in practice, then on the psyche of society.

Naturally any changes to the original deal to mitigate the casual effects will amply display the complete incompetence of those who formed the “deal” in the first place.

It has to be said, thus far it is only Wednesday, and with the proposed Eurozone sponsored Cypriot savings raid, and the truly awful attack on free speech in the UK yesterday as a result of the Leveson inquiry, I am – not for the first time – watching parts of Europe large and small, entity and sovereign nation, moving towards Ukraine rather than Ukraine moving towards the EU in significant areas of democracy, rule of law, human rights and media freedom.

Hmmm

EU “Smart Borders” – Easier traveling for Ukrainians?

Now, as we all know, Ukrainian Visa-free travel with the EU should be a lot closer to reality than it actually is.  Particularly as this issue has been deliberately kept free of personality/government image/perception politics and kept fully insulated within the technical and legal requirements to facilitate it.  No more and no less.

The simple fact is, Visa-free travel for Ukrainians is not as close to being a reality as it could be because of the inaction of the Ukrainian politicians failing to pass the necessary legislation and fighting over the business interests when it comes to who will actually get the lucrative contracts to  produce biometric passports etc.

In truth very little blame can be attached to the EU over the failure of Ukraine to do what needs to be done to actually make Visa-free travel a reality for its citizenry.  The goal posts are not moving.  It is in fact an open goal free from effects of  playing field shifting political shenanigans.  Failure to score in the gaping goal is completely and utterly the fault of the Ukrainian political elite – who one suspects are on the receiving end of far fewer Visa refusals than the average Ukrainian.  Quite frankly, nobody else is to blame.

However, whilst the population of Ukraine patiently wait for their lackluster and self-centered elite to do what is necessary to remove what is often a very expensive, logistically burdensome, heavily and often overly intrusive bureaucratic process, the European Commission is trying to convince the European Parliament to engage in a “Smart Borders” project to make travel easier for people from “third countries”.

The cost of this project – an estimated Euro 1.1 billion.  In EU speak estimated is equivalent to saying “at a minimum”.

The system is supposed to divide visitors to the EU into two categories.  Regular visitors (RTS) and occasional visitors (EES).

Regular visitors will apply to be registered as such – and if successful will be given some form of smart/swipe card and can simply swipe their way into and out of the EU – like some form of electronic Schengen Visa centrally issued and centrally monitored.

Occasional visitors will rely on their biometric passports – or not in the case of Ukraine which is still to generate its first biometric passport for the reasons I have listed above.

Those with biometric passport will have the details stored for 6 months on entry – unless they have previously overstayed when such details can be retained indefinitely according to the proposal – Privacy activists no doubt will have issues with “indefinitely”.

Further, all information gathered can be “available to” all national police institutions.  Whether they will be legally bound to delete all information they may take that was “available” after 6 months, I suspect, will become another major issue.  In effect they can “obtain” all biometric data of any non-EU member entering the EU from a centrally held data base (until deleted) at any time – and may not have to delete it after 6 months as the central data base will.

Hmmm.

Privacy issues aside, surely there is only one simple question to be asked and answered here.

Will the new system make life significantly easier for the EU nations, easier for travelers, but strike the necessarily right balance against illegal/irregular migration?  At an estimated Euro 1.1 billion (guaranteed to be much more), “significant” is an issue here!

Anyway, if this manages to get past the European Parliament and actually become a reality, one has to suspect it will not become reality for a good 5 years at least – probably longer.

Will Ukraine have produced a biometric passport by then?

If it has, then many of the legislative (and business interests) that are preventing it actually making Visa-free a reality for its citizenry will have already been overcome.  The technical monitoring phase would be well underway.  Visa-free imminent, in effect.

So whilst the benefits for the EU from this “smart borders” project seem rather limited from the outset (whether that third nation is Ukraine or not) – and are replete with “privacy issues” – the benefits for Ukraine, as long as the politicians get their self-centred fingers out of their incredibly idle arses, should theoretically be zero given the time frames.

……..And yet, I write this in the full expectation of having to register my wife on the Regular Travelers Programme sometime after 2018 – which will have limited benefit to the EU, limited benefit for her and underline just how feckless the Ukrainian political elite across the entire political spectrum actually is.

Not that any of the above will help much with the UK – Due to my wife regularly swapping her eyeballs, altering her fingerprints frequently, and changing the bone structure of her face as often as the bedding, she will necessarily have to continue to haul herself to Kyiv to be “re-biometricised” every time she needs a new UK Visa.

Rather than be offered a postal service option, having already held 4 UK Visas and thus the UK having her biometrics that many times already – we will continue with the idea she is some form of shape-shifter.

Although to be honest, when the next one expires we may never go again – the UK really isn’t that interesting compared to the rest of Europe – and Schengen Visas are easy to get without leaving Odessa should the “Smart Borders” project be rejected and the old systems remain in place.

Referendums

Referendums – Personally I like the idea of referendums as they are the closest thing to actual democracy that exists in modern times – which explains was governments world wide, with the exception of Switzerland (who regularly have referendums), seem to shy away from them.

With no arbitrary lines drawn on maps to massage the number of voters likely to vote one way or another, and thus insure a parliamentary majority through moving constituency borders – a regular game in the UK – and no electoral colleges able to skew a vote as in the USA for example – referendums really do come down to the popular choice of the public – or at least the public that bother to take part in any referendum.

Hence nobody in politics really likes them as they are not particularly “manageable” and the outcome not necessarily predictable either – especially so when the bigger percentage of what may be a very small turnout, can bind a nation to what seems a dire course.

On occasion, a referendum may give a result that really screws up the grand plan, of recent note, the first Irish referendum result that blocked the EU Lisbon Treaty, thus causing the Irish to hold a second referendum after extreme pressure from the EU to provide the “right” referendum result.

Soon we will possibly have referendums in Scotland over leaving the UK and in the UK over leaving the EU.

Ukraine has a fairly new referendum law too.  It came into force on 27th November 2012 and thus is naturally untried.  The Ukrainian referendum law, like many such laws across much of Europe, is binding on the government and with no required turnout number to make it binding.  The result is the result even if a very low percentage of the population bother to take part.  (Nations like Bulgaria have set a minimum participation percentage to make any referendum binding – Ukraine did not.)

It also provides a mechanism that allows for changing the constitution, no longer requiring 300 MPs to vote in favour of any notion prior to taking matters to public referendum.  That may or may not be a good idea given that it is almost impossible to garner that many votes in favour of anything in a traditionally partisan RADA.

That is not to say it is necessarily easy to call for a referendum for those not in politics.  Whilst it seems politicians no longer hold the only key to calling one in Ukraine, the new law allows any citizens and organisations to do so as well, it qualifies this with a requirement of diverse regional support – thus insuring western Ukraine cannot force a referendum without some support from eastern Ukraine and vice versa.

All Ukrainians are allowed to participate in any referendum, and those who do not are automatically assumed to have given their mandate to those who bother.

All of that said, the Ukrainian political elite, like their European and global counterparts, will not been keen to call any referendum unless the result is almost guaranteed to be the one they favour.  Why hold a referendum when you can hide behind the tired cliché of “popular mandate” for anything you do in office most of the time – and get your way?

It is probably the fact there are so few referendums held (outside Switzerland) that I am actually quite keen on them – unpredictability, democracy and all that!

Executing ECHR judgements

Following on from yesterday’s Council of Europe theme, we now have calls from PACE for a significant number of its members to create bodies to insure the execution of ECHR rulings.

Of those nations, 5 are EU nations and the others are not.  They are  Poland, Greece, Italy, Bulgaria, Romania, Russia, Turkey, Moldova and of course, Ukraine.

It appears that PACE is calling upon these nations to create an agency responsible for insuring ECHR rulings are executed, which is fine as far as it goes, however it can hardly be claimed that all ECHR rulings are executed (in a timely fashion or not) within all the other member states that are deemed to have suitable mechanisms to do so.

The last paragraph of the above link could be very interesting.

“The Council of Europe governments are also called on to “increase pressure and take firmer measures” in cases of dilatory and continuous non-compliance with the European Court’s judgments.”

Interesting insofar as “dilatory and continuous non-compliance” may have some rather unexpected offenders - or maybe not that unexpected actually.

Sexually Transmitted Infections – Sex Workers Ukraine

Before I begin, I should make a declaration of (previous) interest.

No – I am not and never have been a sex worker in Ukraine!

I did, however, spend 8 years dealing with the issue of prostitution and all the surrounding issues in the 1990′s in the UK.  Over such a period of time, and witnessing closely, both the ups and downs of those I came to know very well during that time, attitudes if not changed, certainly become somewhat more understanding – or even mellow – depending upon individual circumstance.

The UN has just released its December 2012 “Prevention and treatment of HIV and other Sexually Transmitted Infections for Sex Workers in Low/Middle Income Countries Policy Brief” – a catchy title I’m sure you’ll agree.

It does not mention Ukraine specifically, but due to the huge variation in living standards here, it can be inferred that this report will apply to a large section (but not all) of the sex workers in Ukraine (and those trafficked out of, or via, Ukraine).

I have to state that I agree with all that is said in the UN policy brief, even the proposal to de-criminalise such work (which is not the same thing as legalising it).

However, in a country such as Ukraine, where under the Tymoshenko government pornography was banned – without defining what was to be classed as pornography and what was not (where would nude sculptures, classical paintings of nudes etc stand?), the pending homophobic laws under the current government et al,  then can we expect any such implementation of UN policy/domestic liberalisation here?

No.