‘Euro realism’

‘Euro realism’ is the slogan of LDD or Lijst Dedecker, a right liberal Flemish party. It’s a relatively new party (+/- 2,5 years). They have been to federal elections, but it’s their first time Europe and their first time regional. Figurehead is Jean-Marie Dedecker, an old judo coach who has made a few enemies over the years. He’s the first on the list, but he is not intending to take his place in the European Parliament, the second on the list Moniek Denhaen is also not taking up the seat, it’s the third on the list the Dutch journalist Derk Jan Eppink who is the first one with intentions to go to Europe. This decision is a bit odd. In a Flemish voting test all parties were questioned on a few points of view. One of them was: ‘Do you think that if you are on a list and you get elected that you should take your place?’ LDD said: “Yes, because a Parliament full of successors is voters fraud.” But anyway I present to you Derk Jan Eppink, the Dutch man on a Belgian list.

Bio
Age: 50
Studies: Law and International politics
Former parties: the Dutch parties PvdA and VVD

What are the most important reasons why people must vote for you?
Eppink: “List Dedecker not only makes the difference for Flanders and Belgium, it could do the same for Europe because it is a progressive Flemish party that stand for strait to the point politics and a good doses of common sense. You can say that the ideology of LDD is socio-economic and right and that we are progressive in ethical matters. In the European party landscape you have the Euro-federalist and us, the Euro-realists. The European project needs a good dose of common sense. We should take a good look at the effectiveness of the decision-making in Brussels and at the effectiveness of all European institutions and a look at the role of the citizens who are at the moment completely alienated from the decision making.”

Small journalistic remark: At the moment some elements of this party’s programme are the talk - or in this case the joke - of the town, because they promise things to the people that have been realised years ago. So it’s a bit of a blow to their points of effectiveness and strait to the point politics.

Is this your first time Europe?
Eppink: “It’s the first time that I have put myself up as a candidate for the European elections.”

Is your programme for the regional elections very different from that for the European elections?
Eppink: “Our programme for the European elections is fully in line with the ideological, federal and regional party programme.”

Is the possible entry of Turkey high on your party’s topic list?
Eppink: “The extension of the Union has made the EU into a strong economic power and it has brought democracy and stability in former dictatorships. That extension was necessary for the unification of the EU. It was also a historic step because it brought an end to the artificial border between east and West Europe that was imposed by the Soviet Union. But the expansion from 15 to 27 member states was a great leap. The EU needs time to absorb all of that and to narrow the newly created gap between rich and poor. A next round of entries is therefore not yet desirable. Solely candidates who have already started the process of entry and who comply with all necessary conditions of entry could be considered an exception. The time is not yet ripe for Turkey. But if the subject of Turkey rises again, we must hold a European referendum to decide the matter. And the referendum should be according to the principle of ‘One person, One vote’ and not with a consent per member state.”

What are your 3 main goals as a Member of Parliament?
Eppink: “ 1. To make Europe a stronger economic power by having a totally free market, a drastic simplification of the VAT system, a common European patent for inventions and the introduction of a common basis for the corporation tax. Further more we need to establish a European supervisor that oversees the different European capital markets. The promotion of quality immigration is also part of the plan together with a relaxation of the Birds and Habitats Directive.
2. I want to create a more assertive Europe that defends freedom of speech, that stands up against any infringement of the human rights and that radiates cultural self-confidence. In order to have that we need to found a European version of the FBI, through which we track down criminals and terrorist throughout the whole European region. In that way we could also have a quality integration via the use of a ‘European blue card’.
3. A green right Europe that is open to nuclear power and that replaces fraud sensitive emissions trading with massive investments in research and development of energy sources with low CO2 emissions.”

If you could change one thing about the working of the European Union or European Parliament what would that be?
Eppink: “A downsizing of the heavy European institutions. The administrative machinery could be simplified if we reduce the size of the European Commission and the Parliament. And if we evaluate the workings of the Committee of the Regions (CoR) and the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC).

Which principle of the European Union or European Parliament can’t ever be touched?
Eppink: “The principle of subsidiarity, which means that as many powers as possible are transferred to the most direct administrative level. Unfortunately this principle is frequently trampled on today.”

Do you think the Belgian people underestimate the importance of Europe and its Parliament?
Eppink: “European policy is domestic policy so it is important to the public what the European politicians decide. Most legislation implemented by the Belgian and Flemish government comes from the EU. But the public loses interest because the bureaucratic mill of the EU has the tendency to debate endlessly in the Commission, the Parliament and the Council of Ministers about the smallest details, while these same institutions didn’t see the economic crises coming. They lose themselves in details like the shape of bananas (bent or right) or the size of jam jar in the case of artisinale production. For example each farmer who sells milk or jam on an individual basis, must fill in a thick stack of papers to meet the European requirements. This abundance of rules is created out of the ultimate goal of uniformity. They think they know everything better in Brussels. Instead of working with directives following the principle of ‘mutual recognition’, the EU has the tendency to harmonize the 27 member states with very detailed legislation. This gives a patronizing effect.

That the people are alienated from Europe was also revealed by the result of the Declaration of Laken in 2001, which tried to put a process of federalization in working through a constitutional convention and a Constitution as was done in the US. It failed because it was a project ‘from’, ‘for’ and ‘by’ the European elite. The citizens were just spectators and they voted against the project. After the ‘no vote’ from France and the Netherlands, there were also 6 other possible negative votes that threatened the treaty. Next, the European leaders started drafting up the Lisbon Treaty, but they where held back by a negative referendum in Ireland. Later this year the Irish will get a second chance to vote yes. When given the chance to vote, the European citizens seemingly need to vote until they say ‘yes’. The European elite will not accept ‘no’ for an answer. After that, the Eurofederalists were of the opinion that we shouldn’t bore the stupid European citizens with too much information. Brussels knows everything better. Referenda are dangerous in the hands of ignorant people who could turndown magnificent proposals. Or as Geert Mak described it: “The European elite cherishes an idealistic arrogance.” According to this self-appointed elite group the citizens are children that need guidance. The elite see themselves as avant gardish and elevated above the ‘unknowing people’. And if people say ‘no’ in a referendum then the federal Eurocrats will be mad at them, because they want a nation that follows. But the citizens don’t want that, many of the new members have just experienced 40 years of communism, they do not want to replace Moscow with Brussels.”

If you could chose – regardless of the outcome of the elections – who gets to take the place of Barroso as President of the European Commission. Who would it be and why?
Eppink: “Tony Blair, he has got a lot of experience and he’s a Labour party politician with liberal instincts.”

Latest posts by evelinedewinter

• Expensive talking barrack
• What do the Belgian politicians want for and from Europe
• ‘A stronger Flanders in a stronger Europe’
• “People at number one”
• ‘Europe, let the people decide’

Rate this article

(3 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

 Loading ...