Even if one is not fanatically pro how the EU and its Parliament operate (which I surely am not), after having participated in the latter institution for a while, one still experiences the end of a (parliamentary) mandate as a noteworthy occurrence, both politically and personally. This has happened to me. It must have also happened and to a larger extent, for MEPs coming from all corners of Europe who like me will not be candidates in the coming elections, but who have have had and retain a great regard for the Parliament.
One needs to take into account the significance that the Parliament has acquired in European governance. This does not derive from its statuory position. On that basis, the Parliament remains the weakest institution of the Union.
On the other hand, over the years it has acquired a certain reputation. It has encouraged the belief that it stands at the forefront of Europe’s major aims and achievements – a dubious belief but it has flourished. This has given the Parliament a soft power which cannot be ignored. Frequently in fact, in an ironic twist, European media give wider coverage to reports about what is being done in the Parliament, than to the facts being created on the ground by decisions of the Council and the Commission.
***
ARGUMENT AND INSULT
It is intriguing how some people who generally hide under a false name, feel the need to intervene in newspapers’ online pages or on the social media on matters about which they obviously know next to nothing. Instead of presenting arguments or comments, they indulge in personal insults, as if these are where their interests lie.
What motivates them? Anger, envy, spitefulness towards whom their insults are directed? And does this somehow given them at least some relief? But how can it provide any satisfaction if acting anonymously as they do, they are not really intersted in the facts at issue? Or perhaps they happen to be bored with the monotony of their lives and try to spice it up by their attempts to successfully disturb others, which is what they believe they are doing?
There is always a difficulty in trying to really understand how people behave, even in the context of what should be a commonplace dialogue.
***
POSTAL SERVICES
The operations of the postal services need to be carefully reviewed. True, the volume of letters and packets being sent by mail has decreased in a big way, except possibly those related to sales being done over the internet. The use of direct means of communication has become steadily easier and recourse to the post has for many become a marginal or insubstantial option.
However, material is still being posted. The fact that the throughput has greatly diminished does not justify that the service itself – not least that for internal deliveries – should be allowed to deteriorate, as I believe it is doing. Like with letters which arrive two days late, even later, or indeed that do not arrive at all. In which case, as they would not have been sent by registered mail, it’s as if they’d just been blown away.
One gets told that there are problems with the availability of postpersons, since they often are foreigners, frequently also have to be replaced, and therefore mistakes have become prevalent. Which only explains why the service has deteriorated. What is being done to stop the rot?