Regarding ‘Italy isolated as ten countries unite on patents‘:

Today, most technical and commercial communications are in English, while an inventor’s mother tongue is their most precise communication tool.

Why not combine the two (the inventor’s usual language + English) in a two-column layout where paragraphs in one language are aligned next to the other. This would maintain a good place for all European languages while allowing information sharing.

An example: http://www.MasterMySubject.org

Christophe Dupriez

Destin

Concernant ‘L’Acte sur le marché unique attire les foudres du forum public‘:

L’article d’EurActiv.com paru suite au débat public organisé par Confrontations Europe ce jeudi 18 novembre est inacceptable. Alors que tous les participants ont souligné la formidable opportunité qu’ouvre cet Acte pour le marché unique, le titre laisse penser que nous sommes opposés au document présenté par la Commission. Dès l’entrée du débat, Philippe Herzog a montré le caractère novateur de ce texte et appelé à l’engagement pour faire aboutir cette entreprise, sachant les obstacles auxquels elle ne manquera pas de se heurter. Si beaucoup ont formulé des suggestions pour améliorer le texte, ce n’est donc évidemment pas contre lui mais au contraire dans un esprit constructif, sans surenchère et avec un esprit de compromis et de responsabilités. Est-il anormal que lorsqu’on donne la parole aux élus du Parlement européen, aux acteurs de la société civile, ils demandent des précisions et formulent des propositions ? C’est ça la démocratie. Il est inadmissible de ne pas avoir saisi avant tout l’esprit profondément positif et constructif de cette réunion.

Quant à la demande adressée au président de la Commission pour qu’il s’engage publiquement lui-même pour expliquer l’importance de ce texte et appeler les citoyens à participer à relever le défi, elle relève du même souci : réunir toutes les conditions de la réussite. En effet, les panelistes sont parfaitement conscients des grandes différences et contradictions qui divisent les Etats-membres, et de la nécessité d’un compromis politique parfaitement soulignée par Mario Monti. L’engagement de la Commission et du Parlement européen est sans aucun doute une condition décisive en ce sens.

Le commentaire de la réunion est suivi de positions de diverses organisations sociales. Et l’article entretient donc un amalgame entre ce qu’ont dit les acteurs présents à l’assemblée générale de Confrontations Europe et des positions exprimées par ailleurs. EurActiv nie les efforts de l’association pour rassembler 300 participants autour de Michel Barnier et d’acteurs prestigieux (Franco Bassanini, Lord Leon Brittan, Pascal Canfin, Louis Grech, Philippe Herzog, Othmar Karas, Mario Monti, Joachim Vannahme) pour exprimer leur volonté commune de se mobiliser afin de faire du marché intérieur le socle d’une nouvelle croissance.

Claude Fischer

Présidente de Confrontations Europe

Regarding ‘EU to raise trade defences against foreign state aid‘:

This is short-termism as usual from the EU and will not really work in the long-term interest of the EU. It is about time, therefore, for the EU to get ‘real’ and understand its major deficiency, address it at its core as an emergency measure and act quickly upon rectifying the dire situation.

The EU simply looks at defences [...] In reality Europe should be concentrating on a long-term ‘offensive’ trade strategy. For nothing else will achieve the holy grail of wealth-creation for our future years in perpetuity, our long-term sustainability and our advancement in successful world trade.

The EU has to restructure and re-engineer its fundamental innovation base and it has to become systematic with a completely new approach and deliverance. Presently we have a mundane system or ad hoc deliberations that just do not gel.

To bring Europe together to form the greatest innovation system in the world, we need to construct the creative infrastructure that can liberate the vast vessel of innovation that is current locked-up within Europe. This we have to do for our own good and for that of our children. For releasing innovation at the leading edge of creativity is what makes nations the most dominant economic powers in the world. If we do not understand this, we are fooling ourselves and fooling the futures for our young.

Consequently the EU and all nations within the EU must as a primary directive for Europe establish a pan-European open research incubator network for all EU citizens. Each nation should have at least one and they should be interconnected across Europe and linked to our leading universities and corporate research centres of excellence.

For without such an open system to release the leading-edge thinking of Europeans, we might as well in the EU reside ourselves to the fact that we will stay in a relative state of constant decline against a backdrop of the ultra-emerging powerhouses of South-East Asia. For Europe’s integrated innovation neglect, as the history of the EU has shown us, is the major reason why we are in the poor economic state that has festered for over a quarter of a century now due to an illogical mindset that service industries are our financial salvation.

Now that the chickens have all come home to roost we see the total fallacy of putting our faith and trust in banks and the service industries in general. No, now is the time for Europe to grasp the mantle and to liberate its suppressed creativity and to unleash this world leading thinking of ‘its people’ (the best in the world according to international studies), which has – like in the past – transformed the world forever.

For currently we exist in the EU within a cocoon of elitism and this has been the overall reason for our constant economic decline against Asia. Indeed keeping this status quo will continue to kill off any meaningful innovative thinking that literally can create trillions in revenues for Europe. Our elitism has for self-preservation and self-interest forbidden the inclusion of all those who can literally/really change the world and the EU itself: the people of Europe themselves.

For they hold the secret to our economic dynamism and the majority do not dwell within the confines of our elitist thinking at universities or advanced corporate research centres. This is the greatest reason why we in Europe are stagnant in terms of world-leading economic vivacity and thinking, as we totally ignore the vast majority of our people’s innovative thinking.

There are dire consequences of neglecting over 95% of Europeans. Get these 95% of people in Europe harnessed and involved, then we would see the EU literally move economic mountains. But will we do this? I very much doubt it, as the intellectual elitism that has destroyed us will continue to do so because they are only interested in the preservation of themselves and their totally flawed, non-performing mindsets of continual decline.

We therefore need an innovation revolution in Europe and a completely new perspective, creative base and human endeavour: definitely not the failed tried and tested system that we have presently, which is dispatching future Europeans to relative poverty in comparison with our ‘ever-growing’ Asian economic competitors, who march on relentlessly.

This is basically the most important long-term problem that we simply have to address.

Dr David Hill
Executive Director
World Innovation Foundation Charity
Bern, Switzerland

Regarding ‘Parliament backs 20-week maternity leave‘:

Europe’s leaders must use Thursday’s EU summit to fight against the introduction of new laws on maternity leave, voted on by MEPs last week, that will increase maternity leave from the current EU minimum of 14 weeks to 20 weeks, all of which will be on compulsory full pay – costing the EU €121 billion between now and 2030.

For small businesses, maternity and paternity leave in their current form are perceived as barriers to employment. For businesses without employees, these two pieces of legislation attract the highest levels of concern when they are thinking of taking on an employee.

We all want adequate, flexible maternity and paternity leave but it should be for elected governments in dialogue with parents and their employers to decide how much their economy can afford to give and how it is to be delivered. These proposals should be about setting minimum EU standards for the health and safety of pregnant workers – not adding new payroll costs for overburdened companies and national social security systems.

This is yet another example of how well-intentioned EU employment law is actually exacerbating our unemployment crisis. In the present economic climate we should be making it easier for people to gain employment, not placing obstacles in their way.

Yours,

Tina Sommer – European Small Business Alliance (ESBA), President
John Walker – Federation of Small Businesses (FSB), National Chairman
Hendrik-Jan van Oostrum – Dutch Retail Association, Head of Brussels Office
Dr. Gunay Cerkez – KTTO (Turkish Cypriot Chamber of Commerce), President

Regarding ‘EU to push patent-free eGovernment’:

When discussing eGovernment and interoperability, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are often overlooked. The fact is that innovative SMEs such as mine play a role that is at least as important as any of the so-called ‘software giants’.

Effective eGovernment requires innovative, tailored and flexible solutions. European SMEs are well-placed to offer the most competent IT solutions – but for that we need an environment receptive to innovation which allows the best technology to compete on an equal basis.

For example, competing against Open Source solutions, and using our knowledge about the Microsoft Platform, we were able to cut the total cost of ownership of a Human Resources solution for a Spanish Regional Government to less than 20% of the total cost of the equivalent Open Source solution. At the same time, their payroll process improved from hours to minutes, without requiring any significant investment in hardware or software, due to better design and appropriate performance tuning.

We could have not achieved these results if we were constrained by an Open Source platform, and the customer would have not benefited from the improvements we were able to provide. The decision of this regional government to not limit their options to Open Source only has improved their processes and saved the money of their citizens.

Policies should not limit procurement options by excluding certain technologies and giving preferential access to open source. They should analyse which specific tools perform better in the most cost-effective manner – even more so in the current economic situation. Only then can we be ready to offer the best solutions on the market.

If the EIF includes a preference for open standards, many technologies will be excluded from participating in the procurement process, thus limiting competition and diminishing the opportunity for innovative and cost-effective solutions.

Fernando G. Guerrero

Solid Quality Mentors

Regarding ‘European businesses crippled by late payments‘:

Your article explains how late payment failures are substantially hurting SMEs, with the risk far more prevalent in South and East European Countries. As CEO of Solid Quality Mentors, a Spanish innovative small and medium-sized enterprise (SME), I welcome any measure which helps us reduce red tape and receive payments more quickly.

In today’s climate it is not enough to be a profitable company. Cash-flow issues caused by payment delays can destroy a profitable company, along with the employment that the company created with so much effort.

While public financing schemes are extremely helpful in providing us with the necessary boost to pursue ambitious projects, having timely and available access to those funds is as crucial as the money itself.

My experience in Spain is that applying for R&D grants is a lengthy and cumbersome process, even after the money has been granted. The conditions of some grants require that we start advancing significant capital well before we even know when the financial help is going to materialise.

It is also our experience that while it is prestigious to land public contracts, governments require longer payment deadlines and are slower than private companies in paying their dues. This is adversely affecting SMEs in the current financial crunch as it directly impacts on our cash-flow.

Any initiative which accelerates payments to European SMEs will have a positive impact on the economy as we will be able to increase investment in innovation, create jobs and boost growth.

Fernando G. Guerrero

Solid Quality Mentors

Regarding ‘China, US ‘moving faster than EU’ on innovation‘:

The problem with EU bureaucrats is that they do not understand the fundamentals. They think that they do, but they do not. That is why the EU is failing in the innovation stakes against the growing innovation might of South-East Asia and China in particular.

All they consider is to get academia closer and closer to business and there lies the golden egg of economic dynamics. They forget that they need the world-changing ideas first.

Dr. Schuurmans’ complete confidence in entrepreneurialism is completely off the richter scale as it is a false one. Entrepreneurs, I would tell Dr. Schuurmans, are not innovators at the creative level of developing the fundamental basis of a new technology industry. That takes decades of dedication and private hard work, usually by independent innovators and inventors outside the confines of both academia or business.

Indeed, nearly all the major technologies that have transformed the world from the dark ages to modern times have developed in this way and not solely between academia and business, like Dr. Schuurmans seem to think.

Unfortunately for the ½ billion Europeans, the fixed-in-time mindset of the EIT chair will be a disaster for all in Europe as it is a stagnant strategy to nowhere. For we appear to presently live in a fool’s paradise, where the same tried and tested failed strategies are attempted time and time again and where all that we do is go round in circles.

It is no wonder, therefore, that Europe is failing in contrast to most of the other innovative and emerging nations of the world. Consequently, we have lost our way, and it is about time that Dr. Schuurmans and the EIT Board went back to basics and determined the fundamentals first and what is vitally missing.

If he does not know what these are and what is vitally missing, he should ring me). For if the EIT Board is serious, this means that they will really have to identify from where all ‘new’ wealth is created and where this is something that they apparently do not know presently. For without this knowledge, the EIT will become more of a death knell for economic dynamism in Europe than the catalyst that all Europeans critically need for their future and the futures of all European generations to come.

Dr David Hill

Executive Director

World Innovation Foundation Charity

Switzerland

Regarding ‘Regional ‘stars’ rewarded for innovative projects‘:

The EU’s integrated ‘innovation chain’ has never been complete and therefore will never work. For if we have a broken link in any connected chain or necklace, it will always inextricably fall to the ground. The only way to fix that link is to connect the two unconnected ends together: likewise for Europe’s innovation strategy, which is currently missing its vital link of ‘independent’ invention and ideas – the prerequisite of economic dynamism in the 21st Century.

Unfortunately, EU politicians and their commissioners do not read or understand what the history of science and technology tells them. If they did, they would understand that over 75% of all the ‘fundamental thinking’ that underpinned the inventions that have made the modern world what it is today did not emanate from our university laboratories or advanced corporate R&D centres, but from the minds of ‘independent’ inventors and innovators.

For example, the late Jack Kilby invented the Integrated Circuit (IC) in his own spare time and was not asked by Texas Instruments or his university to invent it. No, he did so out of sheer interest and basically it became his private hobby. This single invention is now, according to Texas Instruments, underpinning a global annual industry worth trillions of dollars.

Without it, this global industry just simply would not exist – the IC is therefore the greatest wealth creator ever invented and enjoys the equivalent in annual economic turnover to that of India, Russia or Canada.

Wouldn’t it be great if the EU were to come up with several equivalents to the IC, transforming Europe’s economic fortunes overnight? But this will never happen, as EU’s ‘independent’ inventors are not considered to be a part of the EU’s innovation and economic strategy.

That is how backward our politicians, commissioners and policymakers really are; for they have not as yet grasped the vital importance of the contribution that our independent inventors could provide.

Indeed, if they had a clue, they would firstly set up a network where these very special people within an European innovation chain should come first before all others. For we have to have the fundamental thinking first and not our universities or corporate R&D centres first as we have today. Overall if we created the innovative infrastructure for these people to flourish, the EU’s innovation chain could be completed.

This is truly the missing link in the EU’s thinking and until our policymakers understand this pre-eminent European economic deficit, Europe will always stagnate in economic terms against the backdrop of the continual emerging creative might of South-East Asia. For in another 25 years, the EU will be the poor man of the world unless it grasps now the crucial importance of our Independent innovators and puts in place the mechanism that they need to release their unique thinking.

Presently, we have the cart before the horse and to stop the EU’s eventual socio-economic meltdown, we have to reverse these positions for our own good in the long term.

Dr. David Hill
Executive Director
World Innovation Foundation Charity
Bern, Switzerland

Regarding ‘Lawmakers rethinking EU stance on China‘:

On 29 April, [European Commission] President [José Manuel] Barroso will travel to China with an impressive delegation of commissioners and high-level delegates. Apart from celebrating the opening of the World Expo, this visit is a good opportunity to present European concerns and ambitions towards the second-largest economy in the world.

Relations with China are at a crossroads, and political leaders seem to hesitate between taking a tough stance on the alleged under-evaluation of the yuan or the increasing problems of counterfeiting, or instead adopting a policy of dialogue and comprehension for the specific environment in China.

EUROCHAMBRES would like to see a healthy mix of both defensive and offensive initiatives being developed, in the interest of European business.

One important element on the ‘defensive’ side is the reform of the National Indigenous Innovation Product Accreditation System (NIIPAS), a system where companies apply for their products to be accredited as ‘national indigenous innovation products’ and then receive preferential treatment for government procurement.

Already in December, EUROCHAMBRES – together with other business organisations – called upon the Chinese authorities not to implement the system, since it will restrict China’s capacity for innovation, impose onerous and discriminatory requirements on companies seeking to sell into the Chinese government procurement market, and contravene multiple commitments of China’s leadership to resist trade and investment protectionism and promote open government procurement policies.

We welcome the fact that there are now ongoing negotiations on modified new legislation regarding NIIPAS and we strongly support the European Commission’s plan to respond to the consultation process recently opened by the Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology. EUROCHAMBRES urges Mr Barroso to use the occasion of this meeting to ensure that the interests of European businesses are taken into consideration.

A second priority on the defensive side is to step up protection of property rights (IPR). EUROCHAMBRES has been following very closely the negotiations towards achieving an Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and is pleased with the release to the public on 21 April of the consolidated text so far agreed by the parties.

Indeed, we believe the current international framework for IPR issues is insufficient, because counterfeiting and piracy keeps increasing, the Internet is growing in its importance and discussions on enforcement in international fora are not making enough progress. ACTA can be an efficient tool to fight these plagues. We urge the Commission to put all the necessary pressure on the Chinese authorities for them to join these negotiations. Indeed, a country which is responsible for producing and selling of 54% of the 178 million articles seized at EU borders in 2008 cannot be left out of this agreement, and has to increasingly take responsibility in this global fight.

At the same time, Europe needs to become more active in its ‘offensive’ approach to the Chinese market and EUROCHAMBRES has frequently called for more ‘economic diplomacy’.

The European Commission’s initiative to establish an SME Centre in China is a welcome step. Clearly, the Centre needs to build on the concept of complementarity so as to benefit from the expertise and services offered by the existing service providers already established in the market, e.g. Chambers of Commerce, trade promotion agencies, etc., and not to distort the competition. At the same time it needs to have close structural links with the European market where the target beneficiaries, i.e. European SMEs, are based. On that basis, the SME Centre can be a gateway for newcomers on the Chinese market, especially coming from new member states.

A further example to promote European interests in China is the ‘Understanding China’ programme, which is co-funded by the European Commission and implemented by EUROCHAMBRES and a consortium of 11 partners. The programme aims to increase the understanding of European SMEs of the Chinese market through a range of concrete instruments. In 2010, 30 China experts from Chambers of Commerce and related organisations will go through an in-depth training programme, both in Europe and China, to enhance their capacity to support SMEs. In addition, round table discussions will be organised with European SMEs to understand their problems when doing business with China and propose policy priorities. Also the China Advisory Council (CAC) is part of this programme: the next meeting of the CAC, at the end of May, will focus on investment policies with China.

These, and other initiatives, all contribute to shaping a European identity and a common policy towards China. For European business, China is a land of opportunity, but we must make sure our companies can grasp that opportunity and compete with confidence.

Alessandro Barberis

EUROCHAMBRES

Regarding ‘Skills shortage worsens EU unemployment‘:

As a recent graduate from the London School of Economics and holder of a European Parliament scholarship from 2007-09, I have now been making hopeless overtures to the job market for longer than I care to count.

During my four years of graduate studies, I have consistently taken up internships in diverse roles.
Although I seemed to fit like a glove no matter what the job description, I am bound to say that the work in each case did less than justice to my potential, to say nothing of the complete lack of monetary compensation and associated hardship.

Adding insult to injury, I still come across job postings which explicity demand “similar experience in a paid role”.

My friends and I are young, confident and carry a microcosm of spaces, cultures, climates, people, cuisines and tongues within. This equips us with the personalities and attitudes and to a great extent the skills we need to cope with a range of real-life situations [of which a job should to my mind be among the least challenging].

But we no longer harbour the illusion that this enhances our employability as things stand in the world of HR.

We have the wherewithal to swim ashore if you throw us at the deep end of the pool. As for mastering the butterfly stroke, we only ask for a few days at sea.

Kalyani Unkule