The future generation

First: for those who hadn’t spotted it yet: this rhino is a “she”. So, I basically have a sound knowledge of what it means being a woman, stemming from practical experience ranging over…well, many years!

On Twitter, someone suggested to rename Woman’s Day” to “Day of the Condition of Women”: it’s a mouthful, I will grant you that, but at least it has the merit to focus minds on the fact that there’s nothing extremely “Happy” about this day..it’s about women still being disregarded and ill-treated in many parts of the world, and someone thinking it was a good idea to at least ponder on this issue once a year. It’s about have to point something out that should be so obvious in the 21st Century!

This is the reason of my title…but beyond that, I just want to share a few thoughts from a woman that (1) lives in part of the world were inequalities do still exist but are certainly not life-threatening (Brussels) (2) has a great career and job that a lot of blokes would envy (I know: 0 humility on that one) and (3) discovered your view on women changes dramatically when you have a daughter.

I was raised by a stay-at-home mum that had the full-time job of raising four kids whilst moving every 2 years across Africa, South America in the Middle East…and as a child, I kept on thinking: what a lousy job she must have….As a mum myself now, I changed my view to thinking she must have had a tough job, but she certainly did it the best she could.

Growing up, I was struck by the fact that my mum taught my 3 brothers to cook and pretty much do everything a “New man” should be able to do, but when I asked if she could teach me anything behing a furnace (or God behold: sewing on a button), her answer was always the same: study, and make sure you get a job that pays enough for you to be able to pay someone else to do that. And the odd bit was: I actually thought that made a lot of sense!

I built my career so far in the full-knowledge that (1) I was a woman (2) I had every intention of having kids and that at a reasonnably young age, which is considered of very poor taste if you’re a lawyer who has the insane view that you can combine family and career (3) that I’d try to stay polite when for the 100th time someone asks me: “How do you do it?”, a question no one ever seems to ask my husband who does a huge share of the “it” too.

But initially, I didn’t think much of feminism: if you wanted to succeed, you should just do it, regardless of gender and not go into those “gender balance”, “equality”, etc discussions. I don’t want to be equal to a man: I know I’m better anyway

But you know what: yes, it is pretty different to try and run a career as a woman than it is as a man, even in our “developped” countries. And yes, the pressures and disparaging looks you get are sometimes heavy to bear (you know that: “oh, your kid sure has been ill a lot” look…or the even better “what: pregnant again?” look). Not to talk about the guilt that seems to be a standard mum feature…and the surprising thing is that burden is often put to you equally by men and women (especially the younger ones)!

So I am now consciously preparing the future of my daughter in a society that still needs to go a long way...and when I kiss her and her brothers good night, I always whisper four things: “you are smart, you are kind and you are beautiful…and I love you to bits”. Because I just know that if each kid in the world had the chance to hear that whisper every night, a lot could be changed…oh: and the fact that my 3 year old girl can manipulate and kick a** her older brothers with such ease certainly made them aware that there’s no such thing as the “weaker sex”!

I was “dared” by @kattebel to write something on the latest post by the European Parliament web-editors at Writing for (y)EU, regarding the fascination of EU officials at all levels (even the highest) for the West Wing series, and the dual conclusion drawn by Steve that:

“The first is my new working theory, Steve’s West Wing Paradox or the West Wing euro-idealism coefficient. This theory holds that the extent of devotion to an American TV series about American government is a reasonable indicator of the level of euro-idealism among officials of the EU institutions.

The second is linked to this observation, not least because it in inevitably a theory of limited shelf life, and to the second observation that the EU system is maturing and starting to resemble the US system to an ever greater degree. It is simply that the time is surely ripe for an equivalent of the West Wing to be made about the EU…” [emphasis added by me]

Of course, the thought is tempting, and with all the writing talent both inside the institutions and in euroblogosphere, it could probably be done…the problem is: would anyone outside the EU bubble be willing to sit through a one-hour episode about the fascinating interactions of three Presidents and a High Representative, their inner cabinets and outer DGs, etc? Not so sure, quite frankly! I’m a bigger believer in something short and sweet, maybe less in awe of the fascinating wheels of power and more irreverent in the French sense of the word (i.e. “irrévérencieux”, which does not imply a lack of respect, but just an unwillingness to not criticise at the same time, possibly in a funny way).

So how about this alternative: French TV had a great serie called “Un Gars, une Fille”, showing a guy and a girl (Chouchou and LouLou) in 5-minute episodes in their daily interactions, with everything that can imply in a couple and with nice men/women stereotypes.

Imagine the scene above, replace the guys with Herman and José, the girl with Cathy, the shouting step-mom by the Council…close your eyes…yes, you’re getting my drift (though I would imagine Herman to be less hairy).

But then again, this may be a bit intimate an approach and not suite for our respected institutions (I frankly would not be keen on the bed scene translated to our EU leaders…really not).

A more “professional” alternative would be a remake of “Caméra Café”, with Herman, José, Jerzy, Cathy and all their staffers and entourage meeting around the coffee machine and exchanging their thoughts, frustration, master plans, etc.

Here I leave it to your imagination to replace the actors with EU officials…

So Brussels Wing, Three Presidents and an HR, or Caméra Berlaymont? What do you think? Vote and let us know.

[Addition: Oh, and I'm having some fun exchanges on this with Conor from the European Citizen blog, who is definitely rooting for a "Yes Commissioner" version: check out his post and our exchanges here]

This is part of a tweet sent to me by the extraordinarily talented EU journo (and Brussels equivalent of The Onion when it comes to his tweets - especially those with #belgiumnews -  and blog) @quarsan, aka Andy Carling, who amongst other things writes for NewEurope. The reason for this provocative yet friendly tweet, was that he was announcing to me that for the second time in a few weeks one of my posts was included in the paper edition of New Europe, something that is obviously both flattering and rewarding…and I rush to add: he was just pulling my leg on the beer thing…I think…

But the funny thing is that it made me also consider (yet again, thinking about my series on the L-word here, here, and here) the way lobbyists are perceived...a bit like posh lawyers, except they write extremely complexe sentences that start with “Whereas”, whilst lobbyists sell air or shady deals for a lot of money and spend their days wining and dining the elite of decision-makers (just for those unable to spot a second degree rant: I am talking about other people’s perceptions, not my job). If that is truly what a lobbyist does, then I need to ask myself what my job is! Spread over the year, and depending on legislative activities, I probably spend 70% of my time on dossier work, and 30% wandering EU institution corridors. I have never had dinner with an MEP or Commission official one-on-one, and the few lunches I had with EU decision-makers were paid “the Dutch way”, i.e. by splitting the bill. I do confess to buying an occasional quick lunch to an assistant, but those are usually friends (if you spend your life lobbying the EU institutions, you make a lot of enemies in them and a few friends), and the odd coffee at the Mickey Mouse cafeteria. But the whole myth of lavish receptions and cocktails? Truly not my game…

Maybe Farage should wear this next time so people are warned?

Oh, and on the other part of my post’s title: why are we still talking about Farage’s “wet rag” comment? I cannot imagine what makes this guy suddenly so interesting, important and fascinating that we should still be talking about him a week later, if at all. So he had a scripted go at Herman Van Rompuy, that some consider insulting. I must admit that to me, if it’s not defamation or equivalent, free speech applies, especially within an elected forum (Special mention here to the Belgian politician @svengatz ’s twitter discussion on the subject, and his fantastic tweet “after 15y parl experience, I can solemnly confirm: a parl is a pub without beer ”).

But more importantly: Farage is absolutly not important in the European Parliament…and everyone seems to be talking about him because he acted like his usual self, i.e. a brat. I frankly couldn’t be bothered if Mr. Farage considered me as a wet rag (or a dry one, for that matter), a danger to democracy, or what he thinks of Belgium (my home country) either. He’s just not important, interesting or simply relevant enough.

So now, I just need to wait for the man to disappear from everyone’s radar screen, knowing fully well he usually never hits mine, but that their attention is polluting my usual blissful indifference.

Oh, and because I’m a fan of the French movie “Le pere Noel est une ordure” and can’t imagine having many opportunities in the future to place their memorable dialogue re a “rag”, aka “serpillère”":

…only one of the many ooh so funny lines in the Annual Press Revue Performance put together by some of the most renown journos at Albert Hall, driven by the well-known Geoff Meade. The title this year – “Up Rompuy” – says it all. It was all about Barroso II, the red Baroness and the not German Herman, aka “the man with the Van”: truly the EU Brussels bubble at its best.

I’m not sure if you could do a roadshow with this revue, as it is so very much an insiders’ thing, and a lot of the references will be particularly striking (and funny) to those working and/or living within a 10 km radius of Rond Point Schuman. But what was certainly positive about it, was the number of European Commission officials (up to Director-General level and including those most criticised, i.e. the spokespeople) that were amongst the cheering crowd, having a good laugh…well, at themselves, I guess.

The lobbyists were not forgotten, as the monkeys swinging from a Decision to a Regulation in the EuroAvatar world (and I will have  to live for the rest of my life with that picture of a respectable journo dressed in EU blue t-shirt with stars, blue thighs and “blue underpants over his pants” for the rest of my life) and the Casablanca moment between Herman and Cathy was, well let’s just say unique (”We’ll always have Brussels, Cathy”).

Roseland Room, Albert Hall, Brussels, Belgium

Thinking back about my post on creating a face for the institutions on top of  a voice, here was a show pointing out many of the shortcomings of Brussels, Europe and its ever-so complicated institutions and representatives…but you know what, you could feel that these guys are fond of the beast, and the way they made fun of it, made me think yet again: there’s something to be said and felt about Europe…but it would imply accepting to be witty and human about it!

My name is Rhino, Lino the Rhino

I found it funny that suddenly a lot of tweets I saw passing by were mentioning the fact that the EU has its own “secret service”…let’s admit it, if it’s in the press, it’s not really secret But then, that is true of MI-5, MI-6, the CIA, etc…and still there, the romantic vision of James Bondesque spooks comes to mind…except in Europe, we call it SitCen, which sounds more like a bacteria you could pick up in a Belgian hospital than a body of “licensed-to-kill” multi-lingual jet-setting secret agents…Even when it comes to spooks, we can’t make it sound exciting, or even very convincing for that matter!

As a word of background, and I am no specialist on this, I discovered SitCen in 2005 in a Euractiv interview of Gijs de Vries, where he described SitCen as “an integrated group of analysts from our external intelligence services and the internal security services to jointly assess the terrorist threat as it develops both inside Europe and outside”. A funnily vague answer (with explicit reference to WMD, i.e. Weapons of mass destruction) by the then UK Home Secretary Charles Clarke can also be found here and equally dates back to 2005. And if you look at the Wikipedia page on SitCen it seems it’s been around since 2001, albeit under the initial name Counter-Terrorism Group (CTG).

But anyway, the interesting part is that suddenly, a level of excitement reached the EU bubble with simultaneously the SitCen buzz (EUObserver stating a specific cell of secret service agents will be created within SitCen, including “undercover operatives”)  and the EU passports issue regarding potential Mossad activities in Dubai (see coverage by Euractiv here and by EUObserver  here )…and somehow, Europe still manages to look as sexy and efficient as Maxwell Smart (aka Agent 86) from the Get Smart series, rather than invoking the cool of Mr Bond. For those not familiar with the series, Agent 86 worked for the CONTROL organisation, in a perpetual fight against the evil KAOS (now who would that represent at EU level?). Next question if you draw the full parallel is obviously: who could embody the mysterious and beautiful Agent 99, will there only be one Chief, and should SitCen’s subdivision of spooks maybe be called PITS, standing for Provisional Intelligence Tactical Service? Or will they be the men from A.U.N.T.I.E (Ashton’s United Network against Terrorism In Europe)?

So much work to do and so little time to convince we can! So to come back to the title of this post: no excitement yet, I’m afraid.

Work pressure being what it is, this post will be much shorter than I would like, but I still needed to throw it out: there is a huge difference for an institution communicating externally between embodying the VOICE of the institution and the FACE.

Wtf? are you thinking? Has the rhino gone mad (well actually, he’s been mad from the start, so any changes can only be attributed to recovery).

When too much VOICE hides the FACE

Let me try to explain what I am referring to:

• to me, the VOICE of an institution is the communication channel that provides easily accessible information about what that institution is up to and hy it matters to Mr or Mrs Smith in the street. It’s a tweet by @eu_eeas, a press briefing by the spokesperson, a press release on Rapid, etc.
• the FACE of the institution is made up of those individuals that make you “relate” to the institution. That make you think you want to engage not ’cause it’s your job to do so, but as a citizen, a human being, a mom, an angry teenager…It’s a blog like the one put up by the European Parliament webeditors (Writing for (y)EU)  that describes their challenges and dreams, it’s the tweets of @dicknieuwenhuis @euonymblog or @jeaninehennis that tell you they are working on this dossier, are shocked by this press coverage, talked to Ambassador X, or are excited about this project…

Everytime I read something about EU Communications, the tagline seems to be : we need to have a story to sell. To me, if you don’t think Europe is a good story in itself and feel this constant urge to create a zillion other stories on top of it, be my guest. I think however that the important bit is to create a FACE for Europe, and not just stick to the VOICE bit. I realise it’s a challenge, but some seem to get it so why not rely on them to help the others in the institutions to make the shift? I just want to be able to cut off the noise, close my eyes and start seeing FACES…