Party Leader Debate

The elections for both the EU Parliament and regarding gender equality in the right to the Danish throne ended up in a debate between the party leaders, hosted by Lotte Mejlhede/TV2 and Kim Bildsøe Lassen/DR1.

First up was Margrethe Vestager from The Social Liberals (B) - since her party has fought hard to make the change in the Constitution not only to be about gender equality to the throne, but a more complex modernisation - including a review of the fundamental rule and of a more expressed inclusion of human and civil rights into the Constitution. A comprehensive modernisation the party before the election now saw as being very slim. Therefore members of the party had opted for giving blank votes on this issue.

So, not for being against gender equality on the throne - but for the above reasons, Margrethe Vestager was asked to explain the party's lack of success in convincing the electorate (The Social-Liberals ended up 'losing' both elections). And to explain the paradox: were there - in fact - many republicans within her semi-liberal party?

The Liberals

Second in line in the European Parliament/EP were The Liberals (V) with oddly 20 percent of the votes and three out of thirteen mandates. PM Lars Løkke Rasmussen was happy to announce progress since the last elections (less than one percent), thanking voters. And also celebrated the gender equality for princes and princesses alike - when it comes to access to the Danish throne.

Lars Løkke Rasmussen then handed the microphone to new EP member and former liberal spokesperson Jens Rohde, who also thanked the voters and more or less commented on the same issues (apart from a later warm thank you note to his wife - also a building constructor at home - for her strong support):

The Social Democrats

The Social Democrats (S) were topscorers at the EU election, although they had to take a beat from the last EU elections. Party leader Helle Thorning-Schmidt thanked the many supporters and first candidate Dan Jørgensen for his hard work - and became the overall winner of the election to the European Parliament/EP.

Dan Jørgensen in turn thanked his party leader and former Prime Minister and later EP member, Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, who supported his campaign with posters reading 'Do like Poul, vote for Dan'. Well, although this received many laughs along the campaign, many actually did - a reference he made during his thank you speech below:

Historic Elections: EU and The Danish Throne

Sunday 7th June 2009 is a historic day in many senses: Today, during the two elections we had to make a choice about changing one single part of the Constitution, in order to assure gender equality between princes and princesses in the right to the Danish throne. At least 40 percent of all had to vote YES to the ammendment to the Constitution. 45,5 percent did - so we now have gender equality on the right to the throne. The elections day had a historical turnout of about 59,5 percent of the population.

And another choice of members to the European Parliament (EP). Of other historic results were that The Social Democrats (S) had to take a fall of about 11 percent, but still came out as topscorer with 21,5 percent of the total votes. With The Liberals (V) in the second place with 20,2 percent. The real surprises were The Danish People's Party (O) in the fourth position, but the highclimber of the day, with a progress of 8,5 percent more votes than at the last EP elections. And The Socialist People's Party (F) in third place, but with a progress of 7,9 percent more votes than at the last EP elections. Actually 'stealing/buying' votes from the EP coalition partner of The Social Liberals (B), that didn't manage to get into the EU Parliament this time - with a fall of about 2 percent.

And very-very historic: the center EP party of the June Movement (so named after the 1992 Maastricht treaty election, that took place in June of that year) also didn't manage to get in. They have existed for almost 16 years, founded in August 1992) - but had to take a severe fall of 6,7 percent of the votes. The president of the movement would later announce that it didn't make sense to continue as an EP party. So now we only have two parties of the listed nine choices to fight the EU from within: The Danish People's Party (O) - and The People's Movement Against The EU (N for NO), that - just - got into the EP with 7,2 percent of the votes, and one mandate of thirteen.

The paradox being that Danish nay-sayers have been well-represented all along - up until yesterday with three of the listed nine parties aimed at fighting the EU from within...Very Danish.

Here are results according to the Danish media:
http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Temaer/2009/Europa/?v
http://politiken.dk/system/topicRoot/Valg_til_EU-parlamentet_2009/
http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090608/epvalg/90608062/

Civil Rights on Constitution Day

Isn't it odd that when you really need a lawyer that you can't even get to one? For the past couple of years I've tried to get legal counsel on numerous occasions. First, my application to the union kept 'disappearing' - for months. Once in the union I spent several months trying to get legal counsel there - in vain. Due to a very busy secretary who demanded to know - not just in main points, but in full detail - what I wanted to talk with the lawyer about. In full detail? Isn't that priviledged information between the lawyer and the client?

Then I tried a civil rights specialist lawyer, because the above incidents themselves woke me up. Again, a very busy secretary hindered my access. Probably also part of her job. Busy lawyer and all. But what cannot be part of her job was, that she referred me to two different so-called lawyers - whose names I later checked. There were no such lawyers in the lawyer lists. Reversely checking the addresses, there were not even any kind of legal company there. Lastly, after a couple of years of trying to get access to a lawyer, I tried a free of charge legal counsel service - no help, too busy, not even a referral. Isn't it odd though, and isn't legal counsel a civil and human right? Just paradoxed on Constitution Day!

More Civil Rights Celebrations

President Ole Egelund of the association of Forældre mod Politibrutalitet hands the torches to the joggler
Constitution Day should be a celebration. And it truly turned out to be one. As if the musicians managed to drive away the heavy midday rains, the sun broke out, the barbecue was lit - and the joggler started his show. Kindly assisted by parent members from the association of Forældre mod Politibrutalitet (parents against police brutality) - lending him their thighs to stand on.

Before everybody joined in the - very Danish - dancing in circles. All in all a very merry Constitution Day Celebration.

Civil Rights Celebrations

'Sentences should not be given in the streets', 'Hippie bashing should be stopped', 'The police act as gang members' - were some of the one-liners delivered by the association of Forældre mod Politibrutalitet (parents against police brutality).

They referred for one example to the demonstration for Palestine in Copenhagen 13th January this year, where demonstrators were detained - under a paragraph in the law giving the police the right to detain demonstrators for upto six hours under unrest - thus enacting detention in the streets. With no civil right like the right to speak to a lawyer. And as if some superior power heard this, the heavy rains set in during this Constitution Day event. Still, not preventing the group from enjoying and celebrating the day.

Constitution Day Celebration

Today is Constitution Day in Denmark. We celebrate it every year on 5th June with speeches and events around the country.

The constitution was signed on 5th June 1859 by then absolute ruler, Frederik VII. Hereby creating the limited Monarchy we know today - with the Danish Parliament as the legislative assembly, and reducing the monarch to a more or less ceremonial figure.

One of the events took place in the Copenhagen park of Ørstedsparken. The event was arranged by the association of Forældre mod Politibrutalitet (parents against police brutality). It was founded in 2006 after an anti-nazi demonstration that got out of hand with conflicting groups. The members had many other examples of misplaced use of brutality by the police within the past years - latest during the World Business Summit on Climate Change in Bella Center end of May. Therefore, the association presented its main speaker, lawyer Michael Bjørn Hansen, from the law firm of Christian Harlang, specialized in civil rights cases. He spoke up for the right to demonstrate. And against the brutality of the metods used by the police in dealing with demonstrations of various kinds.

One point he made - on this Constitution Day - was that there is actually no demand in the Constitution for the prior announcement to the authorities (police and others) before a demonstration. This is merely a practical arrangement in order to control the potential negative side effects of demonstrations - if they get out of hand. Actually, he pointed out, demonstration is a civil freedom right. Delivering the paradox of the day: the Constitution and the laws of the country should protect demonstrations - rather than control them. Since demonstrations are often the only measure to voice opinions for the week in society. He harvested many cheers and applauses for his help to the association. Which he in turn returned with thanks to the association for gathering examples and cases.

Nicaragua in Political Quicksand

Here we go again: the Nicaraguan government - and even the opposition parties - enters quicksand. This according to Centro de Investigaciones de la Comunicación (CINCO) in Managua, that investigates and forecasts the climate for democracy, government, the media, and political culture in Nicaragua. Reflecting on the past 2½ years of FSLN government under Ortega, since the november 2006 elections. In the latest issue of the analytical political publication of Perspectivas/Boletín (Edición 32), CINCO asked the population of Nicaragua seven questions:

• Has Nicaragua become more democratic?
• Do the institutions function better?
• Does the population have more confidence in them?
• Have relations between government and society become more transparent and better?
• Does the country (Nicaragua) enjoy more international legitimacy?
• Has the social and economic situation improved?
• Has the population more positive expectations?

CINCO notes that the responses varies from political colour of the respondents, but overall the population feels set back. According to CINCO, one of the major political problems is that FSLN/Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional and PLC/Partido Liberal Constitucionalista since the onset of the so-called pact (El Pacto, formed in 2000) controls everything from government institutions, like the legislative institutions, supreme court, and the supreme electoral council. And that FSLN and PLC controls the network of cadres of the local municipalities (los caudillos, so nicknamed after Spanish general Franco - El Caudillo).

So the government sits in quicksand, because the economic situation is continuously worsened. Partly due to sanctions from the international community, partly due to promises of financial assistance from Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez - that just haven't materialized. Meanwhile holding the public institutions and the population hostages.

So the opposition also sits in quicksand - due to lack of political or institutional influence. What CINCO suggests is for the opposition to unite more strongly, with the intellectuals of the left wing parties of MRS/Movimiento Renovador Sandinista and MPRS/El Movimiento por el Rescate del Sandinismo (or simply El Rescate). CINCO criticizes the opposition for not presenting a coherent political plan or strategy - encouraging them to sharpen their profile and focus on the civil rights of the population. And to form a coalition much like UNO/Unión Nacional Opositoro did in the historical 1990 elections, backed by the USA, when Violetta Chamorro managed to overthrow Daniel Ortega and FSLN with 55 percent of the votes to Ortega's 41 percent.

With less than one in ten votes there seems to be a bit of way to overthrow Daniel Ortega and FSLN, unless they manage to bridge all the way to one of the liberal parties - PLC that also calls itself opposition, despite El Pacto - this is the real paradox in Nicaragua. ALN/Alianza Liberal Nicaragüense already formed an alliance with PLC/Partido Liberal Constitucionalista during the 2008 municipal elections - so what the opposition parties do have in common is a critique of the frauds during these elections. And what CINCO suggests is to mobilize and to ride the waves of a wider protest of the government in the population. Ay-Ay-Ay, the quicksand keeps spreading.

For further information, please see:
http://www.cinco.org.ni/publicaciones/

http://www.laprensa.com.ni/archivo/2009/junio/02/noticias/politica/330679.shtml

Emission Omission

It's not in the measurement itself - it's in the reading. The European Environment Agency/EEA just held a technical press briefing to report the latest results from the analytical department of EEA - on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the collective EU member states. And they were happy to note that for the past three consecutive years (2005-2007) the greenhouse gas emissions of the EU member states had declined.

Below is a graphic display of the numbers. Source: European Environment Agency/EEA 2009. Note that the EU15 (blue) comprises the 'old' EU member states: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. And EU27 (golden) all of them, including the new East Block member states:

Paradoxical News took a hard look at this mildly fluctuating graph and asked itself: If the goal is to reach a 20 percent reduction in GHG emissions below 1990 level by 2020 - and the collective member states have achieved an approximate reduction of 9 percent over the past 17 years - isn't it then very optimistic to hope for a further reduction of 11 percent during the next 13 years? And even more optimistic to promise a joint EU GHG emissions reduction of 30 percent, provided that a global deal can be sealed at COP15 in December (i.e. a further 21 percent reduction by 2020)? When all we could read from this graph were merely repeated fluctuations over the entire period. So their happy note appeared to be more of an Emission Omission statement.

So I asked the members of EEA, among them Ricardo Fernandez (EEA analyst), Dr. Andreas Barkman (head of Mitigation Group at EEA), and their points were these:

• Since the Kyoto Protocol (negociated in December 1997, and finally sealed in February 2005) countries have introduced legislation to lock the GHG emissions in.
• Domestic households have introduced GHG saving technologies.
• Countries and private companies have introduced green energy and overall Clean Development Mechanisms/CDMs (i.e. GHG emission saving technical projects).
• There has been an introduction of the ETS/Emission Trading System (were GHG emission allowances are traded between member states) to benefit the overall goal of the joint EU member states.

Jan Høst Schmidt (head of the EU representation in Denmark) further remarked:
'We are in a totally different ball game now'

- and referred to EU President José Manuel Barroso's statement, that we have the public and the science on our side now. Compared to 1990 - or even the Kyoto negociations from 1997 onwards. The editor of Paradoxical News is keeping fingres crossed for further GHG emission omissions.

Itchy Mother Earth

On a lighter note, Chloe Fox, Parliamentary Secretary to the South Australian Government - ended a session in The Climate Group debate panel during the 24th-26th May World Business Summit on Climate Change:

Two planets in the solar systems are talking with each other. One planet, Mother Earth, says: 'I'm so itchy - what can I do?'. And the other planet says, 'Don't worry, it's just homo sapiens - it will soon drop off.'

A Hot Air Balloon Paradox

Who's to pay? - or rather How to pay? - is the big question in the climate challenge to combat global warming. Or in other words, to pay for the hot air balloon salvation. One of the points repeated over and over again during the World Business Summit on Climate Change is that we need innovative financing. To get a hold of that, we needed to hear the bankers. One very hip way of funding is the mentioned ETS/Emission Trading System and the CDM/Clean Development Mechanism. The financing of which were debated in a working group called 'Carbon Markets', consisting primarily of bankers and regulators. And as was pinpointed by moderator Samuel A. DiPiazza, CEO of PricewaterhouseCoopers International, the toughest challenge is to set a price on carbon. And then there is the 'how to':

Some financial suggestions were put forward by Abyd Karmali, Global Head of Carbon Markets at Bank of America/Merrill Lynch. He mentioned Derivatives, Futures, and Options - and excused himself at the same time. You see, since the onset of the financial crisis these three little words have had a sad connotation. In particular, it is worthwhile to recall the big save of exactly Merrill Lynch by Bank of America's take-over in 2008 - precisely due to the heavy use of the derivatives/credit default swaps, which are basically loan insurances. Bank of America had too high a risk exposure with its investments in Merryll Lynch - and actually had to buy the whole hot air balloon in order not to fall themselves. The credit default swaps/loan insurances exposure, in the case of Bank of America, were close to 40 times above its net worth/equity. This according to the weekly letter of Ugebrevet Mandag Morgen in september 2008 - the very initiator and organizer of this climate summit.

So here comes the paradox: Is it really a good idea to save one hot air balloon (the global warming of Mother Earth) - financing it through another kind of hot air balloon (futures and derivatives)? Abyd Karmali tried to answer that himself: 'We have to ensure a healthy market'. If Merryll Lynch is included in this 'we' is my big worry. And in the response to the same critical question Tracy Wolstencroft, Managing Director at Goldman Sachs, made a point: 'In the US it should be financed through bonds'. Probably in line with the new policies put forward by the current government under Obama. To stop the hot air balloons - financial or climate ones.

José Manuel Barroso in Town

Yesterday José Manuel Barroso, President of The European Commission, was in town. He saw Denmark as a good place to choose for the World Business Summit on Climate Change, because as he stated 'We have two very important things on our side - public opinion and science'. During the summit he came to speak about the European joint efforts towards 2020. And stressed three points:

1. The EU wants to ensure a comparable CO2 emission reduction, currently set at a 20 percent reduction (according to the 20/20/20 vision), but the EU is willing to set a 30 percent reduction goal - provided that a global deal can be sealed.
2. Developing countries should do their major part in designing and implementing national low-carbon techniques and economy - and in the EU these vary from 15-30 percent below business as usual by 2020.
3. The EU will rely on both public and private funding. And carbon markets should be the resource. I.e. through the ETS/Emission Trading System and CDM/Clean Development Mechanism - an initiated 'additional' carbon project that would not have been realized if not for this purpose alone.

To make a note: The variations beween the European countries are great. On the green house gas emission reduction goals towards 2020, they vary between -20 and +20 percent, compared to 2005. And on the renewable energy goal as a percentage of the total energy mix, they vary between 10 and 49 percent (Sweden is the top scorer here).

Climate - A Political Headache

Second from the left - Erik Solheim, Minister of the Environment and International Development, Norway, seems to have developed a severe headache during the debate at the summit on climate change

It's just like a game of Mikado, where you throw the sticks and have to carefully pull out your sticks one at a time without moving any of the other sticks. Every game player starts out by removing the sticks the easiest to get to. Then everybody waits for somebody else to make the first risky move and remove the more difficult sticks.

With this metaphor Connie Hedegaard, Minister of Climate and Energy in Denmark, opened the interactive debate on climate change between political leaders. She called for initiative and an ambitious financing plan to overcome the negative effects of climate change.

And they were all waiting for somebody else to make the move. To mention the views of some of the political leaders in the panel: Jim Prentice, Minister of the Environment in Canada, was waiting for the USA - not only to sign the deal on climate change, thus living up to the Kyoto protocol standards - but also to ratify the deal.

Xie Zhenhua, Vice Chairman, National Development and Reform Commission in China, mentioned that China is doing what it can to meet the standards. With a percentage of 7,5 renewable energy in 2005 to a projected 15 percent in 2020 - i.e. solar power, water, and wind energy (The EU goal is an overall 20 percent on renewable energy of the total energy mix, with variations from 15 upto 49 percent - to make a comparison). He saw the main challenges as being setting standards and mechanisms, ensuring innovation and transfer of energy, and creating financial instruments to back the initiatives.

Erik Solheim, Minister of the Environment and International Development in Norway, called for governments to instigate and initiate efforts to combat climate change. And encouraged governments and private companies to co-operate in partnerships. He revealed that his concern and main headache had to do with too little confidence between the developed and the under-developed world on the issue of climate change. He saw this as the main obstacle to resolve the climate problems.

Meanwhile populations and Mother Earth are waiting for somebody to remove the first difficult stick.

Al Gore in Town

Former US Vice President Al Gore was in town today during the World Business Summit on Climate Change. As a natural follow-up to his much appraised, Oscar winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth about the impact of global warming on the planet. An effort that earned him the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for 'informing the world of the dangers posed by climate change'. In this address he also focused his attention on renewable energy.

'The market signals are wrong', was one of the points made by the former US Vice President. His point being that market signals have effects on the future for human beings, so it is important that these signals should reflect human interests - not business interests - since 'Mother nature does not do bailouts' - indirectly referring to the financial crisis bail-outs. And he did not omit to mention John Maynard Keynes as an economic inspiration (who saw government control of private enterprise, and public intervention as necessary for growth).

One of the paradoxical one-liners heard a couple of times before was still effective:

'If you want to go quickly, go alone. If you want to go far, go together. We have to go far - quickly'. This way encouraging leaders of private companies to work in partnerships with governements around the world - to concentrate the purpose of this business summit in a nutshell. And aiming his address to political leaders: 'We know that political will is a renewable resource' - this way going full circle in his message.

Ban Ki-moon in Town

Today the Secretary-General to the UN, Ban Ki-moon spoke at the World Business Summit on Climate Change 24th-26th May in Bella Center, Copenhagen. He was highlighted in the programme and opened the event. He welcomed the initiative from Danish think-tank Ugebrevet Mandag Morgen, and expressed a need for public and private companies to work together in partnerships to solve the climate crisis. And to show global responsibility beyond short term profits. One paradoxical demand that will be more likely to be heard due to the financial crisis - yet probably more difficult to live up to in reality.

The Full Dog Kennel Approach

Is a journalist primarily a watch dog for society? A hunting dog? A rescue dog? Or should today's journalist be more of a shepherd? Associate professor Peter Bro from University of Southern Denmark had stopped the guessing game - and done something to explore what we really want. As readers, viewers, users. Or customers. As people.

His research, based on questionnaires to a representative selection of 1.700 Danes from 2008, shows that our favourite dog is the watch dog on society (75 percent), who passively keep people of state and power in check - but also that we already get this to a high extent (62 percent). When it comes to the hunting dog - the aggressive, and highly active journalist to unfold and reveal stories, and demand action from decision makers - we demand this dog to a 61 percent level, but is fed with it to a 67 percent level in the news. So maybe the aggressive hunter is on too loose a line?

When it comes to the docile shepherd dog, who includes citizens in the news mediation process (asks our opinions, arranges polls, vox pops, and to-way-communication) we get this to a 49 percent level - but would really like it to a 72 percent level. And finally the rescue dog - the ever alert St Bernard dog with the tiny whisky barrel around his neck, if you will - to scent, track and help citizens in current distress, and encourages us to show societal commitment. The poll shows that we ask this of journalists to a 60 percent level, but only receive it to a 39 percent level.

Apparently readers/viewers/users/customers/people are not getting what they really want in the news, which seems to be a combination of the full dog kennel - with a little less hunting dog, with an emphasis on the watch dog and shepherd - and a little more rescue dog than is currently the case. Me? I would take the St Bernard with a little keg of single malt any day. In or out of distress.

For further information about Peter Bro's published research, see:
http://www.sdu.dk/staff/ppe.aspx

From Information to Navigation

'We should look at readers more like customers', Erik Rasmussen, editor-in-chief of the weekly letter of Ugebrevet Mandag Morgen, firmly manifested. His point was that journalism hadn't been able to follow suite with the needs of these customers, hence the declining market for news providers. Erik Rasmussen was directly at odds with Mr. Public Service, DR chairman Michael Christiansen, when he saw readers and viewers more like customers. But that didn't deter him.

Instead of maintaining an old-fashioned view of the journalist, to have a responsibility towards the very abstract 'society as a whole'. The future journalist should be one to care and show responsibility for the reader = the customer. In his mind, the future would hold a shift in paradigme: From information to navigation. Erik Rasmussen held hands with future researcher Anne Skare Nielsen on this point.

This shouldn't stop the journalists from researching stories - it would instead take the best from the analytical, investigative journalism and couple it with the best of the entertaining elements in delivering the stories. I'm paradoxed here: Aren't journalists already doing all they can to do this? Provided the time and the resources.

Future News = No News

What's up with the news in the future? If it looks this grim already, it would be a case of nice to know - if not need to know. During this week's conference on news journalism at DR, we had a look into the crystal ball of news. In the panel future researcher Anne Skare Nielsen from the institute of Future Navigator gave her best bid:

In the future, we will be so fed up with products, possibilities, options, information, news, channels, good stories, satisfier services, and gadgets - that we will be looking for peace and tranquility. So what will really be our need, won't be services, news, and information - but rather instruments for dealing with them. We will need navigation tools. To get what we really need. Apparently future news will be - no news. According to Anne Skare Nielsen tomorrow's scarce commodities will be:

Attention, peace of mind, relations, to do good, absorption, concentration, confidence, passion, originality, and people will be looking for MY story. Here's my paradoxical bewilderment: Isn't that 'future' already here - and hasn't that been the case for quite some years in our highly mediated, 2.0 society?

Conference on News Journalism

Journalists should be more like Shakespeare, was the bold statement of chairman of the board of The Danish Broadcasting Corporation/DR, Michael Christiansen. In the sense that Shakespeare really knew how to catch and maintain the interest and curiosity of his audiences - with characters, interplay, and dramatical build ups. Well, it should be noted that Michael Christiansen comes from a long career as CEO of The Royal Danish Theatre - so it is probably fair to say that he was inspired there...

The DR chairman was one of a panel of media people to debate the purpose and future of news journalism during a conference held this week at the new concert hall of The Danish Broadcasting Corporation. And his Shakespeare opening aside, the chairman also called for the necessity of journalists to be the eyes and ears of the public - to go find, investigate, and to make the public more knowledgeable. Many cheers for standing firm on this public service basis. The paradox is why this should be necessary to repeat, but apparently it is.

Winner of The DR Literature Prize

Lost for words. The 2009 winner of the DR Literature Prize was announced at the end of Copenhagen International Literature Festival and went to Sissel Jo Gazan for her fourth novel Dinosaurens Fjer (translates into Feather of the Dinosaur) - a scientific crime novel and a psychological drama. And though not lost for words in her writings - with the praisings of many critics for her well written style - Sissel Jo Gazan accepted the prize with a happy, though baffled and tongue-tied face. According to her blog sissel-jo.blogspot.com the novel will be translated and sold to the US market.

International Author Encounter

Host of an art radio programme of The Danish Broadcasting Corporation, Karsten Pharao mediated an encounter between Icelandic author Auður Ólafsdóttir and Danish author Helle Helle (this is her name).

Auður Ólafsdóttir presented her current novel of Stikling (Cutting), referring to rose cuttings which the main character of the novel takes to Southern Europe to plant - and begins a new life. After leaving his father, his disabled twin brother, and a newborn daughter from a one-night stand. The one-night stand later seeks him out in Southern Europe with his daughter, and events take off from there - all slowly finding new meaning in life. The Icelandic word of Stikling/cutting also refers to a baby and to a detour.

Danish author Helle Helle's most current novel of Ned til Hundene (roughly translates into 'down to the dogs'). A low key novel about a woman who gets off a buss stop somewhere in provincial Denmark only carrying a suitcase on wheels. All we know is - she is looking for a good place to cry. She finds a temporary home with John and Putte who cares for her, as she slowly finds meaning in the daily routines of local life - among them caring for some local dogs.

The debate between the two Nordic Council Literature Prize nominees 2009 (announced in April go to Norwegian author Per Petterson in October) took us through many comparisons, but all-in-all the two novels focus on the ever paradoxical theme of 'the kindness of strangers'.

Poetry Framed by Music - Two

Poetry was framed in music on several occasions during Copenhagen International Literature Festival '09. One of these was when much acclaimed poet Lone Hørslev read her poems, before the same poems were interpreted by a musical group with the paradoxical name of Er de sjældne (Are they rare). Yes, the event was not only rare - but highly emotional and sensitive.

Poetry Framed by Music - One

During the Copenhagen International Literature Festival '09 a very impressive reading of poetry took place. Poet Nicolaj Stochholm read some of his poems, set to music by many-facetted musician Martin Hall with great intuition an empathy - in a work called Færden (Movements), inspired by the travels and tales of Ulysses. It left the editor of Paradoxical News if not paradoxed, then just that - moved.

Salman Rushdie in Town

Salman Rushdie - here seen on arrival to Huset i Magstræde with festival manager Ivan Rod

Author Salman Rushdie was in town Thursday and Friday during the Copenhagen International Literature Festival, CPH:LITT.09. He gave an hour long talk about his latest book The Enchantress of Florence, and other works and themes.

He was interviewed by his Danish translator, Thomas Harder, and it turned out to be an event of witty, verbal fencing. As witty as are the books and writings by Salman Rushdie in general. Some of the serious questions were rebuffed with answers like 'I hadn't really thought about that' or 'The good thing about translators is, that they think harder about your work than you do - so you can steal their ideas.'

Or on the theme of the many illusions in the historic tales of The Enchantress of Florence - he referred to the Medieval times when people couldn't get fresh bread, so they had to eat old, mouldy, stale bread. This mould gave them hallucinations - so this could be the explanation, when people saw illusions and told hallucinatory stories. If that is the paradoxical fact, Sir Salman Rushdie - please keep eating stale bread!

Happy Mother's Day!

Paradoxical News wishes all mothers everywhere the best day - may appreciation come your way.

A Workers' Day Progression Paradox

1st of May - the workers' day procession

1st of May in the Copenhagen park of Fælledparken is an annual event that draws thousands. Several hundred thousands were reported to show up. An this workers' day should still be relevant with the growing dissatisfaction, rather than progression, of the red block opposition. But it has become somewhat of a cirkus - where the most red you will see comes from the procession standards and the red noses and cheeks of sunburnt onlookers.

Still, in the afternoon some of the speakers - among them Frank Jensen (S), heading for a carreer as mayor of Copenhagen, Bente Sorgenfrey from a Danish union for public employees, and Ole Sohn (F) - and later Villy Søvndal (F) and Helle Thorning-Schmidt (S) repeated the same points over and over again: The current government should initiate a much more comprehensive growth plan with investments in the public sector, should assure jobs in a situation where unemployment is on a rise, should assure a more diverse and inclusive jobmarket - and should bring down the rising inequality between different income groups.

Here's what the youth organisation of The Social Democrats (S) thought of the prospects of government under PM Lars Løkke Rasmussen (V), hinting to a news raid against him for fiddling with receipts for draught beer - as public spending: (themselves having had several draught beers under their vests)

A Three-Flavoured Political Strategy

When people in Denmark buy the ice cream called 'Rainbow Ice', they don't just get ice cream in three different colours, they even get three flavours: Chocolate, vanilla, and strawberry. Neatly stacked together in a rectangular block, clearly defined and separated. Nobody will admit to buying the stuff, but paradoxically it sells in huge quantities.

This is very much the political strategy of the current government in Denmark, with The Liberals (V) and The Conservatives (C) basing their almost permanent majority in the parliament on The Danish People's Party (O). Three different colours. Three different flavours. In unison they offer the Danish electorate choices - within the same block. The blue block. In short, and speaking in political science terms, they have broken the Public Choice code of the bundle purchase nature with voters. You see, when voters 'buy' a political party, they're not only buying one political opinion - but a bundle of them, wrapped up inside a full political programme of that particular party - so it actually makes sense to stay ignorant of most issues. It is rational to be ignorant. Sorry, Public Choicers, for the next very crude ice cream simplification. Why don't you enjoy a couple of scoops as it folds out...

The current government makes it easy for the voters to choose and 'buy'. You see, if you cut the 'Rainbow Ice' block, you can do so from two different angles - and still get three different colours and flavours. The blue block offers three different choices in one block - seen from more than one perspective.

The first perspective is the low income - middle income - high income axis - very important from an identification point of view - where the voters identify themselves with:

• Low income - The Danish People's Party
• Middle/high income - The Liberals
• Middle/high income - The Conservatives

The second perspective is the change-stability-safety axis - also and ever important axis for political parties - where voters get:

• Change - The Liberals
• Stability - The Conservatives
• Safety/value - The Danish People's Party

Up until the 2001 election value-based topics like immigration were banned before an election - it was considered the place not to go. So the order of the day before that was merely a choice of two options: Change or Stability. Most government coalitions up until 2001 were based on two parties in minority coalitions - sometimes three. One for change, one for stability. The same today: with The Liberals (V) voters get economic dynamics and change, with The Conservatives (C) they get stability in public services. Stability and safety are huge, because 'you know what you have, but you don't know what you're gonna get'. And when they do go for change, they go for the same kind of change on economic and tax issues. These two parties balance each other. But since 9/11 it has somehow become OK also to speak on issues like immigration. So the value-based party of The Danish People's Party (O) has gained much support. With us or against us. Pro or con immigration. But still big on safety. Nobody will admit to buying this chunk - but it sells in huge quantities.

All in all an unbeatable bundle purchase package. A little something for everyone. Three clearly defined chunks of ice cream. If you choose one, the other chunks complement it. And the total package is still there for the taking. Perhaps this is why the blue block does so well? So how does the opposition alternative look? On the first axis of low income - middle income - high income:

• Low/middle income - The Social Democrats
• Low/middle income - The Socialist People's Party
• Middle/high income - The Social Liberals

And on the second axis of change-stability-safety:

• Change/value - The Socialist People's Party
• Change/value - The Social Liberals
• Stability/safety - The Social Democrats

The Socialist People's Party (F) goes for stability on social security issues, but are great reformers when it comes to green economy. And when the Social Liberals (B) talk about change, they actually go for the blue block kind of change, namely on economic and tax issues. So the picture is altogether a bit more blurry in the red block. The rainbow ice cream has melted. The voters aren't sure what they're getting when they cut the ice cream block. And perhaps there's just too much change in there? I mean when you 'buy' a political product - perhaps you would want more stability and safety? 'You know what you have, but you don't know what you're gonna get'. They all speak of stability and safety for the low income groups, and of a greener economy. Probably in order to seem like an opposition in unison. So there aren't really three clearly defined chunks in the block of ice cream. Could this be the reason for the much talked about 'cannibalism' between the opposition parties - where one party simply 'steals' votes from the other red block party? And could this melting ice cream be the reason for the lacking success of the opposition - and reversely the success of the current government coalition? Because the opposition hasn't figured out the three-flavoured political strategy? I don't know, it's just one blurry guess. I prefer to stay rationally ignorant.

A New Chapter in Danish Politics

Last night I joined an arrangement for Danish law and economy people, initiated by the ever energetic political science buff Clement Kjersgaard, DR2 host and initiator of the political magazine of RÆSON (roughly translates into 'reason' or 'sense'). The theme was A New Chapter in Danish Politics, focused on the shift in Danish politics from the election in 2001 and the success of the Right wing block - and then tried to give a post-Fogh Rasmussen perspective.

Did the arrangement make sense then? Well, first of all three political science and sociology researchers where brought in to lay down a basis for the debate - and to make sense. Among them Lars Bille, an election researcher, sociologist Rasmus Willig, and party researcher Rune Slothuus.

In short, the change from 2001 was noticeable. The red-blue blocks had been enforced, yet at the same time there is a blurring of the traditional red-blue perspective - in the classical sense of the two opposing policies when it comes to distribution of wealth - since the value-based parties roam on both sides of the traditional axes, and are becoming just as important as the traditional red-blue parties. And when it comes to the value-based policies, they have truely made their mark since 2001. In particular with the government's supporting party of The Danish People's Party (O) - but also the The Socialist People's Party (F) has gained much support, basically in opposing the first.

One point made was that the traditional liberal ideas of freedom of speech, the right to form public debate assemblies, etc. had given way to the purely economic liberalism, placing responsibility entirely on individuals - all the way down to the public employees in kindergardens raising their index fingers, teaching the two-year-olds to be responsible for themselves. No responsibility could be placed on the state, the government, the municipalities, or the private employers - since everything lies in your own hands. In short, liberalism had gone from 'You have the right to be free - to you must be free'.

Then a panel of political editors: Ask Rostrup from the public Danish Broadcasting Company/DR, Arne Hardis from the elitist newspaper of Weekendavisen, and Bjarne Steensbeck from the Right wing newspaper of Berlingske Tidende debated the Fogh Rasmussen legacy. Stressing his importance as a political leader - yet not withholding his less successful legacy of a stressed immigration policy and an activist foreign policy.

Ending with a debate with three present and former politicians, Mogens Lykketoft (S), Marianne Jelved (B), and Hans Engell (formerly Conservatives, presently political commentator). Making much the same points as the researchers and the political editors - yet with more practical details.

So did it all make sense? Yes, the arrangement did. No, the political legacy didn't.

For a more elaborate overview of the Danish political scene, please see:
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/10/cliff-notes-to-danish-politics.html

Sponsor Journalism

A debate has been running in the Danish media and in the media magazine of Journalisten lately. In particular, there is no more room for investigative journalism - because it costs. Editor-in-chief of Politiken, Tøger Seidenfaden, launched a new wave. He suggested that with (his) empty pockets why couldn't the newspapers aim at sponsored investigative journalism, i.e. get readers/users to participate and supply tips, and get people with their pockets full to pay for investigative projects around the editorial rooms. With lots of debates in the wake about the seriousness and integrity of the journalistic products to come out of such sponsoring.

And today, Berlingske Media, Politiken, TV2, and other Danish media form a pressure group to get their hands on the ad market through the Norwegian software service of Open AdExchange, based on individual search words. In order to diminish the search engine dominans of Google - and get their hands on the lucrative ad market. Ladies and gentlemen, my first paradoxical reaction is this: When will news papers focus on news at least half as much as they focus on money, ads, and sponsoring?

Pssst: Paradoxical News is looking for a sponsor

A Sigh From The Gender Agenda

'We have obtained full gender equality the day it becomes as natural to choose just as many mediocre women for managerial positions - as has been the case for years with the choice of mediocre men'. These are the words quoted from - a man. Namely former Danish PM Poul Schlüter.

And here's the paradox: Just as everybody is talking about the weather, but nobody's doing anything about it, we appear to be stuck on the gender agenda. Except for the Danish K2 Network for women in the media industry. They actually walk the talk. Their bold goal is to dismantle themselves. Yep, that is - once there are at least 40 percent females in managerial posititions and in the board rooms. The network arranges conferences, appoints women, hands out prizes (the good, the bad, and really ugly). This network works.

For more information (in Danish), see:
http://www.k2-net.dk/
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/10/surrounded-by-women.html

Pssst: If you're not in the media industry - or not in Denmark - why don't you start your own? And link.

Paradoxical News Expands Its Activities

Paradoxical News is expanding its activities to other projects - that just might fly. Hence the less fluent flow of paradoxical news. The editor of the publication would like to express gratitude towards its patient and loyal niche readership.

Meta-Comment No. 8

Sometimes navigation is best left to the navigators. My navigator just might be brilliant...

Opposition - Part Four

Margrethe Vestager from the Social Liberals (B), accepted the invitation to broad co-operation from Lars Løkke Rasmussen (V) - but called for visual proof. As examples, she mentioned the need for a more ambitious overall growth plan, and also saw a need for action behind the words in negociations about the municipality plans, when it comes to showing more trust and confidence in the employees.

Opposition - Part Three

Anders Samuelsen (Y), gone very-very Liberal, was in the strange position of being a government supporter - and in opposition at the same time. With regard to the lacking trust and confidence in the ability of the employees in the municipalities to handle their jobs, the steps from the government just weren't good enough.

Opposition - Part Two

Johanne Schmidt-Nielsen, political spokes person from The Red-Green Alliance (Ø), had no mercy for Lars Løkke Rasmussen (V) and his speech. In particular she criticized the government's employment efforts and the tough policy initiatives regarding criminal youths.

Opposition - Part One

Opposition leader Helle Thorning-Schmidt (S) was frankly not impressed with Lars Løkke Rasmussen's (V) speech, presenting the government's plan on basic policy areas.

Same Procedure As Last Year

Same-same, but different! - they say in the East and in many parts of the world. Today, the de facto PM Lars Løkke Rasmussen (V) presented himself as the new man with a licence to speak. He opened today's speech in the Danish parliament saying much the same as his predecessor. Namely that the value-based politics, the tax stop, the integration policy, the justice policy, and the foreign policy would stay the same. As would the government's supporting parties of The Danish People's Party and Liberal Alliance. This was not only old wine in a new bottle - it even seemed to have lost its kick along the way.

Under the overall banner of Freedom and Community he stressed the necessity for the freedom of choice in public institutions - to go hand in hand with a strong safety net to help the ones who lose their jobs, fall ill, or who are in a tight spot for a period, for instance during education. The remedy for the financial crisis was reforms - particularly on taxes and the labour market. With ambitious plans to restructure the health care system, to build up know-how and exports based on green energy, to strengthen the development policy. All building on freedom of choice and private initiatives. All in all same procedure as last year.

Easter/Passover Greetings

Paradoxical News wishes everybody the best possible Easter/Passover holidays - and a return with renewed energy next week. Sorry about the delay, but yesterday was a very long day. Enjoy the rest.

Meta-Comment No. 7

Nobody can find their way around the world without proper guidance. I, too, have had to rely on guidance from time to time. Still, being the nicest person, I think my navigator just lost his bearings - as well as his marbles. Whether knocked out by the Easter bunny or simply passed out during Passover - I hope he gets back on track again.

A Change of Guards

The mounted police was brought in to fence off members of the Danish press from the gates at the royal residence of Amalienborg. The reason was a change of guards in the Danish Parliament. Again...

With the adroit cat of PM Anders Fogh Rasmussen (V) away on several international missions (too paradoxical for Paradoxical News to cover), four new members of the present government were presented as Cabinet Ministers by the de facto PM Lars Løkke Rasmussen, The Liberal Party of Denmark (V):

• Lars Hjort Frederiksen (V) as new Minister of Finance (formerly Minister of Employment)
• Inger Støjberg (V) as new Minister of Employment and Gender Equality (formerly political spokesperson for The Liberal Party of Denmark)
• Karen Ellemann (V) as new Minister of Social and Internal Affairs (elected to the Danish Parliament in 2007, and daughter of former Minister of Foreign Affairs Uffe Ellemann-Jensen)

Don't tell me that Danish politics is boring. So here's my paradox for you: when do they actually start working in this mix up of cabinets and political process?

For a more elaborate overview of the political scene in Denmark, please see:

http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/10/cliff-notes-to-danish-politics.html

Financial Crisis At The Turning Point

The Danish treasury outside the Ministry of Finance

The Danish treasury is in a pitiful state - judging from a view of its contents. So sorry is the state that visitors take pity and empty their pockets during visits.

All of this week the Danish Broadcasting channel of DR2 has run a theme on the financial crisis, hosted by Clement Kjersgaard and Jes Stein Pedersen. Their paradoxical edge on the situation is: Kiss the crisis! (love the circumstances).

It seems to me that the more you talk about the crisis, the further it spirals downwards. Self-increasingly. Much like the confused chicken on the stock market. Perplexed. And the more people get stuck. Perpetually.

My paradoxical take on the crisis is this: If the situation gets worse simply by stressing it - why not stop it altogether by ignoring it? So today's Paradoxical News headline story is: 'The financial crisis is at the turning point'. The economy is in a perfect state. Thanks to the generous visitors at the treasury!

Political Mutiny

Democracy is not just out there with the people in Denmark. Danish democracy is really out there. Period. Whether a Prime Minister on the job hunt for the position as the next NATO Secretary General, members of the Social Liberals (B) creating new parties, or latest - the current Danish Minister of Social Welfare, Karen Jespersen (V) first defecting her original party, then defecting her Ministry - Danish politics is in a turmoil. What are voters supposed to think? They make a choice by way of voting. But with the overall tendency of political mutiny, my paradoxical question is this: what is the electorate really left with - if not choice?

Art & Money

Love the circumstances! This was the piece of advice given by self-taught artist, poster designer, scenographer - and much more - Per Arnoldi, when I interviewed him as part of my interview project. He has held worldwide expositions, successfully mixing art and money. Whether in hardship og success the piece of advice paradoxically stays the same: Just love it (and live with it). Probably easier to say after a lifetime of lucrative production and positition. But hey, just love the circumstances. Anyway.

For further information about Per Arnoldi, current exhibitions, picture downloads, please see:
http://www.arnoldi.dk/
http://www.nivaagaard.dk/?Home%26nbsp%3B

http://www.nivaagaard.dk/?Presse:Arnoldi%2C_fotomateriale

Women In Power

Today Anne Vang, a young political science student and a citizen representative in the Copenhagen City Council for The Social Democrats (A), received the Nina Bang prize for her political influence. The Nina Bang prize was conceived by former Social Democrat and Minister of Cultural Affairs, Jytte Hilden. And several present and former Social Democrat women were present at the event. Among them Lord Mayor Ritt Bjerregaard, vice president of the parliamentary group of the party, Mette Frederiksen, and spokes person in the Danish parliament for education, Christine Antorini. The two latter former Nina Bang prize honoraries.

The prize was named after the first woman to be elected to public office in the Copenhagen city hall in 1913, and the world's first appointed minister in The Social Democrat government under Thorvald Stauning in 1924. The event took place at the KVINFO centre, a research centre about women's history, litterature, and gender equality. At least prizes will make these women visible. To men who find it difficult to see them for appointments.

For further information see:
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/10/surrounded-by-women.

The Difference Is the Byline

Writing one-sidedly is not difficult, nor rejectable. People do that all the time. Even journalists - working in communication and information positions. That's all good and fine. But to camouflage information and advertising as articles is something quite different. The difference is the sender. The difference is the byline.

Niche Integrity

People don't want to pay for news. They just want to be roughly informed. Hence the market of free newspapers. Hence the internet news publications. As a journalist, I can get well-paid offers writing one-sidedly about different issues. Or not. This brings me to today's journalistic paradox: why do so many uncritical magazines and publications emerge that employ journalists - where they could simply do with information people? Why do journalists occupy information people's positions at all? And why do information people occupy journalistic positions? An upside-down media world. Riding on a wave of ignorance.

Only those who truly want to get educated and wiser after reading news are willing to pay for a niche publication. Such are the conditions. And today's radio show about people and the media - people in the media, Mennesker og Medier with DR journalist Lasse Jensen, debated this with editor in chief of the weekly letter of Ugebrevet Mandag Morgen, Erik Rasmussen. Much like its counterpart - the weekly letter of Ugebrevet A4, published by the union and labour market player of LO - the weekly letter focuses on societal, economical, and political issues with thorough analyses each week. And has a readership of politicians, decision makers, and media people. The publication is not free - it is actually quite costly, with special offers for students. But some people are willing to pay for knowledge. Still.

Political Mice

When the cat's out the mice play on the table. Yesterday Simon Emil Ammitzbøll manifested himself through a vacant point of view. Formerly a Social Liberal (B), now more of a centered, constitutional liberal outside of parties after a nasty break up with party leader Margrethe Vestager, he had a political win through a niche political project: his suggestion to allow homosexual couples to adopt children on an equal basis as the rest of us won a majority vote in the Danish parliament. Even as a majority vote outside of the sitting government of The Liberals (V) and The Conservatives (C) and its supporting Right wing party (O). Simply because the joint opposition of The Red-Green Alliance (Ø), The Socialist People's Party (F), The Social Democrats (A), and The Social Liberals (B) gained support from six wild mice playing on the table, mainly Liberals voting against the government parties. Good for them. Good for Simon Emil Ammitzbøll. Good for the homosexual couples.

For a more elaborate overview of the political scene in Denmark, please see:

http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/10/cliff-notes-to-danish-politics

Tongue-tied and Slippery

Calling Naser Khader! Thank you for finally bursting the news. You know I was in on the rumour of your conservative shift weeks ago - but I chose not to follow the story, because you kept it zipped. Tongue-tied and slippery. This is the paradox of assuring backing for your story: you end up losing the story. Maybe this is why we see so many 'rumour dogs' in the industry? Not that easy being a fair journalist...

A Cat and Dog Press Conference

Today at the weekly press conference at the Prime Minister's Department practically every journalist had come to confirm the rumours about Anders Fogh Rasmussen's, The Liberal Party of Denmark (V), candidature for the upcoming position as the NATO Secretary General - or the like. And again today he wouldn't respond to hypothetical questions. The same adroit cat versus lethargic dog game as always.

What did happen - and what was reported by the Prime Minister was good news for the economically drained: as of June the public special retirement funds will be released for payment. And good news for the municipalities. Since the government plans to ease on the fixed ceiling for the initial expenditures for construction in the municipalities - i.e. for schools, nurseries, homes for the elderly. Good news from the viewpoint of particularly the opposition, first and foremost The Social Democrats (A), The Socialist People's Party (F), and The Red-Green Alliance (Ø). Although they would probably have preferred making this announcement themselves. But such is the paradox of being in opposition to an adroit cat.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen also commented at length about the gang violence in the streets of Copenhagen, with wild shootings of particularly immigrant youth gangs and Hell's Angels - fighting over the narcotics market. He condemned these shootings and violent attacks in strong terms, suggesting a government plan to stop these. Primarily through extended police presence in the streets, tougher punishment, extended possibility of expulsions, extended possibility of phone tapping, tougher parental injunctions - for instance liability to pay for damages - and extra preventive meassures to help immigrant youths out of the gangs. This will no doubt please the tough-on-crime government party of The Conservatives (C) and the supporting party of The Danish People's Party (O).

And as pointed out by a member of the press, there was even good news for Anders Fogh Rasmussen himself: He is soon to become a grandfather, and is looking forward to this new multitasking duty. All in all something for everybody. Except for the dogs.

For a more elaborate overview of the political scene in Denmark, please see:
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/10/cliff-notes-to-danish-politics

An Off-Beat Film Producer

How do you become a successful film producer? You start by playing drums with limited talent. Today I interviewed the Zentropa film producer Peter Aalbæk Jensen. Believing in his own talent, he thought he would become a jazz drummer. After losing a fortune, he then got into the film industry by way of making video segments of Danish hit bands, just as the concept of music videos was new.

He found his talent, and more than twenty years later he found himself breathing through Cohibas and running the Zentropa film company, artistically headed by film director Lars von Trier - internationally known for Breaking the Waves, Dancer in the Dark, Europa among others. And for initiating the whole Dogma concept, where films were stripped from artificial effects down to an absolute essential minimum of natural light and sound.

Today, the off-beat producer Peter Aalbæk Jensen runs the company of Zentropa with a soft heart and hard head. He has introduced singing in the company in the morning, but is known for firing employees through text messages. He will play the drums on special occasions with friends - just for the love of it. Off-beat and with limited talent.

Compromise And Barter

I joined a group of journalists covering environmental and energy issues on a tour to the European Parliament and the European Commission this week. The talks were very informative - although everything seems to await the trialogue negotiations between the council, the parliament, and the commission end of March. And the pending white book on the issues this April. But what can you do as negotiator if you've bartered until the early hours of the morning - and then some East block representative wakes up and says Njet?

Environ-Mentally Speaking

Brussels looks the same as always: charming and ugly at one and the same time, with the wonderful narrow town houses, modern prestige buildings, and what seems to be permanent building sites all over the inner city. Such are the environmental conditions, and paradoxically no one is bothered by environment in the aesthetic sense of the word. Even European Parliament representatives joked about the ever redundant city plan.

A 20/20/20 Vision

Most people know what a 20/20 vision means - but environmentally speaking here comes the '20/20/20 by 2020 vision' from Brussels: it means that by 2020 there should be a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (CO2), a 20 percent improvement in energy efficiency, and a 20 percent share for renewable energy sources in the EU energy mix.

An example of the scoring points through the CO2 quota system and the energy mix was given: if the Danish energy company of DONG were to construct a wind mill energy plant off the Bulgarian coast in the Black Sea - there could be scoring points along all three elements of the 20/20/20 vision. The company of DONG will score on the CO2 emission quota system. The Bulgarian state will score on the renewable energy goals. And the Belgium state could buy the renewable energy from the Bulgarian state through the inner open market in Europe - thus scoring on energy efficiency, because they could potentially buy the energy cheaper than would be the case if they were to build the energy plant themselves. And presto: the 20/20/20 vision is realized. Strengthening the whole European region in obtaining the overall UN goals from the Kyoto agreements.