EUROPEAN DIARY:In Berlin, high-level views about Ireland and eurozone bailouts are way, way off the record, writes JAMIE SMYTH
BERLIN IN early summer: good food, sunshine and temperatures reaching 25 degrees. Briefings set up with German chancellor Angela Merkel, foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and outspoken finance minister Peer Steinbruck. What more could any European correspondent ask for? A few on-the-record comments explaining Germany’s stance on the key issues facing the EU would be nice, agreed several of my colleagues on the German government’s annual press trip for Brussels journalists.
Three and a half years after arriving in Brussels I’m still flabbergasted by the very different journalistic culture that exists among the German press pack and their politicians.
On last week’s press trip we had to get to grips with the German rules on “off the record” and non-attributable media briefings. Under guidelines drawn up by the German Press Council, a briefing conducted under rule “one” is on the record meaning the name of the politician and official can be quoted in a newspaper report. Under rule “two” the official/politician can only be referred to in print as an “official” or “source” while under rule “three” nothing can be attributed to the politician or official in print. In other words the information from the briefing can only be used as background.
Back in Ireland journalists follow similar rules with their sources, although it tends to be a much less formalised affair. But the use of “off the record” briefings is much more common in Germany than in Ireland or in Britain, particularly when groups of foreign journalists are invited to briefings.
Advocates of “off-the-record briefings” say it allows politicians to be a lot more open about their thinking on crucial issues. Yet it also raises tricky issues regarding transparency and can enable politicians to score petty points against rivals without their comments being fully opened up to scrutiny.
After all, government ministers explaining policies to the press are certainly not in the same league as the whistleblower “Deep Throat”, who was the source for Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein in their Watergate affair investigations.
Aside from the quoting of sources, it is also standard practice in Germany for journalists after conducting an on-the-record interview with a politician to provide a full transcript of the full article or quotes to his advisers for “pre-authorisation”.
Officials say this process is only to ensure that inaccuracies or mistakes are weeded out of the copy, not to change the meaning of any statements. Yet invariably the temptation exists for press handlers to meddle with the interview text to ensure the appropriate message is conveyed to the readers. Any journalist who won’t agree to pre-authorisation can be refused an interview, a tradition that raises questions about media censorship/control in Germany.
To be fair to the organisers of last week’s press trip the quality of the briefings by Germany’s top three politicians and a handful of frontline ministers in the grand coalition government was very good. It’s just a shame I can’t write exactly what Dr Merkel or Mr Steinbruck said.
But here is my interpretation of current thinking in Germany on EU affairs: 1) Berlin thinks a Yes vote in Ireland is the most likely result of an October referendum due to the economic crisis. But it is concerned the Government is not doing enough to prepare for a second vote.
2) There are grave fears Czech president Vaclav Klaus will chair the EU leaders’ summit in June and cause a headache over the clarifications sought by Ireland on the Lisbon Treaty. The option of dealing with the clarifications in July has still not been ruled out by an anxious Berlin.
3) If Irish voters torpedo the Lisbon Treaty in a second referendum in October there will be no further enlargement of the Union. Even Croatia may find the EU door bolted shut. One possible escape route after a No vote is to cram all the key reforms in Lisbon – particularly the double majority voting system – into a Croatian accession treaty. This could then be put to vote in states such as Britain or Ireland – offering a simpler question to voters on enlargement and EU reform.
4) Germany has detailed contingency plans drawn up on how to bail out a eurozone member state but is unwilling to tempt fate by revealing these to nervous markets. German taxpayers should not be asked to bail out countries opposed to further European integration. Any country that requires assistance will have strict conditions and reforms imposed.
5) Any bailout of a eurozone member would probably involve the IMF and not just the Union. It is better to have the IMF imposing tough reforms than the EU, which would then suffer an inevitable public backlash.
6) Germany is deeply concerned about Ukraine, where bitter squabbling between the prime minister and president threaten to wreck IMF-led attempts to stave off economic collapse. If Kiev goes under, eastern Europe could suffer a contagion effect allowing Russia to exploit the situation and spark a conflict in the Crimea region.
7) Franco-German relations – for years the motor behind EU integration – remain fragile but have recovered from last year’s low prompted by disputes over plans for a Mediterranean Union and car emissions policy. Both countries will aim to agree on a candidate to put forward for the position of European Council president – if Lisbon is approved.