The new permanent presidency of the European Council (an innovation of the Lisbon Treaty) and a succession of international and economic crises have lead to a multiplicator of EU summit meetings over the last few semesters. These meetings have given a new urgency and relevance to the classic debate between supporters of the “community method” and those of the “intergovernmental method”. The debate already surfaced at the time of the European Convention, in particular, see the contribution by Michel Barnier and Antonio Vitorino, and was recently fed by Angela Merkel’s “method speech” in Bruges on 2 November 2010. Notre Europe has asked two eminent specialists and practitioners of European integration, Paolo Ponzano and Philippe de Schoutheete, to clarify the terms of this debate and to describe their vision of the current developments and the consequences – positive and negative – for the EU. Notre Europe will invite researchers and interested observers to respond to these contributions and to participate to this debate – superficially theoretical – with an uncertain outcome which is decisive for the future of European integration.

As the Lisbon Treaty came into force and the renewal of the teams at the various institutions is completed, thinking on the future EU budget and policies entered a more active phase. In line with the conclusions of the European Council in December 2005 on the budget review, Notre Europe has continued to insist that discussions should focus on the substance (the policies) before the form (the budget allocations). Following its analysis of the Barca Report last June, Notre Europe considers that the time has come to launch a wide-ranging debate on the cohesion policy, its role in the EU integration, its objectives and its tools.

As we approach the end of the EU budgetary review, Notre Europe invites various prominent scholars and EU observers to discuss the EU budget reform proposal put forward by Alfonso Iozzo, Stefano Micossi and Maria Teresa Salvemini in a policy paper published by CEPS some time ago (A New budget for the European Union?, CEPS policy brief n. 159, May 2008).

How to balance the application of the European Union's free movement rules - in particular, the right to work and provide services in another member state - with the maintenance of different national social systems? In particular, how will these freedoms affect trade union rights such as the right to collective action and collective bargaining? These questions are the object of much debate, following three recent rulings adopted by the European Court of Justice. The ETUI and Notre Europe have therefore decided to launch this forum, in which users will find information on the different cases and analysis offered by a variety of experts.

This contribution purports to examine the problem from a uniquely different perspective. It does not start by taking an ontological view of Europe, in which the EU's activities are determined by reference to what Europe is.

With Barack Obama, John McCain or Hillary Clinton becoming President of the United States, there is hope that the USA could adopt bold legislation to fight global warming in 2009. Albeit with differences, all three have backed serious legislative proposals and indicated their desire to engage actively in international negotiations. However, beyond campaign platforms and rhetoric, which of the three contenders offers the best climate change credentials for Europe? What support is the future President likely to receive to implement climate change legislation on par with Europe's ambitions?

Débat : As the European Commission publishes its proposals on reform of wine market subsidies and following the publication of our study Wine and Europe: the Metamorphoses of a Land of Choice, Notre Europe is relaunching the debate on wine growing and European identity. Half a dozen specialists of different European vineyards made compact, succinct contributions to this debate. Their analyses throw light onto the upheavals in wine-growing, and the associated changes in identity, as a result of European integration and globalised trade. In French only.

Notre Europe, in collaboration with Professor Andrew Moravcsik of Princeton University, has invited prominent thinkers, actors and observers of the EU to join a debate on the following topic: "Legitimising the EU through Participation and Deliberation: Mere Wishful Thinking?".

Notre Europe enters a debate at the heart of today's integration process with policy papers by Simon Hix and Stefano Bartolini.