During the weekly meeting of commissioners, Juncker  made it clear that new chapters in Turkey's accession negotiations could be opened. Furthermore, Turkey is to receive a billion euros for the refugee camps, in addition to the billion euros that have already been promised.  There will be no solution without Turkey, but what motivation does Erdogan have for making Merkel's life easier. The chancellor has always been opposed to Turkish accession to the EU. Furthermore, there are parliamentary elections in Turkey on Nov. 1 and 68 percent of the Turkish population is in favor of stricter rules pertaining to refugees. It sounds nice when Merkel says that fences aren't the solution. But such positions also make her susceptible to political blackmail. What if Erdogan isn't really interested in a solution? What if he is happy to see the camps on the Turkish-Syrian border empty out? What if he is okay with the situation in Syria worsening?  At the end of February, Merkel visited Pope Francis in the Vatican, and brought back with her a question that has remained with her ever since: What if the Middle Eastern conflict between the Sunnis and the Shiites is the modern-day version of the Thirty Years' War, the battle between Catholics and Protestants that turned half of Europe into rubble in the 17th century?  To that question, Merkel has no answer. She has said that Germany will grant protection to those who need it. But if her plan to pacify the world doesn't work, it could be that so many people will come to Germany that Germans will no longer stand for it. Merkel is aware of that, which is why she doesn't want to become involved in a discussion about numbers. She doesn't want to name her own threshold of failure.

Keep interest rates zero bound and ensure another crash. It is causing all the volatility, damaging investment and reducing wages. Eventually economies will hit the buffers and will have nothing to respond with...The financial services "industry" cannot function indefinitely (or even for much longer) with interest rates this low. Savers must get some sort of reward for saving; they shouldn't, at least, be penalized - seemingly without end - for saving. The insurance business, to give just one example, is already warning of trouble ahead.  The IMF should be reminding policy-makers that interest rates need to return to a "normal" rate - say 3% - as speedily as possible. If our systems of production, distribution and exchange, as presently organized, of are incompatible with interest rates in the 3% range, then it is the way we organize those systems of pde that needs to change.  A more sensible policy for the IMF to pursue would be to set a target of, say, 3% interest-rates across the "advanced" world by 2020, and then work back from that target to determine what changes to our systems of pde are needed, now, to enable them to sustain those rates.  Low interest rates have simply bought policy-makers time - time that has been mostly wasted...The dance at the top of the slide disappoints and this bogie's chorus of dissentious staccato rattles the teeth. The abrupt end of this amusement ride is near when central bankers' control levers are stripped clean. Central bankers saved the world, alright,... saved it for the tax man. A plea from central bankers to governments around the world to further impoverish their citizens to save their sorry arses or government's debt will be called in is the message. Sound money is bad and debt is good are the new speak from the MOT. No amount of rope will rescue this...We are now in a Catch-22 situation. If interest rates are kept low, the huge mountain of debt will eventually cause a crash. If interest rates are raised, many people will be trapped by increases in mortgage rates, loans etc. and so the economy will collapse because people will stop spending on all but essentials (and some won't be able to afford those). So what's the solution? I believe the capitalist system is disintegrating and we need a new economic model - not communism, but a mixed-economy model that has fairness, equality and justice as its basic principles, with real and transparent accountability systems. Surely, humans have the creativity for such a model. The most difficult problems will be political will and wresting the wealth and power from the global elite.

Finding solutions for Syria was amply debated  by the European Parliament. Protecting innocent lives and achieving peace for the sake of the whole region is the number one priority. EPP Group MEPs showed their concern about escalating violence, Russia's military intervention and the threat of expanding the conflict throughout the region. They stressed that the impact on Europe is critically important. MEPs called for more EU involvement at international level to put an end to the conflict, combat the so-called Islamic State and stop the migration flow.  The Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Elmar Brok MEP, stressed that the current network of different political interests must be stopped: "Russia, the US and the EU must come together and talk about a common geopolitical strategy like they did in the past in the case of nuclear arms in Iran. The current proxy war, especially by Saudia Arabia and Iran but also Turkey, must come to an end. Regional cooperation should be in the interest of all of them. We need to find a common solution for the situation in Syria to finally achieve progress in the peace process and the migration crisis."

"The contribution of the countries of the region is key to preventing the further propagation of radicalisation", stressed Mariya Gabriel MEP, Vice-Chairwoman of the EPP Group responsible for relations with Mediterranean countries: "A clear and specific commitment of the countries of the region should be made to contribute to the improvement of coordination and to the opening of an exit window. The role of the EU is to work to make this commitment happen and play a balancing role in the redistribution process of influences in the region and to bring back both regional and great powers to the table for a peace process in Syria."  Russia's military intervention worries the EPP Group's Spokesman on Foreign Affairs, Cristian Preda MEP: "Russia has already shown us in the past its willingness to impose its vision of things by force. Its intervention in Syria is no different and makes the situation all the more fragile. By creating more pressure in Syria, Russia is doing nothing short of accentuating the refugee crisis. This is clearly against EU interests. We are deeply concerned about the recent incursions in Turkey's airspace. Turkey is our NATO partner."  The EPP Group Members believe that a lasting solution requires a political transition through a Syrian-led inclusive process with the support of the international community. All parties in the conflict should ensure the protection of the civilian population and honour their obligations under international humanitarian law and human rights law.  By August 2015, 12.2 million Syrians were in need of humanitarian assistance, according to the European Commission.

The situation in Syria, where Russia is openly supporting Bashar Al-Assad's regime against insurgents and violating the air space of Nato-member Turkey, should be addressed by EU leaders. The issue will already have been the main topic of discussion at Monday's meeting of foreign ministers. The summit agenda also includes a discussion on the Economic and Monetary Union, a few days before the European Commission publishes its proposals on micro-economic governance, competitiveness and the eurozone's social dimension.  Ahead of a more concrete discussion at the December summit, EU leaders will be informed about the technical discussions between the EU and the UK on reforms demanded by British prime minister David Cameron.

The EU Council will be preceded by the biannual tripartite social summit, which gathers EU leaders and business and trade union leaders to discuss the economic and social situation in the EU.

On Wednesday (14 October), EU migration commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos will visit Turkey, a week after president Erdogan's visit to Brussels and the publication of an EU Commission action plan.  Although the plan was agreed by Turkey before it was published, details still have to be discussed, in particular the use of €1 billion the Commission wants Turkey to use to deal with the refugee crisis and which Turkey wants to use as part of the accession process, that the money was originally earmarked for.

European justice needs a single European legal space, efficient justice needs simplified procedures.

The European Small Claims Procedure, in use since 2009, is a simplified procedure, based on standard forms, for recovering money owed by someone in another EU country.  New rules approved by Parliament today would broaden the use of the procedure, whilst safeguarding the procedural rights of citizens, by raising the threshold for claims covered by the cross-border disputes procedure from 2000 Euro to 5000. Up to now, the procedure was available only for cases with a value of up to 2000 Euro.  The proposed changes would make the procedure available for more cases, cut court fees and encourage the use of electronic communications, such as videoconferencing, and means for distance payments.  The European Parliament’s vote benefits EU citizens by providing simplified procedures for cross-border dispute resolution. National barriers will no longer be an insurmountable obstacle in judicial matters for individuals, nor, in particular, for SMEs. Electronic communication tools will facilitate the process for those involved.  "Good faith in the execution of civil and commercial contracts will be more vigorously protected and legal security will be guaranteed for the commercial circuit," said Daniel Buda MEP, the EPP Group's spokesperson on the issue.

Private industry was in a rage while privacy groups were elated on Tuesday over a new ruling by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) affirming European citizens’ right to privacy from American tech companies.  On Tuesday, the European court ruled in favor of Max Schrems, an Austrian graduate student who asked that EU’s data protection commissioner bar Facebook from transmitting his personal data to the US on the grounds that many tech firms had cooperated with the National Security Agency. Transmission of personal data had previously been covered by a “safe harbor” agreement between Europe and the US that allowed tech firms to share the data with explicit consent from their customers. Businesses that operate in Europe must now make sure they are compliant with the EU’s own laws before they subject their customers’ personal information to laxer restrictions in the US, the court said.  The advertising industry was not pleased. “Today’s decision by the European Court of Justice jeopardizes thousands of businesses across the Atlantic,” said Mike Zaneis, executive vice-president of public policy and general counsel for the Interactive Advertising Bureau, who called the overturned provision “an efficient means to comply with EU privacy law”. “The weakening of the Safe Harbor agreement limits European consumers’ access to valuable digital services and impedes trade and innovation,” said Zaneis. “We urge the US and EU to agree on new rules for the transatlantic transfer of data, taking into account the CJEU’s judgment.”