The Mercury09.06.2012

No. 04

04 No.

Editor in Chief: Julia Eigendorf

Editor: Lacza Gabór Willy Hug Mariya Pavlova Marjolein Selten Mihals Sapovalovs

Proofreader: Anna-Lena Kirch Layout: Benjamin Doll

Impressum

On 9 June, 2012 the Council of Mi-nisters and the European Parliament voted on the Passenger Name Record (PNR) and the Returns Directive (RD). The two proposals have been discussed intensely during the previ-ous days. At the last press conference held on the day before the vote the political parties and the Ministers of the Council were well prepared. They gave clear statements about how to handle these two important, but in some cases sensitive directives. With

some details there came up some mi-nor differences between the opinions.The EFD mentioned the importance

of the security of the PNR data, im-plying that it should not be given to third party countries, the storage time should be extended and that sensitive data (e.g. religion, race) should not be collected. That last demand was shared by ALDE, too. The Greens said that they share the points of view of S&D and the EPP. EFD mentioned, that they are afraid, that the two direc-

tives will fail because of the majority of the Council would vote against it.In the future, EPP wants to expand

the PNR directive to intra-EU flights and for the EU-3rd party country ship and train routes. The statements from the Council were generally optimistic that the directives might pass. How-ever, the Council representatives em-phasized the financial aspects of both directives: for the PNR Directive the costs of data storage, which would raise in case of including intra-EU

One would think that when the day is there is nothing left to worry about. But in reality it doesn’t work like tha-tIt seemed that members of the EPP faction did suffer from some misun-derstandings between each other and did not really support a common goal: they did not stick to their beliefs and the positions agreed.Severe problems within the party

were to be seen during the negotiation process of the PNR directive. Different speakers from the same party argued against their own ideas. A further re-ason to question the credibility of the party appeared during the press con-ference. The EPP press speaker men-tioned not only the EPP’s willingness to include seaways into the directive but also the idea to prolong the reten-tion period from five up to ten years. The position conveyed did not really match with overall party beliefsUnofficial discussions during the

evening event provided further in-sights to the opinion of the EPP par-ty leader. Mr. Günther seemed to be

concerned about the position being taken by the members of his party against the PNR directive and, what is more important, that their position did not really differ from the position of the EFD, what, according to him, should definitely not be the case and therefore needs to be changed.Such party positions cast a shadow

on the EPP members’ overall under-standing of the PNR directive and put their motivation to represent the real interests of their faction into questi-on. The last interview conducted with Mr. Günther showed that a consensus within the faction has finally been achieved and that there is no more re-ason to worry about previous incon-

EPP is back on the TrackDisagreements are eliminated, consensus is found, fraction is as strong as never before

Both of the directives had passedThe result fulfilled the expectations of the final vote (lg)

flights, and for the RD the financi-al burden for the different member states, because they are not affected equally by illegal immigrants from third countries.The final vote on June 9, 2012 fi-

nally fulfilled the expectations for-med in the press conference: the PNR passed with 21 votes (three ne-gative votes, three abstentions), and in the meantime all Ministers of the Council, except for Finland, appro-ved of the RD. It was an efficient day.

sistencies. This was reached through an unofficial round of discussions led within the fraction which aimed at understanding common goals and positions better. (msa)

2 23. Juni 2011The Mercury, No. 01

After the voting for different amend-ments related to the PNR Directive in the Council of Ministers, it is the European Parliament’s turn to deal with the directive. In order to not leave it solely to the members of the Parliament, the minister of Germany, Mr. Kahn, decided to lobby his ideas in several factions. In the circle of in-terest were ALDE members and Mr. Günther, leader of the EPP faction.During an evening event, Mr. Kahn

called for an unofficial meeting. After a small introduction to the course of that day’s business – especially the vo-ting in the Council – the German Mi-nister shared his personal opinion on different amendments. He was expli-citly satisfied about the failure of an amendment on rail and seaway trans-port, which, according to the current state of business, will not be added to the PNR directive. A further point concerned the amendments that Germany would like to see approved in the Parliament and the question which changes and ideas the factions should promote to get them passed.Mr. Kahn explained that it is not ne-

cessary to overcomplicate the whole idea of the PNR and that therefore the amendment about including rail and

seaway into the directive should be objected. It would be sufficient to just pass the amendment on the air traffic. Introducing rail and seaway transport would result in decreased consumer friendliness, since at the moment there is no need to enter any personal information when travelling between European countries or on domestic routes in both transportation modes. A further implication will be a need to change the whole ticketing procedure, meaning that explicit information will

need to be entered whether online or manually before the departure. Ano-ther issue would be the need to build up large data banks where this infor-mation will be gathered and stored, complicating the question of finan-cing. Companies will not be in favor of bearing additional costs either.As a result of an unofficial evening

meeting, no consensus with partici-pants about respectful amendments was reached. The leader of the EPP faction left the floor almost right after

Mr. Khan was done with presenting his views. Mr. Günther did not share the view of the German Minister on the PNR question and was tired of substantial disagreements within his own faction. The ALDE members lis-tened carefully to the arguments that Mr. Khan brought up to support his point of view, but none of them was in favor of it. The ALDE faction wants to reach a completely different resolu-tion on the PNR directive: the period of data retention should be reduced to 30 days, instead of five years which would generally prevent the option of using this kind of data for proactive measures on Intra-European and do-mestic levels. Also, no consensus was reached on the counter arguments from the German Minister. (sma)

Life behind the scenes of the Parliament and the Council never stopsIt’s late in the night but there is still a lot of effort put into lobbying for ideas by Ministers and MEPs

09. Juni 2012The Mercury, No. 04Daily News

Minister of Greece, Gunner Schuster, said that Greece is highly dependent on EU support in order to tackle il-legal immigration: “We are getting general support from the EU, for ex-ample financial support and political support from Frontex”. He said that the Schengen Treaty is an important achievement, but, however, it is im-portant that all member states are informed about what is going on in the other member states. “Bulgaria didn’t sign the Schengen treaty and in Bulgaria there is a big problem with illegal immigration, so if Bulgaria wants to be part of Schengen it needs to accept the problem.” Concerning the situation before the elections in Greece, Schuster said: “Greece will have a government soon which will face lots of problems to be solved. With illegal immigrants it is a little bit difficult since we’ve suffered from illegal immigration for a long time. However, everybody has to be sup-portive.“ (mp)

„We need support!“Interview with the Minister of Greece, Gunnar Schuster

“We have no money!”Interview with the Minister from Italy, Yike Guo

Gunnar SchusterMinister of Greece

WH: “So the economically strong countries should pay the major share?”

Guo: “I think that every Member of the EU is obliged to make a contribu-tion in this case. We are still in discus-sions. But I think Italy will abstain!” (wh)

WH: “Mr. Guo, what’s your opinion about the considerations of countries with no European external border to introduce border controls?”

Guo: “That`s not our Problem, we all live in the EU and can benefit from the advantages of the Schengen-Trea-ty. Our duty is to protect the external frontier!”

WH: “Mr. Guo, will Italy support the returns fund?”

Guo: “Yes, of course I appreciate the returns fund, but Italy faces an econo-mic crisis, we have absolutely no mo-ney to pay for it.”

WH: “Who else should pay for it? Other countries like Spain or Greek have also enormous economic prob-lems.”

Guo: “I don`t care about the other countries. Italy has no money!”

Yike GuoMinister of Italy

3

Coming to Mainz and participating in MEUM 2012 was a great experi-ence for me. That was my first simu-lation and I was very excited about it. With coffee in the one hand and recording devices in the other I ran through the buildings to catch people who I wanted to interview.The organizers arranged a really nice

social program and there was good coordination during the day in the Council, the EP and the journalists’ team. I experienced how real jour-nalists do their work every day from first hand. Even with the mistakes being made during the day – when we weren’t able to finish our articles till the dead line – I felt very satisfied at the end of the day.The fact that we come from different

parts in the world makes our program very colorful and interesting, because we bring with us our languages, cul-

tures and experience. I made new friends and it was a pleasure to meet everyone taking part in the simulati-on. Working with such nice, friendly and clever people mad my week un-forgettable. (mp)

23. Juni 2011The Mercury, No. 01

“Working for the press is comparable to modern slavery”

to the hostel, but this part exist in the real life, too.However, it was a nice time here in

Mainz, I met a lot of interesting and kind people, and I will definitely put the experience gained in my CV. I do not know if I will participate again in such kind of simulations, but in case I do, I would pay more attention to the online media, e.g. live Twitter reports from the EP meetings. (lg)

I knew in advance that working as a journalist would be an interesting, but hard task. I have first and second hand experience in that field, but that has been connected to online media.During the simulation I worked in

print media, which is different. It is stricter in the length of the article and less flexible due to fixed dead-lines, because the newspaper should be proofread, edited and printed for the next day. We worked after every-body else already went back home or

writing critical things about the of-ficials in order to inform the public. In this simulation most of the par-ticipants were ready  to being inter-viewed  and  providing information, whether as a private person or in their role.The cooperation with the colleagues

was uncomplicated and efficient, but I think the next time I will participate as a MEP or a Minister of the Council, even if I have to wear a suit. (wh)

Being a journalist during the MEU was very stressful. When the MEPs and the Members of the Council had coffee break or lunch to get new pow-er for their work, the journalists had to try and get some interesting infor-mation about the issues being dis-cussed in the Council and the EP. But, the other way round, we can`t have a break when the others are working, because then we have to write the ar-ticles. Thus, working as a journalist means always having less time to eat, to drink and to sleep.However, the duties are very inte-

resting. Asking shrewd questions,

09. Juni 2012The Mercury, No. 04 Getting Closer

It was a great pleasure to work with students from such a diverse back-ground. But it was also a challenge to develop a whole newspaper, which had to live up to the high standard of the simulation. Three days of edi-torial-meetings, photo-selection and deadline-stress. Just like the daily routine of a real newspaper editorial office! I tried to support the partici-pants the best I could and give them a first hand insight into the job of a newspaper journalist. (je)

Mission impossible accomplishedBeing responsible for proofreading

the journalists’ input is at the same time a very rewarding and nerve-jangling task. Making the “miracle” happen and finally having a newspa-per in one’s hands is worth every sin-gle grey hair I will take home from MEU Mainz. Physically feeling the time pressure is probably the best proof that we seem to have managed quite well to simulate “being journa-lists”. (alk)

4 23. Juni 2011The Mercury, No. 01

“It was learning experience”

“It was very fruitful and professional atmosphere.”

Winfred Atori Wameyo

Tzvetelina Markova

09. Juni 2012The Mercury, No. 04Impressions

“It was a really good experience to know the EU decision ma-king process”

Laia Paula Garcia

“It was my first simulation in such an international inviroment”

Sohel Rana

„Succesful negotiations, good cooperation with the Greens.“

S&D Faction

„I was not so attentive, because I didn`t sleep tonight.“

Femke De Geynst