108
10-18 August 2014 5th International Forum of the European Youth Parliament Greece Thessaloniki International Forum Preparation Kit
| Date post: | 01-Apr-2016 |
| Category: |
Documents |
| Upload: | thessaloniki-international-forum |
| View: | 233 times |
| Download: | 3 times |
10-18 August 2014 5th International Forum of the European Youth
Parliament Greece
Thessaloniki International
Forum
Preparation Kit
2
Contents AFCO I - Committee on Constitutional Affairs I AFCO II - Committee on Constitutional Affairs II AGRI - Committee on Agriculture and Rural De-velopment DEVE - Committee on Development ECON - Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs EMPL - Committee on Employment and Social Affairs ENVI I - Committee on Enviroment, Public Health and Food Safety I ENVI II - Comiittee on Enviroment, Public Health and Food Safety II
Page 4
Page 11
Page 17
Page 26
Page 35
Page 42
Page 48
Page 55
3
FEMM - Committee on Womens’ Rights and Gender Equality INTA - Committee on International Trade JURI - Committee on Legal Affairs LIBE I - Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs I LIBE II - Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice nad Home Affairs II TRAN - Committee on Transport and Tourism
Page 61
Page 69
Page 78
Page 84
Page 93
Page 100
4
AFCO I - Committee on Constitutional Affairs I “Despite the EU’s efforts to stimulate voter participation in the 2014 European Elections, voter turnout only increased marginally to 43%. Given that voters who did exercise their right elected an increased number of Eurosceptic and nationalist parties such as UKIP and Front National, how should the new composition of the European Parliament engage in constructive dialogues with such movements and mitigate anti-integration
movements?” Regarding the AFCO committee
The AFCO committee is responsible for:• theinstitutionalaspects of the European integration process, in par-ticular in the framework of the preparation and pro-ceedings of conventions and intergovernmental conferences;• uniformelectoralprocedure;• politicalpartiesatEuropean level, without prejudice to the compe-tences of the Bureau;
• thedeterminationoftheexistenceofaseriousandpersistentbreachbyaMem-ber State (MS) of the principles common to the MS;
by Alastair Payne (UK) and Laure Steinville (FR)
5
Introduction and background information
Last May, 43%1 of European citizens cast their vote to elect the future Members of the European Parliament (MEP). The results have shown a growing popularity in Euroscep-tic and anti-immigration parties, such as UKIP (United Kingdom) and the Front National (France) gaining both 24 MEPs for a 5-year mandate. The EU now faces a new chal-lenge, where its own parliament has an element with a strong anti-EU agenda.
There are varying degrees of Euroscepticism within these parties and there is little con-sensus as to how these parties wish to limit the power of the EU in policy making. In June 2014 UKIP signed an agreement2 to form a parliamentary group without its French counterpart: the Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group (EFD), a group of various Eurosceptic parties, such as UKIP or Beppe Grillo’s Italian Five Star Movement.
Thesepartiesrepresentapproximately20%ofEuropeanvotersandtheirpresenceinthe EP is a result of the democratic process, although low voter turnout in some Member States indicates that Euroscepticism isn’t necessarily the majority view3 . Even though lots of factors have to be taken into account to justify the rise of Euroscepticism, we should ask ourselves if the EU, as it functions nowadays, is truly democratic and if it should move towards more integration and political union or listen to the voices aiming for more sovereignty of EU MS when deciding the political agenda of the Union.
Key Questions
Should there be a change to the European Parliament to reflect the presence of ob-structionist anti-EU parties?What are the key policies of the anti-EU parties, and what influences their position?
1 http://www.results-elections2014.eu/en/turnout.html 2 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-279075863 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/19/european-elections-turnout-luxembourg-slovakia
6
Links
- Official results of the 2014 EP elections: http://www.results-elections2014.eu/en/election-results-2014.html- An article from a non-European point of view commenting on these results: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/may/europe-election-results-052914.html- An article on the EFD: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27907586
Key Terms
- Euroscepticism: The body of criticism of the EU, and opposition to the process of politicalEuropeanintegrationexistingthroughoutthepoliticalspectrum.- Parliamentary group: For a group to be formally recognised at the EP, it must fulfil the criterion of a minimum 25 MEPs and at least one quarter of EU MS must be repre-sented within this group. Being a parliamentary group allows it to receive credits as well as being more visible and influential on the European political scene.- Direct democracy: aims to let citizens directly decide on policy initiatives, i.e. a direct involvement of the citizens in the legislative procedure as well as the use of the methods to bring the citizens closer to politics.
Key conflicts
The two major parties, UKIP and the FN, have strong common beliefs about how the EU should work. It is their opinion that immigration is a threat1 and the EU should have less power in the policymaking and legal system of their respective countries. However, the British position is different to that of France since the UK is not part of the Schengen area and does not use the common currency. Therefore, Marine Le Pen’s proposal to withdraw from the EU to close France’s borders and to leave the Eurozone cannot be applied to UKIP’s policies. As a result, it is not surprising that Nick Farage stated long ago and confirmed his opinion recently that he would not form a parliamentary group with the French party.1 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/10561969/Marine-Le-Pen-says-Front-National-and-Ukip-closer-than-they-would-like-to-admit.html
7
There is also fear that Europe’s fundamental values may be forgotten. While concerns over the impact of free movement and immigration are legitimate and tend to rise in times of financial crisis and austerity1, some parties combine their anti-EU rhetoric with racism against Jews, Muslims and immigrants from other EU Member States. It becomes really serious when outspoken neo-Nazi parties such as Jobbik2 (Hungary) and Golden Dawn3 (Greece) are getting a foothold in both the European Parliament and national parliaments. However, the EU cannot ban the entry of any party which has been legally voted in national elections. There are different election rules in each Member State, and EU doesn’t interfere in them as long as elections are seen as free and fair, and comply with common standards. Initially, the EU was not supposed to become a political union, but rather a tool to en-courage economic cooperation between a few countries4. As a result we may ask our-selves if it is necessary to strengthen democracy and political harmonisation within the EU (one of the greatest criticism of Eurosceptics) if it is not its first task. One way to less-en the criticisms of the Eurosceptics would be to tackle the EU’s democratic deficit and increase direct democracy and citizens’ participation, but this is difficult to achieve and may make legislating within the EU less efficient. One direct democracy tool is the Euro-pean Citizens’ Initiative5 (ECI) which allows citizens to address a petition to the European Commission to make a legislative proposal, once the petition has reached the required levelofsupport.However,creatingasuccessfulECIisacomplexandexpensivepro-cess, meaning they are not widely utilized, particularly by those who feel politically dis-enfranchised, as anti-EU party members tend to.
Key Questions How should the EU involve anti-EU parties, and separate their far-right agendas from the potential for necessary reform, and what kind of reform might be adequate?
1 http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/05/political_economy2 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/concerns-as-neonazi-jobbik-party-wins-20-of-hungary-vote-9244541.html3 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/07/greece-golden-dawn-fascism-threat-to-democracy4 http://www.europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/index-en.htm5 http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/welcome
8
HowshouldtheEUreconciletherighttodemocraticrepresentationofcitizenswithex-tremist views with the values of the European Union? Links
- A video where Nick Farage demonstrates why he doesn’t want to unite with the Front National: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX40BANPAX4- An article showing the main differences between Marine Le Pen’s Front National and Nick Farage’s UKIP: http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/10/its-tempting-to-compare-frances-national-front-with-ukip-but-wrong/- AnarticleexplainingwhyisthereademocraticdeficitwithintheEU:http://www.voxeurop.eu/en/content/article/1652581-european-parliament-democratic-deficit Stakeholders
The European Parliament and its 751 MEPs. The election of the EP takes place every 5 years. The European Parliament has the co-decision power (with the Council) on propos-als by the European Commission1, however it does not have the right of initiative. The elections do not lead to the creation of a government and there is no “European” cam-paign for the elections as they take place nationally.
Eurosceptic parties, who have in the 2014 elections dramatically increased their number of MEPs, now have 140 seats at the EP. Although they only have a minority at the EP, they can still influence a lot the policymaking of the EU especially within the different committees of the EP.
There are 500 million EU citizens, also called the European Civil Society, who can sub-mit an ECI and vote to the elections. They first need to realise the importance of voting at a European level and not on the national policymaking of Member States. Key Questions: What factors contribute to the growth of eurosceptic parties? How should these factors be addressed?
1 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/0081f4b3c7/Law-making-procedures-in-detail.html
9
Should the current model of European Parliamentary elections be improved to better reflect the needs of the modern EU? Links- An article analysing the role and power of Eurosceptic parties at the EP: http://www.euractiv.com/sections/eu-elections-2014/eurosceptic-meps-will-have-marginal-influence-eu-parliament-302482
Existing measures and current legislation
Although the number of Eurosceptic MEPs increased, their numbers are still not great enoughtosystematicallyblockEUlegislation.“RadicalsandextremistsintheEuropeanParliament cannot form a majority”1 , said Manfred Weber, German president of the Euro-pean People’s Party (EPP). “There is a crushing majority of pro-Europeans in the Europe-an Parliament,”2 said Martin Schulz, following his re-election as president of the EP. He went on to say that the Parliament would have to legislate with a larger majority. The So-cialists (S&D), the right (EPP) and the Liberals (ALDE) will have to work closely together.
But the influence of Eurosceptic parties should not be underestimated. “I fear that the FN mem-bers will evolve from observers to contributors in the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee,”3 said Sylvie Guillaume (newly elected VP of the EP). She also warned that if there is no real economic and social progress, it will be difficult to stop the rise of all Eurosceptic par-ties, as they continue to gather momentum. In 2005, the network Democracy international introduced a paper “More democracy in Europe”4 . They called for a new EU convention where big decisions would be taken in an open debate
1 http://www.euractiv.com/sections/eu-elections-2014/eurosceptics-make-controversial-return-eu-parlia-ment-3032422 http://www.euractiv.com/sections/eu-elections-2014/eurosceptics-make-controversial-return-eu-parlia-ment-3032423 http://www.euractiv.com/sections/eu-elections-2014/eurosceptics-make-controversial-return-eu-parlia-ment-3032424 http://democraticeuropenow.eu/
10
between politicians and citizens. Furthermore, obligatory referenda would take place in case of a transfer of sovereignty and treaty amendments1. We can also consider the Internet and social media as platform for discussions, as we haveseentheimpactthatitcanhavetoacertainextentduringtheArabSpring.Italsoprovides the potential for direct democracy in a way which has historically been unfeasi-ble, removing some of the need for representative democracy2 . This kind of shift would have a considerable impact on the involvement of lobbying and interest groups in the process of policy making on a European level.
Finally, the European Citizens’ Initiative, that took effect on April 1, allows the citizens to be “co-authors of the law”: if a measure gathers up to one million signatures coming from at least 7 out of the 28 Member States, it will be addressed to the EC. The EC has stated it will only consider ECIs which do not involve treaty changes to the EU, although the regulation on this issue is unclear3. Key Questions:
Would an increase in direct democracy be sufficient to allow for a constructive dialogue with anti-EU parties? What are the legal challenges associated with changing the way the European Parlia-ment operates?
Links:
- Tony Blair’s (former British Prime Minister) manifesto for a European change and statinghowweshouldreacttothe‘riseofextremes’:http://www.todayszaman.com/op-ed_a-manifesto-for-european-change-by-tony-blair-_349446.html- A more democratic and transparent EU http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/glance/de-mocracy/- AnexplanationoftheEuropeanCitizensinitiative:http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/guide?lg=en1 http://democraticeuropenow.eu/home#democratic_reform2 http://www.ijetae.com/files/Volume4Issue1/IJETAE_0114_109.pdf3 http://www.citizens-initiative.eu/?p=829
11
- ThiswebsiteexplainsthesourcesoftheEuropeanUnionlawhttp://europa.eu/leg-islation_summaries/institutional_affairs/decisionmaking_process/l14534_en.htm- Democracy International’s call for a new EU Convention: http://www.democracy-international.org/join-campaign-calling-democratic-europe AFCO II - Committee on Constitutional Affairs II “Fighting corruption needs to come from the top and that is where Europe fails the test.” Cobus de Swardt, Managing Director of the global Transparency International Secre-tariat in Berlin. With confidence in EU institutions at an all-time low and 120 billion Euros missing from EU coffers, how should the EU work to fight corruption in its institutions and their em-ployees?” Introduction and background The Justice and Home Affairs Agenda 20201 renewed the European Union’s commit-ment to tackle corruption in its institutions as corruption in the public sector is one of the mainimpedimentstoefficiency,foreigndirectinvestmentandinnovation.Sofarexemptfrom corruption scandals (unlike many Member States), EU institutions have suffered from a decline in trust and confidence with repercussions in in the May 2014 elections, seeingalargerrepresentationofextremistpartiespresentinthenewParliament.Areas prone to corruption in EU institutions are procurement, lobbying, conflict of inter-est and the “revolving door”. • Inthecaseofprocurement,corruptioncantakeplaceduringtheneedsassess-ment,thesupplierselectionandthecontractexecution.• Lobbyingbenefitsthepublicinterestifitisundertakenwithintegrityandtranspar-ency, but corruption can give undue influence and unfair advantage to certain policies or people.• Post-employmentconflictofinterestincludetheuseof“insiderinformation”tothedisadvantage of EU institutions, or making decisions as an EU employee which benefits the prospective employer. • Thephenomenonofthe“revolvingdoor”,whichconsistsofindividualsmovingback and forth between public and private sectors has multiplied as a result of the
1 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-174_en.htm
by Malika Bouazzaoui (FR)
12
financialcrisis.ThesepeopletradetheirexperienceandconnectionsinEUinstitutionsagainst employment with lobbyists who target their former colleagues. Links - http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/business/international/anti-corruption-group-finds-fault-with-european-union.html?_r=2:AnexcellentintroductoryarticletoCorrup-tion, by the New York Times.- http://www.transparencyinternational.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/EUIS_By_Numbers.pdf : Infographic description on the integrity of the EU by Transparency Inter-national, an NGO that publicises corporate and political corruption.- http://www.againstcorruption.eu/reports/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-control-ling-corruption-in-the-european-union/:AnexcellentPDFbytheEuropeanResearchCentre for Anti-Corruption and State-Building, pages 28-41 and 45-48 are an obligatory source for delegates.- http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/04/business/international/European-Union-Re-port-on-Cost-of-Corruption.html?_r=0 : A New York Times article highlights the implica-tions of corruption in EU institutions.- http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/pub/2012_regional_policy_paper_1_in-creasing_integrity_and_eu_citizens_trust_in : A report on procurement published by Transparency International.- http://www.transparency.de/fileadmin/pdfs/Themen/Politik/ENIS_Regional_Policy_Paper_Lobbying.pdf: A short report by Transparency International on Lobbying Key questions
Why are some areas more prone to corruption than others?Why are the measures already taken by EU institutions, mainly in the form of rules and codes of conduct, not adequate to tackle corruption? Key conflicts
Corruption in EU institutions has been facilitated by a new, more rapid lawmaking pro-cess known as ‘trialogue’, which are informal meetings of representatives of the Euro-
13
pean commission, European parliament and EU council where the majority of EU laws are drafted. There is no public record of these meetings. In addition, despite the accessibility of EU employees by lobbyists, meetings with and the input of lobbyists regarding draft legislation, laws and amendment is not recorded or disclosed. The register for lobbyists is not even mandatory. According to the Guardian, only just over 6,500 (out of an estimated 15,000) businesses, trade unions, NGOs and professional lobbyists have supplied basic information on what they do and how much they spend on lobbying EU institution in the voluntary register1. Acccording to Corporate Europe Observatory, a watchdog campaining for greater transparency in the EU, there are at least 30,000 lobbyists in Brussels2. The discrepancy between these number alone suggests how unregulated this area is. Moreover, the information disclosed by European Commissioners and MEPs regarding conflicts of interests is not systematically verified by the institutions themselves. Euro-pean policymakers are trusted to put in the public domain any relationships or interests they may have, but do not always live up to this obligation. Meanwhile, committees monitoring compliance with ethics rules lack independence as they are staffed with current or former members of the institutions, thus being less likely to investigate cases of senior employees. Besides, they do not proactively monitor com-pliance (e.g. through conducting spot-checks on asset declarations) or have powers to issue binding recommendations or administrative sanctions for breaches of rules. This lack of monitoring and verification make it difficult to enforce the rules that are already inexistence.
Key questions
How can efficiency of policymaking at the EU be conciliated with the need for openness and tracibility?
1 http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/24/eu-transparent-corruption-conflicts-interest2 http://corporateeurope.org/power-lobbies/2011/09/putting-brussels-lobbyists-map
14
Links - http://www.transparencyinternational.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/EU_Integ-rity_System_Report.pdf : A comprehensive Transparency International report on corrup-tion in EU institutions.- http://www.transparencyinternational.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/EU_Integ-rity_System_Report.pdf : Transparency International report on the European Union In-tegrity System. Please read in particular, but not only, pages 11-12, 17, 50, 65, 87, 122, 158 and 208.- http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/472218/European-Union-s-leading-institutions-are-vulnerable-to-corruption-new-report-finds:TheDailyExpresscommentsoncorrup-tion in leading EU institutions.- http://euobserver.com/investigations/123555: An EU Observer article on 2013 Trial-ogue meetings.- http://ec.europa.eu/codecision/stepbystep/glossary_en.htm: See the definition of Trilogue Stakeholders
The European Anti-Fraud Office1 (OLAF) investigates cases of fraud and corruption in-volving EU money. OLAF is part of the European Commission. Transparency International is an NGO whose mission is to fight corruption, and as such can only make suggestions to EU institutions. RevolvingDoorWatch2 is a database by the Corporate Europe Observatory which lists all EU Commissioners and MEPs who have taken jobs as lobbyists, or former lobbyists who have taken jobs in EU institutions. Recent cases of corruption in EU Member States include the Spanish Princess Cristina, whose trial was led by judge Jose Castro; and the coalition government of the Czech Republic, including Prime Minister Petr Necas and the former and current heads of the military intelligence, whose corruption was discovered by the Police Unit for Combating Organised Crimes.
1 http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/index_en.htm2 http://corporateeurope.org/revolvingdoorwatch
15
Links
- http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/policy/preventing-fraud/index_en.htm : The OLAF website. The Investigations and Policy sections are well worth reading, keeping in mind that this website aims to promote OLAF as an organisation.- http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-is-new/public-consultation/2013/pdf/0027/organisations/transparency-international_en.pdf (Transparency International’s proposals to the European Commission)- http://corporateeurope.org/revolvingdoorwatch Key questions
Who should be in charge of the enforcement of the codes of conducts and other rules EU civil servants are bound by?How could OLAF become more effective at fighting corruption Existing measures and Current Legislation The EU adopts a broad definition of corruption, including bribery, facilitation payments and collusion, conflicts of interest, bid-rigging and trading of influence1. There is a voluntary register for lobbyists of the European Commission and EP, but not of the Council or Member State permanent representations. Permanent EU staff are bound by a broad range of restrictions, including restrictions on their future employ-ment; they are obliged to report conflicts of interest when in service; and are also sub-ject to conflict of interest checks before being hired2. There are also rules on the disclo-sure of interests, assets, income and gifts but no verification of asset declarations are conducted.Inaddition,thecomplexityoftherulesinplaceandthedetailedexceptionsthat often apply to different categories of EU civil servant make it difficult for individual staff members to understand their obligations in all cases and to monitor. Indeed, there are different obligations in different institutions and at different levels of seniority.
1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52003DC03172 http://ec.europa.eu/civil_service/admin/ethic/index_en.htm#3
16
Despite legal obligations to do report any illegal activity or misconduct observed in the course of work in all EU institutions since 2004, only the European Commission has a mechanism in place to protect internal whistle-blowers . However, OLAF does not pos-sessexternalchannelstoreportmisconduct.Asaresult,Europeancivilservantsmaybewary of denouncing a senior Commissioner.
Links
- http://www.theguardian.com/business/2005/may/30/europeanunion.eu : The Gaurdian comments on a commissioner’s transparency initiative.- http://www.thecommentator.com/article/2687/european_union_corruption_knows_no_shame:TheCommentatorgivesanexampleofcorruptionintheEU.- http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P7-TA-2013-0444&language=EN: The European Parliament’s report on organised crime, corruption and money laundering. A word search for corruption will yield clearer results.- http://www.europarl.europa.eu/pdf/meps/201206_Code_of_conduct_EN.pdf : The code of conduct of the European Parliament- http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/organized-crime-and-human-trafficking/corruption/anti-corruption-report/index_en.htm : The 2014 Anti-Cor-ruption Report which includes measures Member States have adopted to limit corrup-tion at a national level- http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/pdf/com_deci-sion_2011_3673_final_en.pdf: The motives behind the Commission§s Decision to launch an Anti-Corruption Report. Also mentions previous initiatives to tackle corruption. Key questions
How should EU institutions effectively dissuade, monitor and sanction cases of corrup-tion by their employees?How should they protect whistle-blowers, who are EU employees who denounce cor-rupt colleagues?
17
Links
The following links are states, international or regional organisations’ solutions to cor-ruption - http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-67_en.htm (solutions different EU member states have found to deal with corruption at a national level. Could any of these measures be adopted at the EU level?)- http://www.acr_2014_en.pdf - http://www.planejamento.gov.br/secretarias/upload/Arquivos/seges/arquivos/OCDE2011/OECD_Post_Public.pdf (read chapter 4, chapter 5 may also be interesting as Norway has a highly effective anti-corruption system)- http://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/UNCAC/Publications/Convention/08-50026_E.pdf
AGRI - Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development ”Agribusiness efficiency and global poverty: After the conclusion of the Common Agri-cultural Policy reforms under the Irish Presidency of the European Union and the imple-mentation of said reforms under the 2014-2020 budget, what steps should the European Union take to mitigate the impact its Common Agricultural Policy may exert on production in developing countries?” Introduction and Background Information
Withcombinedimportsandexportsannuallyat177billioneuro(2009-2011averagedata)1, the European Union (EU) is the world’s foremost trader in agricultural goods and therefore, the EU’s domestic agricultural policies (the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)) and its agri-cultural trade policies directly influence global production. As the world population passed 7 billion in 2011 – of which an estimated 925 million are chronically hungry2 – decisions taken at the European level have an increasingly crucial role for the global population.
1 European Commission Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – “INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF AGRICULTURAL POLICY” - http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/trade-analysis/international-as-pects-of-agricultural-policy_en.pdf2 WFP: www.wfp.org/hunger/stas ; FAO: www.fao.org/docrep/012/al390e/al390e00.pdf
by Yiannos Vakis (CY)
18
Taking the above into account, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Affairs will have to assess the impact of the current EU policies on the agriculture sectors of developing countries,considerfutureoptionstheEUcantake,andproposethenextsteps,balanc-ing out between the support of the European agricultural sector and the EU’s contribu-tion towards global food security – or, in more traditional terminology, world hunger. Support of the European Agricultural sector
The CAP was established in the Treaty of Rome (1957) to ensure the availability of food supplies after a decade of severe food shortages around WWII. Since then, the CAP has undergone a number of reforms (the most notable being the 1992 MacSharry reforms1 which corrected the policies that encouraged the infamous overproduction of “wine lakes” and “butter mountains” of the 1980s and the subsequent dumping2 into third world countries), that have generally shifted domestic support from price and market support coupled to production3 towards decoupled direct income support4 to farmers. Such reforms have gone a long way to remove high tariffs5andexportsubsidies6 and in turn bridge the gap between internal prices and world prices, thus turning the EU from a price setter7 into a price taker8. The European agricultural sector has been gradually moving towards becoming more market-oriented and less trade-distorting, giving less directsupportforEuropeanexportsandallowingimportsmoreaccesstoEUmarket.The latest reform, the CAP post-2013, follows the same course. Moreover, the EU has actively pursued various trade policies (such as the Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN)9 treat-ment ) through and beyond the World Trade Organisation (WTO) with preferential arran-
1 European Commission – The History of the CAP - http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cap-history/index_en.htm2 Dumping: Exporting goods at lower prices than home-market prices in importing countries.3 Price and market support (coupled to production): The government maintains a fixed level of market prices regardless of supply and demand by buying any excess unsold surpluses. This makes farmers’ incomes directly proportional to the quantity they produce.4 Decoupled direct income supports: Regular payments to farmers which are irrespective of the quantity they produce.5 Tariff: a tax on imported goods.6 Subsidy: money paid by the government to keep the price of a good low.7 Price-setter: Someone with the power to influence the price of a good.8 Price-taker : Someone who does not have enough influence to affect the price of a good9 Most-favoured-nation (MFN) treatment: Every time a country lowers a trade barrier or opens up a market, it has to do so for the same goods or services from all its trading partners
19
arrangements for countries, aimed at lowering trade barriers for developing countries and Least Developed Countries (LDCs). European contribution towards global food security and development
CAP must take into account the EU development and cooperation objectives referred to as “Policy Coherence for Development (PCD)” under the Treaty of the EU and the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. PDC is based on the recognition that in pursuing its do-mestic policy objectives, the EU should avoid negative spillover which could adversely affect the EU’s development objectives1. PDC is of particular importance for CAP given thetargetoftheMillenniumDevelopmentGoal1(MDG1)oferadicatingextremepovertyand hunger and the role of the agricultural sector in achieving food security2. Links
- European Commission Press Release “The common agricultural policy (CAP) and agriculture in Europe – Frequently asked questions” - http://europa.eu/rapid/press-re-lease_MEMO-13-631_en.htm - Article brief on the CAP over the years: http://www.politics.co.uk/reference/com-mon-agricultural-policy - European Commission Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – “INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF AGRICULTURAL POLICY” Section 1 pages 4-7 - http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/trade-analysis/international-aspects-of-agricultural-policy_en.pdf- European Commission Staff Working Paper “Impact Assessment of CAP towards 2020”(2011)Annex12-http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/policy-perspectives/impact-as-sessment/cap-towards-2020/report/annex12_en.pdf
1 European Commission Staff Working Paper “Impact Assessment of CAP towards 2020” (2011) Annex 12 - http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/policy-perspectives/impact-assessment/cap-towards-2020/report/annex12_en.pdf2 Research Paper: “CAP and EU Trade Policy Report” - https://www.wageningenur.nl/upload_mm/5/7/0/acac-2c3b-6397-4f07-b9f1-ec6978e1a892_Rapport%202013-023%20Meijerink_WEB_DEF.pdf
20
Key Questions How does the CAP impact developing countries?How has the CAP – and the policy objectives behind it - changed over the years?How do European Trade Policies impact developing countries?What is the EU’s policy towards developing countries?In what manner does the CAP affect the EU’s PCD? Key Conflicts
Instruments of the CAP
The financial support towards the EU agriculture sector given through the CAP (which constitutessome40%oftheEUBudget)isconsideredbymanytobeexcessive.Beforerecentreforms,theCAPdirectlycontributedtowardskeepingthepricesofEUexportslow (through stabilization of floor prices1andexportrefunds2), practices that are said to be anti-competitive and trade-distorting (as had the EU not provided these support mechanismstoitsproducers,thentheirproductswouldhavebeenmoreexpensiveon the global markets and therefore quantities sold would have been lower). Over the past 20 years, the CAP has moved away from financial incentives for food produc-tion (which had led to overproduction) and focused on direct payments to farmers and market-support measures (pillar 1) relating to environmental practices, sustainability and quality and on rural development measures (pillar 2)3 . However, critics consider that the CAP is still “based on supporting productivity and global competitiveness of the Europe-an agri-food industry4.” One must consider whether financing the European agricultural market under the post-2013 CAP reforms continues to act as a protectionist measure as some argue (see Guardian Article5 below) and therefore whether – and possibly how - it impacts developing nations.
1 Floor price: a lower price for a good, fixed by the government.2 Export refunds: Export subsidies paid out to cover the difference between the EU price of a good and its world market price3 European Commission Press Release “The common agricultural policy (CAP) and agriculture in Europe – Fre-quently asked questions” - http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-631_en.htm4 Report: Globalising Hunger: Food Security and the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy –Introduction: http://www.tni.org/files/download/CAPpaper-draft_0.pdf5 The Guardian: “EU agriculture policy ‘still hurting farmers in developing countries’ “ http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/oct/11/eu-agriculture-hurts-developing-countries
21
Trade schemes and FTAs:
The EU’s trade schemes and FTAs (which dictate trade barriers for developing countries) have received controversial criticism. One the one hand, the EU claims that it supports growthandexportopportunitiesthroughtheopen-marketregimes(between2008and2010 the EU had a negative trade balance with developing countries in the range of 20 billion euro)1; whilst, on the other, many argue that FTAs cause developing countries to open up their markets for European surplus production – dumping - which has been stimulated by the generous CAP support2. A different opinion (supported by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food) is that: on imports, developing countries import food to provide affordable prices for peo-ple living in poverty and as a result trade-off the long term objective of reducing depen-dency on international food markets and developing their own agricultural capabilities; whilst,ondevelopingcountryexports,thefocusonexport-ledagriculturalpoliciesdis-courages the local and regional markets which could provide major benefits to the poor-est families3. Moreover, Europe focuses on production of final products4 (demand has increased as the middle income classes in BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) countries increases rapidly), and relies on developing countries for the supply of commodities and interme-diate goods5. Changing these goods into final products creates value, leaving EU pro-ducers with considerable profit margins6. One must consider the ethics in the develop-ment of this trend in trade, particularly since it increases pressure on natural resources
1 European Commission Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – “INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF AGRICULTURAL POLICY”2 Report: Globalising Hunger: Food Security and the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy - http://www.tni.org/files/download/CAPpaper-draft_0.pdf3 A different opinion (supported by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food) is that: on imports, devel-oping countries import food to provide affordable prices for people living in poverty and as a result trade-off the long term objective of reducing dependency on international food markets and developing their own agricul-tural capabilities; whilst, on developing country exports, the focus on export-led agricultural policies discourages the local and regional markets which could provide major benefits to the poorest families. 4 Final Product: the final or resulting product of an industry or production process.5 Intermediate goods: semi-finished products that are used in the production of other goods.6 European Commission Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – “INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF AGRICULTURAL POLICY”
22
indevelopingcountries(seeforexampletheadverseaffectsonCambodiainthelinkbelow). Links
- Report: Globalising Hunger: Food Security and the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy –Introduction: pages 4-6 & Recommendations pages 88-91 http://www.tni.org/files/download/CAPpaper-draft_0.pdf - UN: Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food - The Common Agri-cultural Policy towards 2020: The role of the European Union in supporting the realiza-tion of the right to food - http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/food/docs/SRRTF_CAP_Reform_Comment.pdf - Article “EU’s Everything But Arms initiative is impoverishing Cambodian farmers” http://www.inclusivedevelopment.net/eus-everything-but-arms-initiative-is-impoverish-ing-cambodian-farmers/ Key Questions Since the initial objectives of the CAP (such as food security in Europe) have been achieved, should the CAP continue to take up 40% of the EU budget?TowhatextendistheCAPstillbasedonboostingEuropeanexports?Is removing trade barriers for developing countries beneficial? What impact does trade liberalisation have on developing countries and on the EU? AreEUagriculturalexportsanobstacletoagriculturaldevelopmentindevelopingcoun-tries?Doesexport-ledgrowthindevelopingcountrieshinderthegrowthoftheirdomesticsec-tors?Does the production of final products in the EU put increased pressure on commodity production in developing nations? Are the CAP and European trade policies in line with the EU’s PDC?
23
Stakeholders
Europe’s Farmers who have been receiving CAP financing for over 50 years and have therefore have adjusted their business plans around its policies. Note that the CAP is considered to be of crucial importance to farmers as a guarantee for stable incomes irrespective of the volatility in price and weather which render the agricultural market more vulnerable.
EU Producersareincreasinglycateringfordemandforfinalgoodsinexportmarketswhich necessitate commodities and intermediate goods from the developing world. These include agricultural produce (such as vegetable protein for livestock production). Farmers in Developing Countries are able to sell their produce and at competitive pric-es when they are not met with protectionist measures from foreign markets. They are facedwiththedecisiontofocusonexportsordomesticproduction.Duetothevariousdomestic differences between developing countries (in areas such as the political envi-ronments, available commodities, or natural comparative advantages1), they are “rather heterogeneous in the way they are affected” by changes in the CAP and in European agricultural trade policies.
The European Commission, Council and European Parliament are jointly responsible for approval of the CAP and trade schemes. The WTO, OECD,FAO, G8, G20 are international bodies that deal with Sustainable development, poverty reduction and food security issues. The European Commission works closely with the above organizations to negotiate trade policies and coordinate international policies. Links:- “EU agriculture policy ‘still hurting farmers in developing countries’ “ http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/oct/11/eu-agriculture-hurts-developing-countries
1 Comparative Advantage: the ability of a country to make a specific product more efficiently than another prod-uct.
24
- Article on the reasoning behind changing the GSP http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europ-pblog/2014/04/07/despite-lofty-rhetoric-about-development-the-eu-has-cut-preferential-trading-rules-with-emerging-economies-for-commercial-reasons/- Research Paper: “CAP and EU Trade Policy Report” – in particular: Conclusions, pages 77-79 https://www.wageningenur.nl/upload_mm/5/7/0/acac2c3b-6397-4f07-b9f1-ec6978e1a892_Rapport%202013-023%20Meijerink_WEB_DEF.pdf Key questions
Who is benefiting from the CAP and who is losing out due to it?How would the rural areas in Europe be affected if the support to farmers through the CAP is reduced?Are all developing countries affected by the CAP in the same way?Which are the legislative European bodies responsible for the CAP and which for trade policies?What policies should the European Commission pursue when negotiating on trade poli-cies with its international partners? Existing Measures and Current Legislation
How the EU currently influences agriculture in developed countries:
The EU influences agriculture development in developing countries through: • DomesticSupport:Pillar11 of the CAP provides EU producers with direct pay-ments, now retargeted under the post-2013 reform to reward “greening” measures and to ensure socio-economic development of rural areas2. • Exportsubsidies(orrefunds):Thesepolicieshaveplayedanincreasinglyminorrole(below1%ofCAPexpenditurein2010)andhavebeeneliminatedsinceJuly20133 (atthemoment,exportrefundsmayonlybeprovidedduringmarketcrises).
1 The CAP is structured into two Pillars: Pillar 1 relates to direct support payments to farmers, such as the Single Farm Payment, whilst Pillar 2 relates to the Rural Development Programme (which supports economic and so-cial development in the countryside).2 Commission Staff Working Document “EU 2013 Report on Policy Coherence for Development”http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/documents/swd_2013_456_f1_staff_working_paper_en_v3_p1_746653_en.pdf3 Commission Staff Working Document “EU 2013 Report on Policy Coherence for Development”
25
• EUmarketaccessrestrictions:Theseinclude: o Non-Tariff Measurements (NTM) (sanitary measures and technical barriers to trade – mostly harmonized under World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules) o Trade schemes and Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), namely: • EconomicPartnershipAgreement(EPA)withtheAfrican,Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP) – substantially all trade is liberalized by both the EU and ACP states, but ACP can choose to retain tariffs on 20% of their sensitive products1. • GeneralisedSchemeofPreferences(GSP)whichchangedinJanuary 2014, limiting to 90 countries from 1772. The GSP covers 3 separate regimes: • GSPstandardarrangement–offeringdutyreductions. • GSP+offeringtariffcutsforcountriesthathaveratifiedandim plemented international convention relating to human rights, the envi ronment and good governance. • EverythingbutArms(EBA)arrangement–offeringduty-freeand quota-freeaccessforallproductsexceptarmsandammunition. Links - Commission Staff Working Document “EU 2013 Report on Policy Coherence for Development”- pages 101-107 - http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-poli-cies/documents/swd_2013_456_f1_staff_working_paper_en_v3_p1_746653_en.pdf- European Commission Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – “INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF AGRICULTURAL POLICY” Section 4, pages 22-32 - http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/trade-analysis/international-aspects-of-agricultural-poli-cy_en.pdf- European Commission Press Release on revised EU trade Scheme http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-1187_en.htm
1 European Commission Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – “INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF AGRICULTURAL POLICY”2 European Commission Press Release on revised EU trade Scheme http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-1187_en.htm
26
Key Questions
HowdoesdomesticsupportaffectthecompetitivenessofEuropeanexportsand,there-fore, how does it impact production in developed countries?How“fair”areexportsubsidiesorrefunds? What are the main trade policies currently pursued by the EU?Why are different trade policies being pursued with different groups of countries? DEVE - Committee on Development “Ending poverty and ensuring sustainability are the defining challenges of our time. En-ergy is central to both of them.” Jim Yong Kim, World Bank Group PresidentFollowing on from the creation of the SE4All (Sustainable Energy For All) initiative, what action should the EU now take to deliver sustainable energy for all?”
Introduction and Background
“Energy is the golden thread that connects economic growth, increased social equity and an environment that allows the world to thrive.” - UN Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon
In 2014, 1.3 billion people1-approximatelyafifthoftheworld’spopulation-haveabso-lutely no access to electricity to light homes, conduct business, allow children to study after dark, enable water to be pumped for crops, or allow for food and medicine refrig-eration. A further 40% of the global population1 relies on wood, coal, charcoal or animal waste to cook their food, which results in over 4 million premature deaths and contrib-utes to household air pollution every year2. This is almost double the total number of HIV/AIDS and malaria amounts combined. 95% of the people without access to modern energy services live either in sub-Saharan Africa or developing Asia, 84% of which in rural areas1.
1 http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/media/weowebsite/factsheets/WEO2013_Factsheets.pdf2 http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs292/en/
by Joao Moreira (PT)
27
In September 2011, UN Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon launched the Sustainable En-ergy for All initiative1, sharing his vision2 on how governments, business and civil society can make sustainable energy for all a reality by 2030. It encompasses three interlinked objectives3 to be achieved: doubling the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency; doublingtheshareofrenewableenergyintheglobalenergymixandensuringuniversalaccess to modern energy services. Providing this access and eradicating energy pover-ty is central to achieving the internationally-embraced Millennium Development Goals4. For this reason, governments around the world have pledged their support to the initia-tive and the UN General Assembly has declared 2014-2024 the “Decade of Sustainable Energy for All”5. Key Questions
Why do 1.3 billion people still lack access to electricity worldwide?How might the lack of clean cooking facilities be solved in the short term? How might the lack of electricity be solved in the short/long term?How can we ensure providing electricity to millions of more people will not harm the environment further? Links
Defining and measuring energy access and energy poverty:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTT4TRvRGNE
21st Century - Togo: Lighting Up the Land (a country with barely any electricity):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXtLKjukc_4
OFID (OPEC Fund for International Development) on Energy Poverty:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYWsvkJFh60
1 http://www.se4all.org/2 http://www.se4all.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/SG_Sustainable_Energy_for_All_vision_final_clean.pdf3 http://www.se4all.org/our-vision/our-objectives/4 http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/goals/gti.htm5 http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/ga11333.doc.htm
28
UNEPGoodwillAmbassadorGiseleBundchenexperiencesenergypovertyinAfrica:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA97jZkW8oc
What is the UN Sustainable Energy for All initiative?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIZMyM64MsY
EU Sustainable Energy for All Summit, Brussels 2012:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yl1fau3QIzA
29
Key Conflicts
Even though providing universal access to modern and sustainable energy is a big chal-lenge, it is achievable and many steps have been taken in the right direction already. China has provided hundreds of millions of people in rural areas with electricity and is expectedtoachieveuniversalcoverageby2015.Vietnamhasincreasedtheproportionof its population with electricity from less than 5% to 98% in the last 35 years and Bra-zil’s“LightforAll”programextendselectricitytomarginalandruralareas1.
Most likely, universal energy access by 2030 can be achieved with less than $50 billion per year2, which represents merely 3% of the total projected global energy investment during the same time3. This means that an additional $34 billion is required every year, plusthealreadyexistinginvestmentintheNewPoliciesScenarioofabout$14billionper year - which would represent an increase of about 3.4 times3 . In total, the additional investment required to achieve universal access to electricity is estimated to be around $640 billion between 2010 and 20303, through a combination of on-grid, mini-grid and isolated off-grid solutions. The main implications of achieving modern energy access for all are a 2.5% increase in globalelectricitygeneration,with45%beingexpectedtobegeneratedbytheexten-sion to national grids (60% of which through fossil fuels) and the additional 55% through mini-grid and off-grid solutions (90% of which provided by renewables), with an increase of only 0.7% in CO2 emissions by 2030. Health-wise, 1.5 million lives could potentially be savedthroughtheconsequentadoptionofcleancookingfacilitiesthatareexpectedtoprevent the majority of premature deaths attributable to indoor air pollution4. One of the core problems, therefore, is financing the SE4All, which will not happen in the absence of strong governance and regulatory reforms. The fundamental sources of funding are summarised under three main categories: multilateral and bilateral develop-ment sources, developing country government sources and private sector sources. . All of these sources, having to adapt to the technical and social characteristics of the solu-tions for each requirement (on-grid, mini-grid and off-grid), will have to undergo a signi-
1 http://www.se4all.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/EnergyAccess.pdf2 http://www.se4all.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/accessinfo.jpg3 http://www.iea.org/media/weowebsite/energydevelopment/weo2011_energy_for_all.pdf (pages 3-22)4 http://www.iea.org/media/weowebsite/energydevelopment/weo2011_energy_for_all.pdf (pages 26-28)
30
ficant increase in financing, with a breakthrough still required in developing commercial-ly-viable business models for providing modern energy services to the rural poor on a significant scale. There are more problems to consider though, such as global energy demand growing up to 33% from 2010 to 20351 and the belief by some that bringing people out of en-ergy poverty through renewable energies2exaccerbatespovertyevenfurther3, so that developing countries currently lead the way in renewable energy investment4. Furthermore, although aid to developing countries is reaching an all-time high5, there have been many cases in which the money/food/medicine has been lost/diverted/mis-used, which endangers people in need even further, bringing up many worries under the umbrella of corruption6,7.
The EU, as the world leader in development aid donation, has already pledged its full support to the initiative and has been taking crucial steps to meet its ends8. Together, the Union and its Member States provide more than half of official development assis-tance (ODA) globally9. Key Questions
Howshouldsuccessfulexamplesbetakenandappliedinotherareasoftheworld?Whyis the solution not universal?
1 http://www.se4all.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/rebig.jpg2 http://unearthnews.org/2013/05/03/barriers-to-renewable-energy-in-developing-countries/3 http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/bj-rn-lomborg-says-that-the-prevailing-solution-to-global-warming-is-hurting-the-poor-more-than-the-problem-is4 http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Renewable-Energy/Developing-Countries-Lead-the-Way-in-Renew-able-Energy-Investment.html5 http://www.oecd.org/investment/stats/6 http://www.ibtimes.com/international-aid-money-disappeared-diverted-or-squandered-somalia-re-port-7011447 http://www.ibtimes.com/international-aid-money-disappeared-diverted-or-squandered-somalia-re-port-7011448 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/energy/sustainable/index_en.htm9 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/financing_for_development/index_en.htm
31
If such a little percentage (3%) of the world’s yearly investment in energy is needed to achieve universal electricity access, why should financing not be directed to that pur-pose?What are the actual barriers for financing such a crucial initiative? What is stopping pub-lic and private entities to do so?Which are the best solutions to tackle the electricity shortage problem, especially in ru-ral areas? On-grid, mini-grid or off-grid solutions?Should developing countries also be entitled to bolster their development through non-renewable energy sources like developed countries have done? Or should they seek a greener, sustainable path? How should the diversion or misuse of developmental aid be prevented? Links - World Energy Congress 2013 Speeches: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0wwEKSXTCE- ICCGOV (International Centre for Climate Governance) on Financing Energy Ac-cess: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W3WZdCDfyg- SANKALP Summit 2014 - Financing Innovative Approaches for Access to Clean Energy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0whPWnheUu0- World Energy Outlook 2013 Factsheet - International Energy Agency (IEA): http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/media/weowebsite/factsheets/WEO2013_Factsheets.pdf- Energy for All - Financing access for the poor - International Energy Agency (IEA), 2011: http://www.iea.org/media/weowebsite/energydevelopment/weo2011_energy_for_all.pdf- TEDxTalks-JustinHall-Tipping:Freeingenergyfromthegrid: https://www.ted.com/talks/justin_hall_tipping_freeing_energy_from_the_grid#t-123451
32
Stakeholders
1.3 billion citizens lack access to electricity and about 2.8 billion lack clean cooking conditions. 95% of citizens without access to modern energy services live either in sub-Saharan Africa (58% of its population) or developing Asia (19% of its population), 84% of which in rural areas;
The Sustainable Energy for All initiative was launched by UN Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon and is and initative of the United Nations and the World Bank, through its President, Jim Yong Kim. The European Commission supports the global SE4All initia-tive which is fully consistent with the focal area of the EU’s Agenda for Change to pro-vide access to secure, affordable, clean and sustainable energy services. Two leading figures from the worlds of business and public service, Charles Holliday, Chairman of Bank of America, and Kandeh Yumkella, Chair of UN-Energy and Director-General of the UN Industrial Development Organisation, co-chair the Secretary-General’s High-level Group1;
The main sources of financing for the SE4All initiative are multilateral and bilateral development sources, developing country government sources, and private sector sources2; The European Union and its Member States are also very important stakeholders, be-ing that both environment and energy are areas of shared competence3 according to ar-ticle 4 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)4 , which means both the EU and its member states may adopt legally binding acts in those areas. The European Union External Action Service (EEAS)5 is also a major player in this area. It serves as the EU’s diplomatic arm and manages its foreign relations and policies, includ-ing security, human rights, crisis response and development, working very closely with the European Commission and the United Nations6.
1 http://www.un.org/wcm/content/site/sustainableenergyforall/home/members2 http://www.iea.org/media/weowebsite/energydevelopment/weo2011_energy_for_all.pdf (pages 36-42)3 http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/competences/faq#q34 http://europa.eu/pol/pdf/qc3209190enc_002.pdf#page=525 http://eeas.europa.eu/what_we_do/index_en.htm6 http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un_geneva/eu_un_geneva/index_en.htm
33
Key Questions
Which sources should make for more investment and financing and why?How far should developed countries go to help achieve universal access to energy? And what should the role of developing country national governments in the whole situ-ation be? How should smooth cooperation between stakeholders be guaranteed?How should rural and remote areas be made more attractive for investors? What should the EU and its Members States do to better support developing countries and eradicate energy shortage? Links
- The World Bank and SE4All - Acting on the vision: http://www.worldbank.org/con-tent/dam/Worldbank/document/Energy/Sustainable_Energy_Brochure.pdf- Sustainable Energy for All - A Global Action Agenda: http://www.se4all.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/SEFA-Action-Agenda-Final.pdf- European Commission’s Commitment to Sustainable Energy for All: http://www.se4all.org/countrylevelactions/european-commissions-commitment-to-sustainable-ener-gy-for-all/- US Support for the Sustainable Energy for All Global Action Agenda: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/06/193500.htm- List of the Sustainable Energy for All official partners: http://www.se4all.org/about-us/partners/ Existing Measures and Current Legislation
In 2002, the EUlaunched the EU Energy Initiative for Poverty Eradication and Sustain-able Development (EUEI) as a joint commitment by Member States and the European Commission. The goal of the EUEI is to contribute to providing the access to energy necessary for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. It targets in par-ticular,butnotexclusively,thatofhalvingthenumberofpeopleinextremepovertybythe year 20151.
1 http://www.euei.net/
34
The initiative’s main milestones are the EUEI Partnership Dialogue Facility1, the ACP-EU Energy Facility2, the Africa-EU Energy Partnership3, the Energising Development initia-tive4 , the Global Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Fund (GEEREF)5 and the EU-Africa Infrastructure Trust Fund6; Various global partnerships/programs that support the SE4All initiative are currently in place. Some of the most important include AHEAD Energy7, Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves8, Global Bioenergy Partnership9, Global Village Energy Partnership10 and Lighting Africa11. Another big program administered by the World Bank is the Energy Sector Management Assistance Program12, whose mission is to assist low- and middle-income countries to increase know-how and institutional capacity to achieve environ-mentally sustainable energy solutions for poverty reduction and economic growth. Key Questions
Are the initiatives/programs in place enough? Shouldfurthercommitmentsbeestablished?Towhatextentisthisauniversalproblem?Howshouldweensuretheempowermentoflocalpeoplewhileprovidingexternalhelp?On which level of authority should further legislation and regulation be established? Links
- EU and SE4All: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/energy/sustainable/index_en.htm
1 http://www.euei-pdf.org/2 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/where/acp/regional-cooperation/energy/index_en.htm3 http://www.africa-eu-partnership.org/4 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-372_en.htm5 http://geeref.com/6 http://www.eu-africa-infrastructure-tf.net/7 http://www.aheadenergy.org/index.html8 http://www.cleancookstoves.org/the-alliance/9 http://www.globalbioenergy.org/10 http://www.gvepinternational.org/11 http://lightingafrica.org/about-us/12 https://www.esmap.org/
35
- EU Policy on Energy and Development. Support to SE4All: http://www.nepad.org/sites/default/files/130425%20EU%20SE4ALL.pdf- The EU Energy actions on the energy sector: http://www.ecreee.org/sites/default/files/event-att/eu_energy_actions_in_the_energy_sector-_focus_on_west_africa_0.pdf- EU contribution to the SE4All in Africa: http://www.ecreee.org/sites/default/files/event-att/eu_nicolaslambert.pdf- EU interactive map on Energising Development: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/energising-development-map/- Funding Institutions for Energy Investment in Africa: http://www.laurea.fi/en/con-nect/materials/Documents/Energy%20funding%20institutions%20in%20Africa.pdf- Motivational Sustainable Energy for All Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh5KzBQBGcE ECON - Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs ”Dealing with the debt: Five years after harsh austerity measures were first implement-ed across Europe, calls have been made by Francois Hollande and Matteo Renzi to reconsider the terms of the Fiscal Stability Treaty. Should the EU revisit these terms with a view to a greater emphasis on stimulus and less on austerity?” Introduction and Background Since the financial crisis of 2009, a number of economic and fiscal policies have been put in place in order to limit public deficits and European debt, as well as allow econom-ic recovery in the EU. One such tool is the Fiscal Stability Treaty1, or the Fiscal Compact, whichwasimplementedacross25MemberStatesin2013,tobuildonalreadyexistingmeasures introduced in the Maastricht Treaty and the Stability and Growth Pact. Indeed, much progress has been made in recent times. Both Ireland and Portugal have successfullyexitedtheirbailoutprogrammesimplementedin2010and2011respective-ly. At the same time however, economic growth in the EU and in particular in the Euro-
1 http://www.civitas.org.uk/eufacts/download/TR7.The%20Fiscal%20Stabilty%20Treaty.pdf
by Izaoura Mantsai (GR)
36
zone remains slow. In the first quarter of 2014 the real GDP of the Union grew, but by just 0.2%1. During that same time, Euro zone debt has increased with only two of the Eu-rozonecountries,GermanyandLuxembourg,seeingadecreaseintheirdebt2.
Hardship amongst European citizens during the downturn has been widespread and deeply felt, with many citizen groups taking to the streets to illustrate their dissatisfac-tion with measures imposed. The discomfort and frustration shown by a considerable proportionofcitizensbothonthestreetsaswellasattheballotboxesintherecentMay2014 elections speak with one voice and communicate that austerity measures imposed on their economies and countries are not working and that they have had enough. Similar appeals have been made by a number of high profile politicians, including Fran-coisHollandeandMatteoRenzi,whohavebothcalledforincreasedflexibilityaroundstrict budget and deficit rules as imposed by the Fiscal Stability Treaty. In particular, the 3%ExcessiveDeficitProcedure3 is brought into question with claims that such margins limit the potential for economic growth.
Key Questions
What should a common European response be to such calls?Should terms of the Fiscal Compact be reconsidered?How should the EU deal with public displays of dissatisfaction?How should governments interact with the frustration of their peoples’ in a bid to justify fiscal policy?
Links
- http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/michael-boskin-sees-three-possible-paths-for-the-european-union--with-the-most-likely-also-the-least-helpful
1 https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/art1_mb201406en_pp101-114en.pdf (See page 4)2 http://www.euractiv.com/sections/euro-finance/eurozones-debt-rises-first-quarter-set-peak-year-3036373 http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/economic_governance/sgp/corrective_arm/index_en.htm
37
- AnarticlefromtheEconomistshowingthatwhiletheIrishexitfromtheEU/IMFBailout programme came on time a degree of real economic growth was still not so apparent. http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/07/irish-bail-out-pro-gramme - NewsarticleonPortugal’sexitfrominternationalbailoutprogramme.http://rt.com/news/159624-portugal-debt-bailout-euro/ RT - Anexcellentsummaryofthestimulusausteritydebatehttp://www.economist.com/news/schools-brief/21586802-fourth-our-series-articles-financial-crisis-looks-surge-pub-lic - A project-Syndicate opinion piece presents the various options open to Europe as we try to move forward http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/robert-skidelsky-takes-germany-to-task-over-its-refusal-to-address-its-massive-current-account-surplus Key Conflict
On one side of this debate is the opinion held by the European Commission and current EU fiscal legislation; that growth is a slow process and that the way to real economic growth is through perseverance with current regulatory measures in place, commonly referred to as the continuation of austerity. These policies and beliefs stem largely from pastexperienceofeconomicfailureanditisbasedonthisexperiencethatpoliciesoffiscal control and regulation are encouraged. Austerity programmes usually entail the risingoftaxesandreducedgovernmentspending,particularlyinpublicsector,andaimto reinstate the financial stability of states whilst fostering confidence of consumers and investors.
Whileausteritymeasuresseemtobemostnecessarywhenbudgetdeficitsreachex-treme levels, the instrument still remains a topic of debate among economists. Most prominently, Nobel Prize laureate Paul Krugman has published open critique towards austerity programmes across the EU, claiming that: “All around Europe’s periphery, from Spain to Latvia, austerity policies have produced Depression-level slumps and Depres-sion-level unemployment; the confidence fairy is nowhere to be seen […]”1.
1 http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100153583/why-the-new-york-timess-paul-krugman-is-clue-less-about-the-european-economic-crisis/
38
Another element of the debate with broader consensus is the assumption that austerity leads to a short-term growth of debt to GDP ratio1 ; which is one of the most commonly used indicators for budget deficits. The controversy lies in the uncertainty what hap-pensafterthefirstfivetosixyearsofcontinuedausteritymeasures;whetherthedesiredincrease of trust and private investment will materialise or whether an overly restrained market will lead to further collapse.
Stimulus is commonly seen as the contrary policy instrument and refers to the sum of all monetarypoliciesthatentailastimulatingincreaseingovernmentspending,lowertaxesand public investment. The economic school of thought of Keynesians suggests that, although stimulus increases public debt, it creates even more economic growth, hence compensating the new deficit.
In terms of the Fiscal Stability Treaty itself as previously stated there have been calls to renderitstermsmoreflexibletoencourageeconomicgrowth.AfurtherconflictariseswhenitisconsideredthatsomepartiesclaimthatenoughflexibilityintheTreatyisal-readypresenttoallowforroomforslowerrecoveringeconomiestoextendtheirperiodof economic regain. Key Questions
Should the EU continue on its chosen economic path? Should there be room for change in the policies as they stand today? Is something more required? Should new rules be implemented in addition to current legislation?Whilesomepartiescallforincreasedflexibilityandotherssaysuchflexibilityisalreadyinexistence,howshouldtheEUresolvetheissuepoliticallyaswellaseconomically?
Links
- Why Austerity Works and Stimulus Doesn’t http://www.bloombergview.com/ar-ticles/2013-01-07/why-austerity-works-and-fiscal-stimulus-doesn-t
1 http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/the-imf-on-the-austerity-trap/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
39
- Financial Times article on the recent calls by Matteo Renzi http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/d2bb79a8-f7cc-11e3-baf5-00144feabdc0.html#axzz38HBjWo66- AFinancialTimesarticlewhichusesRenziasasymbolofflexibilityandAngelaMerkel, the German Chancellor, as a symbol of continuation with current measures. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/342ef1a6-f7b9-11e3-b2cf-00144feabdc0.html#axzz38HBjWo66 http://www.social-europe.eu/2014/07/matteo-renzi/- AnIrishTimesarticleontherecentdebateonflexibility.http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/what-is-the-debate-on-eu-debt-flexibility-about-1.1853102 - An austerity-supporting article http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2013-01-07/why-austerity-works-and-fiscal-stimulus-doesn-t - A stimulus-supporting article from the Gaurdian http://www.theguardian.com/busi-ness/economics-blog/2013/jul/01/stimulus-austerity-global-economic-recovery - A Krugman-critic reports a statement for the Telegraph that US-economists are ill-informed about the European economy http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardin-er/100153583/why-the-new-york-timess-paul-krugman-is-clueless-about-the-european-economic-crisis/ - A number of Euractiv articles following recent turns of events between leaders in relationtothecallsforfurtherflexibilityofTreatytermshttp://www.euractiv.com/sections/euro-finance/german-leaders-emphasise-unity-over-stability-pact-course-302946http://www.euractiv.com/sections/euro-finance/socialist-leaders-concerted-push-relax-eu-budgetary-constraints-303028http://www.euractiv.com/sections/euro-finance/italy-and-germany-lost-translation-over-budget-flexibility-303048 Stakeholders
While all citizens and Member States are stakeholders in this topic, those arguably most effected are countries facing the harshest of austerity measures, such as Spain, Portu-gal, Italy, Cyprus, Greece and Latvia.
The European Central Bank (ECB), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the European Commission (EC), and investors are also important key actors as financers and also as regulators. The Economic and Monetary Union is run and coordinated mostly by ECB
40
and the EC. The ECB’s Governing Council has to fulfill its mandate of maintaining price stability by choosing a one-size-fits-all monetary policy for Eurozone countries that are each in very different economic cycles, that have different economic fundamentals and whose fiscal policies are apparently similar (austerity is the key word), but in their effects substantially different. The European Commission monitors performance and compliance with the Fiscal Stabil-ity Treaty and the Stability and Growth Pact, and makes assessments and recommenda-tions to the Council on decisions to be taken. In this way the EC takes care of the politi-cal end of things while the ECB is focused on the monetary end.
There is widespread agreement that new strategies and policies will be required to stim-ulate economic growth in order to stabilize and advance the socio-economic develop-ment in the EU. How this economic growth should come about is the core of this topic. Links
- http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/monetarypolicy2011en.pdf- http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/10/12/imf-austerity-is-much-worse-for-the-economy-than-we-thought/- http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/143478.pdf Existing measures and Current Legislation
National Governments have taken measures to tackle the crisis, cut public spending and continue to try and balance their budgets. In most cases, restrictive fiscal measures, includingsubstantialexpenditurecuts,areestablishedinordertotacklebudgetdeficits.Links provided will show different approaches for various counties.
The Fiscal Stability Treaty is the core guideline of the current EU attempt to strengthen fiscal discipline through budget rules. It primarily focuses on how the Eurozone is gov-erned, as well as coordinates the economic policies of the EU.
41
It repeats and reinforces some of the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact, as well as introducesanumberofnewregulations.AnexampleofsucharuleisthatMemberStates are required to include in national law a balanced budget rule with a lower limit of a structural deficit of 0.5% GDP and aims to prevent another Eurozone crisis from arising again.
AnotheragainisExcessiveDeficitProcedurewhichaimstoavoidexcessivegovernmentdebt. The rule states that government debt should not go any lower than 3% of the na-tional GDP. Cases of infringement will be met with restrictions and ultimately sanctions. The impact of inflation on GDP and as a consequence, the percentage of government debt in relation to GDP is important. If a country’s GDP increases due to inflation, the 3% deficit of GDP which a government is allowed to reach under the Treaty suddenly decreasessothattheexcessivedeficitofacountrymayfallevenwithoutgovernmentschanging any particular spending. This makes the debt appear smaller despite the fact that the debt still remains. Key Questions
How should the EU best tackle the current debt crisis?Which measures should the Eurozone undertake in the coming months and years to improve the economic outlook of the EU? Links- A 2012 report on austerity measures in different Member States http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10162176- A positive article on austerity measures across Europe http://www.debatingeu-rope.eu/2013/10/10/have-austerity-measures-finally-started-working/#.U8xJ4vmSyOU- An overview provided by Citizens’ Information Ireland regarding the Fiscal Stability Treaty http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/european_govern-ment/euro_area/fiscal_stability_treaty.html
42
EMPL - Committee on Employment and Social Affairs ”With youth unemployment averaging a rate of almost 23% across Member States and schemes such as the Youth Guarantee Scheme and still not being widely or successfully implemented on national level, how should the EU work with Member States to encour-age increased use of these projects and improve the quality of proposed schemes?” Introduction and Background Over the past few years the youth unemployment rate among EU Member States has shown an alarming upwards trend (see graph1), now being at an average of 22.20%. The EU has therefore established different plans such as the Youth Guarantee Scheme2 or the Youth Employment Initiative3 in order to strengthen the position of the young workers on the labour market.
The main goal of the Youth Guarantee Scheme is to ensure all young Europeans under 25 years of age obtain a concrete offer in the form of a job, apprenticeship or contin-ued education within four months of leaving their formal education or becoming unem-ployed.
While there are a few Member States such as Finland4, which has roughly 83% of its young job-seekers being offered an opportunity within 3 months of finalising their edu-cation, youth unemployment rates have reached critical numbers in countries like Spain or Greece. How should the EU ensure balance of success among its Member States relating to the implementation of such actions? And how should ‘best practice sharing’ between governments and the Mutual Learning Programme be made more efficient?
1 Graph on EU Youth Unemployment: A visualisation of Youth Unemployment rates fort he past 5 years. http://ycharts.com/indicators/europe_youth_unemployment_rate_lfs2 Youth Guarantee Scheme: Member States specific measures to tackle Youth Unemployment. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=10793 Youth Employment Initiative: A budget of 6 billion Euros to support programmes against Youth Unemploy-ment. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=18294 Finland, a success story: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/youth/Source/IG_Coop/YP_Finland_en.pdf
by Nicole Goetz (CH)
43
Key Questions
What is the basic concept behind the Youth Guarantee Scheme, and is this currently be-ing achieved? Do different governmental forms and individual legislations within Member States affect the success of said schemes? If so, how should the European institutions work in col-laboration with Member States to ensure success in each Member State? Links - Youth Emplyoment: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1036- EurActive Article on struggling Youth Guarantee: http://www.euractiv.com/sections/social-europe-jobs/merkel-admits-eus-youth-unemployment-initiative-has-been-fail-ure-303158- Policy Paper on Youth Employment: http://www.youthforum.org/as-sets/2014/06/0166-13_PP_Employment_Final1.pdf- Youth Unemployment Visualisation: http://www.weforum.org/community/global-agenda-councils/youth-unemployment-visualization-2013 Key Conflicts
While plans to tackle the unstable situation concerning youth employment have been made, reality does not reflect the ambitious goals that have been set. German chancel-lor Angela Merkel states that “youth unemployment is ‘clearly’ one of the areas that needs to work better in the EU”1. According to her, the European Guarantee Scheme has so far not proven to ensure success and should definitely be among the Commission’s key priorities for the present and future. Whileatfirstitmightseemexpensiveandcumbroustoestablishallthesemeasurestosupport the youth, the acclaimed benefits outweigh the costs by far: a less active ap-proach would lead to a badly established generation of workers and thus to a weaken-ing of the labour market in the long-run. Furthermore, young people out of the job mar-1 http://www.euractiv.com/sections/social-europe-jobs/merkel-admits-eus-youth-unemployment-initiative-has-been-failure-303158
44
ketand/oreducationalsystemswouldmeanalossofincomeintaxesandbenefitstothe EU economy.
While all EU Member States have planned and set up individual Youth Guarantee Schemes, one critical point is the lack of money that is invested into the programmes. While most of the funding comes from the European Social Fund1, 6 billion Euros from the Youth Employment Initiative2 were added to the budget for supporting current plans and measures. According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) the amount of invested money would have to be at least three times the current amount for a sustain-ableexecutionoftheprogrammes.
Key Questions
How should the EU ensure that funds for supporting Youth Employment programmes are best used in such initiatives? Whatexistingpointsoftheprogrammesshouldbemademoreefficient?Wherecangovernments learn from each other and what points need to be established separately? Links - The EU Youth Guarantee ‚a lost Generation’? http://www.fairobserver.com/region/europe/eu-youth-guarantee-lost-generation-69584/- Youth Employment Analisys: http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpops/ecbocp89.pdf
1 European Social Fund: 10 billion Euros per year to help secure jobs in Europe and improve job prospects. http://ec.europa.eu/esf/home.jsp2 Youth Employment Initiative: A budget of 6 billion Euros to support programmes against Youth Unemploy-ment. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=1829
45
Stakeholders
Each different party in this jigsaw has their own clear agenda: On the one hand there is the young generation of workers, struggling to gain ground on the European labour market. Many of them are untrained, unemployed and in financially difficult situations.
On the other hand are employers across the continent. In order to be able to compete with other economies and international powers, they are dependent on a well-trained youngergeneration,whichgraduallyreplacesmoreexperiencedworkerswhowillretire.At the same time, pensions and thus the living conditions of the steadily growing older generation are reliant on the efforts of the current workforce and present economy.
Furthermore, the European governments need to find a stable equilibrium between investments in the current market and the sustainability and support of their future work-force.
In order for a Youth Guarantee Scheme to be efficiently developed and implemented, strong cooperation between all key stakeholders is essential: Public authorities, youth support services, businesses, employers, etc. need to follow a common strategy to sup-port the young generation’s establishment within the working world.
How should the European Commission support the formation of a common vision be-tween the different parties within a member state? Where can common interests be-tween the affected groups be found? What are the individual needs and which condi-tions lead to conflicts and which ones lead to synergies?
The general goal of all parties is the same: increasing youth employment and thus an endorsement of the young generation, As well as stability in economic growth with re-sulting benefits for the country as a whole.
Key Questions
What interventions and actions by the EU are necessary in order to improve the coop-eration between the different stakeholders?What are areas for conflict between each of these groups?
46
Links - Ban Ki-Moon on Youth Employment: http://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/news-room/news/WCMS_247414/lang--en/index.htm- ILO article on Temporary Jobs: http://www.ilo.org/global/research/global-reports/global-employment-trends/youth/2012/WCMS_180991/lang--en/index.htm- OECD Jobs for Youth: http://www.oecd.org/els/emp/46717876.pdf- Pensioners rely on Youth for income: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti-cle-2567135/One-five-pensioners-rely-children-help-make-ends-meet-Report-highlights-crisis-facing-millions-workers-struggling-save-enough.html Existing measures and Current Legislation
Due to the gravity of this issue, the European Union has already taken steps in order to tackle the worrying youth unemployment rates. Amongst those actions is the enhance-ment of communication1 between Member States in order to accelerate the process of forming a national Youth Guarantee Scheme. Furthermore, the Youth Employment Initia-tive was implemented to financially support youth employment plans, especially in re-gions with an unemployment rate higher than 25%. The Youth Employment Package2 is a set of proposed measures by the EU to tackle alarminglevelsofYouthunemployment.Thisincludes,forexample,theproposalforaYouth Guarantee Scheme, recommendations for stronger cooperation among the stake-holders, early interventions by supporting organisations and full usage of funds and financial aids that are already available. Through the Youth on the Move3 programme, the quality and employability of the current young generation shall be improved and kept on a high level. By supporting education andtrainings,encouragingpan-Europeanexchangeandsimplifyingthetransitionfrom
1 European Employment Strategy Mutual Learning Programme: encourage mutual learning between EU Mem-ber States in order to assist progress. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=10472 Youth Employment Package: Measures to help Member States tackle Youth Unemployment. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=1036&newsId=1731&furtherNews=yes3 Youth on the Move: policy initiatives on education and employment for young people in Europe. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=950&langId=en
47
training to work, the young generation gets more attractive for the labour market and becomes better integrated. As a part of the Youth on the Move, ‘Your first EURES job’ is a scheme that simplifies job mobility, aiding young Europeans to find work or a trainee-ship within a Member State other than their own. It however not only assists young em-ployees abroad, but also financially supports employers who actively train and recruit freshly educated workers and thus facilitate the reduction of youth unemployment rates within the EU. Key Questions
Howshouldalreadyexistingmeasuresbeimprovedandenhanced?AretherekeyareasthatarenotyetcoveredbyexistingEUactions?How should the utilisation of these initiatives be improved?How should the EU interact with Member State specific projects?
Links - EU Measures to tackle Youth Unemployment: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-re-lease_MEMO-14-466_en.htm- PDF EU Measures: http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=11578&langId=en- Strategies launched in Spain: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2013/03/ar-ticles/es1303011i.htm- Your first EURES Job: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=993- Your first EURES Job: http://www.yourfirsteuresjob.eu/en/- Youth Opportunities Initiative: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=1006- European Economic and Social Committee on Youth Opportunities: http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.soc-opinions.21992- Guide to the Youth Opportunities Initiative: http://www.eubusiness.com/topics/em-ployment/youth-1- Youth Gurantee can boost Eurozone recovery: http://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_185166/lang--en/index.htm - Challenges to the Youth Guarantee’s success: http://www.etui.org/Publications2/Background-analysis/Youth-Guarantees-and-recent-developments-on-measures-against-youth-unemployment-a-mapping-exercise
48
ENVI I - Committee on Enviroment, Public Health and Food Safety I
”As political unrest between Russia and Ukraine persists and the EU’s dependence on
Russia for natural gas imports is called into question, fracking is once more brought
to the fore as an alternative energy source to allow the EU increased control over its
energy supply. Given that some Member States already use or intend to use shale gas
exploitation in the near future, what should the EU common approach to this sugges-
tion be?”
Introduction and Background
Energy security is one of the main pillars of the European Commission’s energy poli-
cies. Europe has faced concerns about energy security for a long time, but it is now
more than ever, that the situation between Ukraine and Russia has highlighted the EU’s
dependence on Russia for natural gas. Considering that about half of Europe’s Russian
gas imports go through Ukraine1, which is a channel that is now unsure and potentially
even threatened to be cut off due to the Russia-Ukraine crisis, it is clear that Europe may
needtostartincreasingindependenceofitsenergymix.
The European Commission states, “shale gas appears to be the unconventional hydro-carbonwiththegreatestpotentialfordevelopmentinEurope,withexplorationactivitiesunderway”2, yet acknowledging the environmental impacts and risks related to the de-velopment of shale gas drilling techniques3. Hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, is a process of drilling and high pressure fluid injection into the ground in order to frac-
1 http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/mar/26/will-shale-gas-make-europe-less-dependent-on-rus-sian-gas2 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:a46647dd-843b-11e3-9b7d-01aa75ed71a1.0001.01/DOC_1&format=PDF3 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:a46647dd-843b-11e3-9b7d-01aa75ed71a1.0001.01/DOC_1&format=PDF
by Annmarie Kiiskinen (FI)
49
ture shale rocks to release natural gas inside. It is still a developing idea in Europe but in the US it has resulted in positive outcomes and the benefits of fracking have so far out-weighed any drawbacks due to the creation of new jobs and economic impact1. How-ever, a few serious mishaps related to fracking have been reported out of thousands of wells. Therefore the approach towards fracking in Europe varies largely: whereas in some countries such as France and Bulgaria it has been prohibited by national authori-ties, other countries such as Germany have started to lean towards allowing the mining companies to keep proceeding with it. This has woken up environmental activists all around Europe due to relatively big environmental impacts caused by the process. Key Questions Should the EU lean towards common interest of the member states rather than individu-al choice?Regardless the direction taken, how should the EU ensure the stability of energy secu-rity? Links - Video:“FrackingExplained:OpportunityorDanger?”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uti2niW2BRA - BBC: “What is Fracking and Why Is It Controversial?” http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-14432401 - EuropeanCommission:“ImpactAssessment:Explorationandproductionofhy-drocarbons (such as shale gas) using high volume hydraulic fracturing in the EU”. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:a46647dd-843b-11e3-9b7d-01aa75e-d71a1.0001.01/DOC_1&format=PDF
1 http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2014/05/21/china-russia-gas-deal-should-unleash-a-euro-fracking-revolution/
50
Key Conflicts
The central conflict to the issue of fracking is economic gain pitched against potential environmental risks and public health issues that increased fracking could potentially cause. The impact of fracking affects the quality of groundwater used in households nearsitesofgasexploitation.Duringtheprocessofshalefracturing,toxicchemicalsand methane gas leak into the groundwater which is then used as drinking water for lo-cal cities and towns1. Though 30-50% of the fracturing fluid is recovered, a major part of intoxicatedfluidremainsintheground. Furthermore, the evaporation and the release of harmful VOC’s (volatile organic com-pounds) into the atmosphere may cause severe environmental problems such as acid rain.Althoughfrackingproducesapproximately300,000barrelsofnaturalgasinaday,it equally causes a number of environmental, safety and health hazards2. On the other hand, the success of shale gas in US has resulted in lower energy prices, improved security of supply, increased employment and a more competitive manufactur-ing base and foreign investment. The same success level cannot yet be seen in other regions of the world but many parts, including Europe, have the potential of benefitting fromdevelopingshalegasresources.Thecarbondioxideemissionscausedbyfrack-ing are slightly larger than in the production of natural gases compared to the amount of energy produced3. However, the emission caused by fracking is smaller than in the pro-duction of coal4. In the United States emissions have decreased with the replacement of coal with shale gas5. Showing a green light to fracking would create dozens of jobs in every shale gas play, contributing to country’s own economy. Looking for alternative energy sources could also help to boost the innovation on European level and attempt to turn into greener energy alternatives on a larger scale. Another key conflict springs from the differing priorities on national and European level: shale gas sources are spread across Member State borders, making it impossible to
1 http://www.dangersoffracking.com/2 http://www.dangersoffracking.com/3 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-14432401 4 http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2012/05/americas-falling-carbon-dioxide-emissions5 http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2012/05/americas-falling-carbon-dioxide-emissions
51
keep one country’s shale gas development and its effects from neighboring countries1. Furthermore, a dilemma persists between fracking companies and the national gov-ernments: the impact of shale gas has a capacity of helping individual Member States become independent on gas imports from the outside, though there is no consensus across Europe on shale gas development. Government attitudes vary largely as well as public opinion in individual countries, causing pressure on governments to take any measures for or against shale gas development . Looking at the international dimen-sion, the Member States vary greatly in their response on the cooperation with Russia2, but it remains that in order to maintain good EU- Russia relations a unified approach from the Union’s part is desirable. The EU has to consider Russia as a factor in decision-making. If the EU moves towards fracking development, Russia is losing one of its big tradeconduits.InthecurrentstateofRussia-EUrelationsmixedwiththesituationwithUkraine, all the international relations are already in a fragile state, needing to further negative tendencies3. While considering alternatives to fracking, there are some ideas to reduce the carbon footprint and find renewable energy sources that would not increase the problems of climate change. One of these options is propane stimulation, a technique focusing on stimulating the shale formations in order to free the gas or oil trapped inside. This hap-pensbyusingpropaneasafracturingfluidandtherefore,doesnotreleasetoxicstotheground waters. The technique is still under review but could provide a greener future to energy security in Europe4. Key Questions How should the EU secure environment and simultaneously be able to maintain energy supply to/within the EU?
1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:a46647dd-843b-11e3-9b7d-01aa75ed71a1.0001.01/DOC_1&format=PDF2 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:a46647dd-843b-11e3-9b7d-01aa75ed71a1.0001.01/DOC_1&format=PDF3 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:a46647dd-843b-11e3-9b7d-01aa75ed71a1.0001.01/DOC_1&format=PDF4 http://www.ecorpstim.com/propane-stimulation/
52
What should the EU do to find out more about the risks and long-term effects of frack-ing, and how these factors can be considered in future actions? Links - The Guardian. “The Eco Audit: Will fracking make Europe less dependent on Rus-sian gas?” http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/mar/26/will-shale-gas-make-europe-less-dependent-on-russian-gas - National Geographic: “Green Fracking? 5 Technologies for Cleaner Shale Energy”. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2014/03/140319-5-technologies-for-greener-fracking/ - Economics of Energy: “Some Economic Aspects of Energy Security”. http://www.eforenergy.org/docpublicaciones/documentos-de-trabajo/WP092012.pdf
Stakeholders The European Commission – aiming to find an alternative to natural gases coming from Russia which are temporarily compromised due to the situation between Russia and Ukraine1.
Russian Federation – a major trade partner to the EU, importing gas to Europe and mak-ing up almost 20% of Europe’s gas supply. Russia sees Europe’s swift towards shale gas as a threat to its economy and trade partnership with Europe.
Environmental Organizations – organizations and parties such as European Greens2 advice against fracking, stating that it cannot be proven to be safe and the long-term ef-fects are unknown. Alarmed by the need of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, envi-ronmental organizations emphasize it would be more beneficial to focus on renewable energy options.
1 http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/865595.shtml2 http://europeangreens.eu/news/no-shale-gas-extraction-fracking-europe
53
National Governments – there is no consensus among European countries regarding fracking. Whereas some national governments support the idea, others are strongly against it: moreover, the opinion among citizens is also divided which puts governments in a very challenging position.
Links - Bloomberg. “Gazprom Biggest Loser as Shale Gas Upends World Markets”. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-21/gazprom-biggest-loser-as-shale-gas-upends-world-markets.html Key Questions What measures the EU should take in order to bring these stakeholders together and find a common ground on this issue?How should the EU interact with individual Member States in order to mitigate conflict of interest between different group views?How could the EU balance between its own need for indigenous energy sources and in the meanwhile stay in good relations with Russia?
Existing Measures and Current Legislation
Through the current initiative “Impact Assessment”1, the European Commission aims to ensurethatdevelopmentsinunconventionalfossilfuelexplorationandproductionarecarried out with efficiently protecting the environment and climate, under legal circum-stances that are agreed upon by all the parties involved2.
1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:a46647dd-843b-11e3-9b7d-01aa75ed71a1.0001.01/DOC_1&format=PDF2 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:a46647dd-843b-11e3-9b7d-01aa75ed71a1.0001.01/DOC_1&format=PDF
54
The Commission has laid out 4 options1 for the EU’s approach in the respective case, which are to be evaluated by Member States in order to clarify the EU legal framework so that the investments in shale gas developments in the EU could take place in safe settings.Also,astudyof“Impactsofshalegasandshaleoilextractionontheenviron-ment and on human health” has been ordered by the European Parliament, aiming to point out the gaps in the regulation of hydraulic fracturing and develop the regulations and recommend additional regulations if needed2. However, no long-term effects can be predicted yet. The EU has a great capacity of shale gas plays, though so far none of them has been brought into production due to the multiple factors that has to be taken into consideration before taking actions3. Links - The European Commission. “Energy and Environment: Environmental Aspects on Unconventional Fossil Fuels”. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/energy/un-conventional_en.htm
Key Questions
What alternative methods/forms of energy supply EU should pursue to prefer?How could EU motivate the Member States to take collective effort on the matter?
1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:a46647dd-843b-11e3-9b7d-01aa75ed71a1.0001.01/DOC_1&format=PDF2 http://europeangreens.eu/news/no-shale-gas-extraction-fracking-europe3 See the picture on p. 12. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:a46647dd-843b-11e3-9b7d-01aa75ed71a1.0001.01/DOC_1&format=PDF
55
ENVI II - Committee on Enviroment Public Health and Food Safety II ”With the recent European Council agreement for Member States to have the final say on Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) cultivation, the EU has taken a step towards a new era of GMO legislation. Given that many Members of the European Parliament are still doubtful about GMO cultivation, how should the EU move forward to prepare for consequences to future generations and bear the advantages to GMOs in mind?”
Introduction and Background
GMOs are organisms, such as plants and animals, whose genetic characteristics are artificially modified in order to give them a new property. This technique clearly bears significantbenefitstofoodstuffsincludingincreasedtolerancetoextremeweatherconditions and temperatures, increased resistance against pests and disease, and an increased food supply as a result of these factors. Furthermore, GMOs can be safely usedforbiomedicalresearch,pharmaceuticalsandexperiments.Withagrowingworldpopulation1 and a consequent growing demand for food, accessibility to nutritious food is of utmost importance and is something that will be continually and progressively de-mandedofproducersanddistributorsoverthenextyearsanddecades. However, concerns have been raised about the quality of GMOs, particularly about the potentialintroductionoftoxinstofood,contaminationbetweenGMOsandnon-GMcrops, nutritional changes to organisms in question, and a variety of environmental risks. On an EU level under current legislation a company can start GMO cultivation only after it has received authorisation2 through risk assessment. Since 2009 the European Commission has been assessing GMO legislation and mainly
1 Population Data Sheet 2013: Interactive Map of world population until 2050. http://www.prb.org/Publications/Datasheets/2013/2013-world-population-data-sheet.aspx2 GMO Authorisation Procedure http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/gmo/authorisation/index_en.htm
by Lorenz Stree (DE) and Dennis Patriarcheas (GR)
56
debating issues concerning traceability and labelling of products, as well as consumer choice. Recently the European Council agreed that Member States will have the final say on GMO cultivation. This allows them to ban or restrict companies on their territory based on their national circumstances without affecting or conflicting with the EU’s au-thorisation system.
Key Questions
What different GM crops are allowed in the EU and how are they used?How can we profit from GMOs? Links - Evaluation of GMO cultivation in the EU http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/gmo/evalu-ation/index_en.htm- Food Safety in the European Union - GMO Evaluation http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biotechnology/index_en.htm- BBC Documentary - Genetically Modified Foods (Video - Long) https://www.you-tube.com/watch?v=rug7RzdrIYQ- What are GMOs? (Video - Short) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvciTwAQ9rM - Review of the economic impacts of GMOs (Pages 1-5, 10-14) http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/publi/gmo/full_en.pdf- MonstantoDictionaryofAgriculture:explanationsoftechnicaltermshttp://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/glossary.aspx
Key Conflicts Current EU Legislation does not entitle Member States to fully take decisions on cultiva-tion on their territory1. For the time being they can only restrict or ban the cultivation of GMOs by adopting safeguard clauses where new serious risks to human or animal heal-
1 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-10-921_en.htm
57
th or environment are identified after the authorisation of a GMO. The debate about GMfoodthusgoesbeyondthequestionofharmGMcropsmaycauseandextendstoacomplexpoliticalissueofauthorisationandlegalrestrictions.GMcropsaretheintel-lectual property of their creators1, but the risk of contamination with non-GM crops could lead to situations where farmers are unintentionally breaking the law.
Due to the fact that long-term-studies on GMOs have not been concluded yet there is still no consensus about the harmfulness of GMOs although recent research suggests that negative effects are limited2. GMOs usually improve both plant fertility and the qual-ity of crop yielded. Leading biotech companies even go as far as clai¬ming that regard-ing the rapidly growing world population GMOs are essential for providing sufficient food supplies3. Genetic modification also offers the possibility of protecting plants from pests without application of pesticides. A specific type of GM corn for instance, is capable of produc-ingitsownpesticide,theso-calledBt-toxin,whichin¬stantlykillspestsandinsectstryingto feed from it. Biotech companies claim that when consumed by humans this pesticide quickly breaks down in the human body which is thus considered harmless for humans. GMbananascanevengaintheabilityofcontainingantibioticssotheycaneasilybeex-ported to third world countries4. Even though GMOs have been used since the 1970s some scientists and individuals claim that long-term consequences have not yet been fully discovered, leading some toconsiderthathealthrisks,althoughnotapparent,mayhypotheticallyexist.Therearesome indicators that consumption of GM food may affect severe allergies5. GM food looks the same, smells the same and tastes the same as conventionally pro-
1 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/biot.200700090/pdf Page 2 of 5, section 3 (Too detailed document, not expected to go through it all and not really important)2 http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/10/14/2000-reasons-why-gmos-are-safe-to-eat-and-environmen-tally-sustainable/ (Very opinionated)3 http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/522596/why-we-will-need-genetically-modified-foods/ (Again, too detailed, just to give an idea of the situation)4 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC438921/pdf/jcinvest00398-0079.pdf5 Both: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Pesticide_illnesses_and_GM_soya.php
58
produced food; it however contains an artificial genetic code that does not occur natu-rally. Once released into nature GMOs could spread onto other fields, a process that is impossibletomonitor.AchievingasafecoexistenceofGMandNon-GM-foodsisthere-fore one of the EU’s main goals1 when it comes to the introduction of GMOs. There is an institution,the“EuropeanCoexistenceBureau”,whichspecificallydealswiththisissue. Key Questions
How should decision-making regarding GMOs be balanced between Member States and the European Union as a single entity?What could be the consequence of the newly suggested decision-making system?Why have controversies grown over the risk assessment of the EFSA?In what way do GMOs impact our economy?
Links
- Seeds of Conflict http://discovermagazine.com/2013/april/16-seeds-of-conflict- UK scientist call for fewer EU restrictionshttp://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26554969- Review of the economic impacts of GMOs (Pages 35-37)http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/publi/gmo/full_en.pdf- Intellectual Property Rights of biotech companies (official): http://www.ip-watch. org/2011/03/30/us-farmers-sue-monsanto-over-gmo-patents-demand-right-to-conventio¬nal-crops/
Stakeholders
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the EU keystone for food risk assessment. De-spite being a body independent from EU institutions, EFSA is in close collaboration with
1 http://ecob.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
59
national authorities and other stakeholders, providing national authorities with risk as-sessments and consultations.
The European Commission as the legislative power of the EU dealing with the legal framework around GMOs. It discussed a proposal1 offering additional possibilities to Member States.
The European Parliament as the Institution proposing amendments to the legal frame-work and voting upon other amendments by the European Council.
National Governments/Member States requesting further possibilities to control GMO cultivations.
Consumers as the ones buying genetically modified food and companies as the pro-ducers and cultivators of GMOs. Consumers’ interests are mainly about price and quality while producers can only offer prices dependent from supply and demand.
International trade: GM food is cultivated and processed in other parts of the world and especially in the United States. The European Union cannot take its decisions on GMO cultivation without taking into account the global market. In this light it is important to note that third-worldcountriesaresomeofthemaindestinationsofGMOexports.
• Ontheproductionleveltherearetwodifferentgroupsofstakeholders.Ontheone hand, biotech companies, such as Monsanto, DuPont Pioneer and DowChemica have a strong interest in GMO cultivation and GMO research. On the other hand, farm-ers using GMO crops are dependent from all of the consequences, good and bad. Links
- European Food Safety Authority http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/panels/gmo.htm- Brief Description of the annual EFSA-NGOs meeting http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/events/event/121127.htm
1 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1038_en.htm
60
Existing Measures and current Legislation
Currently GM cultivation is not allowed, unless it has successfully completed the authori-sation process. Authorisation is carried out by respective national agencies and is final-ised by the European Food Safety Authority. Part of the EFSA’s control is to also monitor cultivation after their release. Since 2010, only two GM crops are being cultivated in the European Union (MON810 and Amflora). By summarising the results of its research, the EFSA regularly publishes documents1 which are intended to support and guide Member States on the safe use of GMOs.
Member States have limited possibilities, as they can only ban or restrict authorised GMO cultivation within their land. However, they have to justify their restriction or ban by adopting safeguard clauses where serious health, environmental issues are identified.
CommissionRegulationNo1830/2003expandedthelabellingrequirementsofGMOsand aimed at im¬proving the traceability of GMOs. Between the years 2001 and 2010, the EU has adjusted its legislative framework to these principles several times. The most recent publication of this kind was Recommendation 2010/01/EC2, which provides guidelinestoEUmemberstatestoensureasafecoexistenceofGMandNon-GMfood.Regulationsregardingimportsandexportshavebeenestablishedandaimtoensurebiodiversity and human health globally; they also transpose the Cartagena Protocol (a protocol for Bio-Safety) into EU law. Key Questions
What is the best legislative way to approach GMO cultivation?What are the current labelling obligations within the European Union?Which legal restrictions other than correct labelling do GMO farmers need to follow once their crops have been authorised?
1 http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2149.htm (Example document, not important at all)2 http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biotechnology/docs/new_recommendation_en.pdf
61
Links - New EU approach http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/gmo/legislation/future_rules_en.htm- Europa - Food Safety http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biotechnology/index_en.htm- Deliberate release of GMOs (official): http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/agri-culture/food/l28130_en.htm - Map, showing which countries have GMO food labelling laws (official): http://b-i.forbesimg. com/bethhoffman/files/2013/08/CFS-GE-Labeling-Map.jpg - EFSA guidelines & risk assessment (official): http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsa-journal/ pub/2150.htm
FEMM - Committee on Womens’ Rights and Gender Equality ”The May 2014 elections saw just a 2% increase in the number of women represented at the European Parliament. Despite this modest growth, gender disparity still remains a reality in both public and private sectors across the EU. Bearing in mind that gen-der quotas are already in place in a number of Member States and are currently under discussion in the European Commission, what strategies can the EU employ to achieve equality?”
Introduction and Background
Women make up more than half of the population of the European Union; still they are a minority at any governance level. After the European Elections on the 25th of May this year women take up 37 percent of the seats in the European Parliament, this is an in-crease of two percent compared to the last elections1. The development towards a more
1 http://www.results-elections2014.eu/en/gender-balance.html
by Sigrun Fagerfjall (SE)
62
equal European Parliament has slowed down compared to the elections in 2009, how-ever, in which the ratio of female MEPs increased by 4 percent. In all Member States the female employment rate is lower than the male one and women are over represented in lower paid sectors1. Although Member States have taken some great steps towards a more equal society, many claim that this development is not happening fast enough and that we have to take action in order to break “the glass ceiling”, preventing women from reaching deci-sion making positions, once and for all. In November 2013 the European Parliament votedtosetatargetforlargecompaniestohave40percentwomenintheirnon-exec-utive board positions by 20202. Gender quotas are not only becoming more common practise on a European level but also nationally in many Member States. France, Ger-many, Italy, Holland, Spain and other Member States already endorse quotas. But at the same time there are many critics, are quotas really an effective way to achieve gender balance and is it a fair system? Key Questions In a society where everyone seems to agree that women should be equal to men, why is this development not happening faster? What factors stand in the way? Is the representation of women in the European Parliament a reflection of the ratio of women in national politics in Member States? Why has the development towards gender balance in the European Parliament slowed down since 2009? Links - Statistics on gender equality in the European Parliament: http://www.results-elec-tions2014.eu/en/gender-balance.html
1 http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/themes/31_labour_market_participation_of_women.pdf2 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1118_en.htm
63
- More statistics and facts: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/publica-tions/2014/0001/P7_PUB(2014)0001_EN.pdf - Statistics on labour market participation among women: http://ec.europa.eu/eu-rope2020/pdf/themes/31_labour_market_participation_of_women.pdf- Analysis of the 2014 election results through the lens of gender: http://time-forequality.org/news/2014-european-elections-through-the-lens-of-gender/- European Commission on the quota instrument: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gen-der-equality/files/quota-working_paper_en.pdf
Key Conflicts
Although European gender equality initiatives, not least gender quotas, have become more widespread1 there are still many people opposing them. Some question why we need gender balance in the labour market and in decision making. The European Com-mission’s Network to Promote Women in Decision-making in Politics and the Economy2 has listed a few reasons why gender equality is beneficial for society. As a principal of democracy the composition of elected bodies in a democratic society should be repre-sentative of the population in order to ensure that their decisions have democratic legiti-macy.Accordingtothisprincipal,electedbodiesshouldbemadeupofapproximately50% women. The European Commission also refers to research that shows that a high-er representation of women in the labour market will contribute to economic growth, higher performance in companies and a better use of the resources put into European education since more than half of the people graduation from European Universities are women3.
Is the use of gender quotas the best way to achieve gender equality in the EU? Quota enthusiasts can list many positive aspects of gender quotas. They have proven to be the most effective measure in the short term to create gender balance in companies. And not only do these measures directly make sure that a higher ratio of women are1 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-first-cracks-in-the-glass-ceiling-eu-votes-to-impose-legal-quotas-for-women-in-the-boardroom-8952718.html 2 http://afaemme.org/european-commissions-network-promote-women-decision-making-politics-and-econo-my3 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/quota-working_paper_en.pdf
64
hired, they also have positive long term effects since women are more likely to hire women and act as role models for each other. Quotas break up elite circles that would otherwise have remained unchallenged1. But there are also cons to gender quotas. Quotas discriminate against individual men running against women for a position. Women who have been appointed to a position throughaquotamightalsobeunderminedandseenaslesscompetentforexample,aswas shown in an American study conducted by Jennifer Whelan and Robert Wood of Melbourne Business School. They found that women appointed to senior management in America with quotas were seen as “less qualified, less competent and less legitimate in their role” than their male colleagues2. Quotas may also contribute to a situation where women run against women for positions and men run against men, which could be unfair and lead to less cooperation between women. Finally, critics also claim that companies could see quotas as a “ceiling instead of a floor” which could stall progress in gender equality in the long run3. Another key conflict when it comes to gender equality initiatives on a European level is the ongoing discussion about whether these issues should be tackled solely on a national level instead. Right now it is up to each country to decide whether they want systems for gender quotas but if the new “Women on Boards” proposal that was already voted through in the European Parliament is adopted in the Council it will become EU legislation4. At the moment, some delegations on the Council still are in favour of non-binding EU advice or on national level decisions in the field5. Great Britain has been a key actor in this debate, not necessarily claiming that gender quotas is not a good mea-sure but stating that it should be up to each country to decide how to promote gender equality in their respective labour markets6.
1 http://www.newstatesman.com/business/2012/09/quotas-women-boards-all-pros-and-cons-one-place2 http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/03/economist-explains-14 3 http://www.newstatesman.com/business/2012/09/quotas-women-boards-all-pros-and-cons-one-place 4 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1118_en.htm5 http://register.consilium.europa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&f=ST%2016437%202013%20INIT 6 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-first-cracks-in-the-glass-ceiling-eu-votes-to-impose-legal-quotas-for-women-in-the-boardroom-8952718.html
65
Key Questions Are gender quotas an effective measure to increase gender equality?How should gender quotas be adapted to different situations and countries? Should decisions regarding gender equality measures be taken on a European level?In what ways should the EU promote gender equality in Member States without taking legislative action? Links
- Quotas: pros and cons: http://www.newstatesman.com/business/2012/09/quotas-women-boards-all-pros-and-cons-one-place- More positive and negative aspects of quotas: http://www.europeanpwn.net/files/quotas_pros_and_cons.pdf- A positive view on quotas: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/while-men-are-in-charge-gender-quotas-are-the-only-way-to-increase-the-number-of-women-in-boardrooms-9091582.html- The Economist on the issue of quotas: http://www.economist.com/blogs/econo-mist-explains/2014/03/economist-explains-14- More on the views of different countries: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-first-cracks-in-the-glass-ceiling-eu-votes-to-impose-legal-quotas-for-women-in-the-boardroom-8952718.html
Stakeholders
All individual European citizens who apply for jobs are stakeholders in this field. There are both positive and negative ways in which gender quotas may affect the individual. A woman applying for a job might have better chances of getting it as a result of a quota. At the same time a man might be rejected in favour of a woman due to the quotas. Other stake holders are European companies. Naturally, they want to do what is best for business. Gender balance has proven to increase performance in companies in gen-
66
general1. But a quota could also hinder a company from hiring the best person for the job. And in some quota systems there are sanctions against any company not filling their quota which of course has negative effects for the company. There are many institutions, agencies and NGOs working to promote gender equality. The European Institute for Gender Equality2 is a European Union agency that supports efforts to promote gender equality. The Quota project3 is an initiative launched by Stock-holm University, IDEA and Inter-parliamentary Union to promote the use of quotas by providing a data base with information about different types of quotas and their effec-tiveness. On a European Level there are Member States as stake holders. Whilst the idea of hav-ing gender quotas has gained support from many member states there have also been countries, such as the UK, who have opposed the idea strongly. Key Questions Are gender quotas good or bad for the performance of a company? Could gender quotas be discriminating against individuals? Who benefits most from a quota system? Links - Quota project data base: http://www.quotaproject.org/aboutProject.cfm- The European Institute for Gender Equality: http://eige.europa.eu/content/about-eige
1 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/quota-working_paper_en.pdf 2 http://eige.europa.eu/ 3 http://www.quotaproject.org/
67
Existing measures and Current Legislation
ThereareafewexistingmeasurestopromotegenderequalityonanEUlevel.Theycanbe divided into three different categories; Equal treatment legislation, legislation pre-venting discrimination against women1, gender mainstreaming, integration of the gender perspective into all other policies, and specific measures for the advancement of wom-en such as distributing information and giving incentives for promotion of equal rights2. Right now the EU equal treatment legislation does not include any legislation that forces Member states to take initiatives such as introducing gender quota systems, however in a Commission Directive dealing with Equal Opportunities it is stated that ” With a view to ensuring full equality in practice between men and women in working life, the principle of equal treatment shall not prevent any Member State from maintaining or adopting measures providing for specific advantages in order to make it easier for the underrep-resentedsextopursueavocationalactivityorpreventorcompensatefordisadvantag-es in professional careers.”3 In other words, current EU legislation allows for measures such as quota systems but leaves it up to each Member State to decide how they want to promote gender equality. The European Commission’s “Women on Boards” proposal was backed by the Euro-pean Parliament in November 2013 and sets a 40% target for the ratio of female board members in large companies for 20204. Now this proposal needs to be adapted by the European Council in order to become EU legislation5. The Women’s charter was adapted by the European Commission in March 2010. This strengthened the EU’s stance when it comes to gender equality and ensures a gender perspective in all EU policies6.
1 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/your_rights/eu_gender_equality_law_update2013_en.pdf2 file:///C:/Users/Ronald/Downloads/Strategy_Equality_Women_Men_EN.pdf3 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/your_rights/eu_gender_equality_law_update2013_en.pdf 4 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1118_en.htm 5 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1118_en.htm6 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0078&from=en
68
The strategy for equality between women and men 2010-20151 contains measures and goals to achieve a more equal European Union. It covers many aspects of gender bal-ance on the labour market and in decision making2. Key Questions Arethealreadyexistingmeasureseffective?What role do NGOs and actors from civil society play in fighting inequality?Are the EU targets realistic?What other measures can be taken? Links
- A summary on and interpretation of EU legislation on gender equality: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/your_rights/eu_gender_equality_law_up-date2013_en.pdf - Moreinformationaboutexistingmeasures:http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/, http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/gender-decision-making/index_en.htm- Women’s charter: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0078&from=en- Strategy for equality between women and men 2010-2015: file:///C:/Users/Ronald/Downloads/Strategy_Equality_Women_Men_EN.pdf
1 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/strategy_equality_women_men_en.pdf 2 file:///C:/Users/Ronald/Downloads/Strategy_Equality_Women_Men_EN.pdf
69
INTA - Committee on International Trade ”While the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) offers the opportunity for EU to strengthen its position on the global market politically as well as economically, questions surrounding the nature of negotiations and resulting quality standards are still at large. How should the EU move forward in the negotiations with the US so as to harness the potential of such a partnership while upholding the process standards that govern its internal market?”
Introduction and Background The European Union (EU) and the United States of America (USA) are two of the world’s largest economies, representing together more than 60% of global GDP and over 600 million of the richest consumers, while being each other’s primary source and destina-tion for direct foreign investment1. In the globally interdependent economy of 2013, some years after the damaging financial crisis, the EU and the USA began negotiating the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which aims to unite these two economies in a single free trade and investment region and to find practical ways to make regulations set by the EU and the US more compatible, while keeping the inter-ests of the people protected and maintaining focus on consumer protection, financial security, environment, health and safety2. The implementation of TTIP would remove any Trade Barriers among the EU and USA, in a range of economic sectors, therefore facilitating the buying and selling of goods 1 HAMILTON Daniels and QUILAN Joseph The transatlantic economy 2014 Center for Transatlantic relations John Hopkins University and Paul H. Nitze school of advanced international studies (2014)http://transatlantic.sais-jhu.edu/publications/books/TA2014/TA2014_Vol_1.pdf European Commission: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, the regulatory part (September 2013)
2 HAMILTON Daniels and QUILAN Joseph The transatlantic economy 2014 Center for Transatlantic relations John Hopkins University and Paul H. Nitze school of advanced international studies (2014)http://transatlantic.sais-jhu.edu/publications/books/TA2014/TA2014_Vol_1.pdf European Commission: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, the regulatory part (September 2013)
by Victoria Savvidou (GR)
70
and services, as well as transatlantic investments, since companies will be able to com-ply with both EU and US laws simultaneously. The elimination of tariffs and trade barriers will inevitably lead to growth. This growth will predictably reduce unemployment rates; in fact, according to the UK Prime Minister David Cameroon, the TTIP could create two millionextrajobs1. Additionally, European Commission independent research shows that TTIP could boost the EU’s economy by 120 billion Euro2. TTIP aims to alter regulations already in place and render them more effective, or to create a stable base for effective laws and regulation of the future. The Commission has publishedanumberofwaysinwhichexistingregulationmaybedealtwith.Thefirstisthat where regulations have broadly the same effect, that complying with either EU or US regulations would be enough to allow companies, under certain conditions, to sell in both markets. It also suggested that both sides of the agreement might alter their regu-lations in order to move closer to an internationally agreed way of dealing with prob-lems at hand. Finally, where regulations differ greatly, the EC recommends increased cooperation between regulators and their practices are recommended in order to lead to cooperation between the two3. Key questions
Is TTIP only a matter of boosting the EU and US economies, or is it also an agreement that will determine future diplomatic relations and alliances among these two world powers?TTIP will create millions of jobs, because it will be much easier for large companies to cooperateandexchangeproductsandservicesonatransatlanticlevel.Whataretheconsequences of this increased competition be for smaller businesses?Since TTIP could contribute to “a stronger set of rules in the area of energy”4, should the
1 http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/17/remarks-president-obama-uk-prime-minister-camer-on-european-commission-pr2 http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/3 European Commission: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, the regulatory part (September 2013)http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/july/tradoc_151605.pdf4 RENSEEN VAN Sonja Why an EU-US trade deal matters for the energy sector Energy Post, November 2013http://www.energypost.eu/eu-us-trade-deal-matters-energy-sector/
71
EUmovetowardseconomicallybeneficialdealsonoilandgasexchangesorshouldwepromote the using of renewable energies? Links - TTIPExplained:UnderstandingtheTransatlanticTradeandInvestmentPartnership(TTIP) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4J2InGns3Y- AseriesofvideosbySwedishAmCham,explainingTTIPhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XTvhW_4SzU - The TTIP agreement on the European Commission’s site http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/- European Commission: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, the regulatory part (September 2013) http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/july/tra-doc_151605.pdf- Delegation of the EU to the USA: EU-US Facts and Figures http://www.euintheus.org/what-we-do/eu-us-facts-figures/- The transatlantic economy 2014: Annual Survey of Jobs, Trade and Investment be-tween the United States and Europe http://transatlantic.sais-jhu.edu/publications/books/TA2014/TA2014_Vol_1.pdf- DraftTTIPText(Limited)–TradeinServices,InvestmentandE-Commerce(2July2013) (as released by the German weekly DIE ZEIT on Febr. 27, 2014) http://eu-secretdeals.info/upload/EU-Investment-Text-TTIP-v_July2nd-2013_v1.pdf- TTIP Mandate- Restricted (17 June 2013) http://eu-secretdeals.info/upload/TTIP-mandate_M-Schaake_website.pdf
Key Conflicts
A traditional Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is about customs and tariffs. The TTIP, how-ever, is not a simple agreement but a partnership, because according to the European co-chair for Transatlantic Business Dialogue Stråberg Hans it is more than an agreement about customs and tariffs because we want to establish “regulatory harmonisation over time ”1.
1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XTvhW_4SzU
72
Despite noble aims, TTIP negotiations are difficult and challenging. Progress is slow and yet the partnership is due to be implemented by the end of 20151. The fact that the EU and the USA are equal in size as trade partners makes it difficult for either to com-promise. Moreover, not only the financial, but also the political and diplomatic relation-ships between the EU and the USA effect the nature of the negotiations, which means that certain events have resulted in “severely shaken”2 relations between these two world powers, even when not directly related to trade, such as the NSA scandal3, and are a cause for European politicians to suggest postponing or even halting TTIP nego-tiations due to their dissatisfaction of the USA’s behaviour towards EU citizens and lead-ers.
There are two main reasons for conflict in negotiation. The first conflict is mainly caused by disparities between the USA and the EU about the content of the partnership. For example,theEUbansallgenetically-modifiedproductsorfarminganimalstreatedwithgrowth hormones, or poultry that has been washed with chlorine4. These are all practic-escommonwithUSfood,butitwouldbeextremelydifficulttointroducethemintoEuro-pean culture. The second reason concerns the dissatisfaction of the EU citizens towards the EU Commission due to the nature of the negotiations. People in both the EU and the USA began to question the transparency of negotiations, because not all TTIP docu-ments are available to the public and this opacity has not gone unnoticed. Key Questions
Do EU citizens question the transparency of the negotiations because they do not be-lieve in this partnership specifically, or because they lack trust in the EU governmental1 GARDNER Andrew Sixth round of TTIP talks end EuropeanVoice, July 18 2014http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/sixth-round-of-ttip-talks-end/2 SMITH-SPARK Laura Germany’s Angela Merkel: Relations with U.S. ‘severely shaken’ over spying claims CNN, October 25, 2013http://edition.cnn.com/2013/10/24/world/europe/europe-summit-nsa-surveillance/3 BALL James “NSA Monitored calls of 35 world leaders after US official handed over contacts”The Guardian, 25 October 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/24/nsa-surveillance-world-leaders-calls4 The NSA Files, by the Guardian: All the articles related to the NSA scandal:http://www.theguardian.com/world/the-nsa-files
73
institutions?Should any alleged general anti-American sentiment in the EU affect negotiations of matters such as trading?What should the EU do to ensure that EU companies that are already in fierce competi-tion with US ones (such as French Airbus and American Boeing) do not have loss by this agreement? What should the EU do to ensure that a transatlantic agreement protects industries with local government protection, such as French champagne or Greek feta cheese? Links
- Delegation of the EU to the USA: TTIP Negotiations http://www.euintheus.org/press-media/ttip-negotiations-round-two/- AMADEO Kimberly Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Advan-tages,Disadvantages,Opportunities,ObstaclesandNextStepsUSEconomy,June2013http://useconomy.about.com/od/Trade-Agreements/p/Transatlantic-Trade-And-Invest-ment-Partnership.htm- Busting the myths of transparency around the EU-US trade deal Corporate Eu-rope Observatory, International Trade (September 2013) http://corporateeurope.org/trade/2013/09/busting-myths-transparency-around-eu-us-trade-deal- European Commission: TTIP is not ACTA http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/july/tradoc_151673.pdf- BERMINGHAMFinbarrAnti-TTIPProtests:ExclusiveInterviewwithBelgianMPAr-rested in Brussels International Business Times (May 16, 2014) http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/anti-ttip-protests-exclusive-interview-belgian-mp-arrested-brussels-1448911- BAKER Dean The US-EU trade deal: don’t buy the hype The Guardian (July 15, 2013) http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/15/us-trade-deal-with-europe-hype- GUCHT Karel You’re wrong, George Monbiot – there is nothing secret about this EU trade deal The Guardian (December 18, 2013) http://www.theguardian.com/comment-isfree/2013/dec/18/wrong-george-monbiot-nothing-secret-eu-trade-deal
74
Stakeholders
As happens in all trade agreement with non-EU countries, the European Commission is the governing body responsible for TTIP negotiations. Relevant mandates are given by the Council, which authorizes the Commission to start negotiations. At this point the Eu-ropean Parliament may intervene, by submitting a resolution that even if it is not legally binding, sends a political message to the negotiators and it reflects views of the people. After the agreement has been finalized, it has to be approved by both the EU Council of Ministers and the European Parliament (and the Congress in the USA – in this case). The following diagram presents trade negotiations step by step1.
1 Trade negotiations step by step DG Trade, European Commission, September 2013http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/june/tradoc_149616.pdf
75
Rules regarding transparency are strict: According to the Commission all documents related to the negotiation or development of the TTIP agreement (…) will be held in confidence1.Reasons behind trade negotiations remaining secret are the following, according to the Commission:- A certain level of confidentiality is necessary to protect EU interests- If there is no climate of confidence, then negotiators on both sides cannot work together to come to the best deal possible.- Thetextsarenotfinaluntilthewholeagreementisagreedupon2 Key Questions
Should the EC do anything more to gain the trust of EU citizens or it’s the people who should realize that trade negotiations will not bring good results if they are made in full transparency?Should we, and if yes, how can we guarantee more integration of all the EU governmen-tal institutions in trade negotiations on an international level, without affecting the cur-rent EU laws?According to the EU law, the European Parliament can submit a legally non binding resolutiontoexpresstheiropiniononthenegotiations.HowcantheMEPssubmittheirideas when the content of the negotiations is not crystal clear? Links - EUCommission:EUTradepolicyexplainedhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiOC5XG2I5Y- Factsheet of the European Commission: Transparency in EU trade negotiations http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/june/tradoc_151381.pdf- Trade negotiations step by step DG Trade, European Commission, September 2013 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/june/tradoc_149616.pdf
1 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/july/tradoc_151621.pdf2 Factsheet of the European Commission: Transparency in EU trade negotiationshttp://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/june/tradoc_151381.pdf
76
- European Commission preparing for EU-US trade talks: 119 meetings with industry lobbyists Corporate Europe Observatory, September 4th, 2013 http://corporateeurope.org/trade/2013/09/european-commission-preparing-eu-us-trade-talks-119-meetings-in-dustry-lobbyists- TheleakednegotiationstextsontheTradeJusticeNetworkhttp://www.tradejus-tice.ca/leakeddocs/- European Commission: Q&A on the TTIP http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/questions-and-answers/
Existing measures and Current Legislation
SixroundsofnegotiationshavetakenplaceregardingtheTTIPagreement,thefifthround being held in May and the last taken place from 14th to 18th July 2014. In the lat-ter, the two chief negotiators – Ignacio Garcia Bercero for the EU and Dan Mullaney for the US claimed that the main line of the negotiations was to clarify any technical ques-tions raised by both sides. Bercero said there had been a “convergence” of the EU’s and US’s ideas in nine areas, including cars, pharmaceuticals and information technol-ogy. Regulation is the area of the negotiations that both sides believe will produce the lion’s share of the transatlantic trade deal’s benefits1. Even after this last meeting, how-ever, both the EU and the USA faced criticism regarding the negotiations’ level of trans-parency.
Indeed, people have severely protested against the secrecy of the TTIP documents. Thanks to or because of these movements, the EC has been committed to provide a maximumofinformationpossibleforthepublicandthemedia,publishingthereforeinitial TTIP Position Papers and engaging themselves to publish more in the future. But the European public is still not satisfied by the position of the Commission, fearing pos-sible negative consequences. A movement against such behaviours was the creation of the Alternative Trade Mandate Alliance (ATMA), an Alliance of almost 50 organizations whose members vision to fundamentally change the EU’s trade policies, putting people and planet before business.
1 GARDNER Andrew Sixth round of TTIP talks end EuropeanVoice, July 18 2014http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/sixth-round-of-ttip-talks-end/
77
Key Questions IfEUpeoplearenotexpressingtheirobjectionsregardingonlyTTIPbutalsothenatureof trade negotiations in general, what measures can the EU governmental institutions take to satisfy their people?What additional actions can the EU people take to make their opinion heard regarding their disagreement on trade negotiations?What should be done on behalf of the Commission to guarantee that the opinion of EU people regarding TTIP is heard?As the 6th round of negotiations has just drawn to a close, how should the EU move forward with the TTIP?
Links
- EU Commission: EU publishes initial TTIP Position Papers http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=943- The Alternative Trade Mandate Alliance http://www.alternativetrademandate.org/about-us/- The draft version of the ATMA vision http://www.alternativetrademandate.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/democracy-paper-FINAL.pdf- The IP policy committee blog http://tacd-ip.org/
78
JURI - Committee on Legal Affairs ”The right to be forgotten: The recent ruling of the ECJ in connection with the Right to be Forgotten as provided in the EU’s Data Protection Package sets a precedent for citi-zens to control the exposure of their personal data, but amidst growing concerns about the implementation and abuse of these measures by public figures, how can the EU balance the rights of its citizens against the risk of revisionism?”
Introduction and Background Information
The Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union states “Everyone has the righttofreedomofexpression.Thisrightshallincludefreedomtoholdopinionsandtoreceive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers”1, yet citizens remain vulnerable in data protection issues, par-ticularly those arising from the state itself, and especially in issues where ownership of data and the manner of processing become relevant`. Historic information about your personal activities, movements and opinions –even teenage pictures on Facebook – re-main available digitally. This introduces new challenges for civil liberties and freedoms, unique to the digital age.
The European Commission recently proposed a Data Protection Package which sets rules to increase the users’ control of their data2. The “right to be forgotten” constitutes a special part of the Data Protection package and enshrines the right of a citizen to have their data erased on request and under certain conditions. The European Court of Jus-tice (ECJ) recently ruled that the individuals should have the right to ask the deletion of certain information of them from the search results of search engines, such as Google, as long as the information is inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant3. The rationale
1 Article 11/1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Full text here: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf2 Data protection reforms’ press release and full text of EU Justice Commissioner Viiane Reding’s statement here: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-46_en.htm?locale=en3 Full ruling here: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsessionid=9ea7d0f130de4e6ac02243c948
by Sayen Tokyay (TR)
79
behind the ruling is to set provisions for the internet not to become a permanent record of a person’s activities and to give the individuals a say on the processing of their own data. Hence if there are no legal grounds on the information to be kept, such as public’s right to know, the information might be hidden from the search results. However, the data, once it is requested to be removed, is actually not deleted from the search engine archive, it just does not appear on the search results with a data control-ler established. It is the only practical implementation of the ruling, yet the implications of a link’s removal from the search engines is controversial, and the information could still be reached from sources outside the EU. Key Questions
Privacy online, if possible: Is a full right to be forgotten possible, and should it be imple-mented in our digital age?What rights should an individual have over their personal information and data? Who actually owns information? Links - “What’s right to be forgotten?”: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27394751- Factsheet on the right to be forgotten ruling: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-pro-tection/files/factsheets/factsheet_data_protection_en.pdf- “What Europe’s ‘right to be forgotten’ means for Google (And you)”: http://mash-able.com/2014/05/13/right-to-be-forgotten-europe-google/?utm_campaign=Mash-Prod-RSS-Feedburner-All-Partial&utm_cid=Mash-Prod-RSS-Feedburner-All-Partial&utm_medium=feed&utm_source=rss
80
Key Conflicts “[Therighttobeforgotten]titleraisesunrealisticandunfairexpectationsofthepropos-als. (…) The ‘reasonable steps’ required by the draft regulation would promise much, but deliver little.” UK Ministry of Justice1. Search engine companies state that the biggest challenge in the implementation of the recent right to be forgotten is the immense number of take-down requests from indi-viduals. The company stated in the beginning of July that they received at least 70.000 requests for more than 250.000 webpages to hide links2 from the search results since the beginning of the ruling in May 2014. One of a major problem for search engines will definitely be the cost of amending the search results by considering the applications. There are claims that Google deliberately allows misuse of the right to be forgotten to be enforced as a kind of a protest3. In July, Google hid access to some articles published in the Guardian after it came out that some of them shouldn’t have been removed4. Such implementations of the rulings are often criticised as being deliberate, since the imple-mentation suggests that “Google is far from whole-heartedly embracing the ECJ ruling” stated Chris Moran, head of search engine optimisation at the Guardian, in his article for The Guardian on 3rd July5. A huge debate that stirred as the right to be forgotten ruling is being implemented and the new data protection rulings of the EU are on their way, is its effect on the freedom of informationandfreedomofexpression.Itisalsoopposedasanattackonfreedomof
1 “Britain seeks opt-out of new European social media privacy laws” Full article here: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/apr/04/britain-opt-out-right-to-be-forgotten-law2 According to the article on the web portal Computer World. “EU privacy watchdogs to quiz Google and Mi-crosoft on ‘right to be forgotten’. “ Full article here: http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9249806/EU_pri-vacy_watchdogs_to_quiz_Google_Microsoft_on_39_right_to_be_forgotten_39_?pageNumber=13 These claims are mentioned in many newspaper articles and magazines online. One of them is an Inde-pendent Article. “Right to be forgotten: Google accused of deliberately misinterpreting court decision to stoke public anger: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/right-to-be-forgotten-google-accused-of-deliberately-misinterpreting-court-decision-to-stoke-public-anger-9582985.html4 Google reinstates ‘forgotten’ links after pressure: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-281576075 “Things to remember about Google and the right to be forgotten”: http://www.theguardian.com/technol-ogy/2014/jul/03/google-remember-right-to-be-forgotten
81
of speech and a step towards censorship by rights groups1. Moreover, individuals could askforanyinformationthatis‘irrelevant,nolongerrelevantorexcessive’tobeerasedfrom the search links and this might be very much abused by public figures and crimi-nals. Although the right to be forgotten is stated not to be absolute, the boundaries of the rights of the citizens and the public’s right to know is a very important aspect of the conflict. Key Questions A politician with a shameful past, a paedophile or a murderer who wants their past infor-mation to be removed: How should the limit be set (if at all) for the right to be forgotten?Will the right to be forgotten affect the functioning of the search engines and social me-dia websites? Links
- ‘The Right to be Forgotten’ a piece by Jeffrey Rosen, a law professor at The George Washington University Legal Affairs Editor, The New Republic: http://www.stan-fordlawreview.org/online/privacy-paradox/right-to-be-forgotten- A piece criticising the Right to be forgotten: http://www.forbes.com/sites/emma-woollacott/2014/06/06/five-reasons-not-to-invoke-your-right-to-be-forgotten/- EU ‘right to be forgotten’ paves way for censorship: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-05/13/right-to-be-forgotten-blog
Stakeholders
The European Commission plays a prominent role in data protection of the EU citizens and the right to be forgotten. Not only considering the Data Protection Directive2 but
1 See the article on Index on Censorship’s, an international organisation that promotes freedom of expression: Index blasts EU Court ruling on ‘right to be forgotten’: http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2014/05/index-blasts-eu-court-ruling-right-forgotten/2 Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31995L0046:en:HTML
82
also the new proposal for the Data Protection Regulation1, the European Commission is one of the key institutions. Also the European Parliament and the Council of the Euro-pean Union, taking into consideration their roles in the legislative procedure, takes im-portant places during co-decision. Member State national governments have a vested interest in data protection policy, as it is their citizens and their surveillance programs which will be affected. International search engine companies, such as Google or Bing, are very much affected by the right to be forgotten since they are processing take-down requests from individu-als. EU citizens are a key group that are affected by the right to be forgotten since the pro-tection of the personal information constructs a very significant part of the issue. Public figures and criminals are very important in the discussion of the right to be for-gotten, since they may abuse this right by requesting to erasure certain information of them. Key Questions
Since the ruling is quite new, what will be the practical effects and impacts on the daily life for European citizens?How should the European legislative institutions work in collaboration with individual Member States to ensure a coherent policy is maintained across the Union? Links - Right to be forgotten could apply beyond search engines: http://blogs.wsj.com/ris-kandcompliance/2014/06/04/right-to-be-forgotten-could-apply-beyond-search-engines/- ‘We need to talk about the right to be forgotten’: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/10/right-to-be-forgotten-european-ruling-google-debate- “5 ways the EU data protection regulations will affect your business”: http://www.cbronline.com/news/security/5-ways-the-new-eu-data-protection-regulations-will-affect-your-business-4260066/page/1
1 Data Protection Regulation Proposal of the European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protec-tion/document/review2012/com_2012_11_en.pdf
83
Existing Measures/ Current Legislation
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling on the right to be forgotten is dated 13 May 2014. After this ECJ ruling, there have been huge amounts of applications to search en-gines to take down personal data from Internet. There is an EU data protection reform in progress since 20121. As the data protection legislation in the EU was set in 1995, it does not cover recent changes and the impact of developing technologies. The data protection reform has many key changes regarding the process of the data and our personal information. New legislation would ensure that the individuals would have information, and give consent, when their data is being processed. The data pro-tection reform consists of two draft laws: A regulation that sets out the data protection and a directive which sets out the processing of data. The draft laws, according to the European Parliament key dates published online, will be completed by the end of 20142. Key Questions
What measures should be taken to ensure that the right to be forgotten does not harm freedom of information and freedom of speech?How should search engines work on the implementation of the requests of link remov-als without problem?How should the EU implement strong measures so that the right to be forgotten will not be abused by the public figures with the defence of personal data protection? Links - How does the data protection reform strengthen citizens’ rights? http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/document/review2012/factsheets/2_en.pdf
1 “Data Protection Reform: Frequently Asked Questions”: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-41_en.htm?locale=fr Also see, “Progress on EU data protection reform now irreversible following European Parlia-ment vote”: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-186_en.htm2 Q&A on EU data protection reform. See the main body of the page and also part “Key dates in parliament”: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/content/20130502BKG07917/html/QA-on-EU-data-pro-tection-reform
84
- The press release of the right to be forgotten ruling: http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-05/cp140070en.pdf- Legislative procedure of the EU to visualise how the EU law is created: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/external/html/legislativeprocedure/default_en.htm?p=911
LIBE I - Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs I ”Inward migration: a challenging opportunity. While many migrants come to Europe by choice in search of better living standards, others migrate in search of safety and shelter as they flee from their home countries. How should the EU balance catering for these migrants and their integration into European society and still protect its external borders?”
Introduction and Background Over the past five years, the number of asylum seekers to the 28 Member States has doubled to 435,385 applicants per annum. On the other hand, from 2002 to 2007 ap-proximately450,000irregularimmigrantswereapprehendedannuallyintheEUmem-ber states, according to a Commission staff working document. In 2007 alone, there were 488,475 removal decisions taken and 226,179 removals of third nationals carried out by the Member States1. The number of removals lies steadily below that of appre-hensions: between 2002 and 2004, only one third of decisions for the removal of de-tained clandestine immigrants were actually implemented. During these past five years, geopolitical changes have created new refugee streams. The on-going Arab Spring, ethnic and civil wars bundled with rebel uprisings in Africa, and countless other conflicts
1 European Commission (2009): Commission Staff Working Document. Third annual report on the develop-ment of a common policy on illegal immigration, smuggling and trafficking of human beings, external borders, and the return of illegal residents, SEC (2009)
by Alexandros Nompilakis (GR) and Mathieu Lohr (LU)
85
in all parts of the world have resulted in millions of new refugees. Entry points to Europe like Lampedusa have become the symbols for how the EU is coping with the unprece-dented waves of refugees seeking asylum in the EU and its neighbouring nations. Whilst countries outside the EU often lack the necessary resources to adequately accom-modate refugees, countries within the EU may be reluctant in accepting these people. Those refugees are now taking increasingly high-risk routes to find refuge within EU borders, and many fall into the hands of human-traffickers and perish on their perilous journey.
The debate surrounding the issues associated with asylum seekers has been raging for yearsonaregional,national,andinternationallevel.DublinI&II&IIIRegulations,Frontex,and related European legislation and agencies are now regularly featured in news re-ports and have become synonymous with the seeming failure of the European Union to address the problems at hand. Theonlyconclusionsofaristhatthereexistsnosingleanddefinitesolutionandmigra-tion is not a one-size-fits-all problem. Furthermore, many of the issues discussed reach further than the asylum seekers themselves. Much of the debate relates to national sov-ereignty, subjective fear of immigrants of all colours and backgrounds by the public, and financial fear of what said migrants may be granted by host countries.
As stated in the topic, regular immigration is a prime topic for EU legislation, but is usu-allyanalysedseparatelyfromasylumpolicyandthusexcludedfromthefocusofthecommittee.
It is important to consider why the national objectives of some Member States seems to focus on closing borders or restricting access of refugees to their country, whilst other call for opening up the EU.
Key Questions
Why is public support for accepting migrants generally currently low? What are the achievements, but also the criticisms, of current EU legislation and its agencies?
86
Who is making money from refugees, and what are we doing about such actors? Links - Short overview of the history of European immigration&asylum policy: http://www.civitas.org.uk/eufacts/FSEXR/EX1.php
- Some numbers on refugees worldwide: http://www.un.org/en/globalissues/brief-ingpapers/refugees/index.shtml
Key Conflicts A key issue lies with the question of where refugees are allowed to apply for asylum. Under Dublin II&III Regulations, refugees are required to seek refuge at their country of entry. However, this is regarded as putting an unfair burden on EU border-countries like Greece or Italy through which many migrants enter the Union. Not only do these coun-tries still struggle with the aftermath of the financial crisis, they often lack the infrastruc-ture needed to accommodate the rising numbers of refugees.This was supposed to be addressed by Dublin III, which would have introduced a quota system to all EU countries, but as Dublin III was initially blocked by the Council of Minis-ters it was later implemented in a weakened form that contains no quota system.
The question of where to apply for refugee status entails the question of what kind of status and rights refugees will be granted if their application for asylum was success-ful. The integration of successful asylum seekers into society poses another challenge. Under EU law, country members can issue a 1 to 3 year “temporary protection” VISA that allows for residence and work within their country of arrival, a third-country, or the whole Schengen area. However, disparities between different Member States often pose dif-ficultiestoasylumseekersandmightleavetheminlegallimboforextendedperiodsof time. Treatment of applications and VISAs allowing for the right to work often take months to be issued. And still, these people require shelter and oftentimes medical attention, and therefore
87
frequently find integration to be a difficult process. Consequently, integration measures can only be a combination of efforts on local, national and European levels. Current EU legislation is understood as being restrictive, but advancements towards a “Common European Asylum System” (CEAS) that would assure greater coherence have been taken and are nearing the finishing line in these months.
A third aspect to the debate lies with preventive measures include developing aid and negotiation support between rival groups and are seen as part of solving the problems at hand on the long term. Additionally to handling the refugee streams heading for Eu-rope, new problems arise once migrants reach the EU. Right now, 90% of refugees to Europe are handled by 9 countries, of which German and Sweden take the largest por-tions.
There is still great reluctance to accept refugees in, with admission rates by most Mem-ber States remaining low. In July 2014, about 130,000 Syrian refugees were located in the EU. That number represents 4% of Syrian refugees, with Lebanon alone holding well over one million of them. The right for refugees to work and be adequately treated is a major logistical and financial problem that is still subject to much debate and funding is-sues.
A recent study published by the UK government highlighted the effects of EU and non-EU migrants to the UK low-skill work-sector. The basic findings are that migrants made a positive contribution to the economy overall. This contrasts to the public opinion, which believes migration to have a negative effect on the economy. However, this gap between the perception and reality of (im-)migration by the general public is typical for the majority of EU Member States. Immigrants are often seen as non-contributing aliens who put drain economy and are often suspected of criminal activities.
So far, this overview has put its focus on asylum seekers fleeing violence when using examples.Itshouldnotbeforgottenthatthenumberofclimate change refugees will growsignificantlyoverthenextyearsanddecades.Thisaspectofthedebateisequallyimportant on the long-run and should not be forgotten.
88
Key Questions Do current measures tackle the root-issues of the problem at hand? How should devel-opment aid be made more effective? Should internal borders be monitored to stop illegal immigrants traveling beyond their country of entry? Is current EU legislation future-proof, and will it remain effective on the long run? What further immediate steps should be taken? Links - ExcellentoverviewaboutthestateofasylumlawsinEuropebytheUNHCR:http://www.unhcr.org/pages/4a02d9346.html- EuropeanCouncilonRefugeesandExileshttp://www.ecre.org/topics/areas-of-work/access-to-europe/9.html- “Temporary protection”-visa http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/poli-cies/asylum/temporary-protection/index_en.htm- Common European Asylum System http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/asylum/index_en.htm- Figures and facts of asylum policy in the EU http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/e-library/docs/infographics/asylum/infographic_asylum_print_a_en.pdf- Building capacity for asylum seekers http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal_consolidated/data/document/etg5-policybrief-capacitybuilding07_en.pdf- Getting asylum seekers into employement http://ec.europa.eu/employment_so-cial/equal_consolidated/data/document/etg5-policybrief-employment07_en.pdf- Migrants in low-skilled work in the UK - report https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/328010/MAC-Migrants_in_low-skilled_work_Summary_2014.pdf- UN – Refugees factsheet with focus on climate change and natural disasters http://www.un.org/en/globalissues/briefingpapers/refugees/nextsteps.html
89
Stakeholders European CommissionThe European Commission has been pushing forward the “Common European Asylum System” for years, creating the Stockholm action plan to bring greater cohesion to dif-ferent EU legislation regarding asylum seekers and refugees. The EC is in favour of a quota system to distribute refugees and asylum seekers evenly amongst EU Member States.TheHomeAffairsDirectorate-GeneraloftheCommissionistheirexecutivearmfor this kind of legislation and in charge of the implementation of FRONTEX and EASO (European Asylum Support Office), among others.
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/agencies/index_en.htm
Council of Europe and Member StatesThis body of the European Union has co-legislative powers and has rejected the initial Dublin III legislation. Their argument was based on the reluctance to overwrite national sovereignty of who they accept as refugees to the European Union. This argument ad-dresses the idea of the proposed quota system within the original Dublin III treaty, which would have automatically allocated asylum seekers and refugees to different Member States.
With this decision, they stand in opposition to the European Parliament that voted for the adoption of the quota system. Between Member States, we have to keep in mind the different interests of states, i.e. those currently receiving more asylum seekers than others.
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)The UNHCR is a UN agency that delivers development aid on the ground at the request of governments or the UN, as well as supporting refugees’ rights and assisting them in questionsoflegalmatters.TheyhavebeencallingforreformsoftheexistingEUlegisla-tion concerning asylum seekers and advocate stronger commitment towards accepting asylum seekers. The European Commission is their second biggest donor to their devel-opment aid programs.
90
EU Partner CountriesThe EU will occasionally establish partnerships with countries to prevent or weaken refugee streams leaving the country in question. This usually happens through develop-ment aid, sharing of border surveillance information and direct support for controlling borders, and repatriation treaties. Key Questions
Why is there a divergence between the EU Parliament, and the Council of Europe and Member States? How helpful and effective are EU partner countries in controlling refu-gee streams? What are the positive and negative consequences of such partnerships?
Existing measures and Current Legislation Dublin RegulationTheobjectiveofthisRegulationistoidentifytheMemberStateresponsibleforexamin-ing an asylum application, and to prevent abuse of asylum procedures. Under the cur-rent Dublin Regulation, also often referred to as Dublin II, the responsibility of which MS has to deal with the migrant in questions remains with the migrant’s country of entry.The effectiveness and the fairness of the system have been put into question, but have also been underlined.
http://www.ecre.org/topics/areas-of-work/protection-in-europe/10-dublin-regulation.htmlhttp://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/justice_freedom_security/free_movement_of_persons_asylum_immigration/l33153_en.htmhttp://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52007DC0299
91
FrontexFrontexfacilitatescooperationbetweenborderauthoritiesofdifferentMemberStates.The agency was set up in 2005 to help guard borders from illegal activities. Besides its facilitator role and intelligence gathering, it has“ Rapid Border Intervention Teams”, which are armed border guards that can be send to support Member States guarding their boarders.
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/justice_freedom_security/free_movement_of_persons_asylum_immigration/l33216_en.htmhttp://frontex.europa.eu/about-frontex/mission-and-tasks Common European Asylum System (CEAS) The CEAS is a system made up of three EU Directives and two regulations. An EU Direc-tive overrules national law, and thus facilitates creating harmonised EU laws, in this case legislation concerned with asylum seekers. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/asylum/index_en.htmhttp://www.asylumineurope.org/news/10-07-2014/italy%E2%80%99s-eu-presidency-fo-cus-implementing-ceas-solidarity-and-mutual-recognitionhttp://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/e-library/docs/ceas-fact-sheets/ceas_factsheet_en.pdf
Temporary Protection (EU Directive)Temporaryprotectionisanexceptionalmeasuretoprovidedisplacedpersonsfromnon-EU countries and unable to return to their country of origin, with immediate and tem-porary protection. It applies in particular when there is a risk that the standard asylum systemisstrugglingtocopewithdemandstemmingfromamassinfluxthatriskshavinga negative impact on the processing of claims. (1)So far, this policy has never been used.
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/asylum/temporary-protection/index_en.htm
92
Links Videos
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1gkg26pSkA- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4zqL-5cMh4 Articles and other coverage
- EU response to the Greek refugee crisis: http://www.unhcr.org/4f269d5f9.html - ECHO factsheet on refugees: http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/fact-sheets/thematic/refugees_en.pdf - https://twitter.com/damomac/status/486777668839280640/photo/1 (random greek media report on “walls” with the Turkish borders)- http://www.eeas.europa.eu/what_we_do/index_en.htm(EuropeanExternalActionService – areas of it are SPOT ON)- http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/justice_freedom_security/free_move-ment_of_persons_asylum_immigration/l33153_en.htm (Dublin II, the super basics)- http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:180:0031:0059:EN:PDF (Dublin III, the whole doc – pretty useless unless you have all the time in the world!)- http://ceciliawikstrom.eu/en/politik/migration-och-asyl/dublinforordningen/# (on Dublin III from a “conservative’s” point of view)- http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/asylum/refugee-status/index_en.htm (Qualification directive - official source, “The new Qualification Directive will contribute to improve the quality of the decision-making and ensure that people fleeing persecution, wars and torture are treated fairly, in a uniform manner.”)- http://www.ecre.org/topics/areas-of-work/protection-in-europe/92-qualification-directive.html (on the Qualification directive from the European Council on Refugees and Exiles)- http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/asylum/identification-of-applicants/index_en.htm (EURODAC makes it easier for EU States to determine respon-sibilityforexamininganasylumapplicationbycomparingfingerprintdatasets.–oldandnew)
93
- http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.gr/2014/03/the-eus-returns-directive-does-it.html (article on the “notorious” return(s) directive – quite interesting from the bullet points onwards with issues such as the time period(s) of “reasonable” detention, etc...)- http://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/kostas-vaxevanis/greek-police-make-life-unliveable-for-asylum-seekers (an article on Greece police’s behaviour towards asylum seekers and illegal immigrants)- http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/greece-stop-unlawful-and-shameful-expulsion-refugees-and-migrants-2014-04-29 (a similar one on what actually happens by the Greek authorities)- http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c2.html (the UN refugee agency)- http://frontex.europa.eu/ (FRONTEX)- http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/12/europe-treatment-asy-lum-seekers-inhumane (An article from the Guardian on EU asylum seeker actions)
LIBE II - Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs II ”Freedom of the press and media pluralism is often cited as a key component for the protection of civil liberties, but in recent years there has been an increase in journalists using the legal defences to which they are entitled to perform illegal and intrusive sur-veillance on private citizens. How can the EU continue to protect press freedom without encroaching upon the rights of its citizens?”
Introduction and Background Today journalism is in the midst of crisis. The traditional media, particularly newspapers, suffer not just from the effects of the global economic crisis but also the impact of struc-tural and market changes which have reduced the profitability of media enterprises. In response to these changing fortunes, severe cuts have been imposed in editorial de-
by David Corish (IE)
94
partments that have weakened the quality of journalism. Many media organisations across Europe have sacrificed reporting standards in pursuit of commercial objectives, overriding ethical values with journalism that is populist, sensational, biased and in some cases; illegal.
Thereisincreasingpressuretoget‘thebigscoop’andexclusivelyrevealcorruption,often by any means necessary. Scandals such as the News International phone hacking case in the United Kingdom have rocked the public’s confidence in the media. People are beginning to question the lengths to which journalists are going, whether legally or illegally, to get stories. Intrusive practices such as subterfuge1, phone2 and email3 hack-ing are on the rise. With this, press freedom is once again put on the political agenda of the European Commission responsible for the Digital Agenda4 and urgently needs to be addressed. It is useful to take a look at different Member States, such as Italy5 and Hun-gary6, and analyse how functional the press regulation is, since there is a line between intervention and setting some ethical rules and hindering the freedom of speech and therefore the pillars of democracy. Key Questions
What is the media’s role in a democratic society and how should the EU ensure this role is respected and supported? How can the EU ensure journalists are free from attempts to hinder their press freedom?
Links - A brief introductory video on the importance of press freedom: https://www.you-tube.com/watch?v=1DHTvyzXIx8 - World Press Freedom Day 2014: Worrying developments for journalists in Europe:http://cmpf.eui.eu/News/All/14WorldPressFreedomDay.aspx
1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3282625.stm 2 http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/top-stories/139689/explainer-news-corp-phone-hacking-scandal/ 3 http://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/apr/05/sky-news-hacking-emails-canoe-man 4 http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/content-and-media/media-policies 5 http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2013/italy#.U8un5PldVAI 6 http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2013/hungary#.U8uoEvldVAI
95
- This is a general and brief account by the BBC Academy of privacy law and some of the issues that may arise for journalists: http://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/journalism/law/privacy/article/art20130702112133653 - Interactive map of press freedoms around the world: http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/freedom-press-2014#.U8usEvldVAI
Key Conflicts
Journalists understand the need for privacy; they draw the line at confidentiality when it is used to limit accountability or to draw a curtain around hypocrisy and misconduct in public affairs. Yet it is of concern to the media when too rigorous application of privacy rules make it close to impossible for them to publish anything touching on the funda-mentalaspectsofaperson’sprivatelifesuchastheirfamilylife,sexualbehaviourandorientation, or medical conditions, even where they believe that publication is in the public interest.
However, media concerns count for little when irresponsible journalists take liberties with the people they serve. The outrage in the United Kingdom that engulfed the global media network News Corporation over illegal phone hacking by its journalists provides a perfect illustration of how quickly reckless and intrusive journalism can damage public confidence. Thus media accountability is paramount for a democracy. Media account-ability, in whatever form it comes, should aim to balance the rights of the individual and the community with the rights of journalists and the press. However, knowing where to drawthelinebetweenprivacyandpressfreedomisanextremelydifficulttask.Howdolegislators and the media balance the need for the public to know with the right to be left alone? It is vital that any legislation imposed does act on behalf of the public and the profession and is not perceived to be there to shield individuals or organisations from criticism or ethical scrutiny. Yet should legislation even be imposed or is self-regulation1 the way forward for a transparent and accountable media?
1 Self-regulation is a solemn promise by quality-conscious journalists and media to correct their mistakes and to make themselves accountable
96
Key Questions
Is it possible to strike the right balance between over-regulation (which may hinder free-dom of speech) and under-regulation (which may allow the news media too much free-dom to commit libel and intrude into private lives)? Is independent self-regulation by the media a concrete and viable solution for media transparency? What of funding? Who should pay for media accountability?How can the EU ensure Freedom of Press in such countries as Italy and Hungary is re-spected? Links
- AnexcellentintroductorydebateoverpressregulationheldbyNewsnightintheUK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6TcrKFevKE- Issue paper on the importance of media freedom and pluralism commissioned by the Council of Europe: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1881589 - “I have for some time been very concerned with the issues of media freedom and pluralism. In any democracy, a free media sector is an important safeguard.” Read blog post by Neelie Kroes, EU Commissioner for Digital Agenda, on the creation of the new European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services. http://ec.europa.eu/com-mission_2010-2014/kroes/en/content/free-media-needs-regulators-be-independent
Stakeholders
In most Member States, the press has set up their own ethical guidelines and regulatory systems1 and are responsible for meeting the standards they have set. Press regulation is different in all 28 Member States and the European Parliament currently does not hold the mandate to influence press regulation directly in Member States.
1 The Media Self-Regulation Guidebook by the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media (No need to read the whole report, but pages 22-24 and page 46-50 are of particular relevance) http://www.osce.org/fom/31497?download=true
97
However, the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)1, recognised by the European Union, the Council of Europe, and the European Trade Union Confederation as the rep-resentative voice of journalists in Europe, is an adamant supporter of the freedom of pressandfreedomofexpression.Similarly,theEuropeanPublishersCouncil(EPC),ahigh level group of Chairmen and CEOs of leading European media corporations, moni-tor and react2 to any proposals for EU legislation or regulation that might affect the me-dia industry. Both of these organisations are critical of any measures which hinder press freedom.
Furthermore, there are several initiatives that are directly or indirectly funded or influ-enced by the European Commission or European Parliament, such as Mediadem3, Me-diaAcT4, Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom5, European Initiative for Media Pluralism6, and the High Level Group on Media Freedom and Pluralism7. All these initia-tives work for greater transparency and pluralistic media across Member States and are important players in the discussion of LIBE II.
However,newspapersarepredominantlyownedbycorporationsandtheyexistinorderto make a profit, or at least to break even. For the most part, they print what their read-ership wants to read and gain the majority of their profits from advertising. If there were not any interest from the public in celebrity lifestyle, there would be no commercial gain in intruding on the private wedding of a pop star. It is important to remember that this commercial element will always be a driving force in the content and coverage of the media today.
1 The EFJ is a regional organisation of the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ). It promotes and defends the rights to freedom of expression and information as guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.2 http://epceurope.eu/issues/position-papers/ 3 http://www.mediadem.eliamep.gr/ 4 http://www.mediaact.eu/ 5 http://cmpf.eui.eu/Home.aspx6 http://www.mediainitiative.eu/ 7 https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/high-level-group-media-freedom-and-pluralism
98
Key Questions How can the various stakeholders interact and cooperate to ensure a fair and efficient outcome to the question of balancing media freedom?How can the EU ensure that all voices are heard and no side is left in the dark?What steps should the EU take to reduce the discrepancies in press regulation across all Member States? Links - The Guardian’s director of editorial legal services asks whether self-regulation of the press should be scrapped in favour of full statutory regulation. http://www.theguard-ian.com/gnm-press-office/phillips-speech-press-freedom-versus-privacy - Website of the European Federation of Journalists, the recognised voice of jour-nalists in Europe. http://www.ifj.org/regions/europe/about-efj/ - EFJ, EMMA, ENPA and EPC statement following European Parliament vote on the EU draft General Data Protection Regulation which weakens press freedom in Europe.http://epceurope.eu/efj-emma-enpa-and-epc-statement-following-european-parliament-vote-on-the-eu-draft-general-data-protection-regulation-which-weakens-press-freedom--in-europe/
Existing measures and Current Legislation
At present, the European Union does not possess the mandate to change press regu-lation in Member States and thus all changes must be made on a national government level and therefore, the press regulation in Europe varies greatly.
In 2013, the European Commission selected four projects1 following a call for propos-als in the field of violations of media freedom and pluralism. The projects aim to provide practical solutions and guidance to journalists in Europe in order to enhance and defend media freedom. All four projects commenced in 2014 and are planned to run for one year. Many within the EU2 believe that cooperation with media organisations is the best
1 http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/media-freedom-%E2%80%93-pilot-projects2 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-252_en.htm
99
way to balance the needs for privacy with the needs of press freedom. Key Questions
Is the EU taking a strong enough stance to ensure press freedom throughout the union, particularly in relation to eastern Member States?How can the EU respond to the rise of online media reporting that does not fall under traditional print guidelines or restrictions (e.g. instant updates via by Twitter) How should the EU clamp down on intrusive and illegal journalistic practices? Links - In 2013, the European Commission published a call inviting proposals that address violations of media freedom and pluralism. The proposals can be found here: http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/european-centre-press-and-media-freedom-re-sults-2013-call-proposals - Article in Committee to Protect Journalists blog that describes resolution and changes in MS media laws that enable governments to interfere in the media and states that they should be monitored yearly: http://www.cpj.org/blog/2013/05/european-parlia-ment-reaffirms-principles-but-actio.php - Council conclusions and of the representatives of the Governments of the Mem-ber States, meeting within the Council, on media freedom and pluralism in the digital environment: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/educ/139725.pdf - Issue paper on the importance of ethical journalism and human rights commissioned by the Council of Europe: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1863637#P84_8648 - Report of the High Level Group on Media Freedom and Pluralism “A free and plu-ralistic media to sustain European democracy.”Not necessary to read the entire report, however section four in particular, ‘Journalistic Rights and Responsibilities’ should be read https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/HLG%20Final%20Re-port.pdf
100
- Response from the European Publishers Council (EPC) to the Independent Report from the HLG on Media Freedom and Pluralism (i.e. previous link) http://epceurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/EPC-Observations-on-the-High-Level-Group-Report-and-Recommendations_June-2013.pdf - Report by the European Union Competencies in Respect of Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (Pages 60-63 and 71-75 as well as the conclusion on page 79-80 may prove useful for research): http://cmpf.eui.eu/Documents/CMPFPolicyReport2013.pdf
TRAN - Committee on Transport and Tourism” ”Transport is responsible for more than a quarter of CO2 emissions in Europe, with 71% of this figure coming from cars. As findings of initiatives such as the EU Transport Score-board show great disparities in energy efficiency, use, and performance across the EU, how should a comprehensive and coherent EU transport policy be developed bearing in mind the aims of the 2050 Roadmap?”
Introduction and background
Inefficient transport systems can have huge knock-on effects for passengers and goods alike: late trains, noise pollution, traffic jams and costly services are but some of the is-sues we are daily faced with. Transportation efficiency is incredibly important for the EU’s integrated market and also has an enormous impact on climatic and environmental issues. Traffic congestion alone costs the EU more than 1% of its GDP1 (or 1.3 trillion euro, which is more than the EU bud-get in its entirety). Enhancing the efficiency and competitiveness of the european trans-port will have an immediate effect on our economy: creating job opportunities, attracting investors and fostering research while also greatly contributing, through the develop-ment of a faster and cheaper connection network, to strengthening our european iden-
1 http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/road/doc/broch-road-transport_en.pdf
by Davide Monticelli (IT)
101
tity allowing a continuous flow of goods, technologies, ideas and people. Road traffic is the most popular mode of transport in the EU and accounts for 73% of the total passengers and 46% of goods transported. It is also the least efficient mode, both in terms of energy used per number of people transported and of CO2 emissions per distance traveled. n the 2050 roadmap1, adopted in December 2011, the European Commission estab-lished the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to 80% below the 1990 levels by 2050 as a key aim. In addition to this document, which certainly labels transport the main source of CO2 emissions, in the same year the white paper entitled ‘Roadmap to a single european transport area’2 was published providing a new vision for an integrated transport system and a set of strategies aimed at reaching the objectives set by the 2050 roadmap. Key Questions
How has the financial crisis affected the efforts of the Member States to enhancing their transport efficiency?Should the EU set objectives in this field for the entire community, for single Member States or for both?Building on the 2050 roadmap, what should EU transport policy focus on in the coming years? Links- employment in the EU transport sector video presentation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9InRx9fP2E- Trans European Transport Network (TEN-T) video presentation https://www.you-tube.com/watch?v=IeDFI38oKKI- TEN-T objectives – (a very important video) http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/infrastructure/index_en.htm1 http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/roadmap/index_en.htm http://www.eutransportghg2050.eu/cms/?flush=12 http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/strategies/2011_white_paper_en.htm
102
- Transport and EU legislation http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/transport/in-dex_en.htm- EU proposals and targets for road transport development http://www.euractiv.com/transport/eu-clean-transport-dream-faces-f-news-518433
Key Conflicts
The positive results shown by the latest EU reports1 seem to suggest that the measures taken to meet the 20-20-20 requirements will suffice to keep lowering our CO2 emis-sions until we reach sustainable levels. In the road vehicles industry the main strategy to lower CO2 emissions, while guaranteeing an efficient service, up to now has consist-ed of a series of commission directives2 setting standards for CO2 emissions. However there is a physical limit to how efficient a fossil-fuelled engine can be, which means that such strategies can only be considered as short-term solutions. As we aim to meet the ambitious objectives set in the 2050 roadmap, our utilisation of fossil fuels will have to be seriously questioned. The problem with moving away from fossil fuels is primarily of economic nature. As pre-viously stated, road traffic is the most common mode of transportation but also the one that is almost completely dependent on fossil fuels. The reason for its popularity is that road traffic is both the preferred means of transport for the private sector, because of its flexibilityandreliability,andtheonewhichismoreconvenientforacountrytomanage,as most Member States already have an infrastructural network in place and its coasts ofmaintenanceandcontrolareoftencoveredbytollsandothertaxes.Butmovingawayfrom road traffic essentially therefore means moving away from fossil fuel use, which is a costly practice.
1 Technical Report No 9/2014 by the European Environment Agencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/european-union-greenhouse-gas-inventory-20142 Commission Directive 2001/116/EC of 20 December 2001, adapting to technical progress Council Directive 70/156/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of motor ve-hicles and their trailers. Directive 2002/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 March 2002 relating to the type-approval of two or three-wheeled motor vehicles and repealing Council Directive 92/61/EEC.
103
Alternative forms of transportation such as trains, trams, underground etc are undoubt-edly more efficient both in terms of people and things they can move relative to energy needed, and also in terms of CO2 emissions being all electrically powered. It is impor-tant to consider however that these systems require a great deal of planning, coopera-tion among member states and enormous initial investments to build a new infrastruc-tural network. Key Questions What could be the advantages of a common system of tolling and driving behaviour to be respected by all member states?Should countries which show the will of investing the cleaner and more efficient trans-port system be financially supported by the EU?How should EU Members States work together to ensure that efficiency and productivity are of prime importance for EU transport policy? Links - Roadmap 2050 official websites for further reading http://www.roadmap2050.eu/project/roadmap-2050- EU plan for reducing emissions coming from transport http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/index_en.htm- Europe climate action program http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/package/index_en.htm
Stakeholders
The definition of the problem is subject to a great gravity if we consider data referring to the EU as a whole. In fact initiatives such as the EU Transport Scoreboard1 have shown that each Member State greatly differs not only in energy efficiency but also in methods oftransportationused.ForexampleLatviamovesanastonishing55%Ca.ofitsfreights
1 http://ec.europa.eu/transport/facts-fundings/scoreboard/index_en.htm
104
by train while Spain relies for more than 90% on road traffic. Some Member States find it more difficult to cut their reliance on road traffic not only because it is the cheapest form of transportation in the short term and does not need big initial investments, but also because they have a modest infrastructural industry, and they would have to buy trains and other necessary machinery to build railroads from other countries.
Only Member States rich enough to invest enormous amounts of money in the construc-tion and maintenance of infrastructural networks different from roadways such as high speed railways, urban underground and overground systems, manage to successfully cut their reliance on road traffic thus reducing their CO2 emissions and enhancing their transportation efficiency. In recent years the private sector has also timidly begun to show an interest in energy efficient means of transportations such as hybrid vehicles. Unfortunately their cost is not particularly competitive on the market in spite of European economic incentives such as super credits1. Key questions Should the geographical characteristics of a country play a part in the question of trans-portation efficiency?What can the EU do to influence the private market in order to make hybrid vehicles more affordable?How should economically poorer Member States work in collaboration with richer Mem-ber States in order to increase coherence of energy use across the EU?
1 The cars Regulation gives manufacturers additional incentives to produce vehicles with extremely low emis-sions (below 50g/km). Each low-emitting car will be counted as 3.5 vehicles in 2012 and 2013, 2.5 in 2014, 1.5 vehicles in 2015 and then 1 vehicle from 2016 to 2019.
105
Links
- EU strategy for reducing CO2 emission from passenger cars http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/vehicles/cars/index_en.htm- Statistics on the use of electrical cars “Electric vehicle market share in 19 coun-tries”. ABB Conversations. Zachary Shahan (2013-03-07). Retrieved 2014-04-12.- Reports on work undertaken by the EC to reach 2050 objectives in transportation industry http://www.eutransportghg2050.eu/cms/first-large-stakeholder-conference/- Article on cities with best public transport http://www.bbc.com/travel/feature/20130416-living-in-great-cities-for-public-transport- Different efforts by different countries to meet CO2 emissions standards http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/index_en.htm
Existing measures and Current Legislation
The Ten-T planned networks are the core transport and infrastructure plan proposed by the European Commission, which aims to close gaps in European transport systems through a number of priority initiatives1. As the Commission became cognisant of the fact that the requirements set in the 2020 climate and energy package2of2009willmostlikelybemetearlierthanexpected,twonew policies have been devised in addition, the first of which is the 2030 framework. This was brought forward by the EC in January 2014 and seeks to drive continued prog-ress towards a low-carbon economy. A centre piece of the framework is the target to reduce EU domestic greenhouse gas emissions by 40% below the 1990 level by 2030. This will be achieved also through a number of strategies3 to improve transport efficiency throughout the member states which include:
1 http://inea.ec.europa.eu/en/ten-t/apply_for_funding/follow_the_funding_process/2013_map_priority_proj-ects_call.htm 2 http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/package/index_en.htm3 http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/index_en.htm
106
- inclusion of aviation in the EU Emission Trading System- introduction of standards to reduce emissions in new cars and vans- introduction of a target for lower greenhouse gas intensity of fuels- rolling resistance limits and tyre pressure monitors made mandatory- public authorities are required to take account of life time energy use and CO2 emissions when procuring vehicles. The second piece of newer legislation is the 2050 Roadmap. The document sets out milestones which form a cost-effective pathway to achieving an 80% reduction in CO2 emissions compared to 1990 levels, including several strategies for transport efficiency, laid out in the white paper on transport of march 2011, such as:- introduction of a single european transport area- further legislation on technologies and behaviours related to transportation- smart pricing and funding of modern infrastructures- further funding to research and technology development With these two pieces of legislation the EU seeks to create a more cohesive european system of transport laying the basis for further decrement of our CO2 emissions and reli-ance on imported fossil fuels. Key Question Should the implications of a more efficient and interconnected european transportation system be apparent in other EU political decisions?How should the EU ensure that all Member States will benefit equally from these direc-tives?What more should the EU do in order to make sure that all the Member States are equally committed to creating a future transportation system free from CO2 emissions?
107
Links - Link to white paper on transport 2011 and to its video presentation http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/strategies/2011_white_paper_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/avservices/video/player.cfm?ref=I069182- presentation of INEA, agency created by the EC to manage financial and technical implementation of TEN-T http://inea.ec.europa.eu/en/news__events/newsroom/intro-ducing_inea_innovation_and_networks_executive_agency.htm- Article on current state of european policies on transport http://www.european-publicaffairs.eu/knitting-road-and-rail-networks-integrating-eu-transport/- report on objectives for maritime transport http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/maritime/index_en.htm
With the cooperation of :
With the kind support :
Under the auspices of :
ΔΗΜΟΣ ΠΟΛΥΓΥΡΟΥ
