Resolution Booklet - 14th National Selection Conference of EYP the Netherlands

2

Index

Programme 3

Procedure of the General Assembly 4

Motion of a Resolution by the Committee on Transport and Tourism II 6

Motion of a Resolution by the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development 8

Motion of a Resolution by the Committee on Foreign Affairs II 10

Motion of a Resolution by the Committee on Human Rights 12

Motion of a Resolution by the Committee on International Trade 14

Motion of a Resolution by the Committee on Transport and Tourism I 16

Motion of a Resolution by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs 19

Motion of a Resolution by the Committee on Foreign Affairs I 21

3

Programme 09.00 Opening of the General Assembly

09.30 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Transport and Tourism II

10.10 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development

10.50 Coffee Break

11.20 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Foreign Affairs II

12.00 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Human Rights

12.40 Lunch

13.40 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on International Trade

14.20 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Transport and Tourism I

15.00 Coffee Break

15.30 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs

16.10 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Foreign Affairs I

16.50 Closing Ceremony

4

Procedure of the General Assembly General rules The wish to speak is indicated by raising the Committee placard. The authority of the Board is absolute. Procedure and time settings 1. Presentation of the Motion for a Resolution (the Board reads out the topic, a member of the Proposing Committee reads out the Operative Clauses); 2. Points of Information; 3. Defence Speech (maximum 3 minutes); 4. Attack Speech (maximum of 3 minutes); 5. Response to the Attack Speech (maximum 1 minute); 6. Open Debate on the Motion for a Resolution: 7. Summation Speech (maximum 3 minutes); 8. Voting procedure; 9. Announcement of the voting results by the Board. Point of Information Request for a brief explanation of the meaning of specific words and abbreviations. Note that translations are not Points of Information. Points of Personal Privilege These are requests for a Delegate to repeat a point that was inaudible. Failure to understand the language being spoken does not make for a Point of Personal Privilege. Direct Responses Once per Debate, each Committee may use the ‘Direct Response’ sign. Should a Committee member raise the Committee Placard and the ‘Direct Response’ sign during the Open Debate, he/she will immediately be recognised by the Board and given the floor as soon as the point being made is concluded. A Direct Response can only be used to refer to and discuss the point made directly beforehand. If two or more Direct Responses are requested at once, the Board will decide which Committee to recognise. In this case, the second Direct Response shall only be held if it can be referred to the first Direct Response, so on and so forth.

5

Points of Order These can be raised by the Chairperson if a Delegate feels the Board have not properly followed Parliamentary procedure. Ultimately, the authority of the Board is absolute. Defence Speech One member of the Proposing Committee delivers the Defence Speech from the podium. It is used to explain the rationale of the overall lines of the Resolution and to convince the Plenary that the Resolution is worthy of being adopted. This speech can last a maximum of three minutes. Attack Speeches One Delegate from a Committee other than that proposing the Resolution at hand delivers an Attack Speech from the podium. It reflects an individual opinion and is used to point out the flaws of the approach taken by the Proposing Committee and should propose alternative solutions. Oftentimes, an Attack Speech is concluded with an appeal to the Plenary not to adopt the Resolution in their present form. Response to the Attack Speeches The Proposing Committee responds to the points raised by the Attack Speeches. They may do so for 1 minute. Summation Speech One or two members of the Proposing Committee deliver the Summation Speech from the podium; the microphone can only be passed once. It is used to summarise the Debate, respond to main, selected criticism and to once more explain why the chosen approach is the most sensible. It typically concludes with an appeal to vote in favour of the Resolution. This speech can last a maximum of three minutes.

6

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY

THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT AND TOURISM II (TRAN II)

With maritime transport being the most effective, cheap and sustainable means of

trade transport - given the constant threat of piracy and robberies at sea: what long term approach should the EU and Europe take to respond to these geo-

strategic challenges and the increasing need for maritime safety and security?

Submitted by: Yonah Berger Barnett (St. Ignatiusgymnasium); Stijn Coremans (Mencia de Mendoza); Caro Dullemond (Stanislascollege); Swier Garst (RGO Middelharnis); Noor ten Harmsen van der Beek (Atheneum College Hageveld); Juliette Hoeksma (Het Nieuwe Lyceum); Jeanice Koorndijk (Wolfert van Borselen); Kimberly van der Laan (Barlaeus Gymnasium); Oscar Mensink (Berlage Lyceum); Piet Seidenberg (Cygnus Gymnasium); Charissa C. Spekle (Marnix College); Naomi Appelman (Chairperson, NL); Mathieu Lohr (Chairperson, LU)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Noting with deep concern the emergence of security vacuums along major maritime trade routes which are important to the EU due to:

i. a shift of American military attention towards Asia,

ii. the EU’s insufficient presence along the aforementioned routes,

B. Concerned by the vulnerability to piracy along the main maritime trading routes as a result of the aforementioned security vacuums,

C. Bearing in mind that maritime transport facilitates up to 90%1 of the EU’s external trade,

D. Alarmed by the international community’s continued inability to eradicate piracy on said routes,

E. Emphasising the important role of private security companies in providing safe passage through pirate infested waters,

F. Concerned by the confusion created by unclear national and international legislation regarding the methods security companies use to properly protect their vessels, cargo and crew,

G. Drawing attention to the failure to prosecute pirates due to:

i. the absence of the rule of law in the country of origin,

ii. the high costs and legal challenges2 involved in prosecuting pirates,

1 http://www.nato-pa.int/default.asp?SHORTCUT=2087. 2 Conflicting and often insufficient legislation.

7

H. Regretting that current insurance policies discourage maritime transport carriers to report acts of piracy,

I. Drawing further attention to the problems arising from outdated ports along the aforementioned routes, such as:

i. limiting the economic potential of said routes due to the inability to harbour larger modern vessels,

ii. forcing shipping companies to utilise old ships with outdated safety features resulting in increased vulnerability to pirate attacks,

J. Conscious that pirate safe havens are a direct result of unstable governments.

1. Authorises the creation of a new maritime security mission by EU Member States, drawing from

experience gained from previous missions, with the aim of temporarily filling the security vacuum;

2. Calls upon the UN to develop a joint mission, with shared responsibilities, to secure global maritime trade routes;

3. Requests the modernisation of major ports along European trading routes, financed by the European Development Fund and under the supervision of the Committee on Development;

4. Urges the European Commission (EC) to propose a Directive:

a) allowing security personnel from private companies to be stationed on commercial vessels,

b) encouraging international trading partners to allow the movement of security personnel from private companies through foreign waters,

c) standardising the rules of engagement across Member States;

5. Calls for the expansion of the competences of ITLOS3 concerning the right to prosecute individuals engaging in pirate activity;

6. Emphasises the need for closer cooperation between the ITLOS and its signatories, specifically in coastal regions;

7. Recommends maritime insurance policy reforms that:

a) prohibit the increase of premiums as a consequence of reporting acts of piracy,

b) implement caps on premiums, set by the EC, after a consultation with experts that are unaffiliated with insurance companies;

8. Strongly supports stabilising struggling nation-states’ public institutions through developmental programs that aim at tackling the root causes of piracy4.

3 The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea is an independent judicial body established by the United Nations concerning maritime law. 4 The root causes of piracy are mostly related to the prevailing poverty, a lack of education and opportunities.

8


THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT (AGRI)

Harvesting a better Europe: With recent CAP reforms aiming to make agriculture in the EU more competitive and sustainable, how should the CAP resolve dealing

with global food markets and non-EU farmers?

Submitted by: Beatrice Donoghue (St. Ignatiusgymnasium); Joost de Haan (Atheneum College Hageveld); Pepijn van Leeuwen (Barlaeus Gymnasium); Emily Miao (Mencia de Mendoza); Nili Nawabi (Wolfert van Borselen); Tess de Rooij (Cygnus Gymnasium); Indra Joke Schrage (Berlage Lyceum); Miriam Sterl (Het Nieuwe Lyceum); Maren de Wit (Stanislascollege), Bernet Meijer (Chairperson, NL); Bram Van Meldert (Vice-President, BE)


A. Stressing that the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) should be in line with the EU development objectives, as stated in Article 208 of the Lisbon Treaty5,

B. Believing that the EU should secure its position on the global food market,

C. Deeply concerned that coupled payments6, combined with export subsidies7, cause the dumping8 of surpluses in developing countries,

D. Further noting that the aforementioned dumping activities may ultimately be an obstacle for local suppliers’ commerce with their products,

E. Noting with deep concern that dumping activities of EU Member States in developing countries lead to overbearing competition for local producers resulting in limited development of developing countries’ agricultural sectors,

F. Recognising that non-EU farmers are disadvantaged in global competitiveness due to limited access to the EU market resulting from imposing import tariffs9 on agricultural products,

G. Alarmed by the increase in global risk of bad harvests due to the vast amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced by the EU agricultural sector,

5 Article 208 of the Lisbon Treaty states that ‘The Union shall take into account of the objectives of development cooperation in the policies that it implements which are likely to affect developing countries’ (http://bit.ly/Mqi4kh). 6 Coupled payments are subsidies allocated to farmers that are coupled to production. The more a farmer produces the more subsidies the farmer receives (http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-11-685_en.htm). 7 Export subsidies are paid by the EU to trading companies to cover the difference between the internal EU price and the world market price (http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/accessing-markets/trade-defence/actions-against-imports-into-the-eu/anti-subsidy/). 8 Dumping is an informal term for the practice of selling a product in a foreign country for less than the price in the domestic country (http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/adp_e/adp_info_e.htm). 9 A tariff on goods coming into a country from abroad, often used by governments as a way of reducing imports and protecting local industries (http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=import-tariff).

9

H. Noting with regret that the environmental objectives set by the European Commission as part of the CAP are not met by the Member States,

I. Fully believing that the cross-compliance 10 requirements are not clear enough, thus providing perpetrators the opportunity to benefit from public subsidies;

1. Calls on the Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development (DG AGRI) to assess the demand for agricultural products in the EU market on an annual basis and establish a limit on the amount of coupled payments to EU farmers;

2. Encourages the Directorate General for Trade (DG Trade) to gradually reduce export subsidies to developing countries whose economies are based on agricultural production in an effort to render their domestic agricultural sectors self-sufficient;

3. Further invites the DG Trade to gradually lower import tariffs so as to render the EU market more accessible for non-EU farmers;

4. Further requests the establishment of a maximum import rate within the EU market calculated on agricultural supply-demand equilibrium, thus guaranteeing the EU market sustainability;

5. Urges Member States to uphold their obligations towards the EU by spending 30% of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) on environmental objectives dictated by the 2013 CAP reforms;

6. Calls upon DG AGRI to create a list of criteria that rural development programmes have to meet in order to comply with the aforementioned environmental objectives;

7. Calls for further exploration of cross-compliance opportunities so as to harvest its full potential and ensure greater eco-friendliness in the European agricultural sector.

10 Cross-compliance is a mechanism that links direct payments to compliance by farmers with basic standards concerning the environment, food safety, animal and plant health and animal welfare, as well as the requirement of maintaining land in good agricultural and environmental condition (http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/envir/cross-compliance/index_en.htm).

10

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS II (AFET II)

French weapons in Georgia, Italian combat helicopters and German

communication technology in Libya: Global military conflicts evoke a booming international trade of arms in which the EU has become the world’s biggest

supplier. How can the EU regulate its arms trading with the Middle East whilst not promoting conflict in the area and simultaneously preserving its trade relations?

Submitted by: John Ashworth (Cygnus Gymnasium); Joost Berkhout (Stanislascollege); Lena Keesen (RGO Middelharnis); Kevin Kerk (Wolfert van Borselen); Robbert Lens (Marnix College); Isidoor Maljers (St. Ignatiusgymnasium); Jeffrey Meissen (Tabor College Werenfridus); Charlotte Oostman (Atheneum College Hageveld); Alison Polack (Berlage Lyceum); Charlotte Remarque (Barlaeus Gymnasium); Daan van de Rijzen (Mencia de Mendoza); Adriaan van Streun (Revius Lyceum Doorn); Simon van Teutem (Christelijk Lyceum Zeist), Fahad Saher Fahad (Chairperson, NL), Hugo Dürr (Chairperson, SE)


A. Mindful of the EU Member States’ lack of general direction towards arms trade relations with the Middle East,

B. Noting that EU Member States and Middle Eastern countries have different objectives regarding the trading of arms,

C. Reaffirming the efforts of the United Nations’ (UN) Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) to reduce illicit arms trade on an international level,

D. Noting with regret the lack of transparency and accountability regarding the available information on the production, usage and transaction of arms between the EU and the Middle East11,

E. Acknowledging that stricter arms trade regulations might cause the Middle East to search for alternative arms distributors, which for the EU, could result in a loss of:

i. economic stability12 13,

ii. oil supply,

iii. quality of diplomatic relations,

F. Deeply concerned by the potential effect that arms, with EU origin, traded to Middle Eastern countries might have on conflict eruption and civilian casualties;

11 EU Member States have not acknowledged the UN Register of Conventional Arms which states that arms trade

data must be reported and published. 12 The EU exported 9.8 billion Euros worth of arms to the Middle East in 2012 (Reuters). 13 In the UK alone, 355,000 jobs depend on the arms industry (The Telegraph).

11

1. Calls upon the European Council to set a general direction on the EU-Middle East arms trading policy;

2. Encourages UN members to follow the recommendations of the ATT and support the need of the international community for stricter regulations in arms trading;

3. Calls for the establishment of an institution with the power to investigate:

a. the origin and destination of EU-traded arms,

b. the data countries and companies report concerning the trading of arms,

c. whether human rights are violated through the use of the aforementioned arms;

4. Strongly recommends that EU Member States integrate a study on EU-Middle East relations into their respective educational curricula aimed at increasing awareness therein;

5. Urges the European Commission to propose a quota on arms exports to the Middle East, totalling to 70% of the corresponding 2012 level, which is to be achieved by 2025;

6. Endorses EU Member States to invest in alternative energy resources so as to decrease their dependency on traditional energy sources provided by Middle Eastern countries;

7. Further recommends EU Member States to raise taxes on arms exports in order to decrease the amount of arms circulating in Middle Eastern countries;

8. Requests the European External Action Service (EEAS) to facilitate a platform of negotiation between EU Member States and Middle Eastern countries with the purpose of easing the transition of trade relations.

12

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS (DROI)

Following the 2011 Poly Implant Prosthesis (PIP) scandal, where for up to a

decade hundreds of thousands of women worldwide were given substandard breast implants, proposals to toughen up European Union legislation on medical devices was passed. What stance should the EU adopt in matters involving the

testing of medicines and medical devices?

Submitted by: Tom Budding (Revius Lyceum Doorn); Maria Dinu (Stanislascollege); Laura Korn (OSG Helen Parkhurst); Steinar Laenen (Cygnus Gymnasium); Daphne Lodder (RGO Middelharnis); Ellen Muller (Revius Lyceum Doorn); Catharina Nguyen (Tabor College Werenfridus); Tess Peters (Mencia de Mendoza); Emma de Rijke (Vossius Gymnasium); Christine Sheldon (Het Nieuwe Lyceum); Francisca Somann (Barlaeus Gymnasium); Lily Voge (Berlage Lyceum); Floris Rijssenbeek (Chairperson, NL); Monica Boţa Moisin (President, RO)


A. Alarmed by the fact that substandard medical devices cause exposure of EU citizens to safety risks,

B. Noting with regret that the current Medical Devices Directive (MDD) is frequently transposed differently in EU Member States, which creates ambiguity and loopholes within the current legislation14,

C. Deeply concerned by the questionable reliability of the Notified Bodies considering their interest in financial prosperity at the detriment of public health and safety,

D. Realising that the current post market-release inspections are not executed in such a way as to ensure optimal safety for patients,

E. Bearing in mind that the Notified Bodies’ prior announcement of their inspections provides the manufacturers with the opportunity to temporarily replace the medical devices with devices capable of passing inspections,

F. Noting with regret that the categories set by the current MDD do not cover all innovative medical devices15,

G. Recognising that insufficient information on manufacturers and their products causes a lack of transparency resulting in substandard medical devices to appear on the market,

H. Emphasising that Notified Bodies do not often test the medical devices through experimental research and frequently only analyse the supporting documentation,

14 MDD is intended to harmonise the legislation on medical devices within the EU. In order for a manufacturer to legally place a medical device on the European market the requirements of the MDD have to be met. 15 A medical device is an instrument, apparatus, implant, in vitro reagent, or similar or related article that is used to diagnose, prevent, or treat a disease or other conditions, and does not achieve its purposes through chemical action within or on the body.

13

I. Expecting that increasing transparency will lead to decreasing patient accessibility to innovative medical devices,

J. Recognising that the EU’s failure to act upon substandard medical devices led to scandals, such as PIP to arise,

K. Noting with regret that patients are unaware of the possible risks generated by medical devices;

1. Requests the MDD to contain multiple specific goals for Member States to prevent unclarity,

transposition and loopholes within legislation;

2. Supports the establishment of the Medical Device Coordination Group (MDCG) as mentioned in the 2012 European Commission proposal;

3. Urges that Notified Bodies will be regulated on national level and supported by European funding;

4. Reccomends that the national governments have authority to verify the activity of Notified Bodies;

5. Further reccomends that in the event of fraud being committed by Notified Bodies, such cases be sanctioned through reorganisation, fines, suspension of supervisory ability and inprisonment;

6. Calls for introducing an optional post market-release evaluation process, giving patients and doctors the opportunity to present their experiences through questionnaires;

7. Encourages the Notified Bodies to conduct on the spot inspections at least once every three months;

8. Reccomends the expansion of the EUDAMED database to include recent reports of the Notified Bodies on technical or chemical components of medical devices and the associated health risks;

9. Further reccomends access to EURAMED to be granted to doctors and Notified Bodies in addition to governmental authorities;

10. Urges doctors to inform their patients about the possible risks mentioned in the EUDAMED database;

11. Calls upon the Notified Bodies to perform compuslory medical devices testing and to report on the results;

12. Requests the MDD to be amended with the new risk class diferentiated categories provided by the EC 2012 proposal to include medical devices using nonviable human tissue or nanomaterial.

14

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE (INTA)

Value versus values: How can the EU ensure that materials and products

imported to Europe are economically viable and in line with European values and sustainability standards?

Submitted by: Sahar Afzal (Berlage Lyceum); Daniel van den Akker (Mencia de Mendoza); Amber Bakker (Tabor College Werenfridus); Hidde Fokkema (St. Ignatiusgymnasium); Daniel Golden (Atheneum College Hageveld); Noah Jansen (OSG Helen Parkhurst); Esther Kingma (Revius Lyceum Doorn); Doris Mourik (RGO Middelharnis); Jason Morgan van Schijndel (Vossius Gymnasium); Malte Stuhlmacher (Cygnus Gymnasium); Pien Tamboer (Wolfert van Borselen); Sigi Voeten (Barlaeus Gymnasium); Alice Zhang (Stanislascollege); Myrna van Dijk (Chairperson, NL); Christos Papadogeorgopoulos (Chairperson, GR)


A. Guided by the European values on human rights, in particular the rights of children, good governance, rule of law and social, economic and environmental sustainability,

B. Realising that the European Union (EU) and its trading partners have different priorities concerning the aforementioned values,

C. Emphasising the interdependence between the EU and its associated trading partners,

D. Expressing its concern about the fact that the production process of some goods imported into the EU is not in line with European values and sustainability standards,

E. Deeply concerned about the lack of transparency of the production process of imported goods for both the EU and European consumers,

F. Recognising that by consuming responsibly, consumers can have an influence on the compliance of production processes with EU standards,

G. Noting with concern that European companies can avoid complying with European standards by outsourcing their production process to producers based in countries with lower standards,

H. Further aware that it takes time to adapt a production process to the high standards and values of the EU,

I. Fully aware that EU’s trading partners cannot fully rise up to EU standards because of a lack of technological knowledge and economical resources,

J. Deeply disturbed by the loss of competitiveness for EU manufacturers because non-EU producers have to comply to standards that are less strict,

K. Noting with regret that European development funds that are aimed at improving the compliance of non-EU production processes with European standards, such as the European-China Trade Pact (EUCTP), did not deliver the expected outcomes;

15

L. Noting that the pending trade agreements amount to 2.2% of the EU’s GDP16,

1. Requests the European Commission (EC) to introduce a labelling system for imports which will

assess the working conditions and the environmental sustainability of the production process related to these imports;

2. Further requests the EC to propose the creation of an independent labelling regulatory body, which will:

a) set the required standards regarding labour conditions and sustainability,

b) grade the products according to the required standards;

3. Invites trading partners to allow supervision of the production process of the foreign companies by a newly established EU independent body;

4. Calls upon the EC to implement a sanctions policy towards companies failing to comply with working conditions standards as defined by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) within a 25 years timeframe;

5. Recommends compliance investigations to be conducted every 5 years and sanctions to be applied in the absence of substantial progress distinguishing between EU outsourcing companies and non-EU companies as follows:

a) EU outsourcing companies will face a profit percentage based fine,

b) non-EU companies will face a quota, based on the percentage of their initial imports;

6. Calls upon the EU to ensure that development aid projects aimed at improving the compliance of non-EU production processes with European standards, should be divided and financed in stages of improvement such that a stage is only financed when the conditions for the previous stage are met;

7. Supports the EC to continue negotiating Free Trade Agreements to stimulate economic growth, while ensuring that the EU standards are preserved;

8. Encourages joint ventures17 between EU companies and foreign trading partners that do not meet the European sustainability standards.

16 Official website of the European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-

regions/agreements/index_en.htm#_europe). 17 A business arrangement in which two or more parties agree to pool their resources for the purpose of accomplishing a specific task. In a joint venture each of the participants is responisble for profits, losses and costs associoated with it. However, the venture is its own entity, separate and apart from the participants’ other business interests.

16


THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT AND TOURISM I (TRAN I)

Urban mobility: As more than half of European citizens live in urban areas, how can the EU combine the improvement of citizen mobility in urban areas with the

transition to green transportation?

Submitted by: Mink Bridié (Berlage Lyceum); Sterre Hoogendijk (Tabor College Werenfridus); Lieke Jansen (Het Nieuwe Lyceum); Maria Bianka Lojanica (Stanislas College); Boris van der Lugt (Barlaeus Gymnasium); Eveline Neele (Christelijk Lyceum Zeist); Melinda Oerlemans (Mencia de Mendoza); Janine Roos (RGO Middelharnis); Marie Sam Rutten (OSG Helen Parkhurst); Anna Stibbe (St. Ignatiusgymnasium); Stephan Verhulst (Atheneum College Hageveld); Senne Zeinstra (Cygnus Gymnasium); Kristýna Stejskalová (Chairperson, CZ); Rosa Douw (Vice-President, NL)


A. Guided by the fact that urban areas within the EU are not prepared to face the difficulties generated by the urban population growth of 21,5% by 203018,

B. Firmly convinced that appropriate improvement of the transportation systems within the EU requires balance between functionality and sustainability,

C. Welcoming initiatives such as White Paper 201119, Horizon 202020 and the Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP)21,

D. Taking into consideration differences in the quality of transportation between different urban areas within the EU,

E. Emphasising the need to promote green transportation22 to EU citizens,

F. Noting with deep concern that green transportation is currently not developed enough to completely replace fossil fuels,

18 Handout development of urban areas: http://www.oneworldconvention.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Handout-Development-of-rural-areas.pdf. 19 White paper 2011 is a European strategy towards competitive and resource effective transport system adopted by the European Commission. The key goals include cutting carbon emissions by 60% and increasing mobility by 2050 (http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/strategies/2011_white_paper_en.htm). 20 Horizon 2020 is the biggest EU Research and Innovation programme ever with nearly €80 billion of funding available over 7 years (2014 to 2020) – in addition to the private investment that this money will attract. It promises more breakthroughs, discoveries and world-firsts by taking great ideas from the lab to the market (http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/what-horizon-2020). 21 SUMP defines a set of interrelated measures designed to satisfy the mobility needs of people and businesses today and tomorrow. They are the result of an integrated planning approach and address all modes and forms of transport in cities and their surrounding area. 22 Green transportation is sustainable as it uses renewable resources instead of fossil fuels.

17

G. Appreciating the efforts of bodies such as the Covenant of Mayors23 and CIVITAS24 contributing to the improvement of urban mobility within the EU,

H. Regretting that not all cities facing the challenge of urban mobility are actively participating in the Covenant of Mayors and CIVITAS,

I. Noting with deep concern that CIVITAS will end in 2016,

J. Appreciating platforms such as GET Service25,

K. Deeply concerned by the lack of cooperation in improving citizen mobility in urban areas and the transition to green transportation between:

i. cities struggling with urban mobility and cities with functional transportation systems,

ii. GET Service and cities in urban areas,

L. Deeply regretting the lack of efficiency of public transportation due to:

iii. absence of punctuality,

iv. the Last Mile Problem26,

M. Deeply regretting the lack of infrastructure for bicycles and pedestrians in cities where it is possible,

N. Aware of the fact that traffic jams are mainly caused by:

v. commuting,

vi. people choosing to travel by car instead of alternative transportation,

vii. car drivers looking for parking spots,

O. Having studied the difference between type-approval and real-world CO2 emission levels of new passenger cars and increase due to unrealistic testing conditions27;

1. Recommends all cities facing an increase in urban mobility to actively participate in the Covenant of

Mayors and CIVITAS;

2. Urges the Covenant of Mayors to actively promote SUMP;

3. Calls upon GET Service to open the platform for the Covenant of Mayors;

23 The Covenant of Mayors is the mainstream of European movement involving local and regional authorities voluntarily committing to increasing energy efficiency and use of renewable energy sources on their territories. By their commitment Covenant signatories aim to meet and exceed the EU 20% CO2 reduction objective by 2020 (http://www.covenantofmayors.eu/index_en.html). 24 CIVITAS is a modern European initiative launched in 2002 to redefine transport measures and policies in order to create cleaner, better transport in cities (http://civitas.eu/). 25 The GET Service platform provides transportation planners with the means to plan transportation routes more efficiently and to respond quickly to unexpected events during transportation. To this end, it connects to existing transportation management systems and improves on their performance by enabling sharing of selected information between transportation partners, logistics service providers and authorities (http://getservice-project.eu/). 26 The Last Mile Problem refers to the fact that many residences and businesses lay beyond an easy walking distance to a station. 27 ICCT: Discrepancies between type-approval and “real-world” fuel-consumption and CO2 values: http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_EU_fuelconsumption2_workingpaper_2012.pdf.

18

4. Calls for the continuation of CIVITAS until 2050 so as to be compatible with White Paper 2011;

5. Recommends the Covenant of Mayors to solve the Last Mile Problem by implementing:

a. an eco-friendly van system in which the frequency of public transport depends on the demand in the area,

b. a public bicycle system;

6. Further recommends the Covenant of Mayors to introduce a pre-paid parking service which allows the reservation of a parking spot online for a specific amount of time;

7. Encourages car rental allowing citizens to hand in their rented cars in several fixed stations in urban areas;

8. Calls upon national governments of Member States to reward employers that reimburse their employees for using public transportation;

9. Supports the idea of carpooling by giving advantages such as special lanes in cities and special parking places;

10. Urges the European Commission to change the current conditions of NEDC28 testing through:

a. limiting the temperature of the testing environment to between 20 and 25°C,

b. testing cars with standard air conditioning alternating air conditioning between on and off during the test,

c. simulating the actual weight of the car instead of the current weight categories.

28 NEDC (New European Driving Cycle) is a standardised test run used to measure CO2 car emissions by simulating a driving experience.

19


THE COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AND MONETARY AFFAIRS (ECON)

With the United States Department of Justice declaring Bitcoin to be a legitimate

financial instrument, the state media of China giving attention to the virtual currency as well and the recent volatility of the value of the Bitcoin, what stance

should the EU take on the matter, the opportunities and dangers of digital currencies?

Submitted by: Felipe Moscoso Cruz (Mencia de Mendoza); Bart Hartog (Marnix College); Burak Konya (St. Ignatiusgymnasium); Hugo Mohr (Het Nieuwe Lyceum); Philipp Moser (Atheneum College Hageveld); Remy Petersen (OSG Helen Parkhurst); Eva Johanna Marianne Prins (RGO Middelharnis); Segher de Reij (Tabor College Werenfridus); Jelle de Ruiter (Cygnus Gymnasium); Joar Spangenberg (Berlage Lyceum); Anlei Tan (Wolfert van Borselen); Derek Hans Uleman (Vossius Gymnasium); Boris Verloop (Stanislascollege); Theo Warnier (Barlaeus Gymnasium); Titus Verster (Chairperson, NL); Ioanna Yiallourides (Chairperson, CY)


A. Fully aware that crypto currencies29 are a means of payment that do not fulfil the first two of the three standards for generally accepted currencies30,

B. Drawing attention to the fact that crypto currencies are the most problematic type of digital currency,

C. Recognising that crypto currencies may have a negative impact on the European economy as a result of:

viii. high volatility due to the fact that the value is purely based on the trust of its users,

ix. the absence of an insurance scheme that will refund money if the currency collapses,

x. the lack of consumer protection against any form of theft,

xi. the unpredictable future of crypto currencies due to their experimental character,

D. Noting with deep concern the dissatisfaction of European citizens with the current banking system with regard to high transaction and administration fees in the form of taxes,

E. Taking into account the potential benefits and opportunities provided by the new phenomenon of digital currencies with regard to the improvement of the current banking system,

29 Crypto Currencies are a type of digital currency that uses cryptography for security. An electronic signature is added when a payment is made. It is this signature, and not a name, that shows up in the transaction history. It is close to impossible to link a name to a signature, making the use of Cryptocurrencies almost anonymous. 30 The three standards for a currency to be generally accepted are (1) a unit of account, (2) a store of value and (3) a means of payment.

20

F. Keeping in mind that certain Member States’ national banks have already implemented differing regulatory measures and adopted a stance on crypto currencies,

G. Acknowledging that the anonymity of users and the inability to trace transactions significantly contributes to the alarming number of crime-related transactions,

H. Concerned that the European Union (EU) has not adopted a strategy to investigate and eliminate major illicit activity platforms on the Dark Web31,

I. Alarmed by the lack of knowledge of potential consumers concerning the dangers of crypto currencies,

J. Deeply concerned with the lack of cooperation between national governments on the subject of crypto currency recognition and regulation, which could result in global trading conflicts;

1. Suggests that the European Central Bank (ECB) plays an active role in discouraging Member States

from recognizing crypto currencies as a legitimate means of exchange;

2. Advises all Member States’ national banks to abstain from involvement with crypto currencies until there is a sufficient amount of information regarding the stability, safety and future of crypto currencies;

3. Emphasises the importance of research in applying the positive mechanisms of crypto currencies, such as peer-to-peer technology32, to the conventional banking system;

4. Calls upon the European Commission to investigate the use of crypto currencies in illegal transactions;

5. Encourages the creation of a programme, modelled after the structure of the ISEC33 and the CIPS34, with a focus on eliminating major internet platforms which host illegal trading using crypto currencies;

6. Endorses the creation of an informative website for potential consumers, warning citizens of the security and investment implications of crypto currencies;

7. Urges the ECB to host a conference for Member States’ national banks to make them fully aware of the inherent high risks in the use of crypto currencies;

8. Expresses its hope for the the G20 to engage in a joint discussion on crypto currencies in order to:

a. exchange knowledge on this new phenomenon,

b. establish common ground on a global scale,

c. prevent conflict regarding regulatory measures.

31 The Dark Web is the part of the internet not accessible for the standard internet user, often used for illegal activities. 32 Online exchange of commodities without any intermediary agent or transaction costs. 33 ISEC is a programme with a budget of EUR 600 million for the period 2007-13 that contributes to crime prevention, law enforcement, witness protection and support and victim protection. 34 CIPS is a programme of the European Commission with a budget of EUR 140 million for the period of 2007-13 that contributes to protect citizens and critical infrastructures from terrorist attacks and other security incidents.

21


THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS I (AFET I)

Ukrainian protests: Since December 2013, thousands of protesters have poured into the streets of Kyiv, angered by their government's move away from the

European Union in favour of closer ties with Russia. What is the future for EU-Ukraine relations?

Submitted by: Queenstar Amponsah Dogbatse (Berlage Lyceum); Kerstin Baars (RGO Middelharnis); Faye Bovelander (Stanislascollege); Rob Droste (Tabor College Werenfridus); Sarah-Jane Faritsia van Els (Wolfert van Borselen); Nina van Giesen (St. Ignatiusgymnasium); Parel van Hoboken (Barlaeus Gymnasium); Max Kosian (Christelijk Lyceum Zeist); Lotte Levelt (Mencia de Mendoza); Florentine Sikking (Het Nieuwe Lyceum); Lauren Wessel (Atheneum College Hageveld); Bart Wolna (Cygnus Gymnasium); Merel Blok (Chairperson, NL); Christian Browne (Chairperson, UK)


A. Deeply concerned by the state of affairs in Ukraine when it comes to:

i. high levels of violence shown towards both citizens and police,

ii. protestors’ requests being overlooked by the Ukrainian government,

iii. attempts made to implement anti-protest laws by the current government,

B. Affirming that Ukraine is currently unable to become a Member State due to:

iv. lack of democracy accompanied by corruption in elections and government,

v. accumulation of large debts such as those responsible for the build up to the 2006 January Gas Crisis35,

vi. violations of human rights exposed during the recent protests and resulting riots,

vii. rejection of the Association Agreement and subsequent partnering with Russia,

C. Recognising the EU needs to improve relations with Ukraine,

D. Noting with regret that Ukraine is currently heavily dependent on Russia, most notably for:

viii. Gazprom’s supply of gas to Naftogaz36,

ix. Russia’s importation of Ukrainian products such as steel, chemicals and fur,

E. Fully aware that the EU cannot provide the same opportunities to Ukraine as Russia, such as financing the creation of a Ukrainian space programme,

35 The stoppage of the supply of gas by Gazprom to Naftogas after a disagreement about lasting debts 36 The state owned national gas company of Ukraine that is in its trade dependent on the Russian gas company, Gazprom.

22

F. Keeping in mind Russia’s historical influence over Ukraine, creating a regional imbalance of various ethnic groups including Russian migrants causing an apparent divide between western and eastern Ukraine;

1. Calls upon the United Nations to enforce Article 5537 of the Charter on Human Rights to bring to light the violations of human rights by Ukrainian authorities and impose the necessary course of action;

2. Appreciates that protestors are defending their democratic right to voice their political opinions, and therefore hopes to support protestors by supplying them with basic medical and dietary needs;

3. Urges the UN to send independent supervisors to coordinate fair elections in 2015, reducing the risk of events such as the 2004 Orange Revolution38 re-occurring;

4. Recommends that the next Ukrainian government, elected in 2015, to sign the Association Agreement and consequently:

a. requesting the release of Yulia Tymoshenko with the intention of holding a fair trial,

b. helping to manage the rise of any debts by implementing various economic strategies as outlined in the Association Agreement,

5. Expresses its desire for the Ukrainian parliament to hold a ‘vote of no-confidence’ to establish the Chambers’ support for president Yanukovych;

6. Calls for further research into alternative energy through the creation of the Directorate for the United Development for Energy (DUDE), a body working under the European External Action Service (EEAS) in line with the aims of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), therefore helping to:

a. reduce ENP members’ dependence on gas,

b. increase chances of a transfer to green energy in the future;

7. Supports the use of pipelines other than those linking Ukraine to Russia, such as the reverse pipeline in Slovakia,thus further reducing Europe’s reliance upon Russia;

8. Requests the allocation of a €15bn39 loan to Ukraine to be paid back over a 20-year period, thus helping to,

a. reduce debts currently preventing Ukraine from becoming a Member State,

b. improving existing inefficient post-Soviet industry to reduce supply costs and therefore increase producer surplus;

9. Further requests that Ukrainian and Russian leaders attend an EU summit with diplomats from both sides in attendance to help alleviate tensions by renewing the dialogue.

37 “The United Nations shall promote: a) higher standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and development; b) solutions of international economic, social, health, and related problems; c) international cultural and educational cooperation; d) universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion” - Article 55 of the United Nations Charter on Human Rights. 38 Removal of Viktor Yanukovych and his cabinet after allegations of election fraud were proved true. 39 Value equivalent to the amount given by Russia in the form of Government bonds for not signing the Association Agreement in November.

Resolution Booklet - 14th National Selection Conference of EYP the Netherlands

Documents

Transcript of Resolution Booklet - 14th National Selection Conference of EYP the Netherlands