Preparation Kit – Turku 2015 21st National Session of EYP Finland

Turku 2015 | 16–19 January

 

Welcome words

Dear Participants of Turku 2015,

I would like in my turn to welcome you to the 21st National Session of EYP Finland.

The National Committee of EYP Finland, together with the Organising, Chairs and Media teams

have been working tirelessly on the preparations of the session which is fast approaching. It is now

your turn to put your energy, work and enthusiasm into making this event an unforgettable one.

In this booklet you will find all you need to assist you in your academic preparation for the session.

The topic overviews below are to be used as a starting point for your own further research. I trust

that you have all started working on your position papers and these overviews will help you go a

step further in your study. Good academic preparation and understanding of your committee topic

will ensure that you all enjoy stimulating and exciting debates during the session.

On behalf of the Chairs’ Team, we look forward to hearing your debates and fresh ideas, and of

course meeting you all in Turku!

Kind Regards,

Valentina Mina

President of the 21st National Session of EYP Finland

 

European Youth Parliament (EYP)

The European Youth Parliament represents a non-partisan and independent educational project, which is tailored specifically to the needs of the young European citizens. European Youth Parliament Finland, established in 2001, is the National Committee of the EYP in Finland.

The EYP encourages independent thinking and initiative in young people and facilitates the learning of crucial social and professional skills. Since its inauguration, many tens of thousands of young people have taken part in Regional, National and International Sessions, formed friendships and made international contacts across and beyond borders. The EYP has thus mad a vital contribution towards uniting Europe.

Today the EYP is one of the largest European platforms for political debate, intercultural encounters, political educational work and the exchange of ideas among young people in Europe. The EYP consists of a network of 41 European associations in which thousands of young people are active in a voluntary capacity.

The EYP is a programme of the Schwarzkopf Foundation.

European Union (EU)

The European Union is an economic and political union of 28 Member States. The EU was established by the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992 upon the foundations of the European Communities.

The EU has developed a single market through a standardised system of laws, which apply in all Member States, and ensures the free movement of people, goods, services, and capital, including the abolition of passport controls within the Schengen area. It enacts legislation in justice and home affairs, and maintains common policies on trade, agriculture, fisheries and regional development. Eighteen Member States have adopted a common currency, the euro.

With a view to its relations with the wider world, the EU has developed a limited role in foreign and defence policy through the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Permanent diplomatic missions have been established around the world and the EU is represented at the United Nations, the World Trade Organization (WTO), the G8 and the G-20

 The EU operates through a hybrid system of supranationalism and intergovernmentalism. In certain areas decisions are taken by independent institutions, while in others, they are made through negotiation between Member States.

The EU traces its origins from the European Coal and Steel Community and the European Economic Community formed by six countries in the 1950s. Since the, it has grown in size through enlargement, and in power through the addition of policy areas to its remit. The last amendment to the constitutional basis of the EU came into force in 2009 and was the Lisbon Treaty.

The Institutions of the European Union

The European Council is responsible for defining the general political direction and priorities of the EU. It comprises the heads of state of government of EU Member States, along with its President (currently Donald Tusk from Poland) and the President of the Commission.

The Council of the European Union (commonly referred to as the Council of Ministers) is the institution in the legislature of the EU representing the governments of Member States, the other legislative body being the European Parliament. The exact membership depends on the topic: for instance, when discussing agricultural policy the Council is formed by the 28 national ministers whose portfolio includes this policy area.

The European Parliament is directly elected parliamentary institution of the EU. Together with the Council, it forms the bicameral legislative branch of the EU. The Parliament is composed of 751 MEPs. The current president is Martin Schultz from Germany.

The European Commission is the executive body of the EU. It is responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the Union’s treaties and the general day-to-day running of the Union. The Commission operates as a cabinet government, with 28 commissioners. The Current President is Jean-Claude Juncker from Luxembourg.

Other important institutions of the EU include the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Central Bank. The EU also has several agencies and other institutions.    

 

Committee topics Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) Chairpersons: Rebecca Kiiski (FI) and Alexander Proctor (FI) The ‘right’ opinion: the result of the elections of the European Parliament in May 2014 reflected yet again the growing popularity of the extreme right and euro-scepticism within the EU, how should the EU react to the loss of citizens trust in its legitimacy and future?

Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) Chairperson: Maximilian Richter (SE) The hottest region in the world: with the melting of Arctic ice exposing unprecedented economic opportunities, how should the EU position itself in the global race to control the Arctic region? Committee on Culture and Education (CULT) Chairperson: Manfredi Danielis (IT)

Education comes first: with the Pisa Report 2012 revealing a worrying disparity between educational performance across Europe: How can the EU support its Member States in providing the highest possible standard of school education?

Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) Chairperson: Yiannos Vakis (CY) The end of austerity: in the light of growing concerns about the effects of austerity policies on economic growth, how should European governments balance their growth with social stability?   Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL I) Chairpersons: Noura Berrouba (SE) and Yannick Weber (CH)

The start-up economy: with high youth unemployment and stagnant economies, how should European governments promote entrepreneurship in order to create a generation of young entrepreneurs?

 Committee on Employment and Social Affairs I I (EMPL II) Chairperson: David Soler Crespo (ES)

Internships – opportunity or exploitation: how can the EU effectively support its youth in making a smooth transition from education to employment?

Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) Chairperson: Katerina Zejdlova (CZ)

Competitive sustainable growth: increasing consumer consumption and an ever developing economy is currently a threat to the environment, what measures should the EU take in order to ensure sustainable development without endangering its economic growth and competitiveness?

Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM) Chairperson: Ia Tserodze (GE)

‘Glass ceiling’ effect vs. low public pan-European support for gender quotas: learning from the early lessons of the Commission’s strategy for equality between men and women 2010-2015 and the Council of Europe’s (CoE) Gender Equality Programme of 2012, how should European stakeholders seek to achieve gender parity across the continent?

Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) Chairpersons: Anna Pusa (FI)

The gas crisis of 2009 and Russia’s energy dominance: with the recent events in Ukraine highlighting the dangers of over-dependence on imported energy, what steps can the EU take to limit its reliance on external energy sources and to protect consumers from price shocks?

Committee on Regional Development (REGI) Chairpersons: Adela Iacobov (RO) Building the periphery: mechanisms such as the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund have played an important role in developing the peripheral areas of Europe, but they are also costly. Keeping in mind that metropolitan areas are the primary motors of growth, how should the EU best supports areas to suit the needs of their population?

 

Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO)

The ‘right’ opinion: the result of the elections of the European Parliament in May 2014 reflected yet

again the growing popularity of the extreme right and euro-scepticism within the EU, how should

the EU react to the loss of citizens trust in its legitimacy and future?

Chairpersons: Rebecca Kiiski (FI) and Alexander Proctor (FI)

In the May 2014 European Parliament (EP) elections, Europe saw an alarming rise in extreme right

and euro-sceptic parties with them winning seats in 23 out of 28 Member States.1 The UK

Independence Party (UKIP) in the United Kingdom winning 27%2 of votes and the Front National in

France 25%3, are only a few examples. These democratically elected members of the EP show a

shift in European politics and have now raised concerns of the citizens’ dissatisfaction and loss of

trust towards the EU.

Extreme right wing and euro-sceptic parties often do not support the EU. These representatives in

the EP could therefore obstruct the decision-making process and democracy by, for example, not

participating. These parties are also often connected to anti-immigrant views, xenophobia4 and

nationalism, views that go against European values. For example in Hungary, extreme rightists

have been found to terrorise the Roma minorities. Nonetheless, the parties are all different from

each other with their own political views and strategies.

The weakened support for European values - such as integration, multiculturalism, and support

for Europe - and the economic crisis have given space for nationalistic and populist parties.

However, other causes have led to their rise, such as unemployment, security and immigration

issues and general dissatisfaction in the EU and its decisions.

                                                                                                                         1  http://www.academia.edu/9274791/AN_ANALYSIS_OF_THE_2014_EUROPEAN_UNION_ELECTIONS  2  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/elections2014-­‐results/en/country-­‐results-­‐uk-­‐2014.html  3  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/elections2014-­‐results/en/country-­‐results-­‐fr-­‐2014.html  4  Xenophobia:  dislike,  fear  or  prejudice  against  foreigners.  

 Where does the dissatisfaction towards the EU arise from? Whether the reason is misperception, a

flaw in the EU’s democratic structures or a lack of interest in politics, it is leading to an alarming

democratic deficit. In Member States the EU does not seem strongly present, with two-thirds of

people saying their voice does not count.5 The European Citizens Initiative (ECI) with direct

democracy6 aims to involve European citizens in the decision making process by giving them the

opportunity to directly voice their opinion. The ECI aims to increase the citizens’ involvement and

increase interest in European issues. However, the process remains complicated and many people

are still unaware of its existence. Other measures also exist, such as the Citizens Dialogue, EU’s

Structured Dialogue, Europe for Citizens Programme, Citizens’ House and Debating Europe. How

can these current approaches be improved and what else can be done to increase the citizens’

trust in the EU?

What are the reasons behind the increase of support towards extreme right and euro-scepticism?

Where does the support stem from? What effect does it have on the EU’s democracy and the

decision-making process? How can the EU regain its citizens’ trust?

Keywords: extremism, anti-EU populism, euro-scepticism, freedom of speech, democracy,

European Parliament elections, European Citizens’ Initiative, right wing.

Recommended Reading:

• The EU institutions and other bodies:

http://europa.eu/about-eu/institutions-bodies/

• Eurobarometer survey on the “Public Opinion in the European Union”:

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb80/eb80_first_en.pdf

                                                                                                                         5  http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb80/eb80_first_en.pdf    6  Direct  democracy:  a  form  of  democracy  where  citizens  themselves  direcly  decide  on  politicical  initivates  instead  of  elected  representatives.  

 • An article by ‘The Economist’ on the impact of the rise of anti-establishment parties:

http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21603034-impact-rise-anti-establishment-

parties-europe-and-abroad-eurosceptic-union

• Report from workshop on “European elections 2014: the rise of xenophobic and

Eurosceptic movements in Europe”:

http://www.diplocat.cat/files/docs/EuroscepticismXenophobiaEurope2014.pdf

• ‘The continent-wide rise of euroscepticism’ by the think-tank Council on Foreign Relations:

http://www.ecfr.eu/page/-/ECFR79_EUROSCEPTICISM_BRIEF_AW.pdf

• “Will eurosceptics force a new political reality on Europe”, video by Euronews

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DM4Oo5O6dBg

• “How it works; Launch a European Citizens' Initiative”, video by the European Parliament:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDJxXiYlK48

 

Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET)

The hottest region in the world: with the melting of Arctic ice exposing unprecedented economic

opportunities, how should the EU position itself in the global race to control the Arctic region?

Chairperson: Maximilian Richter (SE)

A Changing Region

Temperatures are rising around the world, but in the Arctic they rise faster: roughly twice as fast

between 1951 and 2012.7 As a result, the icecap is shrinking and the Arctic is growing increasingly

accessible. When the climate gets milder, trade routes open and economic development to access

natural resources speeds up.

The most immediate effect is on trade. The Northern Sea Route (NSR), for instance, reduces the

shipping distance between Asia and Western Europe by one third;8 with rising temperatures the

route will be an option for more months of the year. As melting goes further, the Transpolar Sea

Route will also become available, allowing transit through the Arctic without entering the

territorial waters of any Arctic state.9

But the warmer climate also brings plans for economic development. The Arctic states hope to tap

into the natural resources of the Arctic, for good reason: ‘about 30% of the world’s undiscovered

gas and 13% of the world’s undiscovered oil may be found there, mostly offshore under less than

500 meters of water.’10 These reserves are expected to remain largely untouched for another

decade or more. Still, they are significant. Putin made the analysis that ‘offshore fields, especially

in the Arctic, are without any exaggeration [Russia’s] strategic reserve for the 21st century’.11

                                                                                                                         7  http://www.economist.com/node/21556798    8  Ibid  9  Malte  Humpert  and  Andreas  Raspotnik.  ”The  Future  of  Arctic  Shipping  along  the  Transpolar  Sea  Route.”  The  Arctic  Institute.  10  Gautier  et  al.  ”Assessment  of  Undiscovered  Oil  and  Gas  in  the  Arctic.”  Science  29  May  2009:    

Vol.  324  no.  5931  pp.  1175-­‐1179  11  http://www.economist.com/node/21556798  

 Now it might be perceived that there are territorial disputes in the Arctic but this is not the case to

any notable extent. The Economist writes that 95% of mineral resources in the Arctic are within

uncontested boundaries (see recommended article).12 Stakeholders have much at stake, but

territorial gains are not the main issue.

Stakeholders

Arctic countries: the countries with Arctic territory are Canada, Denmark (incl. Greenland and

the Faroe Islands), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and USA.

Arctic Council: A body composed of Member States (the Arctic countries), Permanent

participants (NGOs and interest groups e.g. Saami council), and observers (includes EU). Intended

for further coordination and cooperation on the Arctic environmental protection, sustainable

development, search-and-rescue, and other security-unrelated aspects.

Trading countries and f irms: The future of the NSR is important to firms and nations with a

considerable interest in the shipping between Asia and the West.

European Union: Because of its interests in the Arctic, and the importance of relationships with

Arctic countries such as Canada and Russia, the European Union is striving to be an influential

actor in the Arctic region. EU’s Arctic policy objectives fall under both foreign policy and maritime

policy areas.

The role of the EU:

In 2008 the European Commission, at the request of the Council, established three policy

objectives: protect and preserve the Arctic; promote sustainable use of resources; cooperate with

Arctic countries, minorities, and other actors.13 It is worth noting that only the third goal touches

                                                                                                                         12  http://www.economist.com/node/21556797    13  European  Commission.  “Developing  a  European  Union  Policy  towards  the  Arctic  Region:  progress  since  2008  and  next  steps.”  June  2012,  http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/documentation/publications/documents/developing-­‐a-­‐european-­‐union-­‐policy-­‐towards-­‐the-­‐arctic-­‐region_en.pdf    

 on geopolitics (or “control”), by making it a goal for the EU to engage substantively with relevant

international actors.

The EU has influence through Swedish, Finnish and Danish territory in the Arctic region. The EU

has exclusively competence in the field of marine conservation, for example. The EU also has

shared competence in environmental issues, fisheries, and transport (including shipping). In these

fields the EU requires Sweden, Finland and Denmark to pursue certain policies pertaining at least

to their own parts of the Arctic. This is the EU’s direct legal influence on the Arctic.

Indirectly, the EU can also influence policies relevant to the Arctic through Norway and Iceland.

These two countries are not in the EU but are part of the European Economic Area, which in effect

makes EU legislation apply to them despite not being Member States. Here, too, the EU can

influence environmental policies.

Aside from legislative influence, the EU is acting as a negotiating influence on the Arctic. To that

end, the European Union has applied for observer status in the Arctic Council.14 Arctic actors are

reluctant to grant this status, arguably because they do not understand what the role of the EU is,

or should be, in the Arctic.15

Questions to consider

• Which concern – economic, environmental, or geopolitical – is most important? What aspect is

most central to current EU policy?

• Three (3) Member States are Arctic countries. Should the EU play a role in the future of the arctic

at all?

• By what means is the EU able to exert influence in the Arctic?

• Does EU Arctic policy need to be revised in light of recent geopolitical events? What will be the

geopolitical significance of the Arctic in 10, 25, 50 years?

                                                                                                                         14  http://www.arctic-­‐council.org/index.php/en/about-­‐us/arctic-­‐council/observers    

15  Timo  Koivurova,  et  al.  "The  present  and  future  competence  of  the  European  Union  in  the  Arctic."  Polar  Record  48.04  (2012):  361-­‐371.  

 Recommended Reading

Note: Do not read these from beginning to end. Skim relevant parts, focusing on past/current EU

objectives.

• Website of the Arctic Council:

http://www.arctic-council.org/index.php/en/

• The Arctic Policy website of the European Union External Action Service:

http://eeas.europa.eu/arctic_region/index_en.htm

• A 2014 article describing the environmental problems present in the Arctic, and their

relevance to people:

http://dw.de/p/1E2gi

• The EU Arctic Information Center Website - contains information on EU in the Arctic and

the September 2014 report “Strategic Assessment of Development of the Arctic”:

http://www.arcticinfo.eu/en/

• “Developing a European Union Policy towards the Arctic Region: progress since 2008 and

next steps.” European Commission, June 2012:

http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/documentation/publications/documents/developing-a-

european-union-policy-towards-the-arctic-region_en.pdf

• An explanation of competence. Pay special attention to “THE THREE MAIN TYPES OF

COMPETENCE”:

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/treaties/lisbon_treaty/ai0020_en.htm

• An article outlining three reasons why any tensions are unlikely to lead to military conflict

in the Arctic.

http://www.economist.com/node/21556797

• A communication from the Commission to the Parliament and the Council (2008).

Somewhat dated, this communiqué contains recommendations for MS actions and policies:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52008DC0763&from=EN

 • A communication from the Commission to the Parliament and the Council (2012). Evaluates

progress since 2008 and outlines next steps:

http://eeas.europa.eu/arctic_region/docs/join_2012_19.pdf

Optional Advanced Reading:

• Article on how EU influences Arctic policy based on EU competencies. Co-authored by the

expert that will visit our committee during the session:

http://www.arcticcentre.org/loader.aspx?id=a9db8fc6-feaa-4caf-8f5e-6528148c7b84

 

Committee on Culture and Education (CULT)

Education comes first: with the Pisa Report 2012 revealing a worrying disparity between

educational performance across Europe: How can the EU support its Member States in providing

the highest possible standard of school education?

Chairperson: Manfredi Danielis ( IT)

Definit ion of the problem

As part of the Europe 2020 strategy for growth and jobs in Europe16, the European Union (EU)

has launched the Education and Training 2020 strategy (ET2020)17 containing a set of

common agreed objectives for Member States. In regards to education, a set of benchmarks have

been set including: fewer than 15% of 15-year-olds should be under-skilled in reading,

mathematics and science and fewer than 10% of young people should drop out of education and

training.18

However, the results of the last Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Survey19 published in December 2012,

reveal a tremendous gap between national and sometimes regional school education standards.

Socio-economic conditions and migrant status still play a significant role in education standards

and the ET2020 goals appear very distant.

The role of the European Union

“The Union shall contribute to the development of quality education by encouraging cooperation

between Member States and, if necessary, by supporting and supplementing their action, while

                                                                                                                         16  http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/europe_2020_explained.pdf    17  http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/education_training_youth/general_framework/ef0016_en.htm    18  http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/strategic-­‐framework/index_en.htm    19  http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-­‐2012-­‐results.htm    

 fully respecting the responsibility of the Member States for the content of teaching and the

organisation of education systems and their cultural and linguistic diversity.” - Article 165 of the

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

As provided by the TFEU, the EU only has a supporting role in the field of education. All policy and

actions are undertaken by the branch of the European Commission charged, upon other tasks,

with education: the Directorate General for Education and Culture (DG EAC)20.

To receive guidance the DG EAC uses a series of Working Groups, each composed by a vast

symposium of academic experts. The DG EAC publishes a full report that includes specific

academic research, an exchange of best practices and country specific advice. Between 2011 and

2013, eleven thematic working groups have operated and six more are now operational.

Furthermore, since 2010 a variety of flagship initiatives have been launched, such as Youth on the

Move, the Agenda for new skills and jobs, the Digital Agenda for Europe and the European

Platform against Poverty and Social Exclusion.21

Priority Areas and future challenges

Following three years of work, the Commission has published, together with the Council, a joint

report on the implementation of ET2020 highlighting a set of priority areas in which the

Commission has operated, and will continue operating to increase the efficiency of European

cooperation in education and training. These priority areas include supporting national

governments with policies dealing with:

• The reduction of early school leavers;

• Social inclusion in schools with particular attention to the inclusion of the Roma

community;

• Use of ICT tools and Open Educational Resources;

• Increasing the attractiveness of Vocational Education and Training (VET).

                                                                                                                         20  http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/index_en.htm    21  http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/strategic-­‐framework/index_en.htm    

 Additionally empirical evidence based policies are advised by the annual Education and

Training Monitor22, an annual series of reports with clear policy messages for the Member

States. To this extent, the DG EAC cooperates in a strategic partnership with the Eurydice

Network, Cedefop 23 and the OECD.

Key Questions

When it comes to school education (defined as pre-primary, primary and secondary education), the

EU has only supportive competence and the majority of decisions belong to the Member States

which have diverse school systems. However, the Commission has been very active in this advisory

role by using a combination of working groups, annual guidance reports, many official

recommendations for national policy and a series of strategic partnerships.

Is the plan proposed by the Commission effective or should it undertake a different strategic

approach? If so, what further actions should be undertaken with regards to the priority areas?

What further steps can help the EU member states reach the ET2020 goals?

Recommended Reading:

Introductory material

• Main Page of the Directorate General for Education and Culture:

http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/index_en.htm

• Article 165 of the TFEU:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12008E165&from=EN

• Pisa 2012 Reports analysis by the European Commission:

http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/strategic-framework/doc/pisa2012_en.pdf

• Joint Report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the Strategic

Framework for European cooperation in education and training (ET2020):

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52012XG0308%2801%29                                                                                                                          22  http://ec.europa.eu/education/tools/et-­‐monitor_en.htm    23  http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en      

 

Past developments on priority areas

• Council Recommendation on policies to reduce early school leaving:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32011H0701%2801%29

• Council Recommendation on Roma integration measures in the Member States:

http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/strategic-framework/social-inclusion_en.htm

• A short presentation on open educational resources:

https://prezi.com/8ei8snj8tqrc/opening-up-education/

• The Brujes Comuniqué on enhanced European cooperation in VET:

http://ec.europa.eu/education/library/publications/2011/bruges_en.pdf

Additional Information

• The history and present of the Finnish education system (expert article):

http://cice.shnu.edu.cn/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=U5rzr6FYThQ=&tabid=11413&language=z

h-CN

• Official Website of the Eurydice Network providing information and analysis of European

educational systems and policies:

http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/index_en.php

 

Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON)

The end of austerity: in the light of growing concerns about the effects of austerity policies on

economic growth, how should European governments balance their growth with social stability?

Chairperson: Yiannos Vakis (CY)

Background Information:

The sovereign debt crisis: In 2009-2010, a number of euro area countries had increasing problems

with financing their national debts24 (the debt that accumulated over years due to running budget

deficits25). Market uncertainty over whether the countries would repay their debt back to their

creditors made borrowing rates more expensive or even deemed borrowing impossible.

Policy response outline: Two temporary mechanisms were set up by the European Commission

(EC) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in order to provide credit to the aforementioned

countries and to prevent them from defaulting26: The European Fiscal Stability Mechanism (EFSM)

and the European Fiscal Stability Facility (EFSF) which have in total provided euro area countries

with a total lending capacity of €500 billion.

In 2012 a permanent mechanism, the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) was put in place by the

EC providing euro area countries with a more solid financial backstop of permanent lending

capacity of €500 billion. In addition, The Stability and Growth Pact (SGP)27, an agreement between

member states to harmonise their budgets by maintaining low deficits and sustainable levels of

                                                                                                                         24http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/explained/the_financial_and_economic_crisis/why_did_the_crisis_happen/index_en.htm  25  Budget  deficit:  when  government  expenditure  (money  paid  out  by  the  government  in  subsidies,  welfare  payments  and  direct  spending,  among  others)  exceeds  government  revenue  (the  money  the  government  receives  from  taxation)  for  a  given  financial  year.  26  Defaulting:  the  inability  to  meet  the  legal  obligation  of  debt  repayment.  27  The  SGP  comes  under  the  Fiscal  Treaty  or  Treaty  on  Stability,  Coordination  and  Governance  (TSCG)  

 debt, was devised, allowing countries to only run budget deficits in the proportion of only 3%28 of

their country’s annual GDP.

Austerity vs. Stimulus:

The policy response up to date has been largely characterised by austerity. Put simply, this means

that in order to return the level of national debt to sustainable levels, taxation levels have been

increased and government expenditures cut back. This inevitably decreases the level of national

debt, however, many Economists argue that this policy approach does not bring about economic

recovery29, but rather decreases the long-term prospects for a country to grow: it decreases

business incentives to produce (due to higher levels of corporate taxation, making it less profitable

to produce) and decreases consumption (due to increased income taxes and reductions in welfare

benefits, which largely determine people’s disposable income30 and hence their willingness to

consume).

Five years on from the initial sovereign debt crisis, many claim that the reason for the continued

weak economic performance of the euro area is due to the use of austerity measures and their

negative effects on growth, as explained above.

However, those who support austerity measures point out that had they not been instigated, the

level of national debt would have been far greater, as there is no guarantee that expansionary

policies31 would have been any more successful.

Lately, some light may have been shed into this debate following the publication of an internal

monitoring body of the IMF. ‘This policy mix was less than fully effective in promoting recovery and

exacerbated adverse spillovers’32 states the report in reference to the austerity measures

proposed in 2010.

                                                                                                                         28  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/economic_governance/sgp/index_en.htm    29  See  for  example,  2012  Nobel  Laureate  Paul  Krugman’s  stance  on  austerity:  http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/28/opinion/krugman-­‐europes-­‐austerity-­‐madness.html?_r=0  30  Disposable  Income:  income  left  for  an  individual  to  spend  after  taxes  and  national  insurance  contributions  have  been  subtracted,  and  welfare  benefits  added.  31  Expansionary  policies:  measures  that  encourage  growth  by  boosting  the  economy  through  fiscal  or  monetary  stimulus  (higher  government  spending  and  more  money  in  the  economy).  32  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-­‐11-­‐04/imf-­‐s-­‐post-­‐crisis-­‐austerity-­‐call-­‐mistaken-­‐watchdog-­‐says.html  

 Measures currently considered:

The new EC aims to boost growth in the European economy through their newly proposed

Investment Plan33 which aims to finance investment projects worth some €315 billion. The

Investment Plan involves only €21 billion of direct public sector contribution (from the EU Budget

and the European Investment Bank (EIB)), and hopes to raise the remaining sum through the

issuing of bonds by the currently highly credit worthy (AAA rated) EIB. The Plan has received mixed

reactions; critics stress on lack of strategic thinking34, an overly optimistic expectation of private

sector contribution and on the failure of previous such schemes in the past (such as the 2012

Compact for Growth).35

Conclusion:

The question the ECON committee will be addressing is whether the austerity measures used up

to date have been successful, taking into account both their economic and social impact. Should

Member State governments continue to aim for balanced budgets as prescribed by the SGP and to

which extend is decreasing the national debt a priority considering its social impact? Is the newly

proposed Investment Plan the ideal policy mix to promote private investment? How can Europe exit

this long economic slump and achieve sustainable economic growth?

Recommended Reading:

Background Information:

• European Commission video on the European Economy:

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/explained/index_en.htm

• European Commission Website: European Economy Explained: The Financial and Economic

Crisis (see all tabs, pay particular attention to the "short and long term response" tabs

under "Responding to the debt crisis"):

                                                                                                                         33  http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/jobs-­‐growth-­‐investment/plan/index_en.htm  34  http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1423a226-­‐7bc1-­‐11e4-­‐b6ab-­‐00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=intl#axzz3MiqzYSAV  35  http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/81eff850-­‐749f-­‐11e4-­‐8321-­‐00144feabdc0.html#axzz3MiqzYSAV  

 http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/explained/the_financial_and_economic_crisis/why_d

id_the_crisis_happen/index_en.htm

Austerity vs. Stimulus:

• “Europe’s anti-austerity duo” article, The New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/opinion/europes-anti-austerity-duo.html

• “Sovereign Doubts” article, The Economist:

http://www.economist.com/news/schools-brief/21586802-fourth-our-series-articles-

financial-crisis-looks-surge-public

• “IMF’s Post-Crisis Austerity Call Mistaken, Watchdog Says” article on the IMF’s

Independent Evaluation Office Report, Bloomberg:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-04/imf-s-post-crisis-austerity-call-mistaken-

watchdog-says.html

Measures currently considered:

• The Investment Plan explained on the EC website (see the video and all relevant tabs)

http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/jobs-growth-investment/plan/index_en.htm

• “Juncker’s plan for Europe in 90 seconds” explanatory video, Bloomberg:

http://video.ft.com/3911019049001/Junckers-plan-for-Europe-in-90-seconds/World

• “Fiddling while Europe burns” article, The Economist:

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21635017-jean-claude-junckers-investment-

package-laughably-inadequate-fiddling-while-europe-burns

• “How Juncker plans to unleash investment in Europe” article, Financial Times:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/81eff850-749f-11e4-8321-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3MiqzYSAV

 

Committee on Employment and Social Affairs I (EMPL I) The start-up economy: with high youth unemployment and stagnant economies, how should

European governments promote entrepreneurship in order to create a generation of young

entrepreneurs?

Chairpersons: Noura Berrouba (SE) and Yannick Weber (CH)

Youth unemployment rates are at an all-time high with 22.2% of all youth in the EU being

unemployed, and countries like Greece, Croatia, Spain and Italy with unemployment rates around

50%.36 In a business environment where a degree is no guarantee for full-time employment many

young people set out to create their own jobs.37 Rising costs in education are prompting school-

leavers to try to set up their own companies, but many young people are choosing self-

employment and start-ups to fill gaps that they see in the market.38 While entrepreneurship is

mainly considered a path for creative minds to implement visionary ideas, start-ups are also

created by unemployed people seeking self-employment. In 2012, 32.8 Million people EU-citizens

were self-employed, accounting for 15% of total EU employment.39

In the age of the internet, success stories such as the one of Google rising from a micro firm in an

empty garage to a global enterprise suddenly become possible. Digitalization has radically lowered

the obstacles for young people to start their own business and small and medium sized

enterprises (SMEs) have been the major drivers of the economy after the financial crisis. Since

2008, 8 out of 10 jobs in the EU were created by SMEs and 370’000 new microcompanies40 have

                                                                                                                         36  http://www.statista.com/statistics/266228/youth-­‐unemployment-­‐rate-­‐in-­‐eu-­‐countries/  

37  http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/may/12/youth-­‐unemployment-­‐graduates-­‐start-­‐up-­‐own-­‐businesses  

38  http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-­‐resources/research/inspiring-­‐youth-­‐enterprise.aspx  

39  http://epthinktank.eu/2013/07/10/social-­‐protection-­‐for-­‐self-­‐employed-­‐workers/  

40  Microcompanies:  companies  with  9  employees  or  less  

 entered the Single Market, whereas the number of large and medium-sized companies has

remained unchanged.41

Although five of the world’s top ten most innovative countries in the world are European, with

Finland ranking first place42, the European environment for start-ups has often been deemed

unsatisfactory compared to innovation hubs like the Silicon Valley. In 2013, Venture Capital

investment in Europe amounted to 7.4 billion USD, compared to 33.1 billion in the United States.43

Young European entrepreneurs face numerous challenges: language barriers, competition for

funding, different legal forms with unequal requirements across Member States and bureaucratic

obstacles to hire nationals from other EU countries make it difficult to expand a business. A

mismatch of skills taught in tertiary education and required in the entrepreneurial world adds yet

another difficulty. It is but little of a surprise that half of all start-ups fail in the first five years of

their existence and 71% of start-ups do not grow older than 10 years.44 This high risk of failure

highlights the importance of social protection schemes as a safety net in case the idea and

business fails.

Acknowledging the potential of start-ups to boost the European economy, the European

Commission has launched the start-up Europe programme as part of the Horizon 2020 strategy.

With many young people concerned about the lack of income security and financial support45, the

programme is aimed at building the start-up ecosystem, inspiring entrepreneurs and providing

access to funding.46 Almost € 850 million have been allocated to funding opportunities for start-ups

and SMEs, but often, these possibilities are unknown to young entrepreneurs. Venture capital

investments are continuously on the rise and in the third quarter of 2014 alone, €2.3 billion were

                                                                                                                         41  http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_EuropeCompetitiveness_FosteringInnovationDrivenEntrepreneurship_Report  _2014.pdf  

42  http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_EuropeCompetitiveness_FosteringInnovationDrivenEntrepreneurship_Report  _2014.pdf  

43  http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/Global_venture_capital_insights_and_trends_2014/$FILE/EY_Global_VC_insights_and_trends_  report_2014.pdf  

44  http://www.statisticbrain.com/startup-­‐failure-­‐by-­‐industry/  

45  http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=13206&langId=en    

46  http://ec.europa.eu/digital-­‐agenda/about-­‐startup-­‐europe  

 invested in European startups.47 A third way of finding funding has emerged in recent years: 230

different platforms in Europe offer access to crowdfunding48, a method of fundraising relying on a

large number of small investments or donations.

To remain globally competitive and shape a more start-up friendly environment, the Leaders Club,

an informal consortium of successful tech entrepreneurs has drafted the Startup Manifesto with

22 policy recommendations to the European Parliament, the Commission and Member States.

Amongst others, the group calls for revised data protection legislation, tax privileges for share

options, and limitations to employment protection. Some proposals, such as the establishment of a

European Digital Forum, have already been successfully implemented.

But with the number of start-ups ever increasing, the questions arise whether the market has

space for an infinite amount of stakeholders and whether innovation can continue at such a pace.

What should Europe do to ensure it does not fall behind in the inexorable progression of the global

innovation frontier?

Recommended Reading

Introductory reading

• An article providing an overview of the European startup environment:

http://www.b-bice-plus.eu/featuredarticle-startupseurope/

• The EU’s portal on the ‘Startup Europe’ initiative:

http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/growth-jobs/startup-europe

                                                                                                                         47  http://startupxplore.com/blog/analysis-­‐of-­‐the-­‐european-­‐startup-­‐investment-­‐2014/  

48  http://www.crowdfundinsider.com/2014/05/40128-­‐startup-­‐europe-­‐crowdfunding-­‐network-­‐publishes-­‐  report-­‐fostering-­‐crowdfunding/  

 Policy Recommendations

• A report by the World Economic Forum which deals with enhancing Europe’s

competitiveness and fostering innovation-driven entrepreneurship in Europe:

http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_EuropeCompetitiveness_FosteringInnovationDrivenE

ntrepreneurship_Report_2014.pdf

• A manifesto by an independent group of tech entrepreneurs including a number of policy

recommendations:

http://startupmanifesto.eu/

Official Sources

• Website of the European Young Innovator’s Forum, a Foundation by the EU conducting

projects to promote entrepreneurship in Europe:

http://younginnovator.eu/

• Start-up incentives in Europe, EEPO Review. This Review paints the picture of how 29

countries in Europe (EU 28 and Iceland) have been supporting unemployed people to set up

their own businesses through start-up incentives:

http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=13206&langId=en

Press Articles

• An article on Eastern Europe’s “startup capital”, Budapest:

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-10-21/news/55279768_1_hungarian-

eastern-europe-nng

• An article on start-up accelerators across Europe:

http://tech.eu/research/29/there-are-roughly-100-active-startup-accelerators-europe/

 • Research report on inspiring youth enterprise by CIPD:

http://www.cipd.co.uk/binaries/entrepreneurs-what-can-we-learn-from-them_2013-part-

3-youth-enterprise.pdf

 

Committee on Employment and Social Affairs II (EMPL II)

Internships – opportunity or exploitation: how can the EU effectively support its youth in making a

smooth transition from education to employment?

Chairperson: David Soler Crespo (ES)

Topic Relevance and Analysis

Internships, also referred to as traineeships, are a popular and common hinge between education

and employment. It is a hinge that throughout the years has been efficient in providing youth with a

stepping stone to the labour market. However, it is now calling for improvement and change to

enable a safe step into employment for millions of youngsters in Europe.

Internships are a fantastic opportunity for young people to get experience in their fields and get

accustomed to the labour market. Nonetheless, there are also issues connected to them. Some

companies overuse or make a fraudulent use of internships in order to have unpaid interns do the

same work that a formal employee would do. This has become more prevalent during the current

financial crisis. Due to the weakened financial situation, many companies had to shut down and as

a result a lot of young people have found themselves without a job; youth unemployment rates

peaked to a 25% average in the European Union (EU). Many youngsters saw no other choice but to

intern49, sometimes doing multiple internships in sequence in order to gain as much experience as

possible. Many companies have benefited from this situation in an attempt to maintain their

revenues by employing interns that would accept unpaid work or very low remuneration. In 2011,

19% of youth in the EU chose to do an internship because they couldn’t find a job, not because they

thought it would be beneficial to them.50

                                                                                                                         49  http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/intern?q=internship#intern__32    50  http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2013/05/14/should-­‐internships-­‐be-­‐better-­‐regulated-­‐in-­‐europe/#.VJVLQAACg  

 Some people argue that internships offer the perfect opportunity for young people to kick start

their career and gain experience but others argue that nowadays internships are a way of

exploiting young people by taking advantage of their motivation to start working and their lack of

experience.51 What is the perfect balance in ensuring internships are valuable for both the

individual and the company? What workload and level experience of qualify for formal employment

vs. internships? Should there be a law restricting the number of interns companies can take

during a specific time period?

Companies vs the Youth

This topic involves stakeholders with diverse interests and objectives. There are different

perspectives coming from national governments and EU institutions, the private business sector,

and finally the youth seeking to enter the labour market. On the one hand, businesses often use

internships to avoid hiring a permanent employee with the aim of maximising profits instead of

using them as a way of educating young people into the labour market. On the other hand, young

people are seeking fair opportunities and stepping stones into the labour market and fair

employment. National governments and the EU defend both these interests and try to regulate the

system to benefit both sides.

Measures in place

The EU has no direct competence on education, vocational training and the youth. It cannot

therefore adopt a regulation on internships to set common standards and rules across Member

States. As stated in Article 6 of the Treaty of the European Union, the EU can only support,

coordinate or supplement the actions of Member States in this matter.52 Taking this into account,

the DG Employment, Social Affairs, Health and Consumer Affairs Council put forward

in 2014 a proposal for a Council Recommendation on a Quality Framework for

Traineeships. The main objective is to improve transparency and quality of traineeships.

Member States are advised to consider having all traineeships based on written agreements, the                                                                                                                          51  http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/27/us-­‐eu-­‐trainees-­‐idUSBRE95Q0LS20130627    52  http://eur-­‐lex.europa.eu/legal-­‐content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT    

 respect of the rights and working conditions of trainees and have a reasonable duration. It was

also stated that one third of traineeships are substandard in working conditions and learning and

that many are used to replace entry-level jobs.53

Other measures to fight youth unemployment include the Youth Guarantee, a guarantee that

ensures that every young person under the age of 25 is offered a job, further education or work-

focused training at the latest four months after leaving education or after becoming unemployed,

the Youth Employment Init iative, which supports with funding regions where youth

unemployment rises above 25%, the European Alliance for Apprenticeships and the Quality

Apprenticeships and Labour Mobility .

From 2013 to May 2014 youth unemployment has decreased by 1.2%. However, youth

unemployment still remains a huge problem in the EU with levels of 22.2% on average across the

EU in May 2014, while reaching levels higher than 50% in certain countries such as Spain and

Greece.54 The measures mentioned above came into action in 2013 and it is therefore too early to

evaluate their success. Nevertheless, it is certain that there is still great scope for improvement in

this field and the debate on whether internships are an opportunity or exploitation is still ongoing.

Recommended Reading:

Official sources

• “Quality framework for traineeships adopted”, Council of the European Union

www.consilium.europa.eu/homepage/showfocus?focusName=quality-framework-for-

traineeships-adopted&lang=en

• Youth unemployment rates in EU Member States:

http://www.statista.com/statistics/266228/youth-unemployment-rate-in-eu-countries/

• Proposal for a Council Recommendation on a Quality Framework for Traineeships

ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=11213&langId=en                                                                                                                          53  http://www.consilium.europa.eu/homepage/showfocus?focusName=quality-­‐framework-­‐for-­‐traineeships-­‐adopted&lang=en  54  http://www.statista.com/statistics/266228/youth-­‐unemployment-­‐rate-­‐in-­‐eu-­‐countries/    

 • Youth Guarantee scheme:

http://www.youth-guarantee.eu/

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-

room/content/20130108STO05234/html/Youth-guarantee-getting-young-Europeans-back-

to-work

• European Alliance for Apprenticeships:

http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/vocational-policy/alliance_en.htm

• ETUC Resolution on Improving quality of Apprenticeship and Work-based learning

http://www.etuc.org/documents/etuc-resolution-improving-quality-apprenticeship-and-

work-based-learning#.VK2l7cnASHQ

Articles

• “Should the rules for internships be tougher?”, Debating Europe:

http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2013/05/14/should-internships-be-better-regulated-in-

europe/#.VJVLQAACg

• “Brussels army of ‘slave’ trainees escapes EU gaze”, Reuters:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/27/us-eu-trainees-idUSBRE95Q0LS20130627

• “The EU should lead by example on interns’ rights”, Euractiv:

http://www.euractiv.com/socialeurope/put-unpaid-internships-analysis-530518

• “Europe's first 'Intern Day' highlights unfair work conditions”, Euractiv:

http://www.euractiv.com/sections/social-europe-jobs/europes-first-intern-day-highlights-unfair-

work-conditions-303595

• Employement, Social Affairs and Inclusion

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=1

 

Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) Competitive sustainable growth: increasing consumer consumption and an ever developing

economy is currently a threat to the environment, what measures should the EU take in order to

ensure sustainable development without endangering its economic growth and competitiveness?

Chairperson: Katerina Zejdlova (CZ)

As we entered the new millennium it has gradually become clear that climate change and the

environment play a major role in the decision making of world leaders. Although the worlds three

largest carbon dioxide (CO2) emitters - China, India and USA - secluded themselves from the 1997

Kyoto Protocol55, which aimed at cutting the carbon and greenhouse-gas emissions, the

European Union (EU) has taken the role of a global ‘role model’ in a responsible attempt to tackle

climate change. In the fight against global warming the contestants seem to be the economy

versus the environment – does environmental responsibility necessarily come with a price in the

form of economic losses in today’s market-led competitive world?

Over a long period the EU has been consistently pursuing the so-called ‘sustainable growth’

policy as part of the Europe 2020 strategy.56 This policy entails building a low-emission,

environmentally responsible economy with an emphasis on greener technologies as well as

stimulating the business environment focusing particularly on small and medium enterprises

(SMEs).

The environmental focus of this strategy is on the ’20-20-20 targets’57 which were set in

2007, aiming at greenhouse gas reduction by 20% from their 1990 levels, a 20% increase in energy

efficiency and 20% of Europe’s energy made from renewable resources, all of this to be achieved

by 2020. The measures used to achieve this include for example the EU Emissions Trading Scheme

(EU-ETS) and the development of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies. However,

                                                                                                                         55  http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php;  http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/mar/11/kyoto-­‐protocol    56  http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/europe-­‐2020-­‐in-­‐a-­‐nutshell/priorities/sustainable-­‐growth/index_en.htm    57  http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/package/index_en.htm    

 

halfway through, the attainability of these goals is becoming more and more questionable,

especially because of the disparities amongst the EU Member States, with half the Member States

expected to reach the goals while the other half is falling behind.58

In October 2014 the new 2030 Framework for Climate and Energy 59 was approved, further

extending the ‘2020 goals’ as it pushes for a 40% greenhouse gas reduction and sets the new

target for energy efficiency and renewable resource usage to 27%.

Furthermore, the 2020 strategy also focuses on the social aspect of sustainable growth. The EU

aims to achieve a 75% employment rate, fight poverty and social exclusion, invest 3% of its GDP

into research and development and attain a 40% rate of people who have completed third level

education.60

Nevertheless, we have to bear in mind that the EU and its institutions are only ‘one side of the coin’

when it comes to achieving the goals set. The key responsibility lies on the Member States

themselves and reforms on national level are crucial to the success of the strategy; yet equal

engagement of all Member States, as well as of the civil society, in certain countries often proves

rather difficult.

Can economic growth and environmental responsibility be compatible? Are the 20-20-20 targets

attainable or do they only impose excessive restrictions on EU Member States, hindering the

growth of their economies or even fostering disagreement with the policy among the civil society?

Does the Europe 2020 strategy and the recent investment plan of the European Commission steer

Europe in the right direction, or should this policy be reviewed? Is the strategy realistic? Looking

forward, is the new 2030 Framework for Climate and Energy sufficient in fighting climate change

or is it too harsh on Member States? Finally, can measures tackling climate change be efficient

when only implemented and adhered to by the EU but without sufficient cooperation with the much

bigger polluters such as the US or China?

                                                                                                                         58  http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/g-­‐gas/progress/index_en.htm    59  http://ec.europa.eu/energy/2030_en.htm    

 

Recommended Reading:

• Europe 2020 – EU’s growth strategy:

http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/index_en.htm

• EU climate package (aka ‘the 20-20-20 strategy’) explained – useful summary of the basic

facts:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7765094.stm

• The ’20-20-20 targets’ – more in-depth explanation of EU’s climate strategy and measures

used to achieve it:

http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/package/index_en.htm

• The European Semester – official evaluation of the progress towards the 2020 targets and

some recommendations for improvement:

http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/g-gas/progress/index_en.htm

• Piece of analysis on the ‘2030 targets’:

http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2014/10/q-and-a-the-eus-2030-climate-targets/

• Piece on the EU institutions failure to adhere to their own advice on climate:

http://euobserver.com/news/126085

• Example – UK and the repercussions of non-compliance with the set targets:

http://www.theguardian.com/alternative-energy-crown-estate/cutting-carbon-emissions

• Jean-Claude Juncker’s speech, explaining the €300-billion Jobs, Growth and Investment

Package:

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-2160_en.htm

• Opinion article – EU climate policy – too early to celebrate:

http://euobserver.com/opinion/122842

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   60  http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/europe-­‐2020-­‐in-­‐a-­‐nutshell/targets/index_en.htm    

   

Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM)

‘Glass ceiling’ effect vs. low public pan-European support for gender quotas: learning from the

early lessons of the Commission’s strategy for equality between men and women 2010-2015 and

the Council of Europe’s (CoE) Gender Equality Programme of 2012, how should European

stakeholders seek to achieve gender parity across the continent?

Chairperson: Ia Tserodze (GE)

Current Situation

For decades, women have been striving to achieve gender equality in their societies. The European

Union (EU) has taken multiple steps towards gender equality but the progress has been slow.

Women make up for only 17.8% of the members of boards of directors in the largest publicly listed

companies, 2.8% of the CEOs, 27% of senior government ministers, and 27% of members of

national parliaments.61 At the same time, women are drastically outperforming men in higher

education, with more males dropping out of schools than females. Furthermore, women are paid

16% less than men per hour of work, with the gender pay gap still exceeding 20% in Estonia,

Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany, Slovakia and the United Kingdom. Where do we need to

seek improvements to achieve an equal society?

In the framework of the Europe 2020 strategy for growth, recommendations have been addressed

to 13 Member States, dealing with the issue of promoting female employment.62 In order to see

these recommendations be put into practice, the EU resolved to assist them financially by offering

co-funding possibilities through the 2014-20 European Structural and Investment Funds.

In the past 7 years, an estimated 3.2 billion EUR from the Structural Funds was spent on similar

promotion campaigns and on the development of childcare facilities. The EU has also been

working on the ideal time span for maternal leave. While a short period of time might prove

detrimental for women and their children’s health, an overly long time period might result in a

                                                                                                                         61  http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-­‐equality/files/swd_2014_142_en.pdf    62  http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/making-­‐it-­‐happen/country-­‐specific-­‐recommendations/index_en.htm    

decrease of interest towards their previous occupation. The Parental Leave Directive63

resulted in extending the parental leave by a month to give the working parent the right to at least

four months leave. Nevertheless, the number of current fathers who take-up parental leave falls

short in most Member States; it is less than 5% in the Czech Republic, Spain, Hungary, Poland and

Slovakia, and 20% in Belgium, Denmark and Sweden.

The promotion of women entrepreneurship is also one of the aims of the European Commission

(EC). In its Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan64, published in 2013, the EC states that the

majority of women are unaware of the business support programmes and funding opportunities

available. Thus, the EC created a Europe-wide online mentoring, educational and business-

networking platform for female entrepreneurs to promote women entrepreneurship and facilitate

the exchange of best practices.

Measures Taken

The main strategies drafted by the EU to address the above-listed issues were the Council of

Europe’s (CoE) Programme on Gender Equality 2012 and the Strategy for equality

between women and men 2010-2015. Both of these initiatives aim to increase the impact and

visibility of gender equality standards, supporting their implementation in Member States through

a variety of measures, including gender mainstreaming65. Both policies operate under five

priority areas defined in the Women’s Charter66: equal economic independence, equal pay for

equal work and work of equal value, equality in decision-making, dignity, integrity and an end to

gender-based violence, gender equality in external actions and horizontal issues.67

                                                                                                                         63  Directive  2010/18/EU  -­‐  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2013/9780111532850    64  COM(2012)795:  http://eur-­‐lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0795:FIN:EN:PDF    65  Gender  mainstreaming:  the  integration  of  the  gender  dimension  in  all  policy  areas.  66  http://ec.europa.eu/archives/commission_2010-­‐2014/president/news/documents/pdf/20100305_1_en.pdf    67  http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/employment_and_social_policy/equality_between_men_and_women/em0037_en.htm    

The Gender Quotas Debate

The most controversial strategy remains to be the electoral gender quota system. Electoral

gender quotas can take two main forms: legislated quotas and party quotas. Many national parties

and parliaments have responded to growing pressures to increase women’s political

representation by introducing electoral gender quotas. Those defending gender quotas believe it is

an effective tool for ‘fast tracking’ the achievement of gender balance in political institutions,

essential for democratic development, while critics often see quotas as a violation of the principle

of merit and intrusion on party freedom. The response of Member States to the suggestion of

quotas has been diverse (see footnote for type of quotas implemented per state and results

achieved).68

Parties supporting the quota systems, argue that women promoted into positions of power, could

act as positive role models for others and would also be more likely to hire more women. Those

against quotas state that the system is discriminatory towards men, while also set women against

each other, competing for a certain number of "women seats", potentially destroying cooperation

and unity. Additionally, the main argument against quotas is that those women who would be

employed through the system, will be likely to be less respected and given less power. These

opinions tend to take the same form when discussing gender quotas in corporations.

In conclusion, Europe has seen some improvements in gender parity, however as legislations

change and policies drafted, are future strategies realistic and are quotas the golden ticket for

women or do they further strengthen gender stereotypes? Is it even possible to draft resolutions

specifically suited for the socio-economic situation of each nation? How can independent

stakeholders, such as private firms and businesses, contribute towards achieving gender parity?

Recommended Reading:

• Report on Progress on equality between women and men in 2013:

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/swd_2014_142_en.pdf

• Gender Quotas in Management Boards:

                                                                                                                         68  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/note/join/2013/493011/IPOL-­‐FEMM_NT(2013)493011_EN.pdf  (Page  7,  Table  1)  

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201202/20120216ATT38420/20120

216ATT38420EN.pdf

• Council of Europe Gender Equality Strategy 2014-2017:

http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/equality/02_GenderEqualityProgramme/Council

%20of%20Europe%20Gender%20Equality%20Strategy%202014-2017.pdf

• Women’s Charter - A Strengthened Commitment to Equality between Women and Men

http://ec.europa.eu/archives/commission_2010-

2014/president/news/documents/pdf/20100305_1_en.pdf

• Strategy for equality between women and men 2010-2015:

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/employment_and_social_policy/equality_between

_men_and_women/em0037_en.htm

• Mid-term review of the Strategy for equality between women and men 2010-2015:

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-

equality/files/strategy_women_men/131011_mid_term_review_en.pdf

• Council of Europe’s definition of Equality between women and men:

http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/equality/02factsheets/FactSheetGenderEquality

WEB_en.pdf

• Role of Men in Gender Equality:

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/events/role-of-men/index_en.htm

• Gender Equality Index Report:

http://eige.europa.eu/apps/gei/content/Gender-Equality-Index-Report.pdf

• ‘EU gender equality legislation key to breaking the glass ceiling’, The Parliament Magazine:

https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/articles/opinion/eu-gender-equality-legislation-

key-breaking-glass-ceiling

• Official website for the European Institute on Gender Equality

http://eige.europa.eu/

Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE)

The gas crisis of 2009 and Russia’s energy dominance: with the recent events in Ukraine

highlighting the dangers of over-dependence on imported energy, what steps can the EU take to

limit its reliance on external energy sources and to protect consumers from price shocks?

Chairperson: Anna Pusa (FI)

Topic relevance and explanation of the problem

The most recent figures show that the EU imports more than half (53.4 %) of the total energy it

consumes, while the production of primary energy in the EU keeps decreasing.69 The EU imports

88% of its crude oil, 66% of its natural gas and 42% of its solid fuels such as coal, with Russia

being the main supplier of all three.70 Keeping in mind recent events in Ukraine and the EU’s

dependence on Ukraine as a transit country for gas, the EU thus needs to focus on the security of

its energy supplies.

Context: the gas crisis

The most serious gas supply crisis to ever hit the EU occurred in January 2009, during which the

EU Member States were deprived of 20% of their gas supplies due to a commercial dispute

between Gazprom of Russia and Naftogaz of Ukraine.71 As this crisis demonstrates, the key

stakeholders concerning Europe’s energy security are the EU itself, third countries such as

Ukraine and Russia, as well as actors within the energy industry. The EU has taken various

measures since the escalation of events in Ukraine to ensure that the gas crisis of 2009 would not

be repeated this winter or in the future.

                                                                                                                         69  http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-­‐explained/index.php/Energy_production_and_imports  70  http://europa.eu/rapid/press-­‐release_MEMO-­‐14-­‐379_en.htm    71  http://ec.europa.eu/energy/strategies/2009/doc/sec_2009_0977.pdf  

Existing measures and action plans

As part of the EU’s 2030 policy on climate and energy, which includes the Commission’s

Energy Security Strategy from May 2014, the main focus is currently set on increasing energy

production within the EU itself and diversifying the supplier countries and the transportation

routes for energy to reach Europe.72

In order to limit the EU’s overall reliance on imported energy, one focus within the two

frameworks is on decreasing energy demand and increasing the energy eff iciency

within the EU. As one commentator put it: ‘The quickest and most effective form of energy

security is to use less’.73 Within the 2030 framework the EU aims for a competitive, low-carbon

economy that reduces the use of imports and focuses on increasing energy efficiency and using

renewable energy sources. While EU leaders agree the 2030 framework and its governance

process will contribute to the consistency of EU climate and energy policies, the need to keep the

governance process flexible is still emphasized.74

In 2007, the European Commission adopted the Third Package of legislative proposals for

electricity and gas markets, aiming to facilitate the creation of a competitive and integrated

energy market, which would allow consumers to have a choice between suppliers and to enable

suppliers of all sizes to access the market. In 2014, in order to improve cooperation and ensure

that Member States share a joint position on the issues, the European Commission further

identifies the need to create an internal energy market as well as a European Energy

Union, which will focus on diversifying Europe’s energy sources and decreasing dependency on

imports.75 However, a precise vision of how a European Energy Union can be achieved is lacking at

the moment and some are concerned with the inability of Member States to better coordinate

national energy decisions.

                                                                                                                         72  http://ec.europa.eu/energy/security_of_supply_en.htm  73  http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/09/europe-­‐dependency-­‐russian-­‐gas-­‐energy-­‐efficiency-­‐eu  74  http://www.consilium.europa.eu/homepage/showfocus?focusName=council-­‐discusses-­‐follow-­‐up-­‐action-­‐on-­‐the-­‐2030-­‐climate-­‐and-­‐energy-­‐framework&lang=fi  75  http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/energy-­‐union/index_en.htm.  For  the  EU  internal  energy  market,  see  http://ec.europa.eu/energy/gas_electricity/internal_market_en.htm  

Alternative pipelines

As for the energy transportation routes beyond the alternative through Ukraine, there are a

number of pipeline projects discussed with the Trans- Adriatic pipeline, which will transport

gas from Azerbaijan through Albania and Greece, being the most prominent.76 The South Stream

pipeline was also an important project but its cancellation was announced by the Russian

president in early December 2014, generating heated debates. Other alternative routes discussed

are the Trans-Anatolian pipeline and the Nabucco-West pipeline. All proposed projects

must comply with the existing EU legislation and the EU’s Third Package for Electricity and

Gas Markets in order to trade with the EU.77 Another issue that arises is the political stability and

status of the suppliers for the projects, as the regions discussed are facing many internal conflicts

and the Treaty of Lisbon prevents the EU from trading with such partners.

Conclusion

With the abovementioned policies in mind, which measures should the EU focus on to decrease its

dependence on imported energy while still securing supply, taking into consideration the current

context and the international relations between the EU and its trading partners as well as the

critical conflicts involved?

Keywords: energy security, energy dependence, energy efficiency, European Energy Security

Strategy, European Energy Union, internal energy market, EU’s Third Package for Electricity and

Gas Markets.

Recommended Reading

INTRDUCTORY MATERIAL

• Introduction video to energy security in Europe: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/fpis_en.htm

                                                                                                                         76  http://www.naturalgaseurope.com/category/pipelines/trans-­‐adriatic-­‐pipeline  77  http://ec.europa.eu/energy/gas_electricity/legislation/third_legislative_package_en.htm  

• European Energy Security Strategy:

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/security_of_supply_en.htm

• European Energy Security Strategy - Communication from the European Commission to

the European Parliament:

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/doc/20140528_energy_security_communication.pdf

• Questions and answers on security of energy supply in the EU:

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-379_en.htm

• General principles of EU energy policies:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_5.7.1.html

• Renewable energy - national action plans 2020 and overview of existing legislation:

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/action_plan_en.htm

• EU Internal energy market:

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/gas_electricity/internal_market_en.htm

• EU’s Third Package for Electricity and Gas Markets:

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-07-362_en.htm?locale=en

OTHER RESOURCES

• EU 2030 policy on climate and energy – overview:

http://www.biofuelstp.eu/spm6/docs/andreas-pilzecker.pdf

• EU Leaders Push Energy Union in Response to Russian Turmoil

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12-18/eu-leaders-to-push-energy-union-in-

response-to-russian-turmoil.html

• Five priorities for a European Energy Union:

http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/files/our-activities/policy-issues/energy-union/EWEA-EU-

Energy-Union-5-Priorities.pdf

STATISTICS

• EUROSTAT article explaining the statistics concerning energy production and import:

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-

explained/index.php/Energy_production_and_imports

• Main origin of primary energy imports, EU-28, 2002–12:

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-

explained/index.php/File:Main_origin_of_primary_energy_imports,_EU-

28,_2002%E2%80%9312_(%_of_extra_EU-28_imports)_YB14.png

• Production of primary energy, EU-28, 2012: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-

explained/index.php/File:Production_of_primary_energy,_EU-

28,_2012_(%_of_total,_based_on_tonnes_of_oil_equivalent)_YB14.png

Committee on Regional Development (REGI) Building the periphery: mechanisms such as the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund have

played an important role in developing the peripheral areas of Europe, but they are also costly.

Keeping in mind that metropolitan areas are the primary motors of growth, how should the EU

best supports areas to suit the needs of their population?

Chairperson: Adela Iacobov (RO)

Introduction

The 2007–2013 Regional Policy of the European Union (the Cohesion Policy), focused on three main

objectives: convergence, regional competitiveness and employment. The 2014–2020 Cohesion

Policy will focus on five objectives: employment, innovation, education, social inclusion, and

climate/energy.78 These objectives get funding from three different Structural Funds: the

European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), European Social Fund (ESF) and the

Cohesion Fund. The goal is evening out the gap between the metropolitan and peripheral areas

concerning employment, development and competitiveness and also providing the framework to

achieve the Europe 2020 strategy objectives. The European Regional Policy will make available

€351.8 billion (32.5%) of the overall EU 2014-2020 budget to rectify these regional imbalances and

reach the EU 2020 goals.

Structural funds are delivered to different economic territories in the EU using the

Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics (NUTS), which consist of three levels.

NUTS-1 is defined as state level and NUTS-2 and NUTS-3 further divide the states into territories.

As the funds aim to bridge the economic gap between regions most of the money goes to poorer

regions – regions with a GDP per capita below 75% of the EU average will receive 182 billion euros

although the population of these regions combined only consists of 27% of the EU population.

                                                                                                                         78  An  introduction  to  EU  Cohesion  Policy  2014-­‐2020  (European  Commission)  

2010-2013 Regional Policy

The success of the 2007-2013 Regional Policy has been debated: the success has not been easily

measurable; regional inequalities within the EU-15 Member States have increased by 10% since

the mid eighties79; the distribution of funds “involves procurement, which is always a risk area for

frawd”80. In 2009, the Barca Report revealed that only 36.9% of the funds destined for regions are

administered at a regional level.81 Finally, the implementation of funds has proved ineffective in

achieving the Cohesion Fund objectives – to quote German Chancellor Angela Merkel, ‘There are

many beautiful tunnels and highways [in Madeira]. But this did not contribute to competitiveness.’

Lessons from previous cohesion policies have shown that EU resources are used in the most

efficient way where a high degree of integration exists between EU and national development

strategies.

Reforming the Regional Policy: 2014-2020

In line with reaching the Europe 2020 goals and overcoming the inefficiencies of the 2007–2013

programme, the EU has introduced some key reforms to its Regional Policy.

Firstly, the development of a common set of rules which applies to all five European Structural and

Investment Funds aims to focus investment on the key areas of growth and jobs. Secondly, the

prioritization of specific goals such as the concentration of budget expenditure on Research and

Development (R&D) and innovation. Thirdly, the introduction of clear and measurable targets on

the impact of investment. Finally, the introduction of various measures to cut the red tape and

simplify the use of funds.

                                                                                                                         79  A  reformed  Cohesion  Policy  for  Europe  (European  Commission)  80  MEPs  urge  battle  on  funds  fraud  (30.11.2010,  Financial  Times)  81  Barca  report  (European  Commission,  Regional  Policy)  

Challenges facing the 2014-2020 Regional Policy

Globalisation results in the metropolitan areas growing, leaving poorer regions with problems

such as brain-drain, inability to compete economically, and difficulty in financing public goods and

services. Periphery regions are also most heavily affected by the climate change.

A problem with Structural Funds is their allocation of them. The funds are not always spent on the

most essential, as the above comment from Angela Merkel on Spain demonstrates, and the

definition of ‘most essential’ is often open for discussion. The goal with the funds is to foster

convergence, not the highest investment return, which is let to the market itself. Should the funds

thus be allowed to regions and countries that already are relatively wealthy at all? Additionally, if

the authorities mismanage funding, is there a reason to question the delivery of capital to that

authority, despite this authority fitting the criteria for funding?

Another problem is that subsidising areas can have a reverse effect on growth. Some argue that

subsidised areas, especially in less developed Member States, tend to become dependant on

external funding. This is, however, not always the case. To tackle this problem the ERDF has

devised a catch for the regions that receive funding. The catch is that for a region to receive

funding, it has to match this with other funding. This has proven effective to stimulate the growth

of some regions, but for others it has left the region with too much funding.

How can the EU best support social inclusion and the convergance of its regions while at the same

time achieving the Europe 2020 goals and facing the fact that metropolitan areas are the motors of

todays society?

Keywords: Cohesion Policy, Structural Funds, European Regional Development

Fund (ERDF), European Social Fund (ESF), Cohesion Fund, NUTS, Europe 2020,

Horizon 2020

Links for further research

• Cohesion policy (European Commission)

http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/what/future/index_en.cfm

• EU Cohesion Policy 2014–2020

http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/informat/2014/fiche_innovation_en.pdf

• EU Cohesion Policy – Challenges and Responses (Michel Barnier)

www.intereconomics.eu/downloads/getfile.php?id=310

• Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics (NUTS), Eurostat

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/nuts/overview

• Cohesion Policy and the Europe 2020 strategy (European Commission)

http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/what/europe2020/index_en.cfm

• Horizon 2020

http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/what-horizon-2020

• EU Structural funds

http://ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/index_en.cfm?pg=structural_funds  

 

European Youth Parliament Finland – EYP-Finland ry Uudenmaankatu 15 A 5, 00120 Helsinki

www.eypfinland.org eyp@eypfinland.org

Partners of Turku 2015 - 21st National Session of EYP Finland