Being a Delegate can be hard. The Media Team likes to help in anyway we can. Providing a little extra for your Committee Work.
Committee Handbook Cork2016
T able of Content
Committee on Women‘s Rights and Gender Equality Page 4 Committee on Constiutional Affairs I Page 5 Committe on Legal Affairs I Page 6-7 Committee on Fisheries Page 8-9 Committee on Security and Defence Page 10 Committe on Culture and Education Page 11 Committee on Human Rights Page 12-13 Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs II Page 14-15 Committe on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety Page 16-17 Committee on Legal Affairs II Page 18-19 Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs II Page 20 Committee on Constiutional Affairs II Page 21
Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality
A secure Europe for all: Considering the longstanding violations of the rights of transgender people and the extraordinarily high suicide rates among transgender youths, what can be done to ensure their safe and equal treatment across the EU? Transgender people are arguably the most margi- gender people vulnerable, and contribute to the nalized group of persons within the LGBT community. They face unprecedented levels of discrimination all over the EU, both legally and in terms of public treatment, despite Europe championing itself as one of the foremost protectors of human rights. Its sheer magnitude means that the problem transgender people face can be broken down into several key elements.
Legislation
The EU has several pieces of legislation, which protects its citizens against discrimination. The primary and most general of these is the charter of Fundamental Rights. This charter is a kind of “one size fits all” legally binding document, which protects EU citizen’s most basic rights. Article 21 reads, “Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex… or sexual orientation shall be prohibited.” It does not specifically mention gender identity as one of the protected groups, and despite the Court of Justice of the European Union seeing the inclusion of sex as adequate protection, transgender people still face legal discrimination in many member states. Two other pieces of legislation, the Employment Equality Directive and the Equal Treatment Directive, omit gender identity in a similar fashion. Only 13 Member States explicitly protect transgender people from hate crimes.
Healthcare and Recognition
Currently only three Member States, Ireland, Denmark and Malta, do not require a medical diagnosis in order for a transgender person to legally change their gender and only 37 out of 50 European states recognize gender identity as a concept. 24 European states require forced sterilization surgery in order to provide any kind of gender recognition. This means that transgender people are forced to go through a long and expensive medical procedure to be legally treated as the gender with which they identify. Additionally, the high price of the hormone treatments required to medically transition often leave trans-
disproportionately high number of homeless and imprisoned transgender men and women. Even with non-transgender specific healthcare they face issues. This isolation and marginalization is a huge contributing factor to the amount of transgender persons suffering from depression and committing suicide, with one UK survey suggesting that 59% of transgender people under the age of 26 had considered taking their own lives.
Public Opinion
With education on transgender rights and issues being next to non-existent, stigmatization and misinformation within the general public tends to be rife, which leads to hatred and an alarming amount of violence. So much that Transgender Europe (TGEU) has been running the Trans Murder Monitoring project since 2009. This project collects data on homicides against transgender people worldwide. It has found that over 1,700 transgender or gender diverse people have been killed since it began. It’s worth bearing in mind that this figure is an underestimation of the true amount, as often attacks on transgender people aren’t investigated fully, if at all, and the public take almost no notice of them. This is despite the fact that many transphobic attacks demonstrate an extremely high amount of violence and often involve torture and mutilation. From a transgender person’s perspective, remembering their country’s past does not conjure up much fondness. The past was a dark and threatening time for them and, while there have been certain improvements in select Member States, most remain dangerously intolerant. Therefore when, as the session theme asks us to, we imagine our continent’s future, it must be absolutely essential for us to create a continent offering equal rights to all, not only including but specifically to its transgender and gender diverse citizens. Conall Molloy (IE)
Committee on Constitutional Affairs I Strength through Unity: In light of recent suggestions to create a „Leaving the Union“set of rules , how should the EU react to the various secessionist movements across the continent, to ensure the best outcome for all Member States, while guaranteeing that values of democracy, self-determinism and freedom are respected?
T
here are many things that make a nation, and in a modern Europe compromise is often a key characteristic. This is obvious in inter-state relations on EU policy, tax arrangements and division of contributions, but internal relations in Member States often have a greater degree of historical tension with people fighting for their individualism instead of agricultural budget for example. This is one of the differences that has to be acknowledged in this matter: the issue can come down to one side claiming self-determination and the opposition holding a democratic mandate.
Financial and Cultural interests
To better understand what drives a lasting (though not necessarily successful) secessionist movement, it helps to observe the biggest examples. Almost all of them occur where there is both a greater concentration of wealth or resources in the separatist area than the state it currently exists in, and either a real or symbolic cultural difference. Scotland, for example, holds control of the majority of British oil fields and has a history of misrepresentation in Westminster. Catalonia features the tourist capital of Spain and has the history of persecution to rally behind, but now has much of the autonomy that the majority of Catalans want. Our session theme reminds us to remember our country’s past, but at certain times it becomes very difficult to differentiate between expressing cultural difference and racism, when a group misuses its history in order to claim a greater relative share of the wealth of the state. For example, even though they operate in the same region, PSOE (Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party) remember the history of Catalonia very differently to PP (People’s Party). The crux of the argument, is whether a nation is pursuing independence because it feels culturally incompa-
tible with its neighbours, and therefore doesn’t want to share resources with them, or if it just doesn’t want to share with anyone and has judged that a polarising cultural war will leave it with more of the natural assets and fewer of the ‘moochers’ from the rest of the country. The Lega Nord provides a prime example of this, campaigning for a federal Northern Italy with far less dependence from central government while also campaigning for tighter regulation on immigration.
Democracy?
The idea of democracy is essential to the EU, and it’s an idea we hold dear. With this said, it becomes very difficult with regional conflicts to define a democratic mandate, and the flaws in current legislation come through. Many of the conflict zones fulfil the criteria for nationhood, and in their own areas the opinions of the people are abundantly clear. The problems occur when we discuss at what level the Europe a la carte idea should be applied, if at all. If I decide that under my roof, I have a democratic mandate to leave the Republic and apply for my own membership to the EU, am I not entitled to? The legislation in different countries varies greatly when it comes to withdrawal rights and decentralisation of government, and there is no one size fits all solution. I return again to our session theme; Beyond 2016: Remembering our country’s past, imagining our continent’s future. We have a duty to harmonise the legislation across member states, so that any minority nation has the right to input at a European level if appropriate, we need to decide what level of federation or decentralisation is available to our members and most importantly, we must clarify EU legislation for new states because they will exist eventually. Cian Horgan (IE)
Committee on Legal Affairs I Time for reform: With the ineffectiveness of the 40-year-old ‘War on Drugs’, which has now internationally cost more than $1 trillion, what can the EU do to repurpose and improve the current EU Drugs Strategy? The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime misuse of prescription medicines, as well as the alongside Europol estimate the global drugs trade to be worth about $435 billion per year with about $84 billion of this attributed to cocaine trade. EU drugs strategies and action plans do not impose legal obligations on Member States but rather they promote a shared model with defined priorities, objectives and metrics for measuring performance. This framework is used to develop national policies which are increasingly synchronised with EU policies. The latest EU Drug Strategy was conceived during Ireland’s presidency of the Council of Europe in 2013. The EU Drug Strategy (2013-2020) counts as the ninth strategic document on illicit drugs published by the EU since 1990. There are a number of significant changes in the EU drugs market which the 2013–20 strategy aims to address. In particular, the rapid increase in the number of new psychoactive substances becoming available on the market as well as diversification in drug trafficking routes and methods of transport are among the challenges that Member States now face. In particular, the new plan aims at enhancing effective law enforcement coordination and cooperation as well as effective judicial cooperation and legislation within the EU in order to respond effectively to current and emerging trends in illicit drug activity. The strategy also proposes that special attention is paid to communication technologies, which play a significant role in the spread of drugs, particularly new psychoactive substances. It calls for the development of alternatives to traditional law enforcement approaches, which it recognises are increasingly challenged by issues such as the combined use of illicit drugs and alcohol, the
so-called ‘legal highs’ phenomenon.
Between 1990 and 2005, an estimate of 6’300 to 8’500 drug-related deaths were reported in the EU each year. In Ireland, 679 people died in drug-related circumstances in 2013. In that same year, the drugs market in Ireland was valued at an estimated €600 million. In a 2011 Drug Prevalence Survey, just over 27% of respondents reported ever having used illegal drugs in their lifetime. This was an increase of 2% on the last survey carried out in 2007. It is a sad truth that we all will be or have been offered drugs as some point in our lives. What was once a quiet, underground trade is now taking place in broad daylight and right in front of our eyes. Drug culture has only been growing in influence and strength despite the many, many attempts to stymie its progress. The War on Drugs has been fighting a losing battle for the last 40 years. How should we re-structure our strategies best so as to finally gain the upper hand? Pauline Keane (IE)
The Committee on Fisheries An unrenewable resource: Overfishing continues to threaten the balance of our maritime ecosystem, while the demand for fish continues to rise. What role should the EU play in protecting a sustainable maritime economy, considering its ecological impact? Ever
since the peak of fisheries in 1996, the amount of caught fish has slightly declined, but this doesn’t mean that fisheries fish less, that’s quite the contrary. The reason for the smaller gain is that the population of fish in the sea sunk drastically. More fish are fished than born. European fisheries currently provide fish for around 5.4 million people and rising. This leads to them needing bigger catches to fulfill the needs of the customers. To meet the market needs, illegal matters are taken from time to time or TACs (Total Allowable Catches) are set crucially higher than scientifically advised. That’s how overfishing starts, and once it has started, it seems almost impossible to stop it. But it is our utmost concern to stop changing this nuisance, since it does not only come with worrying consequences for assuring food security, but also significantly endangers our marine ecosystem. Fisheries do not only reduce the population of commercial fish, but also a notable amount of other marine life: sea dwellers that get caught in fisher nets (by-catch) and are disposed solely because they are not commercially useable. It also effects birds and other animals, that die due to oil leakage and reefs that are destroyed because of deep sea fishing. Fish are highly important for the marine ecosystem and once overfishing wipes out whole populations, this can, will and does drastically alter the structure and function of this very fragile system. 90 species of marine fish in Europe’s waters are feared to go extinct, if European fisheries continue fishing as unconsidered as they have been for the past few years. Nowadays it is more important than ever, to take steps in the right direction and try to make adjustments, so as to level the playing field for small fisheries and to at least try to protect the marine biosphere. One of the major aspects we have to
work on, is making fish catches sustainable and thus to protect our environment and the international food market, for a better future of ourcontinent. Vanessa Bartl (AT)
Committee on Security and Defence Towards a safer Europe: With the devastating Paris attack that occurred. in November 2015, proving that terorism is still an issue of the utmost importance within EU borders, to what extent should the EU act to monitor online activities in order to prevent such attacks from occurring in the future? Terrorism. One of the fastest growing fears of the 1. But what prevents the governments 21st century. Terrorism has always been a part of the modern world. One doesn’t need to look too far to see the effects of terrorism. Only a couple of hours away is Belfast, a city where even now, we can see the effects of terrorism, after seventeen years since the conflict known simply as “The Troubles” was officially resolved. In 1969, when the troubles started, terrorism was not as it is today. Although the core idea, to spread fear and chaos to further an aim or achieve a goal, the means of achieving it have changed. In troubles-era Ireland, technology was not used to the same extent as in today’s wave of terror attacks. This change in methods used by the terrorists calls for a change in methods used by those who wish to defeat them, to ensure peace and safety to the citizens of the EU and beyond. But what are the methods used by terrorists? One way in which terrorists, such as the so-called Islamic State (IS), use technology, is through the internet. According to the British police, over seven hundred young people have travelled to the Middle East to support or fight for jihadi organisations. But the even scarier part of this is how these young people are being corrupted and recruited. The IS uses the internet as their greatest weapon. They have been found to be using social media websites, such as twitter and kik messenger, to influence their future recruits. To do this, they create seemingly infinite amounts of jihadi-sympathising websites. They then track who views them, and create social media accounts. They use these to build relationships, to get close to these volatile young people. But the issue is the sheer number of accounts and web-pages that are in use. And because there is so many, it bodes the question: Should the governments of member states track the web usage of their citizens?
from monito ring their citizens in this manor? It states in The European Convention on Human Rights that:Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
2.
There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic wellbeing of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
There is also the Data protection directive, which ensures the protection of rights in relation to online privacy. However, there are those who believe it is necessary and justified for the EU to call on Member States to closely monitor its citizens’ online activities. Although there has been a number of IS-affiliated accounts shut down, it is not due to governments’ interventions. Twitter, for example started, a hashtag (#ISMediaBlackout) in order to encourage the reporting of suspected extremist supporting accounts. As a result, many of the IS-affiliated accounts were suspended, but they simply moved to less transparent sites, with less regulations. But how far should the government go for our safety? Should they track their citizens’ activities? Should they begin to act as a nanny state, to limit the ability of terrorist organisations like the IS? Or instead should they ensure that their citizens still keep their privacy? This is for you to decide. Matthew Somers (IE)
Committee on Culture and Education It is all Greek to me: Overcoming language barriers in Europe. What can be done to foster the EU‘s cultural unity whilst preserving linguistic diversity and local cultures, particularly in regards to minority and regional languages such as Catalan? “Remembering our country’s past, imagining our continents future”. The core of this session is the idea of past and present, of what was and what is to be. Of the little impact on the much greater. The past of our own little country has to be kept in mind whilst looking at the big future of our continent, Europe. Just think of how much the Irish language means to Irish people, the fight and the sacrifices that were made so we could be just Irish. We’re such a small country but we still have values and traditions, a language that we need to keep alive. The loss of our beautiful language would be a loss of something much greater than a Cúpla Fochail. It would mean a loss of heritage, a loss of us as Irish people and that would be devastating. Now think of all the other languages in the EU that are a minority, that are being lost and that aren‘t taken seriously. Think of all the other countries who have their heritage. They need to keep their country’s values and traditions alive. Keeping in mind that the necessity of efficient and effective communication is needed in the EU there is an equally vital need to protect and promote cultural and linguistic diversity. The communication that is needed for the future is as important as the need for diversity for culture and for individuality of each member state. While the EU has some influence over the education system of its Member States, it is only a supportive competence of the EU. If the EU is to keep linguistic diversity a key part of all its Member States what can be done to ensure that languages as big as Catalan are kept alive? What can be done to ensure that these languages are kept a part of the heritage and cultural of each Member State? Shauna Breen (IE)
Committee on Human Rights Founding principles in a modern Europe: With the current rise of far right extremist parties and xenophobic political movements in several Member States, the risk of such ideologies discouraging diversity and supporting negativity towards refugees is high. How should the EUrespond to these parties and their ideologies without neglecting their democratic rights and freedom of speech? The rise in popularity of far-right extremist parties in European politics has been a worrying trend in recent years, however the prevalence of this issue has been intensified by the ongoing refugee crisis. The developing influence of far-right parties can be seen across the EU, e.g. the increasing popularity of Front National in France and the FPÖ in Austria. Similarly islamophobic, xenophobic and racist organisations, such as Pegida in Germany who perpetrate the harassment of minorities, have been gaining traction. These parties and organisations are able to capitalise on growing ethno-nationalist sentiment. They encourage resentment towards migrants, refugees and foreign nationals by scapegoating them for issues such as economic decline and high unemployment rates. They often use racist, islamophobic and xenophobic arguments in political discourse and media campaigns, legitimising harmful ideologies and contributing to an increase in hostile attitudes towards and stigmatisation of migrants, refugees, Muslims and other minorities. In many cases the ideologies of these parties have provoked individual citizens and affiliated groups to carry out verbal and physical attacks on minorities e.g. police in Sweden recently disrupted a suspected attack on a refugee centre by 14 far-right citizens armed with axes, knives and pipes whilst prosecutors in Germany charged four suspected neo-Nazi terrorists planning to use explosives to attack a refugee shelter.
The refugee crisis has been utilised by these parties to prey on public fears of security threats by IS, fears which have been heightened since the Paris attacks. They engage in harmful rhetoric when describing refugees often calling them “swarms” or “armies” . The EU has done little to combat this dehumanisation of the millions of people seeking refuge in the EU, many of whom are fleeing the lethal internal conflict ongoing in Syria. The lack of an efficient, EU-wide plan to manage the refugee crisis has only served to worsen the situation. This absence of unity among Member States strengthens the public perception that the EU is unable to cope with accepting refugees and migrants. Megan Luddy (IE)
Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs II
Tools for change: Despite relentless financial literacy initiatives by the OECD, World Bank, EU and various national entities, over-indebtedness persists across Europe. What can be done on an educational front to improve this issue? For generations, goods were exchanged for other goods. Then goods were traded for money – real life cash you could actually see and feel. Then cash turned into a plastic card connected to an account with some numbers on it. With bank accounts and credit cards, it is harder to visualise the money we spend. Many adults and young adults lack the ability to make informed judgements and effective decisions regarding the use and management of money and wealth – they are financially illiterate.
In the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008, the lack of sufficient financial education persists across Europe. However, financial literacy is not only connected to financial education. How well your parents manage finances, does play a part. With the issue of biased information from bank advisors, many rely on their parent’s knowledge. If your parents have a lower level of education, you are more likely to become financially illiterate. In this way, over-indebtness is hereditary. Financial illiteracy is also a cost to Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and its owners, as it is difficult for a small business owner to make informed decisions without financial education. SMEs tend to have much higher rates of job growth, but are more likely to go out of business or remain stunted due to institutional and financial literacy problems. So, how can we solve this? The perhaps most efficient measures can only be taken by national governments, as education is an incentive measure in the European Union. Nevertheless, it is important that we as consumers take control of our private economy, and put an effort into learning some of the necessary financial knowledge. It is up to ECON II to figure out what the next steps to overcome financial illiteracy should be. Camilla Hatling (NO)
Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
The Recycling Revolution: Sweden’s implementation of a waste-toenergy programme has meant that less than 1% of their household waste reaches landfill sites. Following this success, how should the EU promote a wider adoption of such programmes while ensuring that on a largerscale environmental and sustainability goals are met? Today, like one hundred years ago, is a time of con-
flict. Today’s conflict is not one that will be fought with guns or bayonets but rather recycling bins, wind turbines and possibly even waste to energy incinerators. But like previous wars this is entirely the fault of mankind. We do not live in the environment but are ourselves part of the environment. Forgetting this, we have doomed our descendants to generations of hardship. We no longer face a question of should we take action but rather how do we take action. Within this debate of “how”, incineration has earned its fair share of controversy, delays in construction of waste to energy incinerators in cities across the EU (e.g. Dublin) is often due to heated exchanges between environmentalists, local residents, politicians and private companies. Local residents are concerned about the visual and potential chemical pollution from the incinerators, politicians see it as an issue that will only lose them votes, private enterprise see it as a big money-maker (with contracts from state guaranteeing a steady supply of waste to be burnt) and environmentalist themselves are divided on the issue. For them incineration is the last acceptable option, better than landfill but more destructive than recycling and composting alternatives. So to work toward a zero waste society we must consult the infographic, we must reduce, reuse, recycle and incinerate anything left over, right? Well it is just not that simple, incineration releases greenhouse gases and hinders our existing efforts to reach our EU 2020 goals on emissions. In the same way imperialism and greed plunged us into war one hundred years ago, greed and a new imperialism, corporate capitalism is again plunging us into the abyss. If it’s cheaper to pollute and bin waste in huge landfill sites, companies will
do so, irrespective of the long term consequences for humanity. The responsibility to regulate then lies with legislators, either on the Member States’ or on a European level. ENVI has this task, the strategy for the long term sustainability of our planet with regard to our impact based on the use and efficient use of our limited resources. Niall Buckley (IE)
Committee on Legal Affairs II The future of embryonic stem cell research in a heterogeneous legal landscape: How can the EU and its Member States strike a balance in an ever-growing scientific landscape, between protecting embryonic stem cells for moral reasons and enhancing therapeutic prospects for patients suffering from incurable illnesses, while simultaneously protecting the freedom of research? The advance of biotechnology, especially applied Across the EU there are several stances officially to human life, has caused many ethical dilemmas to arise, and has created, or emphasized, the need to define previously blurry limits about what we consider human life. This parameter would define what is morally acceptable during research, whilst maintaining its freedom. The particular issue of human embryonic stem cells (hESC/ESC) has become one of the most pressing dilemmas demanding to be solved. But what are hESC, why are they useful and why is there an ethical dichotomy behind their use?
We must start by defining the concept of hESC: human embryonic stem cells are a type of cell named pluripotent, which means it is still undefined and can later develop into any kind of human cell, thus being capable of repairing damaged tissues and being able to take part in many crucial medical treatments. There are many fields in which they could be used and they become a unique opportunity for scientific research and medical advancement. Even so, because of the moral dilemma their use has, some other similar options are being used as well, such as adult stem cells or induced pluripotent embryonic stem cells; but neither of these, their use nor their study, are as effective and productive as hESC’s. The moral dilemma arises with the question where does human life begin? hESC are usually obtained from surplus fertilized eggs from in-vitro fertilization (IVF) donated voluntarily. Many religious groups consider the embryos they are obtained from already a human being. Therefore, they see the use of these very ecently fertilized embryos, and their later destruction, as the killing of a yet unborn person.
taken by countries for or against the use of hESC, a situation which neither benefits the research completely nor does it effectively block it for its moral issues. So the problem lies behind what the EU should do to create a unified legislative framework to treat the use of hESC for research, so as to maintain cooperation and coherence between its Member States and therefore help stop or boost the hESC scientific and medical research. Lucia Matamoros (ES)
Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs I Out of sight, out of mind: Laundered money is estimated to make up almost 3% of global GDP each year. In light of recent events, how can the EU combat the funding of terrorist activities and “finance crime” within its borders? Money rules the world. Without money, one cannot easily engage in any criminal activities and with the method of money-laundering, one can disguise its mostly illegal origins, so as to avoid the suspicion of law enforcement agencies and prevent leaving a trail of incriminating evidence. Furthermore, the trending hobby of many important people - tax evasion - is diminishing the state’s income and the consequences are that the government can spend less and has to borrow more money. In recent years, the international community has become more aware of the dangers that money-laundering poses in all these areas and many governments and jurisdictions have committed themselves to taking action. For example the so called the Anti-Money-Laundering Directive has been put into place (EU Directive 2015/849), which applies to the financial sector and certain other actors such as lawyers, providers of gambling services and traders in goods (e.g. precious metals and stones), when payments of €10,000 or more are made in cash. Those subject to the directive need to fulfil certain criteria and terms stated in the directive. Within the context of United Nations standards, the Global Programme against Money-Laundering, Proceeds of Crime and the Financing of Terrorism aims to enhance international and regional cooperation in combating this issue, to strengthen the legal, financial and operational capacities of beneficiary States. As you can see, there are already a lot of measures in place but money laundering is still a hot topic. There are a lot of things we have to consider when tackling the problem and ECON I will present you your ideas in a few days. Ricarda Pfingstl (AT)
Committee on Constitutional Affairs I Strength through unity: In light of recent suggestions to create a “Leaving the Union” set of rules, how should the EU react to the various secessionist movements across the continent to ensure the best outcome for all Member State, while guaranteeing that values of democracy, selfdeterminism and freedom are respected? Europe of tomorrow: Considering the persisting huge influence on our daily routine, however they democratic deficit in the EU, and growing Euroscepticism, how can we transform and encourage democratic participation among young people? John McGuinness
There is an great number of young Europeans that need to be encouraged to participate in elections, and politics in general. The turnout amongst young voters (from 18 to 24 years) in the European Elections of 2014 was at only 28%. According to the “Eurobarometer “survey which was published in October 2014 after the European elections, the youngest Europeans were less euroscpetic than the elderly, even though far fewer of them actually voted. The fundamental structure seems very blurred and tangled for most young Europeans, which makes it hard for them to form an opinion. They don’t know what they are voting for, so the consequence is a low voter turnout. Considering that the European Parliament is the only directly elected institution within the EU, this surely is problematic. On the other hand citizens constantly complain that they feel abandoned and are not being listened to, which is how Euroscepticism, the fundamental opposition to the EU, is born. Some citizens suffer from a lack of awareness. They are not aware of the impact the EU could have on their lives and that, as well, contributes to the lack of political involvement. “Why should I care if that doesn’t concern me?” – that’s what some of the young voters are thinking. A possible solution for this problem is to show which impact the EU has on their lives. Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) actually have a
do not set our taxes, or decide about our municipalities.
In the last few years, the EU cut the roaming rates by a huge amount. It also stopped airlines from using totally misleading adverts that suggest you can fly to Ireland for 0,50€. From the food we eat, to the advertisements we watch on TV and the freedom of trading between Member States, the EU affects us all the time. Now this might be important for young Europeans. The EU is also responsible for written health warnings and images on tobacco products (EU Tobacco Products Directive (2001/37/EC). As it was said before there is a lack of knowledge about the EU institution. Therefore there should be more social media campaigns about the it as well as posters and leaflets in places people actually would pay attention. Last but not least the internet should offer a great variety of advertisement and pages offering knowledge about European Union as well. Summarizing the above: less ignorant + less lost + have greater knowledge = greater voter turnout. I want to leave you with the following quote that you can think about: “There are two kinds of Europeans: The smart ones, and those who stayed behind.” H.L. Mencken Zosia Sznajder (PL)