EUROPEAN YOUTH PARLIAMENT GREECE
32nd National Selection Conference Thessaloniki, 19 - 21 December 2015
Committee
Topics
EUROPEAN YOUTH PARLIAMENT GREECE
COMMITTEE TOPICS
Session Theme – State self-determination -A note from the President of the session Until today, the European Union remains a unique political construct: as the only truly supranational organisation globally, its institutional design and processes of decision-making constitute, arguably, one of the greatest political achievements of contemporary history. Yet, in recent times of crisis, the Union often had to take the blame for political, economic and social problems in Member States. While the majority of the political elite in Europe argues that the European Union was above all our only chance to deal with the increasingly complex challenges, Eurosceptics saw themselves reconfirmed when even Europe wouldn’t find the necessary answer. In any case, the recent developments have fuelled the question of what issues should be dealt with on a European level and what should remain under the sovereignty of the State. No doubt, the right to self-determination has to be respected as one of the core values of our modern democracies, even if Member States have gradually agreed to pool those competences within the European Union. The progress of European integration marks a significant development of the European continent in a post-war era. What started as the European Coal and Steel Community evolved into a European Economic Community and then into the European Union we know today. Step by step, Member States discovered plenty of incentives to cooperate on a European level. Until now, the Union underwent an industrial, political, legal, economic, social and cultural integration of states which lead to the division of competences between the EU and its Member States that we know under the current legislation. Greece has experienced this conflict between trust in Europe and the demand for more self-determination like no other country. Frustration and fear have challenged the Greeks’ trust in international agreements, treaties and organisations. The Greek people, their government and the entire European community now have to reconsider, more than ever, which matters should be delegated to the European Union. It is my personal and sincerest hope that they will succeed in finding areas where cooperation on a European level will still be beneficial for Europe and those Member States that suffered most over the last year. This consideration between European integration and self-determination will be one of the dominant conflict lines for all committee topics. The latter cover various policy areas and evolve around issues where a European approach is still controversial, but might be beneficial to some degree. The challenge for all committees will be to weigh the positive and negative impacts of international cooperation within their topic, to agree on an ideal solution and integrate that into the existing policy framework. For politicians, both on a national and European level, these discussions are omnipresent and the delegates of the 32nd National Selection Conference will have the opportunity to experience this reality of politics first hand. I wish them success, but more than anything, I wish them courage and creativity when dealing with these complex debates, that ultimately determine the future of our European continent.
Lorenz Stree
President of the 32nd National Selection Conference
Committee
Topics
EUROPEAN YOUTH PARLIAMENT GREECE
COMMITTEE TOPICS
Committee on Constitutional Affairs I | AFCO I The right of a people to choose its own state and territory versus state sovereignty: following a wave of succession movements and the possible withdrawal of Member States from the EU, how can cooperation be sustained while respecting peoples’ rights to self-governance and independence? The right to self-determination includes the right of peoples to choose their own state and territory. In practice, however, it is not as simple as it sounds. Modern states and territories on the European continent are a product of a series of historical events. States are embedded in the framework of international organisations and treaties, with the European Union being the most impactful membership. Recent movements in Catalonia and Scotland, but also smaller movements in other states, have launched a debate about whether or not those successions would be consistent with EU membership of the original state and/or the new state. Whether or not Catalonia and Scotland could remain in the EU remains a controversy. This topic will have to look into possible consequences of succession movements and attempt to suggest a compromise in the best interest of all parties involved
Committee on Constitutional Affairs II | AFCO II Europe for Citizens and the European Citizens’ Initiative, complemented by referenda on a national level as a response to the so-called democratic deficit of the European Union; what should the role of referenda and other means of direct democracy be, both on a national and European level, in future EU decision-making and the implementation of European law? “Europe for citizens” was created to “foster European citizenship and to improve conditions for civic and democratic participation at EU level” as an answer to criticism against the democratic deficit of the EU. In citizens’ eyes, unpopular decisions are often taken far away in Brussels but imposed on them and their government without giving them a chance to have a say. However, EU legislation is quite clear about what topics are to be handled on a European level and what remains in the sovereignty of the state. Recent examples, such as the Greek referendum or the Scottish independence referendum, can be seen as cases where states chose to involve their citizens in important decisions. Likewise, the European Union has made efforts to offer more tools of direct democracy, revolutionised the 2014 parliamentary elections and tried to act more transparent. The question remains of whether means of direct democracy are indeed the correct answer to take our most difficult and complex decisions or, as Jose Manuel Barroso, the Former President of the European Commission positioned himself in 2010 “Decisions taken by the most democratic institutions in the world are very often wrong.”
EUROPEAN YOUTH PARLIAMENT GREECE
COMMITTEE TOPICS
Committee on Foreign Affairs | AFET United at home but fragmented abroad? The European Union, as a peace project and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, has been criticised for an allegedly inefficient response to armed conflicts globally due to discordant national interests and a lacking application of diplomatic and military tools. How should the EU use its diplomatic power and military resources to more effectively contribute to global peace, while respecting the sovereignty of its Member States? Foreign policy as the last stronghold of national interests and one of the oldest debates in the history European integration: recent examples of conflict from Mali to Syria have repeatedly shown the difficulty of achieving a common European position and harmonised response to armed conflict abroad. The Treaty of Lisbon established a policy framework following the idea of a harmonised Union: the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy as the face of European foreign policy and the European External Action Service (EEAS), give the Union the means to exert its influence. On an international level, the European Union could potentially strengthen its diplomatic and military stance through stronger coordination of its foreign policy. However, most conflicts were approached differently by Member States, acting on national interests, colonial history, domestic political pressure or a more impactful membership in other international organisations and treaties, with NATO being the most significant. The EU and its Member States will have to consider the extent of unity in questions of foreign policy while being aware of the different moral principles in their decision-making processes.
Committee on Economic Affairs | ECON Finding the balance between the protection of national legal standards while developing towards a full common market: How should the EU deal with financial havens, offshore accounts and tax-avoidance regulations in its Member States?
The current scandal surrounding the numerous cases of tax evasion in Luxembourg has triggered a heated debate across the EU. Companies such as Starbucks or Fiat were recently sued for shifting their profits to countries with low taxes, avoiding to pay taxes in the countries where the profit was originally made. These cases of vtax injustice emphasise the thin line between illegal tax evasion and legal tax avoidance practices. In order to reduce their tax liability, EU citizens and companies commit themselves to unduly tax planning or offshore deposits that cross the line from legality to illegality. Accordingly, several Member States are struggling to comply with their economic and social responsibilities as a consequence of loss of revenue. On one hand the question remains of how EU financial systems can operate on the basis of common standards when on the other hand, the EU has no competence in the regulation of tax systems. This topic further looks at how far prevention of tax evasion in EU Member States as a common interest can be tackled on a European level, and how tax evasion can be avoided on a practical level.
EUROPEAN YOUTH PARLIAMENT GREECE
COMMITTEE TOPICS
Committee on Employment and Social Affairs | EMPL Preparing for the next crisis to support those who need it the most: Italy recently pushed for a European unemployment insurance scheme aiming at solidarity within Europe through the stronger protection of Member States from sudden shocks of unemployment. What could be a potential EU strategy towards deeper integration of labour markets and employment policies, while respecting Member States’ sovereignty over their national social policy? A Europe of solidarity and fairness: in the years of crisis, the EU has seen itself under significant pressure to find fast and effective mechanisms to offer support to Member States in need. Stability mechanisms and bail-outs had to be chosen as reactive measures. With many states currently experiencing recovery from the crisis, plans are being made to prevent a similar crisis from happening again. The most common approach is the idea of re-distribution of resources in order to counteract a multi-speed Europe. The European unemployment insurance scheme, its impact and possible implementation are still subject to scientific analysis and research, however the Italian government has most recently taken initiative in this matter. This topic will have to analyse the positive and negative aspects of such an unemployment scheme and discuss ideals of solidarity and economic and social integration.
Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety | ENVI I The 2015 Paris Climate Conference (COP21) as yet another chance for a new legally binding and universal agreement on climate. In response to the outcome COP21, how should the EU and its Member States pursue their own climate targets and contribute to global climate diplomacy? Climate diplomacy has become one of the most challenging political negotiations on a global stage. While some states started early with setting ambitious climate targets, others remain reluctant in the fight against climate change. The yearly Climate Summits within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are seen as the most important platform for global negotiations of targets and EU Member States have a long history among the most ambitious states with regards to climate policy. The European Union itself also experienced delays and debates until it succeeded to reach an agreement about the 2020 climate & energy package and the 2030 climate & energy framework. ENVI I will have to understand how the EU could use this common position of its Member States for a stronger leverage in global negotiations. The COP21 will take place right before this conference and the committee will have to follow the developments of the summit in Paris and then answer and react to the agreements made at COP21.
EUROPEAN YOUTH PARLIAMENT GREECE
COMMITTEE TOPICS
Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety II | ENVI II In Europe one in every three children under the age of 11 is either overweight or obese. Building on the EU Action Plan on Childhood Obesity 2014-2020, Jamie Oliver’s Sugar Manifesto even calls for more drastic steps against the marketing and advertising of unhealthy food products. How should the EU contribute to the protection of our most vulnerable consumers whilst respecting the Member States’ sovereignty with regards to taxation and principles of the free market? Economic integration of markets and trade policy have been shifted to the European Union to a large extent with the aim of finding a balance between fairness of competition and protection of consumers. Market control has been reduced to the minimum level possible in order to respect principles of the free market. The market for food products is directly related to obesity and particularly childhood obesity. Our youngest citizens are seen as the most vulnerable consumers and can be most easily manipulated by advertising and design. A lack of restrictions and initiatives on a local and national level lead to a gradual decrease of public health; in some Member States more than in others. The EU has recently taken initiative towards exerting more control over national markets, production and consumption of unhealthy food products. All expenditures for programmes within this policy area have to be weighed against the rising costs for healthcare as the prevalence of cardiovascular diseases is supposed to sky-rocket over the next decades. Most recently, the celebrity cook Jamie Oliver has published a manifesto in favour of a tax on sugary products which has received plenty of attention. The committee will have to analyse the EU’s attempts to fight childhood obesity and compare them with other proposals in order to come to an own strategy in favour of the health of our youngest.
Committee on Legal Affairs | JURI A legal and practical fundamental rights safeguard for those deprived of freedom in prison facilities: Which common guidelines should the EU Member States agree on regarding detainees’ rights and freedoms, detention facilities, and social rehabilitation? United and yet so different: criminal law remains under the competence of the state which leads to significant imbalances between the systems of legal prosecution and detainment. The recent case of Germany refusing to extradite Bulgarian nationals to serve out their sentence in Bulgaria due to poor prison conditions is only one of the latest alarming examples showcasing the importance of this topic. At the same time, prisoners in a number of EU Member States suffer from inadequate health care and individual support, overcrowded dorms, and lack of educational and training opportunities. However, with the dispute between the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the United Kingdom regarding prisoners’ right to vote, the question of whether other basic rights and freedoms should be guaranteed for detainees arises. The European Prison Rules (EPR) introduced by the Council of Europe (CoE) consist of a set of three recommendations defining the minimum rules applicable in prison facilities. However, all the undertaken reforms face difficulties in improving conditions of detention. Consequently, this topic poses the question of whether or not the national sovereignty in this matter should be maintained and which steps should be taken to guarantee the rights of prisoners.
EUROPEAN YOUTH PARLIAMENT GREECE
COMMITTEE TOPICS
Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs | LIBE While EU Member States recently agreed on a quota for the redistribution of 120.000 asylum seekers, conflicting national interests persist regarding a permanent policy framework and successor to the Dublin 3 regulation. How should the EU respond to the influx of asylum seekers over the next years, addressing the needs of Members States at the external borders of the Union and facing those reluctant to share the burden? The sudden flow of refugees has been dominating European politics over the last months. The political failure to find a European answer to the new scale of the influx has demonstrated how national interests are often stronger than solidarity or humanity. The origin of the problem lies in the structure of the decision-making process over a topic that seems to concern some Member States more than others. Those states on the external borders of the European Union expressed their frustration about being left alone with the responsibility of administrating and welcoming the thousands of refugees arriving every day. Out of the non-border states, Germany was the only country to actively seize responsibility for a great number of asylum seekers. In late September, most EU Member States (opt-out from the UK) agreed on a quota distribution for a fixed number of 120.000 refugees being re-located from front-line states. Offering help to those who are in need of it is a humanitarian question and most EU leaders agree that Europe is obliged to help. The rest remains only a political struggle: this committee will have to find the right incentives and measures, allowing the European Union to handle this flow of refugees including their distribution, housing, training and integration.
Committee on Security and Defence | SEDE A technological revolution turning into unregulated warfare. What stance should the EU take on the usage and development of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) and which are the common principles that should be globally accepted? The development of drones initiated a new era of warfare and was accompanied by heavy criticism with regards to moral implications. International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law, have not yet found an answer on how to incorporate the use of drones. Amid fast developments of UAVs for civil, commercial and humanitarian purposes, their role in modern warfare is largely intertwined with wider technological and political processes. According to a 2014 State Watch report, at least 16 of the 28 Members States already own drones for military (combat or reconnaissance) or non-military (surveillance and detection) purposes. Other Member States still uphold their moral concerns regarding the use of drones. The research and development market could offer an incentive for a European drone project: in terms of research and development the use of drones in the EU now stands 10 to15 years behind the United States of America (USA) and Israel – two global leaders in the field – and has so far frequently resolved to buying vehicles and systems from its allies.