LNC'13: Academic Preparation Kit by EYP Latvia

c i m e d a ac

t i k n o i t prepara

for delegates

H SUPPORT IT W ED S ANI G OR

OF:

CONTENTTABLE AFET

Committee on Foreign Affairs 4

BUDG

Committee on Budgets

Committee on Culture and Education I

CULT I

CULT II

Committee on Culture and Education II

EMPL

Committee on Employment and Social Affairs

Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety

ENVI

LIBE I

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs I

LIBE II

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs II

40 46

5. VSK.

AFET

After putting a hold to the rebel advance and gaining back control over the north, the French intervention in Mali has achieved its initial objective. How can the EU and its Member States contribute to a durable solution of the conflict?

AffairsBircan Kilci (TR) n ig e r o F n o e (LV) and Committe Filips Kapustins by

1. Key terms • Tuareg - A group of peoples in Northern Africa. They are mostly nomadic, meaning they do not have a fixed living place. They survive by herding cattle, although changes in climate have made this more and more difficult. Some Tuaregs are involved in illegal trade networks for cigarettes and other contraband. They live in a region encompassing the north of Mali, Mauritania, Niger and Algeria. A group of Tuaregs fought in Gaddafi’s army during the war in Libya and returned to Mali after Gaddafi was defeated in 2011. • Azawad – A territory located in the northern part of Mali. In April 2012, Tuareg rebels declared the independence of Azawad. • Sedentarism – Lifestyle, as opposed to nomadism, whereby people live in one place. • Songhai – Ethnic group in the north of Mali, characterized by their sedentarism. • Fulani – Another ethnic group in the north of Mali characterized by sedentarism. • National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad (MNLA) – Group fighting for the independence of Azawad in northern Mali. Even though the MNLA consist almost entirely of Tuaregs, they claim that they fight for a state for all ethnic groups in the region. • National Front for the Liberation of Azawad (FNLA) – Group consisting mainly of Arabs fighting for the independence of Azawad. • Ansar Dine – Islamic group with members from different ethnic groups that wants to implement Sharia law in Mali and across the Muslim world. Fights against the government and the MNLA. • Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) – Islamic group that mainly consists of members from Algeria and Mauritania but has become involved in the north of Mali and works together with Ansar Dine to implement Sharia law. • Sharia Law – the code of law derived from the Koran, the central religious text in Islam. Sharia law is controversial because it is argued to be incompatible with democracy. It is part of a very conservative interpretation of Islam. • Operation Serval – the name of the military operation in Mali that is conducted by the French military forces in order to fight back various military movements in the Northern and Central part of Mali.

• Economic Community Of West African States (ECOWAS) – International organisation in which the states in the north west of Africa cooperate on military affairs and to integrate their economies. It has fifteen members including Ghana, Nigeria, and Mali. • United Nations Security Council – As one of the UN institutions, the Security Council is responsible for maintaining international peace and security in the world. It consists of fifteen Member States: five permanent members that have a veto on decisions (US, China, France, UK, Russia), and ten nonpermanent members without a veto. In its resolutions it can give a mandate to countries to intervene in a civil war, or it can create a UN force to maintain or impose peace.

2. relevance of the topic, EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM Conflicts in the poor, underdeveloped, sparsely inhabited area of northern Mali have existed since the early 1960s between the central government and local groups. The north is a mixture of different ethnic groups and lifestyles, there are the Songhai and Fulani who survive on agriculture and have a sedentary lifestyle, while the Tuaregs mainly live a nomadic lifestyle. Islam is the main religion of the region, and local interpretations used to be very moderate. However, in recent years the influence of fundamentalist Islamic teachings has expanded. In January 2012 renewed conflict broke out, with the MNLA quickly gaining ground and by April 2012 declaring the independent state of Azawad. However, soon after the MNLA pulled out of the cities and control was taken over by the fundamentalist Islamic Ansar Dine group, which imposed Sharia law. There are several explanations for the outbreak of civil war. One of them is that after the war in Libya, which led to the fall of the Gaddafi regime, there has been a dramatic increase in weapon smuggling from Libya to the north of Mali. Tuareg mercenaries who returned from Libya gave the rebel groups the necessary additional firepower to be able to fight off the government. By January 2013, Islamist rebel groups had started to approach the capital, Bamako, and president Dioncounda Traoré asked France for help in dealing with the spread of rebellion in the country. The French armed forces intervened, and quickly advanced towards Gao and Timbuktu in the north. At the end of the month French troops entered Kidal, the last major rebel-held town. They were supported by the Malian army and troops from ECOWAS. Even though the French helped to regain control of the North and stabilize the situation, it is still dangerous and unpredictable. In April 2013 France started the withdrawal of its troops from Mali, which will take several months to complete. Elections are planned for 28 July.

Make sense of the rebel groups: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/01/20131139522812326.html

AFET

3. clashes France has long-established trading interests that have remained since colonial times, and other Member States are worried about the involvement of AQIM in the conflict as the region could become a safe-haven for terrorists. Therefore, the French intervention in Mali has been classified as a counter-terrorism operation, aiming to neutralize the various fundamentalist Islamic groups that could get involved in training fighters to organise attacks in Europe, and to impose government authority in the region. However, formulating an EU approach to the conflict has proven problematic. The Common Security and Defence Policy of the EU requires that all 27 Member States agree before steps are taken. That is proving almost impossible. Whereas some Member States, like France, want to take very forceful measures in Mali because they regard it as a threat to European stability, others are careful to get involved, considering it an isolated conflict in Africa1 . This has led France to decide to go in alone, and it will continue to affect future decisions in regards to the Malian conflict. In addition, while Member States can play an important role in establishing security in the north, many of the fighters simply went away when they knew the French were coming. As the borders with neighboring countries are not controlled, it is very easy for fighters to hide in a different country until European forces leave, and resume fighting. It is thus questionable how effective the use of military force by European troops would be in the long term. Are they just delaying the war? Furthermore, any long term solution would need to involve passing on functions to the Malian government. At the moment, they are incapable of effectively governing in the north. By getting heavily involved, the EU risks creating a relationship of dependency. Also, the focus on military involvement has ignored the humanitarian situation. There are many refugees who are living in camps in neighboring countries, and there is a general lack of food and other supplies in North Mali. Furthermore, European involvement in Mali may lead to accusations of returning to colonialism. France has long-standing economic ties with Mali, which holds large amounts of oil and gold. There is also a significant amount of uranium in Mali and France happens to be the largest producer of nuclear energy in the EU. Critics might say that France and other European states have only acted out of self-interest to profit from Malian natural resources.

4. existing measures According to Resolution 2085 of the UN Security Council adopted in December 2012, the UN supported and authorized the deployment of armed forces from ECOWAS to Mali. The intervention carried out by the French military in January 2013 was considered in the spirit of that resolution. A 11,000-strong UN force is planned to be deployed in the beginning of July. An EU training mission started in April in order to help the Malian army to be better equipped to fight rebel forces. In February, the European Union decided to unblock development aid to Mali, committing 250 million Euros to the country1. In May, international donors committed 3.25 billion Euros in donor aid to Mali. The European Commission and the 27 member states have pledged to provide €1.35 billion for Mali through 2014, one-third of the international commitment2. EU starts training mission in Mali: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21998398 Donor aid for Mali: http://allafrica.com/stories/201305200609.html

Mali, new EU development approach: http://www.euractiv.com/development-policy/mali-new-eu-development-approach-news-518404 2 Donors pledge over 3 billion euros in aid: http://www.euractiv.com/development-policy/eu-backs-mali-millions-aid-strinnews-519751

Europeans aren’t ‘fit for purpose’: http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/3277351-europeans-aren-t-fit-purpose

AFET

5. Key actors • Rebel groups – While the MNLA recently agreed with the government to allow elections in the north in July, troops are still fighting the last remains of Ansar Dine. • Malian government – Weakened during the initial conflict, the Malian government now has the task to regain control over the whole country and build up its military. Elections at the end of July will determine its future. • France – The former colonizer of Mali seems to feel that it has done its job and is pulling out, leaving responsibility mainly to the local governments and the UN force, while keeping a small amount of troops and military trainers on the ground. • United Nations – The UN needed time to set up a military intervention mission but will get on the ground on 1 July. It plays a major role in the provision of humanitarian aid and running refugee camps. • EU – The EU’s main focus seems to be the military training mission. In order for the EU to respond to the conflict more effectively it is necessary for all its Member States to agree to further measures. • NGOs – Before the intervention by France, many NGOs were pulling out of the country . They can contribute to a solution through development initiatives. • Journalists – It has been difficult to report on the events that are happening in Mali because of the dangerous situation in the country. However, this makes it difficult for citizens and politicians outside of Mali to make informed decisions. • ECOWAS – Its troops have played an important role in the second phase of the French intervention by supporting the government, and they will also play an important role within the UN mission.

6. Key questions • How can the EU support local actors in reaching agreement as to the future status of northern Mali? • How can the EU formulate a united stance on the conflict and act collectively? • How can the spread of fundamentalist Islamic organizations, including terrorist organizations, be prevented? • How can the EU support government efforts at reducing the impact of conflict? • How can refugees be helped to return safely to their home country? • Is the UN peacekeeping force sufficient to ensure security in Mali? • How can the EU contribute to fair elections in July and August? • Should the EU push the government to negotiate with the rebel groups? • How can the international community help to stabilise Mali in the long run?

7. links for further research What is France risking in Mali? French forces attack groups linked to al-Qaeda in West Africa, as the French president claims a terrorist threat on Europe’s doorstep. Guests: Emmanuel Dupuy, Amel Boubekeur; David Anderson. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFeYZF_60qs The Conflict in Mali, Who is Fighting Whom, and Why? http://globalvoicesonline.org/2013/03/04/the-conflict-in-mali-who-is-fighting-whom-and-why/ Timeline of Mali’s history http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13881978 Rebuilding Mali http://rt.com/news/mali-eu-money-france-289/ Post-Conflict Mali: Reprisal or Reconciliation? Mali has a history of Tuareg rebellions followed by fragile peace and return to violence. Dialogue and long-term planning are needed now to avoid repeating this cycle of conflict. http://thinkafricapress.com/mali/reprisal-or-reconciliation-mali-post-conflict-peace The lack of EU consensus on Mali is a threat to EU stability: http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/3539111-stupidity-and-stinginess-mali EU’s role as donor: http://www.opendemocracy.net/marije-balt/europes-bold-ride-to-stabilise-mali UN Security Council Resolution on ECOWAS intervention in Mali (Resolution 2085- Year 2012) http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2085(2012) UN Security Council Resolution 2100 on the UN Peacekeeping force: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/sc10987.doc.htm

BUD G

Determining the EU’s direction for the future: What priorities should the new EU budget fund and how should the budgetary resources be distributed between these priorities?

dgetnsšmits (LV) and Anna-Helena Saarso (EE) u B n o e e t it m Com by Arnolds Eize

1. Key terms • Budget - Annual financial plan that provides forecasts for each financial year - an estimate of future costs and revenues, as well as their detailed description and justification. • EU budget - The European Union has its own budget to carry out adopted policies, such as the Common Agriculture Policy, Social Policy, Regional Policy, the Erasmus programme, Research and Development Policies, and also cover administration costs. Unlike national budgets, the EU budget only funds some areas: those in which pan-European co-operation is considered to be beneficial for the Member States. On the other hand, healthcare and pensions for example are the domain of national governments and are funded by national budgets. The EU budget represents approximately 1% of the Member States’ Gross National Income (GNI)1. • Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) - A seven-year spending plan of the EU which sets the basis for annual budgets. The MFF limits expenditure for each year and sets maximum amounts available for each policy area. It provides a financial, as well as a political framework for the management of EU resources. • Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) - Adopted in 1962 in response to the creation of a common EU market, because the Member States wanted the field of agriculture to continue to be regulated. One of the reasons was the fear for food shortages, which could be prevented if the state guaranteed a certain level of food production. Currently, the CAP’s purpose is to ensure adequate living standards for farmers and provide a stable, safe and affordable food supply for the consumers. The CAP’s budget made up about 43% of the whole EU budget in the last years, focusing on income support for farmers, rural development and market support. • Structural Fund and Cohesion Fund - Tools through which the European Regional Policy is funded. Most of the resources of these funds are spent on poorer regions of the EU. Some of the main funding priorities are: economic growth, research and innovation, infrastructure and transport, regional development, sustainable energy, social inclusion. So far, the Structural Funds and Cohesion Fund have represented around 35% of the EU budget, being the second largest budget item.

• European Court of Auditors (ECA) - Composed of one member from each EU Member State, the European Court of Auditors was established to audit the accounts of EU institutions. Despite its name, the ECA does not have any judicial functions, but is rather an external investigatory auditing agency. The role of the Court is to oversee the implementation of the EU budget and the legality of spending the EU funds. • ‘Europe 2020’ - A 10-year growth strategy consisting of several targets and initiatives in areas such as education, employment, research and energy, in order to achieve smarter, more sustainable and inclusive growth for the EU.

The Gross national income (GNI) is a measure to calculate the total income in a country in one year, in other words: it is a way to measure the size of a country’s economy.

BUD G

Determining the EU’s direction for the future: What priorities should the new EU budget fund and how should the budgetary resources be distributed between these priorities?

2. relevance of the topic, EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM With the current Multiannual Financial Framework of the European Union ending this year and the new MFF 2014-2020 being negotiated, discussions of EU’s funding priorities are of high relevance. Although the EU budget makes up a marginal amount of the Member States’ GNI, it is the sole resource for funding EU administration and policies, through which Member States benefit from the EU. In line with austerity measures applied to national budgets, for the first time in the history of the EU, the EU budget is set to shrink in real terms1 for the new MFF period of 2014-2020. Nevertheless, the EU budget must be able to effectively fund policies in a rapidly changing world. For instance, the new MFF will carry the responsibility to achieve the ‘Europe 2020’ targets. Taking into consideration the current economic situation, it is of high importance for the new MFF to immediately help tackling problems such as youth unemployment, while also maintaining a long-term perspective. There are 27 different Member States with diverse backgrounds, levels of development, needs and priorities in the EU. However, the EU aims at improving the situation in all its Member States through pan-European co-operation. The main challenge that the EU faces when drafting the new MFF and annual budgets is how to balance particular national interests and allocate the funds in a way that benefits all the parties involved.

Adjusted to the expected level of inflation over a period of time.

3. CLASHES While seven years ago the political agreement on the last MFF was reached already in April, this time different European institutions still have areas to agree upon. Members of the European Parliament, for example, face a dilemma between their own countries and common interests on a European level. On the one hand, every Member State has a cautious attitude towards the money invested in the EU budget. On the other hand, all Member States benefit from the EU budget. It often happens indirectly because of, e.g., increased trade between countries. One of the main aspects of discussions is which areas and policies should be prioritised in the new MFF. Agricultural associations stress the importance of the CAP as a tool to secure EU’s food sovereignty, as well as increase the productivity of agriculture in the EU. On the other hand, agricultural economists from all over the EU have emphasised the need for an open trading market for agricultural products, since sustainable food production can only be achieved globally. Scientists call for an emphasis on research and development as an effective way to catapult the EU’s role in agriculture and energy, instead of direct funding to production which brings no long-term development. In times of high unemployment, Martin Schulz, the president of the European Parlia-

ment, has stressed the importance of allocating funds towards education and innovation, in order to build a more sustainable Europe for the future. At the same time, others support investment in infrastructure as a way to stimulate trade and, thus, create jobs. There is also a disagreement on whether the EU’s budget should be decreased in line with austerity measures on the national level, or whether the EU should increase its budget. Countries such as the UK, Germany and Sweden – the main contributors to the EU budget – see cuts in the EU budget as absolutely essential. They are called the ‘Friends of Better Spending’. On the other hand, countries such as France, Spain, Italy and Poland – Member States who directly benefit the most from EU spending, mainly through CAP and the Cohesion Fund, are strongly against cuts in EU budget, especially in times of an economic crisis. They call themselves ‘Friends of Cohesion’. The initial draft budget, proposed by the European Commission, also included increased spending from €862,363 million (1.045% of EU GNI) to €1,025 billion (1.05% of the EU GNI) over the next seven years. European Commission President Barroso responded to the decision of the Member States to reduce this amount by saying that the Commission would have liked to see ‘more ambition for Europe’1 . The European Parliament has similarly argued for an increase in the EU budget. Further arguments relate to where the money should come from: currently the EU relies on contributions from Member States, but proposals have been made to introduce an EU-wide taxation system. One such proposal was a ‘financial transaction tax’.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-130_en.htm

4. existing measures The Multiannual Financial Framework for 2007-2013 was adopted in 2006 as a strategic plan for the use of EU’s resources. The two main priorities for this seven-year period were the CAP and cohesion policies. The MFF 2007-2013 accounts for the EU’s highest expenditure plan so far. On 29 June, 2011, the European Commission presented its first proposal for the MFF 2014-2020 – the ‘Budget for Europe 2020’. The clarification phase, aimed at providing a better understanding of the proposal, lasted until March 2012. It was followed by a negotiation phase to narrow the gap between Member States on key issues. The negotiations are run on the principle of “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”. So far, neither of the legislative branches of the EU - the Council of the European Union or the European Parliament has agreed on the proposal. At an earlier stage of discussions the Council insisted on a cut in the seven-year budget plan, which was adopted in the proposal. However, the European Parliament insists on introducing more flexibility and an opportunity for a mid-term review of the MFF. At the moment, the three actors are still in the process of negotiations, but the new MFF should be approved by July.

BUD G

Determining the EU’s direction for the future: What priorities should the new EU budget fund and how should the budgetary resources be distributed between these priorities?

5. Key actors • European Commission (EC) - The executive body of the EU. Each Commissioner has a specific portfolio. Members are bound to represent the interests of the EU as a whole, instead of national concerns, even though every Member State has one Commissioner. The current Commissioner for Financial Programming and the Budget is Janusz Lewandowski. The EC draws up and proposes the annual budget. Furthermore, the European Commission is responsible for the implementation of the budget and together with the European Court of Auditors they ensure the correct spending of EU funds. • Council of the European Union (The Council) - The Council is where ministers of the Member States meet to discuss affairs on a specific topic. Depending on the topic, they meet in a different composition, e.g. for healthcare issues the ministers for Public Health meet, for infrastructure issues the ministers responsible for Economic Affairs meet. The Council is one of the two chambers of the EU’s legislative branch, together with the European Parliament. The Council responsible for budgetary matters is the Council on Economic and Financial Affairs. Together with the European Parliament, the Council amends and finally passes the EU budget. • European Council – The European Council has a President (currently Herman van Rompuy), and further consists of the heads of state and government of the Member States, and the President of the European Commission (currently José Manuel Barroso). The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (currently Baroness Catherine Ashton) attends the meetings. The European Council is where the member states negotiate about current political issues related to the EU. In the context of the budget, the European Council has to reach an agreement on the key political issues related to the budget. One of the major issues it discusses is the size of the budget. • European Parliament (EP) –The EP is the only directly elected body of the EU, and shares equal budgetary powers with the Council as budgets must also be approved by the EP before coming into force. The Parliament is also responsible for approving the implementation of the previous budgets based on the annual report of the European Court of Auditors.

6. Key questions 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

What should be the priority areas for the next Multiannual Financial Framework? How should the EU allocate funds to each of those? Should the EU budget be decreased in light of austerity measures on the national level? How can the relatively small EU budget be spent more efficiently? How can the next MFF incorporate a long-term perspective and help to meet ‘Europe 2020’ targets?

7. links for further research AwiderangeofmaterialsbytheEuropeanCommissionontheMultiannualFinancialFramework2014-2020: http://ec.europa.eu/budget/mff/index_en.cfm Myths and Facts on the EU budget: http://ec.europa.eu/budget/explained/myths/myths_en.cfm#9of15 An article on the budgetary priorities of citizens visiting EU institutions in Brussels, May 2013: http://ec.europa.eu/budget/news/article_en.cfm?id=201305231527 Long-term EU budget negotiations - EP sets out its stance: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/pressroom/content/20130312IPR06440/html/Longterm-EU-budget-negotiations-EP-sets-out-its-stance Divisions amongst Members of the EP regarding the CAP: http://euobserver.com/economic/119412 Analysis of the negotiations from October 2012: http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/portal/rielcano_eng/Content?WCM_GLOBAL_ CONTEXT=%2Felcano%2Felcano_in%2Fzonas_in%2Fari68-2012_mff_negotiation_europe2020

CULT1

With decreasing numbers of students in remote regions leading to school closures: how to balance the need for sufficient student numbers with the demand for schools close to home? How can quality education be ensured in parts of Europe with a declining population?

tiontiIPärn (EE) duca E d n a e r u t (LV) and Ka by Reinis Tutāns mittee on Cul

Com

1. Key terms • Remote regions - Areas further from cities and major population centres that are inhabited by citizens, e.g. countryside. • Declining population – Refers to a long-term reduction in the number of people living in a specific area. • Rural school – A school that is located in a rural environment, such as countryside. • Urbanisation – Increase in the proportion of people living in towns and cities, migrating from remote regions within a country. • Centralisation and decentralisation of education – Respectively governing the education policies and having complete administrative power on a national or on a regional level.

2. relevance of the topic, EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM It is estimated that from 20151 , births will start to be outnumbered by deaths across the EU for the first time since the industrial revolution. Due to population decline, many other issues arise, beginning from urbanisation, as people tend to live closer to their work and schools, to gravely concerning ageing population. As a result of urbanisation, the number of students in remote regions is falling as well, which has become a significant problem in Latvia leading to school closures in rural territories and diminishing of smaller villages and towns.

School closure is considered as one of the main problems within the remote regions in Latvia and is also common in such countries like Ireland, Scotland, Norway, Russia etc. Some of the reasons for school closures are the economic crisis, insufficient financing of education, ageing population, and a problem with ensuring qualified teachers. Furthermore urbanisation and emigration issues, which results in low number of students, who are in need of basic school education. After shutting down a school, the remaining students have to figure out a way to get to the nearest one to their homes, which might be more than 20 kilometres away. According to Ministry of Science and Education in Latvia, a school can only exist if there are 10 children in class on average3. Regarding the rural community, if they develop, the whole infrastructure around will develop and hopefully attract people to live and work there as well. The long-term development of rural society depends on, whether the educational environment in Latvia would be balanced, sustainable and encouraging to remain loyal to their hometowns. No doubt that decline in population has a great impact on life in rural territories. Quality education can’t always be provided everywhere due to the reasons stated before. To acquire balance for sufficient student numbers with the demand for schools close to home as well as quality education, has never been an easy task.

Saving remote regions in Latvia (in Latvian): http://laukuskolas.wikidot.com/

The whole situation creates a chain reaction and impacts the entire rural territory, with the main victims in this case being the people who continue to live in the remote regions. No inhabitants mean no labour, which also is the key reason for urbanisation, and infrastructure, school closure, poverty of children and after all eventually creating ghost towns. As a matter of fact, in October 2012, 42% children in Latvia are living at risk of poverty and social exclusion, not even mentioning that since 2004, number of people living in poverty has increased by 158%2 .

European depopulation: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-08-26-European-deaths_N.htm 2 Poverty and social exclusion in Latvia: http://www.rebaltica.lv/en/investigations/the_other_side_of_latvias_success_story_/a/799/the_hidden_side_of_latvia%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%98success%E2%80%99_story.html

CULT1

3. clashes Life in city versus life in the countryside. There are those who argue that there is no need to implement measures to preserve population numbers in the countryside. Urbanisation is a natural process and we should accept the choices of citizens. However, others argue that there are positive benefits when living in the countryside like lower pollution and less intensive use of local resources, and that incentives to continue living there are legitimate. This dilemma needs an answer before deciding what measures would be effective to preserve population numbers on the countryside. The optimal balance between student numbers and school location. Preserving schools close to home might be an incentive for people to stay in the countryside, but it might affect the quality of education. On the other hand, a more centralised system of schools might be better able to guarantee quality education, while their location can discourage people to settle in isolated areas far away from the school. Schooling is only one consideration of people to stay in rural areas, economic opportunities and a social structure are equally important. It can be argued that schools promote development of the territory around, including creation of new businesses and infrastructure overall. On the other hand, if a small village cannot provide for the needs of a family to begin with then investing in education is also rather difficult. Thus, the balance needs to be found between investing in the school system and improving the more general living climate in the countryside.

4. existing measures Financing model ’’Nauda seko skolēnam’’ (’’Money follows the student’’) A model, initiated in 2008 with a goal to promote quality education and competitiveness, ensure efficient use of funding allocated to education, also equal and transparent distribution of funds on each student, including students from remote regions. www.ies.ee/iesp/No12/articles/05_Grivins.pdf (focus on the first two chapters) Swiss – Latvian cooperation programme The Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation worked with 59 Latvian municipalities in accordance to the Latvian regional development project. 110 school buses were purchased to meet the specific capacity requirements of each municipality for improvement of school transport system. These busses have helped to organise and school-transport system in areas with difficult accessibility and disadvantaged possibilities. http://www.erweiterungsbeitrag.admin.ch/en/Home/News/Press_Releases_and_Articles/Close_ up?itemID=197271 National Development Plan of Latvia for 2014 – 2020 In line with the EU’s 2020 goals, Latvia has made a National Development Plan for the years 2014- 2020. The objective of the plan is to facilitate a balanced and sustainable development of the country, as well as to ensure an increase in Latvia’s competitiveness. Part of this strategy is the promotion of economic activity in the regions. National Development Plan (page 58 is on regional differences): http://www.nap.lv/images/NAP2020%20dokumenti/NDP2020_English_Final.pdf E-Learning programmes Virtual environment is become increasingly popular and with that, e-learning programmes and other services through Internet like job interviews. ‘’Revitalizing Small Remote Schools for LifeLong Distance e-Learning’’ is a programme implemented with the support of the European Commission with a goal to examine whether it is possible and economically feasible to supplement educational opportunities to remote regions in the EU through e-learning. http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/llp/projects/public_parts/documents/ict/2011/ict_mp_143664_revit.pdf

CULT1

5. Key actors • Students in remote regions – This group of people are the main victims of school closure as they are the ones in need of education. Children who live further away from towns have difficulties reaching schools as they are too far and infrastructure is poorly developed. • Teachers and schools in remote regions – It is no secret that outside the bigger towns finding a job is a challenge. One option is to be a teacher, which is a highly important profession, however because of decreasing number of students and school closure, teachers lose their jobs and have no possibilities to get new ones without changing their residence and city they live in. This issue discourages people to become teachers, especially in remote regions. • National governments – In many EU Member States, including Latvia, the main decisions surrounding education policy are decided at the national level and executed by the Ministry of Education. The extent to which it transfers some of its authority to the regional governments is different in each Member State. • Regional governments – Depending on the Member State, regional governments take decisions on how the education system is set up. In Germany, for example, education is almost entirely organised at the level of the regions. In Latvia, the regional governments have been given a more important role since 2009 with the introduction of the ‘money follows the student’ programme. • European Union – In some policy areas, the European Union has very limited authority, and education is one of them. The EU mainly has a supporting function. However, in trying to tackle education imbalances it has defined its main task to be facilitation of knowledge sharing and spreading data about skills mismatches.

7. links for further research An overview of regional inequalities in the different EU Member States (excluding some of the smaller states) - EN http://www.nesse.fr/nesse/activities/reports/mind-the-gap-1 Poverty and income inequality - EN http://www.rebaltica.lv/en/investigations/the_other_side_of_latvias_success_story_/a/799/ the_hidden_side_of_latvia%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%98success%E2%80%99_story.html Reasons for decrease of citizens in rural areas - LV http://www.tvnet.lv/zinas/latvija/301226-kur_palikusi_lauku_iedzivotaji Further impact of population decline in EU - EN http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20080911163129801 Development strategy of Latvia till the year 2030 - EN http://www.latvija2030.lv/upload/latvija2030_en2.pdf Social and economical factors of decrease of students in EU - EN http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2327/Population-Education.html Consequences of population decline and fertility rates - EN http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_releases_for_journalists/130424.html

6. Key questions 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

What are the possibilities for quality education in remote regions? How to make education in rural territories more appealing and accessible for local people living in the areas? What action should regional governments take in order to ensure quality and accessible ed ucation for every student? What other possibilities are there to educate young people? Which is a better option – to close schools with insufficient number of students in favour of larger agglomerations of schools, or to preserve schools in rural areas? Is the financing model ‘money follows the student’ a useful strategy to tackle education im balances? Is E-learning a viable strategy to increase access to quality education for citizens in rural areas?

CULT11

In light of discussions in Latvia concerning the role of the Russian language in society, and with respect for diversity as a founding principle of the EU: to what extent should minority languages be recognised by Member States? How can the EU play a supportive role?

ion IIvič s (LV) t a c u d E d n a e Matuse (UA) and Niklāvs tee on Cultur

Commit

by Iryna Garbu

2. relevance of the topic, EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM

1. Key terms • Minority group - A group who differ from the majority in a certain country, most often defined in terms of ethnicity, religion, language or culture. • Minority language – A language spoken by a minority of the population in a territory. Such people are termed linguistic minorities or language minorities. • Human rights – The basic rights and freedoms to which every human is entitled regardless of race or sex. The main ones are the right to life and liberty, freedom of thought and expression and equality before the law. However, rights of minority groups are also specifically protected by human rights treaties. • Citizenship – The right to work and live in a country and to participate in political life. It denotes the link between a person and a state. • Integration – The bringing together and uniting of things, i.e. the integration of two or more economies, cultures, religions etc. In the context of different social groups it is often used to describe the process through which people who immigrated to a country adapt to the dominant culture. • Multilingualism – The act of using or promoting the use of multiple languages. • Language policy – A policy that is designed to favour or discourage the use of a particular language or set of languages.

The EU has pledged respect for the cultural and linguistic diversity of its Member States and has recognised minority languages as a key part of that diversity. Despite this increased recognition, in some states language minorities still lack rights. The EU today counts 23 national languages1, however, an EU report from 2008 argues there are at least 138 identifiable linguistic minority groups in the EU.2 Latvia is one of the examples where there is a large language minority present. Russians in Latvia are the largest linguistic minority in the whole of Europe, constituting almost 30% of Latvia’s population3. Yet the Russian language has not been given an official status in the country. In the past there have been attempts to change the law by both opponents and proponents of increased language rights: first a failed bill to close down minority schools, then a referendum to institute Russian as a second language in Latvia. In this referendum the majority of Latvians voted against but there were cities such as Daugavpils, where more than 85% voted in favour of the change to the constitution4. For Latvians a history of oppression by Russia and its continued political influence only make the issue more sensitive. However, the multi-linguistic issue remains relevant not only in Latvia. There are minorities which often categorise themselves as a cohesive, united community with a shared language and cultural identity. They hope to gain political recognition and autonomy. This can be seen, for instance, in the German-speaking communities in Denmark, the Arabic-speaking community in Malta, the Basque and Catalan communities in Spain, the Sami speaking community in Sweden and the Hungarian, Ukrainian, German or Ruthenian communities in Slovakia.5

1 2 3

http://ec.europa.eu/languages/languages-of-europe/eu-languages_en.htm European minority languages Data acording to the Euromosaic study by the European Commission, 2013 – http://ec.europa.eu/languages/euromosaic/lat3_en.htm 4 “The territorial results of the referendum” byJ. Paiders, nra.lv, 2012 http://nra.lv/viedokli/juris-paiders-3/66551-referenduma-teritorialie-rezultati.htm 5 German in Denmark: http://www.uoc.edu/euromosaic/web/document/alemany/an/i2/i2.html Arabic in Malta p.7: http://www.epasi.eu/CountryReportMT.pdf Basque and Catalan communities in Spain p.2: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_237.en.pdf Sami in Sweden: http://ec.europa.eu/languages/euromosaic/sv2_en.htm

CULT11

3. clashes The European Union’s policy on languages recognises all languages as equal; both minority and regional languages are legally protected. At the same time, the relationships with Russians remains tense for many ethnic Latvians who still have memories of Soviet occupation. Adding Russian, the language of their former occupiers, as an official language would threaten Latvia’s independence and the survival of the Latvian language - a vital element of Latvian identity.

4. existing measures Several improvements in the situation of minority languages can be attributed to the Charter 1 and recommendations made during the monitoring procedure. Examples include the recognition of minority languages which had previously not enjoyed any status (such as Croatian in Slovenia) or the right to use Frisian family names in the Netherlands. Denmark adopted several special arrangements2 for its German minority when merging municipalities in North Schleswig. In Northern Ireland, a licence for the broadcasting of private radio in Irish was allocated. Norway presented an action plan3 to ensure the use of Sami in hospitals, and Sweden established a right to use Finnish in relations with authorities and courts.

1 2

European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/148.htm The German Minority in Denmark http://www.bdn.dk/english.6129.aspx Action Plan for Sami Languages http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FAD/Vedlegg/SAMI/HP_2009_samisk_sprak_engelsk.pdf

5. Key actors • European Commission – It is one of the most important European actors with regard to minority languages due to its support in the promotion of them through financial programmes – particularly those targeting to education and regional development. With the support of the European Parliament it arranged financial support to help languages which are not official. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union approved in Nice the 7th December 2000 contains article 22, which states that the EU shall respect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity. • EBLUL and Mercator – The European Commission also supported the biggest organizations in this field: EBLUL and Mercator. EBLUL is the European Bureau for Lesser Used Languages. Established in 1982, it is a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) promoting linguistic diversity and has an important role in providing information about policies to protect minority languages. Mercator is the European information and documentation network for minority languages, established in 1987. It provides the general public with data and reliable information on the situation of minority languages. • European Parliament – In the European Parliament a significant role in dealing with the issue of minority languages has been played by two collective actors. The first is the Intergroup for Minority Languages (IML) and the second actor is the Committee on Culture and Education (CULT)1 which is responsible, among other things, for “the protection and promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity”. • Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) – The High Commissioner on National Minorities (HCNM) of the OSCE is trying to secure conditions for the preservation and free use of minority languages and for the equality of persons belonging to linguistic minorities. However, this organisation lacks political influence. The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), which currently comprises 55 Participating States, has also been in the vanguard of the protection of the languages of national minorities, primarily through the activities of the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities (HCNM).

Committee on Culture and Education http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/cult/home.html#menuzone

CULT11

• The Council of Europe – The Council of Europe has been very important in the protection of minority languages, having created two treaties of particular relevance: the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages in 1992 and the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in 1995. Both treaties contain many provisions relating to minority languages and, as treaties, they are legally binding for the states which have signed and ratified them. These documents have become a point of reference for national legislation of those states that have subsequently ratified these treaties. • National governments – The most important decisions surrounding minority rights are made on the national level. • Language minorities – Should be able to make a choice individually and collectively about how important their language is for their identity. The uniqueness of each minority situation requires that language planning be conducted jointly by government institutions, minority representatives and a wide range of other formal and informal stakeholders including the civil society and pressure groups.

6. Key questions

7. links for further research A map of minorities, ethnic groups and native people in Europe: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5S6OgWqlTmlTlJZQnVXajd2MUU/edit?usp=sharing An overview of Legal Instruments of Minority Protection in Europe: http://www.gfbv.it/3dossier/eu-min/autonomy-eu.html Latvians reject Russian as official language http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/19/latvians-reject-russian-official-language A Guide to Minority Rights in Europe: http://www.gfbv.it/3dossier/eu-min/min-guide.html The European Union and minority languages: Evolution, achievements and contradictions in the light of the Treaty of Lisbon: http://www.idps.unisi.it/issue0/16/the-european-union-and-minority-languages-evolutionachievements-and-contradictions-in-the-light-of-the-treaty-of-lisbon European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/minlang/

• Which minority languages should be recognised? • How should the EU be involved in the issues of minority languages groups, taking into account the fundamental rights such as freedom of thought, freedom of speech and respect for private lifestyles? • Should the EU push Member States to change their laws in regard to minority languages? • What are the opportunities and what are the dangers of language recognition? • Should the Russian language gain official recognition in Latvia? • Should certain rights of large language minorities like Russian- and Turkish-speakers be guaranteed?

EM PL Committee on

With Roma migrants struggling to integrate and facing increasing abuse, France is proposing voluntary repatriation as the solution. How can the EU act to ensure the social and economic inclusion of its largest ethnic minority?

airs Aff l ia c o S d n a iņš (LV) Employment R) and Niks Bērz ci (T

by Tuna Dökme

2. relevance of the topic, EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM 1. Key terms • Roma - The term Roma generally refers to people who describe themselves as Travellers, Gypsies, Manouches, Ashkali, Sinti as well as other terms. They may differ in language, religion, history or nationality, but share a common ethnicity which is claimed to originate in India. • Integration - Integration means including all members of a specific society under one roof of common identity and shared values. • Gypsy Law - A general term for the oral legal system of the Romani people which, although it differs from one community to another, generally has similar norms. • Repatriation - The process of returning a person back to one’s place of origin or citizenship. • Gaje - A term used by the Roma to define all non-Roma people.

Roma people are the largest ethnic minority of Europe who throughout history have faced discrimination, social and economic exclusion and were subject to ethnical cleansing as recently as 1999 in Kosovo. Even in today’s Europe of tolerance and multiculturalism, it is impossible to say that both sides have overcome their prejudices towards each other and that Roma communities have successfully integrated into European societies. There is an estimated number of 12 million Roma living in Europe, including different groups such as Gypsies, Sinti, Kale, Calé and Travellers. Although the exact percentage differs from country to country, the majority of Roma people do not have stable jobs. Approximately 80% of the Roma are unemployed, live in extreme poverty or at risk of it and lack access to social services such as education, social insurance and healthcare. A large part of the Roma society does not possess a valid identity card or citizenship in their country of residence. Many Roma children and women are still victims of violence, exploitation and trafficking. Moreover, in many European countries Roma people are subject to ‘moral discrimination’, meaning they are regarded as a threat to society not because of their race or religion, but because of their different lifestyles and moral laws which are perceived by many as opposed to social order and social responsibilities. It would be right to say that prejudices also exist within the Roma community towards gaje, which results in the Roma people being accused of being ethnocentric and considered as unable to integrate into society and its laws. The problem is, therefore, more complex than any other minority issue. The respective prejudices have deeper roots. Furthermore, since anti-Gypsism presents its reasons as moral, i.e., because social and moral values are being refused, the integration of the Roma depends not only on social and economic policies, but also on building a common understanding and overcoming historical preconceptions.

EM PL

4. existing measures 3. CLASHES Lack of a common Romani identity In the last couple of decades, Roma activists have assumed that advocating Roma inclusion would be more effective if done on the European level with pan-European NGOs, such as the International Romani Union, the European Romani Rights Centre (ERRC), and the European Romani Travellers Forum (ERTF). Yet the Roma are not to be understood as a homogenous group, since their only common value is their ethnic background and, in fact, Romani communities differ from each other by their religion, culture and history. Many Roma people do not speak Romani, and even those who do, use various dialects. Such differences make it challenging for the Roma to consider themselves as one nation and to unite their efforts. Different social approaches: Gypsy law As mentioned before, Romani people have an oral legal tradition aiming to organise the Romani society, which prohibits them from complying with the written law of European states. The most problematic aspect of Gypsy law is that the majority of criminalities, such as theft or fraud, are only considered as crimes if committed against other Romani. Gypsy law historically manifests mistrust against gaje who, according to Romani, lack decency and moral, and is based on the supposed cultural superiority of the Romani. Many of the Romani communities today truly believe in this and follow the principle. It is an uncertain and controversial matter, and it must be noted that different groups apply this legal tradition only to an extent, yet for most Europeans, the existence of such legal system causes prejudices about Romani. Member States’ Policies A recent EU-wide public opinion survey shows that a quarter of Europeans would feel uncomfortable to have a Roma as their neighbour. In some countries even half of the respondents take this view. Countries in Western and Central Europe fear that floods of Roma immigrants seeking better living conditions will come from the recently admitted Member States in Eastern Europe. On the other hand, many in the Eastern European countries respond with resentment to special EU programs on both national and EU level that aid Roma but do nothing for non-Romani who are in the same economic situation. Not surprisingly, such attitude also influences government policies on the national level, some of which are quite controversial. For example, the Italian government had decided to collect fingerprints from all Roma in case they fail to show a valid identity card. When faced by criticism, the Italian government justified their decision by claiming that the Roma are the ones most likely to commit crimes. Another example would be an act by the French government to repatriate the Romani which was initiated in July 2010 and received much criticism from the EU institutions. In 2009 France deported 10,000 Roma back to Romania and Bulgaria. The next year at least another 8,300 Roma were deported until August. Furthermore, since July 2010 at least 51 illegal Roma camps have been demolished. Such approaches by several Member States make it difficult for the EU to implement a common strategy regarding the issue.

The EU sponsored a conference titled ‘Romani in an Expanding Europe: Challenges for the Future’, at which Eastern European governments launched the ‘Decade of Romani Inclusion: 2005– 2015’. That is an unprecedented political commitment by European governments to improve the socio-economic status and social inclusion of the Roma. This international initiative brings together Member States, Intergovernmental and Non-Governmental Organisations, as well as the Roma civil society. In 2001 the International Romani Union requested the international community to recognise the Romani Nation by an oral statement before the UN Commission on Human Rights. In that statement the speaker described the nation as one with no territorial or state status claims, but one that unites individuals under the rule of law for the achievement of a common dream: a dream comparable to that of Martin Luther King Jr. The European Commission (EC) has been funding various Romani NGOs, for instance, the European Network Against Racism (ENAR) (since 2001) and the European Romani Information Office (ERIO) (since 2007). Through the Mediation for Roma (ROMED) programme, the EC and the Council of Europe have trained more than 1000 Romani mediators across Europe to help Romani integrate into local communities. Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary have granted to NGOs (e.g., Equality Bodies) the right to bring general minority rights claims to court without requiring individual victims. ‘DOSTA!’ campaign aims at combating prejudices and stereotypes against the Roma. The campaign consists of providing educational material and technical support for awareness-raising activities against stereotypes and discrimination of Romani people in the eighteen European countries which have, so far, joined the project. The conclusions of May and June 2011 on Romani integration by the Council, following the proposal from the European Commission on an EU Framework for national Romani integration strategies. In this framework, all Member States were expected to present a strategy to the European Commission for Romani inclusion or sets of policy measures within their already existing policies for improving the situation of Romani people. For this purpose they set up national contact points. The EC assessed these strategies and published its conclusions in the communication ‘National Romani Integration Strategies: a first step in the implementation of the EU Framework’. Although much has been done in order to tackle the existing problems, most of the measures have been only mildly successful and improvements are insignificant if looked at from a global perspective.

EM PL

5. Key actors The EU has three type of competencies which are divided according to what the EU can do and how much it can interfere to the Member States’ policies. As the Roma integration is related to social policies and human rights, it falls under an area called “Share Competencies” meaning that both Member States and the European Commission have the power to make laws and to initiate strategies.

The homepage of the ERRC: http://www.errc.org/

However, there are certain areas related to Roma integration which are fully under the responsibility of the Member States such as education policy, learning EU languages, study time abroad, and the mutual recognition of educational qualifications from other countries. Most of the responsibility and the power to adopt laws therefore lie with the Member States. The EU can however financially support the Member States in these areas through the European Social Fund and coordinate a common strategy as it is the case for National Roma Integration Strategies.

Hristo Kyuchukov and Ian Hancock on the Identity and Life of Romani Groups in Different Parts of Europe: http://www.slovo21.cz/nove/images/dokumenty_integrace/fin_cd_roma_identity_part%201.pdf

There are also various Roma NGOs on local, national and international level who could be involved in the integration policies. Largest of the international Roma NGOs are mainly European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) which is an international public interest law organisation working to combat anti-Romani racism and human rights abuse of Roma through strategic litigation, research and policy development, advocacy and human rights education and ERGO Network which consists of professionals working for the improvement of the situation of Roma in Europe.

6. Key questions • Is there a way for the EU to enforce an effective legal framework, whilst oral laws have a strong basis within the Roma community? • Can there be a successful framework while the Romani are not a unified identity? • Bearing in mind that there is no experience with recognition of a non-territorial nation, what is the threshold that must be attained before a legal framework can be created “that unites individuals under the rule of law for the achievement of a common dream” for the Roma? • What should be done about the situation that the Roma have stayed isolated largely by choice, illiteracy being as one of the means, as pointed out by many scholars? • How can the prejudices formed over centuries both by Roma and other Europeans be eliminated, in order to help integration? • Should Member States adopt a common policy towards Roma people?

7. links for further research

The homepage of the ERGO Network: http://www.ergonetwork.org

Iskra Uzunova on the EU policies for the Romani integration in Europe and an analysis on why it is failing: http://academos.ro/sites/default/files/biblio-docs/845/roma_integration_in_europe.pdf The measures taken within the ‘National Roma Integration Strategies by 2020’ and the progress in each country: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/roma_nat_integration_strat_en.pdf Various documents published by the European Commission on the Romani: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/document/index_en.htm#h2-6 Data on Roma by the United Nations Development Programme: http://europeandcis.undp.org/data/show/D69F01FE-F203-1EE9-B45121B12A557E1B France and Romania Sign an Agreement of Voluntary Repatriation of Roma: http://www.euractiv.com/socialeurope/france-romania-ink-roma-repatria-news-514783

ENVI

Decades of urbanisation: with Europeans continuing to move to the cities, what policies are necessary to ensure the protection of public health and a reduction of environmental damage in Europe’s major cities?

nmendt,FFo o ir v SSaaffeettyy kus (LV) n E d n o d o o e o e t n it d a n m a h m t l h o C icHHeeabaylRtucsandra Pintea (RO) and Anrijs Šim Publ Public 1. Key terms • Urbanization - A result of the process of people moving from the countryside to the cities, this term refers to the expansion of cities and the accompanying intense industrialization. It causes both socio-economic and environmental problems. • CO2 emissions – Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the primary greenhouse gas produced by human activities. While earth’s climate has consistently changed over thousands of years and the current rise in temperature is thus not new, the majority of scientists believe that man-made emissions of greenhouse gases have contributed to the rise. The most important human activities that generate CO2 emissions are: the combustion of fossil fuels for energy and transportation, industrial activity and deforestation. • Overexploitation – Also referred to as overharvesting, it occurs where harvesting exceeds the ability of natural resources to be reproduced. This can happen to renewable resources such as wild plants and animal species. Overexploitation is one of the main activities which jeopardizes biodiversity and it can endanger species and lead to deforestation. • Biodiversity – The variety of life on Earth, its biological diversity within a given species, ecosystem or biome is frequently referred to as biodiversity. The period since the interference of humans has recorded an on-going reduction in the number of species. The main cause is considered to be the human impact, specifically the destruction of the habitat of animals and hunting. • Carbon cycle – The carbon cycle is the biochemical process which ensures the exchange of carbon among all Earth’s layers. Along with the nitrogen and water cycles, the carbon cycle creates the basis that makes the Earth capable of sustaining life. • Carbon sink – Natural or artificial mechanisms responsible for accumulating and storing carbon-containing chemicals, carbon sinks are vital in the current environmental context. Examples are the photosynthesis process as a natural one and landfill zones as an artificial one. Public awareness of the significance of these CO2 sinks has grown since passage of the Kyoto Protocol, which promotes increasing removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. A simple way to do this is by planting trees.

2. relevance of the topic, EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM Two centuries ago, cities were considered to be an unhealthy and destructive environment, a hotbed for diseases and plagues. This was one of the main reasons why the majority of the world’s population lived in rural habitats, while only 2% lived in the urban areas. Nowadays, the number of urban residents is more than half of the world’s population and it is expected to grow roughly 1.5% per year between 2025-2030, when it will swell to almost 5 billion1. At the same time, intense economic development will take place concentrated within cities, which could have severe implications on the environment. Overexploitation of resources, global deforestation- about 1215 million hectares of forest are lost each year2, greenhouse effect and water pollution are only part of the problems intensive urbanization will cause worldwide. In 2010, the European Union recorded almost 5,000 million tonnes in CO2 emissions3, which has been increasing ever since. Together with the emissions of other countries this has altered the carbon cycle, both by adding more CO2 to the atmosphere and by influencing the ability of natural carbon sinks. At the same time, it contributes to the so-called “city heat”, which is the phenomenon that cities are often 1 to 6 °C warmer than surrounding landscapes. Another sector which has been suffering because of the immense amount of people migrating into the big cities, is public health. On the one hand, the environmental problems cause diverse health conditions, from respiratory infections to parasitic diseases, which can endanger not only the inhabitants of the region, but also the biodiversity. On the other hand, in many cases, hospitals and their staff proved to be inefficient and improperly equipped, hence unable to adapt to their patients’ medical needs. Several South-Eastern European countries, for example Romania, have a public healthcare system guaranteed by the national constitution and funded by the state. However, Romania is known to have the lowest medical expenses, per capita, inside the EU (€433 million in 20054) in comparison to some other southern countries (Greece €2.2 billion, Hungary €1.3 billion and Bulgaria €671 million) and the EU average of €2.3 billion. These numbers are especially concerning because Romania has by far the largest population of the aforementioned countries. This significantly affects the quality of services5. Overall, urbanization impacts the human habitat in a number of ways, both positively and negatively. As it has been stressed before, there is an undeniable interdependence between urbanization, environment and health sector. However, it is our duty, as the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, to make sure that this interdependence creates a background for a healthy and fruitful development.

Global Health Observatory (GHO) http://www.who.int/gho/urban_health/situation_trends/urban_population_growth_text/en/ 2 An overview on deforestation http://wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/about_forests/deforestation/ 3 The EU in the world 2013-A statistical portrait, page 110 http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-30-12-861/EN/KS-30-12-861-EN.PDF 4 Romania health system review, page 44 http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/95165/E91689.pdf 5 The SWOT analysis of the Romanian health care system and the key elements for resource allocation http://mrp.ase.ro/no33/f4.pdf

ENVI

With the Europe 20201 strategy the EU has made a decade long plan to realise ‘smarter, sustainable and inclusive growth’ in cooperation with national governments. One of the goals is to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20% compared to the level of 1990. Also, the strategy hopes to achieve an energy-efficient Europe, by reforming areas such as transport and industry, and by providing a proper financing framework2. Locally, many major cities have environmental strategies in place. For instance, the London Underground Environment Strategy 2008– 2013 strives to ensure that the environmental impact of public transport is managed appropriately. It plans to deliver a considerable decrease in CO2 emissions and improvement in resource use, waste management and air quality.

Moreover, London is known for its Barclays Cycle Hire (BCH) scheme, which is a bicycle sharing scheme launched on 30 July 2010. For a yearly payment of 50 Euros, members can take a bicycle from different pick up points in town and use it for free if they return it to any pick up point within half an hour. The project is part of a transformation of London into a more eco-friendly transportation system, whereby cycling and walking have been given an important role . As part of this strategy the roads of the city are also being adapted to include bicycle lanes. Other measures that have been introduced in London are a tax for any vehicle that wants to enter the city. All these measures are to encourage British citizens to start cycling rather than using a motor vehicle. Similar to London’s biking strategy is Vélib’, the French equivalent. This programme was launched on 15 July 2007 and has expanded ever since, across Paris and in some surrounding municipalities. Since 2011, Vélib’ has been complemented by Autolib’, an electric car sharing scheme operating on similar principles. Bicycle sharing systems are known to be implemented in many other European cities, such as Copenhagen (City Bikes), Vienna (Cyclocity), Barcelona (Bicing), Hamburg (StadtRAD Hamburg) and Amsterdam (OV-fiets). Other projects that have been implemented in European cities to help the environment are the Park’n’Ride system in the United Kingdom, Sweden, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic, which allows people to park at the edge of a city and then take public transport into the city center, and low emission zones3 in Germany, Denmark and other countries, which ban polluting vehicles from entering roads in a specified area. Another measure to protect the environment is the North-East Atlantic Environment Strategy, which is a proposal aiming to protect the marine environment in the North-Eastern area of the Atlantic Ocean and to regulate European standards on the release of hazardous and radioactive substances into seas and continental waters. There are a few EU funded environmental projects like TRANSPHORM and PURGE. TRANSPHORM was initiated in 2010 by the Research Department of University of Hertfordshire, UK. The project does research on how transport can have a negative impact on health. PURGE was created by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and aims to develop methods to show the positive and negative impacts on population health and well-being of greenhouse gas reduction strategies implemented in Europe. In terms of public health, the EU has very little to say as the competencies are mostly located with the Member States. Nevertheless, in 2007, the European Commission created a new health strategy called “Together for Health”, which will be in place until the end of this year. Its main focus is to increase cooperation between Member States on health issues, to ensure investment in sustainable health systems and to give Member States guidance on effective policies. In February 2013 the Commission proposed an investment scheme, “Investing in Health” as a part of the Europe 2020 strategy. This project aims to improve the efficiency of healthcare spending.

3. clashes Even though the benefits of improving the environment are mostly aimed at the residents living in cities, it is precisely them that could become the main objectors to any changes. Implementing new technologies and systems such as solid waste disposal or air- and water filtering systems for improving the environment means extra costs that result in higher taxes. Environmentally friendly ways of living are becoming more popular throughout the years, but nevertheless it is not the priority of citizens1. The governments are working to find the balance between environmentally friendly measures and reasonable costs while implementing the changes. The EU and environmentalists are strongly in favour of rapid measures, but on the contrary there are lobby groups representing for example the car industry to whom rapid changes in legislation can prove costly. City planning and safety is another issue considering that these changes affect, for example by changes in modes of transportation. One issue is the increase in the use of bicycles. Big metropolitans are already struggling with tight conditions and increasing traffic on the streets, while sidewalks are often narrow and there is not much space for bicycle lanes.

1 Problems of urbanisation in the inner city – inequalities http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/geography/urban_environments/urbanisation_medcs_rev3.shtml

4. existing measures

Europe 2020 targets: http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/targets_en.pdf A strategy for competitive, sustainable and secure energy: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0639:FIN:EN:PDF

Low Emission Zones explained: http://www.lowemissionzones.eu/what-are-lezs

ENVI

5. Key actors Environment-related issues are a shared competency, which means that the EU has left it to the Member States themselves to solve various problems regarding the environment, only helping with general policies and action plans1. However, when it comes to urban areas, in the past ten years Member States have transferred responsibilities to regional authorities. City authorities are thus responsible for adapting to environmental challenges. However, according to the UN Environment Programme national governments have failed to contribute the necessary resources for the regions to fulfil these responsibilities2. As explained above, in the field of health the main competency is with the Member States, although the European Commission supports their efforts with the ‘Together for Health’ and ‘Investing in Health’ strategies. Non-Governmental Organizations such as Greenpeace contribute by spreading knowledge about environmental and health issues, as well as through the implementation of different programmes.

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Articles 4-6 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:115:0047:0199:en:PDF 2 United Nations Environment Programme: http://www.unep.org/geo/geo3/english/420.htm

6. Key questions • Who should take the leading role in improving the environment in cities? Should the EU have more power over national authorities in this matter or should emphasis be put on the city governments? Also, should local and global NGO’s be given any real powers to influence Member States? • Should more European cities follow the example of London in implementing green measures? If yes, then what possible obstacles could there be for other cities to implement similar measures? • What concrete actions are to be considered in order to create a healthy and secure environment in intensely urbanized regions? • To what extent can and should the EU act in order to diminish the destructive effects of urbanization while still trying to create a base for demographic and economic development? Is it possible to embrace an eco-friendly lifestyle in all European major cities or will EU encounter possible scepticism and a conflict of interests? • Are existing measures sufficient for a sustainable resource, waste and pollution management? Also, can local environmental projects and strategies be expanded to the national and European level? • How can the EU contribute to proper medical care in all Member States, considering their national autonomy? Is simply investing in healthcare a sustainable strategy? Or should resource-lacking medical systems be restructured from the core?

7. links for further research European Commission staff working document-Investing in Health: http://ec.europa.eu/health/strategy/docs/swd_investing_in_health.pdf Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/pdf/com2011_571.pdf Europe 2020- Resource Efficiency: http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/themes/17_resource_efficiency.pdf Europe 2020- Health and Health Systems: http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/themes/05_health_and_health_systems.pdf London Underground Environment Strategy 2008 – 2013: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/lu-environment-strategy.pdf The North-East Atlantic Environment Strategy: http://www.ospar.org/html_documents/ospar/html/10-03e_nea_environment_strategy.pdf Periodic Report Summary - PURGE (Public health impacts in urban environments of greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategies): http://cordis.europa.eu/search/index.cfm?fuseaction=result.document&RS_ RCN=13823303&RS_LANG=IT More about PURGE project: http://purge.lshtm.ac.uk/project TRANSPHORM - Transport related air pollution and health impacts integrated methodologies for assessing particulate matter http://ec.europa.eu/research/environment/pdf/project_summaries/fp7/environment_and_ health/transphorm.pdf

LIBE1

Immigration provides challenges and opportunities for both social stability and economic growth. Taking that into account, what changes to immigration policies are necessary within the EU?

ties, om r e ib ir L a s sI I e (LV) il ir iv a Aff C e n Aff e o e H m e o t d H it n nd Puri (UK) and Gundega Ēlert tic e eaa Comm tic Jus Jus by San 1. Key terms • Freedom of movement - A human rights concept, consisting of three basic elements – freedom of movement within the territory of a country; the right to leave any country; the right to return to one’s country of origin. Freedom of movement is guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 13) at an international level, as well as ensured as a right for EU citizens by the Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States. • Asylum seeker - An individual seeking safety from persecution or serious potential danger outside of his or her own country of origin, and awaiting a decision on the application for refugee status. In case of a negative decision, the person is obliged to leave the country, unless a permission to stay is granted on humanitarian or other relevant grounds. • Externally Displaced Person - An individual who has left his or her home country as a result of or in order to avoid the effects of armed conflict, and/or situations of generalized violence, violations of human rights, natural or man-made disasters, but expects to return eventually. Depending on the individual’s ability to return, externally displaced persons may be entitled to recognition as refugees. • Economic migrant - An individual who has emigrated from one region to another for the purposes of seeking employment or improving their financial position. An economic migrant is distinct from an asylum seeker, refugee or an externally displaced person because of the purpose for migration. • Irregular migration - Movement that is not in accordance with the regulatory norms of migration between countries. From the perspective of destination countries irregular migration can be defined as entry, stay or work in a country without the necessary authorization or documents required under immigration regulations, while from the sending countries perspective, the irregularity is crossing the international borders without the necessary documentation. The use of the term “illegal migration” is mostly restricted to cases of smuggling of migrants and human trafficking. • Xenophobia - A fear of what is perceived as foreign or strange. It is mostly expressed as attitudes, prejudices and behaviour that excludes, rejects and even vilifies persons, based on the perception that the subjects of this attitude are foreigners to the society or nationality. • Integrated Border Management - A concept for establishing collaboration in the management of borders among agencies responsible for border controls. Based on a common understanding of the problems and goals related to specific border areas.

2. relevance of the topic, EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM Immigration is not a phenomenon that has arisen recently. Crossing the borders of countries for economic and social reasons has been a common action since the formation of countries. In the past few decades the European Union (EU) has become a desired destination for many. Asylum seekers approach the EU as a safe zone, whereas a large number of economic migrants seek higher financial stability and economic benefits ensured by the Member States of the EU. However, in the past few years immigration rates to the EU have been growing rapidly. In 2011 there were an estimated 1.7 million immigrants that travelled to the EU from outside the union. The same year 27 EU Member States received as many as 300,000 asylum applications, mostly coming from Middle East or Africa:- Afghanistan, Pakistan, Tunisia and Nigeria. It is important to note that the largest increases in the number of applicants were recorded from the African countries that were facing civil unrest and political change in spring 2011, also known as the Arab Spring – including Tunisia, Libya and the Ivory Coast. Immigration to the EU can be and is seen differently in every member state. It has the potential to solve social and economic problems, for example, the problem of an ageing population, or the need for high skilled workers, but also runs the risk of causing social and economic instability. A rapid growth of the number and popularity of extreme right-wing parties and organisations all through Europe can be observed, even more, nationality-based conflicts and riots are becoming more and more regular. Moreover, immigration in the EU is not distributed evenly between the Member States, therefore causing economic instability. Another issue that cannot be forgotten regarding immigration in the EU is irregular immigration. In 2008 the EU was facing between 1.9 million and 3.8 million irregular migrants. The vast majority of member states view these illegal immigrants as a huge economic burden as they are using welfare benefits provided by the state, but not contributing back to society in terms of taxes, and fees. The EU migration policy should tackle both economic and social issues that immigration can cause, as well as work on maintaining the positive impacts the new Europeans can have on the future of the union.

LIBE1

Immigration provides challenges and opportunities for both social stability and economic growth. Taking that into account, what changes to immigration policies are necessary within the EU?

4. existing measures

3. clashes One of the key conflicts with the current state of affairs is the decoupling of the EU’s views from the social views in separate member states. The EU views immigration as something which brings competitiveness, diversity, and opportunities for Europeans. However, as seen throughout Europe today, immigration is interpreted differently by the populations of different member states. In Italy, and many other countries, immigration can also cause hate, xenophobia, hostility and racism1. This is clearly visible in the growing support for far right parties throughout Europe but especially in the UK, the Netherlands, and Denmark. The Netherlands has had a remarkable gain in support, with over 17% of people voting for the ‘Freedom Party’. It is important for the EU to find a balance between the views of individual member states, and its own directives. Should the EU allow immigration to carry on as is? Or should the EU increase its competency in migration policy and take steps towards developing a more dynamic approach which is better applicable to all member states? The EU is notorious for accepting a large number of asylum seekers. This first came to light during and after the Arab Spring, where the number of asylum seekers rose by 20 times the number in previous years. The EU takes a strong moral stance on asylum seekers, believing that the protection of fundamental rights belongs to Europe’s core identity.2 However, asylum seekers cause much controversy, as recently shown by the EU taking legal action against the UK, which refuses to agree to a ‘free-for-all’ benefits basis, as this would cost the tax payer an extra 180 million Euros each year.

Cecilia Malmström, EU commissioner responsible for home affairs: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/immigration/index_en.htm 2 UNHCR, 2013: http://www.unhcr-centraleurope.org/en/what-we-do/ensuring-legal-protection/european-union-asylum-policy.html

The Schengen agreement allows free travel of all European Citizens throughout the European Union, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Lichtenstein, but not the UK or Ireland. The Schengen agreement includes other factors in addition to the removal of internal borders, including common minimum standards on asylum. However, immigration is still largely in the domain of national policy, and differences remain between the strictness of different Member States’ policies. In addition, in 2005 Spain was criticised for granting an amnesty to around 700,000 illegal migrants that were a vital part of its workforce. It was seen to undermine the EU’s overall immigration policy. In addition, in 2008 the maximum length of detention still varied from 32 days in France to 20 months in Latvia, and it was indefinite in other Member States. Between 1999 and 2005, several legislative measures harmonising common minimum standards for asylum were adopted within the EU, the four most important ones being: • Directive on reception conditions for asylum-seekers • Directive on qualifications for becoming a refugee or a beneficiary of subsidiary protection status • Directive on Asylum Procedures • The ‘Dublin’ Regulation, which determines which EU State is responsible for examining an asylum application. Usually, the responsible Member State will be the state through which the asylum seeker first entered the EU. In order to attract highly qualified migrants, the EU has instituted a Blue Card system, which allows high-skilled workers easier access to the job market.1 The EU Immigration Portal, launched in November 2011, provides hands-on information for foreign nationals interested in moving to the EU. The site is also directed at migrants who are already in the EU and would like to move from one EU State to another. It provides specific practical information about procedures in all 27 EU States for each category of migrants. Future: Greater mobility brings with it opportunities and challenges. The EU is currently developing a comprehensive and common migration policy that will help the EU to seize these opportunities while tackling the challenges head-on. The policy aims to establish a framework for legal migration, taking fully into account the importance of integration into host societies.

The Blue Card system: http://www.apply.eu/

LIBE1

Immigration provides challenges and opportunities for both social stability and economic growth. Taking that into account, what changes to immigration policies are necessary within the EU?

5. Key actors The main EU institution in terms of immigration is the European Commission, and particularly the department on home affairs. Immigration falls under Cecilia Malmström, the EU commissioner on home affairs. The European Commission is taking initiatives towards a common immigration system. Frontex (European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union) deals with border control on the outside borders of the EU. Frontex promotes, coordinates and develops European border management in line with the EU fundamental rights charter, applying the concept of Integrated Border Management. Frontex helps border authorities from different EU countries work together. The agency was set up in 2004 to reinforce and streamline cooperation between national border authorities. The European NGO Platform on EU Asylum and Migration Policy (EPAM) is an informal group of European non-governmental organisations and networks seeking to contribute to the development of asylum, refugee and migration policy in the European Union. Every member state of the EU is also extremely important in terms of EU migration policy, as each member state possesses its own views, and experiences its own problems and benefits with immigration.

6. Key questions • To what extent should immigration policy become an EU competency instead of a national competency? • How can the EU ensure equal distribution of immigrants among the Member States? • What actions should be taken at the EU institutional level in order to best help those outsiders that most need asylum? • How can the EU use migration to fill gaps in the labour market? • What measures can the EU take to tackle the problem of irregular immigration?

7. links for further research EU Immigration Portal http://ec.europa.eu/immigration/ European Commission, department on Home Affairs, Immigration Policy http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/immigration/index_en.htm Frontex Home-page http://www.frontex.europa.eu/ Migration Policy Institute Home-page http://www.migrationpolicy.org/europe/ “A Great Migration”, The Economist – an article on the example of Spain and issues caused by immigration http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21578702-spain-needs-its-youngpeople-create-new-businesses-great-migration?zid=307&ah=5e80419d1bc9821ebe173f4f0f060a07 “Riots put Sweden’s open-door immigration policy in spotlight”, Reuters – A news article on the recent riots in Stockholm and their connection to the rise of anti-imigration parties in Scandinavia http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/27/us-sweden-riots-idUSBRE94Q0E620130527 Frontex, ‘missions and tasks’: http://www.frontex.europa.eu/about-frontex/mission-and-tasks EU immigration policy explained: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7667169.stm Q& A The Schengen Agreement: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13194723

LIBE1I

Diversifying marriage: should Member States legalise same-sex marriage? To what extent should the EU protect LGBT rights?

ties, e AffaairirssIIII r e ib L il iv C n o me Aff are (LV) nnddHHoom Committee jus iceeaa L) and Ieva Past (N ijn Justtic w le e Ko by Willem 2. relevance of the topic, EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM 1. Key terms • LGBT - Term that refers to lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders collectively. • Civil union - A partnership between two people, recognised by law, which grants them certain rights, benefits and responsibilities similar to those of marriage. • European Convention on Human Rights - Came into force in 1953. All member states of the Council of Europe1 are signatory parties of the Convention. Moreover, being a signatory party is a prerequisite to join the EU. The Convention serves to safeguard human rights in all Member States of the Council of Europe. Any person, who feels that his or her rights have been violated by the state, can bring his case to the European Court of Human Rights. • Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Adopted in 2000, the Charter confirms the political, social and economic rights of all EU citizens and residents. It is predominantly based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. With the Lisbon Treaty that came into force in 2009, the Charter is now legally binding. Any EU law, implemented by either the EU or its Member States, may be overruled by the Court of Justice of the European Union, should it fail to comply with the Charter. • Stepchild-adoption - A form of adoption in which one partner in the same-sex couple adopts the other partner’s biological child.

Explanation of the Council of Europe: http://www.ilga-europe.org/home/guide_europe/council_of_europe/what_is_council_of_europe

From the historical perspective, views on LGBT rights have developed strongly in Europe. Throughout history, LGBT people have often been prosecuted based on their sexual orientation. Even in the 20th century, homosexuality was still classified as a disease in many European countries. In 2013, however, seven EU member states have legalised same-sex marriage, demonstrating how views on LGBT rights have changed over time. Although discussions on LGBT rights are often of a moral nature, the first aspect of the problem is mainly practical. In countries where there is no recognition of same-sex partnerships whatsoever, same-sex couples are denied rights that are granted to heterosexual couples. These include the ability to make health decisions for one another, being each other’s automatic legal beneficiary, taking the partner’s surname and many fiscal advantages. As established in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, it is up to national legislators to decide which couples are eligible for marriage, and which couples are not. As a result, there is a strong diversity across the EU when it comes to this matter. These strongly divergent legal situations make the lives of samesex couples abroad extremely complicated. In countries where marriage and civil partnership for same-sex couples are unrecognised, these same-sex couples are unable to use their rights as legal partners, in for example taking medical decisions for the partner in case of emergency. As such, the current situation limits same-sex couples’ freedom of movement, one of the EU’s core values. Secondly, there is the matter of adoption. Seven member states allow both regular adoption and stepchild adoption by same-sex couples, whereas three member states allow stepchild adoption only. Again, this causes very unpractical legal situations for same-sex couples. Thirdly, there are still signs of discrimination against the LGBT community across the EU. In the light of the recent discussion about same-sex marriage in France, violence against members of the LGBT community increased, demonstrating that discrimination against the LGBT community still exists.

LIBE1I

Diversifying marriage: should Member States legalise same-sex marriage? To what extent should the EU protect LGBT rights?

4. existing measures 3. CLASHES Currently, it is up to national governments to make their own legislation regarding marriage. At the same time, the EU has the task to guarantee fair legal treatment of all its citizens in all its Member States. This results in two main conflicts. Firstly, there is the moral and often religious discussion about whether or not marriage should be open to same-sex couples or not. It is argued that marriage is an institution meant for one man and one woman. Thus, allowing same-sex couples to marry would devaluate the institution of marriage. Proponents of same-sex marriage believe that a government should treat all its citizens equally. To make sure that all are equal under the eyes of the law, all couples of marriageable age should be allowed to do so. Should same-sex marriage be granted the same rights as heterosexual couples, and if so, should this be called marriage? Should same-sex couples be allowed to adopt? Secondly, there is the question whether the EU should intervene in national legislation on the matter or not. Here, we see a clear clash between the job of the EU, which is to guarantee a fair treatment to all, and the sovereignty of member states to create their own legislation on the issue. Should there be a harmonisation of policy in this area or should national governments continue to decide for themselves on this matter?

In 2001, The Netherlands was the first country in the world to legalise same-sex marriage. Up to today, six more EU members have opened up marriage to two persons of the same sex, most recently France. Nine member states recognise some kind of registered partnership or civil union, granting same-sex couples rights that are very similar to those granted by marriage. In seven member states there is no form of recognition of same-sex partnerships whatsoever. Moreover, in another five member states, including Latvia, a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage is in place. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union added sexual orientation to the list of prohibited grounds for discrimination1. At the same time, the Charter states that the right to marry and found a family is guaranteed in accordance with national legislation2. The Lisbon Treaty made the Charter legally binding, thus prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation. Additionally, the Employment Equality Framework Directive, proposed by the European Commission, was adopted by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union in 2000. The directive obligated all member states to introduce legislation to prevent discrimination on the basis of, amongst others, sexual orientation within employment. The Commission has confirmed that all member states have successfully adopted legislation that serves the goals as set in the directive. In contrast to the Charter, the Convention does not explicitly mention sexual orientation as a prohibited ground of discrimination3. However, previous cases have demonstrated that â&#x20AC;&#x153;other statusâ&#x20AC;?, as mentioned in the specific article, is also applicable to sexual orientation. The Convention grants the right to marry, however, only to a man and a woman.4

Article 21 of the Charter: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf Article 9 of the Charter: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf Article 14 of the Convention: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/005.htm Article 12 of the Convention: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/005.htm

LIBE1I

Diversifying marriage: should Member States legalise same-sex marriage? To what extent should the EU protect LGBT rights?

5. Key actors • National governments – As decisions about marriage and civil unions are taken at the national level, national parliaments play the most important role on this issue. As a result of the divergent opinions across the EU, these decisions differ greatly, from allowing same-sex marriage to constitutional bans. • LGBT community – This group is directly affected by repressive legislation and at the same time, most active in the struggle for recognition and rights. • Progressive parties – Parties that support the LGBT community in trying to achieve equal rights. • European Commission – As the institution with the Right of Initiative in the European Union, any proposal for new legislation is to be submitted by the Commission, although the Parliament and the Council of the European Union can request the Commission to propose legislation. However, the EU institutions have only very limited powers, as marriage rights are part of the national legislation. • The Catholic Church – Roman Catholicism has always opposed same-sex marriage, regarding marriage as something to be reserved for heterosexual couples only. The church significantly influences public opinion: in Poland, for example, where about 90% of the population is Catholic, the acceptance of same-sex couples is the lowest of the entire EU.1 • The Muslim community – In Sharia law, all homosexual acts are forbidden, which is why acceptance among Muslims is generally low. In The Netherlands, for example, 17% of the originally Dutch population would mind their children having a same-sex relationship. Amongst inhabitants of Moroccan or Turkish descent, countries where Islam is the dominant religion, this percentage was 75%. • Conservative parties – These parties want to protect more traditional values and see the LGBT community as a threat to the grounds upon which their societies are based.

Polish politics regarding LGBT rights: http://emajmagazine.com/2011/07/20/polish-politicians-two-stances-on-gays/

6. Key questions • Should same-sex marriage be legal? • What rights should derive from a same-sex marriage / civil union? • Should same-sex couples be allowed to adopt children? • To what extent should the EU intervene in national legislation regarding LGBT rights? • Should the rights of same-sex couples that go abroad be recognised and protected? • How can the EU contribute to decreasing discrimination against the LGBT community?

7. links for further research Article from The Economist about recent developments regarding same-sex marriage: http://www.economist.com/news/international/21566626-trend-toward-giving-homosexuals-full-marriage-rights-gaining-momentum-have-and?zid=318&ah=ac379c09c1c3fb67e0e8fd1964d5247f Report on the controversy regarding the legalisation of same-sex marriage in France: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22671572 Article on the situation of the LGBT community in Poland: http://emajmagazine.com/2011/07/20/polish-politicians-two-stances-on-gays/ Article on the development of public opinion considering LGBT rights in Hungary: http://emajmagazine.com/2011/07/07/lgbt-rights-in-europe-four-countries-on-the-spot-hungary/ Article from The Economist on the acceptance of homosexuality at schools in the United Kingdom: http://www.economist.com/node/21548961