Maastricht2017 - Academic Preparation Kit

ACADEMIC PREPARATION KIT

TABLE OF

CONTENTS Word from the President

3

The Committee on...

Security and Defence

SEDE

4

Constitutional Affairs

AFCO

8

Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs I

LIBE I

12

Transport and Tourism

TRAN

17

Environment, Public Health and Food Safety I

ENVI I

21

Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs II

LIBE II

25

Environment, Public Health and Food Safety II

ENVI II

29

Employment and Social Affairs

EMPL

34

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

WORD OF WELCOME Dear participants of Maastricht 2017, The Chairs’ Team of the 17th National Selection Conference of the European Youth Parliament in the Netherlands can proudly present you the Academic Preparation Kit. This document consists of the topic overviews that have been written and composed by the Chairs based on the committee topics of the Conference. The overviews will give you the first introduction to the topic relevance and outline stakeholders involved, elaborate on measures that are in place and offer thoughts for future prospects to explain the complexities of each of them. The topic overviews are supposed to provide you with an objective summary of the committee topics and should only act as the point of departure for your own academic preparation.

The Conference commemorates 25 years since the Treaty of Maastricht was signed and dedicates its attention to fundamental changes in creating the European Union that we know. As the Treaty has been amended for several times after, there still is much that is very relevant today. The Conference topics will give the committees a chance to discuss policy areas that shape the future of the Union.

Being aware and being involved is what the EU needs from its citizens in these unexpected times. We witness nationalist movements that gain momentum faster than before and cross border relations with third countries deem to be difficult or even a threat to the unity of the Union at times. Therefore, it is more important for civic movements, like the European Youth Parliament, to carry its role in the society and more than ever highlight the identity of the EU that is based on peace and respect for human rights.

We will all have a change to contribute to Maastricht 2017, the first steps can be taken right here when going through the Academic Preparation Kit. I highly encourage you to read the document in full and think along with all of the topics that we will be discussing.

I wish you all the best with the preparations for the Conference; be curious, be active and see you very, very soon!

Kati Pärn President of the 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

3

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

THE COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND DEFENSE

Schengen for Defence: In light of rising security concerns, the need for more advanced EU defence policies, and a common European Defence Union, what strategies must the EU develop to secure citizens’ safety?

by Ella-Maria Palkoaho (FI) and Andreas Janssen (NL)

Topic Explanation

In 2012, the European Union (EU) received the Nobel Peace Prize, for ensuring ‘six decades of peace and reconciliation in Europe’. Five years later, the EU’s role as a peacekeeper has become far more challenging. Recent terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels, Russian aggressions in Crimea, chaos in Syria and concerns over cyber security have shown that the safety of Europe’s citizens is at serious risk.

The EU is the world’s second-largest military spender.

However, faced with budget constraints, many EU Member States have cut national defence budgets.

Between 2005 and 2014, military expenditure in the EU has fallen by 9%. Russia, on the other hand, has increased it spending 97% in the last decade.

Additionally, military equipment is mostly bought at a national level (see figure), which results in a lack of interoperability between national defence systems.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker thus has expressed concerns that “no EU member state is capable of defending either itself or the continent.”

To address this issue, some have proposed to increase European military cooperation and integration. However, the extent of the European Defence Union, and how far Member States should commit to it, remains contested.

Key Actors

The EU’s central body for security cooperation is the Political and Security Committee (PSC), which directs all crisis management within the EU and defines guidelines for the Union’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). The PSC decides based on recommendations by the European Union Military Committee (EUMC), which brings together all Member States’ Chiefs of Defence. As national Foreign Ministers also make up the Foreign Affairs Council, which is responsible for implementing foreign and security policy, Member States remain the primary actors in the field of security and defence.

4

As an alternative platform for improving collaboration, all but six of current EU Member States are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), in which European and North American militaries cooperate. This raises the question whether European military cooperation should be intensified within the framework of NATO or developed independently. NATO itself advocates closer cooperation

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

among EU Member States, believing that both sides could benefit from it. At the moment, EU-NATO relations are formalised by the Berlin Plus Agreement, which tries to avoid duplication, discrimination, and decoupling between the organisations.

Furthermore, it grants EU the access to NATO’s capacities for its own military operations.

The defence industry also is a key actor in the European military landscape. Large suppliers and SMEs are heavily reliant on national investment budgets in order to provide arms and military technology. It has been argued that overcoming the national fragmentation of the industry and integrating it into an European defence market would grant these suppliers more access to investments, as well as the ability to cooperate on joint military research.

Measures in Place

The Treaty of Lisbon entails several provisions for security collaboration. If invoked, Article 222, the Solidarity clause in the Treaty of the Functioning of the EU, and Article 42(7), the mutual defence clause in the Treaty of the EU, oblige Member States to direct all means possible to a fellow Member State facing a security threat. As Art. 42(7) has so far only been invoked once, its implications in case of large scale aggressions remain unclear. The Treaty also set up Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), which allows like-minded Member States to institutionalise their military cooperation. Despite slow implementation, some argue that it represents a practical way towards military integration and a way to strengthen the European pillar within NATO. Under the framework of EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) there have been developed various initiatives for defence cooperation, such as EU Battlegroups.

These multinational rapid reaction forces remain under direct control of the Council of Ministers. Yet, they have never been deployed, which suggests a need for reform. Should the EU keep evolving the Battlegroups, potentially into a common European army? So far, command of the EU’s joint military operation remains with the Member States. Another initiative is the European Defence Agency (EDA), which acts as a catalyst for defence cooperation. Since its creation in 2004 it has launched multiple initiatives facilitating cooperation in the field of defence research, armament procurement and training.

The European Defence Action Plan is a proposal by the European Commission to support efficient spending in joint military projects. An important part of this plan is the establishment of the European Defence Fund, which is to fund collaborative research on defence technologies, and to support Member States in making shared purchases of military equipment. Ultimately, the Commission hopes to thereby strengthen a common defence market.

Problem Statement

Building a European Defence Union is not just a matter of solving practicalities. It is a principal question that touches upon the sovereignty of Member States in defence policy. However, Member States themselves often pursue conflicting priorities, thus blocking progress. Some, such as Germany and Estonia, have spoken out in favour of increased military integration and already cooperate bilaterally and share military units. Others, such as Denmark, firmly oppose the idea, arguing that a Defence Union would diminish their national sovereignty and ability to efficiently protect their citizens.

But even among the Member States that are willing to accept some form of cooperation,

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

5

national priorities may strongly diverge. Whereas such Member States might be willing to integrate military capabilities by collaborating on an operational level, there still is considerable resistance to the idea of integrating military policies and international security approaches. The resulting reliance on ad hoc agreements and lack of a coherent strategy represent a considerable obstacle.

However, there are also more practical barriers besides diverging national interests.

From 2009 to 2013 expenditures for collaborative security equipment as a share of total expenditures for procurement has dropped from 22% to 15%. This means that national armies use different and incompatible weapon systems, which exacerbates operational cooperation and leads to duplication. Another major cause of inefficiency is the longstanding fragmentation of the European defence market. Member States often circumvent European rules meant to integrate the defence market in order to protect jobs in their national industries.

Food for Thought

Defence cooperation is a hotly debated topic in the EU, raising various questions about the purpose and means of European military capacities. First and foremost, should the EU even pursue a common Defence Union, or is defence best left in the hands of Member States? Secondly, if indeed military integration is the solution to strengthening the EU’s security, in what form should further integration take place? Should the EU focus on integrating defence policy or build on integrating military capabilities?

To answer these questions, the strengths and weaknesses of existing policies have to be assessed. Why have Members States been unwilling to utilise opportunities such as PESCO or the EU Battlegroups? In the case of the latter, what steps should be taken to effectively operationalise this framework?

Finally, in order for cost-efficient armament programmes to take place, the defence market needs to be opened up to EU-wide competition and investment. Member States have been unwilling to participate in a single defence market, in protection of their own national industries. How can the EU guarantee the creation of a single European defence market?

Further Links

Video explaining the CSDP as a tool for intervention in international conflict areas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMS-7mwuXgY Article assessing the cooperation and competition between the CSDP and NATO: http://www.nouvelle-europe.eu/en/csdp-and-nato-friends-competitors-or-both Position paper calling for the establishment of a common European Defence Union: http://www.eppgroup.eu/system/files_force/publications/2015/11/EPP_Position_ Paper_European_Defence_Union_EN.pdf Article examining the opportunities for further European defence integration after Brexit: http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21707499-after-brexit-vote-european-unionpushing-more-military-integration-its-proposals?zid=312&ah=da4ed4425e74339883d47 3adf5773841

6

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

Article weighing bilateral agreements against more structured cooperation: http://www.institutdelors.eu/media/tgae20117eondarza.pdf?pdf=ok Article on the launch of an EU defence research plan: http://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/after-trump-and-brexit-eu-tolaunch-defence-research-plan/ Briefing by the European Parliament on the thoughts of an EU army: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2015/551346/EPRS_ BRI(2015)551346_EN.pdf The Commission on challenges for European defence cooperation: https://ec.europa.eu/ epsc/publications/strategic-notes/defence-europe_en

7

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

THE COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS Negotiating Brexit: Following the British vote to leave the EU, what stance should the EU take in their negotiations with the UK?

by Emilios Charalambous (CY) and Boris van der Lugt (NL)

Topic Explanation

What happens when the world’s biggest trading bloc starts breaking apart from the inside?

The choice of the United Kingdom (UK) to exit the European Union (EU) following the Brexit referendum in June 2016 has further divided the European leaders after years of economic crisis, a record influx of migrants and a series of deadly attacks by Islamist militants.

The UK joined the EU in 1973 but has always been reluctant to participate in continental politics, and many saw the UK as an obstacle in the path towards a closer Union. Yet, Britain’s exit will have many effects on both parties. The UK’s exit from the Union will change the balance of power within the EU. For a long time the UK, France and Germany were the ‘big three’ in the Union, this dynamic now will change. A more direct result from Brexit is that the EU will have to do without the UK’s contribution of 10.5 billion in its budget. The UK’s choice to leave could give the push also to other Member States.

Right before and after the vote, big economic fallouts were predicted for Britain. But the economy grew by 0.5%, which is more than was predicted and consumer confidence returned to the same levels as before the vote. Also predicted is damage to Britain’s ties with countries outside the Union. Britain will have to re-negotiate all of its trade deals with other countries, which will be a long process.

Also considering the uncertainty it is causing for citizens in the UK and in the EU, it is of the utmost importance that both find a common stance to take during the negotiations.

Key Stakeholders

UK’s Prime Minister Theresa May has signalled an upcoming clean break with the bloc in March when she wishes to trigger the Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon. Her actions and final decision up to the upcoming spring will be determining the final stance the EU will have with regards to the British exit and the follow-up negotiations. Yet, a ruling from the High Court of Justice decided that the British government cannot go ahead with Brexit without parliamentary approval. The government is fighting this decision in The Supreme Court of the UK. The parliament did vote in favour of May’s Brexit timeline on 7 December. The Supreme Court hearings took place in the first week of December and a decision is expected in January.

8

Another sector, which holds stake are the UK citizens themselves. Only 52% of them voted to leave the EU, which means that a considerable amount of Brits wanted to stay.

Especially 18-35 year olds were largely in favour of remaining in the EU. Guy Verhofstadt,

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

the chief European Parliament Brexit negotiator, proposed that keeping EU-citizenship would be an option presented to all British citizens Theresa May has recently said that she would consider ‘associate European citizenship’.

The European Council is the one what will set out guidelines for the withdrawal negotiations. The Council’s President Donald Tusk has said that he believes there can only be a ‘hard Brexit’ or no Brexit at all. According to him, staying in the EU should always be the best deal Britain can get. The European Commission will then take the Council’s guidelines and will draft a more detailed mandate for the negotiations. They will also handle the negotiation process. The European Parliament will have a more limited role in the negotiations as it will just be kept informed, yet it is the one who must pass the final agreement with a majority vote.

Measures in Place

Even though it has only been a few months, there have been various developments. In October 2016, Theresa May announced that Article 50 will be triggered before March 2017.

However, London business entrepreneur Gina Miller went to the High Court because she believes Theresa May needs parliamentary approval to invoke Article 50.

Quickly after Theresa May became the Prime Minister, she appointed long time Eurosceptic David Davis as Secretary of State for exiting the EU. While both parties have not let too much slip on their ideas for what the final agreement should be like, a few things have been made clear. Davis has said that his ideal outcome would be ‘free-tariff access to Europe’.

The European Commission, Parliament and Council have all appointed Brexit negotiators since the vote. The Commission appointed Michel Barnier, the Parliament Guy Verhofstadt and the Council Didier Seeuws. In a non-binding report, written by Mr. Verhofstadt, voted in the Parliament’s Constitutional Affairs committee he described Brexit as ‘an opportunity to reduce the complexity of the Union’. Furthermore, EU leaders that have spoken about it have all said that they will not let Britain get a better deal outside the Union than they would by staying in. More specifically, Davis’ wish to retain ‘free-tariff access to Europe’ which basically means remaining in the Single Market has been deemed impossible by EU leaders. Jean-Claude Juncker, the President of the EC said the following on the matter: ”You cannot have one foot inside and one outside”.

French President Francoise Hollande said: “The UK wants to leave but pay nothing, that’s not possible”.

Problem Statement

The EU has to choose a stance on handling Brexit - they could go for an amicable approach, which would mean that the EU would smoothen Britain’s process leaving the EU, fostering a new relationship similar to the Union’s attachment to Norway and Switzerland, namely the ‘Norway model’. The ‘Norway model’ would give Britain access to the European free market in exchange for a financial contribution, which by some researches say could be lower to what Britain pays as a Member State now, without the other commitments as a Member State.

9

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

Yet, the deal would require Britain to accept EU immigration policy, which is Theresa May’s government’s top priority to avoid. Therefore, for the British, leaving the Single Market in other words the European Economic Area (EEA) has to be negotiated separately.

Extraction from the EEA is outlined in Article 127 of the European Economic Area Agreement. It is not clear if it is possible to trigger Article 50 without triggering Article 127, yet Article 50 says nothing about leaving the Single Market because both these memberships are part of a different agreement.

Furthermore, some say that a soft negotiating stance on the EU’s side could be “seen to be giving in to a country that is leaving”; indeed, with rising Euroscepticism, if other Member States get the impression that leaving the EU is easy, they could take the same step. Guy Verhofstadt’s arrangement in which all UK citizens would be offered European citizenship was not met with a lot of enthusiasm at first, yet Theresa May has recently said that she would consider ‘Associate European citizenship’.

On a military level, a milder Brexit would allow the UK to continue with their consequent military investments and the EU to keep its role on the global stage as a key military power. Yet, the UK left the EU in a vulnerable position as the UK were their main military power and strongest voice with the sanctions against Russia, but also many of the smaller European militaries looked up to Britain’s armed forces for leadership. Their The Royal Navy has been patrolling the Baltic, Aegean and Mediterranean seas, the latter as part of an EU mission. However, a hard Brexit could result in the UK not being able to do their planned military investments and the loss of their nuclear submarines. This would worsen the diplomatic position of both the UK and the EU. On the other hand, the decision of Britain to leave the EU seems not be favoured in the some circles of the trading bloc. Accordingly, access to the Single Market for goods and services will likely to be denied as it is bonded with the four basic freedoms. Additionally, UK’s on-going talks with other possible trading partners such as China could motivate the EU to be even less forgiving in the negotiations. In the event of a ‘hard Brexit’ where the UK cannot stay in the Single Market, the UK will receive a large amount of tariffs which will reach 13 billion while they will be paying up to 5 bn themselves when they leave the EU. After the Brexit vote the British Pound fell dramatically, but since it has been recovering.

This makes it seem as if leaving the EU doesn’t result in the economic backlash that was promised. Something the EU, as mentioned before, does not want other countries to think. The EU always had a compelling trading partnership with the UK before the Brexit vote. The UK has for instance never been part of the Schengen area.

Being the EU’s 3rd largest trading partner, about 44% of UK’s exports in goods and services went to the EU in 2015. Brexit caused insecurity in the economic circles of both, yet, the UK managed to empower its economy by 0.5% 3 months after the Brexit, and having much potential for growth through the flexibility that its exit has provided them with, making them able to evolve their trade.

10

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

Food for Thought

Can the EU maintain a steady economical and political relationship with the UK in order for most of them to benefit from it? EU citizenship is a privilege almost half of the UK population choose to have by voting against the referendum. How could Mr. Verhofstad’s proposal of individual EU citizenship be accepted and promoted amongst the higher circles of the UK and the other 27 Member States in order to ensure the socio-political benefits of everyone? After a long period of more and more European citizens and politicians criticizing the EU, and now one of the Member States actually leaving; how can the EU use the negotiations to restore faith in the EU with its citizens and politicians?

On a more global level, to what extent would a potential partnership of the UK with other economic powers, such as China or the U.S. affect the EU?

Further Links

The link thoroughly explains the EU’s role in Brexit and the relevant legislature: http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/brexit/brexit-brief-eu%E2%80%99s-rolebrexit-negotiations The European Commission explaining EU citizenship: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/citizen/ Five models for post-Brexit UK trade: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36639261 A clear breakdown of the Brexit vote: http://www.politico.eu/article/graphics-how-the-uk-voted-eu-referendum-brexitdemographics-age-education-party-london-final-results/ Daily global updates on the Brexit https://www.euractiv.com/topics/brexit/ The Department for Exiting the European Union’s website https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-exiting-the-europeanunion

11

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS I European Agenda for Migration: Given that social policies carry key importance when tackling the influx of refugees, how should the Member States ensure an effective social integration of migrants coming from third countries?

by Elina Mäkelä (FI) and Liam van de Ven (NL)

Topic Explanation

With social unrest throughout the European Union (EU) due to the influx of refugees, the EU now faces the challenge of integrating the 1.3 million refugees that are spread throughout the Union into society. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees defines refugees as ‘’People fleeing conflict or persecution. They are defined and protected in international law, and must not be expelled or returned to situations where their life and freedom are at risk”. Measured in terms of numbers and strain on Member States, this is the greatest refugee crisis since the Second World War. The crisis has led to the rise of civil unrest and anti-immigrant factions throughout the Member States, and is one of the main causes of nationalist movements such as the emergence of the Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV).1 Furthermore, as some Eastern Member States are negotiating rejecting refugees due to cultural differences, the EU is put to the challenge of creating trust in integration policies throughout the continent. As of now, many refugees are confined to refugee centres without the possibility of employment or education, two essential factors to social integration.

Key Actors

The individual migration centres and integration programmes of the EU Member States are the central actors responsible for social integration of refugees and asylum seekers, or lack thereof, in their respective countries. However, while the integration of refugees and asylum seekers is a competence of Member States, the European Commission (EC), through directorate-generals, has an important role to play in providing support and incentives for Member States’ actions. The Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs (DG HOME) is the key stakeholder when discussing this topic, as it deals with cross-border issues, such as asylum, migration, border control, organised crime and terrorism. In June 2016, DG HOME adopted the Action Plan on the integration of third country nationals, which provides a comprehensive framework to support Member States’ efforts in developing and strengthening their integration policies, and describes the concrete measures the EC will implement in this regard. While it targets all third-country nationals in the EU, it contains actions to address the specific challenges faced by refugees, including education, employment and vocational training, active participation and social inclusion. It is useful for the Member States in integrating refugees into local societies by presenting tools for a more strategic approach on EU funding for integration, and to strengthen coordination between the different actors working on integration at national, regional and local level - for example through the European Integration Network promoting mutual learning between Member States.

1

12

Bar-On, Tamir (2013), “Neither right, nor left?”, in Bar-On, Tamir, Rethinking the French new right alternatives to modernity, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, pp. 39–41

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

Frontex, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, aims to promote, coordinate and develop European border management in line with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the concept of Integrated Border Management. Frontex has recently launched the European Border and Coast Guard, whose mission is to “provide the missing link in strengthening Europe’s external borders, so that people can continue to live and move freely within the European Union”. This aims to help the EC fulfil its commitment to get back to the normal functioning of the Schengen area and the lifting of temporary internal border controls by the end of the year as set out in the Commission’s Back to Schengen Roadmap. Frontex is a relevant actor to the issue through its efforts to protect the integrity of EU borders and the safety of those crossing it, and its commitment to the Back to Schengen Roadmap.

Europol, the EU’s law enforcement agency, strives to achieve a safer Europe through assisting the Member States in their fight against serious international crime and terrorism. Fighting crime and terrorism is essential to better the safety and security of EU citizens, but also to diminish xenophobia and hate crimes against refugees and third country nationals, and improve their chances for successful social integration. It is also Europol’s responsibility to monitor the safety and legality of methods of travel to the EU, such as the highly unsafe transportation by sea.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) leads and coordinates international action to protect refugees and resolve refugee problems through providing emergency assistance such as shelter and healthcare, and arranging transport and assistance packages.

Measures in Place

The Action Plan on the integration of third country nationals (2016) is the most recent new collection of policy concerning the integration of refugees. It introduced the notion of pre-arrival and pre-departure preparation for migration, highlighting the need to prepare both the population of the host country receiving refugees and the refugees themselves. This goal would be reached through contact between the country of origin and the country of destination. The Action Plan also covers a wide range of other measures, including but not limited to: recognition of third country qualifications and funding refugee entrepreneurship. Furthermore, the Action Plan includes support for cultural integration through projects like Creative Europe, as well as working towards the adaptation of the anti-discrimination directive. These are but a few examples of the policy the Action Plan includes, as it provides a very wide array of different policies concerning the integration of refugees.

The social and labour market integration of refugees, part of the European employment strategy, highlights the importance of providing refugees with proper living spaces, education and employment. Another measure included is the recognition of third-country qualifications. The overall focus of this strategy is introducing refugees to the labour market as soon as possible, in order to promote integration. ‘’The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees [...] defines the term ‘refugee’ and outlines the rights of the displaced, as well as the legal obligations of States to protect them”. Its core principle is non-refoulement, which means refugees cannot be

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

13

sent back to their country of origin as long as they would be in danger there. This has implications for social integration, as it restricts Member States from sending back certain individuals, instead having to apply national laws to them.

UNHCR Annotated Comments to Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection deals with the living standards of refugees, including access to legal support, education and employment. On paper the directive is fairly clear, however in practice the Member States interpret it in vastly different ways, resulting in low living standards for refugees in certain parts of Europe. In particular, the fact that not all refugees have the chance to work and study results in social tensions, as refugees feel undervalued by their host state.

The Creative Europe Programme encourages EU civil society to start transnational projects to support the integration effort through cultural appreciation by providing subsidies. The working period for the projects is from 2016 to 2018 and will receive a subsidy of 200.000 euro on average. Twelve projects concerning refugees are active which provide a platform for refugees’ stories. For example, the ‘Re-build Refuge Europe’ programme introduces safehouses for artists and journalists under threat and works with refugees on creative projects. The success of these projects is as of yet not examinable as they mostly concern themselves with long-term cultural integration. It should be noted that there has been an enormous response from civil society, as over three times as many applications for subsidies were filed as was originally predicted by the EC. The German national integration policy is an excellent example. It emphasises the need for government support for integration, yet also demands that refugees make a considerable effort towards integrating into German society. The policy essentially works with a reward system, allowing refugees to acquire longer running visas if they participate in integration facilities like language courses. It also expands the government’s competences in dealing with refugees, most notably the right to decide where refugees are to live in order to prevent large concentrations of them.

Problem Statement

Third-country nationals living in the EU face significant barriers when entering the labour market. They are also more at risk of poverty or social exclusion compared to natives, even when they are in employment. However, the socio-economic prospects for refugees are even worse. Research suggests that early and effective labour market participation is a key aspect of the integration process and determining for the long-term economic impact of the recent crisis. Successful integration could also have many benefits to host societies, such as boosting the local economy and diversifying the workforce. However, this will require quicker administrative procedures, swift access to basic pre-conditions, such as housing and healthcare, and to the labour market, facilitated recognition of foreign qualifications, as well as education and training.

The EU response to the crisis has been divisive and fraught with complications, with disagreements over sharing responsibility, scapegoating, Member States such as Hungary closing their borders, and many EU governments prioritising preventing arrivals and deflecting responsibility to other Member States. The media has amplified and victimised

14

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

the refugee influx, and political leaders have lent their voices to anti-Muslim and antiimmigrant rhetoric, in some cases even leading to violent backlash towards ethnic minority groups already settled in Member States. Furthermore, in a historical context, European nations have been fraught with struggles of handling diversity for decades.

Especially in the past decade, concerns about cultural identity, social cohesion and security, as well as concerns about the economy, access to public services, crime and employment have been increasing.

Debates regarding refugee integration are divided into two camps, those who favour an assimilationist view - the newcomer adopts the dominant values and identity of the culture - and those who argue in favour of multiculturalism and embracing cultural differences.

Beyond strategic clashes, refugee integration also faces logistical struggles, with many Member States having backlogs of thousands of refugees. Prolonged procedures, staff shortages, and bureaucratic “red tape� foster a period of uncertainty with asylum-seekers stuck in limbo. For example, even in Germany it takes 7-10 months for an asylum seeker’s application to even be processed, building a backlog which slows progress and adds further to feelings of resentment in the native population as they see a slowly moving but never-ending line of refugees and a lack of meaningful progress.

Food for Thought

It is clear that the integration process must be well planned and start early. Broadly speaking, the main stepping-stones to successful integration are legal status, appropriate accommodation, access to employment and education including language classes and family reunification. What then can be done by Member States to ensure an effective social integration of migrants coming from third countries? In the difficult context of immigration crisis and xenophobia, what stance should be taken by civil society and governments of Member States, and what role will the EU play in all of this? It is important to think past merely the surface of the problem, also exploring historical trends of xenophobia and integration of immigrants, examining underlying structures of where the influences behind these trends lie and the relationship between events and trends, and finally what mental models lie at the heart of the issue, and how they can be reconstructed to settle the problem.

15

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

Further Links

Article written for the European Social Innovation Competition covering a contest on creative methods of integration in Member States: http://www.nesta.org.uk/blog/howeurope-supporting-integration-refugees-and-migrants Overview by the European Commission on refugees, migration and intercultural dialogue: https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/creative-europe/cross-sector/refugeesmigration-intercultural-dialogue_en European Parliament resolution on social inclusion and integration of refugees into the labour market: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP// TEXT+REPORT+A8-2016-0204+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN Article on the challenges faced by the European Union in social integration of refugees: https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/01/13/europe-integrating-refugees-next-big-challenge Overview by the European Commission on social and labour market integration of refugees: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1274&langId=en

16

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT AND TOURISM Single European Transport Area: To achieve an optimised aviation network and better European flight connections between the Member States, how can the EU ensure a competitive and resource efficient air traffic system?

by Thanos Theofanakis (NL) and Vice-President Lukas Rosenkranz (DE)

Topic Explanation

“If you are not mobile, you are marginalised in society. Mobility enables people to meet each other. And in the European Union it is very important for us to cross borders”, Michael Kramer, the chair of the Committee on Transport in the European Parliament, argues. With 918 million passengers using air transport in 2015, a network of over 400 airports, and approximately 5 million jobs connected to the aviation sector, aviation is with high importance to European competitiveness and mobility.

Despite its importance, the aviation sector long remained fragmented and differently regulated by the European Union (EU) Member States. The European Commission played an instrumental role in liberalising and integrating the market through its implementation of “The three packages for aviation liberalisation” as a part of the establishment of a Single European Market.

Reforms included introducing price flexibility, facilitating market access, privatisation, and breaking up monopolies.

In December 2015, the European Commission adopted an Aviation Strategy for Europe, which is currently being negotiated. It is therefore a critical time to contemplate the future of Europe’s aviation.

Key Actors

Within the Commission, the Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport (DG MOVE) is tasked with creating a Single European Sky (SES) and overseeing European aviation policies. The European Parliament has urged the Commission to switch to a “top-down approach” in doing so in order to overcome Member States’ resilience against further integration of the aviation market. There are numerous European agencies promoting innovation and investment into the transport system, such as the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency (INEA), which manages multiple funds and programmes building an efficient, integrated, and competitive transport system. However, despite this vast network, the EU has delegated parts of the regulation of the SES to an organisation working closely together with the EU called Eurocontrol, which thus is the central player

17

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

for air traffic management (ATM) in Europe.

As the EU and Member States share competences in transport, national actors remain influential as well. For example, national governments still need to provide a mandate for the Commission to negotiate air transport agreements with non-EU states on a caseto-case basis. Furthermore, many EU transport policies have to be overseen by National Regulatory Authorities. To ensure a harmonised application of rules, these cooperate in pan-European organisations, such as the European Air Safety Agency (EASA).

The EU also has a diverse set of private aviation businesses. Airlines, travel agencies, airport operators, and plane developers contribute to Europe’s economic well-being.

However, some of them are direct competitors and pursue conflicting interests, such as low-cost airlines and legacy airlines or regional airport operators and operators of airports that are international transport hubs.

Measures in Place

Since the inception of the European project, a Common Transport Policy has been a cornerstone of European economic integration. However, the policies included in the Treaty of Rome in 1957 left regulation of aviation to the Member States. In the 1980s, calls for integration of the aviation sector gained momentum, culminating in the delegation of ATM to the European level in 2004.

The framework for the development of a Single European Transport Area is set by the Commission’s 2011 White Paper for Transport. It identifies 40 concrete initiatives to build a resource efficient and competitive pan-European transport system, which provides 4 hours door-to-door connections to all EU citizens. For aviation, the key goal is completion of the SES, which aims to increase capacity, resource efficiency, and safety as well as lower costs by integrating ATM. In order to generate the necessary funds, the Single European Sky ATM Research (SESAR) pools together previously fragmented research and development efforts. Further, under the TEN-T plan the Commission has approved investments into strengthening links between national transport systems, thereby connecting different regions of the continent more efficiently. In order to also link the EU better with international aviation, the European Common Aviation Area helps harmonising regulation and investment with neighbouring countries.

Besides facilitating research into resource efficient technologies for decreasing aviation’s environmental impact, the EU included aviation into its Emissions Trading System (ETS). This has provoked criticism for not including airlines from non-EU Member States and concerns over the scheme’s effectiveness.

Problem Statement

18

European legacy airlines, the traditional national flag airlines such as Lufthansa or British Airways, struggle to maintain profitability whilst competing with low-cost challengers, such as Easyjet or Ryanair.

Competition from outside the EU, primarily from statesupported Gulf-airlines, further contributes to their struggle. Therefore, low-cost and legacy airlines have joined forces in lobbying for lower taxes and lighter

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

regulation to increase their competitiveness vis-á-vis non-European competitors. At the same time, others have argued that an active role for the EU is necessary in ensuring the protection of travellers’ rights. The process of building a Single European Sky thus reflects more fundamental debates about the extent to which the Single Market should be liberalised. What balance should the EU find between facilitating competitiveness and regulations promoting passenger protection and investments?

As the European transport system is composed of the national transport systems of 28 Member States, increasing connectivity between different regions of Europe and overcoming fragmentation are major challenges. Critics have pointed out that the SES suffers from gridlock due to diverging Member States’ interests, thus being unable to effectively overcome the fragmentation into national airspaces. Still, aviation plays a key role in connecting the core and peripheral regions. However, the design of an interconnected European transport system remains contested. Should the EU focus on a core network, linking major transportation hubs more efficiently? Or should it develop a comprehensive network that is more wide-spread yet also less efficient? What seems clear is that increasing connectivity will lead to increasing demand for air travel. But as the number of flights is expected to grow by 50% until 2035, whereas airports’ capacity is estimated to grow by just 17%, there are growing concerns over airport congestion.

Congestion and fragmented aviation markets also contribute to inefficient use of resources. Since 1990, CO2-emissions in transport have increased by 28%, compared to a decrease of 32% and 24% in industry and households respectively. The White Paper aims at reducing the environmental impact of flights by 10% and calls for a 40% use of sustainable low carbon fuels in aviation by 2050. However, these goals require significant investments into new technologies. How can the EU support the European aerospace businesses, such as Airbus, in developing resource-efficient technologies?

Food For Thought

Mobility is central to the European project. Connecting all Europeans, from all corners of the Union, requires an efficient and comprehensive aviation system.

The Committee on Transport and Tourism will therefore have to tackle important questions, such as what the EU’s role should be in the international aviation market, how the EU can decrease CO2 emissions while maintaining its highly competitive aviation area without compromising on passengers’ rights, and how the EU can most effectively encourage and implement environmentally friendly innovation.

Additionally, TRAN will discuss what the EU’s approach to ensuring a high level of connectivity throughout Europe should be and what steps should be taken by the EU to create new and improve existing infrastructure in Member states.

19

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

Further Links

Has The Single European Sky Project Failed?: http://aviationweek.com/aftermarketsolutions/has-single-european-sky-project-failed Brochures and Videos explaining the “White Paper - Roadmap to Single European Transport Area”: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/strategies/2011_white_paper_ en A history and contextualisation of aviation market integration in the EU: http:// researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN00182/SN00182.pdf A presentation explaining the EU’s priorities for transport: https://www.aerosociety. com/Assets/Docs/Events/Conferences/2016/796/01b-Torsten%20Klimke.pdf Overview of the “Single European Sky”: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/air/ single-european-sky_en A critical assessment of the status quo of the “Single European Sky”: https://www. euractiv.com/section/transport/opinion/the-single-european-sky-we-have-a-problem/ Introducing the EU’s “Aviation Strategy”: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/air/ aviation-strategy_en An overview over key aviation statistics: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php/Air_transport_statistics The Commission’s consideration on reducing the environmental impact of aviation: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/air/environment_en Financial Times on collaboration and competition between European airlines: https:// www.ft.com/content/2d2e6ec0-b39e-11e5-b147-e5e5bba42e51 A comment on the launch of the EU’s new aviation strategy: http://www.politico.eu/ article/sky-high-ambitions-for-eu-aviation-bulc/ Why are European airlines less competitive than their American counterparts?: https:// www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-09/europe-s-big-airlines-are-nowherenear-as-profitable-as-their-u-s-rivals

20

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

THE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, PUBLIC HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY I Gardening the Earth: Acknowledging the positive impact of green urban areas on the well-being and health of citizens, by what means can the Member States improve the living conditions of Europe’s urban residents?

by Molly McKeagney (IE) and Thijs Korsten (NL)

Topic Explanation

With nearly 75% of European citizens living in urban areas there is a pressing need for accessing green urban areas. Due to the ever rising European and global populations there is a further need to ensure that a high quality of life will be provided for those living in urban areas in the future. Cities are subject to a variety of issues such as lacking in green space and pollution. Urban dwellers face health issues such as a reduced quality of sleep, elevated stress, respiratory and cardiovascular problems. In order to improve the living conditions of Europe’s urban residents the following areas need to be considered: green area provision, sustainable transport, housing, and waste management.

Green urban areas are defined as “public and private open spaces in urban areas, primarily covered by vegetation, which are directly available for the users”. The idea of a green space with vegetation is very broad: parks, greenbelts, community gardens, empty lots of land, botanical gardens and green roofs, are all examples of some green areas. It is important to note that this list is not exhaustive but more indicative of what can be considered a green urban area.

Figure 1: Areas involved in urban By increasing the number of green urban areas and access to health them there is a positive impact on inhabitants of urban areas. The mental health and physical health benefits can be seen such as improved quality of sleep and reduced stress levels. Furthermore, there is an environmental shift, which further benefits the health of urban dwellers. This shift can be seen in relation to pollution levels; sound and air pollution levels are lowered. The trees act as a buffer zone for sound but also reduce the CO2 levels. Similar effects can be obtained by small-scale Green Infrastructure solutions.

Another dimension of urban sustainability is urban mobility, meaning transport. Urban areas generally have public transport networks, which reduces the amount of cars but also contributes to air pollution as they mostly run on fossil fuels. A transition to more renewable energies and technologies in both urban transport as well as housing is necessary. Bicycle and pedestrian lanes, for example, both enhance the health and reduce the carbon footprint of urban dwellers. Energy-efficient housing contributes to lowering CO2, which is important as cities are especially vulnerable to warming like the urban heat island effect. Additionally, sustainable waste management impacts urban areas.

Waste management can reduce the negative effects of waste on health, and through recycling increase energy and resource-efficiency.

21

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

Figure 2: The percentage of green urban areas in core cities in the European Union (EU).

Key Actors

There is a combined legislative effort from the EU institutions, such as the European Commission, European Parliament, and Member States. This multi-level policy approach is furthered by non-governmental organisations like the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO and the EU work on joint projects and cooperate together on the policy level, this can be seen with the tobacco control legislation. The two organisations work together with a common goal of improving the living standards and health of those living in Europe.

The European institutions have the power to write legislation and enforce it across Member States, this can be seen with the air quality standards. As the issue of urban development, such as green areas, impacts each Member State differently, policy implementation will have to be carried out by each Member State individually. Therefore, Member States are the central actors in this issue. The EU can encourage the Member States to take their own initiative and cooperate amongst each other, and make policy suggestions.

Additionally, urban planners and architects that are procured by Member States and their local governments should be taken into consideration. It is on the regional level that has the most impact on European urban residents as it is the actions of their local government, which will directly affect their quality of life. The European Commission takes a role of encouraging and supporting actions and initiatives of local governments and Member States. The Green Capital Award, and financial support provided through the Cohesion Fund and LIFE+ fund are examples of how the EU supports and encourages sustainable urban initiatives across Member States.

Measures in Place

The EU has a longstanding commitment to environmental policy, the Europe 2020 policy is an example of this. It sets out a plan for sustainable energy consumption and climate change. The EU 7th Environment Action Programme is a broad framework to guide environmental policy-making. This policy aims at improving environmental and health conditions, and urban sustainability.

The EU provides funding for various projects related to urban green spaces. This can be seen with the Cohesion policy spending, as well as the LIFE+ fund. Another method of encouraging green urban areas is the European Green Capital Award, which is awarded annually to cities, which set an example for urban sustainability.

22

Furthermore, the EU Green Infrastructure Strategy promotes green urban solutions, such as the use of green roofs to improve air and water quality, which is achieved

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

through knowledge-sharing, and financial and technical assistance. With regards to green urban mobility, one of the most important policies is CIVITAS, which is a network of cities that promotes sustainable urban transport. It tests measures and urban transport solutions, such as bike-sharing systems and biofuels, and carries out research projects.

Waste management and recycling is another crucial dimension of urban sustainability, as it relates to energy and resource efficiency. It is primarily guided by the Waste Framework Directive. Among other things it establishes recycling targets for 2020.

It also creates a waste hierarchy - the principal goal is waste prevention, followed by reusing, recycling and recovery, and ultimately disposal.

A truly sustainable city is one in which citizens both work and live sustainably. This is achieved by sustainable housing. The three most important policies with respect to this are the EU GreenBuilding Programme, the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive and the Energy Efficiency Directive . They focus on energy efficiency in non-residential buildings and government-owned buildings.

Finally, the EU incentivises the development of green innovations and technologies, and promotes knowledge sharing and cooperation across Member States and cities. This is achieved with the Environmental Technologies Action Plan, which promotes the use of environmental technologies. URBACT and the Urban Development Network (UDN) are knowledge sharing platforms, which facilitate the exchange of information and ideas, but also bringing together people from different sectors. It creates networks between cities that generate new plans and ideas. The UDN complements URBACT by reviewing the implementation of funds, by helping cities implement policies, and further facilitating communication among cities and the EU.

Problem Statement

There are discrepancies across the Member States in relation to green urban areas and waste management. Certain Member States operate in a very sustainable manner with plenty of recycling options, renewable energy and technology incorporated into their urban areas and planning. However, there are other Member States that still lag behind in that respect. In conjunction with this, another issue is that urban planning is primarily a Member State issue, which does not fall under the competences of the European institutions. However, it is important to consider the extent to which the EU can and should ensure that Member States and local authorities strive for urban sustainability.

Another issue that arises is that of the financial cost of urban development and the different economies of the Member States. Given the recent housing crisis, economic turbulence and other socioeconomic issues, green urban development is not prioritised in many Member States. The prioritisation of urban sustainability and the impact upon urban residents is often neglected by Member States, which in return has given rise to many of the issues faced by urban residents today.

Food for Thought

Urban planning is in the hands of the governments of the Member States and cities,

23

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

whose urban policies are not necessarily sustainable. In what ways can the EU ensure that incentives and Member State policies are effective, despite the fact that it is mainly a Member State-lead issue? How can the EU develop concrete policies that still allow Member States to tailor them to their cities’ needs?

The costliness of sustainable urban development results in a number of issues to tackle in relation to urban green areas, transport, housing, waste and public health. How can the EU ensure that all European citizens have equal accessibility to green urban spaces within a variety of different urban locations? And how can the EU encourage the implementation of best practices?

In what new ways can the EU promote the development of eco-friendly innovations that can be used to create a greener urban environment? How can the EU better promote research, innovation and investment in sustainable technologies? How do different Member States deal with waste management? Which methods work and which do not?

Further Links

Urban Environment: http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/urban/intro EU Policy on the Urban Environment – Overview: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/urban/index_en.htm Urban Agenda for the EU: http://urbanagendaforthe.eu/pactofamsterdam/ Europe’s first carbon neutral neighbourhood: https://youtu.be/6yZYXSsWnsg Statistics – Green Urban Areas: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Urban_Europe_-_ statistics_on_cities,_towns_and_suburbs_-_green_cities#Green_urban_areas Green Infrastructure and Public Health: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/pdf/Green%20Infrastructure/ GI_health.pdf What is Green Infrastructure?: https://www.epa.gov/green-infrastructure/what-green-infrastructure Urban mobility: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/urban/urban_mobility_en Statistics – Municipal Waste: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Municipal_waste_statistics

24

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS II Rise of Nationalism: With the growing distrust towards mainstream politics and an increase in populist rhetoric and anti-EU positions, how must the EU act to ensure that political debates are carried out with dignity and respect?

by Laura Joël (NL)

Topic Explanation

Le Front National in France, Partij voor de Vrijheid in the Netherlands, Alternative für Deutschland in Germany, and the Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs in Austria - nationalist parties and movements are on the rise across Europe. In some countries they have had considerable electoral success, such as the conservative party Fidesz coming to power in Hungary or the UK equivalent UKIP playing a key role in voting for Brexit. These movements are diverse, but share one common notion to opposition further European integration. This confronts the European Union (EU) with a dilemma of how to deal with movements that fundamentally disagree with its very existence. In other words, how can the EU make sure not to shut out these voices and answer the concerns they raise whilst at the same time not being “destroyed from within”?

Democracy as a competition of ideas requires an open and tolerant political debate.

However, nationalism incites hate speech, depriving public debate from dignity. At the same time, attempts to re-establish a respectful public discourse and tackle hate speech have been perceived as censorship and a violation of freedom of expression.

A rise of nationalism and populism represents a fundamental threat to the EU. Growing rejection of European ideas could very well cripple European cooperation and diminish the EU’s influence on its Member States. In the end, this puts the future of the EU itself in question.

Key Actors

Populist movements across Europe follow different agendas - they can be left-wing or right-wing, authoritarian or anarchist. However, many carry a nationalist and antiimmigrant attitude, as well as an anti-establishment and anti-status quo sentiment rejecting the EU. In their populist rhetoric, some have detected an illiberalism that threatens to end a political consensus based on tolerance and liberal values. Despite their appeal to nationalist ideas, many of these movements have also started to cooperate on a European level.

Nationalist and populist parties also directly challenge established parties. Traditionally, these are meant to serve as a link between citizens and governments. However, declining election result and membership increasingly inhibits their ability to do so, contributing to a perception of alienation between politicians and citizens.

The key platform for political debate and democratic participation within the EU is the European Parliament (EP). In the 2014 elections, anti-EU parties made significant gains,

25

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

which lifted questions of how to deal with populists and nationalists in parliaments to the top of the European agenda.

The Council of Europe (CoE) and its European Court for Human Rights (ECtHR) is essential for balancing freedom of expression and the protection against hate speech.

The CoE is not part of the EU and includes non EU-members. Whereas all EU Member States are subject to the rulings of the ECtHR, the EU has not yet completed its ascension to the jurisdiction of the court. Even though the EU works closely together with the CoE, its own court, the European Court of Justice (ECJ), also rules in matters of human rights and hate speech. However, ECJ and ECtHR rulings can differ, making for possible clashes over which jurisdiction prevails.

Recently, social media and traditional media outlets have also come under scrutiny for not effectively curbing the spread of hate speech and fake news on their platforms, which many argue fuels nationalist and populist argumentations.

Measures in Place

Growing pressures from right-wing populist parties has pushed multiple Member States to give in to some of their demands, for example in adopting a tougher stance during the refugee crisis. In Member States were these parties have gained power, such as Poland or Hungary, national governments have openly promoted an illiberal conception of democracy, curbing the freedom of press, courts, and the civil society. This has been perceived as an attack on European values, leading to calls for suspending some of the countries’ membership rights. This process is provided for by Article 7 of the Treaty of the European Union. However, opponents of this measure fear that it would further nurture anti-EU sentiments and instead advocate for an open dialogue to resolve the issues.

Once being elected to the European Parliament, political parties in the EP are entitled to EU resources for funding their activities. This is supposed to ensure that all relevant political groups have the means to make their voice heard. These funds do not cover national political parties’ activities. However, it also allegedly led to the paradoxical situation of EU funds being spent on the Leave campaign during Brexit.

26

To ensure a respectful and dignified political debate, there also is a complex set of legislation regulating their conduct. On the level of the CoE, Article 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) protect the freedom of thought and expression. At the same time, §2 Art.10 prohibits the abuse of these rights, for example in the form of hate speech. The Convention on Cybercrime extends these rights and obligations to the cyberspace. The EU has incorporated these provisions into its own Charter of Fundamental Rights. Its decision 2008/913/JHA sets further limits to the freedom of expression for the sake of preventing hate speech. Recently, it has also agreed upon a Code of Conduct with social media providers obliging them to more forcefully tackle the problem of online hate speech, defined as “all conduct publicly inciting to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin”. However, this voluntary approach of self-regulation has been criticised for being ineffective. How should the EU’s and its Member States’ position themselves in this multi-level system of rules?

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

Problem Statement

Various explanations for the current appeal of nationalism and populism have been offered.

Firstly, many citizens feel alienated from the political process, resulting in antiestablishment sentiments. From the opposite perspective, Eurosceptic attitudes are often dismissed as ignorant or hateful, further contributing to the perception that European elites do not sufficiently engage with justified concerns of their citizens. Some argue that this means that centre parties have failed to offer solutions for these concerns within the established frameworks, thus pushing many citizens into more radical populist movements. How should more centre-ground parties re-integrate those citizens into the traditional democratic process?

Secondly, there is a deepening distrust towards EU institutions. This distrust is fed by criticism of a democratic deficit within the EU as well as lack of understanding of how the EU works. How can the EU improve its perception as a democratic institution? How can populist movements be incorporated into that process? And can proposals, such as including understanding the functioning of the EU in national school curricular, work?

Thirdly, economic hardships as a result of globalisation pressures and the global financial crisis in 2008 contributed to a radicalisation of public discourse. Many citizens increasingly worry about their economic future, fearing to fall behind. The Euro crisis also witnessed hardening national opinions, with Northern Member States blaming the Southerners for living above their means and vice-versa. This environment of “economic patriotism” was conducive to the growth of nationalism.

The effects of nationalism are just as diverse as its causes. Radicalised political debates nurture an “us-versus-them” thinking, which can culminate into anti-immigrant rhetoric and xenophobia. Many have linked the increasingly intolerant public debate with rising hate-crimes. Hate speech can thus have very real consequences. However, in preventing it, the EU faces the dilemma of balancing freedom of expression with the right to non-discrimination. Electoral success of antiEU parties also has practical implication for the workings of European institutions. Those parties have been accused of blocking any reforms from within the EU for ideological opposition to the idea of the EU as such. Instead of working towards solutions, they are criticised for reinforcing gridlock. Is there a way for the EU to turn the role of these parties more constructive?

Food For Thought

Over the years, the EU has developed many strategies to cope with populist and nationalist challenges, ranging from exclusion to adoption.

What is critical is finding an approach that takes its citizens’ worries seriously without sacrificing the

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

27

Union’s founding values of tolerance, liberalism, and democracy in response to nationalist and illiberal demands. To do this, the Union has to engage directly with its citizens, focus on their justified criticisms, and strengthen the consensus around its basic values. After all, not all concerns raised by populist movements can be outrightly rejected as racist or ill-informed, but point towards real problems of the European project. However, the Union’s ability to react is limited in times when its very legitimacy is questioned.

Further Links

A paper that looks into why extremist right-wing parties are supported and how they can be countered: https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/r0911_ goodwin.pdf An article that talks about populism in Europe and how it affects the EU: http:// carnegieeurope.eu/2016/06/14/can-eu-survive-populism-pub-63804 Paper that describes populism in-depth and describes the historical background: https:// muse-jhu-edu.ezproxy.leidenuniv.nl:2443/article/223242/pdf Europedia, some basic facts on European integration, based on work of Nicholas Moussis: http://www.europedia.moussis.eu/books/Book_2/2/1/4/?all=1 Explaining Workers’ Support for Right-Wing Populist Parties in Western Europe: Evidence from Austria, Belgium, France, Norway, and Switzerland. The title says it all: http://www. jstor.org.ezproxy.leidenuniv.nl:2048/stable/pdf/20445147.pdf Paper that analyses the up and downsides of populism from philosophical viewpoint: http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.leidenuniv.nl:2048/stable/pdf/10.1086/505378.pdf An analysis of radical right-wing populist parties in Western Europe: http://www.jstor.org. ezproxy.leidenuniv.nl:2048/stable/pdf/422034.pdf Radical right-wing populism approached in more than one way: http://www.jstor.org. ezproxy.leidenuniv.nl:2048/stable/pdf/1407611.pdf An analysis of the rise of populism in Europe and the consequences for the EU: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/europe/2016-06-03/rise-populism-europe An article that discusses hate speech: http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2016/10/12/radical-speech-censored/#.WFESgHd0dE4 An article that discusses how Facebook can tackle fake news: http://www.bbc.com/news/ technology-37974306

28

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

THE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, PUBLIC HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY II Implementing eHealth: With growing public health expenditure and the rising need for efficient access to care, in what way should the Member States better implement eHealth to improve current healthcare systems?

by Belle Prinsen (NL) and Peter McManus (UK)

Topic Explanation

How often have you looked up your symptoms on the Internet when you were not feeling well? More and more people turn to the Internet for answers on their medical problems.

Meanwhile, cross-border activities within the European Union (EU) in healthcare are increasing, with patients being treated in other Member States’ hospitals and healthcare professionals exchanging information through information communication technology (ICTs).

Due to improved ICTs, healthcare is no longer solely a national concern. Despite eHealth bringing many advantages, there is an increasing need for efficient healthcare and healthcare costs are rising. Public health expenditures in the EU have grown from 6.4% of GDP in 2000 to 7.8% in 2014 and are expected to rise even more. This is due, in part, to an aging European population and other socioeconomic and cultural factors, such as a rising obesity rate and the delivery of ineffective health services. EHealth could be a key factor in keeping up with these developments, but there are still certain problems to tackle.

For a start, many people still lack the necessary skills to navigate online content effectively. In addition, not all digital platforms are user friendly, making the navigating process extra hard. Another problem is the differences in the healthcare systems of the different Member States, making information exchange and research projects less efficient. The EU aims to improve these issues, ensuring a coherent approach and proper education on the use of eHealth in order to tackle the current problems on health expenditure and the accessibility of care.

Key Actors

EU Member States - hospitals, doctors, health professionals, etc. Naturally, these are key actors in the EU Third Health programme. Ultimately it is the responsibility of Member States to implement eHealth solutions at a national level but the EU supports them in doing so, facilitates cross-border health services and encourages knowledge sharing.

They also play an important role in doing research and promoting eHealth services.

There are numerous health associations in Europe, such as the European Connected Health Alliance (ECHA), the European Public Health Alliance (EPHA) and the European Federation for Medical Informatics (EFMI). They can play an important role in bringing organisations and people together, educating them and representing all sectors of health care. On top of that, they play a role in promoting high standards as well as research and development in the field.

29

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

COCIR is the European Trade Association representing the medical imaging, radiotherapy, health ICT and electromedical industries. Its key objective is to promote “free worldwide trade of innovative medical technology while maintaining the competitiveness of the European medical imaging, radiotherapy, electromedical and health ICT industries”.

By bringing those industries together it plays an important role in the EU framework on eHealth.

The European Commission: As the EU’s executive body, manages and implements EU policies on eHealth and controls the budget. Additionally, it sets objectives and keeps track of the progress made.

Measures in Place

The eHealth Network is the European network existing of Member States’ authorities. It draws up guidelines on the field of eHealth and intents to facilitate access to safe health care as well as improving interoperability between digital health systems of different Member States. It supports a variety of projects under three categories: projects that help the management of certain conditions, projects that innovate the way systems work and promote interoperability between organisations and projects that support eHealth in middle and low income countries. For example, the telemedicine project ELECTOR in Denmark allows Doctors to consult with patients with arthritis, who are geographically isolated.

The Third health programme is the main instrument for delivering the EU’s health strategy and covers the period between 2014 and 2020. Apart from general health, it aims for more innovative and efficient health systems as well as easier access to health care. It works through annual work plans and has a budget of 449.4 million euros. It is a critical, overarching framework by which the EU can deliver on its health strategy, “Together for Health,” which feeds into the Europe 2020 strategy, aiming to create a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy in the EU. Renewing Health is a regional cooperation that aims to implement health-related ICT services with a patient-centred approach, on a large scale. It has already undertaken action in nine European regions and is partially supported by the European Community.

In June 2016, an eHealth week took place in Amsterdam to raise awareness on the issue.

In January 2017, another one will take place in Malta, focusing on giving European citizens access to their personal health data and improving public health through better use of clinical data. Apart from discussing important eHealth related matters, it also helps to promote companies on the field by picking winners for their EU eHealth small and medium sized enterprises’ (SME) competition. One of the winners of 2016, for example, was iHealth, a management platform for chronic diseases.

30

EpSOS was a pilot programme financed by the European Commission from 2008 up to 2014. It was a large-scale operation that included national ministries of health, competence centres, industry and the project management team. Together they created and evaluated a service infrastructure that demonstrates European cross-border cooperation between electronic health record systems. So far, it has been successful in creating clarity and meeting the legal and technical requirements originally set for cross-border data exchange. The EXPAND project will look to follow up on the progress made, however it

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

is anticipated that National Health Services will take forward the recommendations in the final evaluation. Indeed, the eHealth Network has established a subgroup of Member States dedicated to the continuation of epSOS services.

The eHealth Action Plan 2012-2020 is a policy focusing on supporting research, promoting international cooperation, achieving wider interoperability of eHealth services and ensuring wider deployment as well as facilitating uptake. In addition to the Action Plan, a document on telemedicine was issued by the Commission to deal with legal matters such as privacy and data protection. It should be noted that both the Action Plan and the document are mere guidelines and therefore not binding for the Member States.

Problem Statement

A key conflict with e-health is the impact it has on health inequalities which result not only from economic, environmental and lifestyle-related factors, but also from differences in accessing healthcare. On one hand, there is potential for e-health to greatly improve access to healthcare for those who can confidently use the growing number of mobile and online devices for monitoring health and interacting with healthcare. However, those population groups that could most benefit from e-health resources are also those least likely to possess the technology or the digital literacy to do so (Tudor Hart, 1972).1 For example, e-health has great potential to provide better access to healthcare for those in rural areas through tele-consultations or online communication, but this population group is also less likely to have good Internet access. Following from this, is the need to make information in e-health services understandable across population groups.

A further issue that arises is the standardising of information, particularly with regard to mobile applications. However, there is no EU-wide guidance on health-related applications, other than those for a specific diagnostic purpose, meaning the information available and reliability varies from app to app. On one hand, regulating the content of such apps would ensure patient safety and give consumers confidence to use them, however there is a risk of overregulation and stifling innovation. Conflict arises between a “do just enough” attitude seen in the communications industry and the principle of “first, do no harm” favoured in healthcare regulations.

There is no doubt that Electronic Healthcare Records (EHRs) are transforming the way healthcare is delivered, ensuring healthcare professionals have a wealth of information on patients’ past healthcare encounters. However, many concerns over privacy and data security have been raised given the sensitive nature of information stored in EHRs, with for instance the Dutch parliament voting against implementing a nationwide EHR system in 2011. The unintended disclosure of information could negatively impact on citizens personal and professional lives and thus, making systems robust to cyber attack is seen to be essential. A further aspect of this is the significant potential for abuse of the system, and ensuring that only healthcare professionals are accessing data for legitimate purposes. Who should be able to access patient data and how can they do this? Clearly, there is benefit to being able to access records in emergency situations where swift action can be life-saving but should all doctors be able to access all records at all times?

1

Tudor Hart, Julian. (1972) ‘The Inverse Care Law.’ The Lancet , Volume 297 , Issue 7696 , 405 - 412 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(71)92410-X

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

31

Indeed, resolving the privacy question is essential for ensuring public trust in the system, and some would make the case for giving patients’ access to their EHR as a way to do so, a step that could also empower patients to take more control of their health.

However, studies have found no improvement in health outcomes and concerns remain over patients’ ability to sensibly interpret their records as well as further questions about privacy (de Lusignan S, Mold F, Sheikh A, et al., 2014). 2 Electronic healthcare systems can have both positive and negative effects on patient safety. On one hand, qualitative research has shown that EHRs have boosted performance, allowing clinicians’ to find information more easily and ensuring that all notes are legible (Holden, 2011).3 However, such systems can also make the simplest of tasks overly complicated and create unnecessary steps, increasing the opportunity for error, leading to potentially devastating consequences.

Food for Thought

There is no doubt that E-health has enormous potential to mitigate the growing public health expenditure and facilitate better management of chronic diseases. However, issues regarding privacy, infrastructure and patient safety remain. Would a pan European system improve healthcare outcomes or lead to more breaches in privacy? What data should be provided in an Electronic Healthcare Record? Should different people be able to access different information?

Do we need to standardise mobile health applications more to ensure better patient safety or is this over-regulation? Is E-health the answer to health inequalities or will result in groups without access to technology missing out on opportunities to access healthcare?

Further Links

The European Commission Action Plan on E-health (Click on link in “related documents” to access PDF): https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/ehealth-actionplan-2012-2020-innovative-healthcare-21st-century Summary of the Green Paper on M-health that the European Commission published in 2014 along with the response of various stakeholders: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/summary-report-public-consultation-green-paper-mobile-health Video from the eHealth Industries Innovation Centre in Wales explaining the potential of E-health in all aspects of care: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VJtFN382DI Video showing how e-health can facilitate patient involvement in the management of 2

de Lusignan S, Mold F, Sheikh A, et al. (2014) ‘Patients’ online access to their electronic health records and linked online services: a systematic interpretative review.’ BMJ Open; 4: e006021. doi:10.1136/ bmjopen-2014-006021 3 Holden, R. J. (2011). Cognitive performance-altering effects of electronic medical records: An application of the human factors paradigm for patient safety. Cognition, Technology & Work (Online), 13(1), 11–29. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-010-0141-8

32

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

Chronic Conditions, reducing hospitalisation and healthcare costs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyI7mtSFLdo Presentation evaluating the arguments for and against providing patient access to EHR from e-Health week in 2015: https://www.eiseverywhere.com/file_uploads/bef6fc0ffb2ea734c89887c4d2444855_PEREHUDOFF_Patientaccesstotheelectronichealthrecord. pdf Article from the BBC discussing the vast potential of mobile applications in health as well as potential limitations: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-27141119 Coverage of press release from the European Public Health Alliance discussing eHealth inequalities and digital literacy: http://satprnews.com/2016/12/14/e-health-should-notexacerbate-existing-inequalities-ngo-warns/ Politico article discussing Data Protection, Interoperability and access to EHRs: http:// www.politico.eu/sponsored-content/knowledge-is-power-the-data-driven-future-ofhealth-care/

33

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

THE COMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS Debating Opportunity Over Exploitation: With internships becoming crucial for graduates at the start of the career ladder, how should the Member States effectively support its youth in making a smooth transition from education to employment?

By Annie MacConnachie (UK) and Vice-President Mighel Molenkamp (NL)

Topic Explanation

Internships are a crucial stepping stone for young people making the move from education to employment. They provide much needed experience and references and often lead directly to a job offer from the company that accepted the intern. These internships seek to address a number of gaps in the work force, as the lack of relevant skills for available jobs and an education or training mismatch are important factors in youth unemployment. At present, 4.5 million young people aged between 15 and 24 are unemployed in the European Union (EU) and more than 7 million young Europeans aged between 15 and 24 are neither employed nor in education or training (see figure 1).

Figure 1, Eurostat: Employment, education and training status of young people (aged 20–34), EU-28, 2005– 15(%)

At the same time, despite ever increasing numbers of young Europeans going to university and being more educated and skilled than previous generations, young people continue to face significant structural hurdles in obtaining quality employment which respects EU and national standards. Often graduates will work unpaid internships and struggle to move up the career ladder, regardless of their high level of qualification. Without an

34

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

efficient and sustainable quality transition from education to employment in Europe, the youth unemployment crisis cannot be solved. While it is clear that schemes like internships play a vital role in preparing the youth for the job market, these programmes and apprenticeship schemes vary in success and number across the Union. Measures that aim to improve and standardise the quality of internships, such as the European Youth Forum’s “An employer’s guide to quality internships”, are widely disregarded.

Moreover, the financial crisis of 2008 created additional problems for young people trying to access the jobs market. Youth unemployment is more sensitive to the economic cycle than overall unemployment because young people are generally less experienced, indeed the rate of unemployment for young people is more than double the usual unemployment rate. The implementation of effective education, training and skills policies with the support of employers, employment agencies and other relevant stakeholders can help reduce unemployment.

Youth unemployment statistics: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index. php/Unemployment_statistics#Youth_unemployment_trends Skills policies to fight youth unemployment: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/ getDoc.do?type=REPORT&reference=A8-2015-0366&format=XML&language=EN Employers’ guide to internships: http://www.youthforum.org/publication/an-employersguide-to-quality-internships/

Key Actors

Responsibility for employment and social policy lies primarily with national governments.

Thus, EU funding supports and complements their efforts. To counteract the impact of demographic changes, EU employment and social policy is designed to ease the transition from school to work and make it easier to find employment. Other than that, the EU coordinates and monitors national policies and supports training and skills development in Member States. Additionally, the EU promotes social security and inclusion by providing and coordinating funding to help Member States invest in people in areas like training and job-hunting.

The European Commission encourages EU national governments to create job opportunities, reduce labour market disparities, and monitors employment policies in EU countries, such as employment contracts and workplace conduct.

Furthermore, central to this issue are the youth and employers as these are the most directly affected by policy on employment. Young people have a vested interest in being able to gain entry to a graduate job or apprenticeship that bridges the gap from education to employment. Equally, employers need a constant cycle of skilled employees joining, advancing and retiring, so one must be aware of the need to promote young people.

35

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

Measures in Place

The European Social Fund (ESF) funds projects designed to help people improve their skills and job prospects. The European Commission sets funding priorities but is not directly involved in selecting projects. ESF strategy and budget are determined jointly by the European Commission, EU governments, and the European Parliament.

In order to support employment, social policy and labour mobility across the EU, the European Commission directly manages the EU Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI). To apply for funding, eligible organisations must respond to a call for tenders or proposals from the EaSI. With a budget of €6 billion for 2014 - 2020, the Youth Employment Initiative aims to support those “Not in Education, Employment or Training” in regions most affected by youth unemployment. Additionally, EU Member States are developing the Youth Guarantee Implementation Plans to ensure that all youngsters under 25 receive a good-quality offer within four months of leaving education or becoming unemployed. These plans are not implemented by all Member States. For example, in the UK, specific regions qualified for funding and specific goals, such as more affordable childcare were introduced. The plan has reported that in the UK in 2016, youth unemployment rate, and NEET (youth not in education, employment or training) rate have decreased from previously high crisis levels.

The Riga Conclusions on Vocational Education and Training (VET) have put forth several priorities for 2015 - 2020, including the endorsement of non-formal and informal learning as well as the development of skills acquired through initial and continuous VET. Organisations like the European Student Placement and Internship Organisation offer help in searching the large variety of options available.

Problem Statement

With millions of young people in Europe constantly struggling to find a job, the economic recession has forced many to accept unpaid internships or become long-term unemployed – which leads to a lack of confidence, social exclusion, poorer health, depression and even suicide. Without a doubt, there is a need to support high-quality internships and tackle the causes of skills mismatch and its impact on the labour market. The disparities in opportunities offered within countries and also across Europe force many young people to move to find opportunities, often ones that do not give a salary. (see figure 2) Figure 2, Eurostat: Young people (aged 15–29) neither in employment nor in education and training (NEET) by broad groups of country of birth

36

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

There is a pressing need to combat high youth unemployment and support targeted measures that aid young people in their transition from education to work. A generational gap in the workforce will cause shortages in years to come. It is most beneficial for governments, graduates, national economies and employers to have as many people in work as possible and to have skills suitably utilised and distributed. Youth unemployment has to be addressed while remembering that employment and social policy is primarily a responsibility of national governments.

In many countries, with a set national minimum wage, trainees are hired without pay.

Since many interns are not paid, they are also not provided with any social security or important health insurance by their employer, thus leading to a group of unprotected individuals who lack the support they require.

The EU provides corporate social responsibility (CSR) agendas, which are designed to help remind businesses of their responsibility for their impact on society. They enhance market rewards for CSR and also push to integrate CSR into education and training.

Food for Thought

All of the above prompts several questions: It is clear that there are a multitude of current measures in place to address youth unemployment. So how are the current measures and schemes in place to aid the education to employment transition failing and how can this be addressed? How can the overall quality of internships and apprenticeships be improved and standardised so that all interns and apprentices benefit? In an attempt to widen perspectives to include noninternship employment options, what are the other options in place for careers in which internships are not offered and how can they be expanded?

It must be remembered that change can be difficult as employment and social policy are mainly dictated by Member States. How can the EU best promote growth in this area, while remembering that employment and social policy is primarily a responsibility of national governments? CSR and internship guidelines have recently given employers much more responsibility for their employees. How can current guidelines for programmes like apprenticeships be improved or better adhered to? As it is always important to consider other factors, are there other factors that contribute to the high youth unemployment figures and if so what are those factors? How can special attention be paid to decreasing the disparities in opportunities for graduates both within Member States and in Europe as a whole? With particular consideration on how to tackle “migration culture� where all graduates move to a certain area to begin working.

Further Links

Corporate Social Responsibility: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/corporate-socialresponsibility_en Migration Pathways case study: http://www.cpc.ac.uk/publications/cpc_briefing_ papers/pdf/BP9_Migration_Pathways_of_UK_Graduates.pdf

37

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

Youth unemployment in statistics: https://www.statista.com/statistics/266228/youthunemployment-rate-in-eu-countries/ Reviewing the Riga Conclusions: https://eu2015.lv/news/media-releases/2389ministers-agree-on-riga-conclusions-to-boost-competitive-and-innovative-vocationaleducation-and-training Tackling Youth Unemployment: http://www.global-economic-symposium.org/ knowledgebase/the-global-society/tackling-youth-unemployment/proposals/tacklingyouth-unemployment Closing the gap between education and employment: http://oecdeducationtoday. blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/closing-gap-between-education-and.html Education to Employment: http://www.forbes.com/sites/sebastienturbot/2016/01/28/ education-employment-skills-gap/#543436ec73cf

38

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

MAASTRICHT2017 IS MADE POSSIBLE BY

PRINTING MADE POSSIBLE BY

MAASTRICHT2017

The 17th National Selection Conference of EYP The Netherlands

MAASTRICHT2017 Booklet design by Tom Cobbenhagen Cover photo by Wouter Postma