EFO15 Pilsen Resoution Booklet

7/25/2019 EFO15 Pilsen Resoution Booklet

1/24

EUROPEAN FORUM PILSEN 2015

RESOLUTION BOOKLET


2/24


3/24

General Assembly of the European Forum Pilsen 2015, 16. 8. 2015, Magistrt msta Plzn

TABLE OF CONTENT

Procedure of the General Assembly

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on International Trade

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Culture and Education

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Human Rights


4/24


PROCEDURE OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

General Rules

The Board will recognise committees to speak when and only when their committee placard has been raised. The Board willrecognise all committees fairly and attempt to give each committee the same number of points, where possible. Whenspeaking during the open debate, delegates should refrain from making multiple points.

All points will be allocated at the Boards absolute discretion.

Procedure and time settings

Presentation of the Motion for a Resolution (by the Board)

Reading of the Operative Clauses

Defence Speech (3 minutes)

Attack Speech (3 minutes)

Response to the Attack Speech

Open Debate

Summation Speech (3 minutes)

Voting Procedure

Announcement of voting results by the Board.

Explanation of the placards

Point of Personal PrivilegeRequest for a delegate to repeat a point which was inaudible, for instance due to microphone failure.

Point of OrderIf a delegate feels the Board has not followed the correct procedures of the General Assembly, they may request their Chairto raise this placard.

Direct ResponseTwice per debate, each committee may use their Direct Response placard to ensure they will be awarded the next point bythe Board. A Direct Response can only be used to refer to and discuss the point made directly beforehand. If there are multiplecommittees wishing to make a Direct Response, the point will be awarded at the Boards discretion.


5/24


Explanation of Speeches

Defence SpeechOne member of the Proposing Committee delivers the Defence Speech from the podium. It is used to explain the rationaleof the overall lines of the Resolution and to convince the Plenary that the Resolution is worthy of being adopted. This speechcan last a maximum of three minutes.

Attack SpeechesAn individual Delegate from a Committee other than that proposing the Resolution at hand delivers an Attack Speech fromthe podium. It reflects an individual opinion and is used to point out the flaws of the approach taken by the ProposingCommittee and should propose alternative solutions. The speech should disagree with the overall direction or aim of a

resolution.

Summation SpeechOne or two members of the Proposing Committee deliver the Summation Speech from the podium; the microphone canonly be passed once. It is used to summarise the Debate and must contain both a summary and response to all the main pointsraised.


6/24


MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BYTHE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE

Considering the controversy surrounding the Transatlantic Trade andInvestment Partnership (TTIP) with the USA, how should the EU proceed with

these talks to ensure a set of measures, which benefit EU citizens as well as theEUs economy?

Submitted by: Paul GESLAIN (FR), Simon GUTSCHLHOFER (AT), Vclav MALINA (CZ),Magali MEDINGER (LU), Luong NGUYEN (CZ), Sofie SCHRYVERS (BE), KemalSOMDAS (TR), Julia WODZISKA (PL), Milana Yandieva (Chairperson, CZ).

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Fully aware that the TTIP could boost the EUs economy by:

i. creating an estimated 400,000 additional jobs,1

ii. increasing the EUs overall Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 0.5%,2

iii. fostering international trade,

B.

Having examined similar free trade agreements (FTAs), such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)3and the USKorea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS),4the outcome of which was less beneficial than initiallycalculated,

C.

Observing the lack of transparency of the negotiations, causing controversy and distrust of the TTIP,

D. Alarmed by the possibility of US companies taking advantage of the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS),5

E. Deeply regretting the ongoing lobbying of enterprises during TTIP negotiations, potentially leading to theprioritisation of firms interests over the interests of EU citizens;

1Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership The Economic Analysis Explained, European Commission, September 20132ibid.3North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is a free trade agreement between the USA, Canada, and Mexico. (Office of theUnited States Trade Representative)4USKorea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) is a free trade agreement between the USA and South Korea. (ibid.)5The Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) is a mechanism included in international investment agreements to ensure thatcommitments to protect mutual investments are respected by involved countries. (European Commission)


7/24


F. Noting with regret the sparse involvement of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in TTIP negotiations,

G. Deeply conscious of the differences between EU and US legal classifications of:

i. chemicals,

ii. genetically modified organisms (GMOs),

iii.

hormonal growth promotants (HGPs),6

iv. animal cloning,

v. animal feed additives,

H. Bearing in mind the potential losses for EU companies caused by US companies occupying the newly opened market incase of privatisation of public services in the EU,

I. Concerned that EU workers rights and data protection standards would be jeopardised by a harmonisation of EU and

US standards,

J. Recognising that the entrance of fracking products to the EU markets through TTIP, as well as potential frackingactivity of both EU and US enterprises, can result in damage to the environment;

1. Recommends the European Commission to assign a team of experts to conduct further research on the potentialaftermath of TTIP by examining similar prior FTAs;

2. Urges the European Commission to publish officially confirmed drafts of the TTIP mandate;

3.

Encourages leaders of trade unions and the Committee of Regions

7

to register to attend the rounds of TTIPnegotiations;

4. Further requests that in the case that an ISDS lawsuit is ruled in favour of a private US company, the compensation paidby the EU Member States governments is:

a) not higher than the initial financial value of investment,

b)

determined according to the importance of an investment for a concrete firm;

5. Calls for ensuring the obligatory enlistment of TTIP lobbyists in the EU Transparency Register8by the EuropeanCommission;

6. Calls upon the European Commission to ensure that SME representatives from all Member States are present at eachround of negotiations;

7. Emphasises that EU product standards should not be negotiated on unless US product standards are higher than those ofthe EU;

8. Trusts the set guidelines of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 9to determine the safety of US imported goods;

9. Requests Member States to ensure only EU companies have the right to provide services in respective sectors in case ofprivatisation of specific public services and during public procurement proceedings;

6Hormonal Growth Promotant (HGP) is a supplement of natural hormones of oestrogen, progesterone and testosterone stimulatinggrowth. (Meat & Livestock Australia)7Committee of Regions (COR) is the EUs assembly of regional and local representatives.8EU Transparency Register is a list of EU companies and their respective lobbying interests. (European Commission)9European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) provides independent scientific advice to member national authorities on existing andemerging risks in food safety.


8/24


10. Endorses that data protection and workers rights should not be included in TTIP negotiations;

11. Approves of the Member States freedom to decide on their own fracking policies, as we ll as the amount of shale gasimports and exports.


9/24


MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BYTHE COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL MARKET AND CONSUMER

PROTECTION

New industry: The Sharing Economy is a modern phenomenon whereconsumer choice has outpaced consumer protection legislation. How should theEU respond to call for increased regulation on services such as Uber and AirBnB,and should protections be put in place for incumbent businesses being displaced?

Submitted by: Serena DIBARI (IT), Silvia GROTHE (ES), Nadja KANKARE (FI), Valentine SzitaMARSHALL (NL), Marketa OVECKOVA (CZ), Ben van de RUIT (NL), IvanSYSOEV (CY), Aline VERBEKE (BE), Adam WESTLAKE (CZ), DaryaSavishchava (Chairperson, BY).


A. Bearing in mind that the sharing economy is beneficial for consumers as it enables access to goods and services at adecreased cost and increased convenience compared to more traditional purchasing models,

B.

Noting with satisfaction the reduced impact on the environment associated with reusing and recycling materials in thisway,

C. Believing that the explosive growth of business models based on the principles of the sharing economy are caused by:

i) the financial and economic crisis in 2008,

ii)

digitalisation,iii)decrease of consumer trust in large corporations,

D. Realising that regulatory differences for consumer-to-consumer (C2C)10platforms in Member States make consumerprotection standards difficult to maintain,

E. Noting with concern that some activities of C2C businesses are not covered by current regulations imposed onincumbents11leading to unfair competition,

F. Keeping in mind that incumbents lobby for protection against the increased competition they face from C2C platforms,

10Consumer-to-consumer (C2C) - a business model where two individuals transact or conduct business with each other directly andprivately.11Incumbent firms a company which is already in position in a market with an established market share


10/24


G. Deeply concerned by the lack of clarity regarding provider and consumer liability in the event of harm or damagearising during a C2C transaction,

H. Taking into account that the shared economy is based on trust, which can leave consumers vulnerable if online reviewsystems are abused;

1. Suggests the European Shared Economy Coalition (ESEC) conducts research and provides a report on currentlegislative frameworks in Member States to assess potential loopholes, best practices and possible issues for sharingeconomy business models;

2. Encourages the European Commission to cooperate with ESEC in creation of a common legislative framework for theregulation of shared economy business models concerning:

a) provider and consumer liability and safety,

b)

quality of the provided goods and services;

3. Further appeals to the operators of sharing economy platforms to clarify provider and consumer liabilities in case ofdamage or harm in the terms and conditions for the service;

4. Urges the European Commission to initiate legislation that would legally define C2C service providers whose annualincome from the usage of C2C platforms exceeds the national minimum wage as sole traders12;

5. Calls upon Member States to impose the same tax and labour legislation applied to incumbents on users of sharedeconomy platforms;

6.

Advises operators of C2C platforms to implement more reliable online ranking systems for provided goods and services,with provisions for:

a)

reviews for transactions that can be verified;

b) official ratings by accredited state agencies.

12Sole traders are individuals who are considered self-employed and responsible for all aspects of their business.


11/24


MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BYTHE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY,RESEARCH AND ENERGY

Topic: From Fracking to Fission: What energy mix should the EU and MemberStates aim for in order to best meet the demand for energy security, whilst also

respecting environmental and economic concerns?

Submitted by: Flore CORNU (BE), Ioanna DROUSSIOTOU (CY), Tamara Happ (NL), FilippoLINZI (IT), Hoang NGUYEN (CZ), Ana REIS (PT ), Michal SKLEN (CZ), JulVan den BROECK (BE), Francesco M. Delorenzi (Chairperson, BE).


A.

Alarmed by the current unsustainable energy mix in Europe and the impact it has on the environment,B. Viewing with appreciation the EU taking a global leading role in the switch to cleaner energy resources,

C.

Believing that converting to greener energy offers great potential to foster economic growth and create new jobs,

D. Noting with regret that the surge of energy subsidies is distorting the energy market and has caused increasedconsumption responsible for 36%13of the carbon emissions between 1980 and 2010,

E. Being aware of insufficient use of existing interconnecting technologies14which have a potential to provide a moreefficient access to energy,

F. Noting with deep concern the 15% decrease in energy production and 30% increase in energy import between 1990and 2013 resulting in energy dependency and therefore forcing the EU to spend more than 1,000,000,000 per day on

energy supply15,G.

Disturbed by the fact that Russian state-owned energy corporations abuse their dominant market position and chargethe more energy-dependent Member States unjustifiable prices,

H. Concerned by a subjective lack of trust among EU citizens towards the safety of nuclear energy,

I. Keeping in mind that extraction of shale gas through fracking has been forbidden in 5 Member States due toenvironmental concerns;

13The Economist January 201514Interconnectors allow Member States with an energy surplus to channel their extra power to countries dealing with shortages.15EU28 Data Sheets 2015


12/24


1. Calls upon the European Commission to create a long-term plan on the EUs energy mix with the following criteria tobe included in the 2050 Energy Strategy:

a)

a minimum of 75% of the energy mix generated through renewable resources and nuclear power,

b)

a shift in the nuclear power generation from fission to fusion,

c) a maximum of a 7.5% share of solid fuels such as coal,

d) obligatory reporting of Member States on their progress towards indicated goals provided every 5 years;

2. Expresses its hope for the EU to take a strong position at the Paris Climate Change Conference in December 2015 witha focus on:

a) increasing household energy efficiency,

b) reducing greenhouse gas emissions,

c)

encouraging the rest of the world to follow a similar framework;

3. Recommends the European Commission to enforce a 5% annual decrease of energy subsidies;

4. Encourages the European Commission to include the following components in the Energy Union strategy:

a) smart energy grids which comprise of high-tech interconnectors and upgraded storage facilities,

b) a centralised coordination working group under the auspices of the Directorate General for Energy (DGENER);

5.

Emphasises the importance of energy consumption sustainability achieved by:

a) diversifying energy imports in order to reduce the EUs dependency on Russian gas suppliers,

b)

establishing further trade relations with other partners such the U.S., Norway and North-African countries,c) sufficient usage of domestic renewable resources;

6. Recommends that deficits in energy production could be met by the reintroduction of previously phased-out nuclearpower plants, while:

a) stimulating further development of existing renewable resources,

b) strongly focussing on further research of nuclear fusion,

c) raising awareness about the beneficial nature and safety of nuclear energy;

7. Accepts the independent choice of Member States towards exploitation of fracking in their energy, but recommendsthat where fracking is permitted, experts appointed by the European Commissions DG ENER should monitor theprocess.


13/24


MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BYTHE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES,JUSTICE AND HOME

AFFAIRS

With the threat of mass surveillance, censorship and cybercrime looming, how

should the EU reform its legislation concerning the Internet, digital media anddigital communications, in order to protect the rights and liberties of its citizens,whilst ensuring national security and continuing to foster economic growth and

innovation?

Submitted by: Maria COSSI (IT), Hannah DELAHUNTY (FR), Michaela FRIOV (CZ),Ceddrich GORDENNE (BE), Erik KOEKEN (NL), Aleksander ARSKI (PL),Victoria Gil MARTINEZ (ES), Utkan Dora NCL (TR), Ada PAVEL (RO), DennisPatriarcheas (Chairperson, GR)


A. Convinced that mass surveillance violates citizens' right to privacy, despite its contribution to national security,

B. Noting with deep concern the failure of legislation to keep pace with technology, in particular:

i) the General Data Protection Regulation16,

ii) the Framework decision combating Fraud and Counterfeiting of non-cash means of payment 17,

iii)

the ePrivacy directive18,

C. Fully aware of that differing national interests pose a barrier to creating a common policy on cyber security,

D. Fully supporting the implementation of EU citizensright to be forgotten19,

16The General Data Protection Regulation is a single law unifying data protection within the European Union.

17The aim of this framework decision is to supplement the measures already taken by the Council to combat fraud involving non-cashmeans of payment. In particular, it defines the types of fraudulent behaviour that can be considered criminal offences punishable in all EUMember States.

18A directive on Privacy and Electronic Communications dealing with confidentiality of information, treatment of traffic data, spam andcookies.19A right to have personal information deleted from a second party's databases.


14/24


E. Deeply concerned by the amount of personal data and private information held by large corporations,

F. Bearing in mind that only a third of Europeans are aware of the existence of National Public Authority responsible forprotecting their rights regarding their personal data,20

G.

Noting with regret the low number of shoppers who feel safe making online transactions due to insecurities caused bycybercrime21,

H. Contemplating the current technological inaccuracy to identify and target specific content to block, resulting in under-or over-blocking,

I. Expressing its dissatisfaction towards the potential abuse of personal data by large corporations who exploit data for thepurposes of advertisements and increasing prices for certain customers through the use of cookies22,

J. Recognising the lack of sufficient information, awareness, and tools regarding the risks of using the Internet,

K.

Deeply disturbed by the fact that net neutrality and the right to use the Internet are not implemented in the legislationsof all Member States,

1. Calls upon the European Commission to initiate legislation harmonising data retention rules between all MemberStates, prioritising the right to respect private life and the protection of personal data;

2.

Further encourages the enforcement of the aforementioned law by a brigade within Europol23composed of agentsdispatched in all National Data Protection Authorities, imposing financial penalties for unjustified breaches of the law;

3.

Emphasises the importance of the creation of an EU Internet Charter by the European Commission, clearly stating EUcitizens rights regarding the Internet including:

a) the right to be forgotten,

b) the right to use the Internet,

c)

net neutrality,

d) protection from cyber-crime;

4. Urges the establishment of a multilateral Intelligence Codexfor intelligence services by the Council of Ministers,which would lay down rules concerning cooperation in order to fight terrorism and organised crime;

5. Further requests that the Intelligence Codexdata is used only for the purposes for which they were collected, in orderto ensure the citizens right to privacy;

6. Recommends granting an authorisation to assemble a permanent team composed of legal specialists by the European

Commission, which would focus on adjusting the aforementioned law as the technology advances;7. Expresses its hope to achieve a single common legislation regarding cyber security in Horizon 2020;

8.

Encourages the enlargement of the European Consumer Centres24(ECC) scope of action by allowing citizens toreport any cyber-attack or privacy violation they are victims of;

20Special Eurobarometer 359, Attitudes on Data Protection and Electronic Identity in the EU21Digital Agenda for Europe: Pillar III22A message given to a Web browser by a Web server, stored in a text file. The message is then sent back to the server each time thebrowser requests a page from the server.23The Police Office of the EU.24The European Consumer Centres promote the understanding of EU consumers' rights and assists in resolving complaints aboutpurchases made in another country of the network, when travelling or shopping online.


15/24


9. Further recommends the ECC to incorporate an assistance team that would assist victims and inform them about theirrights, the relevant authorities, and basic guidelines for safe use of the Internet;

10.

Calls upon the European Commission to encourage the reinforcement of security measures during online transactions,encouraging widespread adoption of PIN transaction security devices by banks25and further development of two factorauthentication technology26;

11. Supports the inclusion of a research programme in the EU budget, which would improve the website-blockingtechnology;

12.

Recommends the Directorate General on Justice and Consumers to advocate the banning of cookies which are used toincrease prices of products;

13. Endorses the development the European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA)27initiative of EuropeanCyber Security Month (ECSM)28by holding:

a)

workshops in Internet safety for all age groups,b) conferences for students;

14.

Emphasises the need for the implementation of the ECSM at a local level and its long-term continuation with:

a) EU-subsidised training sessions for web-users on cyber security,

b)

EU-organised seminars for enterprises;

15. Calls for the creation of sub-organisation within ENISA assisting victims of online crime and making citizens aware ofthe importance and implications of cyber criminality;

16. Calls upon the ENISA to financially award online retailers with a high degree of cyber security, and allow the retailersto promote this certification on their website;

17. Suggests the inclusion of a cyber-safety module in each Member States secondary school IT programmes.

25Devices made available by banks to provide two-factor authentication when making transactions.26Two-factor authentication is a technology that provides identification of users by means of the combination of two differentcomponents.27European Network and Information Security Agency works for the improvement of network and information security; its experts alsopublish reports on the status quo and points for improvement and encourage cooperation between Member States.28European Cyber Security Month is a European Union advocacy campaign, which aims to promote cyber security among citizens,change their perception of cyber-threats and provide up to date security information, through education and sharing good practices.


16/24


MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BYTHE COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AND MONETARY AFFAIRS

In the aftermath of the Greek default and with rising tensions in the Eurozone,how can the EU reform the legislation around the Euro, and what measures

should be taken in order to secure the future of the shared currency?Submitted by: Benjamin BIENERT (FR), Ana CHARLO (ES), Tor FRYER PETERSSON (SE),

Cansu KOLAY (TR), Michal KYTNAR (CZ), Marilena PAPACHRISTODOULOU(GR), Roberta PISCITELLI (IT), Nicole TLASKAL (AT), Isaac VAARZON MOREL(NL), Nicklas Kvamees (Chairperson, SE).


Fiscal policy coordination and enforcement

A.

Bearing in mind that fiscal integration in Europe through increased EU influence over fiscal policy29would:

i) increase coordination between fiscal and monetary policy30within the eurozone, thereby increasing economicstability,

ii) reduce an individual eurozone countrys ability to conduct unsustainable fiscal policy,

iii)

further economic integration between Member States,

iv) stabilise the euro by dampening the effects of supply or demand shocks31,

B. Further bearing in mind that fiscal integration, is problematic as:

i) Member States do not necessarily have the same political objectives, necessitating different fiscal policies,

29Fiscal policyis a set of government spending policies typically conducted through altering spending or taxation. It aims to affectunemployment and growth as well as stabilise the economy over a business cycle, by directly affecting the overall demand in theeconomy, the distribution of income, and levels of investment and saving. Within the EU, fiscal policy is conducted individually by eachMember State though some coordinating agreements exist, such as the Stability and Growth Pact and the European Fiscal Compact.30Monetary policycontrols the supply of money in the economy, primarily by setting interest rates and setting reserve requirements forbanks. Its aims are to maintain price stability maintaining low, stable inflation and stabilise the economy over a business cycle in termsof growth and unemployment. Within the eurozone, monetary policy is conducted by the European Central Bank.31Supply or demand shocksare sudden, unpredictable increases or decreases in the demand or supply for a good or a service, and cancause macroeconomic imbalances and instabilities.


17/24


ii) Member States ability to adapt fiscal policy to their country-specific problems is reduced, potentially breechingthe EUs principle of subsidiarity32,

iii)

increasing EU influence over fiscal policy potentially threatens national sovereignty,

C.

Having concluded that the inefficiency of the present-day form of European fiscal coordination is a result of theinsufficient enforcement of common fiscal provisions,

D. Further concluding that the reluctance to impose sanctions upon the 18 out of 28 Member States33which violate thefiscal provisions set forth by the Stability and Growth Pact34(SGP) and the European Fiscal Compact35(EFC) results inwidespread disregard for these provisions,

E. Fully aware that the EU undermines its authority on enforcing fiscal policy coordination by providing bailouts tocountries which violate provisions in the SGP and the EFC,

F. Concerned that some Member States prioritise short-term political goals over long-term economic stability, which in

many cases has lead to unsustainable public finances,Assistance to distressed economies

G.

Affirming the need to assess possible sovereign bailouts of Member States which already have received bailouts against adifferent set of criteria than for Member States who have not,

H. Appreciating the founding of the European Stability Mechanism36(ESM), even though eurozone countries exposethemselves to a high financial risk when giving bailouts to distressed countries,

I. Deeply concerned by the risk that bailing out countries with distressed economic situations might cause moral hazard37,

Monetary policy

J.

Realising that the monetary policy of the European Central Bank cannot be sufficiently adapted to every individual

eurozone countrys macroeconomic situation,K. Emphasising that successful fiscal integration can lessen the negative effects of the difficulties with adapting monetary

policy to suit each eurozone countrys specific macroeconomic situation,

Exclusion from the eurozone

L. Having considered the negative effects of excluding a country under severe economic stress from the eurozone,including diminished trust in the monetary union,

M.

Guided by the positive effects of excluding a distressed country from the eurozone, such as:

32The principle of subsidiarity, as is defined by article 5(3) of the TEU, states that the EU shall only act if the objectives of the proposedaction cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States [] but can rather [] be better achieved at Union level.33As of 2014, 18 out of 28 Member States were in violation of either the debt or deficit limits set forth by the SGP and the EFC.34TheStability and Growth Pact(SGP) is an agreement aiming to coordinate Member States fiscal policies, and includes provisionslimiting sovereign debt to 60 % of GDP and budget deficit to 3 % of GDP. The SGP has three main components: the preventive arm, thecorrective arm, and enforcement. Under enforcement, eurozone countries found not to comply with the preventive and corrective armsof the SGP can be fined up to 0.5 % of GDP35TheEuropean Fiscal Compact (EFC) is largely a stricter version of the SGP signed by Member States except the United Kingdom,Croatia and the Czech republic. Unlike the SGP, it binds only eurozone countries. In addition to the provisions in the SGP, the EFC alsorequires its signatories to implement budget deficit correction mechanisms into national law36TheEuropean Stability Mechanism(ESM) is a permanent emergency fund for lending money from capital markets in order to assistcountries with lending difficulties. Its capital is partly sourced from the eurozone countries and primarily from capital markets, and has amaximum lending capacity of EUR 500 billion. It replaces the previous, temporary crisis resolution mechanisms the European FinancialStability Facility and the European Financial Stability Mechanism.37Moral hazardarises whenever a party to an agreement has an incentive to act against the interests of others. For example a country, ifsufficiently convinced it will receive a bailout should it encounter fiscal problems, could be prompted to undertake excessive risks.


18/24


i) short-term devaluation of the countrys new currency, making the countrys export more competitive and inthe medium term boost its competitiveness,

ii)

strengthening, unifying and stabilising the countries remaining in the monetary union;

Fiscal policy coordination and enforcement

1.

Declares fiscal integration through a European fiscal union not to be desirable;

2. Expresses its conviction that the present-day form of fiscal coordination would be sufficient, if properly enforced;

3. Affirms that Member States in strained economic situations should be subject to sanctions when not taking propermeasures towards achieving sustainable public finances as required by the SGP and the EFC;

4.

Supports the amendment of the SGP so that any country with an on-going Excessive Deficit Procedure may not takepart in a vote in the Council of the EU about imposing sanctions upon a Member State under the SGP;

5.

Stresses that Member States who apply for or receive sovereign bailouts ought to conduct comprehensive structuralreforms;

6. Encourages Member States who breach the fiscal soundness criteria of the SGP and the EFC38, to have representativesfrom the European Commission observe and provide advice at national budget negotiations;

Assistance to distressed economies

7. Reaffirms sovereign bailouts as a measure only to be considered when all other options have been exhausted;

8. Calls upon the Board of Governors of the ESM not to grant ESM bailout funds to Member States who already received

bailouts but refused to implement agreed upon reforms;9. Urges the Board of Governors of the ESM to enter provisions into any future bailout agreements as to make bailout

funds paid out over an extended period of time, with later payments conditional upon the countrys successfulimplementation of agreed upon reforms;

Exclusion from the eurozone

10. Further calls upon the European Council to initiate a treaty change amending the Treaty on the European Union(TEU) in order to allow for a eurozone country, to be excluded from the eurozone via unanimous decision by the EuroSummit, the country in question not taking part in the decision;

11. Affirms that a country that is excluded from the eurozone through the aforementioned procedure should be allowed tore-join the eurozone only once it again meets the convergence criteria39.

38The fiscal soundness criteriaof the SGP and the EFC requires all Member States to have a government budget deficit of no more than3 % of GDP, and a government debt-to-GDP ratio of no more than 60 %.39

The convergence criteriaare the set of criteria that a country has to meet in order to be eligible to join the eurozone. The criteria are:(i) price stability, (ii) soundness of public finances (budget deficit), (iii) sustainability of public finances (government debt-to-GDP), (iv)exchange-rate stability, and (v) interest rate levels.


19/24


MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BYTHE COMMITTEE ON CULTURE AND EDUCATION

How can the EU influence the education and training of its citizens, as well astheir job mobility, in order to ensure a balanced workforce that meets the

changing skill demands of the labour market?

Submitted by: Beatrice GILUI (IT), Lukas ISCHLSTGER (AT), Stella Celine KIM (DE), ArnaudLAUREYS (BE), Ji PALOUNEK (CZ), Pedro ROLO (PT), Ayla SENTURK (TR),Bo van DAELE (BE), Anna WILK (PL), Margot Sulvic (Chairperson, FR)


A.

Alarmed by the lack of communication between educational institutions and employers leading to:

i) a mismatch between competencies required by employers and those taught to the future workforce,

ii) ineffective career guidance for students,

B. Keeping in mind that both geographical and occupational job mobility 40are limited for workers by languageproficiency and issues concerning recognition of qualifications,

C. Deeply concerned by the reluctance of European citizens, notably Vocational Education and Training (VET) graduates,to accept low-skilled jobs due to low wages and unsatisfying working conditions,

D. Aware of the increasing number41of young Europeans Not in Employment, Education or Training (NEETs),

E.

Noting with regret the lack of quality apprenticeships and internships in national educational systems,F.

Expressing its appreciation of dual educational systems, combining both theoretical and practical education,

G. Observing the lack of information on already existing European initiatives, aiming to encourage both job mobility andalternatives to traditional education, such as the European Employment Services (EURES) and the European Alliancefor Apprenticeships (EAfA);

1. Calls upon Member States to implement a minimum wage for low-skilled jobs to increase their attractiveness for EUcitizens;

40Ability to work in another country or in a different position.41Eurostat December 2014


20/24


2. Strongly encourages educational institutions and companies to improve their collaborative effort to anticipate the needsof the labour market through improved communication and partnerships;

3.

Encourages Member States to implement specific programmes targeting the reintegration of NEETs into the labourmarket by offering them additional education and providing help with job research;

4. Strongly encourages the standardisation of university curricula throughout the EU in order to allow a systematicimplementation of the Bologna Process42;

5. Further recommends the implementation of dual educational systems in every EU Member State;

6. Stresses the importance of increasing the number of internships in order to enable students to gain working experienceand increase their chances to find a job after graduation;

7. Strongly recommends Member States to encourage additional education and training for already qualified people inorder to enable them to increase their range of competency and occupational mobility;

8.

Suggests the implementation of compulsory Information Technology (IT) classes for students to meet the changing ITskill demand;

9.

Calls upon Member States to support the integration of workers from other EU countries through:

a) language and culture courses,

b)

child and health care support,

c) support in finding accommodation;

10. Draws attention to the importance of the promotion of EU initiatives such as the Youth Guarantee43through socialmedia, press, and other forms of advertisement.

42Aiming to ensure compatibility between similar diploma in participating Member States.43Plan to ensure access to job, apprenticeship, traineeship or education for people under 25 years old, within four months of formallyleaving education or being unemployed.


21/24


MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BYTHE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS

With current migration mechanisms failing both for the vulnerable seekingrefuge and the Member States attempting to accommodate them, how should the

EU and Member States adjust their stance on refugees and asylum seekers in

order to fulfil their humanitarian duty to the people fleeing their home countries?

Submitted by: Claire ANGELOPODOU (GR), Ins FRANA (PT), Alec LAMBERTS (BE), RicardaPFINGSTL (AT), Nikola RADULOVI(RS), Martina Doria SENDIL (ES), EleonoraVILLA (IT), Luc VORSTEVELT (NL), Lena Strehmann (Chairperson, AT).


A.

Deeply disturbed by the circumstances which force hundreds of thousands44of people to leave their countries to seekrefuge, such as abuses of fundamental human rights, civil war, and extensive poverty in the refugees countries of origin,

B. Concerned by the high number of fatalities incurred by asylum seekers attempting to reach Europe by boat,

C. Taking note of the Council Directive 2001/51/EC45, which states that airlines have to pay for the journey back to theillegal immigrants countries of origin if they are not given refugee status once they arrive in the EU,

D.

Aware that this forces the use of dangerous and illegal transportation by boat, the cost of which is up to three timeshigher46than the cost of a journey to Europe by airplane,

E. Further noting with concern that due to the Council Directive 2001/51/EC, airlines do not risk transporting illegalimmigrants without a visa,

F. Noting with regret that the material reception conditions47, as agreed upon in the Council Directive2003/9/EC48,areonly provided in the reception centres and therefore not available for every refugee arriving in the EU,

G. Fully aware of the unequal distribution of refugees in the EU,

44Al Jazeera News 2015.45The Council Directive 2001/51/EC supplements the provisions of Article 26 of the Convention implementing the SchengenAgreement of 14 June 1985.46Foundation for Economic Education 2015.47Member States must guarantee certain material reception conditions, in particular accommodation, food, and clothing; in kind or in theform of a financial allowance.48The Council Directive 2003/9/EC lays down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=celex:32003L0009http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=celex:32003L0009http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=celex:32003L0009http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=celex:32003L0009


22/24


H. Alarmed by the Member States failure to implement the agreements made in the Common European Asylum Systemdue to:

i)

the fear of the loss of national cultural values caused by the refugees influence,

ii)

poor social integration of the refugees,

iii) citizens anticipating decreased job prospects as a result of the refugees becoming employed,

iv) the high costs of providing shelters and basic needs for the refugee incurred by Member States,

I. Recognising the heavy administrative burden and the long processing time for asylum applications,

J. Noting with concern the rise of anti-immigration political parties in some Member States;

1.

Calls upon the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to further engage inthe improvement of the political situation in the refugees countries of origin by developing diplomatic relationshipswith the EU and these countries;

2. Calls for increased patrolling by Frontex49at the European coast of the Mediterranean to tackle human trafficking byarresting smugglers;

3.

Further suggests the establishment of a database storing detailed information on every illegal immigrant, which iscollected by case workers at the airport of departure, in order to assess their eligibility for asylum once in the EU;

4.

Urges Member States and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to increase the number of reception centres at thecoastal areas and thereby provide basic needs and necessary material for more refugees as agreed upon in the CouncilDirective2003/9/EC;

5.

Further requests that Member States provide accommodation for refugees by repurposing empty buildings andequipping them with electricity and water;

6. Invites the European Commission to encourage the equal distribution of refugees among the Member States inaccordance with the criteria agreed upon in the European Agenda on Migration;

7. Encourages Member States to provide educational programmes for refugees aiming to improve their social integration;

8.

Further recommends that Member States and NGOs establish a sensitisation campaign aimed at ameliorating the rise ofanti-immigration political parties, consisting of:

a) seminars,

b) school projects,

c)

an audio-visual media campaign.

49Frontex promotes, coordinates and develops European border management in line with the EU Fundamental Rights Charter; applyingthe concept of Integrated Border Management.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=celex:32003L0009http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=celex:32003L0009http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=celex:32003L0009http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=celex:32003L0009http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=celex:32003L0009


23/24



24/24

THE EUROPEAN FORUM PILSEN 2015 IS ORGANISED UNDER THEAUSPICES OF MARTIN ZRZAVECK, LORD MAYOR OF PILSEN

General Sponsor

Main Sponsors

Official Sponsors

Long-term Sponsors of EYP CZ

Documents

EFO15 Pilsen Resoution Booklet