Valencia  2014  9th  National  Selection  Conference  of  the  

European  Youth  Parliament  Spain    

24th  –  27th  April  2014    

Resolution  Booklet        

 

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND

SOCIAL AFFAIRS

With youth unemployment on the rise, youngsters are increasingly directed towards zero-hours and other contracts offering limited employment rights

and job security. Considering that the need of employers for flexible workforces can clash with the wish for more stable employment relations, how should the EU further pursue its flexicurity objectives set forth in the

European Employment Strategy?

Submitted by: Paloma Abril Poncela (La Vall), Frans Cederlöf (FI), Maialen Ciarsolo (San José Jesuitak), Carlota Cumella de Montserrat (Canigó), Blanca Dominguez Parra (I.E.S Santiago Sobrequés), Mireia Gracia Abio (Santa Rosa Huesca), Iván Herraiz Soto (Mas Camarena), Carlos Navarro ( I.E.S. La Serranía), Sofia Ortega Sampietro (I.E.S. Sierra de Guara), Blanca Valero Munoz (Madre María Rosa Molas), Öykü Talı (Chairperson, TR)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Noting with deep concern the EU-wide youth unemployment rate1 of 23.3%2 , which is twice as high as the unemployment rate amongst adults,

B. Acknowledging that European enterprises have difficulties in employing skilled workers due to the small number of apprenticeships and training programs available,

C. Aware of the fact that the skills mismatch between young people leaving formal education and entering the labour market causes an increase in youth unemployment,

D. Keeping in mind that a single flexicurity model cannot be implemented in all Member States due to their economic, demographic and cultural differences,

E. Deeply concerned by the lack of protection of labour rights within the EU,

F. Alarmed by the low levels of social and job security especially for interns and self-employed citizens,

G. Having studied that certain Member States, such as Germany and the UK, are taking restrictive measures concerning migration due to large numbers of Eastern and Southern European youths seeking employment in these countries,

H. Fully alarmed by the fact that 25.9 million EU citizens are currently unemployed whilst there are only 2 million vacancies3,

I. Fully concerned by the fact that European funds aimed at eradicating unemployment are not being invested efficiently,

J. Taking into account the lack of governmental support to promote youth entrepreneurship in the EU;

1 The youth unemployment rate is the percentage of 15-24 years old that are seeking to obtain a job but are not able to do so. 2 Statistics are from Eurostat for the last quarter of 2012. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Unemployment_statistics 3 Statistics are from Eurostat, February 2014.

 

1. Supports the implementation of Life-long Learning Programs (LLP) such as internships by ensuring that all Member States implement the Agenda of New Skills for New Jobs enshrined in the European Employment Strategy4;

2. Calls for the creation of an online database which facilitates communication between universities, enterprises and public institutions in order to reduce skills mismatch;

3. Strongly recommends Member States to adapt a flexicurity model that meets their individual economic and social needs;

4. Requests the EU to ensure that the flexicurity models implemented by Member States achieve the four main objectives of flexicurity outlined in the European Employment Strategy5;

5. Encourages Eurofound6 to redirect its focus towards the protection of labour rights;

6. Urges the Member States to focus more on the particular position of the self-employed and interns in the respective social security systems;

7. Further recommends Member States to increase the effectiveness of their unemployment offices in order to reduce the unemployment rates by:

a) providing them with extra financial support,

b) the creation of job seeker agencies within aforementioned unemployment offices targeting both the private and public sectors;

8. Endorses financial support from both the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and Member States’ governments towards young entrepreneurs especially regarding security, taxes, healthcare and retirement.

4 The European employment strategy seeks to create more and better jobs throughout the EU. It takes its inspiration from the Europe 2020 growth strategy. 5 These include flexible and reliable contractual arrangements, comprehensive lifelong learning strategies, effective active labour market policies and modern social security systems 6 The European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) is a tripartite European Union Agency, whose role is to provide knowledge in the area of social and work-related policies. The Internat’onal Labour Organisation (ILO) and Eurofound cooperate on a wide variety of issues such as youth employment, restructuring and managing change, wages, working conditions, collective bargaining, industrial relations and social dialogue.

 

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS

Recent initiatives such as the Common European Sales law and the struggling EU Patent Package have put Commisioner Reding’s

“Justice for Growth” policy on the agenda again. How should the EU continue its efforts in the harmonisation of civil law in order to

facilitate free movement rights in the Union and foster growth and stability in an economically troubled Union?

Submitted by: Diego Azanza Garcia (Sierra de Guara), Álvaro Fabón Gonzalvo (San Alberto Magno), Victoria Gil Martinez (San Alberto Magno), Brooke Nicholls (St. George’s Malaga), Írem Özyurt (TR), Maria del Rosario Rodriguez Martin (Deutche Schule Malaga), Valentina Schütze Sanchez (Cambridge House Community College), Ilir Kola (Chairperson, AL)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Observing that discrepancies in civil law among Member States can obstruct the free movement of European Union (EU) citizens,

B. Realising that each Member State has its specific legal system and tradition that form a major obstacle for the harmonisation of civil law,

C. Noting with deep concern the recent initiatives of several Member States that hinder the exercise of free movement rights by EU migrants citizens,

D. Recognising the relevance and potential of the Draft Common Frame of Reference7 (DCFR) in achieving the further harmonisation of civil law in the EU,

E. Fully aware that differences between educational systems across the EU can hamper the validation of pre-university diplomas and certificates in other Member States, thus potentially hindering citizens from exercising their free movement rights,

F. Noting with regret that EU citizens cannot vote in the national elections of their country of residence and therefor being unable to enjoy their right to political representation whilst living abroad,

G. Bearing in mind that differences in national contract law affect cross-border trade negatively, making it more complex and costly,

H. Taking into account that 71% of businesses are willing and able to use a harmonised EU contract law for cross-border sales to consumers8,

I. Alarmed by the fact that fiscal policies within the EU vary, occasionally leading to double taxation,

J. Taking into consideration that 57% of consumers were dissuaded from cross-border online shopping due to uncertainty about their legal situation in case of faulty products9;

7 A draft proposed in 2009 by the European Commission that serves as a model civil code for the EU and can be a first step toward a European Civil Code. 8 Data according to the European Commission’s paper “Completing the Single Market: Adopting the Regulation on a Common European Sales law” (2013) 9 Ibidem

 

1. Believes that further harmonisation must be accomplished in order to facilitate free movement whilst preserving each Member State’s individuality and legal traditions;

2. Reminds Member States that according to the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU each citizen has the right to move freely within the Union;

3. Supports the further development of the DCFR into a Common Frame of Reference that further facilitates the harmonisation of civil law within the Union;

4. Encourages Member States to grant EU citizens the right to cast their vote during national elections in their country of residence once they have legally resided there for over a year;

5. Calls upon the Directorate-General Education and Culture to propose a common system of studies validation regarding pre-university studies in order to facilitate free movement of citizens within the Union;

6. Strongly suggests the development and implementation of a Common European Contract Law, based on the DCFR, with the objective of reducing the cost of cross-border purchases;

7. Suggests that individuals solely pay tax on pensions and inheritance in their country of residence, thus avoiding double taxation;

8. Recommends Member States to further implement the ‘Blue Button’10 package for online businesses in order to boost cross-border trade.

10 According to the European Commission, the Blue Button would provide the consumer with the option to be subject to the relevant common EU consumer protection laws as opposed to multiple, possibly conflicting national laws. This would ensure consumer protection on cross border sales.

 

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS II

With the rise of secessionist movements in Flanders as well as the referendums on the independence of Catalonia and Scotland having

been set for 2014, several territories within Member States have shown their desire for increased autonomy or independence. Viewing

the absence of any legal Framework on the matter, how should the EU act in respect of the possible secession of these territories?

Submitted by: Júlia Cano (Saint George’s School Girona), Alicia Carneros (Princess Margaret School), Monica Casanova (Cambridge House), Zeynep Enderer (TR), Mirian Goitia (Arizmendi Ikastola Gaztelupe), Oriol Gutiérrez Carreño (Col·legi Montserrat), Ainhoa Larreategui (Lauaxeta Ikastola), Javier Leal (Madre María Rosa Molas), Lucia Matamoros Pava (Escola Thau Sant Cugat), Kevin Rodriguez Ferreiro (Mas Camarena), Nuria Sans Duran (St. George’s School Malaga), Kateřina Žejdlová (Chairperson, CZ)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Fully alarmed by the potential political impact following a secession taking place in a Member State,

B. Noting with regret that the secession of a particular territory could deteriorate the economic and political relationships in this region,

C. Expecting profound changes in the dispersion of the political power in countries that have been separated,

D. Keeping in mind that violent11 independence movements may emerge in case of insufficient dialogue between the government and the pro-independence fraction of the population,

E. Fully aware of the fact that the process of gaining independence would inevitably entail high costs for the seceding territory,

F. Bearing in mind that the uncertainty of a continued European Union (EU) membership for the seceded territory may initially create economic and cultural turmoil,

G. Noting with regret that a secession could potentially lead to a domino effect inciting more separatist tendencies in territories all over the EU,

H. Recognising the absence of a legal framework on the matter as the EU refrains from taking a clear stance,

I. Pointing out that newly established countries using the Euro as currency would have to decide on their future in the Eurozone,

J. Emphasising the opportunity for the cultural emancipation of a new country whilst retaining the cultural links with the country it seceded from,

K. Acknowledging that referenda on independence are:

i) a way of expressing the feelings, opinions and decisions of the citizens,

ii) an example of a truly democratic process undertaken by a government that actively takes into account the views of its citizens,

11 Any type of organised terrorism with the political goal of independence, excluding individual violence and violence occasionally occurring during demonstrations.

 

iii) legal in most Member States on a national level whilst being unconstitutional in some States on a regional level;

1. Declares that the EU will retain its neutral position whilst at the same time taking an active role in the matter of separatist movements with the objective of mitigating the tensions by:

a) acting as a mediator between the national and the territorial governments in negotiations, facilitating the dialogue through organising regular meetings,

b) pressuring the countries concerned to reach a compromise;

2. Calls for the establishment of a working group consisting of experts under the supervision of the European Commissioner for Enlargement, responsible for handling all the measures the EU will take on the matter;

3. Expresses the need to provide citizens of the affected countries with unbiased information on the reasons for secession as well as the possible implications of the secession that has been approved by both the national and the territorial government;

4. Proclaims that after the secession the new country should be able to reapply for EU membership following a defined transition period during which economic stability in the country would have to be achieved;

5. Confirms that during the period of transition the country will still be able to benefit from Member States’ advantages such as:

a) free trade within the EU internal market although with a gradual withdrawal of these privileges until membership is negotiated,

b) the possibility of temporarily staying in the Eurozone to help facilitate the economic transition;

6. Urges all Member States that additional criteria concerning the secession process of the newly established country be taken into account in the EU accession process such as:

a) the secession having been conducted in a democratic and peaceful way,

b) the new state presenting an action plan outlining its post-secession development;

7. Requests the aforementioned working group to provide a guideline to both the seceding and the residual country on the situation of enterprises operating in the affected territory thus advising the affected governments to:

a) discourage companies to relocate,

b) reassure companies that they will not encounter difficulties with EU cross-border trade;

8. Encourages the government of the seceding country to maintain a already established bilingual educational systems in order to preserve the cultural identity of both countries;

9. Strongly recommends the utilisation of referenda as a way of dealing with the arising issues and further suggests the Member States to make them more just by giving the votes from the seceding region a greater importance.

 

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, TECHNOLOGY AND

RESEARCH

Whilst allegations emerge of price-fixing on the British gas market and the German RWE npower being under scrutiny for tax

avoidance, an estimated 50 to 125 million Europeans are now in a state of “fuel poverty”. How can the EU improve openness and

encourage competition on an oligopolistic energy markets?

Submitted by: Keda Bamber (St. George's School, Malaga), Blanca Carcasona (San Patricio), Aitor Fernández Garay (San José Jesuitak), Natalia Ferrando Lázaro (I.E.S. Sierra de Guara), Oihane Iturbe (Arizmendi-Almen), Juan Munuera Rufas (Santa Rosa Huesca), Miguel Navid (Col·legi Montserrat), Ellen Pellosniemi (FI), Can Sarıkol (TR), Caterina Andrea Valenzuela Fizedeanu (Caxton College), Cristina Crespo (Chairperson, ES), Hauke Sommer (Vice-President, DE)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Recognising increasing consumer distrust in energy providers triggered by both fluctuations in energy prices and uncertainty regarding the real profit margins for energy companies,

B. Deeply concerned by the increase of energy prices in the EU leading to regional fuel poverty due to:

i) lack of competition,

ii) the current economic situation,

iii) increasing scarcity of fossil fuels,

iv) alleged price-fixing,

C. Noting with deep concern that there is insufficient control over large energy companies resulting in cases of tax avoidance such as that of RWE, who admitted to having avoided corporate tax over a period of six years,

D. Fully aware that European energy markets is controlled by a small number of large corporations such as EDF or RWE creating high entry barriers for new and independent competitors,

E. Alarmed that the aforementioned oligopolistic structure of the Members States’ energy markets creates a risk of price-fixing as exemplified by the on-going investigation by the European Commission (EC) into an alleged collusion between the Royal Dutch Shell PLC, BP PLC and Statoil ASA,

F. Approving the measures that have been initiated by the EC to strengthen European energy markets, such as the Third Energy Package,.

G. Keeping in mind that the Third Energy Package is not yet fully implemented in all Member States,

H. Noting the lack of consistent laws, regulations, standards and practices concerning energy markets across the Member States;

1. Endorses the development of an online consumer protection platform by the Directorate-General Energy, modelled upon the British ‘uSwitch’ web platform, that assists consumers in choosing their energy supplier;

 

2. Recommends Member States and EC to redirect fines imposed on energy companies for the infringement of EU competition law into programmes that fight the fuel poverty caused by their malpractices, as suggested by the British Labour Party;

3. Proposes the creation of a new European regulatory organisation based on the structure of the British ‘Ofgem’, with the aim of issuing reports on the practices of European energy companies;

4. Suggests that banks and national governments facilitate the financing of small competitors on European energy markets by offering low interest loans or by lowering taxes, thus reducing entry barriers;

5. Urges the European Competition Network to strengthen its current legislative requirements regarding mergers in energy markets through further specification and simplification;

6. Expresses its hope that the measures introduced in the Third Energy Package will be implemented in all Member States within the next decade;

7. Approves the steps taken towards the creation of the Internal Energy Market 2014, namely the pilot project for joint electricity trading;

8. Calls for the cooperation of both the Directorate-General Energy and the governments of Member States in supporting the implementation of Smart Grid technologies.

 

FACT SHEET (ITRE)

Smart Grids: The concept of SmartGrids was developed in 2006 by the European Technology Platform for Smart Grids, and concerns an electricity network that can intelligently integrate the actions of all users connected to it - generators, consumers and those that do both - in order to efficiently deliver sustainable, economic and secure electricity supplies. A smart grid employs innovative products and services together with intelligent monitoring, control, communication, and self-healing technologies in order to:

1. Better facilitate the connection and operation of generators of all sizes and technologies

2. Allow consumers to play a part in optimising the operation of the system

3. Provide consumers with more information and better options choosing their energy supplier

4. Significantly reduce the environmental impact of the whole electricity supply system

5. Maintain and improve the existing high levels of system reliability, quality, and security of supply

6. Maintain and improve the existing services efficiently

7. Foster the development of an integrated European market.

Taken from: European Technology Platform.

Third Energy Package: Since March 2011, the Gas and Electricity Directives of the EU’s Third Energy Package for an internal EU gas and electricity market are transposed into national law by Members States. The core elements in this set of legislative measures are the three applicable Regulations:

• Ownership unbundling, which would split generation of electricity from transmission in order to avoid vertical integration,

• Independent system operator, which would let the transmission networks remain under the ownership of energy generating groups, but transferring control of their daily business to a trustee – the independent system operator.

• Independent transmission operator, which would allow energy companies to retain ownership of their transmission networks, yet the transmission subsidiaries would belong to independent companies operating under stringent regulatory control.

The EU has summarised these goals in their Energy 2020 strategy. Critical evaluation of the measures proposed in this strategy is central to understanding the EU efforts in addressing the topic of an integrated energy market.

Ofgem: As a regulator Ofgem works closely with [electricity] suppliers to improve their performance in several areas including how they:

• Handle consumer complaints,

• Fulfil their social obligations,

• Provide support for vulnerable consumers,

They carry out a wide range of research [on the British Energy Market] and publish reports and data to explain our findings.

Taken from: Ofgem’s oficial website.

 

European Competition Network: The European Competition Network (ECN) has been established as a forum for discussion and cooperation of European competition authorities in cases where Articles 101 and and 102 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union are applied. It should ensure an efficient division of work and an effective and consistent application of EC competition rules. The EU Commission and competition authorities from EU member states cooperate with each other through the ECN by:

• Informing each other of new cases and envisaged enforcement decisions;

• Coordinating investigations, where necessary;

• Helping each other with investigations;

• Exchanging evidence and other information; and

• Discussing various issues of common interest.

The objective of the European Competition Network is to build an effective legal framework to enforce EC competition law against companies who engage in cross-border business practices which restrict competition and are therefore anti-consumer.

Taken from: EC’s official website.

uSwitch: uSwitch is a certified energy utility comparison website that operates in the UK. It is both impartial and independent.

Pilot project for joint electricity trading: As of this year a pilot project for joint electricity trading has been initiated, involving 14 EU Member States. The project, designed by the EU Commission, regulators, grid operators and power exchanges, is a milestone on the way towards an integrated European Energy Market. It works by the principle of market coupling, which combines all offers and bids in a region and creates an integrated electricity market in the areas concerned.

 

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY

THE COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND DEFENCE

The recent uprisings in the Central African Republic and France’s subsequent unilateral response revamped the debate on defence integration and led to the first European Defence Summit in five

years. With the summit being declared a moderate success, how can the EU put into action an intention for deeper cooperation in the field

of security whilst taking into account concerns of sovereignty and budgetary constraints?

Submitted by: Nerea Barriocanal (Arizmendi-Almen), Alaitz Gabilondo Errasti (Arizmendi Ikastola Gaztelupe), Mar Iglesias i Salvador (I.E.S. Santiago Sobrequès i Vidal), Jenny Lindman (FI), Alex Pujol (St.George’s School), Noah Schumacher (Deutsche Schule Malaga), Enrique Tasa (Caxton College), Ana van Breukelen Garcia (La Vall), Andrea Villalba (King’s College), Irati Zallo (Lauaxeta Ikastola), Chairperson: Lāra Niamh Eckert Reinfelds (CH)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Observing a lack of unity of thought and identity regarding matters of Security and Defence within the European Union (EU),

B. Affirming that different levels of EU involvement desired by Member States in defence matters makes cooperation difficult to achieve,

C. Noting with deep concern the dependence of the EU and its Member States on:

i) the Big Three12 in Security and Defence matters due to their importance and influence,

ii) Security and Defence assistance by the United States of America (USA) due to the limited budget of the EU and its Member States,

D. Further noting the unanimity requirement in the Berlin Plus Agreement13 for the EU to be provided with the possibility of using North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) assets for peacekeeping purposes and crisis management,

E. Deeply concerned that not enough cooperation, integration and ‘pooling and sharing’ initiatives are carried out due to sovereignty issues of Member States,

F. Alarmed that Member States do not have enough skilled personnel or technical capacity in the field of Security and Defence,

G. Keeping in mind that the support by USA policymakers for developing EU security policies depends on the condition that they do not weaken the position of NATO14,

12The United Kingdom, France and Germany. Called so because of their importance and influence within the European Union, these countries have strongly shaped the development of the Common Security and Defence Policy throughout the years. Their disagreement as to the future of the CSDP is an important factor in the merely moderate success of the European Defence Summit of December 2013. 13 The Berlin Plus Agreement was made in December 2002. It gives the EU the possibility of using NATO assets for peacekeeping purposes and crisis management. However, all NATO members must agree with the use of these assets, NATO can refuse the use of assets. 14 North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, its aim is to “safeguard the freedom and security of its members through political and military means”

 

H. Perturbed by the EU’s dependency on NATO’s military capacity and consequently on the USA’s willingness and ability to collaborate,

I. Noting with regret the political stalemate that has arisen due to difficult relations between Cyprus, an EU member state but not a member of NATO, and Turkey, not an EU member state but a member of NATO, which impedes fully effective cooperation,

J. Taking into consideration the overwhelming amount of bureaucracy that reduces the pace at which crisis interventions occur,

K. Recognising that European Defence Summits15 are not held regularly nor often enough,

L. Having considered that EU Security and Defence spending has been reduced and that the citizens of Member States do not see the importance of spending on these matters,

M. Taking into account the possibility of conflicts between Member States;

1. Recommends a reassessment of the 2003 European Security Strategy in order to evaluate and

consider current threats and objectives;

2. Urges Member States to seek the permission of the Council of the European Union16 when intending to perform military interventions and request the aid of fellow Member States in case of approval, resulting in a faster resolution of conflicts;

3. Endorsing the creation of an EU specific armaments market that will reduce dependence on foreign providers and unlock economies of scale by:

a) allocating a fixed percentage of the defence budget to research and development,

b) aligning technical standards and operating procedures,

c) promoting economic incentives such as free and cross border trade;

4. Further invites The Big Three to aid and assist smaller countries in matters related to Security and Defence by providing experts and advisers enabling these nations to help in future operations;

5. Encourages the organisation of a conference assessing the functionality of the Berlin Plus Agreement;

6. Requests amendments to the Berlin Plus Agreement regarding voting procedures to reach a new understanding within the next 5 years;

7. Expresses its hope that Member States will start to move towards ‘pooling and sharing’ of non-deployable assets, in order to reduce military costs;

8. Urges an improvement in the mobility of EU Battle Groups, in order to make them more deployable by further investing in infrastructure and developing transport facilities;

9. Proclaims the need for yearly European Defence Summits to build on the successes attained at the 2013 conference;

10. Further recommends Member States to maintain their current monetary contribution to the EU’s Security and Defence Budget;

11. Emphasises the need for the EU to take a neutral stance in the event of a conflict between Member States, whilst authorising the provision of humanitarian aid.

15 The European Defence Summit was a meeting in 2013 were the EU discussed their common security and defence policy, the economic and Monetary Union, and economic and social policy enlargement and migration and energy. 16 The Council of the European Union is a part of the EU legislature that represents the executives of EU Member States. It is composed by 28 national ministers (one per state)

 

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS I

With the final race towards the 2014 European elections in full swing and voter turnout reaching historical lows, a debate on the decline in European democratic legitimacy has been omnipresent. How can the EU, together with its Member States, respond to the issue of an ever-

decreasing electorate and its institutional democratic deficit?

Submitted by: Olalla Benito (Hastings School), Eulàlia Casas Turu (La Vall), Adrià Castillo (I.E.S. Santiago Sobrequés), Ana Gabarda (IES La Serranía), Elvira Fonz Gutiérrez (Santa Rosa School), Miguel Fuentes Montiu (Caxton College Valencia), María Granero (Cambridge House), Hatice Izel Ayartepe (TR), Teresa Jordà Baleri (Saint George’s School, Girona), Genís Marfà (Collegi Montserrat), Zoe Vetsch (Mas Camarena), Rebecca Smith (Chairperson, FR)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Defining democratic legitimacy of the European Union (EU) based on the following features:

i) participation of the EU citizens in European Parliament (EP) elections,

ii) transparency of institutions and politicians,

iii) correct functioning of the institutions,

B. Further defining the institutional democratic deficit in the EU as the absence of some legitimacy features in the institutions of the EU, for example low voter turnout,

C. Concerned with the number of special legislative procedures in which the EP has comparatively less power than the other legislative bodies of the EU,

D. Believing that the European Citizen’s Initiative17 requirements are too difficult to fulfil,

E. Alarmed by governments of Member States attaching more importance to national interests than European ones,

F. Aware of the differences regarding voting procedures in the European elections across Member States,

G. Alarmed by the substantially decreased trust in the EU in recent years18,

H. Realising that the EU’s institutional organisation is rarely understood by the general population, due to its complexity,

I. Noting with regret a lack of European identity due to:

i) a lack of media coverage on pan-European issues, including but not limited to EP elections,

ii) the people’s lack of awareness of the EU’s impact on their daily lives;

17 According to the Lisbon Treaty the EU should further enforce the use of direct democracy within its citizens. The European Citizens initiative allows one million EU citizens to call upon the European Commission to make a legislative proposal. 18 Comparison of results of the Eurobarometer from 2007 and 2012.

 

1. Calls for an Intergovernmental Conference to instigate a treaty change aiming to:

a) expand the scope of the ordinary legislative procedure to matters which are currently governed by special legislative procedures19,

b) increase the number of policy areas that are subject to harmonisation;

2. Further calls for the change of the criteria required to pass a European’s Citizens Initiative by:

a) decreasing the amount of signatures needed from one million to seven hundred and fifty thousand,

b) reducing the minimum number of countries from which the signatories have to be to three;

3. Requests a review of the rules of procedure of the European Parliament to accommodate a faster legislative process;

4. Recommends the Member States to standardise procedures of EP elections, for example the minimum age of candidates and the methods of election;

5. Urges that recommendations made by OLAF20 pertaining to the eradication of corruption and fraud involving the EU budget be made binding;

6. Encourages Member States to include topics on the functioning and institutional structure of the EU in their respective school curricula;

7. Supports an increase of the budget for the EU’s means of mass communication, such as the online media campaign for the EP elections or Euronews;

8. Further supports the Erasmus+ Program by increasing funding for projects related to political youth engagement and political education.

19 In the ordinary legislative procedure, the European Parliament is put on equal footing with the Council. In special legislative procedures, the European Parliament only has an advisory role. 20 OLAF is the European Anti-Fraud Office, which is part of the European Commission. As an administrative and investigative service, all it does is make recommendations on what action should be taken by the EU or national authorities following its investigations.

 

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON CULTURE AND EDUCATION

Despite our reliance on science and technology to generate solutions to the challenges of a modern information society, the number of

young people choosing to study science and take up scientific careers is in freefall. How can the EU address this lack of interest and

potential shortage of human resources in science-­‐related industries on an educational level?

Submitted by: Cristina Aubach (Escola Thau Sant Cugat), Irene Díez (Canigó), Alba Etxeandía (Aritzmendi-Almen), Markel Hernández (Lauxeta Ikastola), Nila Hedjri (Deutsche Schule Málaga), Aritz Labrador (San José Jesuitak), Lucas Mateu (San Patricio), Shany Mizrahi (King’s College Madrid), Ömer Oguz (TR), Eleftheria-Irida Karasmanoglou (Chairperson, GR)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Guided by the fact that Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subjects are generally perceived as more demanding of and challenging for students in comparison to those in the field of humanities and social sciences,

B. Fully aware of how the recent economic and financial crisis has triggered budgetary cutbacks in STEM related studies,

C. Noting with regret the increased knowledge gap between students and the needs of the labour market,

D. Recognising the high demand for skilled labour in STEM industries in order to keep up with the rapid advance of technology,

E. Noting with deep concern the small proportion of women deciding to pursue a career in STEM,

F. Further noting that women are not equally represented in fields concerned with technological innovation,

G. Taking into account initiatives such as the European Schoolnet Academy21 and SCIENTIX22, promoting an EU-wide collaboration amongst STEM teachers and researchers;

1. Trusts universities to acknowledge the importance of introducing internships as part of their curricula for STEM students in order to bridge the gap between higher education and the labour market;

2. Requests Member States to increase their efforts in providing government subsidies to research facilities in the field of STEM;

3. Strongly recommends Member States to introduce an annual ‘Science Week’ for high school students which would include:

21 European Schoolnet Academy is a platform where you can learn about innovation in the school and classroom through online professional development courses for teachers in primary and secondary schools www.europeanschoolnetacademy.eu 22 SCIENTIX promotes and supports a European-wide collaboration amongst STEM teachers, education researchers, policymakers and other STEM education professionals. http://www.scientix.eu/web/guest;jsessionid=B18CE9D4D5D48DC522100E516C62B3B3

 

a) motivational speeches and activities,

b) international science and technology olympiads,

c) interactive encounters with university students,

d) practical experiments;

4. Recommends universities to establish partnerships with industries in STEM sectors to facilitate the acquisition of funds and the influx of highly skilled graduates into the labour market;

5. Encourages schools to invite female entrepreneurs in STEM careers to hold conferences for students at all educational levels;

6. Urges Member States to allocate a greater percentage of their scholarships to female students interested in STEM subjects that obtained outstanding grades in their secondary school examinations in order to increase gender equality;

7. Expresses its hope for the preservation and increase in membership numbers of educational initiatives, such as the European Schoolnet Academy and SCIENTIX by raising awareness through the aforementioned ‘Science Week’.

 

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND

HOME AFFAIRS

Security and transparency, two sides of the same coin: In light of the recent turmoil surrounding the leaking of NSA documents that revealed the magnitude of electronic surveillance, what further

measures should the European Union assume in order to guarantee the privacy as well as security of citizens in the face of foreign

surveillance?

Submitted by: Ana Blasco (IES La Serranía), Anastasía Budko (King's College Madrid), Sara Cerdán Palomera (Madre María Rosa Molas), Elvira Ehnström (FI), Joan Manel García-Reyero (Escola Thau Sant Cugat), Ainhoa Gonzalez (Arizmendi Ikastola), Álvaro Javier Población Montero (San Patricio), Luca Rayes (Hastings School), Emma Ruano (Princess Margaret School), Diego Serrano (San Alberto Magno), David Soler (Chairperson, ES), Nathan Hunter (Vice-president, UK)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Taking into consideration Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights23 of the European Union (EU) that contain the human right to privacy,

B. Observing that citizens nowadays take being protected by their governments for granted and therefore lack interest and motivation to seek information about the surveillance measures taken,

C. Bearing in mind that terrorism is a major issue that needs to be tackled, as demonstrated by the 2012 ACE European Risk briefing survey24, where 63% of respondents viewed terrorism as an increasingly worrying matter,

D. Recognising that governments might withhold tackling terrorism as the main objective for mass surveillance and are therefore engaging in data collection to serve other purposes,

E. Deeply concerned about the different tools and sites that the internet provides for criminal purposes through Deep Web sites such as TOR25,

F. Fully alarmed by the unwillingness of Member States to take security measures unless these serve their own political and economic benefit, as seen in the 2012 European Commission proposal that aims to improve the regulating directives on processing personal data,

G. Convinced that Member States laws that are being passed are often ambiguous and therefore inefficient, as the French Quadrature du Net Consumer26 group pointed out while criticising the 2013 European Data Protection legislation,

23 The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU brings together in a single document the fundamental rights protected in the EU. The Charter contains rights and freedoms under six titles: Dignity, Freedoms, Equality, Solidarity, Citizens' Rights, and Justice. Proclaimed in 2000, the Charter has become legally binding on the EU with the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, in December 2009. 24 The ACE European Risk briefing survey was a research carried out between 13 April and 3 May 2012 comprising 606 European risk managers, CROs, CFOs, COOs and those responsible for buying insurance. 25 TOR is a free software for enabling online anonymity and censorship resistance. Tor directs Internet traffic through a free, worldwide, volunteer network consisting of more than five thousand relays to conceal a user’s location or usage from anyone conducting network surveillance or traffic analysis. 26 La Quadrature du Net is an advocacy group defending the rights and freedoms of citizens on the Internet. It is established in France and acts in the European Union.

 

H. Keeping in mind the difficulties of creating EU law respecting privacy, and the consequences for companies such as Google facing discrepant legislations between Member States,

I. Noting with regret the lack of caution that users of the Internet exercise, as shown in the 2013 Facebook Friend study conducted which proved that awareness about the importance of surveillance is increasing too slowly,

J. Recognising that people often do not read the Terms and Conditions that companies provide on the Internet, causing a lack of concern for our privacy,

K. Believing that the public needs to be informed about the objectives of intelligence agencies,

L. Understanding that surveillance problems differ throughout the EU, all the while taking into account that Member States will only cooperate if they have a common interest,

M. Taking into account that citizens’ private data protection is regulated by Member States despite the fact that this data is transnational in its essence;

1. Calls upon the EU to implement legislation limiting the control that companies have over personal

data and the sharing thereof, thus respecting the fundamental right to privacy;

2. Encourages the establishment of an EU-wide educational initiative involving actors such as Think Tanks and activities such as debates with the aim of informing citizens of the importance of national security;

3. Requests the creation of an EU anti-terrorism agency, subdivided into regional departments, with the objective of reaching a joint decision on the authorisation of further investigations;

4. Further proclaims the aforementioned agency as an effective means to reduce surveillance upon citizens;

5. Urges increased control over webpages that facilitate illegal online actions through the persecution of suspicious activities;

6. Expresses its hope that Member States will apply adequate security measures in order to build their citizens’ trust, thereby improving the political and economic situation in said country;

7. Proclaims the EU provide personalised advice for each Member State when passing laws in order to enhance the understanding of how it will affect them and how they should adapt to it;

8. Calls for the introduction of common requirements for large online firms operating in Europe, ensuring the respect for the privacy of EU citizens so that these face the same consequences for abuse of personal data regardless of the State in which the offence occurs;

9. Suggests the creation of an organisation which unites victims of online crime and offers them the opportunity to advise and protect citizens by sharing their experience;

10. Recommends the creation of additional abbreviated summaries of Terms and Conditions in order to encourage citizens to grant their informed consent;

11. Emphasises the need to inform the public of the objectives pursued by the intelligence agencies, both in Member States and outside of the EU, in order to increase transparency;

12. Further emphasises that the methods used by the aforementioned agencies are to be kept confidential in order not to compromise national security;

13. Further requests an increase in the number of meetings aimed at the harmonisation of data protection policy between Member States.