AcAdemic PrePArAtion

KitMunster Regional Session

Fostering Developmentat Home and Abroad6th - 8th February 2015

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 2

4 - 7

8 - 10

11 - 15

16 - 20

21- 24

25 - 27

28 - 33

34 - 37

38 - 41

42 - 46

47 - 51

52 - 55

56 - 57

58 - 59

EU Institutions Explained

Committee on Development

Committee on Environment , Public Health & Food Safety II

Committee on International Trade

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice & Home Affairs

Committee on Foreign Affairs

Committee on Environment , Public Health & Food Safety I

Committee on Constutional Affairs

Committee on Development III

Committee on Development II

Committee on Employment & Social Affairs

Committee on Industry, Research & Energy

Clauses & Phrases

Sample Resolution

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie2 3

Dear delegates,

Welcome to Munsters 2015, and the European Youth Parliament! On behalf of the entire chairs' team, I am extremely happy to present the Academic Preparation Kit for the session for your viewing. This booklet will attempt to explain how the European Union works, and outline the backgrounds, issues, and current legislation in place regarding the various Committee Topics we will discuss at the session under the theme "Fostering Development at Home and Abroad".

What has been done? Your chairpersons, now experts on the topics, have compiled an overview on each topic up for discussion. Their aim is simply to make these complex topics tangible and digestible for you guys. What happens next? You are expected to now read the overviews included in this publication, and pay special attention to the Committee Topic you will be discussing at the conference itself, following the links, and forming opinions on what you think should be done to solve these problems.

We are all looking forward to meeting you next week, and encourage at least 6 hours preparation on your part to both enable you to follow discussion as best as possible and also to keep up the high academic standard associated with the European Youth Parliament.

Thank you for taking part in the conference, and very much looking forward to meeting you all soon!

Til then, Lucy BradfieldPresident of the Session

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 4

Main Institutions of the European Union- European ParliamentThe first part of the EU´s legislative branch consists of 751 Members of Parliament elected for 5 years by all EU-citizens. The first direct election of the EP was held in 1979, the latest in 2014. The parliament is divided into seven big fractions plus several independent Members of Parliament. It is working either in a big plenary or in its 20 different committees, each responsible for specific issue areas. The Parliament shares its legislative competences with the “Council”.

For legislation covered by Ordinary Legislative Procedure, the European Parlia-ment decides, along with the Council of the European Union, whether to accept, reject or amend proposals by the European Commission. The European Com-mission is accountable to the European Parliament. - European Council (since 1974)The European Council represents the interests of the national governments of each member state. On it sit the heads of state or government of every member state. It holds regular meetings (aka summits, at least four times per year) of the Heads of State/Government + Commission President + President of the Europe-an Council + High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of the Eu-ropean Union. The European Council provides political guidelines, sets general goals and incentives to the further development of the EU.

The European Council acts as a collective “head of state” for the EU and its Pres-ident is the figurative leader of the EU. However the actual powers of the Euro-pean Council and its President are very limited. Its main influences stems from the political power exerted by its members through their role of leading mem-ber state governments The European Council acts as the final arbitrator in cases where conflict exists between other institutions.

- Council of the European Union (Council of Ministers)The Council of the European Union forms the other half of the legislative branch of the EU (alongside the European Parliament). While the Parliament represents the interests of the Citizens of the EU, the Council of the European Union represents the interests of the National Governments of Member States. Also known as “the Council”, it is structured in issue-specific councils with the respective ministers of the Member States (e.g. Council Justice and Home Affairs with all ministers of the interior). The issue division in the councils is mirrored in the parliamentary com-mittees (e.g. environment, education, economy, and budget). The council shares its legislative competences with the EP and holds executive powers, too. Italy

EU InstItUtIons ExplaInEd

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie4 5

holds the current Presidency until December 2015, when Latvia will take over. The Council used to be the most powerful legislative institution within the European Union. However the Lisbon Treaty made co-decision with the European Parlia-ment “Ordinary Legislative Procedure”.

- European CommissionThe European Commission forms the executive branch of the European Union ‘government’ and represents the interests of the EU as a whole. It is made up of 28 commissioners. (One Commissioner per Member State, with one commis-sioner being selected as the President of the Commission by the qualified ma-jority of the European Council).

Commissioners are appointed by their nation state, approved by the European Parliament and responsible for one issue area (e.g. Connie Hedegaard as Com-missioner for Climate Action). The Commission monitors the adherence to the EU aquis communautaire, represents the Union in foreign relations and has the exclusive Right to Initiative1.

The Commission as a whole is subject to the approval of the European Parlia-ment and represents the interests of the EU as a whole. It is the only institution with the power to initiate laws and oversees implementation of EU legislation.

What does the EU do?The EU is engaged in many policy areas and tries to implement its goals togeth-er with its Member States. The Union can provide money and/or expertise for projects or certain measures, or it can pass regulations that harmonise laws and norms in Europe and/or gives them a new direction. Furthermore the EU deals with many issue areas, in which it has no competence to regulate, but can nev-ertheless express visions, requests and warnings in order to provoke the Member States to act. The Union is more and more visible as a single actor and is also able, in case of a consensus, to speak on behalf of Europe within the scope of the CFSP.

1 Right of Initiative: The right to propose laws. In the EU: right to propose Regulations and Directives to the European Parliament and the Council.

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 6

How does the EU legislate?The European Union can issue several legal acts; however, not all are fully binding for its Member States. There are several types of legal acts which are applied in different ways:

- A regulation is a law that is applicable and binding in all Member States directly. It does not need to be passed into national law by the Member States although national laws may need to be changed to avoid conflicting with the reg-ulation.

- A directive is a law that binds the Member States, or a group of Member States, to achieve a particular objective. Usually, directives must be transposed into national law to become effective. Significantly, a directive specifies the result to be achieved: it is up to the Member States individually to decide how this is done.

- A decision can be addressed to Member States, groups of people, or even individuals. It is binding in its entirety. Decisions are used, for example, to rule on proposed mergers between companies.

- Recommendations and opinions have no binding force.

When is the EU allowed to act?

Competences of the European Union are grouped into exclusive, shared, supporting, and special competences. The division of competences between the European Union and the Member States is defined according to three main prin-ciples:- The principle of conferral requires the Union to act only in the policy areas and to the extent granted to it by the Treaties. - The principle of proportionality ensures that the content and form of the action does not exceed only what is needed to achieve the objectives set by the Treaties.- The principle of subsidiarity determines that in areas of shared compe-tence, the Union may intervene only if it is capable of acting more effectively than the Member States.

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie6 7

How is legislation passed?1

Every European law is based on a specific treaty article, referred to as the ‘legal basis’ of the legislation. This determines which legislative procedure must be fol-lowed. The treaty sets out the decision-making process, including Commission proposals, successive readings by the Council and Parliament, and the opinions of the advisory bodies. It also lays down when unanimity is required, and when a qualified majority is sufficient for the Council to adopt legislation. The great ma-jority of EU legislation is adopted using the Ordinary Legislative Procedure. In this procedure, the Parliament and the Council share legislative power. - The European Commission initiates the legislative process by proposing a piece of legislation. Typically National Governments, lobbyists and Committees of the European Parliament are consulted by the Commission before such pro-posals are made.

- The proposed legislation is passed on for viewing by the European Parlia-ment and Council of the European Union. They will consult with each other and make their own decisions on whether to pass the proposed piece of legislation as law, reject or to propose amendments.

- A piece of European Union legislation becomes enacted by European law, under the ordinary legislative procedure, when it is supported by both the Euro-pean Parliament and the Council of the European Union.

1 A more detailed view of the ordinary legislation can be found here:http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/0081f4b3c7/Law-making-procedures-in-detail.html

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 8

“Ending poverty and ensuring sustainability are the defining challenges of our time. Energy is central to both of them.” Jim Yong Kim, World Bank Group President Following on from the creation of the SE4All (Sustainable Energy For All) initiative, what action should the EU now take to deliver sustainable

energy for all?

By Jack McGann (IE) & Katerina Stravi (CY)

Introduction and Background

Sustainable development can only be achieved if poverty is eradicated. With energy being the core of both these issues it is crucial to rapidly attain sustainable energy for all. This decade, 2014-2024, was declared as the Decade of Sustainable Energy for All by the United Nations, emphasising the importance of addressing the energy issues around the globe.

The Sustainable Energy for All initiative works towards accomplishing the three main goals by 2030: a) universal access to electricity and clean cooking fuels; b) doubling the share of the world’s energy supplied by renewable sources from 18% to 36%, and c) doubling the rate of improvement in energy efficiency. Eighty-five countries have opted-in to this initiative, and many public, private and non-governmental actors are supporting its implementation.

Despite the work currently done by the UN through the SE4All initiative, 1.2 billion people in the world still lack access to electricity and 2.8 billion depend on traditional biomass for their energy supply, hence resulting in indoor and outdoor air pollution attributable for 4.3 million deaths a year. These figures indicate the magnitude of the problem suggesting that actions need to be taken fast.

Key Conflicts

Modern energy services, such as electricity, enhance the life of the poor in countless ways. Electricity supplies the most efficient form of lighting providing extra hours to study or work improving the educational level and the efficiency of the community. Modern cooking facilities significantly reduce the daily exposure of households to poisonous cooking fumes thus help to avoid premature deaths caused by indoor air pollution. Additionally mortality rates will decrease, as clinics will be able to store life-saving vaccines.

The rapid development of sustainable energy will provide developing countries with new opportunities for growth by generating jobs, increasing agricultural prosperity, through ploughing and irrigation, and introducing new markets. It can

CommIttEE on dEvElopmEnt I DEVEI

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie8 9

directly reduce poverty by raising a poor country’s productivity and extending the quality and range of its products thereby putting more wages into the pockets of the deprived.

Despite the importance of the foregoing matters, billions of people continue to be without basic modern energy services, lacking reliable access to either electricity or clean cooking facilities. This situation is expected to change only a little by 2030 unless more vigorous action is taken.

Energy poverty is made obvious differently in urban and rural areas and hence the solutions would differ in each case. Towns where electricity is present are the first to be supplied with modern energy systems, whereas rural areas, which lack electricity and are usually hard to reach and spread-out are generally not equipped with modern infrastructure. In most cases, poor households, isolated from formal energy supply, rely on dry-cell batteries, paraffin or automotive batteries, which are costly and often dangerous.

In addition, when considering energy poverty, it is important to distinguish between the three types of energy vector involved in the energy value chain: electricity, the modern energy vector; motor fuel, which essentially provides mobile and stationary motive power where electricity is not available; and heating and cooking fuel, burned to produce heat.

The technical and economic constraints associated with each region are different. It is hence necessary to tailor actions and investments according to the vectors under consideration, emphasising that poor populations can be integrated into the energy value chain.

It is also possible to link energy development and the fight against poverty without jeopardising the environment.

Stakeholders

As aforementioned, 1.2 billion people lack access to electricity and according to the International Energy Agency (IEA) more than 95% of these people are either in sub-Saharan African or developing Asia, with 84% found in rural areas.

However developing countries are not the only ones directly related to sustainable energy. The challenges faced are universal and inter-related with all economies as well as the environment and thus need to be addressed together by all countries. It should also be noted that these challenges often relate to governance, human rights and peace and security issue.

Existing Measures and Current Legislations

The committee must consider a great number of variables when discussing

DEVEI

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 10

the topic of energy, as they are numerous measures currently taken by the United Nations. “Rio+20” is the short name for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, which took place in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in June 2012. At Rio+20, more than $513 billion was pledged to build a sustainable future, marking a major step forward in achieving the future we want.

Another UN initiative is the “Millennium Development Goals” which focuses on eradicating poverty as well halting the spread of HIV/AIDS and providing universal primary education, also takes a stand in sustainable development and sustainable energy to help endeavouring countries.

Last but not least, as mentioned above, the Sustainable Energy for All initiative has made some significant targets and has provided strategies in order to achieve them in the years to come.

Links:

1. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/wssd/documents/energy_initiative.pdf

2. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52001D-C0264&from=EN

3. http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/media/weowebsite/energydevelop-ment/weo2011_energy_for_all.pdf

4. http://www.un.org/wcm/webdav/site/sustainableenergyforall/shared/Documents/SEFA-Action%20Agenda-Final.pdf

5. http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/documents/2013-02-22_communica-tion_a_decent_life_for_all_post_2015_en.pdf

DEVEI

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie10 11

With one in three EU citizens overweight or obese, European health systems are coming under increased strain through increased chronic diseases among citizens. Although Food Information has become more sophisticated in the EU, and many healthy-living awareness campaigns exist across Member States, the problem remains unresolved and increasing. How should the EU work with Member State governments to prepare

to deal with the future consequences?

By Varvara Tyurina (RU) & James Bradfield (IE)

Introduction and BackgroundThere is an Old Russian proverb which says: “A good man is big”. The logic is simple: when you are hungry you get thin while satiety usually brings peace and placidity. Until the 21st century, carrying extra weight was considered an indication of wealth. Over the last 100 years we have seen many dramatic changes in the food industry such as self-service supermarkets stuffed with semi-processed goods, worldwide restaurant franchises and fast-food services which have helped in making food cheap and affordable. The plenitude has resulted in a huge increase in obesity across Europe e.g. in Hungary obesity has gone from 13.2% to 28.5% (1988-2009), in the UK from 14% to 26.1% (1991-2010) and even in countries with a traditional, low-fat diet such as Spain from 6.8% to 16% (1987-2009).

Numerous studies reveal that obesity leads to serious health problems such as diabetes1, increased risk of high blood pressure2 (and therefore heart attack) as well as mental health problems3. Currently 35million Europeans4 suffer from diabetes with this figure expected to rise to 43million by 20305. Despite the measures to increase the awareness of the implications of overweightness, the percentage of obese people in Europe (approx. 23% of women and 20% of men) is startling

1 http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandeventspggrp/imperialcollege/newssummary/news_5-9-2013-15-57-12 http://www.world-heart-federation.org/cardiovascular-health/cardiovascular-disease-risk-factors/obesity/3 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080602152913.htm4 Europe defined as: Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, the Republic of Ireland, Italy, Kosovo, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the UK. 5 http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/50080632.pdf

CommIttEE on EnvIronmEnt, ENVI IIpUblIC HEaltH and Food saFEty II

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 12

while the dominant trends do not look optimistic.

Useful Links: 1) Two good introductions and outlines of obesity http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/noncommunicable-diseases/obesity/obesityhttp://www.ucd.ie/lipgene/downloads/findings/consumer/Questions%20and%20Answers.pdf 2) Childhood obesity and current trends:http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/258781/COSI-report-round-1-and-2_final-for-web.pdf?ua=1 3) Facts and figures along with further links:http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/noncommunicable-diseases/obesity/data-and-statistics 4) OECD introduction to obesity and trends:http://www.oecd-il ibrary.org/sites/9789264183896-en/02/07/index.html?itemId=/content/chapter/9789264183896-26-en 5) Prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adolescents http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_fi le/0005/96980/2.3.-Prevalence-of-overweight-and-obesity-EDITED_layouted_V3.pdf?ua=1

Key ConflictsAs you enter the supermarket you face a great variety of low-cost, processed, fast-cooked products. Walls of highly calorific food, stuffed with salts, sugars and fats, which add to the palatability and our enjoyment of the food, are seen all over. These foods can be highly damaging to our health yet are of great appeal if you are on a humble budget. Isn’t it the right of each EU citizen to buy the foods they wish and for supermarkets to sell what they want according to the EU being an open market system under competition law? Latest estimates in the European Union suggest overweightness affects 30-70% and obesity affects 10-30% of adults. Polls reveal that family affluence is significantly associated with overweightness or obesity in around half of the countries surveyed in the HBSC study: those from lower affluence families are more likely to be overweight or obese6. When the income of a family is low people tend to save up on everything, so when they choose between healthy but expensive fruits, vegetables and farm-produced meat and dairy products and harmful but cheap goods, the final decision is obvious. What can the EU do to help these less well-off citizens?

6 http://www.growingup.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/documents/Maternal_Health_Report/GUI_Infant_Maternal_Health_4_web.pdf (page 60)

ENVI II

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie12 13

Despite the evident health detriment of supermarket and fast-food7 products, the food producers are not willing to change the composition of the products but instead choose to further popularise their items through pseudo health-conscious campaigns and introducing new ‘low-calories’, ‘zero-fat’, ‘sugar-free’ products. The EU must decide if it is fair to use advertising in this way.Lastly the EU member states will have to consider the cost of cutting obesity now so they can save on its results in the future.

Useful Links: 1) Report on links between non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and obesityh t t p : // c a r i b b e a n . s c i e l o . o r g / s c i e l o . p h p ? s c r i p t = s c i _arttext&pid=S0043-31442011000400014 2) BBC report linking obesity to loss in cognitive function:http://www.bbc.com/news/health-19323061 3) “Inactivity kills more than obesity”:http://www.bbc.com/news/health-30812439 4) Complications associated with obesity:http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/obesity/basics/complications/con-20014834 5) The public being manipulated by multi-national corporations:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r_9HPzMZTU 6) Four great info-graphics on the increase in food portion sizes:http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/wecan/portion/documents/PD1.pdf http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/wecan/portion/documents/PD2.pdf http://makinghealtheasier.org/newabnormal http://www.worldobesity.org/aboutobesity/world-map-obesity/ 7) Cost as a barrier to healthy eating:http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/10October/Pages/Healthy-food-costs-you-more-claim.aspx 8) The cost of obesity in Europe:https://euobserver.com/news/21720 9) The effect (especially on the young) of advertising:http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=570933

StakeholdersConsumers – all the European citizens buying goods in supermarkets and eating in restaurants and fast-food services thus vulnerable to or already affected by overweight and obesity

7 http://www.livestrong.com/article/530492-fast-food-rising-obesity/

ENVI II

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 14

The World Health Organisation (WHO) – is the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system. It is responsible for providing leadership on global health matters, shaping the health research agenda, setting norms and standards, articulating evidence-based policy options, providing technical support to countries and monitoring and assessing health trends.

The European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO) – membership association comprising 31 National Association Members, which promotes the study of obesity as well as facilitating and engaging in actions that reduce the burden of unhealthy excess weight in Europe through prevention and management

Food producing companies – some companies engaged in producing supply low-cost, semi-processed, fast-cooked products using GMOs, additives, antibiotics and other harmful substances

Private sector – the individual entrepreneurs or groups run business in food industry (should it be a corner shop or a small farm producing products for sale)Food safety authorities - e.g. EFSA (the European Food Safety Authority)

Useful Links: 1) WHO http://www.who.int/about/en/ 2) EASO http://easo.org/ 3) Who is affected by obesity:http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/noncommunicable-diseases/obesity/data-and-statistics 4) Jamie Oliver battles obesity (video):http://www.ted.com/talks/jamie_oliver?language=en 5) What Canada is doing to fight obesity:http://www.besthealthmag.ca/best-you/prevention/5-ways-canadians-are-fighting-obesity?slide=6 6) Cashing in on obesity:http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/aug/07/fat-profits-food-industry-obesity 7) Corporate responsibility for health:http://healthland.time.com/2012/06/22/study-soda-companies-corporate-social-responsibility-campaigns-are-harming-your-health/

Existing measures and Current LegislationThe EU is struggling to combat the issues of overweightness and obesity. New food labelling legislation has been introduced recently aiming to raise the awareness among the consumers on the actual composition of the items they purchase and to make it easier to make an informed, healthier decision. This

ENVI II

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie14 15

is the first step in improving the health situation across Member States as we look to provide the consumer with more information than they’ve previously had. Along with revised food labels Member States continue to introduce social media campaigns highlighting the present situation and carry out polls on trends in health issues. The WHO European Childhood Obesity Surveillance Initiative (COSI) is also designed to help the EU in fighting the overweight issues.

Useful Links: 1) This is quite a long document but is a really good description of changes recently made to food labels:http://www.fdii.ie/Sectors/FDII/FDII.nsf/vPages/News_and_Events~Press_release_archive~guide-to-new-eu-food-labelling-rules-launched/$file/FDII%20Labelling%20Guide.pdf 2) More colourful version of the above produced by an Irish food distributor:http://www.pallasfoods.eu/wp-content/uploads/20141204_A_-Guide_to_EU_Food_Information_Regulation.pdf 3) What WHO does:http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/childhood_what_can_be_done/en/ 4) Introduction to COSI (Childhood Obesity Surveillance Initiative):http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/disease-prevention/nutrition/activities/monitoring-and-surveillance/who-european-childhood-obesity-surveillance-initiative-cosi

Case StudyNorth Karelia is a region in the North-West of Finland. It is an area well known for its production of both meat and dairy. In the 1960s Finnish men had the world’s highest death rate from heart disease. This was largely down to the diet that the majority of the population lived by. A Finnish professor, Pekka Puska saw this as an issue that could be turned around with a number of lifestyle changes. In 1972 the region embarked on a new journey to reverse the high death rates and non-communicable diseases they were suffering from. https://www.idf.org/sites/default/files/attachments/article_593_en.pdfhttp://www.irishhealth.com/clin/ffl/finland.html

ENVI II

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 16

Following the release of some of the negotiating documents on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), how should the EU combat claims surrounding the issues of transparency and public dissatisfaction regarding the talks, while also ensuring the EU’s priorities and aims of the agreement

are clear going forward in talks?

By Claudia Dalby (IE) and Michal Koláček (CZ)

Introduction and BackgroundAt present, no Free Trade Agreement (FTA) exists between the United States (US) and the European Union (EU), despite the heavy dependence each economy has on the other. Together the EU and US represent over 50% of the global Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a measure used to gauge the size and health of a country’s economy. Every day, the EU and US trade goods and services worth €2 billion. As such, this transatlantic trade relationship has a major influence on the shape and growth of the global economy.

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a comprehensive free trade and investment treaty currently being negotiated between the EU and the US. The main goal of TTIP is to remove regulatory trading barriers and ‘harmonise’ trade laws, such as health and safety regulations, tariffs, strict food labelling regulations, and other red tape surrounding trade; all of which impose additional expenses on transnational corporations on both sides of the Atlantic and, therefore, to open up the US to European firms, and vice versa. If agreed, TTIP would become the largest trade agreement ever.

Key Questions- What are the most important aspects of the TTIP?- What has led the EU and the US to start the negotiations? - What is the agenda of the upcoming discussions?

Further readingEC: About TTIP – EU Negotiating Texts and 2-page Fact Sheetshttp://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1230

EC: FAQ on TTIPhttp://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in–focus/ttip/about–ttip/questions–and–answers/index_en.htm

CommIttEE on IntErnatIonal INTAtradE

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie16 17

EC: TTIP Explainedhttp://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/september/tradoc_151787.pdf

BBC: TTIP – The EU-US trade deal explainedhttp://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-30493297

EPRS: Towards an EU-US trade and investment dealhttp://epthinktank.eu/2014/07/11/towards-an-eu-us-trade-and-investment-deal-2/

Key ConflictsHowever, TTIP is already viewed with apprehension and scepticism from the general public, primarily due to the secret nature of the initial negotiations. With many protests and social movements springing up to try to combat TTIP, the EU took steps to increase the transparency of the negotiations. Eight negotiating documents were published and made available to the public in January 2015. While much of the negotiation process is still mired in secrecy, many hailed the EU’s move as one in the right direction.

Even after publishing the documents, the biggest opposition still comes from the introduction of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) into TTIP. This law will essentially give corporations increased rights to bypass and sue foreign government legal systems, such as when local health and safety regulations conflict with trade deals and threaten their investments. From the view of corporations, laws pertaining to tobacco, energy and water corporations hinder the ability to make profits. The new trade agreements threaten to make them even more powerful, granting them right to threaten means by which the government might seek to defend their citizens or the environment.

Public campaigns surrounding the issue have also drawn light onto regulation problems within TTIP. The worries suggest that harmonisation of standards might actually result in deregulation in cases in which regulation is needed, such as food safety standards, pesticide use or genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The EU also struggles in approaching the US with regards to geographical indications (GIs) as the US has an entirely opposite attitude towards them.

INTA

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 18

Despite problems that arise from TTIP, the benefits that would come from implementing free trade and cutting regulatory barriers between the world’s largest economies are plentiful. Mutually recognised similar safety standards will guarantee safety of EU and US services and products when shared across the Atlantic. By focusing work on regulation in areas where laws are similar in both the EU and US and making them more compatible, there will be economic gain at no cost to citizens and at no loss to the public sector.

Key Questions- Why is TTIP met with such opposition by the public?- How could the EU involve citizens more in ongoing discussions?- What are the controversial aspects of TTIP and how should they be tackled

by the EU?- Does it make sense to ratify TTIP without ISDS and regulation agreements?- Would the new regulation limit the rights of particular Member States?- How large is the anticipated economic growth, consequential of TTIP?

Further readingBusiness Europe: Why TTIP?http://www.businesseurope.eu/Content/Default.asp?PageID=867

International Business Times: TTIP and ISDS – The Obscure Trade Clause Threatening to Tear European Politics Aparthttp://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ttip-isds-obscure-trade-clause-threatening-tear-european-politics-apart-1470908

Corporate European Observatory: 10 reasons to oppose investors’ super-rights in EU trade dealshttp://corporateeurope.org/international-trade/2014/04/still-not-loving-isds-10-reasons-oppose-investors-super-rights-eu-trade

The Guardian: EU under pressure to allow GM food imports from US and Canadahttp://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/05/eu-gm-food-imports-us-canada

StakeholdersTTIP affects everyone who is a stakeholder in trade – that includes governments, transport, large and small businesses, and even the consumer – meaning this issue is very much close to home.

It is generally accepted that TTIP holds more importance for Europe than the US, which gives the US an upper hand in negotiations. EU GDP is expected to

INTA

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie18 19

increase more than the US counterpart, as well as creating more jobs in European countries which need it desperately. For the US, the opportunity to open sensitive EU markets for GMOs is the largest attraction for TTIP. However despite the consequences, for the two economies to successfully agree upon TTIP, it will require great flexibility, constructiveness and compromise on both sides, due to the large differences in regulations.

For consumers, the practical benefits of TTIP include lowering roaming charges, changes to import duties, and animal identification systems and food alert systems which would limit food scandal scares. Negative consequences for consumers may include finding food on their plates and products on their shelves which have not been produced according to European safety standards. In order to protect consumers, the EU must work hard to maintain exact wording on the environmental and consumer protection standards they deem appropriate.

Key Questions- What will be the biggest struggles during the negotiations?- In which areas shall not the EU step back from its demands?- How much is TTIP beneficial for corporate sector? - Which rights do citizens have in terms of having a say to TTIP?

Further readingVox EU: The problem with TTIPhttp://www.voxeu.org/article/problem-ttip

Financial Times: Businesses in support of TTIPhttp://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f40a72ba-a309-11e4-ac1c-00144feab7de.html

Blog: The consumer view of TTIPhttp://www.beuc.eu/blog/why-consumers-should-be-at-the-heart-of-ttip/

Existing Measures and Current LegislationThe negotiations were officially announced in February 2013 and started in July 2013 while being led by the European Commission (EC) and the US Trade Representative (USTR). They are based in week-long cycles altering between Washington and Brussels. In the first week of February 2015, the 8th round of the talks will take place in Brussels expecting to bring TTIP another step closer to consensus. The original projected deadline for the talks was by the end of 2014, however this was extended and the final document is promised to be prepared by the end of 2015.

INTA

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 20

Once negotiations are over, the document needs to be approved as the whole by EU Governments and Members of the European Parliament on the European side, and by both houses of the Congress on the side of the US. Nonetheless, even after ratifying TTIP, it will not utterly overrule and amend EU laws whilst any changes to EU laws need to be approved by the competent institutions. Yet, it is important to keep in mind that TTIP can alter the way of implementation of existing law, as well as creation of future law.

Key Questions- Who are the leading persons on each side of the barricade and what are

their stances?- How important is for both the EU and the US to finish TTIP as soon as

possible?- To what extent will TTIP affect EU law?

Further readingEurActiv: TTIPhttp://www.euractiv.com/topics/ttip

The Huffington Post: TTIPhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/ttip/

Business Report: Let’s finish TTIP, say EU leadershttp://www.iol.co.za/business/international/let-s-finish-ttip-say-eu-leaders-1.1797550#.VMRoj0eG8oE

INTA

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie20 21

Inward migration: a challenging opportunity. While many migrants come to Europe by choice in search of better living standards, others migrate in search of safety and shelter as they flee from their home countries. How should the EU balance catering for these migrants and their integration into European

society and still protect its external borders?

By Andrew Bathe (IE) and Anna Didyk (CZ)

Introduction and BackgroundViolence, persecution, conflicts and political instability in countries like Syria, Ethiopia, Libya, Eritrea, have caused an increased flow of immigrants and asylum-seekers to Europe. In the midst of this crisis illegal ferries services have been established who are profiting from people desperate to reach Europe by sea. In their hundreds people are making the journey to Europe in old unsafe boats that are completely unequipped to handle so many passengers. This results in many deaths. On the 3rd of October 2013 more than 350 migrants died while trying to reach Lampedusa, an Italian island, probably the most famous of such incidents. A few months later, during February 2014, 15 sub-Saharan migrants died on their way to the Spanish enclave of Ceuta. In order to prevent further tragedies, the project Mare Nostrum was created with purpose to save migrants from sea.

Most arrivals happen in summer, due to good weather conditions and because it is easier to boat cross the sea from Africa. The boats are also of bad quality since it offers the cheaper sailing option. The agency responsible for maintaining the security of the EUs borders is known as Frontex. According to Frontex’s annual report, the whole of 2013 saw a 48% rise in illegal migration compared with the previous year, from 72,437 to 107,365. Syrians accounted for almost a quarter of last year’s total - 25,546 - with Eritreans (11,298), Afghans (9,021) and Albanians (9,500) making up the main other nationalities. Of course all of this inward migration is not evenly spread across the EU, for instance the counties of Europe’s Southern coast such as Italy and Greece receive the vast majority of migrants fleeing North Africa. This leads a disproportionate strain put on local governments who are tasked with providing food, shelter and medicine to all the migrants they receive.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/e-library/docs/infographics/immigration/migration-in-eu-infographic_en.pdf

CommIttEE on CIvIl lIbErItEs,JUstICE and HomE aFFaIrs

LIBE

LIBE

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 22

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2841686/The-truth-East-European-migration-One-30-Latvians-living-Britain-one-60-Poles-statistics-don-t-latest-influx.htmlhttp://frontex.europa.eu/assets/Publications/Risk_Analysis/Annual_Risk_Analysis_2014.pdf

Key ConflictsThe EU has always recognised the availability for an individual to seek asylum as a key human right and it prides itself as a safe haven for those fleeing persecution or serious harm. However in recent years, major world events such as the Arab Spring, the civil war in Syria and the war with ISIS/ISIL have seriously tested the EU resolve as it struggles to cope with the sheer number of migrants arriving at its borders coupled with an extraordinary back log of asylum applications to be processed.

The Common European Asylum System is a relatively new EU initiative which has adopted several EU laws concerning the whole asylum process and it was created in the hope that it would streamline the asylum application process; improve the conditions of migrants who arrive in the EU and to establish a coherent implementation of the standards across all member states. However the new system has been largely unsuccessful in achieving many of these goals.

The “Dublin” system - which states that in the first Member State where a migrant arrives, his fingerprints are stored or an asylum claim is made, is responsible for the claimant - channels most asylum applicants to the periphery of the EU. However Germany, France, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and Belgium handle 70% of asylum cases, and none of them are located at the external border of the EU. This happened because the second Dublin Regulation resulted in Greece’s asylum system breaking down and transfers of immigrants to Italy, Hungary, Poland and Malta have been suspended due to the deteriorating situation there. Many families were torn apart by the Dublin transfer process because governments were focused on removing asylum seekers to the EU country that they first entered, rather than working to keep families together.

Also, asylum seekers spend months in detention centres. The Dublin III regulation was created in order to solve this problem: it claims that while waiting for a decision on their appeal the individual has the right to remain in the country and that a State will not be permitted to transfer a person if there is a risk that s/he will be subjected to inhuman treatment in another Member State.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/27/uk-mediterranean-migrant-rescue-plan

LIBE

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie22 23

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Migration_and_migrant_population_statistics&printable=yes

StakeholdersFrontex – the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union, the European Union border agency. Frontex promotes, coordinates, and develops European border management in line with the EU fundamental rights charter.

The European Union – The organisation responsible for the existing policies such as the Common European Asylum System which has set common standards on reception conditions and rules on who qualified for refugee status. However, with the geopolitical situation constantly changing and the inflow of migrants rising, are there any changes to be made?

Member States – however good the legislation proposed by the European Commission is, the main task is always its implementation on the national level because ultimately is up to the individual Member State to decide how much asylum seekers it wishes to accommodate. Often Member States usually don’t want to take the responsibility and try to transfer refugees to another state.

Citizens of the EU – in many EU countries, citizens are against the inflow of immigrants, which makes it harder to implement EU standards.

Existing Measures The Dublin Regulation deals with the situation where an applicant for protection makes a claim in one European Union (EU) member State, but has previously made a claim in (or been present in) another. In such cases, the person may be transferred back to the Country of entry into the EU , which in general will be deemed to hold the responsibility for determining their claim.

Dublin IIThis Regulation establishes the principle that only one Member State is responsible for examining an asylum application. The objective is to avoid asylum seekers from being sent from one country to another, and also to prevent abuse of the system by the submission of several applications for asylum by one person.

Dublin III - became applicable on 1 January 2014 and seeks to improve conditions for persons seeking protection in Europe.

Mare Nostrum was a EU-funded cross-border project exploring new ways of

LIBELIBE

LIBE

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 24

protecting the Mediterranean coastline which ended in October 2014. Mare Nostrum, had a budget of EUR 4.32 million, of which 90% was funded by the EU. It was a year-long mission to rescue migrants. Italian navy has plucked out more than 100,000 shipwrecked refugees.

Triton – launched on November 1st 2014, in comparison to Mare Nostrum, where the priorities were proactive search and rescue, Triton focuses on borders surveillance and operate only within 30 miles of the Italian coast. Budget - €2.9m, less than a third that of its Mare Nostrum’s. Coordinated by Frontex, under Italian command.

LIBE

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie24 25

Conflicts in Ukraine, Libya and Mali have brought the European Union’s ability to project its power internationally into question. How should the Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy define Europe’s international

role and establish the Union as a significant international actor?

Chaired by Ben English (IE)

Introduction and BackgroundWith the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia; the continued fallout from wars in Libya and Mali have brought war close to the borders of the European Union; thousands of European citizens have joined Jihaadist movements in Syria and Iraq, the European Union’s international interests have never before been so overtly challenged.Historic precedent suggests that Europe will have trouble addressing these chal-lenges. From the bloody aftermath of the fall of Yugoslavia to the more recent conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Europe has seemed incapable of pushing its interests substantively internationally.

Key conflictsThe Treaty of Amsterdam (1999) established a Common Foreign and Security Pol-icy for the European Union. With European integration developing at a rapid pace in a broad range of policy areas from monetary policy to agriculture now Europe was attempting to develop a common approach on the international stage. With the ending of colonisation in the 1980s, the end of the Cold War and the emer-gent power of numerous Asian countries from Japan to India, it was apparent that European states were individually losing their international clout.

However, the European Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy has largely been derided as an example of the limits of European integration. The national governments of member states have zealously guarded their control over for-eign policy. Only in taxation policy has resistance to integration been comparably strong. At the same time a vast range of foreign policy interests exists across the Union. The result has largely been gridlock.

While France is ever keen to prove its continued status as a Great Power by lead-ing military expeditions such as in Mali, cultural hangovers of its role in two World Wars leave Germany refusing to even countenance its use of military force abroad. While much of central Europe’s economy’s depend heavily on Russian oil and gas, much of Eastern Europe, especially the Baltic states, remain intensely fearful of Russian expansionist intentions. The international interests of European mem-ber states often run in completely opposite directions.

CommIttEE on ForEIgn aFFaIrs AFET

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 26

Key questions• How should the European Union face these growing international challenges? • Does the European Union have a role in conflict resolution in areas such as

North Africa or the Middle East? • Can the European Union overcome national clashes of interest to collectively

deal with international security threats? • Can economic, human rights and securi-

ty goals be simultaneously pursued in the European Union’s in-teractions with authoritarian powers such as China and Russia?

Stakeholders and Measures in placePreviously the institutional framework of the European Union has been criticised as incapable of properly implementing foreign policy in the rare occasion a cohe-sive position can be found amidst the maelstrom of national interests. However, the Treaty of Lisbon (2009) attempted to address this. It brought the various aspects of European Foreign policy under the leadership of a single person, the High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy who would be responsible for coordinating and implementing a European foreign policy across the various European institutions. It also established the European External Action Service to essentially serve as foreign service staff to the High Representative. While Eu-rope has articulated a more cohesive position on many issues since Lisbon, many have criticised the High Representative as being unassertive internationally and unable to push for a strong international position within the European Union’s political system. However, many hope that the replacement of Baroness Cath-erine Ashton by the Italian Foreign Minister Federica Mogherini this year as High Representative should represent a strengthening of the role.

While the High Representative can serve an important role in the coordination an implementation of the European Common Foreign and Security Policy and joint-ly, with the President of the European Council, serves as the face of the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union, it is the National governments of member states that remain the main decision makers in European foreign pol-icy. Governments in Dublin, Stockholm, Madrid and in the twenty five other Euro-pean capitals retain a veto over European foreign policy action.

Further ReadingEuropa.eu overview of the European Common Foreign & Security Policy:http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/treaties/lisbon_treaty/ai0025_en.htm

Video from Irish Institute for European Affairs on the role of High Representative:http://www.iiea.com/events/the-high-representative-for-foreign-affairs-and-

AFET

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie26 27

europes-voice-in-the-world

The Economist from 2010 on the new position of High Representative & Baroness Catherine Ashton:http://www.economist.com/node/15498000?zid=309&ah=80dcf288b8561b-012f603b9fd9577f0e

The Guardian on incoming High Representative Federica Mogherini:http://www.theguardian.com/global/2014/aug/30/portrait-federica-mogheri-ni-eu-foreign-policy-chief

On EU action in Syria:http://www.iss.europa.eu/publications/detail/article/the-eu-and-syria-every-thing-but-force/

BBC on EU Training Force in Mali:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-22391857

Reuters reporting on EU sanctions for Russia:http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/25/us-ukraine-crisis-eu-idUSKCN0HK-1WZ20140925

This Topic Overview was taken from the 2014 Dublin Regional Session Academic Prep Kit

AFET

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 28

With the European Council agreement for Member States to have the final say on GMO cultivation, the EU has taken a step towards a new era of GMO legislation. Given that many Members of the European Parliament are still doubtful about GMO cultivation, how should the EU move forward to prepare for consequences to future generations and bear the advantages

to GMOs in mind?

By Brendan Byrne (IE) & Karolina Kraft (SE)

Introduction and BackgroundA Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) is an organism whose genetic material has been altered to contain a segment of DNA from another organism in order to obtain a characteristic that does not occur in it naturally. Such characteristics include resistance to pests and viruses, tolerance to herbicides and severe weather conditions, as well as increased crop yield. Due to these characteristics GMOs have become widely popular in fields of agriculture, medical research, and environmental management.

The supporters of GMOs assert that the application of GMOs has lead to the creation of projects like Golden Rice and drought-resistant GM crops in deserts in order to battle the issues of food shortage and world hunger. Whereas anti-GMO campaigners argue that GM crops may pose serious dangers. The concern is that genetic manipulation may cause changes in the nutritional value and allergenic properties of the products, evolution of pesticide-resistant insects, and a number of health issues.

The EU has begun to address the aforementioned concerns by implementing strict GMO labelling laws and a moratorium on the growth and import of GM crops. As per the current legislation any company wishing to cultivate GMOs must first undergo a GMO Authorisation Procedure.

However, legislation is currently being agreed upon by the European Parliament and European Council which would give Member States the possibility to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of GMOs on their territory, without affecting the EU risk assessment; thus placing the final say in relation to specific GMOs in the hands of individual Members States rather than the EU.

CommIttEE on EnvIronmEnt, ENVI IpUblIC HEaltH and Food saFEty I

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie28 29

Key Questions- What are the advantages and disadvantages of GMOs compared to naturally grown products? - Which GMOs are allowed in the EU and for what purposes? - Which EU Member States cultivate GMOs, which allow their import and which forbid it?- What’s the difference between GMO and traditional selective breeding?

Useful Links • Genetically modified organism (GMO)• http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/897705/genetically-modified-organism-GMO/279978/GMOs-in-medicine-and-research

• A decade of EU-funded GMO research (2001 - 2010)http://ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-funded_gmo_research.pdf

• Modifying the Endless Debate Over Genetically Modified Cropshttp://science.time.com/2013/05/14/modifying-the-endless-genetically-modified-crop-debate/

• Evaluation of GMO cultivationhttp://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/gmo/evaluation/index_en.htm

• Genetically Modified Cropshttp://www.greenfacts.org/en/gmo/index.htm?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Press+Release+Happy+International+Year+of+Biodiversity&utm_rnational+Year+of+Biodiversity+CID_71ca617ae5e25b7f3f541e7eed6d3b62&utm_source=VitaminesCEmailing&utm_term=GeneticallyModifiedCrops

Key Conflicts First it has to be noted that EU authorities have approved only two GMO crops for commercial cultivation within the EU, and one was later blocked by the EU General Court in 2013. Therefore Maize is at present the only GM crop cultivated within EU borders. GM crops are introduced largely through imports from America and Asia.

Therefore, one of the key areas of controversy related to GMO products concern imported GM food labelling. It is impossible for the naked eye to differentiate genetically modified products from naturally grown ones, thus the demand of the consumers for those products to be labelled.

ENVI I

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 30

The role of government regulations is another area of controversy. Until very recently, Member States weren’t fully entitled to make decisions concerning GMO cultivation on their territory. However on the 13th of January 2015 the European Parliament passed a new law that allows Member States to decide on their production. But environmental groups have largely criticised an opt-out measure.

Eight GM modified crops await EU approval but as mentioned, only one variety of maize (corn) has been grown commercially. Following the new ruling, some EU countries may now allow more as the decisions falls into their own hands. These include Britain, which does a lot of plant science, and Spain, which has over 130,000 hectares of GM maize alreayd. Yet equally many countries (for example Germany) are planning to become GM-free.

Contamination from GMOs to non-GM crops, or cross-pollination, will still be a major concern going forward. Not only is there a large fear of cross-species pollination, where a GM crop may reproduce with a non-GM crop, there is also the problem of cross-border pollination. Even if Germany moves to have all GMOs banned across the country, the risk of cross-pollination with Germany’s natural crops is not eliminated. The EU’s new legislation has given the final decision to each nation, making this a national issue, but cross-border pollination could lead to GMOs becoming a pan-European problem.

Key Questions- What are the potential consequences of GMO food labelling? - How should the decision making process be balanced between the European Union and the individual Member States - What are the economical and social benefits of GMOs?

Useful Links • Frequently asked questions on genetically modified foodshttp://www.who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-genetically-modified-food/en/

• GM Science Review: An open review of the science relevant to GM crops and food based on interests and concerns of the publichttp://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121212135622/http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file15655.pdf

• Public views on GMOs: deconstructing the mythshttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1083956/

ENVI I

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie30 31

• EU Agriculture Commissioner promises GMO labelling, despite TTIPhttp://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2015-articles/15878-eu-agriculture-commissioner-promises-gmo-labelling-despite-ttip

• Commission Regulation (EC) No 50/2000 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32000R0050

Stakeholders A crucial stakeholder is the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which is the keystone of EU risk assessment regarding food and feed safety. EFSA is an independent European agency funded by the EU budget that operates separately from the European Commission, European Parliament and EU Member States, but works in close collaboration with national authorities by providing independent scientific advice on existing and emerging risks.

The European Commission, as the EU legislative power that defines the legal framework around GMOs , the European Parliament, which has the right to propose amendments to said legal frameworks, and Member States with their aspiration for wider decision-making power concerning GMO legislation are all also key stakeholders in GMO issues.

It is central to also consider biotech corporations, as they’re the ones essentially responsible for GMO advancements. The biggest companies of the field are Monsanto (USA), DuPont (USA), Syngenta (Switzerland), Groupe Limagrain (France).

Last but not least, the essential stakeholders are of course the consumers and the farmers, who are the ones directly affected by genetically modified products both in terms of profit and health risks.

Key Questions - Who benefits the most from GMOs? - How is each stakeholder affected by the actions of other stakeholders? - What are the benefits and risks for each stakeholder?

Useful Links

• Parliament backs GMO opt-out for EU member statesh t t p : // w w w . e u r o p a r l . e u r o p a . e u / n e w s / e n / n e w s - r o o m /

ENVI I

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 32

content/20150109IPR06306/html/Parliament-backs-GMO-opt-out-for-EU-member-states

• About the GMO Panel and the GMO Unithttp://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/gmo/aboutgmo.htm

• The world’s top 10 seed companies: who owns Nature?http://www.gmwatch.org/gm-firms/10558-the-worlds-top-ten-seed-companies-who-owns-nature

• Who benefits from GM crops?https://www.foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/publications/foei_who_benefits_from_gm_crops_2014.pdf

Existing Measures and Current Legislation Previously, Genetically modified food products can only be allowed on the market once they have received authorisation. The EU carries out the authorisation process, and the resulting decision applies to all EU countries. Yet the change in legislation in January now allows EU countries to ‘opt-out’ even if the EU authorise the GMO. The European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) runs a risk assessment on the GMO. EFSA then makes the application summary available to the public.

As defined in the Commission Regulation No 1830/2003 regarding traceability and labelling, operators shall ensure that the information of a product consist of or containing GMOs is transmitted to the operator receiving the product. Concerning the labelling of products consisting of or containing GMOs, operators shall ensure that the information appears on a label or in the display of the product.

Achieving a safe coexistence of GM and non-GM food is one of EU main goals when it comes to the introduction of GMOs. The European Coexistence Bureau is an institution specifically created to establish control in this matter. Yet the way forward for this safe coexistence is still unclear.

Key Questions- What are the prospects for GMOs in the EU taking into consideration the wider range of Member States’ decision-making power? - What guidelines, besides labelling requirements, should farmers follow when cultivating authorised GM crops?

Useful Links• Deliberate release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)

ENVI I

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie32 33

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/agriculture/food/l28130_en.htm

• COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION on guidelines for the development of national strategies and best practices to ensure the co-existence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farminghttp://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/publi/reports/coexistence2/guide_en.pdf

ENVI I

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 34

“Fighting corruption needs to come from the top and that is where Europe fails the test” - Cobus de Swardt, Managing Director of the global Transparency International Secretariat in Berlin. With confidence in EU institutions at an all-time low and 120 billion Euros missing from EU coffers, how should the EU work to fight corruption in its institutions and their employees?

By David Corish (IE) & Sophie Silverstein (CH)

Introduction70% of Europeans believe corruption is present in the EU institutions. Suffering from a decline in trust and public confidence in EU institutions saw repercussions in the May 2014 elections, as a larger representation of extremist parties were elected into the new European Parliament. The Justice and Home Affairs Agenda 2020 renewed the European Union’s commitment to tackle corruption in its institutions, as corruption in the public sector is one of the main impediments to efficiency, foreign direct investment and innovation. EU institutions are vulnerable to corruption due to loopholes and poor enforcement of rules on ethics, transparency and financial control. This is no surprise when we reflect on the unregulated lobbying system and the failure of many Member States to ban undisclosed political donations. Furthermore, obstacles for citizens in accessing information as well as a lack of a code of conduct for many parliamentarians only further fuel the democratic deficit undermining the legitimacy of EU institutions. Yet commitment is needed from the top, if we are really to fight the corruption that exists in Europe - a joint effort, across all Member States, is required.

Key Questions:- What corruption in the EU have you come across?- What do you think are the main motives of corruption?

Further Reading:- Excellent introductory article on corruption within the EU: - http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/business/international/anti-

corruption-group-finds-fault-with-european-union.html?_r=3- Infographic description on the integrity of the EU by Transparency

International:http://www.transparencyinternational.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/EUIS_By_ Numbers.pdf

Key ConflictsCorruption in EU institutions has been facilitated by a new, more rapid lawmaking

CommIttEE on ConstItUtIonalaFFaIrs

AFCO

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie34 35

process known as ‘trialogue’, informal meetings of representatives of the European Commission, European Parliament and EU Council where the majority of EU laws are drafted. Yet search for any mention of trialogues in the EU treaties and you will draw a blank. There is no public record of these meetings. The two points at which MEPs vote for laws, in committee before and at the end of the trialogue process, and the final vote among all 751 deputies, are both in public, but this only camouflages the fact that most of the negotiations are held behind closed doors with no public access. In addition, despite the accessibility of EU employees by lobbyists, meetings with and the input of lobbyists regarding draft legislation, laws and amendments are not recorded or disclosed. Thus the influence and power of Lobbyists within the institutions is unknown.

Meanwhile, committees monitoring compliance with ethics rules lack independence as they are staffed with current or former members of the institutions, thus being less likely to investigate cases of senior employees. Furthermore, they do even not proactively monitor compliance (e.g. through conducting spot-checks on asset declarations) or have powers to issue binding recommendations or administrative sanctions for breaches of rules. This lack of monitoring and verification make it difficult to enforce the rules that are already in existence.

Key Questions:- What are the benefits of Trialogue discussions? Can it be improved?- How much influence do Lobbyists have within the EU institutions?- How can efficiency of policymaking at the EU be conciliated with the

need for openness and tracibility?

Further Reading:- Lobbying within the EU:

http://www.transparencyinternational.eu/focus_areas/lobbying-the-eu/ - EU trilogues undermine parliamentary committees:

http://www.euractiv.com/future-eu/trilogues-boost-influence-majori-analysis-515205

Stakeholders Countries Specific countries are worst off in the face of corruption such as Spain, Italy and Greece with 95%, 97% and 99% corruption respectively. Romania and Bulgaria are also in this group and as a consequence they are currently blocked from entering the Schengen zone. The other end of the spectrum is occupied countries that have most adequately responded to corruption such as Finland that control political party financing through its 2010 Act on Political Parties that was amended to correspond with GRECO1 demands or the United Kingdom that instated the 1 Council of Europe group of states against corruption

AFCO

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 36

Bribery Act in 2010.

Institutions and people Formed in 1999, the Council of Europe Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) aims to achieve compliance with the anti-corruption standards set up by the Council of Europe through monitoring and mutual evaluation of Member States. The goal is that Member States begin to encourage each other to take action against corruption.

Transparency International is a global anti-corruption group with an EU office headed by Carl Dolan. Its successes include drawing up international anti-corruption conventions and prosecuting corrupt leaders and businesses. It works through an interaction of international and local branches and measures.

Cecilia Malmström was the EU Commissioner on Home Affairs in the period 2010-2014 and was in charge of the EU Anti-Corruption Report published in February 2014.

Key Questions: - Do you think measures against corruption are most affective on a national,

EU or international level?- In line with the first question, how much responsibility should single countries

assume for their internal corruption issues?

Further reading:- Website of GRECO (includes overview of actions and further resources):

http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/greco/default_en.asp - Corruption across EU ‘breathtaking’ – EU Commission: http://www.bbc.

com/news/world-europe-26014387 - Transparency International: Corruption fuels euro zone crisis: http://www.

euractiv.com/euro-finance/transparency-international-corru-news-513183 - Corrupt EU politicians think they have a right to rob their countries: http://

rt.com/shows/sophieco/175340-corrupt-eu-economy-money/ - Transparency International – Overview: http://www.transparency.org/

whoweare/organisation

Existing measures and current legislation The differences between Member States pose an obstacle to eradicating corruption despite measures against it being in place. For one, the specific problems connected to corruption vary from country to country and the implementation of measures varies from one state to another. Below is a brief overview of measures already in place.

AFCO

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie36 37

Adopted by a total of 41 countries and established in 1994, the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention defines legal rules that criminalise bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions and enforces these. In 2009 this was strengthened by the Recommendation for Further Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials.

Set up by the Commission in 2003, the Framework Decision aims to eradicate passive and active bribery in the private sector. However, the second implementation report on this decision showed unsatisfactory results. The Stockholm Programme published in 2011set the EU agenda in the period 2010-2014 in the areas of justice, freedom and security. It gives the Commission the mandate to develop a comprehensive EU anti-corruption policy in line with an internal security strategy.

The 2014 EU Anti-Corruption Report was created with the intention of generating the political momentum to tackle corruption and raising awareness on corruption overall. It divides issue connected with corruption into four areas; the political dimension, control mechanisms and prevention, repression (legal response) and specific risk areas.

Key Questions: - Why do you think there is such a significant divide between measures

planned by various EU and non-EU bodies and those actually implemented by the Member States?

- How do you think the EU can diminish the gap between measures merely outlined and measures implemented by the Member States?

- Do you see the recent Anti-Corruption Report as a step in the right direction to eradicate corruption or as an insignificant measure?

Further reading: - First EU integrity report highlights risks of corruption in European institutions:

http://www.transparency.org/news/pressrelease/first_eu_integrity_report_highlights_risks_of_corruption_in_european_instit

- European Commission – Corruption: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/organized-crime-and-human-trafficking/corruption/index_en.htm

- The Stockholm Programme : http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/human_rights/fundamental_rights_within_european_union/jl0034_en.htm

- OECD Bribery and Corruption resources: http://www.oecd.org/daf/anti-bribery/oecdantibriberyconvention.htm

AFCO AFCO

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 38

West Africa is dependent on external economic and medical relief to stop the spread of Ebola, as are many of health ser-vices and resources in developing countries What further mea-sures should the EU take to tackle this epidemic, prevent the expansion of the virus in other countries, and develop health-

care systems abroad in the long-term?

by Ellen O’Doherty (IE) and Yannick Weber (CH)

Introduction and BackgroundThe current outbreak of the Ebola virus in Western Africa, killing over 6,300 in-dividuals, began in March 2014. It is assumed that the virus was transmitted to humans by infected bush meat. There is no known cure for Ebola, despite recent research efforts and the development of experimental cures such as ZMapp. The virus is contracted through contact with blood or bodily fluids of an infected indi-vidual. The seriousness of the crisis is highlighted by the fact that Ebola has a 70% mortality rate. The knock on effect of the Ebola outbreak is an accompanying hu-manitarian crisis, in that food, water and sanitation become scarce.

On the 8th of August 2014, Margaret Chan, Director General of the World Health Organisation (WHO), declared the Ebola outbreak in West Africa a public health emergency of international concern, calling for a coordinated international re-sponse in the implementation of “extraordinary measures for containment to deal with the virus”

• http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/thematic/wa_ebo-la_en.pdf#view=fit

• http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/12/141230-ebola-virus-ori-gin-insect-bats-meliandou-reservoir-host/

Key ConflictsIn the worst affected countries, Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia, fears and mis-understandings of the virus pose a major challenge. Instead of quickly disposing of highly infectious dead bodies, funeral rituals involving touching of the sick were still conducted. Additionally, a great mistrust in government facilitated the spread of the disease. Sometimes Ebola patients were hidden from authorities, so as to prevent them from being taken to a hospital where seemingly everyone leaving was dead.

The three countries, often lacking even basic medical infrastructure, have re-ceived different levels of international support and emergency aid - Liberia being

CommIttEE on dEvElopmEnt III DEVE III

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie38 39

vastly supported by the US and Guinea receiving prompt help from former colo-nialist power France. Sierra Leone, also struggling with a number of health worker strikes, was not supported on a comparable scale.

A further key conflict associated with the Ebola crisis lies in the appropriate al-location of research and developmental resources. The virus has claimed over 6,300 lives, and there have been more than 21,261 reported cases. Comparatively, last year more than a million people died of tuberculosis and AIDS respectively, making research on Ebola less of a priority to pharmaceutical companies with their limited resources.

• http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21636081-slowly-and-messily-struggle-against-virus-being-won-exorcising

• http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/healthtopics/ebola_marburg_fevers/Pages/Info-graphics.aspx

StakeholdersThe wide range of stakeholders in the Ebola outbreak reflects the seriousness of the crisis; they range from local to international. A major player is the World Health Organisation, a United Nations body involved in setting up treatment cen-tres, raising awareness about Ebola through programmes such as community ed-ucation and providing epidemiological data.

With Ebola patients transferred to a number of European countries for treatment, Ebola has become the worry of not only the EU as a whole, but also to individ-ual national governments - especially as there are confirmed cases of infections of medical personnel in these countries. In addition to co-ordinated EU efforts, these individual governments contribute to efforts to contain the virus.

The EU has contributed over €1.2billion in financial assistance to combat the cri-sis. An EU Ebola Task force has also been established to coordinate the Euro-pean effort with other actors. Commissioner-elect Christos Stylianides has been appointed to the role of EU Ebola response Coordinator, tasked with reinforcing and coordinating the European effort.

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) is ‘a worldwide movement of current and former field staff’ that offers medical humanitarian assistance internationally. MSF cur-rently operate eight Ebola case management centres (CMCs), providing approxi-mately 650 beds in isolation, and two transit centres.

The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent (IFRC) Ebola relief efforts operate in 16 African countries. They provide safe and dignified burials,

DEVE III

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 40

community education and engagement, monitoring and contact tracing, emo-tional and psychosocial support, and clinical case management.

• http://www.who.int/csr/disease/ebola/en/• http://www.msf.org/diseases/ebola• http://www.ifrcmedia.org/ebola/

Existing measures and Current LegislationLocal airports have begun exit screening for travellers leaving Ebola affected countries. This screening has been in operation since August and enforcement is a priority of both the WHO and the EU. While compliance is high, the incubation period of up to 21 days, during which the infected show no symptoms and are not yet contagious, makes the sustainability and effectiveness of the measure appear questionable.

The European Commission is active with financial aid, experts on the ground, supply of mobile laboratories, support to the local authorities, reinforcement of national health infrastructures, coordination for the delivery of supplies and medical evacuations. In addition to the work co-ordinated by the Commission, individual member States have also pledged more than € 600 million to assist Ebola affected countries and have already supplied assistance in-kind such as airlifts of supplies. The Commission has also mobilised over €137 million in devel-opmental assistance. An organised system of medical evacuation has also been implemented in which humanitarian workers diagnosed with the Ebola virus are to be evacuated to a European hospital within 48 hours. Three European Mobile Laboratories (EMlabs) have been deployed to the affected region for the detec-tion of the virus and training of health workers; an additional one will be opera-tional in early 2015.

Aside from the question, what more the EU can to do in order to contain the spread of Ebola, what long term repercussions does this crisis have for the EU’s development policies? What lessons can be learned from the current crisis? How can these be applied to long-term healthcare development policies in the future in order to improve medical infrastructure abroad?

• http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_consumer/dyna/enews/enews.cfm?al_id=1558)

• http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-1903_en.htm• http://europa.eu/newsroom/highlights/special-coverage/ebola/index_en-

.htm• http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-26835233• http://www.euronews.com/2014/10/28/ebola-in-europe-the-situa-

DEVE III

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie40 41

tion-is-excellent-professor-jean-claude-manuguerra/• http://ec.europa.eu/health/ebola/index_en.htm• ht tp ://eur- lex .europa .eu/ lega l-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?ur i=CE-

LEX:32013D1082&from=EN

DEVE III

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 42

With supply chains of multinational corporations being spread across an ever greater number of countries to take advantage of less regulated labour markets in the developing world, how should Europe act to ensure that products bought and sold within the common market are produced safely and ethically?

By Julia Fahy (IE) & Adam Stanford (UK)Introduction and BackgroundWith increased globalisation and a growing interdependence between European Union Member States and countries further afield, it is important to discuss the factors of trade affected in this transition - particularly focusing on labour. The EU is strict on regulation in the labour market, insisting it must be applied across all Member States. Currently EU Labour Law defines the rights and responsibilities of a worker within the EU, covering two main areas - working conditions, and discourse between workers and employees. Flexicurity - combining flexibility and security in the workplace - is one of the goals mentioned across Member States. Along with specified regulation for Health and Safety, and suitable working conditions, flexicurity encourages safe and ethical practices. The goals of the current EU Labour Law include making sure that “countries and businesses compete fairly on the strength of their products – not by lowering labour law standards”, this is a goal that now must be considered in a wider context considering our ties to labour markets outside of the EU.

In operating across many borders, multinational companies are escaping much direct regulation that exists within the EU, and are being afforded the opportunity to compete with an unfair advantage. However, it is not only the inequality in the the market that concerns the EU, but rather the origins of the products that are then sold within our control. It is the lack of regulation that fuels this outsourcing of labour to the developing world - evidently implying cheap labour that has no guarantee of safe or ethical practices.

The labour market is very competitive - the cheapest option for employers, multinational corporations in this case, is most often the one that they will chose. Less regulation brings less cost for the employer - for example, lower wages can be provided and less money can be spent on health and safety regulations. The competitive market of labour is thus going to favour those less regulated systems - less regulation means we can not guarantee safe and ethical practices. Without being able to rely on a direct influence, how can the EU ensure adequate health and safety regulations be implemented in the global labour market?

CommIttEE on dEvElopmEnt II DEVE II

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie42 43

It is time for the EU to focus on how we can influence the safety standards of labour markets in developing countries. We must draw attention to the process, and not simply the product that arrives in Europe for our consumption, ensuring not to associate with the practices that it condones within its own borders.

Useful Links:International Labour Standards (lots of summarised information)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_labor_standards#cite_note-Berik56-17 Post 2015 development goalshttp://www.ilo.org/global/topics/post-2015/lang--en/index.htm

Key Conflicts The key conflicts of this topic lie within the lack of direct influence the EU has outside its own borders. It is important to explore how the EU can ensure the standards we advocate for corporations in our jurisdiction are transferable to their actions in developing countries. The Labour Laws that exist in the EU are less evident when discussing the working conditions in many developing countries. Many challenges facing developing countries have been outlined in a report published by the International Labour office in 2010, which must be considered in search of the solution to this problem. These challenges include the fiscal capacity of such states and the lack of social dialogue, “where worker organisations are often weak, and collective bargaining mechanisms are typically inadequate”. It is clear that the power the EU holds in influencing multinational corporations and the products that enter our trading market must be employed in this case.

The explicit power the EU has in regulating Member States is not as clear cut when it comes to influencing happenings in developing countries, or in multinational corporations whose base may also fall outside of the EU’s control. Therefore, in solving this dilemma it is important to consider options other than direct regulation. There are indeed other aspects of this scenario that can be influenced by the EU. The EU is a large actor in the global trade market and thus the power that we hold in these trade relationships should be explored in our goal to regulate how multinational corporations act outside of the EU. How can the EU use the power they have in trading markets, as a buyer and seller of goods, to influence better labour conditions in developing countries?

DEVE II

DEVE II

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 44

It is also interesting to consider the positive effects that trade can have on developing countries. If the EU could ensure safe and ethical practices in the labour market of developing countries, it is expected that the economy and standard of living in these countries would improve also.

Useful Links:10 benefits of trade for developing countrieshttp://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/january/tradoc_148991.pdf

Trade and Globalisation (lots of good links on this website)http://www.globalization101.org/trade-introduction/ Conflict with forcing higher working standards in developing countries (stops at 2.30)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDW-cNJ-WWw

StakeholdersAt a base level there is a trio of significant stakeholders in relation to the European labour market and trade - workers, employers and governments across the EU. Each group has a voice that the EU is obligated to represent, and different stances on the topic. The priority of workers is maximising their rights and income, employers seek lax regulations in order to increase their competitive edge, and governments wish to satisfy both parties whilst maintaining trade markets.

More specifically beyond this, however, are the following invested parties: Multinational Corporations: A multinational corporation is an organization that controls productions of goods or services in one or more countries other than the home country. An example of this would be Activision Blizzard, which is based in California but has subsidiaries in other nations such as Ireland. A change in regulation could impact a corporation’s competitive edge by forcing certain minimum standards of either wage or welfare for their workers, potentially damaging their profits. They are pertinent stakeholders, given that a lax focus on ethical standards allows these corporations to be particularly competitive. A growth in regulation or any other implemented change would therefore directly impact upon the interest of these companies. The ILO: The International Labour Organisation exists beyond just the boundaries of the EU, and in this sense its program of international social dialogue has the potential to impact upon multinationals. It is a legislative model that aims to globalise these regulations. The ILO is a concentrated group of the United

DEVE II

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie44 45

Nations that assists its 185 member countries in social dialogue to promote rights at work. Their “Declaration on Fundamental Principles of Rights at Work” claims these conditions to be universal and applying to all people. Member States must comply with their directions – however compliance is left to the interpretation of each Member State.

The WTO: Another NGO that is invested in this topic, the World Trade Organisation states as a primary goal a desire to improve the working conditions of those within its member states. The EU acts as a single unitary actor within the WTO. A consideration of multinational production is vital in this case. The Member States: Each Member State is an individual actor in this dilemma. Although we act as a union, it is their responsibility to implement the laws and regulations put forward by the EU. In this situation, every Member State has a context of its own, different priorities and thus varying interpretations of rights in the labour market. Therefore, any change to policy must be considered in light of each state, and the variety of companies and workers that exist between them.

Useful links:International Labour Organisation – Labour Law http://www.ilo.org/global/topics/labour-law/lang--en/index.htm

European Commission - Rights at Work http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=82

Europa information on EU employment and social policyhttp://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/employment_and_social_policy/index_en.htm

Measures in PlaceThe Declaration on Fundamental Principles of Rights at Work, set in place by the ILO, is a supposed international baseline for the rights of the worker. Labour organisations are usually obliged to negotiate with the national subsidiary of the multinational corporation in their country, which is more often than not willing to negotiate contract terms only on the basis of domestic wage standards. This essentially means that developing countries can suffer as their working standards may be well below those in the parent company’s country. As outlined in the aforementioned EU Labour Law, every EU worker has certain minimum rights relating to health and safety at work, equal opportunities for

DEVE II

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 46

women and men, protection against discrimination and general regulations in relation to contracts and working hours. However, this only applies to workers within the confines of the EU. The WTO encourages countries to restrict imports from other countries that use slave or prison labour, or when products present a threat. However, compliance to these guidelines are left to the interpretation of each nation, as in the case of the ILO - these restrictions therefore may not always be adhered to. Most multinational companies endorse some combination of the core labour standards of the ILO, the industrial relations guidelines of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), freedom of association norms of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Global Compact and other international human rights instruments. However this does not always translate into action, and therefore such declarations cannot be seen as binding. Useful links:European Commission – Labour Lawhttp://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=157

The Declaration on Fundamental Principles of Rights at Workhttp://www.ilo.org/declaration/thedeclaration/lang--nl/index.htm

DEVE II

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie46 47

With youth unemployment averaging a rate of almost 23% across Member States and schemes such as the Youth Guarantee Scheme and still not being widely or successfully implemented at national level, how should the EU work with Member States to encourage increased use of these projects and improve the

quality of proposed schemes?

Introduction and BackgroundBy the end of 2014, over 5 million young Europeans (under 25) were unemployed. This startling figure represents an unemployment rate of over 21%, which is more than twice as high as the adult unemployment rate (9.0%). Countries such as Greece and Spain top the scale with devastating youth unemployment rates of 53.1% and 53.8%, respectively. Yet despite the financial crisis, there are over 2 million unfilled vacancies in the EU. With the youth unemployment rate among EU Member States still increasing (see graph1), the EU has mobilised various plans, such as the Youth Guarantee Scheme2 or the Youth Employment Initiative3, in order to strengthen the position of the young workers within the European labour market.

The main goal of the Youth Guarantee Scheme is to ensure all young Europeans under 25 years of age obtain a concrete offer in the form of a job, apprenticeship or continued education within four months of leaving their formal education or becoming unemployed.

While there are a few Member States, such as Finland4, who are successfully tackling youth unemployment, other Member States have been slow to adopt and publicise the Youth Guarantee Schemes. How should the EU ensure balance of success among its Member States relating to the implementation of such actions? And how should ‘best practice sharing’ between governments and the Mutual Learning Programme be made more efficient?

Key Questions: - What is the basic concept behind the Youth Guarantee Scheme, and is this currently being achieved? 1 Graph on EU Youth Unemployment: A visualisation of Youth Unemployment rates for the past 5 years. http://ycharts.com/indicators/europe_youth_unemployment_rate_lfs 2 Youth Guarantee Scheme: Member States specific measures to tackle Youth Unemployment. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1079 3 Youth Employment Initiative: A budget of 6 billion Euros to support programmes against Youth Unemployment. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=1829 4 Finland, a success story: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/youth/Source/IG_Coop/YP_Finland_en.pdf

CommIttEE on EmploymEnt and soCIal aFFaIrs

EMPL

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 48

- Do different governmental forms and individual legislations within Member States affect the success of said schemes? If so, how should the European institutions work in collaboration with Member States to ensure success in each Member State?

Further reading:1. Youth Employment: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=10362. EurActiv Article on struggling Youth Guarantee: http://www.euractiv.com/

sections/social-europe-jobs/merkel-admits-eus-youth-unemployment-initiative-has-been-failure-303158

3. Policy Paper on Youth Employment: http://www.youthforum.org/assets/2014/06/0166-13_PP_Employment_Final1.pdf

4. Youth Unemployment Visualisation: http://www.weforum.org/community/global-agenda-councils/youth-unemployment-visualization-2013

Key ConflictsWhile plans to tackle the unstable situation concerning youth employment have been made, reality does not reflect the ambitious goals that have been set. German chancellor Angela Merkel states that “youth unemployment is ‘clearly’ one of the areas that needs to work better in the EU”5. According to her, the European Guarantee Scheme has so far not proven to ensure success and should definitely be among the Commission’s key priorities for the present and future.

While at first it might seem expensive and cumbrous to establish all these measures to support the youth, the acclaimed benefits outweigh the costs by far: a less active approach would lead to a badly established generation of workers and thus to a weakening of the labour market in the long-run. Furthermore, Young people out of the job market and/or educational systems would mean a loss of income in taxes and benefits to the EU economy.

While all EU Member States have planned and set up individual Youth Guarantee Schemes, one critical point is the lack of money that is invested into the programmes. While most of the funding comes from the European Social Fund6, 6 billion Euros from the Youth Employment Initiative7 were added to the budget for supporting current plans and measures. According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) the amount of invested money would have to be at least three times the current amount for a sustainable execution of the programmes. 5 http://www.euractiv.com/sections/social-europe-jobs/merkel-admits-eus-youth-unemployment-initiative-has-been-failure-303158 6 European Social Fund: 10 billion Euros per year to help secure jobs in Europe and improve job prospects. http://ec.europa.eu/esf/home.jsp 7 Youth Employment Initiative: A budget of 6 billion Euros to support programmes against Youth Unemployment. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=1829

EMPL

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie48 49

Key Questions: - How should the EU ensure that funds for supporting Youth Employment programmes are best used in such initiatives?

- What existing points of the programmes should be made more efficient? Where can governments learn from each other and what points need to be established separately?

Further reading:1. The EU Youth Guarantee ‚a lost Generation’? http://www.fairobserver.com/

region/europe/eu-youth-guarantee-lost-generation-69584/2. Youth Employment Analisys: http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpops/

ecbocp89.pdf

StakeholdersEach different party in this jigsaw has their own clear agenda: On the one hand there is the young generation of workers, struggling to gain ground on the European labour market. Many of them are untrained, unemployed and in financially difficult situations.

On the other hand are employers across the continent. In order to be able to compete with other economies and international powers, they are dependent on a well-trained younger generation, which gradually replaces more experienced workers who will retire. At the same time, pensions and thus the living conditions of the steadily growing older generation are reliant on the efforts of the current workforce and present economy.

Furthermore, the European governments need to find a stable equilibrium between investments in the current market and the sustainability and support of their future workforce.

In order for a Youth Guarantee Scheme to be efficiently developed and implemented, strong cooperation between all key stakeholders is essential: Public authorities, youth support services, businesses, employers, etc. need to follow a common strategy to support the young generation’s establishment within the working world.

How should the European Commission support the formation of a common vision between the different parties within a member state? Where can common interests between the affected groups be found? What are the individual needs and which conditions lead to conflicts and which ones lead to synergies?

EMPL EMPL

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 50

The general goal of all parties is the same: increasing youth employment and thus an endorsement of the young generation, As well as stability in economic growth with resulting benefits for the country as a whole.

Key Questions: - What interventions and actions by the EU are necessary in order to improve the cooperation between the different stakeholders? - What are areas for conflict between each of these groups?

Further reading:1. Ban Ki-Moon on Youth Employment: http://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-

ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_247414/lang--en/index.htm2. ILO article on Temporary Jobs: http://www.ilo.org/global/research/global-

reports/global-employment-trends/youth/2012/WCMS_180991/lang--en/index.htm

3. OECD Jobs for Youth: http://www.oecd.org/els/emp/46717876.pdf4. Pensioners rely on Youth for income: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/

article-2567135/One-five-pensioners-rely-children-help-make-ends-meet-Report-highlights-crisis-facing-millions-workers-struggling-save-enough.html

Existing measures and Current LegislationDue to the gravity of this issue, the European Union has already taken steps in order to tackle the worrying youth unemployment rates. Amongst those actions is the enhancement of communication8 between Member States in order to accelerate the process of forming a national Youth Guarantee Scheme. Furthermore, the Youth Employment Initiative was implemented to financially support youth employment plans, especially in regions with an unemployment rate higher than 25%.

The Youth Employment Package9 is a set of proposed measures by the EU to tackle alarming levels of Youth unemployment. This includes, for example, the proposal for a Youth Guarantee Scheme, recommendations for stronger cooperation among the stakeholders, early interventions by supporting organisations and full usage of funds and financial aids that are already available.

Through the Youth on the Move10 programme, the quality and employability of the 8 European Employment Strategy Mutual Learning Programme: encourage mutual learning between EU Member States in order to assist progress. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1047 9 Youth Employment Package: Measures to help Member States tackle Youth Unemployment. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=1036&newsId=1731&furtherNews=yes 10 Youth on the Move: policy initiatives on education and employment for young people in Europe. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=950&langId=en

EMPL

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie50 51

current young generation shall be improved and kept on a high level. By supporting education and trainings, encouraging pan-European exchange and simplifying the transition from training to work, the young generation gets more attractive for the labour market and becomes better integrated. As a part of the Youth on the Move, ‘Your first EURES job’ is a scheme that simplifies job mobility, aiding young Europeans to find work or a traineeship within a Member State other than their own. It however not only assists young employees abroad, but also financially supports employers who actively train and recruit freshly educated workers and thus facilitate the reduction of youth unemployment rates within the EU.

Key Questions: - How should already existing measures be improved and enhanced? - Are there key areas that are not yet covered by existing EU actions? - How should the utilisation of these initiatives be improved?- How should the EU interact with Member State specific projects?

Further reading:1. EU Measures to tackle Youth Unemployment: http://europa.eu/rapid/

press-release_MEMO-14-466_en.htm2. PDF EU Measures: http://ec.europa.eu/social/

BlobServlet?docId=11578&langId=en3. Strategies launched in Spain: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/

eiro/2013/03/articles/es1303011i.htm4. Your first EURES Job: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=9935. Your first EURES Job: http://www.yourfirsteuresjob.eu/en/6. Youth Opportunities Initiative: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.

jsp?langId=en&catId=10067. European Economic and Social Committee on Youth Opportunities:

http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.soc-opinions.219928. Guide to the Youth Opportunities Initiative: http://www.eubusiness.com/

topics/employment/youth-19. Youth Gurantee can boost Eurozone recovery: http://www.ilo.org/global/

about-the-ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_185166/lang--en/index.htm 10. Challenges to the Youth Guarantee’s success: http://www.etui.org/

Publications2/Background-analysis/Youth-Guarantees-and-recent-developments-on-measures-against-youth-unemployment-a-mapping-exercise

Topic Overview taken from the 2014 Thessaloniki International Forum

EMPL

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 52

Despite the fact that diversification of energy sources is a noble aim of the EU, still almost 25% of its gas supply still comes through Ukraine. As tensions continue in this area and the increased use of other gas sources such as Azerbaijani or Norwegian supplies offering alternatives, should the EUrethink its current energy strategy in order to become more independent and ecological?

By Katie Kilcoyne (IE) & Nikola Vranes (RS)

Introductionhttp://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/http://www.roadmap2050.eu/ http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/industrial-competitiveness/industrial-policy/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/2030/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/energy-strategy/2020-energy-strategy

It’s openly known that Europe is heavily dependent on foreign gas suppliers which make it hard for the E.U. to become a serious global competitor on the international market. The E.U. needs a more efficient domestic market, even if it is dependent on external influence. However, this is hard to achieve due to the dominance of certain countries, such as Russia, over the gas market. While energy is a necessary resource for all it can also be used as a political tool, especially for those in control of the market. Such political factors can negatively affect Member States dependant on the resource as seen in ongoing tensions between Russia and Ukraine. Ukraine has long been a country of transit for Russia’s gas supply to the European market, with 25% of Europe’s gas supply still coming through Ukraine. This is one reason for Europe’s need to seek other suppliers of gas. Other potential import countries of natural gas include Iran, Norway or Azerbaijan, all of which have been highlighted by many as alternative sources of gas.

As much as such political reasons are important to consider while evaluating the EU’s energy supply, it is also important to consider the environmental impacts – and therefore longevity – of current procedures. It is commonly accepted that fossil fuels are running out and that energy sources must – at least to a degree – be diverted to alternative energy sources; and investing more into the development of greener substitutes. These sustainable recourses include:

CommIttEE on IndUstry, rEsEarCH & EnErgy

ITRE

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie52 53

bioenergy, solar power, wind energy, hydrogen power, photovoltaic solar power, wave power etc. depending on the Mmber States capability. The EU has already taken steps towards such diversification as seen in the Roadmap 2050 and the 2030 Climate and Energy Targets, but does the EU need to work faster in order to secure its energy supply?

Key Conflictshttp://www.nato.int/docu/review/2014/NATO-Energy-security-running-on-empty/Ukrainian-conflict-Russia-annexation-of-Crimea/EN/index.htmhttp://americastradepolicy.com/the-ukraine-crisis-and-the-eus-dependence-on-russia-an-important-wake-up-call/#.VLp9BUesVMIhttp://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/jan/07/gas-ukraine

One conflict present in this topic is the ongoing political situation in Russia and Ukraine. The EU is involved by association due to the fact that Russian supplies such a substantial amount of Europe’s gas and 80% of these transits occur through Ukraine. In April of 2014, Moscow threatened to cut gas supplies to Ukraine (for the third time since 2006) if Russia receives no energy prepayment from Ukraine who are currently in a 2.2billion US dollar debt to their neighbours.

At the same time, in December 2014 the European Commission signed an agreement to strengthen and modernise key sections of the gas transition mechanisms in Ukraine, showing that the EU is committed to continue using this route as a method of bringing gas to Europe. The uncertainty as well as the environmental impacts mentioned above have urged Europe to begin looking at other potential sellers of gas (Azerbaijan and Norway), and further research and development into green energies are all in an effort to minimise conflicts and secure the EU’s gas supply by being less dependent on Russia.

There is also a moral conflict in play here – should Europe continue to develop its links with gas and other fossil fuels as sources of energy? Can Europe even consider moving away from Russian supplies at the moment – or what needs to happen in order to allow such development? How should Europe develop through initiatives such as Horizon 2020 in a bid to diversifying its energy mix?

Stakeholders http://aei.pitt.edu/58206/1/gp_eu_10_09_en.pdfhttp://www.dw.de/gazprom-warns-europe-gas-supplies-via-ukraine-still-at-risk/a-18192188http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/174b403e-6c87-11e3-ad36-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3P69RI4P5

ITRE

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 54

The key stakeholders for delegates to consider here are many. On one hand, both Russia and Ukraine are important to consider as their conflict stretches beyond that of the buying and selling of gas and is considered by some to be a political struggle. Working on behalf of the European Union, how should we engage dealings with these players?

Private companies such as Gazprom, a Russian state-owned company, are also important to consider. Gazprom remains the key gas supplier to the European market and secures more than a quarter of the total consumption in Europe. There are other private companies working in the areas of greener sources who must be considered. How should such companies enter the market and compete with other secure and reliable sources? What resources are available to encourage their development and stimulate their growth?

Adding to the stakeholders are other countries who may aid the EU in reducing its dependency on Russian gas supply, such as Azerbaijan and Norway in particular. Norway is the EU’s second largest supplier of gas after Russia, making up about 20% of the market. However, it would only be able to increase exports by 15% from a current level of around 300 million cubic meters a day, and only for a limited period of time, according to statistics developed from the petroleum ministry.

Currently, renewable energy sources account for about 25% of Denmark’s total energy consumption, and it’s widely acknowledged that the country’s goal to completely abandon coal, oil and gas by 2050 is realistic. What can the EU take from such an example and how should Europe become greener through its independence?

For the final group of stakeholders – European citizens – energy security is imperative. How should the Union act on behalf of its citizens to ensure fuel for both mobility and industry?

Existing Legislation:http://www.iea.org/media/workshops/marionwilde1.pdfhttp://www.globalwarming.org/2014/12/02/eu-climate-policy-boomerangs-subsidizes-coal-gashttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/europe-2020-in-a-nutshell/index_en.htm

With regard to Europe’s need for natural gas measures in place, the “Gas Regional Initiative (GRI)” aims to push the development of regional gas markets. However, it faces obstacles such as the lack of market integration, transparency and balancing issues. Despite these drawbacks, it would create a single-Europe gas market, independent (or at least less dependent and therefore diversified) from

ITRE

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie54 55

external influences.

Measures already in place regarding greener more renewable energy sources and sustainable recourses are the “Horizon 2020”. This measure is the biggest EU Research and Innovation programme with a budget over 80 billion euros over the course of 7 years. However it is only a financial instrument for the implementation of Innovation Union, a Europe 2020 flagship initiative aimed at securing Europe’s global competitiveness. The “Europe 2020” is a ten year growth strategy started in 2010 which focuses on employment, research and development, climate change and energy sustainability, education, fighting poverty and social exclusion all of which makes it very diverse and thorough, but highlighting Energy Security and Sustainability as one of the most important factors for the European economy moving forward.

ITRE

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 56

The introductory clauses of a resolution explain the problem that needs to be solved. Essen-tially, this section contains everything but proposing action to be taken to solve the problem. Keep in mind that the selection of the introductory phrases will be a first step to determine whether the resolution will be more general or more specific, more radical or softer in its ap-proach. Introductory phrases are lettered, underlined and separated by commas. Below are indicated some common introductory phrases, but the list is non-exhaustive

Introductory phrases

Acknowledging with (deep) gratitude etc.AffirmingAlarmed (by)AnxiousAppreciatingApprovingAware (of)Basing itselfBelievingBearing in mindCognisantCommendingConcerned (by)ConfidentCongratulatingConsciousConsideringContemplatingContinuing to take the viewConvincedDeclaringDeeply alarmedDeeply concerendDeeply convinced Deeply regrettingDeploringDesiringEndorsingEmphasisingExpectingExpressing its appreciationExplressing its concernExpressing its regretFirmly convincedFulfillingFully alarmedFully awareFully believingFurther deploringGravely concernedGuided (by)

Having adoptedHaving approvedHaving consideredHaving examinedKeeping in mindNoting with (deep) appreciationNoting furtherObservingPaying tributePointing outProfoundly concernedReaffirmingRealisingRecallingReconfirmingRecognisingReferring (to )RegrettingReiterating its convictionRemindingSeekingSeriously concernedStressingStrongly emphasisesStrongly supportingSupporting (fully)Taking into considerationTaking note ofViewing with appreciationWelcoming

IntrodUCtory ClaUsEs

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie56 57

The operative clauses of a resolution describe the actions that need to be taken in order to solve the problem. Operative clauses should be organized in a logical progression, and each clause should contain a single idea or policy proposal. Keep in mind that not all resolutions of the European Parliament are binding. Therefore, it is important to choose the operative phrases and the wording of the operative clauses accordingly. Operative phrases are, like the introductory phrases, underlined. However, each operative clause begins with a number, ends with a semicolon and the final clause ends with a full stop. Below are indicated some common operative phrases, but the list is non-exhaustive.

Operative Phrases

AcceptsAffirmsAppealsAppreciatesApprovesAsksAuthorisesCalls (for/upon)CommendsConcursCondemnsConfirmsCongratulatesConsidersDecidesDeclares (accordingly)DeploresDesignatesDirectsDraws attention (to)EmphasisesEncouragesEndorsesExpresses its appreciationExpresses its beliefExpresses its thanksExpresses its hopeFurther concursFurther inviteFurther proclaimsFurther recommendsFurther remindsHas resolved (to)HopesInstructsInvitesNotes with appreciationNotes with approval

Notes with interestProclaimsProposesReaffirmsRecognisesRecommendsRegretsReiteratesRemindsRepeatsRequestsResolvesSeeksSolemnly affirmsSolemnly declaresStrongly condemnsStrongly urgeSuggestsSupportsTrustsTakes note (of )TransmitsTrustsUrgesWelcomes

opEratIvE ClaUsEs

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 58

Motion for a resolution by

the CoMMittee on Civil liberties, JustiCe and hoMe affairs ii

Freedom of the press and media pluralism is often cited as a key component for the protection of civil liberties, but in recent years there has been an increase in journalists using the legal defences to which they are entitled to perform illegal and intrusive surveillance on private citizens. How can the EU continue to protect press

freedom without encroaching upon the rights of its citizens?

Submitted by: Name, Surname (School Name), Chairperson (CO)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Recognising that free and pluralistic media acts in the interest of freedom of speech and freedom of expression, and is crucial for European democracy,

B. Bearing in mind the influence of the Media in shaping public, knowledge and opinions through material broadcasted and published,

C. Approving the work of the Press Complaints Commission (PCC)1, the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) 2 and the European Publisher Council (EPC)3,

D. Noting with regret the effect of the financial crisis upon the quality and standard of journalism,

E. Concerned by the fact that profit–orientated Media can be driven to use illegal and intrusive practices in order to obtain information for writing material,

F. Deeply conscious of growing public scepticism towards media organisations due to reported cases of illegal and intrusive activities,

G. Taking into account /detrimentalthe negative effect caused by the spread of false and unverified information in stories which lack utilising a reliable sources,

H. Realising that the majority of media industries currently operate under self-regulation4, ,,,

I. Fully alarmed that governments have the power to deny licenses for independent television and radio channels, as well as critical newspapers, thuswhich , limitings their ability to publish their views,

1 The PCC is a voluntary regulatory body for British printed newspapers and magazines that consists of representatives of the major publishers which administers the system of self-regulation for the press.2 The EFJ is a regional organisation of the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ). It promotes and defends rights to freedom of expression and freedom of information as guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.3 The EPC review the impact of proposed European legislation regarding the press before expressing an opinion to legislators, politicians, and opinion-formers with a view to influencing the content of final regulations.4 The Media is self-regulating when it implements and abides by its own unique policies, guidelines, ethics and standards.

samplE rEsolUtIon

Munster Regional Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie58 59

J. Noting with satisfaction the 30 recommendations for respect, protection, support and promotion of pluralism and freedom of the media in Europe proposed by the HLGMFP in January 20135,

K. Further noting in particular the recommendation which calls upon Member State National Competition Authorities to make proactive and regular assessments of individual countries’ media environments and markets and highlights potential threats to pluralism;

1. Calls for the pending recommendations of the January 2013 High Level Group Report to be implemented by the Commissioner for Digital Agenda as soon as possible;

2. Requests that the assessment of media organisations by Member State National Competition Authorities be according to itheir compliance with common guidelines and toensuringe that all information is:

a. derives from a multitude of verified sources;

b. is obtained exclusively through legal methods;

c. remains factual, truthful and reliable;

d. is reported to the relevant authorities if obtained by illegal or intrusive practices;

3. Designates National Competition Authorities to accordingly award a certificate of compliance, which can be displayed on all published material, to media organisations that adhere to the above guidelines;

4. toReminds the media of the right to approach relevant National Competition Authorities in cases of misconduct or violations of Freedom of Press;

5. Recommends the introduction of a pan-European identification card for journalists working for European media corporations in all Member State;

6. Solemnly confirms that any violations against the common guidelines by journalists will be strictly punished with the confiscation of their MTM ID pan-European identification card;

7. Supports the constant accessibility of the MAVISE6 database administrated by the European Audiovisual Observatory;

8. Urges the introduction of Media Literacy Modules in High-School curricula.

5 The High Level Group on Media Freedom and Pluralism was established in October 2011 by Vice-President of the European Commission Neelie Kroes. The Group is fully independent and its mandate is to draw up a report for the European Commission with recommendations for the respect, protection, support and promotion of pluralism and freedom of the media in Europe.6 MAVISE is a database on television channels and media companies in the EU which was created to provide better knowledge of the audiovisual market and ensure a transparency industry.

Resolution from the 2014 Thessaloinki International Forum