PV\1159706EN.docx AP102.625v01-00

EN EN

EURONEST PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLYASSEMBLÉE PARLEMENTAIRE EURONEST

PARLAMENTARISCHE VERSAMMLUNG EURONESTПАРЛАМЕНТСКАЯ AССАМБЛЕЯ ЕВРОНЕСТ

Committee on Economic Integration, Legal Approximation and Convergence with EU PoliciesCommittee on Social Affairs, Education, Culture and Civil Society

NEST_PV (2018)0213

MINUTESof the joint meeting of 13 February 2018, 10.45-14.15

TbilisiParliament of Georgia

The meeting opened on Tuesday, 13 February 2018 at 10.45. In the chair were:- Clare MOODY, Vice-Co-Chair of the ECON Committee (points 1 and 4);- Vardan BOSTANJYAN, Co-Chair of the ECON Committee (points 2 and 3);- Malahat İBRAHIMGIZI, Co-Chair of the SOC Committee (point 5);- Georgi PIRINSKI, Co-Chair of the SOC Committee (points 6 to 8).

The meeting was opened at 10.45 by the ECON Committee’s Vice-Co-Chair, Clare MOODY(EP - UK, S&D) and Co-Chair, Vardan BOSTANJYAN (Armenia).

1. Adoption of the draft agenda

The agenda was adopted unchanged.

2. Approval of minutes of the meetings of the Euronest Committee on EconomicIntegration, Legal Approximation and Convergence with EU Policies held on 30October 2017 in Kyiv

The draft minutes were approved with the changes proposed by Irina Pruidze.

3. Approval of minutes of the meetings of the Euronest Committee on Social Affairs,Employment, Education, Culture and Civil Society held on 30 October 2017 in Kyiv

The draft minutes were approved unchanged.

4. Exchange of views on Foreign Direct Investment: nature, volume and evolution of flowsbetween the European Union and the Eastern Partnership Countries

- Presentation by the ECON Committee Co-Rapporteurs Clare MOODY (EP) andOleg REIDMAN (Moldova) of the working document for the ECON Committee’s

AP102.625v01-00 2/12 PV\1159706EN.docx

EN

report on ‘Foreign Direct Investment in the EU Member States and EasternPartnership Countries: Perspectives’

Clare MOODY pointed out that Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is commonly defined as acategory of cross-border investment in which an investor resident in one country establishes alasting interest in and significant degree of influence over a business resident in another country,owning 10 % or more of the voting power in the business in question. FDI is a key driver ofcompetitiveness and economic development. Information on its evolution over time providesan indication of a given country’s external competitiveness and the effectiveness of its overalleconomic, trade and investment policies. She noted that over the last few years, specialisedinternational institutions have been advocating better regulation and practices in the domain ofFDI, with a view to curbing the associated risks of corruption and money laundering.

Ms MOODY said that the latter aspect has been illustrated, in the European Parliament, by thecreation of a Committee of Inquiry to investigate alleged contraventions and maladministrationin the application of EU law in relation to money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion(also known as the ‘PANA Committee’). Its work concluded with a final vote in plenary on 13December 2017, on political recommendations to the Commission and Council.

Mr REIDMAN said that investment of any kind forms a basis for development. He stressed theimportant benefits that investment brings for economic growth. He pointed out that investorsare encouraged by a favourable domestic environment, profit and economic motivation. Theyare looking for resources such as labour and infrastructure which can only be developed bynational governments. He added that a liberalised tax regime and availability of financing arealso key determinants.

He summarised Moldova’s achievements in creating a favourable business environment, andemphasised the achievements of the Eastern Partnership countries in terms both of acceding tothe World Trade Organisation and of association with the EU and concluding free traderegimes. He also highlighted the modernisation of legislation on citizenship and contracts asbeing essential for attracting FDI.

He commented on the challenges lying ahead for FDI, and stressed that free trade regimes donot necessarily bring a favourable environment for investment.

The co-rapporteurs pointed out that ongoing economic crises in the world and in Europe arecreating a struggle for investment, while on the other hand this is the only way to emerge fromcrisis. They stressed that it is therefore necessary to find compromises in order to catch up withthe EU in terms of investment climate.

- Presentation by Carlo NATALE, Chargé d’affaires ad interim, EU Delegation toGeorgia, on the nature and volume of foreign direct investment flows between theEuropean Union and the Eastern Partners

Mr NATALE began by pointing out that political factors have to be taken into considerationwhen analysing FDI and its role in the economy of the region. Three of the Eastern Partnershipcountries have Association Agreements with the EU and the other three do not. The AssociationAgreements with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine aim to create deep and comprehensive tradeareas. The agreements signed following negotiations between the EU and Armenia andAzerbaijan do not go that far but also contain assurances for foreign investors. He noted thatthere is a substantial economic difference between the EU and the Eastern Partnership countries,reflected in the investment figures. For the Eastern Partnership region as a whole, in 2016 EU

PV\1159706EN.docx 3/12 AP102.625v01-00

EN

foreign investment stocks were 30 times bigger in comparison to the Eastern Partnershipcountries investment stocks in the EU.

He stressed that in the Eastern Partnership countries the investment environment differs widely.From the western perspective investing in EU Member States is considered to be safe and stablewhile investing in Eastern Partnership countries entails more risks. Changes in government orpolicies can lead to changes in the regulatory environment or changes regarding the allocationof public procurement contracts. Unfortunately, issues of transparency and predictability of thelegal system still raise considerable problems in some of the Eastern Partnership countries.

The speaker stressed that geopolitical circumstances also play a role in defining the status of acountry as an investment destination. For this reason many EU Member States have tried toprotect national investor rights through bilateral investment treaties. Even though investmentby the Eastern Partnership countries is lagging far behind that of the EU, there is the will on theEU side to promote and actively support investment in the region. This is shown by the growinginterest of the European Investment Bank and the steady increase of its lending capital.

Mr NATALE underlined that the EU intends to support development of FDI in the EasternPartnership region. He referred to the latest manifestation of the EU external investment plan,an ambitious initiative launched in September 2017. The aim of the plan is to contribute togrowth and generate employment in the partner countries of Africa and the Easternneighbourhood by mobilising domestic and foreign investment, especially by the private sector.The plan is intended as a strategic instrument combining financial assistance and policydialogue with partner countries in order to achieve the objectives of the partnership.

The speaker also stressed the importance of the ongoing dialogue with partner countries toidentify and address the key factors in the business environment which hampers investmentflows. To this extent the EU has launched a structural reform facility which aims at working inclose cooperation with international financial institutions and using technical expertise andpresence on the ground in order to identify key reforms that can unlock investment, frominvestment protection to privatisation and from capital market development to public financemanagement. Additionally the EU has started a promotional campaign to roll out the investmentplan in the Eastern Partnership countries.

Mr NATALE welcomed the dedicated activity planned for next March to bring together themain stakeholders, EU national authorities, international financial institutions and foreign anddomestic private businesses and jointly discuss how to make best use of the Europeaninvestment plan instruments in Georgia.

- Presentation by Giorgi CHERKEZISHVILI, Deputy Minister of Economy andSustainable Development of Georgia, on the nature and volumes of foreign directinvestment flows between the European Union and Georgia

Mr CHERKEZISHVILI introduced the actions of the Ministry of Economy and SustainableDevelopment of Georgia and the achievements of Georgia in creating a favourable businessenvironment, combating corruption, concluding free trade regimes, liberating the tax regime,promoting a skilled and trained labour force, and developing the financial sector. He pointedout that Georgia ranks in ninth position for doing business worldwide.

He stated that in 2017 Georgia received a total in FDI of USD 1.6 billion, of which 500 millionwas from European countries. The transport, communications, energy, manufacturing andconstruction sectors accounted for the greater part of FDI received. The main investor countries

AP102.625v01-00 4/12 PV\1159706EN.docx

EN

were Azerbaijan and Turkey and, from the European side, the UK, the Netherlands and theCzech Republic.

The speaker referred to the challenges that Georgia faces related to an unemployment rate of11.8 %. Half of the employed population works in agriculture, which generates only 9 % oftotal GDP.

Mr CHERKEZISHVILI stressed that tourism is the fastest growing industry in Georgia. Forthis reason the development of infrastructure is of major importance for the government:modernisation of roads, railways and logistic sectors is in progress. He presented the activitiesof the Government of Georgia aimed at diversifying renewable energy sources.

He said that the financial sector is the fastest growing sector in Georgia. All significant FDI byEuropean countries is in the financial sector and in Georgian banks. Georgia has 16 commercialbanks which are developing quite fast. He underlined the activity in Georgia of the EuropeanBank for Reconstruction and Development, which has financed more than two hundredprojects, 81 % of them in the private sector.

The speaker referred to the newly established agency existing under the Ministry of Economy,‘Enterprise Georgia’, directed towards the development of entrepreneurship throughestablishing new enterprises, expanding existing ones, and promoting entrepreneurial culture inthe country. The agency focuses on increasing the competitiveness of the private sector,enhancing the country’s export potential and promoting FDI in Georgia.

- Presentation by Mr Stephen THOMSEN (Head of Unit of Investment PolicyReviews, Investment Division, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development)on the advocacy of better regulations and practices in the domain of foreign directinvestment

Mr THOMSEN presented the tools the OECD uses to provide investment policy reviewsworldwide. The tools focus on coherence among policies and good governance practice. Hestressed that the aim in attracting foreign investment is to ensure and maximise theinclusiveness, sustainability and productivity of growth, the point being the returns to societyfrom foreign or domestic investment. The aim of investment policy is to improve the return tothe economy and society from investment.

The speaker referred to the common challenges that governments face worldwide in their effortsto improve the investment climate. He reiterated that the regulatory environment for investmentis complex. Many OECD partner governments, as well as Georgia, have investment laws,specifically either for foreign or domestic investment, which constitute a useful form oftransparency device. He stressed that governments should ensure protection for foreigninvestment, international investment agreements, state investor contracts and the rule of lawand governance in their country.

Mr THOMSEN highlighted that Georgia is among the highest-ranked countries in terms ofdoing business. This can help reduce red tape, but ease of doing business does not necessarilylead to an increased flow of FDI. This is a complex area, and the costs and time involved instarting business form one element of the overall investment climate. Another critical issue fordoing business is less regulation. Speed does not improve investment, and sometimesgovernments seek to improve their ranking in terms of doing business without addressingfundamental problems of business regulation and the economy. Governments should payparticular attention to the costs of regulation for small firms, as doing business can beproblematic for small domestic firms. Openness to foreign investment is vital: more open

PV\1159706EN.docx 5/12 AP102.625v01-00

EN

economies receive more FDI. Mr THOMSEN pointed out that Georgia is open and receives arelatively high share of investments. He underlined the importance of protecting investor rights,stressing the right to repatriate profits, indirect expropriation, intellectual property rights andnumerous other elements that determine the protection of investor rights, not only under theconstitution and investment law, but also in the framework of international agreements signedby the government. Investors have additional protection through a dispute settlement procedure.The speaker stressed that it is hard to find conclusive evidence that offering more protection toinvestors results in greater investment. There is little evidence to show that countries with moreBilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) receive more investment. Governments should take intoaccount the risks they face - for example, reputation risks, which lead to reduced flows offoreign investment.

Mr THOMSEN underlined that in parallel with international treaties, governments shouldcontinue to improve their domestic court systems.

He stressed that governments devote considerable resources to promoting investment imagebuilding, promotion and policy advocacy. He argued that renewed investment is more importantthan new investments: a high share of FDI in any economy is actually reinvestment in existinginvestments. He thus recommended that governments keep existing investments, adding thatconsultations with the private sector is important. According to Mr THOMSEN, an investmentpromotion agency should be the voice of the private sector or of foreign investors. Governmentsthat spend more of their resources on policy advocacy often perform better in attracting andretaining investment. He stated that an effective investment climate requires good coordinationand a coherent and transparent legislative framework. Coordination should be not only acrossministries, but between the centre and the provinces. Good governance provides thepredictability and stability that are essential for investors.

Vardan BOSTANJYAN (Armenia) took the floor on the issue and pointed out that thedevelopment of individual national economies as well as of integration within the frameworkof the Eastern Partnership require considerable investment. In his view FDI can be attractedfrom the partner countries and can also take the form of mutual investment, whether from theEuropean Union or from third countries (including Iran, China and India). In particular, in 2018a significant increase in direct investment is expected not only from EU Member States but alsofrom Asian countries.

He suggested that Chinese investors would acquire assets not only in the fuel and chemicalsector, but also in manufacturing: however, the main spurt of investment expansion wasexpected in the mining sector. With the help of various loan instruments, including preferentialloans, China was promoting the development of the transport corridors of the Silk Road. Overthe period 2008-2016 Asian investors had continued to increase direct investment in the EasternPartnership and the Eurasian Economic Union. The accumulated FDI of 12 Asian countries(China, Japan, Turkey, India, Israel, Mongolia, the Republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia, the UnitedArab Emirates, Iran, Singapore and Vietnam) had increased from USD 32 billion in 2008 toUSD 75.6 billion in early 2017.

The speaker pointed out that with each passing year, flows of FDI between the EasternPartnership countries increase. He emphasised the role in increasing FDI flows of theComprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement, which was signed on 24 November2017 and became an important milestone in the 25-year-old history of relations betweenArmenia and the European family. As an active member of the Eastern Partnership, Armeniaalso plays the role of a bridge between the Eurasian Economic Union and the EU, whichundoubtedly meets the national interests of all our countries.

AP102.625v01-00 6/12 PV\1159706EN.docx

EN

He recalled that an increase in FDI cannot be an end in itself for the Eastern Partnershipcountries. FDI should address the issue of ‘20 specific tasks for the period until 2020’, byinvesting in human capital, the development of youth skills and entrepreneurship.

Armen ASHOTYAN (Armenia) mentioned that money laundering and taxation are veryimportant challenges for the Eastern Partnership countries. He recalled the recent hearings inthe European Parliament on the money laundering scandal in Azerbaijan. He asked the Co-Rapporteurs of the Economic Integration Committee to focus more on the issues of taxation inthe draft resolution.

Beka NATSVLISHVILI (Georgia) stated that FDI does not bring immediate structuraltransformation for the economies concerned. He argued that currently the main issue for theGovernment of Georgia is how to structurally transform the country’s economy. Attentionshould be paid to what kinds of FDI attract countries. Those which are most worthwhile arethose which create added value and have a spillover effect on the economy. He drew attentionto the fact that Georgia is on the top ten list of ‘doing business’ rankings, as well as performingwell in other rankings, but is still not attracting the substantial FDI flows that would creategenuinely high added value. The reasons for this are lack of education, lack of a trainedworkforce, and lack of human resources. Therefore the government should work to create thenecessary basis for high-value FDI and ensure structural transformation of the economy.

Malahat IBRAHIMGIZI (Azerbaijan) pointed out that Azerbaijan and Georgia are strategicpartners. She stressed that Azerbaijan has never been seen as an aggressor country, while allinternational organisations recognised Armenia as an occupant and aggressor country,occupying 20 % of Azerbaijani territory.

Mr THOMSEN commented on the questions and stressed that FDI can only complementgovernment policies: it does not affect the role and responsibility of governments in developingtheir countries’ economy.

Ms MOODY said that the delegations should work on the draft report and table amendmentsby the deadline, i.e. 15 May 2018. She recalled that the next committee meeting would be heldin June, in parallel to the Seventh Ordinary Session of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly.

5. Exchange of views on tackling informal and undeclared labour and enhancing socialsecurity of employees in the European Union and Eastern partner countries.

- Presentation by SOC Committee Co-Rapporteurs Jiri MASTALKA (EP)(replacement) and Karine ATSHEMYAN (Armenia)

The presentation on tackling informal and undeclared labour and enhancing social security ofemployees in the European Union and the Eastern partner countries was made by AndrejsMAMIKINS (on behalf of Jiri MASTAKLA) and Karine ATSHEMYAN.

Mr MAMIKINS noted that the European Pillar of Social Rights provides guidance forstrengthening social rights for EU citizens, by ensuring equal opportunities, access to the labourmarket, fair working conditions, social protection and inclusion. He highlighted that similarstandards can be relevant for Eastern Partnership countries. Mr MAMIKINS pointed out thatundeclared work is a common phenomenon in all countries, within both the EU and its Easternneighbours, and has serious consequences for individuals and also for the societies as a whole.Reducing undeclared work needs to be a broader strategy for boosting structured job creation,improving job quality and enabling better access to employment support. He highlighted the

PV\1159706EN.docx 7/12 AP102.625v01-00

EN

growing cooperation between the EU and its Member States in tackling undeclared work andthe policy adjustments being developed to tackle the problem. He stressed that undeclared workhas a serious cross-border character: many of the undeclared workers in the EU come fromEastern partner countries, and it is important to help people realise the real value of mutuallybeneficial partnership between the EU and Eastern European countries.

The floor was given to Karine ATSHEMYAN, Co-Rapporteur (Armenia). She referred to theproblems on the labour market, seeing them as the main factor hindering economicdevelopment, not only in the EU but also in the Eastern Partnership countries. She added thatundeclared labour is a serious problem for Armenia too. She mentioned the special instrumentsexisting to bring illegal workers into the formal framework, and referred to the established tradeunions whose work increases the possibilities of collective bargaining for a decent wage andproper working conditions. She stressed that a broader strategy is necessary to reduce thenumbers of illegal workers, and welcomed the solutions being developed by the Europeaninstitutions to address the situation in this sense. Ms ATSHEMYAN emphasised that in 2016the European Parliament and the Council had initiated the establishment of the EuropeanPlatform to enhance cooperation in tackling undeclared work, with a view to creating a singleconsultation framework based on the exchange of experience and adopting a work programmefor 2017-2018. There is a need to enhance workers’ rights in the interests of their protection,creating a favourable environment for sustainable businesses. Ms ATSHEMYAN stated that itis important to enhance the role of trade unions in order to boost social dialogue andconsultation of the social partners.

- Presentation by Rudi DELARUE, Deputy Head of Unit for international issues,DG Employment, European Commission

Mr DELARUE said that a sound labour and economic policy framework is an importantelement for sustainable and inclusive growth, stressing the importance of better jobs, a labourinspectorate, effective taxation services and social dialogue bodies. He noted that Georgia isworking on labour inspection, employment services and occupational safety on the legislativelevel, on a basis of compliance with EU standards and taking account of social and economicinterests. Mr DELARUE emphasised that there is a growing interest in issues of transition frominformal to formal economy. He stressed that the European Pillar of Social Rights has beenadopted at the highest level by the European Parliament, the Council of the European Unionand the European Commission: it consists of 20 principles and rights falling into three groups,namely access to the labour market and equal opportunities, fair working conditions, and socialsecurity. This framework is designed to encompass both social and economic policy. MrDELARUE stated that priority is to be given to cooperation and joint action: there is a proposalfor a European social security number, which would promote the formalisation of socialsecurity cooperation between Member States and social security institutions. He mentioned theinitiatives of the Commission to promote the implementation of the European Pillar of SocialRights.

- Presentation by Paata BELTADZE, Solidarity Centre Georgia, expert

Mr BELTADZE spoke on the informal economy in the Eastern Partnership countries. Hestressed that the informal economy is a complex phenomenon influenced by a wide range ofeconomic, social, institutional and cultural factors, which vary from one country to another.Various studies estimate that half of the workers in the developing world are self-employed andmany of these are part of the informal economy. Mr BELTADZE noted that workers in Eastern

AP102.625v01-00 8/12 PV\1159706EN.docx

EN

Partnership countries have found themselves to be, in effect, without labour protection becausetheir employment relationship is disguised, ambiguous or not clearly defined. The level ofinformal and undeclared labour compared to overall employment varies from 30 % in Moldovaand 46 % in Ukraine up to 60 % in Georgia and Azerbaijan. It was found that informal work inUkraine’s economy is quite significant: nearly 45 % of the participants are fully or partiallyinvolved in informal activities. The Government of Armenia estimates the share of the informaleconomy at between 30 and 40%, while opposition politicians suggest higher estimates inexcess of 45 %. Some estimates suggest that as much as 60 % of Azerbaijan’s official GDP iscreated by the informal economy. In Georgia, more than 50 % of the labour force is consideredto be self-employed and non-observed (the latter being another label for the informal economy):these workers account for some 20 % of the country’s GDP, according to official stateestimates, or according to some definitions as much as 30 %. 30.9 % of the total employedpopulation in Moldova were informally employed in 2013, and 68.7 % of informal jobs werein the agricultural sector. Mr BELTADZE emphasised that strengthening the capacities andcompetencies of labour inspection authorities is generally a very important tool in combatingthe informal economy, while trade unions also play a key role in reducing undeclared work.

- Presentation by Michael NEWSON, Senior Labour Mobility and HumanDevelopment Specialist, International Organisation for Migration, IOM Regional Office(Vienna)

Mr NEWSON spoke on aspects of migration and undeclared work in Europe. He said thatreducing the level of undeclared work needs to be a part of a broader strategy concerning theimpact of migrants on undeclared work and the necessity of intergovernmental cooperation.The speaker stressed that irregular migration and undisclosed employment concern not only thecountry of destination but also the country of origin. Social networks and recruitment agencieshave a huge impact on the conditions that workers face in the country of destination, and peopleengage in disclosed or undisclosed employment regardless of whether they have a work permitor not.

Mr NEWSON noted that international migration within Eastern Europe is growing rapidly: forexample, the population of Ukrainians in Poland has increased over the past five years, but wedo not know the real figures. It is difficult to obtain quantitative data on migration and irregularmigration, and alternative sources of information are needed.

Rebecca HARMS, Member of the European Parliament, referred to the long route fromundeclared to declared work for Polish workers who came to Germany, and to the similarprocess now happening for Ukrainian workers in Poland. She emphasised that for most of theseworkers there is no other choice than to accept undeclared work, as they and their families backhome face tremendous poverty, and that it is therefore also necessary to fight poverty in theregions they come from in order to tackle the problem.

Beka NATSVLISHVILI, Member of the Georgian Parliament, pointed out that the discussionshad only concerned combating informal and undeclared work and the ways of providing socialsecurity for the people. He called for the members of the committee also to consider work andsocial security issues affecting women who work in the home. Mr NATSVLISHVILI said thatthe Government of Georgia was currently working on a pensions system that would includepersonal savings, and that this could be a good means of overcoming the problem of informalor undeclared work. He noted that a universal healthcare system and an accumulative pensionssystem are considered to be instrumental in ensuring social security provision.

PV\1159706EN.docx 9/12 AP102.625v01-00

EN

Guguli MAGRADZE, Member of the Georgian Parliament, said that the visa-free regime hasproved a great success and represents an achievement and an opportunity for Georgia, but italso poses challenges since some people do not use it appropriately and stay on in westernEuropean countries as illegal workers. Ms MAGRADZE called on the EU institutions to act tofacilitate the issue of work permits for Georgian citizens.

Malahat IBRAHIMGIZI noted that the statistics on undeclared work in the Eastern Partnershipcountries are outdated and do not reflect reality. She asked the rapporteurs to clarify thosestatistics.

Georgi PIRINSKI said that these problems should be solved by national governments andnational authorities. He considered undeclared work to be a problem that directly harms faircompetition, causes lost taxes and contributes to lost security, all phenomena that directlydamage public authorities and institutions. The European Union was built on the notion of thesocial market economy, but over the past decades that has been eroded to a large extent. MrPIRINSKI stressed that the report on undeclared work can be broadly used in all membercountries by all relevant organisations, thus showing that Euronest is actually engaging withproblems that affect people’s lives.

Ms IBRAHIMGIZI recalled that the deadline for amendments to the working document was 15May 2018

6. Discussion on the modalities of the Euronest PA Platform on the fight againsttuberculosis and exchange of experience on similar platforms in Eastern Partnershipcountries

- Presentation by Tsira CHAKHAIA, Eastern European and Central Asian CountriesCoordinator, Global TB Caucus Secretariat;

- Presentations by Sadagat VALIYEVA, MP (Azerbaijan); Iveta TONOYAN, MP(Armenia); and Akaki ZOIDZE, MP (Georgia);

Mr PIRINSKI recalled that the Euronest PA TB Platform is working on the fight againsttuberculosis (TB) and exchange of experience. The platform was initiated by OxanaDOMENTI, former member of the Parliament of Moldova, who had been the rapporteur on thisissue. The Euronest PA is continuing to work on the fight against tuberculosis.

Tsira CHAKHAIA, Eastern European and Central Asian Countries Coordinator, Global TBCaucus Secretariat, explained the current situation in the fight against tuberculosis. Sheemphasised that across human history no infectious disease has killed more people thantuberculosis, although it is often perceived as a disease of the past: today TB has reclaimed itsstatus as the world’s biggest infectious killer. The Global TB Caucus aims to accelerate progressin fighting the global TB epidemic through targeted actions at global, regional and nationallevel. At the global level it works in partnership across countries to target organisations such asthe G20 with coordinated messaging and calls for action. At the national level, the focus is onbuilding groups of parliamentarians to form National TB Caucuses. Ms CHAKHAIA stressedthat now is a very important time for the global response to tuberculosis. This year, for the firsttime ever, the UN will hold a High Level Meeting on TB. She said that the Euronest PA TB

AP102.625v01-00 10/12 PV\1159706EN.docx

EN

Platform can promote and encourage the involvement of decision-makers and policymakers inefforts to tackle TB.

Sadagad VALIEVA, Member of the Azerbaijan Parliament, said that the World HealthOrganization had declared a critical situation in 1993, with a view to action to prevent thedisease and keep it under control, and recommended that all countries combat TB together. Shementioned that this problem is vital in Azerbaijan too, but according to the latest statistics apositive tendency is being observed in reducing cases of new infection and enhancing theeffectiveness of treatment. There is a ‘National Plan on Prevention of Spread of TB’, and in2016 a framework agreement was agreed between Azerbaijan and the Global Fund to FightAIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. Ms VALIEVA stressed that the number of TB cases inAzerbaijan had declined compared to previous years.

Iveta TOROYAN, Member of the Armenian Parliament, stated that tuberculosis is one of theimportant problems for her country as a whole - a problem for Armenia too. She stressed thatArmenia has a functioning National TB Centre, which is working on new forms of treatmentand is financed by the government, and that the country has effective methods for reducingtuberculosis.

Akaki ZOIDZE, Member of the Georgian Parliament, emphasised that since 2000 almost amillion people have died of TB in Europe and Central Asia. He stressed the need to step upjoint efforts at national, regional and global level to facilitate a major shift in priorities andpolicies in order to end the global TB epidemic by 2035. Mr ZOIDZE emphasised that jointefforts are particularly important to provide financial and technical support for the response toTB in countries across the region. He expressed his appreciation of the work of OksanaDomenti, who had initiated the process and established the TB platform in the framework ofthe Euronest PA.

Mr PIRINSKI suggested that Mr ZOIDZE be the rapporteur on this subject and update theinformation about the situation regarding TB in the different countries.

7. Planning and preparing of the ECON and SOC Committees’ activities for 2018

Mr BOSTANJYAN announced that the next meeting of the ECON Committee will be heldfrom 25 to 27 June in Brussels. He offered to participate in the ECON Committee conferenceto be held in Yerevan.

Mr ASHOTYAN proposed that members participate in the conference to be held in theframework of Euronest PA from 7 to 9 June in Yerevan on the digital economy and digitaltransformation (‘Smart Citizens, Smart Cities’).

Mr PIRINSKI announced that the next meeting of the SOC Committee would be held from 25to 27 June in Brussels.

The meeting closed at 14.15.

PV\1159706EN.docx 11/12 AP102.625v01-00

EN

List of participants:

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTMs Rebecca HARMS, Co-President of the Euronest PAMs Clare MOODY (Vice-Co-Chair, United Kingdom, S&D)Mr Dariusz ROSATI (Poland, EPP)Mr Giorgi PIRINSKIMr Andrejs MAMIKINS

ARMENIAMr Armen ASHOTYANMs Armine KYUREGHYANMs Mane TANDILYANMr. Vardan BOSTANJYAN (Co-Chair of ECON Committee)Mr. Samvel FARMANYANMr. Karen BEKARYANMs. Iveta TONOYANMr. Ararat ZOURABYANMs. Karine ATSHEMYAN

AZERBAIJANMr Mukhtar BABAYEVMs Malahat IBRAHIMGIZIMs Sadagad VALIEVA

GEORGIAMs Irina PRUIDZE, Vice-Co-Chair of ECON CommitteeMr Beka NATSVLISHVILIMs Salome SAMADASHVILIMr Akaki ZOIDZEMs Guguli MAGRADZE

MOLDOVAMr Marian LUPU, Head of DelegationMr Ion APOSTOLMr Oleg REIDMANMr Vadim PISTRINCIUCMr Anatolie ZAGORODNÎI

UKRAINEMs KOROLEVSKA NataliiaMr KODOLA OleksandrMr CHEKITA Gennadiy

AP102.625v01-00 12/12 PV\1159706EN.docx

EN

Mr Vitalii KURYLO