Resolution Booklet
EYP the Netherlands
Preliminary Rounds 2013/2014
Procedure of the General Assembly
General rules The wish to speak is indicated by raising the Committee placard. The authority of the Board is absolute. Procedure and time settings 1. Presentation of the Motion for a Resolution – the Board read out the topic; 2. A member of the Proposing Committee reads out the Operative Clauses; 3. Points of Information (asked for by any Committees and answered by the Proposing Committee); 4. Defence Speech (maximum 3 minutes); 5. Attack Speech (maximum 3 minutes); 6. Open Debate on the Motion for a Resolution; 7. Summation Speech (maximum 3 minutes); 8. Voting procedure – the votes are collected by the Chairpersons; 9. Announcement of the voting results by the Board. Points of Information These are requests for brief explanations of the meaning of specific words and abbreviations. Please note that translations are not Points of Information. Points of Personal Privilege These are requests for a Delegate to repeat a point that was inaudible. Failure to understand the language being spoken does not make for a Point of Personal Privilege Direct Responses Once per Debate, each Committee may use the ‘Direct Response’ sign. Should a Committee member raise the Committee Placard and the ‘Direct Response’ sign during the Open Debate, he/she will immediately be recognised by the Board and given the floor as soon as the point being made is concluded. A Direct Response can only be used to refer to and discuss the point made directly beforehand. If two or more Direct Responses are requested at once, the Board will decide which Committee to recognise. In this case, the second Direct Response shall only be held if it can be referred to the first Direct Response, so on and so forth.
Points of Order These can be raised by the Chairperson if a Delegate feels the Board have not properly followed the Parliamentary procedure. Ultimately, the authority of the Board is absolute. Defence Speech One member of the Proposing Committee delivers the Defence Speech from the podium. It is used to explain the rationale of the overall lines of the Resolution and convince the Plenary that the Resolution is worthy of being adopted. This speech can last a maximum of three minutes. Attack Speeches An individual Delegate from a Committee other than that proposing the Resolution at hand delivers an Attack Speech from the podium. It reflects an individual opinion and is used to point out the flaws of the approach taken by the Proposing Committee and should propose alternative solutions. Oftentimes, an Attack Speech is concluded with an appeal to the Plenary not to adopt the Resolution in the present form. Summation Speech One or two members of the Proposing Committee deliver the Summation Speech from the podium; the microphone can only be passed once. It is used to summarise the debate, respond to main, selected criticism and to once more explain why the chosen approach is the most sensible. It typically concludes with an appeal to vote in favour of the Resolution. This speech can last a maximum of three minutes.
Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) Towards a more democratically accountable EU: keeping in mind low voter turnouts for European Parliament elections, how can the role of the European Parliament (EP) be strengthened to secure European democracy in the long term?
The European Youth Parliament, A. Deeply regretting that since the first direct EP elections in 1979, voter turnouts have been constantly dropping, reaching a low point of 43% in 2009, B. Realising that low voter turnouts undermine the democratic legitimacy of the EP and the EU as a whole, C. Observing that low voter turnouts are mainly caused by a general lack of knowledge about EU affairs, as well as voters’ inability to connect with politicians that work on an EU level, D. Believing that the EP currently lacks the powers to sufficiently execute its function as the EU’s only directly elected institution; 1. Calls upon Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) to set up EU-‐‑wide campaigns for the upcoming EP elections in 2014 2. Encourages Member States to create an obligatory course about the EU’s history and its functioning in all secondary schools, that emphasises the success of the European project as well as the need for further integration to ensure its continuance; 3. Supports a treaty change that grants the Right of Initiative to the EP and the Council of the European Union; 4. Further requests a treaty change that allows the EP to dismiss individual Commissioners by means of a vote of no-‐‑confidence.
Motion for a Resolution bythe Committee on Culture and Education (CULT) The fight for fair play: in the light of the review of the World Anti-‐‑Doping Code, how can the EU best contribute to decreasing the use of doping in both professional and recreational sports? The European Youth Parliament, A. Believing that the health of the athlete is the athlete’s doctor’s main responsibility, B. Recognising the role that drug manufacturers have in the doping issue by releasing new performance-‐‑enhancing substances, C. Convinced that the influence of international criminal organisations in the doping issue is the main reason for Member States’ failure to effectively address this issue, D. Deeply concerned by the low amount of blood tests that are carried during and outside sports events due to the high costs of transport of blood samples;
1. Calls upon the EU Expert Group on Anti-Doping (XG AD) to include proposals for equal sanctioning for athletes and their doctors, such as disqualification or long-term ineligibility, in its contribution to the revision of the World AntiDoping Code; 2. Encourages Member States to financially reward pharmaceutical companies whose products have, for a period of one year, not been verifiably used in doping practices in sport; 3. Urges the XG AD to include the possibility of declaring doping tests invalid, in case they are not examined within 24 hours, in its contribution to the revision of the World Anti-Doping Code; 4. Supports research by WADA on the possibility of using lie detectors as a mechanism for doping control.
Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs I (ECON I)
The future of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU): now that European leaders have agreed on the specifics of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM), what are the next steps in completing the banking union? The European Youth Parliament, A. Noting with deep concern that between 2008 and 2011, Member States have been forced to spend €4,5 trillion on rescuing banks, B. Confirming the need for a Eurozone-‐‑wide banking union to guarantee the long-‐‑ term sustainability of the Eurozone banking sector, C. Emphasising that banks should financially contribute to measures taken to establish this banking union, D. Believing that a Eurozone-‐‑wide deposit guarantee scheme is essential to restore trust in Eurozone banks; 1. Supports proposals by the European Commission to create a Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM) for the Eurozone; 2. Suggests that, in case of bank resolution, the required funds for the SRM will be provided by the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), under the condition that this has been approved by the European Parliament; 3. Requests that, in the long term, 50% of the ESM’s capital will be provided by Eurozone banks; 4. Calls for the immediate establishment of a Eurozone-‐‑wide deposit guarantee scheme, completely funded by Eurozone banks.
Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs II (ECON II) Europe as a tax haven for multinationals: how can the EU and its partners tackle legal tax avoidance to ensure a fair tax system, while respecting Member States’ sovereignty? The European Youth Parliament, A. Fully aware of the estimated €150 billion Member States lose each year as a result of tax avoidance, B. Recognising that the EU has no influence whatsoever on national tax rates, C. Noting with interest the effects the “Offshore Leaks” programme by the ICIJ has had on private tax evasion and the combat against it, D. Bearing in mind the risk of corporations opting to move elsewhere, should their fiscal situation in the EU deteriorate too heavily; 1. Calls for the creation of a public database of tax avoiding companies and individuals, as well as the countries that facilitate this; 2. Encourages Member States to introduce a Financial Transaction Tax (FTT) on all financial transactions; 3. Calls for an EFTA-‐‑wide double tax agreement, similar to already existing double tax agreements between individual Member States; 4. Encourages further negotiations with other international parties, such as the G20, to combat tax avoidance on a global level.
Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs I (EMPL I)
With one out of four EU citizens at the risk of poverty and social exclusion according to Eurostat, how can the EU cooperate with Member States to decrease the negative impact of the crisis on society’s weakest? The European Youth Parliament, A. Noting with deep concern that 24.2% of the European population is currently at risk of poverty or social exclusion, B. Bearing in mind that, if policies remain unchanged and the state of the European economy does not improve, the EU will fall 5 million short of its Europe 2020 target to have 20 million fewer people at risk of poverty or social exclusion by 2020, C. Believing that, in order for the European Social Fund (ESF) to be effective, it required better funding and spending that is more specifically aimed at society’s weakest, D. Deeply concerned by the fact that Member States’ wishes to reduce their debt and deficit have led to budget cuts on social welfare; 1. Calls for an increase in funding of the ESF to a minimum of 15% of the EU budget; 2. Calls upon the European Commission (EC) to spend at least 50% of the ESF budget on projects in Member States that have an at-‐‑risk-‐‑of-‐‑poverty-‐‑rate of above 30%; 3. Urges the EC to explicitly allocate funds to projects that support specific groups with higher unemployment and at-‐‑risk-‐‑of-‐‑poverty-‐‑rates; 4. Recommends Member States to refrain from further budget cuts on social welfare.
Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs II (EMPL II) Pensions under pressure: as Europe’s population is getting older and older, what steps should the EU take to reform pension systems and guarantee a good standard of living for the youngsters of today, once they reach their retirement? The European Youth Parliament, A. Concerned by the European Commission’s (EC) projections of fertility rates in 2060, which stand at 1.68 in comparison to a population replacement level of 2.10, B. Recognising the need for the youth to, next to pensions provided by the state and their employer, build up an additional, personal pension, C. Emphasising the need to promote demographic renewal in the EU by improving the balance between professional, private and working life, as suggested by the European Commission, D. Noting with deep concern the immense growth in healthcare costs of 4.6% per year between 200 and 2009 for the EU as a whole, whereas in 2010, only 3% of the healthcare budget was spent on the prevention of diseases; 1. Encourages Member States to create special personal pension plans for people in employment under the age of 25, enabling them to start saving for their retirement under favourable tax conditions; 2. Recommends Member States to invest in family friendly policies and childcare services; 3. Supports a policy switch in healthcare towards measures which emphasise that taking care of the elderly is a shared responsibility between the family and the state; 4. Calls upon Member States to spend at least 10% of their total healthcare expenditure on prevention.
Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety I (ENVI I)
With natural disasters, such as floods, droughts and storms, occurring regularly in the EU, what role should the EU play in preventing these disasters and providing aid to the affected areas?
The European Youth Parliament,
A. Fully aware of the threat that natural disasters, as a result of climate change, increasingly pose to the safety of citizens, B. Emphasising that it is a responsibility of all Member States to support Member States that are most vulnerable to natural disasters, C. Concerned by the fact that many EU citizens are unaware of the risks of natural disasters and, as a result, are insufficiently insured against them, D. Believing that cooperation between local governments across the EU is crucial to successfully adapt to climate change; 1. Recommends the European Commission to establish a European Climate Adaption Fund (ECAF), that will invest in long-‐‑term climate adaption measures for private companies; 2. Suggests that the contribution of each Member State to this fund be based on the likelihood of natural disasters occurring in this Member State; 3. Calls upon Member States to implement policies that oblige citizens to insure themselves against all forms of natural disasters; 4. Calls upon the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CERM) to establish partnerships between municipalities and regions that face similar challenges when it comes to climate change.
Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety II (ENVI II) A potential boost or threat? In the light of increasing technological possibilities, what stance should the EU take when it comes to genetically modified (GM) food, bearing in mind public concerns about their possible effects? The European Youth Parliament,
A. Realising that current EU legislation on GMOs results in a poor competitive position in the global food market, B. Believing that food security should be prioritised over food safety, C. Fully aware of the high risk of the formation of monopolies in the market for GM food, D. Noting with regret the negative public opinion towards GMOs across the EU; 1. Calls upon the European Commission and Member States to simplify procedures that enable the introduction of new GMOs to the market; 2. Further requests the European Commission to limit market shares of individual companies in the GMO market to a maximum of 15%; 3. Recommends Member States to cooperate with companies from the GMO sector in educating the general public about the benefits of GMOs; 4. Urges the European Commission to spend a larger share of the money allocated to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) on research that enhances agricultural productivity.
Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy I (ITRE I) A commitment against carbon: what can the EU do to meet its target of a 20% reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission by 2020? Is there a future for the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS)? The European Youth Parliament, A. Alarmed by the severe impacts of climate change such as rising sea levels, extreme and unpredictable weather, global warming and water shortages, B. Bearing in mind the goal set in the Kyoto-‐‑protocol to lower the EU’s GHG emissions by 20% to 1990 levels in 2020, C. Concerned by the current surplus of carbon allowances on the market, due to a reduced demand caused by the EU’s poor economic situation, D. Noting with regret that low prices for allowances reduce incentives for companies to lower their carbon emissions; 1. Supports the continued use of the EU ETS as the EU’s main instrument in the combat against climate change; 2. Urges the European Commission to set EU minimum and maximum prices for allowances; 3. Calls upon the European Commission to increase the yearly allowance reduction from the current 1.74% to a minimum of 3%; 4. Encourages the European Commission not to reintroduce the 900 million allowances that it has recently taken out of the market.
Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy II (ITRE II)
Standing on the shoulders of giants: what strategy should the EU develop to maintain its leading position in the area of research and innovation? Is Open Access part of the solution?
The European Youth Parliament, A. Observing worldwide developments in the area of research and development that pose a threat to the EU’s leading position in this field, B. Expressing its appreciation of Open Access and Open Innovation initiatives, C. Realising that European-‐‑wide Open Access policies reduce profits from copyrights on academic work and that therefore, new ways have to be developed to finance academic publishing, D. Believing that cooperation between the academic field and the private sector to ensure long-‐‑term funding for academic research; 1. Calls upon the European Commission (EC) to, in the future, only fund research projects whose results will be published in line with the principles of Open Access; 2. Emphasises the need for the global implementation of Open Access through opening negotiations with members of the G20 major economies; 3. Calls for the creation of an EU General Research Fund, voluntarily sponsored by the European private sector and managed by the EC, which will finance academic publishing of the EC’s interest; 4. Further requests 10% of the annual EU Research and Development budget to be made available for research projects that have been selected by the public through academic contests.
