Issuu

14th National Selection Conference of EYP Poland Opole 2017 31.08 - 03.09

Resolution booklet

Table of contents PROGRAMME OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

PROCEDURE OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE, AND HOME AFFAIRS (LIBE)

THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND ENERGY (ITRE)

THE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, PUBLIC HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY (ENVI)

THE COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS (JURI)

THE COMMITTEE ON CULTURE AND EDUCATION (CULT)

THE COMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS (EMPL)

THE COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AND MONETARY AFFAIRS (ECON)

THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT (AGRI)

THE COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS (AFCO)

Programme of the General Assembly Sunday, 3rd September 2017 8:15 - 8:30

Opening of the General Assembly

8:30 - 9:15

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

9:15 - 10:00

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Industry, Research and Technology (ITRE)

10:00 - 10:15

Coffee Break

10:15 - 11:00

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI)

11:00 - 11:45

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI)

11:45 - 12:30

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Culture and Education (CULT)

12:30 - 13:30

Lunch

13:30 - 14:15

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL)

14:15 - 15:00

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

15:00 - 15:45

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI)

15:45 - 16:00

Coffee Break

16:00 - 16:45

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO)

16:45 - 17:45

Closing Ceremony

18:00 - â€Ś

Departures

Procedure of the General Assembly GA PROCEDURES AND TIMING 1. Presentation of the Motion for a Resolution: the Board reads the topic 2. Reading the Operative Clauses (from the stand; maximum duration: 3 minutes) 3. Defence Speech (from the stand; maximum duration: 3 minutes) 4. Attack Speeches (from the stand; maximum duration: 3 minutes; if there is extra time left, another attack speech can be granted for a maximum number of 2 Attack Speeches) 5. Answer to the Attack Speech/es (from the floor, one speaker, maximum duration: 2 minutes) 6. Open Debate on the Motion for a Resolution (duration: around 40 minutes): there will be a maximum of four rounds of debate; each one will be answered by one member of the Proposing Committee. 7. Summation Speech (it answers to the very last round of debate; one or two speakers; from the stand; maximum duration: 3 minutes). 8. Voting on the Motion for a Resolution (Chairpersons collect votes). 9. Announcement of the voting results. POINTS OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE These are requests for a Delegate to repeat a point that was inaudible. They cannot be used to ask for translations or any other clarifications. POINTS OF ORDER These can be raised by the Chairperson if a Delegate feels the Board have not properly followed Parliamentary procedure. Ultimately, the authority of the Board is absolute. DIRECT RESPONSES Once per Debate, each Committee may use the Direct Response sign. Should a Committee member raise the Committee Placard and the â€˜Direct Responseâ€™ 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 has to refer to the Direct Response made directly before it. In the case of Direct Responses to a point made by the Proposing Committee while answering a round of debate, the placard should be raised immediately as the point is heard, but the Delegate will only get the floor at the end of the intervention. In these cases, the point will have to be clearly identified once the Delegate begins to speak. 3

DEFENCE SPEECH The Defence Speech is delivered from the podium by one member of the Proposing Committee. 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 3 (three) minutes. ATTACK SPEECHES Attack Speeches are delivered from the stand by individual Delegates from a Committee other than that proposing the Resolution at hand. Furthermore, they reflect individual opinions and should only be made when the Delegate fundamentally disagrees with/opposes the overall direction of the Motion for a Resolution. In addition to pointing out the flaws of the approach taken by the Proposing Committee, the speakers should also propose alternative solutions. Attack Speeches are often concluded with an appeal to the Plenary not to adopt the Resolution in its present form. For each Debate, up to two Attack Speeches will be allowed, for a total of 3 minutes SUMMATION SPEECH The Summation Speech is delivered from the podium by one or two members of the Proposing Committee â€“ in the latter case, the microphone shall be passed only 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 3 (three) minutes. VOTING PROCEDURE Each Delegate is allowed one vote (in favour, against or abstaining) per Resolution. Being individual, the votes are still collected within Committees by the respective Chairperson, who will input them into the GA Statistics platform. The results will be compiled automatically and immediately announced by the Board.

Motion for a Resolution by:

The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs (LIBE) Communicating through diversity: The presence of different ethnical and cultural backgrounds is one of the EU’s main distinguishing traits. In the light of the conflicts that may arise when different cultural communities are treated differently in the various Member States, what should the EU do to ensure that the rights of national and ethnic minorities equally respected within its borders? Submitted by:

Błażej Bęben (PL), Weronika Dorocka (PL), Sara Faruque (PL), Julia Galera (PL), Ewa Kowalska (PL), Weronika Kozłowska (PL), Kacper Kunysz (PL), Małgorzata Kupiec (PL), Iga Lubczańska (PL), Patryk Sapała-Niedzin (PL), Elvira Gudmundsson (SE), Ireneusz Sołtykiewicz (PL), Filip Wojczuk (PL), David Teixeira (Chairperson, PT)

The European Youth Parliament, A. Noting with regret the lack of knowledge regarding cultural and religious minorities, often results in prejudice and discrimination, B. Seeking an enhancement of operational readiness as well as legislative improvement in present social integration policies, C. Deeply concerned that 25% of minority respondents had faced discrimination in terms of healthcare, education, employment and housing in the previous twelve months, as stated in European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey (EU-MIDIS), D. Recognising that 57% of minority respondents were unaware about anti-discrimination legislation on the basis of racial or ethnic origin in the areas of employment, education and social protection, as stated in the EU-MIDIS, E. Deeply disturbed that minority members feel threatened about the existence of physical and psychological harrassments based on ethnicity and nationality, F. Stressing both the misrepresentation and lack of representation of the minorities in the media and other form of outlets, G. Bearing in mind the lack of representation of minority groups in the public sector of certain Member States;

1. Calls upon Member States’ governments to apply the example of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategy in facing other minorities’ discrimination in terms of education, economy, housing and healthcare; 2. Encourages national governments to revise legislations aimed at protecting rights of minorities and taking actions against hate crimes; 3. Recommends the Member States’ governments to implement anti-discrimination trainings for emergency services and provide the minority members with further access to psychological aid; 4. Urges the European Union’s Agency for Fundamental Rights to create a report highlighting misrepresentation and the lack of representation of minorities in the media; 5. Further encourages local governments to issue media outlets in which minorities are represented and discrimination is discouraged; 6. Stresses the importance of supporting the minority representatives’ participation in government entities through the implementation of voting list quota; 7. Requests the European Commission to ease the access to information and knowledge about minorities’ rights through civil workers training, free emergency call centers and websites; 8. Advises national governments to implement long-term cooperation between educational institutions and minority oriented Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs).

Fact Sheet The European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey (EU-MIDIS): It is a survey conducted by the European Agency for Fundamental Rights which aims to provide information regarding discrimination of minorities in the EU. EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategy: It invites all Member States to present the European Commission with their strategy for Roma inclusion or for specific policy measures for the Roma within their wider social inclusion policies. The European Union’s Agency for Fundamental Rights: It aims to provide the EU institutions and Member States with assistance and information within the field of fundamental rights, in order for said entities to make informed decisions on future actions regarding Human Rights.

Motion for a Resolution by:

The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) Towards sustainability: The EU is working towards cutting its greenhouse gas emissions, encouraging all Member States to focus on a more sustainable energy production. How can the EU ensure that all Member States will adhere to the guidelines proposed in the 2030 Policy Framework for Climate and Energy in order to make the EU’s economies and energy systems more competitive, secure and sustainable? Submitted by:

Maciej Czajkowski (PL), Agata Dohojda (PL), Kacper Kryk (PL), Karolina Kuźniar (PL), Gabriela Kwiatkowska (PL), Robert Lotawiec (PL), Bernardo Monteiro (PT), Natalia Mrówczyńska (PL), Agnieszka Sieczek (PL), Emilia Syväjärvi (DE), Weronika Szpak (PL), Cecilia Wennerström (SE), Jan Zimoch (PL), Stella Benfatto (Chairperson, FR/IT)

The European Youth Parliament, A. Viewing with appreciation that in 2015, within Member States greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were overall reduced by 22% compared to the 1990 levels, as stated in the EU Reference Scenario 2016 publication, B. Realising the particular contribution of transportation in comprehensive GHG emissions across the EU, as stated in the EU Reference Scenario 2016 publication, C. Aware of an overall increasing demand for energy in the EU as mentioned in the 2011 Commission staff working paper on security of energy supply and international cooperation, D. Continuing to take view to the 2015 Paris Agreement and the targets settled to reduce global emissions, E. Appreciating the EU’s Eastern Partnership aiming to strive for energy security with eastern countries, F. Acknowledging with deep gratitude the European Commission’s 2030 Policy Framework for Climate Change, G. Deploring the lack of implementation of the internal energy market, as one of the main targets set by the European Commission in the 2030 Policy Framework for Climate Change, H. Concerned by the discrepancies in taxation systems and national legislations across the EU, slowing down the creation of an energy union, I.

Alarmed by the fact that some Member States are still importing fossil fuels from countries which are politically unstable,

J. Taking into account the lower price and the higher use of fossil fuels in comparison to renewable sources, 7

K. Noting with regret that some Member States are not able to to immediately introduce renewable energy production systems due to the high costs of the required infrastructures and/or specific climatic and geographical conditions, L. Further acknowledging the lack of awareness among EU citizens regarding the nature of the source used in the production of energy they consume;

1. Urges the Member States to focus on reducing the amount of GHG emitted by transports via national policies promoting the use of sustainable transportation such as electric cars and public transports; 2. Asks the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Policy and Security, the Vice-president for the Energy Union and the European Commission's Directorate General for Energy to closely cooperate towards becoming an international independent energy market; 3. Invites all Member States to further develop cross-borders energy transport infrastructure; 4. Stresses the opportunity of the development of the Mediterranean gas hub; 5. Expresses its appreciation for the European Commission funding programmes such as Horizon 2020, the NER 300, the EU Cohesion Fund, the EU Regional Development Fund, supporting Member States in their efforts to implement the 2030 Policy Framework for Climate Change; 6. Instructs national governments to focus on new legal and technical strategies to further implement the 2030 Policy Framework for Climate Change; 7. Resolves to further limit the usage of coal with less than 70% carbon content through the establishment of fees on Member States utilizing it as a main source of energy production; 8. Calls upon all Member States to expand funding into the research of innovative, efficient and sustainable energy production and storage systems; 9. Encourages national governments to further fund infrastructures enabling the production of renewable energy or improving the efficiency of the current energy production systems; 10. Hopes that the European Commission and Member States will continue their financial support for the installation of renewable energy generators for individual and household; 11. Suggests energy supply companies to directly inform their clients about the type of source and the percentage of renewable energy used in their production process.

Fact sheet The EU 2016 Reference Scenario: It is a projection regarding the current set of energy, transport and emissions policies coupled with market trends are likely to lead. It was published by the European Commission's Directorate General for Energy and it provides a benchmark against which new policy proposals can be assessed. The 2011 Commission staff working paper on security of energy supply and international cooperation: It is a working document issued by the European Commission on the 7th of September 2011. It provides key facts and figures on the external dimension of the EU energy policy. The 2015 Paris Agreement : Under the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change, is a document by signing which governments agreed on the need for global emissions to peak as soon as possible. The EU, one of 155 parties, has ratified said agreement. European Union's Eastern Partnership: It is a joint initiative involving the EU, its Member States and six eastern European partners: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. Multilateral cooperation enables partner countries to work together on cross-border issues such as: democracy, sufficient governance and stability, sustainable economic development, energy security and people-to-people contacts. 2030 Policy Framework for Climate Change: An EU framework which sets three key targets in the energetic field in order to tackle the problem of climate change. This targets are to be met by 2030. Member States are expected to cut 40% of GHG emissions from 1990 levels, 27% share for renewable energy, 27% improvement in energy efficiency. It also stresses the importance to reinforce the integration of an internal energy market. Internal energy market: It aims at establishing a genuine EU-wide market for the products and services of the energy sector, through the removal of barriers, whether of public or private origin, and the establishment of common rules. Energy union: If established, its goals is making energy more secure, affordable and sustainable. It will facilitate the free flow of energy across borders and a secure supply in every EU country, for every European citizen. Mediterranean gas hub : The Mediterranean area can act as a key source and new route for supplying gas to the EU. Horizon 2020: It is the biggest EU Research and Innovation programme ever with nearly â‚Ź80 billion of funding available over 7 years (2014 to 2020) â€“ in addition to the private investment that this money will attract. It promises more breakthroughs, discoveries and world-firsts by taking great ideas from the lab to the market.

The NER 300: It is one of the world's largest funding programmes for innovative low-carbon energy demonstration projects. The programme is conceived as a catalyst for the demonstration of environmentally safe carbon capture and storage (CCS) and innovative renewable energy (RES) technologies on a commercial scale within the European Union. The EU Cohesion Fund: It was established in 1994 for the purpose of strengthening the economic, social and territorial cohesion of the EU with the aim of promoting sustainable development. For the 2014-2020 programming period, the Fund provides support to: investment in the environment, including areas related to sustainable development and energy which present environmental benefits; trans-European networks in the area of transport infrastructure and technical assistance. The EU Regional Development Fund: It is one of the main financial instruments of the EUĘźs cohesion policy. Its purpose is to contribute to reducing disparities between the levels of development of European regions and to reduce the backwardness of the least favoured regions. Particular attention is paid to regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps, such as the northernmost regions with very low population density as well as island, cross-border and mountain regions.

Motion for a Resolution by:

The Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) Mens sana in corpore sano: In a world where workplace tend to place unhealthy expectations on individuals, illness such as depression and anxiety quickly arose. With an increasing number of EU citizens having mental health issues hindering them from performing their daily tasks, how can the EU act in order to provide appropriate treatment and counter stigmatization in the workplace? Submitted by:

Jan Bylicki (PL), Mateusz Chojnacki (PL), Gustav Ekström (SE), Julia Kelsz (PL), Beata Konopkin (PL), Maja Kudowska (PL), Aleksandra Kuśmierska (PL), Gabriela Musialik (PL), Martyna Olejnik (PL), Ania Rejman (PL), Daniela Ševčíková (CZ), Maria Tylińska (PL), Grzegorz Zaleski (PL), Eliza Badesku (Chairperson, RS)

The European Youth Parliament, A. Deeply concerned by the lack of adequate knowledge from the Member States’ population regarding mental health issues, bearing the risk of both social exclusion and stigmatization, B. Noting with deep concern that more than 300 million people are now living with depression, according to the World Health Organization (WHO)’s campaign Depression: let’s talk, C. Conscious that corporate employees are often experiencing distress and anxiety due to long working hours and competition in the workplace, D. Fully aware that 50-60% of lost working days is due to work-stress according to the campaign Healthy Workplaces 2014-2015, E. Noting with regret that people affected by mental problems run an increased risk of falling victim to addictions and related diseases, F. Aware of the lack of adequate preparation in regards to stress management among young people, G. Bearing in mind that 3 out of 4 people who are suffering from major depression do not receive adequate treatment, as stated in the WHO World Health Day 2017 results, H. Alarmed by the lack of knowledge employees’ have on their rights and the fear of standing up for them;

1. Resolves to the prevention of mental disorders among young people by creating workshop programmes at schools as well as advanced trainings for school psychologists; 2. Invites the Member Statesâ€™ local governments to include psychiatric check-ups as part of the yearly health check with the assistance of WHO; 3. Further invites employers to provide employees with additional benefits such as gym memberships in order to improve work-life balance; 4. Expresses its belief that launching advertisements on social media will raise awareness about the importance of mental health in the workplace; 5. Encourages the European Brain Council to further conduct research in regards to mental health issues and their treatment; 6. Supports EU Member States in providing information about employees' rights and harmful work environment by implementing consultations with lawyers for both employers and employees.

Fact Sheet Stigmatisation: The assignment of negative perceptions to an individual because of perceived difference from the population at large. World Health Organization (WHO): Its primary role is to direct and coordinate international health within the United Nationsâ€™ system. Its main areas of work are: health systems, promoting health through the life-course, non-communicable diseases, communicable diseases, corporate services, preparedness, surveillance and response. Depression: letâ€™s talk: A WHO campaign, aiming at raising awareness about the spreading of this mental health issue and its consequences on the individuals affected. Healthy Workplaces 2014-2015: It is a two-years campaign coordinated by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, aiming to raise awareness on stress and psychological risks in the workplace. WHO World Health Day 2017: This is a WHO campaign raises awareness on health issues affecting the population, their causes and consequences, as well as their prevention. European Brain Council: It is a non-profit organisation gathering patient associations, major brainrelated societies as well as industries. Established in March 2002, its mission is to promote brain research in order to improve the quality of life of those living with brain disorders in Europe.

Motion for a Resolution by:

The Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) Towards a faster and more efficient dialogue: With the Mediation Directive the EU encourages all Member States to use mediation to tackle cross-border disputes in civil and commercial matters. Considering that this method for alternative dispute resolution is at different stages of implementation in the different Member States, how can the EU promote a common approach to mediation within its borders? Submitted by:

Aleksandra Adach (PL), Julia Bartosik (PL), Ewa Białogłowska (PL), Martyna Czajka (PL), Julia Grzelczak (PL), Marta Grzybczyk (PL), Edyta Jagielska (PL), Weronika Leśny (PL), Alicja Nawrocka (PL), Aleksandra Pikuła (PL), Wiktoria Rybicka (PL), Filip Týc (CZ), João Verdelho (PT), Zuzanna Laudańska (Chairperson, PL)

The European Youth Parliament, A. Noting with concern that the Mediation Directive 2008/52/EC is not offering precise solutions, thus preventing Member States from fully implementing it, B. Deeply concerned by the differences in the implementation stages of the Mediation Directive 2008/52/EC across Member States, C. Deploring the low level of credibility and trust towards mediation institutions, D. Taking into account that mediation is not considered as an official profession and therefore not fully trusted and respected by the EU citizens, E. Noting with regret the insufficiency of existing mediation regulations at national level, F. Recognising scarcity of official data necessary for specialists to carry out research on the implementation of the Mediation Directive, G. Highly alarmed by the lack of awareness and knowledge about the alternative dispute resolutions among European citizens and legal professionals, H. Pointing out the lack of financial support covering the costs of mediation for poverty-stricken EU citizens;

1. Reminds the Member States to utilise the Article 5.1 of the Mediation Directive 2008/52/EC, stating that the national legal bodies may invite the parties involved in a conflict to use meditation to settle the dispute;

2. Recommends the European Commission to issue separate guidelines for each Member State concerning the Mediation Directive 2008/52/EC and the current stage of its implementation; 3. Asks the European Commission to raise awareness on the Alternative Dispute Resolution procedures among consumers, traders and the citizens in civil disputes, through brochures and other media outlets; 4. Encourages the dispute resolution bodies from the Members States to run collaborative international projects such as seminars and networking platforms; 5. Suggests Member States to introduce workshops at all level of education to teach students about peer mediation and create an â€œout-of-courtâ€? dispute culture; 6. Calls upon the European Commission to establish an association of mediators, which would: a. allow mediatorsâ€™ gathering and cooperation on an international level, b. create a common and mandatory training model for all members, c. ensure high quality of the mediation process, 7. promote cooperation with universities and the creation of mediation courses across all Member States higher education institutions; 8. Urges the European Statistical Office (Eurostat) to pursue research on mediation data and statistics in cooperation with national and regional statistical offices; 9. Further suggests Member States to establish a network of information exchange among the legal professionals, promoting mediation as a quick and cost-effective extrajudicial resolution of disputes in civil and commercial matters; 10. Invites Member States to financially support less-advantaged citizens by covering their mediation processes costs.

Factsheet Mediation Directive 2008/52/EC: This directive covers certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters. It aims at ensuring that consumers have equal access to Alternative Dispute Resolutions procedures. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): These procedures are an alternative to resolving disputes before a court. In the EU ADR procedures can take different forms such as mediation, conciliation, ombudsmen, arbitration and complaints boards. European Statistical Office (Eurostat): It is the statistical office of the European Union providing high quality statistics that enable comparisons between countries and regions. 14

Motion for a Resolution by:

The Committee on Culture and Education (CULT) The power of languages: The linguistic diversity does not limit itself only to differences among Member States, but it is witnessed also within their borders. What measures should the EU take to ensure a common stance for national governments on second language learning in both formal and informal education? Submitted by:

Bartosz Chrząszcz (PL), Bruno Felgentreu (DE), Filip Frey (PL), Hampus Hallin (SE), Maja Grzesiuk (PL), Alicja Matusiak (PL), Wiktoria Mika (PL), Julia Sokołowska (PL), Dominika Strzelecka (PL), Maria Świstuń (PL), Wiktoria Tułodziecka (PL), Samuel Týče (CZ), Julia Wrońska (PL), Mariam Kunchuliya (Chairperson, UA), Zofia Sznajder (Chairperson, PL)

The European Youth Parliament, A. Keeping in mind that one of the EU's multilingualism goals is for every European to speak at least two languages in addition to their mother tongue, B. Firmly convinced that linguistic diversity is a valuable asset to of each Member State,

the cultural heritage

C. Realizing that intercultural misunderstanding, political, and ethnical tensions may be caused by lack of multilingualism, D. Alarmed by the decreasing number of multilingual EU citizens, also due to different foreign languages formal education systems across Member States, E. Noting with deep concern the considerable number of people abandoning foreign language learning upon finalizing compulsory education, F. Taking into account that the separation of ethnic minorities leads to impaired contact with their respective vernacular, G. Expressing its appreciation for the rising popularity and success of non-governmental and governmental programmes supporting and promoting foreign language learning, H. Noting with regret that 34% of EU citizens lack both interest and motivation in learning a foreign language as stated in European Commission’s Languages in Education and Training: Final Country Comparative Analysis 2014, I.

Aware of the lack of multilingualism which leads to a reduced academic development and limited career prospects for EU citizens,

J. Fully aware of the potential of the European Voluntary Service’s projects and proposals;

1. Asks Education and Training 2020 workgroups to develop guidelines and strategies adjusted to each Member Stateâ€™s educational system; 2. Strongly advises Member States to further promote language and exchange programmes organised by projects such as Erasmus + ; 3. Instructs the European Centre for Modern Languages to conduct on new interactive and technological methods for foreign language learning;

researches

4. Encourages the European Commission to implement mandatory, free of charge, EU language courses on the example of the European Voluntary Sources; 5. Calls upon the Member Statesâ€™ governments to raise awareness about the benefits of multilingualism within society through organised workshops and advertisements on social media platforms; 6. Invites the Member States to ensure that representatives of minority groups have equal opportunity to receive education both in their mother tongue and the official language of country they are living in; 7. Suggests the Member States to diversify their national teaching methodology through the implementation of bilingual textbooks and other educational materials; 8. Further encourages the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training to establish trainings and online platforms focusing on foreign language learning for employees belonging to linguistic minorities in the Member States where they are working; 9. Urges the Commission for Social Policy, Education, Employment, Research and Culture to increase its financial support to Member States with a high percentage of ethnic minorities.

Fact Sheet European Voluntary Service: It helps young people in travelling abroad to participate in volunteering projects. They can involve many different kinds of activities in areas such as youth work, cultural activities, social care or environmental protection. Languages in Education and Training: Final Country Comparative Analysis 2014: This report is a comparative analysis of countries’ education and training in languages to the end of upper secondary education. Education and Training 2020 workgroups: - They are designed to help Member States address the key challenges of their education and training systems especially focusing on language learning. These workgroups aim at improving the quality and efficiency of education and training on foreign language learning, promoting equity and social cohesion. Erasmus+: This EU programme supports education, training, youth and sport in Europe. Its budget of €14.7 billion will provide opportunities for over 4 million Europeans to study, train, gain experience, and volunteer abroad. Commission for Social Policy, Education, Employment, Research and Culture: It coordinates the Committee of the Regions' in inter alia multilingualism and promotion of minority languages and cultural diversity. The role of the Committee of Regions is to cooperate with the Member States’ local authorities towards cohesion across all the EU. European Centre for Modern Languages: It is a partner of the European Council, whose objectives are to help Member States to implement innovative as well as effective language teaching policies. European Voluntary Sources: It is a voluntary programme for European youngsters which provides them with the opportunity to get to know and experience other cultures and develop skills that are useful to personal, educational and professional improvement. European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training: It helps the European Commission, EU countries, employers' organisations and trade unions to match training provision to labour market needs. 17

Motion for a Resolution by:

The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL) Fair labour mobility: A recent study of the European Commission has shown that the Posting of Workers Directive is applied in different ways across the Member States. How can the EU improve its application within its borders and secure fair and equal rights for posted workers in all Member States? Submitted by:

Iga Adamska (PL), Aleksandra Cyran (PL), Julia Gontarek (PL), Gabriela Grodecka (PL), Aleksander Hartwig (PL), Carin Lundqvist (SE), Paulina Michalak (PL), Łukasz Ogrodnik (PL), Aleksandra Posielska (PL), Aleksandra Śliwkowska (PL), Jerzy Ulewicz (PL), Julia Kułakowska (Chairperson, PL), Nikola Milenković (Chairperson, RS)

The European Youth Parliament, A. Recognising the increasing number of posted workers in the EU at 41.3% between 2010 and 2015, according to the publication Posted Workers in the EU, B. Aware of the differences in remuneration systems and approaches towards posting of workers in Member States, C. Condemning the phenomenon of letter-box companies as a result of different economic situations in Member States, D. Noting with regret that the Posting of Workers Directive (PWD) is not sufficient for the current economic situation in the Single Market as it allows for diverging interpretations across Member States, E. Concerned with the lack of data regarding information on posted workers such as bonuses, labour laws, and wages, F. Alarmed by the fact that it is not mandatory for some subcontractors to abide by the same laws as the main contractor which causes further avoidance of the laws, G. Noting with deep appreciation that the Enforcement Directive strives to improve the application of existing legislation regarding posting of workers, H. Strongly disapproves of the proposed changes in the Revision of Posting of Workers Directive regarding temporariness of posted workers, I.

Seriously concerned by social dumping which hinders economic competitiveness;

1. Encourages Member Statesâ€™ public enterprises to specify and disclose information on their remuneration systems; 2. Advises Member States to create data gathering institutions on letter-box companies; 3. Invites the European Commission to continue the dialogue with all Member States on the implementation of the PWD, focusing on the temporariness of posted workers; 4. Further invites the European Commission to create a Monitory Committee on Posting of Workers, specialising in gathering data, supervising the implementation of the PWD and bridging the gaps between legislative disparities of Member States; 5. Further encourages posting companies to conduct and disclose regular reports regarding their workers; 6. Instructs Member States to make their labour laws more accessible to the parties involved in the posting process by creating a publicly available database; 7. Requests the European Commission to monitor Temporary Work Agencies and subcontractors to ensure their functioning in accordance to the laws; 8. Strongly encourages the Member States to entirely implement the Enforcement Directive; 9. Suggests the European Commission to withdraw from implementing the Revision of Posted of Workers Directive; 10. Suggests the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs of the European Commission to enhance cooperation with trade unions aimed but not limited to their modernisation.

Fact Sheet Posted worker: An employee who is sent by his employer to carry out a service in another EU Member State on a temporary basis. Posted Workers in the EU: An EU publication analysing the phenomenon of posted workers across EU Member States. Remuneration: The reward for employment that is given in the form of pay, salary, or wage, including allowances and benefits. Letter-box companies: An enterprise that establishes its domicile in a tax friendly country with just a mailing address while conducting its commercial activities in other countries for minimizing its tax liability. Posting of Workers Directive (PWD): It was issued in 1996 and defines a set of mandatory rules concerning posted workers. It guarantees that posted workers are entitled to minimum conditions common in all Member States on top of being subject to rules and social security according to the law of the sending Member State. Subcontractor: It is a type of contractor who forms agreements with the contractor, not with the customer. Contractor: It is a person or a company that seeks to do business by obtaining contracts and carrying them out. Enforcement Directive: It was adopted in 2014 in order to practically improve the PWD and further avoid issues such as fraud, rule evasion and lack of information exchange between Member States. Revision of Posting of Workers Directive: This revision was declared by the European Commission to propose clarification and accountability of rules on posted workers in the PWD, coherence with other pieces of EU legislation, and preventing any social dumping within the EU. This document aims at setting a level-playing field and fair competition between posting and domestic companies, and ensure protection of posted workers. Unfortunately, this revision was not widely welcomed by Member Statesâ€™ national governments. Temporariness of posted workers: It is a set of rules concerning the treatment of posted workers according to the time they spend in the host country. Social dumping - It defines unfair competition due to the application of different wages and social protection rules to different categories of workers. Temporary Work Agency: It is a "three-way" or "triangular" relationship involving a worker, a company acting as a temporary work agency and a user company, where the agency employs the worker but places him or her at the disposition of the user company.

Motion for a Resolution by:

The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) While EU leaders are debating on the economic benefits of a flexible economic approach, countries with lower GDPs are still struggling to remain inside the Eurozone. How can the EU reach a sustainable economy for all Member States, without drastically reducing the use common currency within its borders?. Submitted by:

Karolina Bartosik (PL), Weronika Gromek (PL), Piotr Kaczorek (PL), Konrad Kowalski (PL), Mikołaj Krzyżanowski (PL), William Leijon (SE), Marcin Mochanacki (PL), Emilia Moskała (PL), Wiktoria Nadolna (PL), Emilia Pochroń (PL), Paulina Spała (PL), Bartosz Świąc (PL), Barbara Tumm (PL), Kim Nike Wiederhold (DE), Małgorzata Braszka (PL), Magnus Berg Sletfjerding (NO, Chairperson)

The European Youth Parliament, A. Noting with regret the lack of fiscal cooperation among Eurozone Member States, B. Emphasizes the lack of economic integrity between Eurozone and other EU Member States (e.g.: different currencies’ exchange rates), C. Expresses its regret that low interests rates lead to accumulation of debt among Member States experiencing economic crisis, D. Alarmed by certain Eurozone Member States, such as France and Germany, ignoring European Central Bank (ECB) recommendations, but still remaining absolved from legal repercussions, E. Deeply concerned by the undisciplined deficit spending resulting in excess being common practice among Eurozone Member States such as Ireland and Greece, F. Keeping in mind that austerity measures among Eurozone Member States may result in decrease in Gross Domestic Product (GDP), ultimately impeding economic growth, G. Emphasizing the need for an official money transfer system from more economically developed countries to less economically developed countries, H. Aware of the inefficient policy of the ECB not being categorized to suit individual countries, I.

Keeping in mind that asymmetrical growth poses a hindrance to a well-functioning currency, widening the gap between more developed and less developed areas in the EU,

J. Bearing in mind that the lack of education about the Eurozone among its citizens may lead to confusion and hostility towards the Eurozone and/or a fiscal union;

1. Invites EU Member States to create a common fiscal union leading to sustainable development; 2. Encourages the ECB to enhance cooperation with national banks, extending the Exchange Rate Mechanism II (ERM II) program to countries which are not joining the Eurozone in the foreseeable future; 3. Calls upon the ECB to create branches in all Eurozone Member States, strengthening cooperation with national banks through accurate market examination and policy adjustments; 4. Suggests the European Commission to draw consequences of violating the ECB regulations on part of the Member States; 5. Further invites the European Commission to create a Committee on Balancing Economic Households, monitoring spending of the Member States while also preventing overlending; 6. Further suggests the ECB to introduce a policy enforcing the counter-cyclical approach to the Member States; 7. Asks the ECB to create a body conducting extensive research and supervision over Member States; 8. Recommends the European Commission to create and manage a Fund of Economic Distribution with money from economically developed Member States; 9. Further encourages the European Commission to create an educational program for EU citizens informing on investments, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and startups creation, and the benefits of a fiscal union.

Fact Sheet European Central Bank: An EU body independent of national and community political authorities, it sets monetary policy. It supervises financial institutions within the Eurozone such as credit institutions, financial and mixed financial holding companies. Deficit spending - occurs when a governmentâ€™s expenditures have higher value than its revenues collected by taxation over a fiscal period, contributing to a government debt balance. Austerity measures - reductions in government spending, increases in tax revenues or both. These steps are taken to lower deficits and avoid a debt crisis. Gross domestic product - the monetary value of all the finished goods and services produced within a country's borders in a specific time period. Fiscal Union - multiple states sharing the same budget, coordinating taxes, and distributing funds centrally. Asymmetrical growth: The differences in the economic development of Eurozone Member States. Exchange Rate Mechanism II: It ensures that the exchange rate fluctuations between the Euro and other currencies do not lead to destruction of economic stability of a single market; it prepares non Eurozone Member States for entering it. Counter-cyclical Approach: It is implemented when policies are made to counter the cyclical fluctuations in an economy, as opposed to a procyclical approach, where policies favor and magnify economic fluctuations. Small and medium-sized Enterprises: Those enterprises which employ fewer than 250 persons and have an annual turnover not exceeding 50 million euro. 23

Motion for a Resolution by:

The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI) Com The Second Pillar of the CAP: The purpose of the Rural Development Policies' priorities and goals is to enhance the rural sector's crucial impact on the EU’s economy until 2020. Considering the differences of extension and development of the rural areas across Europe, how can the EU ensure that these policies are homogeneously implemented by all Member States? Submitted by:

Aleksander Banaś (PL), Bartosz Biernacik (PL), Artur Cedzich (PL), Aleksandra Furmanek (PL), Patrycja Furmaniuk (PL), William Sieling Gasnier (SE), Joanna Gołąbek (PL), Klaudia Lancewicz (PL), Petr Mizera (CZ), Jakub Pypkowski (PL), Iwo Rosochowicz (PL), Michał Wójcik (PL), Dominika Żmuda (PL), Kevin Boland (IE) Chairperson

The European Youth Parliament, A. Recognising the differences in topography and climate, the level of development and organization of the agricultural sector and land across Member States, B. Deeply conscious of the bureaucratic impediments in the implementation of local programmes supported by the Rural Development 2014-2020 thus dimensioning participation, C. Noting with regret the lack of attractiveness of rural lifestyles stemming from lack of both professional and social infrastructure, D. Taking note of the lack of flexibility and adaptability of members of the farming community towards education and technological advancements, E. Alarmed by the lack of utilisation of funding available for rural development projects by Member States, F. Deeply disturbed by the competitive disadvantage in the global food market faced by small local farms in comparison with big industrialised farms;

1. Calls for the establishment of a conference modeled upon the International Farming Systems Association, recognising the diversity of agriculture across Member States and promoting international knowledge exchange of farming methods; 2. Invites Member States to provide information programmes on guidelines concerning rural development programmes’ (RDP) application writing through local vendors;

3. Urges Member States to continue rural development in the areas of technical infrastructure, transport, and cultural amenities under the Rural Development 2014-2020 framework; 4. Encourages Member States to simplify and streamline the application process for funding through RDPs for the small farming community; 5. Requests educational institutions across Member States to organise accessible courses, workshops, and lectures focusing on the implementation of new technologies and access to funding from RDPs for the small farming community; 6. Directs Member States towards annually observing the efficiency of the implemented RDPs through open dialogue with the Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development; 7. Suggests Member States to promote the establishment of regional cooperatives amongst small farmers.

Fact Sheet Rural Development 2014-2020: It sets out to encourage Member States to implement rural development programmes. There are 118 different rural development programmes in the 28 Member States for this period, with 20 single national programmes and eight Member States opting to have two or more (regional) programmes funded through the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) worth â‚Ź100 billion from 2014-2020. International Farming Systems Association: The main activity of the IFSA Europe Group is the organisation of the bi-annual European Symposium. These symposia are a platform for dialogue between scientists and practitioners from a wide range of theoretical backgrounds and methodological focus in the agricultural sector. Directorate-general for agriculture and rural development: This body is responsible for EU policy on agriculture and rural development and deals with all aspects of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Cooperative: It is an autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their common economic, social, and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly-owned and democraticallycontrolled enterprise.

Motion for a Resolution by:

The Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) The Brexit aftermath: Opposite to the UK parting from the EU, recent elections’ results in different Member States highlighted the desire for improvement in European politics, with a focus on transparency and a equal democratic representation. Since those values are fundamental assets to debunk Euroscepticism, how can the EU enhance those democratic values within its borders? Submitted by:

Inez Brogowska (PL), Agata Cejrowska (PL), Franciszek Dąbrowa (PL), Weronika Grzybczyk (PL), Zagros Hama (SE), Sonia Jakubiak (PL), Maksymilian Kaszubowski (PL), Katarzyna Krupa (PL), Beatriz Marques Da Silva (PT), Ewa Rewers (PL), Daniel Sypniewski (PL), Julia Waligóra (PL), Jakub Woźniak (PL), Erik Koeken (Chairperson, NL)

The European Youth Parliament, A. Deeply concerned that EU citizens lack knowledge regarding their representation in the EU institutions, B. Taking note of the lack of communication between the EU institutions and citizens, causing limited access to relevant documents concerning legislation making, C. Bears in mind that the Transparency Register does not comprise meetings that take place inside the Council of the European Union, D. Further notices that the Transparency Register is not mandatory for all companies or individuals that take part in the EU’s decision-making process, E. Fully aware that the process of enrolling in the Transparency Register involves excessive bureaucracy, F. Conscious that the European Commission can freely deny any European Citizens’ Initiative from being forwarded in the legislative procedure, G. Noting with regret the complexity, high cost, and the extensive number of criteria of the European Citizens’ Initiative, discouraging citizens from participating in it, H. Deeply alarmed by the EU’s citizens’ lack of awareness regarding their opportunities to contribute to EU legislation, I.

Deeply disturbed by the lack of transparency regarding important EU-wide legislation that is a result of closed-door meetings of the Council of the EU,

J. Fully alarmed by the overuse of trilogue in the legislative process;

1. Requests the Directorate-General for Communications (DG COMM) and the Member States to act in cooperation with educational institutions; 2. Invites the Director General for Communication to create an informative newsletter about the work of the EU and potential involvement of its citizens in the decision-making process, as well as the expansion of public constitutions concerning EU legislations; 3. Suggests the European Commission to simplify the Transparency Register’s website; 4. Urges the European Commission to make the Transparency Register mandatory for all lobbyists acting within the EU and applicable to meetings inside the Council of the EU; 5. Further invites the European Commission in cooperation with the European Court of Auditors to: a. keep track of the taxpayer money within the EU institutions, b. register and examine all filed requests for document access, c. publish all requested documents apart from necessary exceptions; 6. Directs the European Commission to decrease the number of submission criteria for the European Citizens’ Initiative by: a. lowering the required amount of signatures by 25%, b. extending the time restriction on the gathering of votes to 18 months, c. covering 50% of costs incurred when submitting the European Citizens’ Initiative; 7. Further encourages the European Commission to provide feedback instead of rejecting the European Citizens’ Initiative not fulfilling the criteria; 8. Urges the institutions of the EU to increase the transparency of closed-door meetings, through issuing reports on the discussions’ results; 9. Calls upon the European Council and European Commission to decrease the prominence and frequency of trilogue in the legislative process by acknowledging it as a formal procedure.

Fact Sheet Transparency Register: A mandatory register for the lobbyists and organisations who influence decision making at meetings with Commissioners, directors-general, and cabinets. Everyone needs to register a set of information, such as contact details, affiliated organisations and the aims of this person or organisation. European Citizens’ Initiative: It allows European citizens to directly propose a law to the European Commission. This initiative needs to be supported by at least one million people, from at least seven different Member States. Initiatives currently have 12 months to reach the required amount of votes. Trilogue: It is an informal tripartite meeting attended by representatives of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. There is no standard form of representation for those meetings. The level and range of attendance, the content and the purpose of trilogues may vary from very technical to very political discussions. They may address issues of planning and timetable or go into detail on any particular substantial issue. Directorate General for Communication (DG COMM): The DG COMM is the department of the European Commission responsible for explaining EU policies towards outside audiences. It coordinates communication campaigns with the European Commission. European Court of Auditors (ECA): It monitors the finances of the EU and reports on its spending and revenues to ascertain that the EU funds are spent correctly. Closed-door meetings of the Council of the EU: During these meetings important EU-wide legislation, such as economic reforms, can be discussed by the relevant ministers of the different Member States. Those meetings are often private, or behind “closed-doors”, leaving the general public without any knowledge of the results of the meeting.

Supported by:

Chair of the City Council of Opole Marcin Ociepa

Marshall of Opolskie Voivodeship Andrzej BuĹ‚a

Mayor of the City of Opole Arkadiusz WiĹ›niewski

The Governor of the Krapkowice Province Maciej Sonik

In cooperation with:

Initiated by:

The Schwarzkopf Foundation is the international umbrella organisation of the European Youth Parliament (EYP). EYP Poland is a National Committee in the EYP Network.