livret de resolutions en

2nd Interregional Session of the Center-East Committee of EYP France

Institution Saint-Paul – Saint-Etienne 5th – 7th February 2016

1

RESOLUTION BOOKLET

2nd Inter-regional Session of the Center-East Committee of EYP -France

5th – 7th February 2016

Saint – Etienne



2

General Assembly procedure 1. Introduction 2. Points of information – one delegate answering 3. Defence speech – one delegate. 3 minutes, tap microphone at 30 seconds remaining. 4. Attack speech – one delegate. 3 minutes, tap microphone at 30 seconds remaining. 5. Two direct responses 6. Open debate – 4 or 5 rounds of questions from all committees. Several delegates answering. 7. Summation speech – one or two delegates. 4 minutes 8. Voting procedure

Placards: Committee placard: With every other placard, the committee placards needs to be raised as well. At all times when there is a delegate from the committee still willing to speak, the committee placard must stay raised. Point of information: The board will ask the committees if they have a technical question. Point of personal privilege: If a speaking delegate can’t be understood for acoustic reasons or because he is not speaking loudly enough, this placard may be raised. The delegate will then be asked to repeat his point. Point of order: If the board makes a procedure mistake, the chairpersons will raise the placard.

Direct response: If raised allows the committee to be recognised immediately.



3

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

Considering the great economic potential of a free movement zone, how can the European Union take advantage of the Schengen agreement to foster innovation

and economic cooperation?

Submitted by : Vincent Billet, Stephen Bouleghlimat, Diane Forey, Camilia Lefkir, Raffy Melkonian, Enzo Simard, Juliette Van Den Brule, Adèle Baudat (Chairperson, FR)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Noting with regret that the members of the Schengen Area have varying tariff policies for businesses,

B. Alarmed by the increasing number of companies leaving the European Union (EU) borders in

order to decrease manufacturing costs,

C. Noting with deep concern the lack of localised companies in the Schengen Area,

D. Observing the economic success of the Nothern Range,

E. Guided by the directives of European Research Center (ERC),

F. Taking note of the monopolisation of green energy within the EU,

G. Aware of the discrepancy between the quality and content of higher education among the eastern EU Member States ;

1. Calls upon the Member States to equalise tariff rates;

2. Encourages the third-world countries to adopt similar policies;

3. Recommends members of the Schengen Area to establish a patronage network in order to

improve and maximise the efficiency of the poorer companies ;

4. Invites the Member States to adopt the Asian hinterland dynamic in order to: a. Render economic cooperation and trading unions among the countries more

favourable, b. Prompt innovative and eco-friendly infrastructure ;



4

5. Recommends the ERC to continue carrying out research, concerning ways in which the Member States could create a mutually profitable environment including the eastern countries, in order to asertain innovation and overall development in the EU ;

6. Calls for an establishment of a Headmasters’ and Headmistresses’ Conference within the EU in

order to ameliorate and ascertain the complementariness of the Members States’ educational systems;

7. Encourages the Member States to decrease brain drain rates by creating partnerships between

universities in order to strengthen the quality of education and provide opportunities for further development.



5

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN)

In light of the recent Thalys train attack from Paris to Amsterdam, to what extent should the European Union and the Member States improve security in cross-

border transport without impeding the free movement of people within the Schengen area?

Submitted by : Alexandre Bedo, Mathieu Laurent, Camélia Musungu, Natan Pouleau, Sarah Rachidi, Océane Urtado, Matthias Hodler (Chairperson, )

The European Youth Parliament :

A. Emphasising the importance of the fundamental principle of free movement of persons within the Member States of the Schengen Area and the Schengen agreement’s important symbolic as well their economic role in the European Union (EU),

B. Alarmed by the increase of radicalisation of many forms including radical Islamism in the EU

Member States in recent years,

C. Noting with concern that recent terrorist attacks may threaten the further development of free movement of persons in the Schengen Area,

D. Deeply conscious that it proves to be more difficult to control private, compared to public,

means of transportation when crossing borders due to privacy issues,

E. Fully alarmed by the fact that terrorists can take advantage of the free movement of persons within the Schengen Area when planning and executing attacks,

F. Aware of the technical impossibility of exhaustive controls of passengers and luggage crossing

the borders within the Schengen Area as well as the fundamental incompatibility of such action with the ideas and legal rules of the Schengen agreement,

G. Taking into account that the free movement of people can create a feeling of insecurity among

the population that can lead to actual insecurity,

H. Fully believing that the method of nominative tickets as well as warning announcements in public places can play an essential role in fighting and preventing terrorist attacks,



6

I. Welcoming the measures to fight terrorism on cross-border train lines outlined in the Paris Declaration of 29th of August 2015;

1) Encourages the Member States to use metal detectors at the entrance of their respective major railway stations;

2) Recommends the Member States to allocate funds to the development of more precise and efficient technological means for discovering terrorists moving within big crowds;

3) Calls upon the Member States to increase the number of randomly targeted security checks – and security checks in general – of travellers at borders;

4) Further invites the Member States to launch media and educational campaigns in order to reduce feelings of insecurity among the population caused by reoccurring, unforeseen terrorist attacks;

5) Further recommends to improve the surveillance of individuals featured on terrorist watch lists of the Member States and/or Europol, putting special emphasis on those carrying out frequent travels;

6) Calls for an increase of the funds used by the Member States for military and police presence in important public hubs and means public and cross-border of transportation both national and cross-border transportation.



7

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

In light of the financial crisis causing large numbers of graduates moving to different European Union countries for employment, what measures can the

European Union adopt to avoid a brain drain from certain Members States and ensure an even distribution of skilled labour without restricting free movement in

the Schengen zone?

Submitted by: Kavi Ashta, Julian Bouchut, Elodie Campo, Félicité De Beaucoudrey, Arlind Meha, Matthias Masini (Chairperson, CH)


A. Deeply regretting the decreasing number of qualified workers in South and East European Union (EU),

B. Noting with concern the stagnation of further development due to brain drain, induced by the lack of job opportunities,

C. Recognising that the present economic disequilibrium and the uneven distribution of qualified workers result from:

a. Lack of information about job opportunities, b. Paucity of economic investments,

D. Declaring that the brain drain is largely due to a disproportionate level of attraction among EU Member States,

E. Noting with regret that the level of accessibility and quality of higher education varies across the EU,

F. Taking into account the underrepresentation of some Member States, due to the uneven territorial repartition of European institutions;



8

1. Calls upon the European Investment Fund (EIF)1 to invest in companies from countries affected by brain drain ;

2. Encourages a stardardisation of laws concerning the establishment of 2a company within the EU ;

3. Calls for the European Employment Service (EURES) 3 to provide information about job opportunities offered in countries affected by brain drain ;

4. Requests that future european institutions are located in Member States where no such established exists ;

5. Urges the European Regional Fund (ERDF)4 to establish research centres in countries with a lack of qualified workers ;

6. Recommends the implementation of a specifically-appropriated grant for students from the south and east EU in order to pursue studies in a higher education institution in that region ;

7. Notes the importance of raising the quality of education in countries affected by brain drain.

1 Established in 1994, the EIF provides funding to the small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), particularly to new businesses. It also gives guarantees for financial institutions to cover loans to SMEs. 3 Established in 2002, EURES is a cooperation network designed to facilitate the free movement of workers within the 28 EU Member States, including Switzerland, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. 4 Established in 1975, the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) reinforces the economic, social and territorial cohesion in the EU by supporting a balanced development between the regions.



9

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

With Schengen Member States closing their internal borders facing a large numbers of refugees, how could the Schengen agreement be revised to provide a unified approach to the influx of refugees, whilst upholding its founding principles

of freedom of movement and security?

Submitted by : Léa Da Ponte, Kader Ferraz, Arthur Haberstrau, Alicia Magat, Sara Vandasova, Anastasiya Yushyna, Chloé Auclair (Chairperson, FR)


A. Alarmed by the daily fatalities resulting in illegal crossing of migrants encouraged by smugglers,

B. Noting with regret the lack of effective control on immigration and the arms trafficking from countries outside the Schengen space,

C. Fully aware that ill-intentioned individuals move freely in the Schengen area by integrating with the influx of refugees,

D. Deeply disturbed by the clear incompatibility between the principle of free movement of people and the current polices closing borders within the Schengen Area,

E. Deeply regretting the lack of cooperation on immigration policies between the EU Member States, consistent with the Dublin Regulation;

1) Calls for the European Commission to increase funding for the surveillance of the external

borders of the Schengen Area;

2) Encourages the Member States particularly affected by the influx of refugees to create more control and reception centres for arriving refugees;



10

3) Considers an essential revision of the Schengen Agreement with the aim of implementing financial sanctions against countries not complying with the free movement of persons;

4) Calls for a revision of the Dublin Regulation, allowing the creation of monthly quotas of refugees for each Member State;

5) Authorises refugees to concoct a list of seven countries where they wish to apply for asylum

according to the quotas of each Member State;

6) Supports the fight against smugglers by augmenting the financial and economic resources of the agency Frontex;

7) Urges the Member States to strengthen legal sanctions against the smugglers.



11

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Regional Development (REGI)

With the European Cross Border Cooperation program celebrating 25 years, how can the European Union support the further development of cross border cities,

learning from this program?

Submitted by : Gabriel Courbon, Félix Grondin, Michael Maitre, Nicolas Matagne, Lou Salazard, Filip Sun Fann, Leopoldo Zampiccoli (Chairperson, IT)


A. Bearing in mind that the cultural divide among cross-border cities may provoke disputes within communities, induced by language barriers, historical conflicts and opposing traditional and cultural values,

B. Observing the lack of cooperation between the cities’ public services, such as the police, firefighters and hospitals,

C. Expressing its appreciation for the hospital of Cerdagne, situated on the border between France and Spain at Puigcerda, that successfully initiated a joint service for cross-border communities,

D. Deeply concerned by the increase in anthropic activity within the environment, thus posing a threat to biodiversity across borders,

E. Alarmed by the increasing deterioration of the environment and the emergence of health risks connected with the release of CO2 emissions by coal-fired power plants situated near borders,

F. Aware that the closely situated nuclear power plants result in tensions between cross-border cities, due to associated risks of radioactive leaks;

1. Encourages local primary and secondary education institutions to increase cross-cultural awareness by the inclusion of appropriate material and activities in their programs;

2. Recommends the respective municipalities to hold joint cultural events, in order to highlight and valorise common traditions;

3. Endorses the creation of a shared communication system between local security forces with the

aim of improving their efficacy;



12

4. Supports the further implementation of common public transport lines between cross-border cities, allowing for easier movement across borders;

5. Draws attention to the importance of the establishment of joint hospital services, as exemplified by the Les Pyrenees’’ common hospital between France and Spain;

6. Calls upon the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) to allocate a grant to the cross-border cities for the establishment of:

i. urban Social Areas of Conservation (SACs) along riversides, ii. green areas, iii. pensile gardens on rooftops;

7. Further invites the cross-border cities to hold forums on the issue of C02 emissions generated

by coal-fired power plants in border regions, discussed among elected representatives, scientific committees and respective Chief Executive Officers (CEOs);

8. Strongly condemns any construction of nuclear power plants along borders;

9. Calls for the shift towards a renewable energy system through cooperation among cross-border cities.



13

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Industry, Research

and Energy (ITRE)

Taking into account the European Commission’s Energy 2020 strategy, how can Schengen Members improve their cooperation to increase the use of renewable

energy and reach energy self-sufficiency?

Submitted by : Marie Babe, Julia De Rooij, Martin Gaboriaud, Cyprien Le Grand, Théophile Pierron, Yann Pra, Juliane Rathier, Cloé Thomas (Chairperson, FR)


A. Taking into account the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy of the European Commission aimed at:

a) Reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20% in relation to its levels in 1990,

b) To raise the share of renewable energy to 20%,

c) Increase the energy efficiency of 20%,

B. Aware of the dependency of the Member States (MS) on energy, largely monopolised by non-signatories to the Schengen Agreement,

C. Noting with regret that this dependence could cause energy shortages in times of conflict,

D. Taking into account that lobbying power is exploited by the energy-exporting countries,

E. Deeply regretting the overconsumption of fossil fuels by Schengen Area countries, in comparison with any other form of energy source, thus polluting and arriving at the point of exhaustion,

F. Fully aware of considerable lack of renewable energy production and its unbalanced repartition within the Schengen Area,

G. Realising that the geographical and climatic assets of signatory states are not used to their full potential;



14

1. Calls for the establishment of a communication service in order to hold campaigns and events, raising awareness about reneweable energy;

2. Encourages the establishment of an energy department with competencies that include:

A. the formulation of guidelines for signatory states to adopt a more eco-friendly lifestyle,

B. developing a distribution plan of renewable energy sources, while taking into consideration geographic and climatic aspects of the territories,

C. the establishment of a supranational network which will distribute energy according to the needs of each state;

3. Calls for the establishment of a research service that will:

D. establish quotas requiring signatory states to diversify their energy exporters,

E. establish a common platform for all Schengen signatory countries in order to go on a joint venture and purchase renewable energy technologies from providers,

F. in cooperation with the Member States fund research with the aim of augmenting the level of innovation and creativity with regards to renewable energy;

4. Recommends the aforementioned services to be under the leadership of energy ministers of respective signatory countries as a single agency.



15

They support the European Youth Parliament – France :

They support the 2nd Interregional Session of the Center-East Committee of EYP-France :

livret de resolutions en

Documents