ON TOPICS

It is safe to say that the EU has entered a new tu-multuous age after the European elections ear-lier this year. It is quite easy to belittle the Euros-keptics for these tumults, deem their opinions as extreme and be on our merry way. However, there is more to Euroskeptics than “They’re na-tionalist demagogoues who have abused peo-ple’s dissatisfaction over the Euro crisis”. In fact, they raise some legitimate points over several elephants the EU has been housing in its room.

Not every Euroskeptic holds all of the same views as the notorious Nigel Farage, in fact, rea-sons for opposing European integration can be very diverse and even conflicting. Euroskeptics don’t usually agree on their stance towards the EU itself. There are two main types of Euroskep-ticism: hard and soft, with only hard Euroskepti-cism calling for the complete dissolution of the EU. Soft Euroskeptics can very well be in favour of the EU’s existence and membership to it; what they do not agree on is the way it currently is.

What is it about the EU that rubs them in the wrong way then? The answer, unsurprisingly, varies, but the main problem is the EU’s tech-nocratic nature. Between the Commission, the Council of the EU, the European Council and the European Parliament, only the EP is democrati-cally elected; the rest are appointed by national governments. Considering that the EU currently has exclusive competences on some legislati-ve areas, this means that the people’s voice on some matters is simply not heard at all. This is only one of the many areas on which the Euros-keptics actually have a point (even if you are a

diehard federalist sleeping with an “I <3 Junc-ker” tee at night), and although their proposed course of action might not be the only one, their concerns should perhaps be answered.

The most important thing, however, is mana-ging to differentiate the Euroskeptic views and the negative connotations that come with them, even though they usually are not related. UKIP has managed to get Euroskeptics labelled as homophobes, and the Front National is certainly trying its best to show them as too patriotic. We must remember that Euroskepticism is merely a stance on Europe and nothing more, and even then it can differ.

AFCO Iby Barış Can Kaştaş

INTAby Eirini Daliani

The creation of a transatlantic market is simulta-neously a chance and a challenge.It is a challenge because there are several ba-rriers that need to be overcome in order to achieve the desirable result, starting from the tariffs and the regulatory framework. At the same time, negotiations are difficult re-garding the content of the partnership, the ne-cessary compromise and transparency. More specifically, transparency is an issue of vital im-portance that has triggered a round of protests in the EU and has shown that trust towards the EU’s governmental institutions is fragile. Also, same level of financial safety across the board, consumer protection, health, environ-ment and qualification are fields that need to be covered under the umbrella of TTIP.

On the other hand, TTIP is a chance that can lead to growth in sectors such as the economy and diplomacy. Working on what is already in place and setting a stable base for future law making and regulations is crucial while dealing with this topic. Moreover, given the fact that

both the EU and USA are overpowers, a balance between their interests should be considered.

It is my belief that the EU should restore its internal integrity before moving to the final agreement. The economic crisis has revealed problems in many sectors and words must be turned into concrete actions. European citizens’ voices must be heard so as to turn the challenge into a chance over time.

The emergence of the first steam locomotives in early 19th century England is what enabled the industrial revolution to develop its full im-pact. Since then, machine-powered transport has gone from being a fascinating novelty to something we are completely dependent upon. The unfortunate reality however is that this is no longer sustainable, with transport accounting for more than a quarter of CO2 emissions in Europe, of which 71% originate from cars.

In December of 2011, the European Commis-sion adopted the 2050 Roadmap, which aims to reduce the EU’s greenhouse gas emission to 20% of the levels in 1990. After the EC re-cognized the goals set in the 2020 Climate and Energy Package will likely be met earlier than expected, the 2030 Framework was es-tablished with the goal of reducing greenhou-se gas emissions to 60% of 1990 levels. Fur-thermore, the Ten-T networks planned by the

EC aim to fill gaps in the European transport systems.

Uniting the reduction of transportation borne greenhouse gas emissions with the EU’s eco-nomic needs poses many challenges. Road traffic is currently the most popular mode of transport in the EU, preferred by the gover-nment for its low infrastructure cost and the private sector for its flexibility and low cost. But is also the least efficient environmenta-lly, while congestion costs the EU economy 1.3 trillion euros annually (more than 1% of its GDP and the entire EU budget). Unfortu-nately, high upfront costs, the requirement of good planning and strong collaboration with other Member States is discouraging to the adoption of alternative, more efficient means of transport such as trains, ships and appea-ling public transport systems. It is also vital that true alternatives to our reliance on fossil fuels for transportation are found, as efficien-cy cannot be improved indefinitely and the resources are finite. We should then ask ourselves: To what extent shall the different situations of MSs be consi-dered? And how can differences in financial resources be compensated in order to achie-ve the greater long-term goal of more effi-cient, more economical and more sustainable transport?

TRANby François Heusser

Journalism: the profession of gathering, repor-ting about, writing, and publishing news stories.

The purpose of journalism is to ensure a well-in-formed citizenry, with the required knowledge to make the best possible decisions. Journalists must maintain their loyalty to the citizens and the greater public interest by publishing unbiased and truthful stories. However, with the current economic crisis, a commercially viable press is re-quired and hence journalists shift their loyalties from the citizens to making profit for their com-panies.

Recently, it has been the case that journalists have taken extreme measures to get information for their stories; measures that are often intrusive and violate the rights of the citizens. An example of such actions can be clearly seen through the case of the “News International” phone hacking scandal. Whether an act intrudes or not on the privacy of someone, it solely depends on what one interprets as an intrusive act. Intense survei-llance, even if it occurs in public, which is already considered legal, may give rise to intrusion claims or harassment and stalking lawsuits. Hence, it is of

great importance that the press is regulated in order to ensure the wellbeing of citizens.

On the other hand, press freedom is one of the main objectives of the EU as it safeguards freedom of expression and information, which are two of the most basic human rights. Press freedom allows discussion and criticism of the activities of both the authorities and civil and private structures. Taking actions against the media could violate press freedom and make publication of stories and informing citizens virtually impossible.

Hence, what is best for the public interest? Regulating the press to protect the people or allowing extensive press freedom to in-form the people? Could a perfect balance be achieved?

LIBE IIby Katerina Stavri

On August 2nd the Greek ministry for Economics “announced” the year’s taxes on estate and housing properties, cancelling even vaca-tion plans due to their shockingly high rates. Meanwhile, with our fifth year into the crisis, pleads for a more lenient budget framework are bombarding the EC, with GDP growth reaching a marginal 0.2%. With an incoming debate between states affected by austerity supporting a more flexible Fiscal Stability Treaty and regulatory agencies which claim that flexibility is already there, the question arises as to which direction the EU should follow; the same austere fiscal policy or one more liberally oriented?

Across the Atlantic and 60 years into the past, the astronomical U.S. debt after World War II, accounting for 160% of its GDP, would be considered a hindrance to economic growth. Nevertheless it managed to achieve the highest growth rates of its history. How? In J.M.Keynes’ “General Theory of Unemployment” we are reminded that growth ulti-mately resides in society’s tendency to consume. Consequently, debts oriented to public consumption and production are more of an invest-ment than a debt. With that in mind, I believe, that unless the EU “ca-tegorizes” debts and introduces a stimuli oriented economic policy, continued austerity will lead down a precarious path.

ECONby Panagiotis Patikos

An increasing number of governments across Europe, including the British government, are keen to encourage the extraction of shale gas, arguing it will improve their country’s energy security, boost their economy and create jobs. Other countries, such as France and Bulgaria, have it completely prohibited it at present, des-pite outside pressure.

The controversy stems from the opponent’s con-cern that the high-pressure injection of water ris-ks polluting water supplies, damaging the envi-ronment, causing minor earthquakes and further worsening climate change. However, the recent standoff with Russia over Ukraine might change the way European countries obtain their natural gas. Many have given various solutions, which go from becoming 100% powered by renewa-bles to exploiting nuclear energy or even buil-ding stronger ties with countries rich in oil and gas such as Azerbaijan to diversify the number of countries from which Europe sources its oil. In 2009, almost 80% of EU’s natural gas imports came only from Russia, Norway and Algeria.

Perhaps a more reasonable approach to the pro-blem would be a combination of all. Fracking should not be completely ruled out just yet, but more technological research should be conduc-ted in order to make this process more environ-mentally friendly.

Exploring water-free fracking seems like a reaso-nable choice as it eliminates the need for water. In addition, the gel retains sand better than wa-ter, making it possible to get the same results with one-eighth of the liquid. As Europe’s ener-gy security seems to be under threat, all stake-holders need to be aware of the solutions that lie in front of them now more than ever.

ENVI Iby Lira Loloçi

Eradicating poverty and ensuring sustainability have put in the spotlight the need for long and short term efficient solutions which will benefit not only rural but also marginal areas in de-veloping countries.

It is a fact that universal access to energy is achievable. Howe-ver, financing the effort and ensuring the right use of aid in developing countries stresses the need for tackling the pro-blem from its roots. Strong governance, regulatory reforms, in-vestments and co-operation are fields of high importance. All the efforts should take seriously into consideration renewable sources of energy, whilst respecting the environment.

Now, more than ever, sustainability in everyone’s livelihood and the elimination of poverty is not an option but a necessity. The means to achieve that are merely a grain of sand in relation to the amount of money and energy spent annually in every lon-gitude and latitude around the world. As I see it, letting peo-ple starve to death and having appalling living conditions is at least inhuman and sadistic. However, through collective effort, co-operation, patience and will, in some years we might enjoy the same privileges, having overcome the cruelty of our times.

DEVEby Dimitris Davris

The EU’s territory is classified as ru-ral with more than 77% of it consisting from farmlands and forests. It is the-refore easily understandable that the agricultural policy is crucial for the EU, with its annual budget withholding more than 40% of the total EU budget. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), introduced for the first time in 1957, has changed over the years. After the refor-ms set in 2013 the three main goals are: Food production (safety), Sustainable management of food resources and De-velopment of rural areas through the EU.In addition to this, CAP encourages the modernisation of European agri-culture by helping farmers improve their facilities. It also helps young peo-ple to enter farming by providing them with bonus direct payments for the first five years they work on the sector.

However, this policy has many drawbacks. One the most important is the unequal contribution of the money addressed to farmers, as there is no specific tariff according to the fields’ area and the type of crop. On top of that, through this payments farmers are no longer linked to the production, me-aning that no matter how much they produce they can enjoy financial security from CAP’s budget.

Another concerning issue is the impact of CAP to world’s markets. It is a matter of fact that the open-market regimes facilitate the exchanges between the EU and developing countries, so the problem arises when subsidies keep prices artificially low, mainly for grain traders, so developing country farmers cannot compete. On top of that, these countries become dependent on EU’s im-ports and they do not develop their agricultural sector. Finally, regarding exports, their prices are usually higher and their products are not compatible to worldwide markets. Taking all these facts into account, what should be done to mitigate the negative impact of CAP in developing countries?

AGRIby Eva Gouda

The EU has probably one of the most stringent regulations on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) licensing 48 so far; howe-ver with a new agreement from the EC for Member States to have a greater, and almost final say on GMO growth, the field seems to be changing.

The uses of GMOs range widely from the production of GM crops to ‘pharming’, where transgenic animals are developed with the ability to produce bio-therapeu-tics. An example of this is the drug A Tyrn, recently licensed for use in the US as an anti-clot-ting factor. Inevitably there have been many concerns raised by groups such as ‘Alliance of Na-tural Health’ over the use of GMOs with points being made including the risk to human heal-th and the environment. This, coupled with the fact that Mem-ber States now have the ability to ban the growth of a GMO if serious risks to human or animal health are recognised, has given rise to a bad press without full assessment of the advantages and benefits they also produce.

Therefore, it is essential to fully explore all aspects and the im-pact on future generations, be-fore suggesting any decisions for the EU to take regarding GMOs.

ENVI IIby Alexandra Thompson

It is time for Europe to tackle the intricate system of international corruption, which clearly shows itself through the annual loss of 120 billion Eu-ros a year in financial transactions within the EU area.

The Brussels “lobbycracy”, which influences the three political institutions at the heart of the EU’s legislative process, is facilitated by the increasin-gly prevalent phenomenon of “trialogue”. This, together with delays, prevarications and long si-lences from the MEPs prevents from noting con-flicts of interests in the public domain. Moreover, the unclear situation shaped by di-fferent obligations at different levels of seniority allows civil servants within the EU to avoid their responsibilities. Areas prone to corruption in EU institutions are mainly public procurement and the lobbyist industry especially when it is affec-

ted by the “revolving door”, since the main as-set for a lobbyist is contacts with and influence on government officials.

Encouraging information-sharing among natio-nal governments and civil society organisations is needed to tackle a systemic problem. By sim-ply washing its hands of this dilemma, the EU fails to recognise a substantial issue linked to the reliability of its political authority. Indeed, co-rruption not only hurts the European economy but also undermines citizens’ confidence in de-mocratic institutions, thus reinforcing the rise of extremist parties.

AFCO IIby Monica Maurelli

The percentage of women in the European Par-liament has increased by 2%, bringing the num-ber to 37%. With this, the percentage of women in the EP became higher than that in national parliaments within the EU.

The European Women’s Lobby offered a diffe-rent analysis: “With this snail’s pace it will be ano-ther half a century before the EP reaches gender parity”. Truly, out of 28 Member States the only countries to have more female than male repre-sentatives are Belgium, Austria, Italy, Poland, Czech Republic, Finland and Luxembourg.

Stating that discrimination against women in the labour market is illegal, and underlining the im-portance of the principle of ‘equal pay for work of equal value’, Article 157 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union calls for each Member State to ensure this principle.

The European Commission already has some measures in place in order to tackle the gender pay gap, like the annual European Equal Pay Day, instituted on 2011. In Germany, software like Logib-D allows companies to study the gen-der pay gap within their organization.

The main cause behind the leap in women’s re-presentation in the parliaments may be gender quotas, implemented in 8 Member States. Quo-tas result in an immediate increase in gender ratio and can also ensure that women focus on improving their performance and not tackling gender barriers. However countries like Fran-ce deem quotas to be discriminatory and ban them, finding them detrimental to the functio-ning of the market since they force companies to hire people fitting the quota and not the job description.

FEMMby Ece Çakır

The complex problem of restraining over privacy in the inter-net has been present ever since its creation. Recently propo-sed by the European Commission, the right to be forgotten is a part of the EU’s Data Protection Package. It aims at suppor-ting citizens’ fundamental rights by providing them with the opportunity to ask for deleting their data being ‘irrelevant, no longer relevant or excessive’ from certain searching engines, such as Google. Here’s important info too. Nevertheless, after making such a request, the data is not permanently erased. It is just not reachable with the use of the aforementioned searching engines. Still, it may be obtained from the sources outside the EU. There are tomany important things written underneath this box, but you will never read them!

Moreover, there is a risk that the right to be forgotten may be easily abused or misused in various ways. It is hard to de-fine whether something actually fills the set criteria, or brings some personal benefits for the requester. The initiative brings numerous aspects that need to be considered while deciding about deleting the content – what if it concerns more than one person, while others do not want it to be deleted? What if it actually brings some significant information about public figures? Here’s the answer to all. Those questions remain wi-thout proper answer today.

JURIby Joanna Stachera

In the last years the number of migrants in the European Union has increased dramatically due to the recent events in North Africa. Today, over 90% of all migrants are to be found in just 9 Member States, which find themselves unable to provide the people with proper medical treat-ment and a place to sleep.

Even though there already exist the Dublin I, II and III Regulations, FRONTEX, related European legislations and agencies, the European Union is yet to find the right solution to overcome the problem of migration.

Greece has fewer than 1,000 reception places available but every year the country gets more than 10,000 asylum applications because about 90% of people detected irregularly entering the European Union arrived first in Greece. That is why the conditions of the migrant detention centres are so appalling. This shows that Gree-ce is not able to handle all the asylum seekers alone.

Another problem is that the citizens often do not accept the migrants and therefore make their integration even harder. To overcome this, the people must understand that they can benefit from the immigrants. It is also important that the foreigners learn the new language as soon as possible and that is why the governments have to provide language courses.

In my opinion all Member States should work to-gether in order to tackle the increasing number of asylum seekers and to provide them with cen-tres where they can sleep, get medical treatment and have a contact person. Bearing in mind that in 2050 every third citizen in the EU will be over 65 years old, the migrants could be beneficial for our economy, so I believe they should be ac-cepted.

LIBE Iby Teresa Gisinger

The costs of unemployment to the individual are not hard to imagine. When a person loses his or her job, there is often an immediate impact to that person’s standard of living. Even for those eligible for unemployment benefits and other forms of government assistance – like food as-sistance –, it is often the case that these benefits replace 50% or less of their regular income. That means these people are consuming far less than usual. The economic consequences can go be-yond just less consumption, though. Many peo-ple will turn to retirement savings in a pinch; dra-ining these savings has long-term ramifications.

One of the most successful ways to combat unemployment is definitely internships. Unpaid internships provide numerous benefits to emplo-

yers. They can use internships as a cost-effecti-ve recruiting strategy for services received at no cost – compensation – to them. Interns benefit from internships by gaining valuable experien-ce, and they often get a unique inside perspec-tive on their primary career field, which can help them in their decision-making process on the career of their choice.

Finally, a major benefit of education is the lower risk of unemployment at higher educational le-vels. However, young people usually lack a lot of skills that would make them competent enough on the labor market. As result, more and more people are now taking part in projects, which are organised by non-formal educational initiatives.

EMPLby Maša Memedović

With the cooperation of:

With the kind support of:

Under the auspices of:

ΔΗΜΟΣ ΠΟΛΥΓΥΡΟΥ