The 12th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference
OULU SEPTEMBER 8-9, 2003
The Baltic Sea Region – An Area of Knowledge
Leena-Kaarina Williams (Editor)
CONTENTS
OPENING OF THE CONFERENCE 5 PAAVO LIPPONEN 5 JAN-ERIK ENESTAM 7 KARI NENONEN 10 MIKKO LOHIKOSKI, The 3rd Baltic Sea NGO Forum 12 RISTO ERVELÄ, Baltic Sea States Subregional Co-operation (BSSSC) 14 SIIRI OVIIR 15 SANDRA WEIDEMANN 16 MIKKO LOHIKOSKI, Union of Baltic Cities (UBC) 17 MARKO MÄLLY 18 ALFREDO BIONDI 19 OLEG SALMIN 21
FIRST SESSION 23
CO-OPERATION IN THE BALTIC SEA REGION 23
Report on behalf of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Standing Committee on the developments since the 11th Parliamentary Conference 23 OUTI OJALA 23
Report on behalf of the CBSS 26 KRISTIINA OJULAND 26
Democracy at a Crossroads 30 H.E. HELLE DEGN 30
A regional approach for marine environment protection: the aspect of safer shipping 34 INESE VAIDERE 34
Common measures to combat environmental risks of increased shipping 38 HANNA MATINPURO 38
BRIEF COMMENTS 41 SYLVIA BRETSCHNEIDER 41 ASTRID THORS 43 ASMUND KRISTOFFERSEN 44 VATANYAR YAGYA 45 ANKE SPOORENDONK 46 OLE STAVAD 46 FOLKE SJÖLUND 47
2 ELENA KALININA 48
SECOND SESSION 49
KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY IN THE BALTIC SEA REGION 49
Knowledge Society – What does it mean? 49 INGE LØNNING 49
The Baltic states on the move towards a Knowledge Economy 52 ALGIRDAS KUNCINAS 52
Bottom-up Strategies to the Knowledge-based Society - Meeting the Future in the Baltic Sea region 56 BERND HENNINGSEN 56
State policy of the Russian Federation in Information and Communication Technologies 61 ANDREY KOROTKOV 61
BRIEF COMMENTS 64 DOROTHEE STAPELFELDT 64 EKKEHARD KLUG 65 ARJA ALHO 66
THIRD SESSION 66
KNOWLEDGE-BASED SOCIETY AND ITS IMPACT ON THE LABOUR MARKET IN THE BALTIC SEA REGION 66
Co-operation between science and industry 66 MARIE EHRLING 66
Labour market in the Baltic Sea region – future perspectives 69 KRZYSZTOF KRYSTOWSKI 69
Migration policy in Russia and its impact on the labour market 73 IGOR UNASH 73
Demographic situation and influence of education and competence on economic growth 76 TOIVO ROOSIMAA 76
DISCUSSION 78 TRIVIMI VELLISTE 78 IGOR UNASH 78 OUTI OJALA 79
3 KRYSZTOF KRYSTOWSKI 79 GIEDRĖ PURVANECKIENĖ 79 OLE STAVAD 79 IGOR UNASH 80
BRIEF COMMENTS 80 CHRISTOPH ZÖPEL 80 SØREN VOIE 81 MANFRED RITZEK 82
Adoption of the Resolution 83 KENT OLSEN 83 HEINZ-WERNER ARENS 84
ANNEX I 84
ANNEX II 88
4
Opening of the Conference
PAAVO LIPPONEN
The Baltic Sea region is one of the most dynamic areas in Europe. It has the potential for becoming a globally significant growth region, representing a market of approximately 100 million people. Despite of the recent slow growth in the world economy the Baltic Sea region has still achieved high growth rates. It has a strong basis for developing into a leading knowledge-based economy e.g. in information technology and biotechnology. Thus, the region greatly contributes to reaching European objectives of growth, competitiveness and job creation.
Oulu is a leading growth centre in the Baltic Sea region, world-famous of its success in knowledge-based economy. Broad co-operation between enterprises, local and regional authorities and the university is working here – one of the secrets behind Finland's place at the top of world competitiveness ranking.
The purpose of the Northern Dimension of the European Union is to stimulate sustainable economic growth and to increase welfare in Northern Europe. The most effective tool for realising this objective is to strengthen contacts and co-operation between states, enterprises and citizens. This will gradually lead to positive interdependence which is the best guarantee for peace and stability.
The enlargement of the Union will further underline the importance of EU-Russia relations and of the Northern Dimension. As future member states, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland will bring an important contribution to the EU-Russia co- operation. The Union's share of Russia's foreign trade will rise to 50 percent. A major part of this trade takes place in the Baltic Sea region.
The present EU-Russia border will become much longer. In the future, this border should no more be a dividing line of prosperity and well-being. We need to step up our joint efforts to promote regional cross-border co-operation and to increase people-to-people contacts between the enlarged EU and Russia.
The Northern Dimension idea was launched and adopted as policy in 1997. During the past few years it has developed into a series of concrete projects. The most tangible results so far have been achieved in environmental protection.
The construction of the south-west wastewater treatment plant in St. Petersburg has started. This is the largest single investment in improving the condition of the Baltic Sea during this decade. The establishment of the Northern Dimension Environmental Partnership was another breakthrough. The EBRD, the European Commission, the NIB, the EIB and several others have committed more than 120 million EUR to the support fund. We hope that more countries will join the Partnership Fund and that the proposed projects are implemented as soon as possible.
Progress has been made in environmental protection, but much is still to be done. The Baltic Sea is one of the world's most polluted seas, and the situation is critical in the Gulf of Finland. There is no single reason for this. All the countries at the
5 seaside are to blame for this situation. We need to pull our act together and protect the fragile nature of the Baltic Sea.
Finland held the presidency of the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) until mid- June this year. One of the main concerns during the Finnish presidency was the safety of maritime transport, especially because of the increasing transportation of oil and its consequences on our sensitive marine environment. We still have to do a lot with this issue.
Co-operation with the civil society in the Baltic Sea region continued during our presidency. The NGO Forum arranged in Turku in May 2003 was a success. Concerning labour market issues, Finland hosted a special Northern Dimension Forum in February 2003 in Helsinki. I have noted with satisfaction that the Baltic Sea Trade Union Network (BASTUN) has been invited to participate in the CBSS structures.
I hope that a dialogue between the social partners can some day take place in the framework of our regional co-operation.
We have here today at this conference the honour of hearing an intervention by Ms Helle Degn, CBSS Commissioner on Democratic Development. During the Finnish presidency the Council of the Baltic Sea States took the decision on the expiration of her mandate. This was based on the development of democracy in our region. And this development, Ms. Degn, has had an important role. I would like to express my gratitude to you, Madam Commissioner, and welcome you to this conference.
The second Northern Dimension Action Plan has been prepared under the leadership of the European Commission. The active engagement of the Commission guarantees best that the Northern Dimension is a common policy of the whole enlarged EU and the partner countries. The European Commission and the Italian EU presidency will get our full support in the preparation of the second Northern Dimension Action Plan for the years 2004-2006. The new Action Plan is expected to be adopted during this autumn. I welcome the commission's active engagement in the implementation of the Action Plan.
I hope that the co-operation between the present and the future member states of the EU and the Russian Federation and other partner countries functions well in preparing the new Action Plan. In the Northern Dimension, we need to improve the financing facility by extending the EIB's mandate to also financing infrastructure projects in Russia instead of focusing mainly on environmental programmes. Also the relocation of the EIB's current leading mandate must be balanced, so that more funds are allocated not only to the Mediterranean and to the Balkans but also to co- operation with Russia. For trade relations in this region, Russia's membership in the WTO will be of vital importance.
In general, increased and improved co-operation and co-financing between the international financial institutions, private investors and public programmes is necessary for successfully implementing the Northern Dimension.
Multi-sectoral cross-border co-operation across the EU's new border with Russia should become a priority in the new Action Plan. An important remaining task is to
6 prepare the ground for private sector investments by removing local barriers to trade and investment and by improving border crossing.
The second Northern Dimension Action Plan should be broad, horizontal and expansive. In addition to environmental protection, energy co-operation, transport policy, development of the Information Society, human resources and knowledge capital should also be among priorities in our co-operation.
In the energy sector, the goal is to create an integrated energy market and an efficient environmentally sound energy system for the Baltic Sea region. One of the fundamental objectives of the Northern Dimension is the enhancement of the welfare, health and security of our citizens. The major health risks – such as HIV and tuberculosis – call for joint action by us all.
The second Northern Dimension Action Plan must recognise the need to enhance co-operation in social and health questions. The Northern Dimension Partnership in Public Health and Social Well-being has been broadly prepared and based on a Finnish-Norwegian initiative. The partnership will be launched at a high-level conference organised later this year in Oslo. I hope that the necessary financial resources can be allocated to this important partnership.
Due to the demographic development, the future centre of gravity of the European Union will be in Southern Europe. This is why now is the right time to further strengthen our co-operation in the Baltic Sea region and the whole of Northern Europe. We need a common analysis on both opportunities and threats that our region will be facing. We also need to define joint measures to cope with them.
I believe that the Northern Dimension can play an important role in this process. It can also serve as a model for the relations the European Union is to establish with its neighbours in the Wider Europe. Continuing dialogue between parliamentarians, governments and NGOs on Baltic and Northern issues is indispensable. Today's conference is an excellent example of our common will to enhance co-operation in Northern Europe.
JAN-ERIK ENESTAM
It is a great pleasure for me to greet this 12th Baltic Sea Parliamentary meeting and to wish you all heartily welcome to Finland. In my own work, both as a Minister of the Environment and as a Minister for Nordic co-operation, the Baltic Sea is a familiar ground. In both roles I find the Baltic Sea very topical at present. There are more challenges and greater opportunities in our co-operation with adjacent countries than ever before.
All through history, the Baltic Sea has been a connecting link. People and goods have crossed this sea in all directions. It has provided a living for fishermen, and it provides excellent recreation, both during calm periods and during tempests. We have come to respect the Baltic Sea.
This Sea is surrounded by some 85 million people now experiencing calmness, stability and economic development. This state of affairs, however positive, also has regrettable side effects. The coastal states heavily load the sea, and as this loading has lasted for quite some time, the sea itself requires a long time to
7 recuperate, even if we can curb our discharges and emissions. Additionally, other risks emanating from human activities today more seriously threaten the valuable and sensitive marine systems that perhaps at any previous time .
The Baltic ecosystems are extremely vulnerable. This sea is almost closed; it is a shallow basin of brackish water in a cold climate. A simple comparison with the Mediterranean will illustrate what I mean. The average depth of the Baltic Sea is 52 metres, that of the Mediterranean is 1450 metres. The deepest point of the Baltic Sea lies at 451 metres, whereas the Mediterranean reaches down to 5267 metres. The Baltic Sea may in fact be more vulnerable than any other sea on the globe.
The main problems now are the eutrophication caused by excessive nutrient loads and the risks of serious accidents in the increasing oil transports. The most visible signs of eutrophication are the repeated algae blooms in summer as well as the slime covering shores and fishing equipment. We have too many recent examples of oil accidents and wilful oil discharges from ships. It has been estimated that by 2010, oil transports on the Gulf of Finland will double from the present 70 million tons a year, whereas in 1987, the transports were about 15 million tons. Especially the shallow and narrow navigation channels and difficult winter ice conditions contribute to the risk. A major oil accident anywhere on the Baltic Sea would be a catastrophe indeed.
It is perfectly clear that we need joint efforts to quickly curb the nutrient discharges into the Baltic and more international co-operation to raise the technical and safety level of the ships used for transports on the Baltic Sea as soon as possible. We also have to improve oil-combating capacity, especially in Russia and the countries now acceding the European Union.
I would like to say a few words about what the Finnish government is doing to protect the Baltic Sea environment. About a year ago, the government approved a resolution on a Baltic Sea Protection Programme. This holds important goals and also provides resources especially to stave off eutrophication and to diminish risks from oil transports. The implementation of this programme and supplementary activities are among the government's top environmental priorities.
The Baltic Sea Protection Programme has been efficiently implemented. There is additional financing over the environment programme for agriculture to curb nutrient discharges. De-nitrification of effluent waters from communities is increased under new permit conditions. We are also refitting a fairway maintenance ship for use in oil combating. The government's programme has an agreement for the procurement of a new multi-purpose icebreaker with oil-combating equipment suitable for winter conditions. We are also financing the refitting of two smaller ships. Additionally, we have supported and still support improved preparedness in Russia and Estonia for oil combating on the open Sea.
Another major step towards the protection of the Baltic Sea was when, last spring, the foundation stone for the south-western sewage works in St. Petersburg was laid and the building started. This project combines resources in Russia, donor countries, international financing institutions and the European Union. Finland is supporting the project with 10 million Euro. Similarly, as the Baltic countries become members of the European Union, their sewage discharges will diminish.
8 I am pleased to say that international co-operation during the last few years has been quite successful. In 2001, the HELCOM ministerial meeting in Copenhagen agreed that all coastal states require oil to be transported in ships with a double hull by 2010, the target year was set by the IMO. The ministers also discussed the issue of compulsory escort tugs in the frequently shallow approaches to the Baltic harbours. The European Union has approved an immediate ban on the use of single hull transports of crude oil, and oil transports in single vessels will be phased out by 2010. Finland, Estonia and Russia are jointly setting up a Vessel Traffic Management and Information Service for the Gulf of Finland, which will be taken in use next year. Within HELCOM, Finland, Russia, Estonia and Sweden are preparing regulations for winter navigation, which will also provide the basis for EU regulations on the matter.
As the European Union expands to almost all Baltic shores we may expect that Russia will also adopt the agreed safety levels. Better safety at Sea was stressed in the joint declaration from the European Union – Russia summit meeting, which acknowledged the central role of the IMO in this matter. Maritime safety on the Baltic Sea will only be improved by means of agreement on the practical steps to be taken. Here, the work is now clearly geared to influencing the IMO. We hope all parties will take a constructive view of the matter.
The general public expects efficient measures for the protection of the Baltic Sea. Recent activity in Finland and on the international scene has increased optimistic anticipation. But I would like to stress that the state of the Baltic Sea, and the curbing of oil damage risks, will only come about by continued and active work in all the coastal states. There is strong economic growth in the countries surrounding the Baltic Sea. With continuing growth we have to have absolute reductions in both the load and the risks. It is particularly demanding in the countries in economic growth, in Russia, and in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, which are about to become members of the European Union. For the Gulf of Finland it is very important that effluent discharges from St. Petersburg continue to diminish. The south-western sewage work is only a partial solution. We also have to see that more efficient agriculture does not lead to increased runoff of nutrients. Support from the European Union is vital especially for environmental protection in Russia, and the Northern Dimension Partnership Fund in the EBRD is an instrument of great importance for the state of the Baltic Sea. Support over this Fund should absolutely and unambiguously be channelled to environmental protection projects.
From the perspective of Nordic co-operation, I particularly welcome the theme of this conference "The Baltic Sea region as an area of Knowledge". International surveys indicate that no European region is as well prepared for the Knowledge Society as is Northern Europe.
In the Adjacent Areas Programme of the Nordic Council of Ministers, education and training have in fact been primary objectives ever since its inception in 1991. The grant schemes, which were established for children, young adults, university graduates and civil servants, have provided direct contacts and first-hand knowledge. Over the past decade, co-operation with Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and north-west Russia has expanded into several forms of scientific research. The Nordic ministers of Education and Research in July this year adopted an action plan for the period 2004-2006, which will take this co-operation further. The plan aims at developing a common Nordic-Baltic region for education and research and
9 expanding project co-operation with Russian public authorities and institutions in these fields. A consultative body with representatives from the nine states will administrate the activities, including Nordplus Neighbour and NorFa Neighbour, the mobility and grant schemes.
Today's knowledge-based society builds on information and communication technology. Finland and the other Nordic countries see great opportunities in ever closer co-operation with the partners around the Baltic Sea in this field. Global competitiveness considerations bring into focus research and development that especially supports a knowledge-based economy. The rich academic traditions and high standards in theoretical mathematics and computational sciences which are a legacy of the former Soviet Union can play a major role when combined with the organisational capabilities and the high ICT penetration of the Nordic countries.
The Nordic Council of Ministers actively collaborates with the CBSS in these matters. Our common aim is the implementation of the Northern Dimension Action Plan. With this in mind the Nordic countries intend to expand the NORDUnet, which is an ICT infrastructure providing universities with high-quality Internet capacity. The present intra-Nordic NORDUnet2 focuses on Internet applications within distance- and lifelong learning, telemedicine, digital libraries and infraservices. The objective is to create a new, similar programme that will include north-west Russia and the Baltic states.
Let me summarise: The Baltic Sea is a super sea, although I have mainly dealt with the threats to it. It is of utmost importance that the present generations, and the generations to come, take proper care of it.
Above all, however, the Baltic Sea is surrounded by a wealth of opportunities. It is important to note that a balanced economy, increased social equality and welfare, and democratic development contribute to ecologically sustainable development on, in and around the Baltic Sea. Better training, more research, and the spread of the Information Society will enable us to use knowledge properly. This should inspire us to continuous co-operation for the benefit of the Baltic Sea and those who live within its sphere of influence.
KARI NENONEN
It is a great pleasure and honour for me as a mayor to welcome all the distinguished participants of the 12th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference to the city of Oulu.
Oulu is indeed a very good choice of venue for a conference whose theme is "The Baltic Sea region – an area of Knowledge" as this arena, more obviously than most, has transformed itself through determined efforts, spurred on by a few strokes of good fortune, from a declining community of heavy industries around 1980 into a modern high-tech concentration with a firm belief in technical skills, knowledge and international activity that is capable of occupying a leading position globally in such fields as wireless communication. As the international press have so flatteringly said, here is a town far away in the cold, dark north which is creating some of the hottest technology in the world.
10 The following basic facts about Oulu will serve well to describe our position as a centre of advanced technology located on the northerly shores of the Bothnian Bay:
The Oulu of today is:
-a growing European centre of expertise with 125,000 inhabitants and a total population of 200,000 in the city and its surrounding region combined. -the sixth largest city and fourth largest urban region in Finland, with the country's fastest annual rate of population growth. -the economic, educational, research and service centre for Northern Finland. -the site of a multidisciplinary university of 15,000 students, founded in 1958, and a polytechnic with about 6,500 students. -the location of the internationally renowned "Oulu phenomenon" by which it evolved rapidly into a high-tech growth centre, especially in the field of wireless communication, by relying on powerful, comprehensive co-operation between the public and private sectors, companies, training and research units. -the home of Technopolis, the oldest science park in Scandinavia, founded in 1982, which nowadays houses some 550 companies and premises that cover about 188,000 square metres of floor space in 40 buildings in Oulu, Espoo and Vantaa. -a place for employment for about 80,000 people, some of whom work in the high- tech sector. -the centre of a region in which some 700 companies are located, varying in size from very small-scale enterprises to the Nokia Group, with around 4000 employees.
The long industrial history of the Oulu area has been based on the twin foundations of wood processing and chemicals, industries that have themselves adapted over the years to become modern exponents of advanced technology. Our chemicals industry, for instance, is at the forefront of knowledge in environmental protection, especially in the field of waste water purification, and is constantly working with the world's leading experts in environmental technology to develop these techniques further.
This field of environmental technology represents one implementation of the basic philosophy that governs all the branches of industry in Oulu that display international potential, in that each is regarded as forming a cluster, the crucial elements of which are research and development, a competent staff, close networking, mastery over production processes, and local entrepreneurship. Other growth areas of this kind include information technology, content and media technology, biotechnology and welfare technology. We are paying particular attention in all of these fields to the creation of the necessary critical mass and to commercialisation of the expertise available, the aim being to launch products on global markets.
We are currently in the process of transforming our city to comply with the concept of the Information Society, one of the key themes of this conference. The Information Society can only be said to work well when the new operating models entailed in it are accepted by everyone as part of their daily routines. We are planning support and training measures by which local residents can be instructed in the use of new technology in order to obtain maximum benefit from it. Again, new mobile solutions and web-based services are being developed jointly with the university, the polytechnic and the business sector.
11 In its recently revised strategy, the City of Oulu, together with its surrounding region, has made a clear commitment to supporting positive development trends throughout Northern Finland and has also assumed responsibility for development over the whole of the extreme north of Europe. In line with this, cross-border co- operation with adjacent areas and more extensively within the Baltic Sea region and with other European partners is one of our key priorities.
The Bothnian Arc is a good example of cross border co-operation with adjacent areas. This concept covers the whole area of the northern Gulf of Bothnia coast stretching from Kalajoki in Finland to Piteå in Sweden, with Oulu and the Swedish city of Luleå as the main urban centres. The area has a total population of half a million, about 60% of whom live on the Finnish side, and represent a significant proportion of the industry, expertise and jobs that exist in northern Finland and northern Sweden.
Bothnian Arc projects were started in 1998 with support from the EU Interreg IIC programme, starting out with three regional planning projects, focused on regional development, communications and tourism. A co-operation network has now been set up, the various actors have found each other and the work is able to go forward.
Here, as in many other instances, it is the Baltic Sea that brings representatives of people living along its shores together to discuss common themes and work together to discuss common themes and to work towards common goals. I would like, therefore, to conclude my words of welcome by assuring you on behalf of the City of Oulu and the Bothnian Arc that we are eager and ready to add our expertise to any co-operation that is aimed at building up an affluent, healthy Baltic Sea region with a strong belief in knowledge, sustainable development and a good operating environment as one part of an expanding Europe. I hope that these two days may contribute something new and significant to inter- parliamentary co-operation between the nations at the Baltic Sea.
MIKKO LOHIKOSKI, The 3rd Baltic Sea NGO Forum
In just over a decade, a remarkable process of co-operation has emerged in the Baltic Sea region, which has again become a natural and dynamic area of interaction. With the enlargement of the European Union just ahead of us, this process is bound to accelerate and deepen.
One of the unmistakable signs of this trend is a dynamic co-operation between the civil society organisations. This became evident in the Third Baltic Sea NGO Forum held in Turku, Finland, 8-11th of May 2003, under the patronage of Ms. Tarja Halonen, the President of Finland. It was a highlight of the Finnish Presidency of the CBSS. The main theme of the Forum was "Northern Dimension – Human Dimension? Strengthening of the Civil Society in the Baltic Sea region."
With over 400 representatives of NGOs and other civil society organisations from the Baltic Sea co-operation and adjacent areas, the Turku Forum was the largest and the most representative of NGO Forums so far organised. They discussed in plenary sessions and thematic groups issues such as sustainable lifestyle in the Baltic Sea region, social exclusion and participation, gender equality and human rights, co-operation between NGOs and public authorities and access to
12 information. Detailed reports of these proceedings are available through the Forum Internet pages.
Representatives of the national focal points agreed on a joint final document, which – as decided by the final plenary session, was finalised by the Finnish organising committee on the basis of comments received from the Forum participants.
The Forum emphasised that the European Union enlargement process should not build new barriers, but lead to increased co-operation between countries of the region. It is very important that in this process Russia is not isolated and left outside of the European space but is actively engaged at all levels.
Strengthening of the civil society is an integral and important part of the enlargement process. Strong and independent civil society organisations are an indispensable element of the European societies, today and tomorrow. They enable participation of citizens, provide useful services but also function as critical watchdogs of public authorities when need be. Without a lively civil society, democracy cannot function properly.
The Forum considered it vital to involve civil society organisations more actively in the planning and implementation of the Northern Dimension to enhance its human dimension and to root it better with the lives of ordinary citizens, a prerequisite for stronger public support.
However, they have common values. Those participating in the NGO Fora want to promote peace, security, democracy, human rights and sustainable development in the region and beyond it, develop international co-operation to the benefit of all peoples of the region, work for the protection of the Baltic Sea – our common resource that unites us.
Furthermore, we all want to promote the rule of law and democracy, as well as social cohesion, tolerance and pluralism and to end social exclusion in our societies. Human rights – civil and political as well as social economic – including the rights of minorities as well as gender equality, are all vital elements of democratic society. They must be promoted, respected and protected at all levels.
The Forum called for action to achieve an overall strengthening of the civil society organisations, and creation of favourable conditions for their functioning. These include issues such as simple registration procedures, a taxation system supporting the non-profit character of their work and philanthropic giving, non-interference of public authorities in their work, transparency of public decision-making and access to public information.
Strong civil society is a vital dimension of, and a guarantor for democracy. NGOs are not, and should not be seen, as competitors of the elected democratic structures.
Therefore, we would very much appreciate closer co-operation with parliamentarians and governments to promote processes that aim at enhancing the functioning of civil society organisations. The idea was discussed to have a closer look at the operational environment of the civil society organisations in various
13 countries. I wonder, whether the Parliamentary Conference through its Standing Committee could contribute to this process?
The National Focal Points of participating countries decided to set up a permanent Baltic Sea NGO network for their multilateral interaction. The aim is to create an open and transparent, clearly defined network structure, not any fixed organisation. By doing so, they follow the example of the states, sub-regions, cities, parliamentarians, business representatives and others.
The Baltic Sea NGO network shall work closely with other relevant structures and organisations. We have requested an officially approved consultative status with the CBSS, and also look forward to a close co-operation with the Parliamentary Conference and other regional structures.
Estonia has recently succeeded Finland as the chairman of the CBSS. The NGOs welcome with great enthusiasm the invitation to organise the Fourth Baltic Sea NGO Forum in Estonia in 2004 and are ready to actively contribute to its success.
RISTO ERVELÄ, Baltic Sea States Subregional Co-operation (BSSSC)
It is my great honour and pleasure to be here today and to be able to participate in your debates on behalf of the Baltic Sea States Subregional Co-operation – the organisation which represents regional authorities around the Baltic Sea area. The subjects you have chosen for this years debates are not just of great importance for the healthy development of the Baltic Sea region but also very timely.
The situation in Europe is changing dramatically. People's life expectancy is ever increasing; and with that an ever growing feeling that all their expectations will improve. That the general environment and the conditions of life will be enhanced, that they will be able to have an ever more active presence in public life, and young people rightly expect to be active partners in those areas which have an impact on their current and future lives. But not only that, the modern labour market is shifting ever more rapidly towards the service and knowledge-based sectors, there is an ever quickening pace of change in the world economy which demands greater flexibility and adaptability from labour forces and the education sector. And of course the need to devote more and more attention to the vital issue of equality of opportunities puts new demands on all of us.
All of these trends and issues need to be addressed effectively by decision-makers at all levels. The BSSSC thinks that in the Baltic Sea region these new situations are more visible – as if through a magnifying glass. On the one hand we can boast that here in this Baltic Sea region can be found some examples of world class best practice. On the other hand, the challenge of enlargement and the ever changing demands of the global economy require an even more effective dissemination of these best practices, a more orchestrated approach and, of course, even more strenuous efforts so that we do not just keep up with the changes but remain ahead.
As was pointed out in our resolutions from the Pärnu annual conference "within the greater Europe of the Regions the Baltic Sea region is gaining the unique opportunity to become a European model region in view of its economic prosperity as well as to the incoming knowledge-based society". Using that expertise which is
14 already present in the Baltic Sea region, and the opportunities presented by the processes of transformation, we can be a front runner in the world of change.
In this respect we welcome the eEurope and eEurope+ initiatives as well as the related plans and actions within the Northern Dimension. We also insist on the fact that the role of local and regional authorities should be recognised and supported in current and future decisions. We are active in implementing new policies and initiatives; we initiate and promote projects and actions on those issues I have described. And all this is done in close contact with those citizens whose needs and expectations we are here to respond to.
Another important issue you have decided to cover here in Oulu is maritime safety. It is, to a great extent, an issue for specialists to tackle. But also of concern to us all, especially to local and regional authorities who, when faced with disasters, whether natural or man-made, are often left to deal with very dire consequences. Therefore the BSSSC is of the opinion that it is necessary to work towards improvements both at Sea and on land, to establish financial instruments which will offer compensation for the damage caused by such catastrophes, as well as to take tough measures against those who caused the calamity.
On behalf of the BSSSC, I wish you a successful conclusion to the debates which will take place here and I am sure that decisions to be made here will make the Baltic Sea region even better in the future.
SIIRI OVIIR
The Baltic Sea region is gaining ever more importance politically, culturally as well as economically. Although the sea is common for all of us, it has its differences at its every coast. For the Estonians, if you allow me to make a brief excursion into linguistics, it is not the Ostsee, for us it is the West Sea; for our southern neighbours it is the Baltic Sea. When historically the background of the Baltic Sea was a large and busy trade route, then nowadays the Baltic Sea is becoming the first inland sea of Europe.
On the Baltic Sea, one communicates in nine languages, nevertheless, people here act in concord and very soon they will also share common legal standards. This is the substructure on what Estonia together with the other states of the region, is building the Northern Dimension of Europe.
The essence of the Northern Dimension is the border of the European Union with Russia which is to function as a border line not as a wall.
We are lucky to enjoy a privilege, one binding factor, a gift of the nature – the Baltic Sea, the medius terraneous of the Nordic countries, the axis of our life. It is by far more than just a place for catching salmon – it is a region that forms and shapes our common policy and at the same time it is the region shaped by our common policy. Tons of organisations have been established for developing our co- operation. We are discussing our problems at parliamentary conferences. The organising of women's conferences has become a tradition. The last women's conference took place in Tallinn, the next one will be organised in St. Petersburg.
15 What are women striving for? Women want to give a stronger utterance to their voice, they want themselves, their experiences and their needs to be heard. And one can be sure that it is not only women that gain from it – the whole society will enjoy its benefit.
Men have been leading states and making politics for centuries. Women have entered the world of politics relatively late – in the Nordic countries in the middle and in the Baltic countries in the end of the last century. We, women have entered politics because there was no way of proceeding in the old way any more. We came to shift some essential value systems to their right places, to make the society socially more secure and more democratic. And women will not stop halfway.
In the globalising world life is offering ever new challenges. The realisation of these challenges is based, first of all, on co-operation and knowledge.
I wish the 12th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference every success and thank you for your attention.
SANDRA WEIDEMANN
On behalf of the young people of the Baltic Sea region and as the representative of the Baltic Sea Secretariat for Youth Affairs I would first of all like to thank you, Mr. Speaker, for including young people and young peoples views in this conference.
In particular I wish to thank the Nordic Council and the Regional Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern for inviting two youth representatives, one from Finland, Mr. Faiz Alsuhail, and one from Poland, Mr. Pawel Gradzko, to this years' conference.
They both are engaged in the work of internationally active youth organisations and therefore have acquired already a deep insight of the changes and challenges for young people in today's societies.
We are very grateful that these youngsters here and now have the opportunity to meet with parliamentarians from around the Baltic Sea and discuss with you their views on the future development of the Baltic Sea region, and in particular on the topic of Knowledge Society.
The issue of Knowledge Society and the role of the Baltic Sea region in this context was already discussed at last years Baltic Sea youth ministers conference in Vilnius and is of course a very important topic – especially for young people, who are looking for jobs and who try to qualify for higher and higher demands from all sides.
Before that background there are two main issues or even problems that the young people of the Baltic Sea region want to bring to your attention:
Firstly, in many Baltic Sea states it is still not accepted by the society when a young person wants to use some years, for example after school or during their studies, to go abroad to learn about other cultures, see other countries, do voluntary work –in short orient themselves in the world in order to find out what he or she wants to do
16 in life. It is not supported by families, companies, schools or universities that these young people want to broaden their horizons.
For example, young people who want to spend a year abroad after school are asked by their relatives and neighbours whether their marks in school were not good enough to study.
The second important issue is the recognition of credits and diplomas from foreign institutions. For example young people who want to study a year abroad do not get their credits and work fully recognised at their home universities. In other faculties young students can not take exams at an earlier or later date when wanting to work or do internships abroad and therefore have to study longer or can not go abroad. Students who completed their studies abroad face hurdles and large costs when trying to get diplomas from abroad recognised and translated. For others it's not possible to get recognition of their certificates from abroad at all and they have to take similar classes or courses again in their home countries. And last but not least: non-formal education measures such as intercultural learning exchanges are not commonly recognised.
As you can see there is a wide range of issues that are important for young people. Thus, they call upon you to look for solutions and take political action. Based on their large experiences they offer to be your competent partners in finding them.
MIKKO LOHIKOSKI, Union of Baltic Cities (UBC)
It is a great pleasure to address this meeting on behalf of the Union of Baltic Cities and its over 100 member cities. We highly appreciate this invitation.
The UBC is currently preparing for its General Conference to be organised in Klaipeda in five weeks time. The theme of this bi-annual conference is "The Baltic Wave – Business Development in the Baltic Sea region". In plenary sessions and working groups we will discuss various aspects of economic development in our region and the role of the cities in promoting that and the social responsibility of business. In addition to representatives of member cities, we have invited prominent representatives of the business community to take part in this discussion.
In Klaipeda, the General Conference will also hear the reports from the UBC Commissions and three networks, whose work covers most of the issues the cities are dealing with.
Co-operation between cities in the Baltic Sea region has developed strongly during the last years. Bilateral relations continue to be important, but around them, a viable and dynamic multilateral network has emerged. The UBC is proud of this development.
What makes such a city network effective? It is the members. In the UBC, more than a hundred cities share information and experiences, mutual know-how, for the benefit of all. For example, in the field of sustainable development, the UBC has so far implemented well over ten multilateral development projects and through training, helped hundreds of decision makers and experts at the local authority
17 level to improve their skills. This all contributes to the implementation of the Northern Dimension.
As a result, the co-operation in the field of environment and sustainable development is now entering a new phase. Over 90 per cent of the UBC cities have already adopted their own programme for sustainable development. In the new programme of sustainable development for the years 2004-2009, the UBC will move from supporting the drafting of such local development plans to supporting of strategic activities – that is, to implementation.
The most challenging development for the UBC, as well as other organisations in our region, is the enlargement of the European Union, which will bring substantial changes for the activities and policies of cities in all countries of the region. We see it as our task to prepare this process from the local authority perspective.
The UBC, like other Baltic Sea regional organisations, has actively participated in the process of formulating EU's Second Northern Dimension Action Plan 2004-2006, and through the CBSS made a number of concrete proposals. We highly appreciate this mechanism of co-ordinated consultation.
Having said that, on e has to note that the second NDAP paper in its present form, still includes a number of aspects which are not beneficial for co-operation in the Baltic Sea region. For example, the rules and concepts of the EU cross-border co- operation are not adopted to the conditions of the Baltic Sea region, resulting in that only about 2% of the available EU funding ends up in our region. Another issue, which the UBC has actively discussed, is the issue of EU transportation policy, which should recognise sea connections, and not only roads, rails and air connections as important transportation links.
The UBC also considers, that the 2nd NDAP should be strengthened by emphasising the role of local authorities and the co-operation between civil society organisations.
To end, I would like to invite you all to the forthcoming UBC General Conference in Klaipeda.
MARKO MÄLLY
I would like to thank you for this opportunity to bring our greetings from the Baltic Sea Commission of the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions (BSC-CPMR) as an observer to the 12th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference. I would also like to bring the best greeting from our President Anders Gustav.
The CPMR was established in 1973 in St. Malo and we are celebrating our 30th anniversary there this week. The CPMR unites 150 regions from all over Europe. Our organisation fosters the development of co-operation between European regions as well as with regions from non-EU countries. CPMR promotes the model of sustainable development and the maritime dimension of Europe through a number of EU sectoral policies including structural funds, transport, agriculture, environment and maritime related activities like fisheries, integrated coastal zone management and maritime safety. The goal the CPMR member regions have set themselves is promoting together a more balanced development of the EU by
18 highlighting the value of all its geographical areas with a view to strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion. They are pursuing this objective in several ways:
By studying together with the EU, national and regional institutions can learn how to implement a Europe-wide polycentric development model.
By ensuring that EU policies with a high territorial impact include this dimension in the best possible way.
By developing inter-regional co-operation within large European geographical entities such as the Baltic Sea, the North Sea, the Atlantic, the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, the Balkans, Islands in and also outside of Europe.
The CPMR Baltic Sea Commission was created in 1996 in Kotka and now the BSC secretariat is located and works from the Lahti region in Finland. The BSC includes thirty regions from nine Baltic Sea states. The aim of the BSC is to put together the regions with similar geographical conditions and represents them before the national governments and the EU.
The BSC bases its strategy on the fundamental ideas of the CPMR "Towards a Balanced Europe" from the peripheries to large, integrated maritime units, in view of achieving a polycentric Europe. The integration process in Europe and the globalisation as well as the regional policy which is still inadequate from the peripheral point of view, have obvious consequences in the peripheral and maritime Baltic Sea area.
The priority tasks for the BSC are the achievement of cohesion and common economic area around the Baltic Sea, responsible environment activities, preservation of the cultural heritage and encouraging people to use their human resources of the Baltic Sea region.
The EU Northern Dimension Policy is the area where the BSC will be involved more actively and comprehensively, especially when it comes to the cross-border co- operation at the new external borders of the European Union. At the moment there are two active working groups in the BSC, one for the cross-border co-operation and one for transport dealing also with the issue of the EU Northern Dimension Policy.
Founded by the regions to represent them, the CPMR Baltic Sea Commission aims to be a credible and constructive partner to national governments, parliaments and the EU in the common efforts to develop the Baltic Sea area through the interregional co-operation of the Baltic Sea regions. The observer status of the BSC at the BSPC gives the BSC the possibility to implement this task and to complement the inter-parliamentary co-operation of the Baltic Sea states through the inter- regional co-operation of the Baltic Sea regions.
ALFREDO BIONDI
Thank you to the Baltic Sea Parliamentary conference on behalf of the parliamentary dimension of the Adriatic-Ionian Initiative and also of course on behalf of the Italian parliament where I have the honour of being a deputy speaker.
19
I wish to first of all thank our host, the speaker of the Finnish parliament Paavo Lipponen for inviting us to attend your deliberations and of course also for the very nice evening last night. In the last few years the relationships between our two parliamentary dimensions have become progressively more intensive, this is not fortuitous since the Adriatic and the Baltic Sea are joined by ancient historical links such as the amber route which since Neolithic times has connected the coasts of both seas, as conveyed, in both directions exchanging people and ideas and has thereby contributed one of the corner stones on which the common identity of our continent is based upon.
Today the process of European unification is heading towards new and crucial challenges after achieving one very important result which is the extension of Europe to 25 members, the final aim being a re-unified Europe without walls, without boundaries to strengthen its common cultural heritage and the full sharing of democratic values. In this context you can clearly identify the challenges and the tasks that lie ahead but also the potential that can be elicited by our synergy.
The economic and social context of the coastal states of the Baltic Sea and the Adriatic-Ionian basin are very different but they also have a number of similarities and similar problems, suffice you to think of themes related to the transition economies. These countries are united by strong historical and geographic links but sometimes they are very different from the point of view of social, cultural, religious lives and this is why I think it is very useful to carry out an in depth comparison of our experiences.
The experiences we have made so far have demonstrated that the Adriatic-Ionian co-operation has enormous potential. In the first phase of the life of this initiative we had to face up to a real emergency, I refer to the problem of illegal trafficking, particularly the trafficking in human beings. The results achieved have been considerable insofar as that the illegal trafficking to the southern shore has practically ceased. So this has encouraged us to deepen co-operation between member countries and we step up the efforts to develop the pan-European transport lanes number 5 and 8. It also encourages us to start new initiatives, such as a co-operation in the areas of infrastructure promotion and of of entrepreneurship and culture.
Let me just mention one initiative which is very important in the context of the overall strategies of the initiative also because it is related to the university and thereby to the second session of the conference. I would like to refer to the creation of a virtual Adriatic University (Uniadrion) which will be a crucial tool to promote integration between universities of the coastal countries, culture and science are on the one hand a very strong factor of cohesion and also they are the best possible investment to guarantee high levels of economic and social development of this region. In view of the important results achieved in this field in the Baltic Sea region I consider that the in depth discussion which will take place on the knowledge-based society is going to be very interesting, because knowledge is an added value in the development of the potentials of our countries.
In May, the 3rd meeting of the speakers of the seven member countries with the presence among others of Mr. Kent Olson, member of the Standing Committee of the BSPC, took place, and the future lines of the parliamentary dimension of the
20 AII have been outlined. It is not fortunate that in the final document the BSPC was not specifically mentioned and also not the economic co-operation with the Black Sea. These countries are well aware that what happens in the triangle between the Baltic Sea, the Adriatic Sea and the Black Sea will be crucial to prevent new dividing lines in Europe. So that Europe can play the role of a global player.
There the role of parliaments will be decisive because parliaments are the direct expression of people's sovereignties and may I say that the so called parliamentary democracy has often been considered as parallel and not converging with the diplomacies of governments. It nevertheless plays a role because it connects people to institutions so that people and institutions are a reality and not a formal reality but a concrete reality. Therefore we have to have a closer and closer integration between the various forms of co-operation, between the representative assemblies that work on our continent. Thank you very much for inviting me, thank you for allowing me to listen to what I have heard so far and I wish you a good conference.
OLEG SALMIN
On behalf of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Economic Co-operation, I would like to express thanks to the BSPC for the kind invitation to take part in this important forum. I would also like to sincerely thank the Finnish Parliament and all our Finnish friends for their warm hospitality and excellent organisation of this event.
In today's interdependent world, regionalism is seen as an agent of integration as well as a lever for economic transformation. Regional partnership contributes to political stability as it is one of the most effective confidence-building measures. It can be a vehicle of concerted action to take measures against the contemporary scourges like organised crime, terrorism, and illicit drug and arms trafficking, which threaten regional security and stability.
In the early 1990s, several sub-regional groups of diverse character and role were initiated, from the Baltic to the Black Sea. The Black Sea Economic Co-operation (BSEC), established in June 1992, is a living example of this new trend. As an idea, which had found its right timing and venue, the BSEC completed its institutional structure within a very short period of time, and became a full-fledged regional economic organisation in May 1999.
Established ten years ago as the parliamentary dimension of the BSEC, the PABSEC has revealed itself as a unique political forum of inter-parliamentary dialogue in the Black Sea area. Composed of 70 parliamentarians from eleven BSEC member states, PABSEC has played an irreplaceable role in mobilising the efforts of the national parliaments, aimed at promoting the values of pluralistic democracy, the rule of law and market economy. Our main objective is to support the actions of the national parliaments aimed at enacting legislation needed for the implementation of the projects undertaken by the organisation of the BSEC, and to provide a legal framework for the successful development of multilateral economic, political and cultural co-operation in the region.
Multilateral economic co-operation was placed on top of the Assembly's agenda. The PABSEC has constantly addressed the main aspects of the regional economic
21 co-operation and put forward relevant recommendations aimed at achieving a higher degree of integration of the BSEC region into the European and world economy. The Assembly has been promoting policy, along with institutional and regulatory reforms, towards a sustainable model of economic development in order to improve the living standards and meet the challenges of the new century.
Continuing to focus on priority economic topics, the Assembly has also embraced the issues of democracy and the rule of law. The idea of the "new partnership between the Black Sea countries inspired by the values of democracy, the rule of law and respect of human rights" enshrined in the Bosporus Statement, adopted by the BSEC Summit in June 1992, guides the whole BSEC process consistently supported by the Parliamentary Assembly.
During its ten-year activity, the Assembly also adopted recommendations on protection of the Black Sea environment, combating organised crime and terrorism, forging cultural and educational co-operation and setting social guarantees during the transition period.
The PABSEC initiatives on co-operation between the capitals the public broadcasters and the constitutional courts of the member countries, as well as the organisation of the Children and Youth Festival of the BSEC member-states, have also led to strengthening co-operation at the level of civil society and increasing people's awareness of a Black Sea identity.
The Assembly has also dealt and – in fact it is intensely involved at present – with a project directly related to the theme of this conference. This spring we established a special sub-committee on Information Technology. At our last General Assembly in Moldova last June, we adopted a Report on the Black Sea Knowledge-Based Information Society and a recommendation on Black Sea Information Alliance. These documents envisage enhanced co-operation among the PABSEC member countries in the field of information technology and creation of a common information space. I think that our two parliamentary forums could exchange ideas on this subject as well as on many other issues of regional and European significance.
This year in February, PABSEC celebrated its 10th anniversary. PABSEC presents itself today as a dynamic democratic forum for dialogue and co-operation at inter- parliamentary level, as well as an important channel of mutual interaction among the national parliaments within the PABSEC framework and paves the way towards rapprochement of the countries and gradually creates a climate of co-operation, trust and stability in the region.
Before concluding, I would like to wish utmost success to this conference and express hope that the relations between our two parliamentary structures will continue as part of our common commitment to build a new wider Europe.
22 FIRST SESSION Co-operation in the Baltic Sea region
Report on behalf of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Standing Committee on the developments since the 11th Parliamentary Conference OUTI OJALA
It is a great honour for me to address this gathering on behalf of the Standing Committee. It is a good tradition to give a report from the preparatory body. Last year in St. Petersburg, we did a lot of work regarding the resolution. The work in St. Petersburg was rewarded when the then Russian member of the Standing Committee, Mr. Tulaev, thanked the conference and its resolution for being a part of the solution of the problem of Kaliningrad visa and transit arrangements.
One of the two main tasks of the Standing Committee is to follow-up the final document from the annual conference. The other one is to prepare the next conference. The mandate of the Standing Committee has proved to be efficient but at the same time narrow and I think it is time for us to consider development of the role of the Standing Committee in a broader direction. I do come to this later on. I have been happy to be a part of an excellent working team. The St. Petersburg Conference decided to amend the rules in order to have two more members in the Standing Committee. This was a good and constructive solution, the committee with seven members is still small enough to be flexible but at the same time the membership mirrors the geography in a balanced way. Since the conference in 2002 the Standing Committee has met four times: in 2002 in Bytow, Poland; and in 2003 all meetings have been convened in Finland, in Helsinki, Turku and Oulu. Throughout the last year the Committee elaborated the programme and concept of the present conference and drafted the proposed text of the resolution.
The current presidency as well as the whole Standing Committee have focused on the implementation of the resolution passed by the representatives of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in St. Petersburg. The Standing Committee has concentrated on concrete political activities, such as the Northern Dimension issues, trans-border co-operation and maritime security and safety.
Concrete steps have been taken during the last year. One of the most important duties was our engagement to the work on the Northern Dimension. The parliamentary conference was invited to participate at the preparatory work of the CBSS concerning the 2nd Action Plan of the Northern Dimension. This was a new opening and a good possibility to influence the decision-making process in the CBSS as the lead organisation. Nevertheless, I must admit that our parliamentary input could have been a stronger one. The problem is that the Standing Committee has not mandate from the parliamentarians to act as a steering political body. Consequently, the Standing Committee can not take a position in a single issue if this issue is not mentioned in the resolutions. The role of the CBSS has proved to be important in the context of political level networking in the region. The CBSS has assumed a prominent role in this work and contributed to the work of the EU. The Northern Dimension has the overriding objective to strengthen democracy, stability, security, prosperity and sustainable development in Northern Europe. The BSPC has also announced its strong support for the work the CBSS has done concerning the new Action Plan for the Northern Dimension. The Standing Committee also had the
23 possibility to attend the CBSS Ministerial meeting in June 2003 in Pori, Finland. In February 2003 the Standing Committee met the chairman of the CBSS, the Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja.
Since our conference in Malmö in 2000, the topic of maritime safety has been a substantial component of the resolutions of 2001 and 2002. The results of a working group that had been appointed for the first time had finally also entailed to the fact that an observer status was granted to the conferences of the Helsinki Commission. This observer status was administrated on behalf of the Standing Committee by representatives of the Nordic Council as well as the State Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
The environmental issues have already from the beginning on been high on the agenda of the BSPC. Another key sector for the Baltic Sea region in the Northern Dimension is transport. The question of maritime safety unites these two matters of interest and concern.
Last autumn there was a severe oil catastrophe on the Spanish coast line when the giant oil tanker with the challenging name Prestige disappeared below the Atlantic waves leaving Spain and Portugal braced for a major ecological disaster. The ship – actually a rust-bucket tanker, Liberian-owned, registered on the Bahamas, operated by a Greek company and chartered by a Swiss-based subsidiary of a Russian industrial conglomerate – had been classed as seaworthy by an American shipping authority. The ship had started its last journey from one of the big Baltic Sea harbours in Latvia, Ventspils. Thus, this accident and disaster could have happened in the shallow Baltic Sea. This catastrophe in Spain is a sad reminder for us about the importance of the work with maritime safety. The Standing Committee had only a couple of days later its meeting in Poland. As we had discussed this maritime safety issue at the St. Petersburg conference and had a resolution, there was a possibility to act. Letters were sent to both the CBSS and the HELCOM.
Besides all the other projects that the BSPC's Standing Committee deals with, I would like to take the opportunity to remind you of the Baltic Sea Fund.
The BSPC's most recent resolutions expressed the wish that small, practicable steps be taken at first with the aim of ultimately setting up a Baltic Sea Youth Fund in the medium or long term. Since then, the BSPC has been giving financial support to the Baltic Sea Youth Forum.
I am appealing to all participants of the BSPC to support the Baltic Sea Youth Fund and the raising of donations.
Regional processes are important. One that matters very much from our perspective is the EU enlargement. It relates not just to the economy but to the whole society. I am convinced that the EU enlargement will promote this region, The European Union's Northern Dimension provides an additional framework for our regional co-operation. Also Russia comes closer to the EU through various co- operative structures.
Developing Baltic Sea co-operation in the field of civil security is vital. Organised and cross-border crime, a growing drug problem, trafficking of women and children, smuggling of persons, and a brutalised violence are emerging and worrying
24 manifestations on the crime scene. Powerful measures against cross-border crime, trafficking, drug dealing and racism are urgently needed, just like measures to overcome cultural and social disparities and facilitate integration between various groups of society. It is fundamentally important that the measures carried out are in full compliance with basic freedoms and rights. We heard the greetings from the NGO Forum held in Turku in May 2003. We have reasons to be quite satisfied with the development of the activities of the NGOs of our region. The Forum was an encouraging and promising event and an important and concrete step in direction to create a more organised and structured co-operation also among citizens and between NGOs. The organisation and working conditions for the NGO sector is a part of basic freedom and rights.
The social and economic differences among the Baltic Sea states remain substantial. The marine environment of the Baltic Sea is precarious. Major changes are to come. Within eight months the Baltic Sea will become inner waters of the Union and Russia. The opportunities of the moment are self-evident. There are no political crises around the Baltic Sea. The economic growth in this region is among the highest in the world. The network of co-operation is rapidly growing at all levels.
The Baltic Sea co-operation is coming of age. Since 1991 it has been obvious that the regional parliamentary perspective is a strong factor in the development. The 11th conference last year in St. Petersburg and the interest and broad participation at this 12th conference are an evidence that the parliamentary democracy has been established and deeply founded in the region. There are many reasons why the parliamentary involvement in the region is so active. Co-operation enhances security. We wish to build a region of mutual understanding.
I come back to the CBSS which is our main counterpart. I already noted with satisfaction the good co-operation between the CBSS and the parliamentary conference BSPC which in my opinion stand at a cross-road right now. The EU- enlargement and its impacts on our region and the increasing role of the CBSS concerning the development of the Northern Dimension make it necessary to discuss the role of the BSPC and how to organise our parliamentary co-operation in the future. The parliamentarians wish to strengthen and develop the structures and organisation of our co-operation in the direction of a parliamentary dimension of the CBSS: Now the BSPC has a status as one of the regional organisations co- operating with the CBSS and this gives a very good possibility to follow the work of the CBSS in which openness and ability to contacts as crucial principles are appreciated by the parliamentarians. I can inform you that the organisation I am representing here and in the Standing Committee, the Nordic Council and its Presidium, has already approved and supported the idea of developing our parliamentary co-operation. We support a more structured and specific parliamentary dimension to governmental co-operation.
Today we can look at the development of the Baltic Sea region as a success story. Further strengthening of the co-operation contributes to continuation of the success and leads to development of the region with even more active civic participation and strong democratic institutions.
25 The Baltic Sea region deserves our commitment. An extensive network of parliamentary contacts is a solid base. By being active and involved the BSPC is making its contribution for the future of the region.
I hope that you enjoy the debates and I am looking forward to a constructive and strong parliamentary input in the common work.
Report on behalf of the CBSS KRISTIINA OJULAND
In the name of the Estonian Presidency of the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS), I would like to thank you for your invitation to address this important gathering.
I wish to begin in a positive key and bring to your attention a new development in regional co-operation: Last month, a festival uniting musicians and environmentalists of the Baltic Sea region was held in Stockholm, where world- famous soloists, choirs, and orchestras performed for appreciative audiences. High- level experts and politicians debated the challenges of preserving the Baltic Sea marine environment. What does this have to do with the broader political agenda of the Council of the Baltic Sea States? I can assure you, a great deal.
The festival demonstrated that people from different sectors of society are ready to work together to protect the fragile Baltic Sea. Musicians took time out from their busy schedules and accepted much less than their usual fee to support the environmental cause. What struck me, when reading the festival programme, were the strong convictions that these musicians expressed. We, as professional politicians, can only be impressed when eminent performers speak from their hearts on environmental issues and about the need for more vibrant cultural co- operation when it comes to dealing with the Baltic Sea. I am sure that you, parliamentarians from the region, feel as inspired as I do by such devotion from musical personalities like Esa-Pekka Salonen from Finland, Valerij Gergiev from Russia, Gideon Kremer from Latvia, Eva Dahlgren from Sweden, and Tõnu Kaljuste from Estonia. In connection with the opening of the festival, the World Wildlife Fund held a high-level seminar, with participants ranging from the King of Sweden, to environmental scientists, to representatives of prominent firms, which focused on the launching of the new WWF action plan to save the Baltic Sea. Let us all learn from this festival and do our best to promote and further develop regional co- operation for a sound and sustainable environment.
I believe that a strong commitment to a cause comes naturally to those directly affected by the issue. We cannot and should not expect others from outside the region to take the lead in cleaning up the Baltic Sea. The activities and recommendations of the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM) form a sound basis for the hard political decisions that need to be taken if we want to succeed in saving the Baltic Sea.
Estonia is committed to having the Baltic Sea classified as Particularly Sensitive Sea Area (PSSA). In three days, the Swedish ministers for the environment and of infrastructure will be getting together with their colleagues from the other countries around the Baltic Sea to discuss the initiative. For the Baltic Sea to obtain PSSA status in March 2004, an application must be presented to the International
26 Maritime Organisation by December this year. All the Baltic Sea littoral countries, except one, have already agreed to work towards this goal. And I take this opportunity to appeal to our Russian friends to join this noble effort.
My task here today is to report to you on the work of the CBSS. Since time is limited, I will focus on a few matters, concerning which, our regional co-operation is particularly crucial, and will remain so even after European Union enlargement. The environment is one such area.
I'm glad that our ministers of the environment met, for the first time in seven years in Luleå, Sweden on August 28-29. The eleven ministers agreed to take urgent and concrete measures for enhancing maritime safety in the Baltic Sea. They emphasised that Baltic 21 should be complemented with cross-sectoral activities following EU enlargement. The ministers declared that they would work together to influence the new Action Plan for the Northern Dimension, and to harmonise environmental legislation between Russia and the EU.
At a meeting on 29-30 September in Gothenburg, it is expected that six CBSS countries will sign the Testing Ground Agreement for the Kyoto Protocol. This will help us reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I hope that my own country and the other member states also sign this agreement. Estonia is now chairing the Group of Senior Energy Officials (GSEO) of the Baltic Sea region Energy Co-operation (BASREC). During our presidency, we intend to further develop activities in this field, such as the Baltic Ring, which is the regional integration of electricity and gas networks.
The highlight of the Estonian CBSS presidency will no doubt be the 5th Baltic Sea states Summit meeting of the CBSS heads of government in Tallinn on June 28-29. During our CBSS presidency, we are implementing a new model for high-level meetings: the prime ministers and foreign ministers would, in turn, meet every other year. I am convinced that this arrangement would also allow us to focus more efficiently on the full range of inter-governmental co-operation.
This is the second time that Estonia is presiding the CBSS – the first time was ten years ago in 1993-1994. Many significant changes have taken place in that decade. During our first presidency, the CBSS was mostly centred upon a political dialogue between diplomats. By now, the CBSS has blossomed and has become a comprehensive network covering virtually every field of governmental activity. Thus, it is only natural and logical that the prime ministers of the CBSS countries have taken an increasingly central role in guiding and shaping our co-operation. It marks the maturity of regional co-operation that the diplomats role has become relatively less important, and that the role of various experts and technicians has become the key to ensuring that the real work at the grass roots level which affects the daily life of our citizens, gets done properly.
I am sure you agree that ensuring the health of our citizens must be a primary concern. At the Baltic Sea states Summit in Kolding, Denmark, three years ago, the heads of government and the president of the European Commission decided to establish a Task Force on Communicable Disease Control. This Task Force has some 150 ongoing projects and links up with organisations including the WHO, UNAIDS, and USAID. Through direct contact with health and prison personnel in the region, the Task Force works in a down-to-earth manner to fight some of the worst
27 scourges: tuberculosis and HIV. The Task Force also helps to develop primary health care. Even with only the modest financing of each project, such as the sending of medical supplies to hospitals in north-west Russia and the ventilation of prisons in the Baltic Sea countries, the various local health and prison personnel involved are extremely pleased with the results. One reason for the Task Force's effectiveness is that the local partner makes the decision concerning what is needed, and is responsible for carrying out the project. The Task Force has the responsibility of submitting proposals for concerted action to the heads of government. This way of working shows how the CBSS develops close regional ties for achieving tangible progress. I encourage you, to help support continued regional co-operation in the public health field. And I pledge, that Estonia will do its best to ensure, that the next Baltic Sea states' Summit will make the necessary decisions to ensure the continuation of these essential joint endeavours.
A new Northern Dimension Partnership in Public Health and Social Well-being is expected to be established during a high-level meeting in Oslo on October 27th. The Partnership will include many of the activities of the Task Force: communicable diseases control, training in public health, and health sector reform. It will be wider in scope and will also address life-style ailments caused by drinking, smoking, drugs and nutrition. I fully support this initiative. I am convinced that already established networks and local knowledge, so well provided by the Task Force, will form an excellent foundation for the Partnership in Public Health and Social Well- being. Following the tradition established by the Northern Dimension Environmental Partnership (NDEP) and the Northern Dimension itself, the Partnership will, I am sure, provide yet another opportunity to bring our regional co-operation into a broader European and global network.
The 5th Baltic Sea Summit will also have to decide on the continued mandate of the Task Force on Organised Crime, established by the First Summit at Visby in 1996. During the past seven years, this task force has been very successful in co- ordinating efforts to combat organised crime in our region. Although the situation in this field has improved, no one can claim that the scourge of organised crime no longer affects the region. I am sure that the prime ministers will again make the right decisions regarding the continuation of the Task Force's endeavours appropriate for the post-EU enlargement situation in the region.
It is beyond doubt that the Task Force on Organised Crime works intensively in areas that are of top priority in the region. Its nine expert groups address issues including money laundering, corruption, illegal migration, environmental crime, narcotics and trafficking of women. On this note, I would, in particular like to stress my deep concern for children that are victims of trafficking, and I refer to my own and the Pori communiqués strong calls for more concerted efforts in this field, during the CBSS Ministerial meeting last June.
Please let me continue by speaking about the CBSS co-operation in the field of civil security. I know that your parliamentarians' co-operation is giving priority to this issue. Estonia has, for more than a decade pushed for better regional co-operation of, for instance, maritime safety and co-ordination of search and rescue operations. Unfortunately, our ideas had not gained enough ground in time to increase the regional search and rescue capabilities before the ferry Estonia went down in 1994. Perhaps more lives could have been saved if the countries around the Baltic Sea
28 had, at that time, been better prepared to co-operate and carry out joint operations.
I am happy to tell you that the regional professional contacts in the field of search and rescue are being strengthened through the CBSS EUROBALTIC programme. The programme began this year and runs through 2006. It is quite encompassing, and will improve the protection of both human life and the environment against man-made and natural disasters. Polish and Swedish experts in the civil protection field have provided detailed plans in an application to the EU Interreg, TACIS and PHARE. About one million EUR have been secured so far, and the CBSS countries are matching this amount. It is essential that EUROBALTIC systematically brings together the various experts in this field. They know exactly what needs to be improved in their own countries, and they are dedicated to working together, with colleagues in the region, on very specific matters. Just to mention a few of the many details, which need to be worked upon: creation of a joint 112 emergency call service for the region; developing civil protection training systems; carrying out of training exercises for responding to major oil spills; exchanging of volunteer fire brigade experiences; deactivating of WWII ammunition and explosives in the Kaliningrad region; and organising a workshop on cultural heritage protection during natural disasters.
Speaking of cultural heritage, I would like to bring your attention to a feature of the Baltic Sea that embraces both culture, maritime safety and nuclear and radiation safety. I am referring to the lighthouses along our coasts. They are being automated, and many are in need of renovation. Some have gained a new purpose as popular attractions for tourists. This summer, a photo exhibition of lighthouses along the Baltic Sea coast was shown in museums, libraries and lighthouses. At its October meeting, the CBSS Working Group on Nuclear and Radiation Safety will examine the issue of dangerous radioactive materials left in some lighthouses along the Baltic Sea coast.
The ministers of culture will meet in December in St. Petersburg. Estonia is proud to host the Secretariat of Ars Baltica, one of the oldest regional co-operation initiatives, which was initiated by the former prime minister of Schleswig-Holstein, Björn Engholm, already in the late 1980s. It is particularly appropriate, that the ministers of culture meet in St. Petersburg during its 300th anniversary. As an Estonian, I fully appreciate the historic role of St. Petersburg as one of the main intellectual and cultural centres in the region, and look forward to its future development.
Outi Ojala already spoke about NGO co-operation in the region. Civil society is indeed an integral part of the Baltic Sea region co-operation. Estonia is looking forward to hosting the next NGO Forum in Pärnu, following up last year's successful Forum in Turku. We should all promote a more constructive and harmonised participation of citizens and non-governmental organisations in further developing our region.
The ombudsman institution plays a critical role in linking civil society with the legislative and executive branches of government. Ombudsmen's powers and limitations were discussed at the CBSS Ombudsmen's Third Seminar that was held in Tallinn about a week ago. The continued functioning of the ombudsman is important as we strengthen our democracies.
29
I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the CBSS Commissioner for Democratic Development, Ms Helle Degn, for the devotion, competence and tangible results she and her office have shown. As the end of the commissioner's mandate draws near, I wish to stress that the CBSS will remain committed to safeguarding the democratic process through its existing structures, and through partnerships with the relevant pan-European institutions. It is a pleasure to note, that regional networks, such as the Union of the Baltic Cities and your own parliamentarian co-operation are helping to safeguard transparency in the public sphere, and many other crucial principles of democracy.
Although I have already spoken at length, I have barely touched the surface concerning what the CBSS is doing presently, and have hardly had the a chance to trace its future potential.
I can assure you that Estonia means business. With the EU enlargement scheduled to take effect at May 1st of next year, our CBSS presidency coincides with one of the most momentous events in our region since the fall of Communism and the restoration of the independence of the three Baltic states. Since then, however, more than a decade has passed and we are fully aware that the CBSS, which was established under entirely different conditions, must undergo a process of adaptation to a totally different, a really open and liberal Europe. This means, that the CBSS must also go through a process of critical self scrutiny. As a significant step in this direction, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that an audit of the CBSS Secretariat will be carried out by an independent auditor by the end of the Estonian presidency, in order to assess the work of the Secretariat. In a way it will also cast a light on the effectiveness of the whole CBSS.
I'm looking forward to the new era, where the centre of gravity of the EU will move closer to our region. Programs such as the Northern Dimension and New Neighbours/Wider Europe will become more visible and get the attention in Brussels that they deserve.
I also look forward to hearing your views as parliamentarians of the region, on what we, as the executive branch of government, should do to further improve our mutual co-operation.
Democracy at a Crossroads H.E. HELLE DEGN
Thank you for the invitation to participate and contribute to this event, the 12th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference, and a special thanks to our Finnish hosts.
One of the most exciting experiences of our times has been the opportunity to witness power in transition. We all have been given the unique possibility to experience the beginning of a new era and such an opportunity is only granted to every third generation. Therefore it has also been important for me to collect the knowledge of the changes in the Baltic Sea region, throughout the 1990'ies. These changes have been of crucial importance for the European governance, in order to make both the public and those carrying responsibility aware of these efforts as well as to reflect upon them. Developing global and regional democratic governing is the challenge of our time.
30
Engagement in international co-operation has become one of the benchmarks in the development of modern societies. Importantly, however, the growing participation of states in binding international regimes has produced notable democratic deficits, due to the fact that an increasing number of decisions are taken on an international level, which are immediately and directly applicable in national legislation, but without passing the normal national procedures and accepted national preparatory legislative work.
Facing the decline in importance of national boundaries with the free flow of market, media and money - a proper balance between the different branches of power must also be established at the global level, and not only at the domestic level.
The forthcoming enlargement of the European Union and the results of debates within the European Convention will certainly influence the political and legal development, both of the continent as a whole and of the Baltic Sea region more specifically. In particular, the issue of the extent to which the European integration process has increased, has caused tensions between the legislative and executive branches of power. The lack of openness and transparency in the EU system causes mistrust and the executive branch is not held accountable. Let me remind you of the case of the Santer Commission, which was forced to step down. Fortunately, the European Parliament refused to approve the Commission's budget. However, even though the Commissioners stepped down a large number of the civil servants are still in their offices and Mr Neil Kinnoch hasn't been able to clean up the mess afterwards. The European Parliament's Budgetary Control Committee examined again in July this year the executive branch of EU – the EU Commission and EUROSTAT and at the end of the month the Commission President will have to explain his position in the case in front of the European Parliament.
The upcoming enlargement of the European Union will create a new challenge for the whole region as multilevel aspects of co-operation that ignore state boundaries and that transcend the traditional territorial unit of democratic-based governance will be enhanced. The convention debate and decision making procedures are in this regard very important to consider – not least for the small countries and especially for small countries which have experienced transition of power during the 1990'ies. Simultaneously, however, new issues will have to be approached regarding how to develop relations between those who will find themselves inside the EU and those who will remain outside. International co-operation, however, should be seen only as one part of the process. It is important to note that the enlargement will also strongly influence the domestic system of checks and balances.
The effectiveness of domestic scrutiny is an important mean of co-operation between the parliaments and governments of the region. The tie between the executive and the legislative branch is, in this respect, very sensitive. This is especially the case in terms of the parliaments' access to up-dated and all relevant information, the time frame granted to the parliaments for discussions, the freedom given to the parliaments to formulate their own positions and the extent to which parliamentary positions have to be taken into account by the respective government. The countries of the region apply a broad range of legal solutions in this respect.
31
Another issue to mention at this point is the democratic reforms, which have been undertaken also in the Russian Federation. The current situation of the federation is, for the most part, incomparable with other states in the region and in various aspects constitutes a very unique case. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, a number of democratic reforms were implemented. However, the imperial past and tradition, the complex and problematic relationship between the centre and the regions and, not least, the size of the country, have all significantly affected the performance of the democratisation process. The impact of those reforms that have been undertaken has been notable, however, this is an on-going process and as such progress and further results still remain to be seen. All countries in the CBSS region have developed democratic parliamentarism, however, in a wide range of various ways.
Of particular importance is the role played by the parliaments with respect to the supervision of foreign policy, which traditionally has been recognised as a realm of responsibility of the executive branch. Nowadays, however, elected representatives have a certain amount of influence on these matters. All the CBSS member states are members of the UN, OSCE and the Council of Europe, and national parliaments are represented through appointed delegations in the parliamentary assemblies of these organisations.
In general, parliamentary committees on foreign affairs perform only consultative functions and do not enjoy the right to deliver binding opinions. Nevertheless, the governments are requested to provide these bodies with broad information about the conduct of foreign affairs. In Sweden, for example, the government is obliged to consult the Advisory Council on Foreign Affairs before taking decisions, although opinions expressed by the Council are to no extent binding. Slightly different is the situation in Finland where the Foreign Affairs Committee can issue advisory statements to the government on the committee's own initiative. Of particular attention is the unique position of the Danish Foreign Policy Committee, whose influence on the conduct of the government in foreign affairs is secured by Art. 19.3 of the Danish constitution.
A separate issue is the role of the parliaments with regard to the conduct of European affairs. Several of the CBSS member states are also members of the European Union or are applying for membership. In both present and future EU member states the parliaments have established standing committees on European affairs or European integration. These committees constitute the main forums where the exchange of information and opinions between the government and the parliament takes place. In Denmark the European Affairs Committee is very influential since it provides the ministers with a mandate before the EU's Council of Ministers' meetings take place and supervises the government's conduct of policy at the EU level.
This ensures a prior involvement of the parliament in the decision-making process in European affairs. The Danish system has proved to be very effective and has been partially copied by Sweden and Finland, where the governments are under the political obligation to consult the committees dealing with European Affairs. In the Finnish system the government must, if necessary, even delay expressing Finland's position in European negotiations until the committee has carried out its scrutiny of
32 the issue at hand. Moreover, following discussions at the European level the relevant minister is required to report back to the Grand Committee.
In the states applying for EU membership the parliamentary committees on European Affairs have significantly less influence on the government's conduct than those in the member states mentioned above. Although the right to receive information and to question the government is granted, the governments are neither legally nor politically obliged to consult the parliaments. Therefore, the possibilities to substantially influence the government's conduct of European policy are limited. In Estonia, for example, the government may consult the European Affairs Committee if the government considers it necessary. Only in Latvia and Lithuania has it already been strongly recommended that the Parliament should be granted the right of authorising the government's position and conduct before European summits take place.
My recommendation for all future EU member states is that they should develop procedures that will strengthen the parliament's role in the conduct of European affairs and thereby enhance the democratic accountability of this policy. Democratically elected representatives must be given the right to supervise state policy in all spheres in order to prevent any exacerbation of the democratic deficit and to avoid a substantial shift of competencies from the legislative to the executive branch of power. I hope that the specific examination of this issue, that has been noted in my book "Power in Transition" and that indicates how joining international organisations can result in the reduction of parliamentary competence and scrutiny, will raise awareness of this problem, particularly in those states that are to join the EU in 2004.
Only discussions and insightful exchange of information and experiences can result in the development of a modern and vibrant participatory democracy in our region; a democracy, which will be able to cope with the challenges of our times. Finally, please allow me to mention the EU referendums we have seen lately. I have followed the results in each country very carefully. My concerns are not related to the YES votes – but on the absence of voters, the very low turnouts. It will make it difficult for political leaders to govern and to pave the way forward when the reluctance is so remarkable. Aiming at continuously developing our democracies, low turnouts show that we have to do our very best to improve methods of participation and involvement. In concluding let me express the hope that "Power in Transition" will encourage further discussions in the Baltic Sea region, discussions that amongst other things might reflect upon:
-the development of a modern and expedient division between the different branches of power; -encouraging participatory democracy; -building efficient power structures; -ensuring democratic accountability and transparency; -developing common regional positions amongst the CBSS Member states as they all address the challenges of our times.
Let me use this opportunity to say good-bye to all of you, as this is my last opportunity to address this assembly in my capacity as CBSS Commissioner.
33 Thank you for your attention and may this assembly grow and be strengthened.
A regional approach for marine environment protection: the aspect of safer shipping INESE VAIDERE
At this moment when we have a discussion here, around 2000 ships are en route in the Baltic Sea, about 200 of them are oil tankers. It means that we should be sure every moment that all these ships reach their port of destination successfully, all cargoes are transported safely and the environment is well protected.
Assessing the risk of pollution of the sea from ships there are two things to be taken into account:
- the sensitivity of the sea area; and - the character of the maritime traffic, including the number of ships and the type and amount of cargo transported.
The sensitivity of the Baltic Sea mainly is determined by its natural conditions: limited water exchange through narrow Danish Straits, that takes thirty years for a total exchange of waters. A significant freshwater impact due to the runoff of more than 200 rivers, and A huge catchment area, which is four times the size of the sea itself. It should be realised, if harmful substances are introduced in the sea they will remain there for a very long time.
As concerns the shipping and oil handling in the Baltic Sea area noteworthy is the following estimation related to economic development of the Region. A doubling in the transport of goods at sea has been estimated by year 2017. Looking at different sectors, general cargo and container traffic is expected to triple; oil transportation is thought to increase by 40%. Expansion of existing as well as new oil terminals in the Gulf of Finland and the economic growth in the Eastern Baltic countries may lead to further increases.
The Baltic Sea states quite early realised that something multilateral had to be done about the deteriorating situation of the Baltic Sea area. The basis for this is the Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, from 1974 and revised in 1992 as well as recommendations adopted unanimously by the nine countries bordering on the Baltic Sea area and the European Community.
The work under the Convention is carried out in several subsidiary bodies and working groups, under the governance of the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM) - and supported by a Secretariat of 14 persons.
The work has two aims: 1.) To protect the marine environment of the Baltic Sea from all sources of pollution and 2.) to restore the ecosystem of the Baltic Sea and preserve its balance.
As an important step towards putting a coherent policy on marine environment in Europe into practice the First Joint Ministerial meeting of HELCOM and OSPAR
34 commissions held in Bremen in June this year should be mentioned, when two international marine commissions, encompassing 20 countries and the European Commission, met jointly. Latest ship accidents in the north-east Atlantic and the Baltic Sea proved once more that such issues as the impact of shipping to the marine environment is commonly important for both Commissions and should be discussed jointly at the highest level.
At the same time the Helsinki Commission also held a separate ministerial meeting with the participation of the environmental ministers from all the Baltic Sea states and a representative from the European Commission. A new focus for HELCOM was decided, especially taking into account EU enlargement by May 2004.
Firstly - as the environmental focal point for the entire Baltic region, and a reliable source of information on the state of the Baltic Sea which can form the basis for decision-making in other international fora;
Secondly – as an independent regulatory body, issuing regulations to supplement those imposed by other international organisations, in order to cater for the Baltic's specific needs;
Thirdly – as a supervisory body dedicated to ensuring that unified environmental standards are fully implemented throughout the Baltic Sea and its catchment area.
Among main priorities within this new role of HELCOM are: Ensuring maritime safety, preventing pollution from shipping and upholding a swift response to maritime incidents.
At the meeting in Bremen ministers agreed to increase their efforts to ensure safety of navigation and emergency capacity in the Baltic Sea area, by making maritime safety an absolute priority for all Baltic Sea governments. Therefore the EU member states and the Accession Countries will work together on elaboration of a joint application for designation of areas in the Baltic Sea as Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs), taking into account sensitivity of the Baltic marine environment. Participation of Russia in this process is highly welcomed. Unfortunately, the question on accelerated phasing out of single-hull tankers in the Baltic Sea area did not reach consensus due to the refusing position of the Russian delegation.
The work to reduce the environmental risks associated with the heavy traffic in the Baltic Sea area is mainly concentrated around:
- Elimination of illegal discharges; - Improved safety of navigation to reduce the risk for accidents; - Adequate ability to respond to an accident. This work is based on inventories on transport volumes and risk assessments.
By undertaking joint actions in the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) the Baltic Sea states have obtained recognition by the international community of the sensitivity of the Baltic Sea and its heavy sea traffic – requiring all ships regardless of flag to comply with more stringent discharge regulations when in the Baltic Sea area. This applies to discharges of oil, other hazardous substances and garbage – and is spelled out in the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution
35 from Ships – generally referred to as MARPOL 73/78. Likewise various measures to improve the safety of navigation have been adopted.
Regardless of these facts the problem with illegal oil spills has been, and still is, of great concern for all those working for a clean and healthy sea area. And an accident in 2001 – after a collision between an oil tanker and a bulk carrier – which resulted in the outflow of 2700 tonnes of heavy fuel oil – again stressed the dangers of the crowded waters.
Despite the designation of the Baltic Sea area as a MARPOL special area around 400 deliberate illegal oil discharges are detected every year.
Even if one of the preconditions for becoming a special area is that there are satisfactory reception facilities in the area, also measures to urge the shipping to use these and to deter ships from illegally discharging at sea, are needed.
To get a halt to deliberate illegal discharges HELCOM in 1996 adopted the Baltic Strategy for Port Reception Facilities for Ship-generated Wastes and Associated Issues, resting on three main pillars:
- Ascertain availability of adequate port reception facilities in all the Baltic Sea states; - Ascertain a high degree of delivery of ship-generated and cargo-associated wastes by obliging ships to deliver wastes that it is illegal to discharge into the sea. This is upheld by a decision to apply the "no-special-fee" system – whereby all ships calling at a port have to pay a so-called general environmental fee - irrespective of whether or not wastes are delivered and irrespective of the amount of wastes delivered. - Alignment of the amounts of the fines for deliberate illegal discharges, regardless of where an offender is convicted, including the establishment of a network for co- operation between the prosecutors in the Baltic Sea states.
Now, has it so far been a success and has the number of illegal discharges decreased? I wish I could say "yes" for both of these questions but the answer is not that clear. There is a slight reduction of the illegal spills for the Baltic Sea as a whole. But in some parts of the Baltic Sea the number of illegal discharges has increased slightly – whereas in other parts there is no data because of the lack of aerial surveillance. So we still need to continuously discuss how to obtain a full and harmonised implementation of the Baltic Strategy.
The quite heavy sea traffic in the Baltic Sea, coupled with narrow straits and shallow waters leading to traffic junctions, each year causes a number of incidents. Over the years there has been quite a number resulting in an oil discharge, and also a few with discharges of other harmful substances.
One of the main assignments within the work of HELCOM is to ensure that the Baltic Sea states can work together during a maritime accident. The starting point for this co-operation is: - The establishment of a minimum national ability enabling a response to pollution incidents at sea; and following this - The establishment of guidelines for how to carry out the co-operation; included in a HELCOM RESPONSE manual, as well as
36 - The testing of the co-operation through operational exercises with the participation of response vessels from the Baltic Sea states.
Operational exercises – so called HELCOM BALEX DELTA exercises - have been carried out on a yearly basis since 1990.
While much has been achieved within the field of response to maritime incidents, both as regards the response capacity of the Baltic states and the standing operational response network between the Baltic Sea states, the increasing maritime transportation still places demands on the availability of personnel, equipment and response vessels. A possible new approach how to obtain this would be for the Baltic Sea states in the future not only to rely on each others' assistance during maritime incidents but also to rely on each others' – and more specifically neighbouring states' - response capacity. This could be obtained by the establishment of – in addition to a minimum national response capacity, depending on the size of the response area – sub-regional arrangements between neighbouring states with a special focus on high risk accident areas. Taken together – these capacities should fit into an established overall HELCOM capacity for the whole Baltic Sea area.
Work has already started within this field with the conclusion of sub-regional arrangements for the Gulf of Finland and the South-western part of the Baltic Proper, including the Danish Straits – two areas in the Baltic identified as main high risk accident areas.
Work to improve the safety of navigation was substantially addressed by HELCOM in 2001 following the biggest oil spill in the Baltic Sea in 20 years. An extraordinary HELCOM Ministerial Meeting was arranged, where the Contracting Parties were represented by both their ministers responsible for the environment and their ministers responsible for maritime transport, as well as by a representative from the European Community. A voluminous package of measures was adopted to improve the safety of navigation but also – and thereby acknowledging that it will never be possible to totally eliminate the risk for a new accident - the adequacy of response and emergency measures in the Baltic Sea area. This package of measures is commonly referred to as the HELCOM Copenhagen Declaration. The adopted measures range from:
- Joint initiatives within the International Maritime Organisation with regard to new safety and environmental protection measures;
- Decisions on implementation of regulations adopted by IMO and the International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO), where possible with the strictest demands to safeguard the Baltic Sea; and
- Initiation of regional actions, thus making use of the ability of HELCOM to bring about actions quicker than typically possible in IMO.
The fact that the HELCOM Copenhagen Declaration was adopted by the ministers gives it a particular political weight – however, it is important to stress that we are not only talking about a Declaration of good will. Many of the measures were also included to the Helsinki Convention; these measures entered into force on 1 December 2002 and are thus legally binding under international law.
37
Much progress has been achieved in the implementation of the HELCOM Copenhagen Declaration and for those activities with a set target date the implementation will be reached in time. To achieve a full implementation it is, however, important to have a continued commitment on a broad regional level.
The work of HELCOM shows its capacity to meet new challenges but also that improved maritime safety and emergency as well as response capacity can be gained on a regional level. An enlarged EU does not change this situation – but it does require the states bordering on the Baltic Sea area to co-ordinate internally as well as among each other to agree upon their standpoint to be presented in different international fora.
The operational work to respond to maritime incidents will continue in its present form. To the extent possible the Baltic Sea states should work for the allocation of EU funds for identified needs in the Baltic Sea area within the response field.
As for the work to prevent pollution from ships HELCOM should ensure that the diversity of the Baltic Sea area is taken into account in the EU regulatory process. And if need be HELCOM shall make use of its own legal mandate to adopt measures supplementary to the EU measures, due to specific Baltic Sea requirements.
Let me finally encourage you to have a look at our website where you can find a lot of information about the work carried out to ensure a safe and environmentally sound navigation and about HELCOM as such.
Common measures to combat environmental risks of increased shipping HANNA MATINPURO
The Baltic Sea is one of the most polluted seas in the world. It also has some of the densest maritime traffic in the world. At the same time it is characterised by its sensitivity and high vulnerability. I will not go into the details about its ecological characteristics nor its value for us, as people from the Baltic Sea region, I think you all know this by your own experience.
Luckily the Baltic Sea region is also known of its extensive networks and forums for regional co-operation. This Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference being one of them. Several other networks are also present today in this meeting. It's a great pleasure for me to have this opportunity to address you all.
I am representing the Finnish Association for Nature Conservation, with its 30,000 members, the biggest environmental NGO in Finland. I also bring the message from the already mentioned NGO-forum (thematic group on sustainable lifestyles) and from the Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB), which is a network of environmental organisations from the countries of the Baltic Sea. Currently CCB unites 27 member organisations from Finland, Russia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Germany, Denmark and Sweden. Together the member organisations of CCB have over half a million members in all countries around the Baltic Sea. Maritime safety issues have been high on the regional and international agenda. In the Baltic Sea area the increased traffic and forecasted continuous growth poses an increasing threat to the marine environment. Without improvements in safety
38 and environmental protection the growth in the volume of traffic will inevitably result in more accidents and increased pollution.
This has been recognised in different forums and the necessary actions to lower the negative impacts and risks from increased traffic has been presented. One of the main actors in this work has been the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference. And your work is ver much appreciated.
The needed joint measures to enhance maritime safety are listed in several forums, and there is widespread common understanding of the possible and needed measures. This includes a wide set of measures: regulations, economic incentives, finances, information, guidance and education. The need to phase-out single-hull tankers; rules for winter traffic, ice classification and ice breaker service arrangements; designation and protection of Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs); strengthened liability; mandatory pilotage; control of illegal waste and oil discharges; regulation on discharges of ballast water; emissions limits; a clean ship concept; improved seafarer training; a joint Baltic Sea Fund (funded by fees from ship owners and shipping companies operating in the Baltic Sea should be founded to cover rescue operation costs in case of oil spills or other hazardous spills), a charging system to encourage good ship-owners, to name a few.
Is everything then in order? As you know these mentioned measures are not yet in place. These ideas are not yet reality. And in case of existing regulations, implementation and enforcement is lacking. I will not go into the details of these measures, though they are important, but I will concentrate on three political approaches for actions which would help to get the process forward. And here is a role for you, parliamentarians as well.
1) Work on all levels of co-operation, national, regional and international. HELCOM, EU and IMO. To enforce and put timetables into action. 2) Point out those who are stopping progress. 3) To make things political, to take the political responsibility
I want to comment on these points briefly: 1) For example, while the declaration of the joint ministerial meeting (HELCOM- OSPAR) mentions all the current pressing issues and some progress was made at the meeting (the ministers agreed to speed up the entry into force of several instruments like dealing with ballast water, antifouling, liability and damage compensation), this resolution mostly only "welcomes", "supports" or "urges" action in other forums (principally the International Maritime Organisation and the EU); It only refers to joint efforts in other forums on existing initiatives and relates to the implementation and enforcement of existing measures.
Few would disagree that the IMO has a vital role to play in this area, but it is wrong to believe that on shipping issues its competence is or should be exclusive. Shipping is certainly a global trait and ideally regulation at that level makes most sense, but the IMO contains many countries, including the influential Flag of Convenience (FoC) nations representing the shipping industry, that are happy to sideline environmental concerns. Timely agreement on appropriately progressive measures has in the past proved difficult, if not impossible to achieve at IMO. It is also true that global standards cannot always take account of the particular
39 environmental sensitivities or political priorities of sea areas like the Baltic, or accommodate regional desires to go beyond what can be agreed globally.
An implicit acknowledgement of these limitations is behind many of the post- Prestige and indeed post-Erika EU initiatives (e.g., on the phase-out of single-hull tankers). They illustrate both the possibilities for regional action and the effect that a willingness to act regionally can have on the performance of IMO. A post-Erika EU initiative and threat of regional action led to the IMO's initial phase-out timetable for single hull tankers, and a similar threat post-Prestige looks likely to result in further restrictions on the life-span of these vessels.
The joint ministerial meeting was a disappointment. It cannot ignore what is happening elsewhere, but ministers should recognise that it has a role to play in ensuring the success of those initiatives, and a responsibility to act itself if other forums fail to deliver.
Firstly, if ministers are to defer to action elsewhere they must make it clear what they expect from those forums and they must identify deadlines by which action has to take place. Secondly, they must make it clear what action they will take at OSPAR-HELCOM level if the initiatives in other forums do not yield satisfactory results. Initiatives at IMO on single-hull tankers, PSSA's, FoCs (the Flag-State Code and Compulsory Model Audit Schemes), pilotage, as well as ballast water, harmful antifoulings and port-state control require this kind of treatment. I urge the BSPC to help in this issue and to challenge governments to work on all levels.
2) As you know the joint ministerial meeting did not succeed in making a joint application to designate the Baltic Sea as a PSSA. And we all know that it was Russia which deleted the text from the declaration.
We have to help each other to achieve the high standards in environmental protection, but if necessary be ready to also point out those who are lagging behind and slowing down the process and put public pressure on them. And at the same time try to find ways to help laggards out of the situation. In this case it was Russia, in other cases it was other countries, like Finland in the question of seal hunting at the June HELCOM meeting. Finland stopped a HELCOM decision on seal management that could have helped the Baltic fishermen to reduce the conflicts between seals and fisheries in the Northern Baltic.
International pressure helps to widen the national discussion. E.g. in case of Russia I know that most of the people on the shores of the Baltic Sea are in favour of designating the Baltic Sea as a PSSA, or they would be if they were informed of the process.
Besides increasing the transparency of, and information on, and follow up of the political forums the whole transport sector needs much more transparency and liability and responsibility of all actors. It also needs a chain of custody system, to make it possible also for customers to know how the oil and chemicals cargo is transported and how the 'polluter pays principle' is followed.
40 3) The role of the BSPC and national parliaments is important. I call on you to give HELCOM more political weight. In conclusion, we need common measures to combat environmental risks of increased shipping. But I would like to also challenge you to look at the whole picture. Is the increase of maritime traffic possible for ever and is it inevitable?
BRIEF COMMENTS
SYLVIA BRETSCHNEIDER
On behalf of the delegation of the Parliament of the state of Mecklenburg- Vorpommern, I would like to thank both the City of Oulu and the Finnish Parliament for their hospitality.
At this point, I do not want to repeat what Ms. Ojala has said on this topic, but Malmö has prepared the ground for the work to be done by our conference. The topic of 'maritime safety' was a key element in the resolutions adopted in 2001 and 2002, and it will play a major role at this conference as well. In the final analysis, it is owed to the work done by the newly established Committee on Maritime Safety (COMS) working group and its contacts, and to the fact that the BSPC was granted an observer status at HELCOM. In accordance to the mandate, the exercise of this observer status was shared by representatives of the Folketing and of the Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. The results of this mandate have been described in a written report that is available at this conference.
This report including annexes describes how the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference executed its mandate and the considerable extent to which the resolutions of the conference have already been implemented by the executives of the Baltic Sea countries. It also shows that the topic of maritime safety, in which the BSPC has invested much dedication, commitment and effort, was very successfully supported in terms of both practical and political results.
I would now like to limit my remarks to key political aspects of our report on the topic of 'maritime safety'. For those who are interested, the written documents and annexes provide more detailed information.
The key conferences in the framework of the exercise of our observer status at the Helsinki Commission were the joint IMO/HELCOM/EU Workshop in Rostock in March and the Ministerial Meetings of HELCOM and OSPAR in Bremen in June this year. In addition, observers were present at the meetings of the HELCOM Heads of Delegation (HOD) in Berlin, Rostock and Bremen.
All in all, it is fair to say that parts of the HELCOM Copenhagen Declaration – and the resolutions from Greifswald – have already been successfully implemented, although it is necessary to continue to step up efforts designed to improve maritime safety.
In accordance with the resolutions adopted by the BSPC in Greifswald and in St. Petersburg, nearly all Baltic Sea countries felt that it was necessary to designate Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSA), to introduce compulsory use of pilots in such areas and to accelerate the phase-out of single-hull tankers. This view was not
41 shared by the representatives of the Russian delegations. Because of the unanimity rule, it was therefore not possible to adopt any resolutions to this effect at the HELCOM Ministerial Meeting.
The rejection of the designation of PSSA in the Baltic Sea meant that one of the key goals of the other Baltic Sea countries had been thwarted, i.e. to implement stricter rules via the IMO for ships travelling in such areas. The Russian delegation felt that the national rights of each Baltic Sea country in its territorial waters should be respected when it came to implementing special measures and rules for the protection of the marine environment in keeping with IMO rules. In addition, in the context of the phase-out of single hull tankers the Russian delegation pointed out that it was necessary to consider the dependence of countries on the oil industry.
The compromise found fell short of what had been expected. The goal must now be to try to develop regional measures that will have the same effects as the planned accelerated phase-out of single-hull tankers and the banning of the transport of heavy oil in single-hull tankers. It remains to be seen whether individual Baltic Sea countries – acting either alone or as a group – will take initiatives to that effect in the framework of the IMO. The BSPC must therefore continue to call for the implementation of such measures.
In my statement, I cited important demands of the BSPC, which are also included in the draft resolution. I also drew attention to the joint resolutions adopted by the environmental committees of the Nordic Council and of the Baltic Assembly calling upon players at all levels to apply stricter rules to the disposal of harmful substances from shipping operations, and to make every effort to convince the IMO that the entire Baltic Sea should be designated as a PSSA. In addition, I expressed my gratitude to HELCOM for including the BSPC as an observer because this has made it possible to build bridges between the legislative assemblies and the executives across boundaries.
The participants of the joint HELCOM/OSPAR ministerial meeting stated, that many initiatives had been launched not only at an international level by the IMO and the EU, but also on the national and regional level. They emphasised that the key objective now was to implement the measures adopted to date systematically and rapidly within the framework of the law of the Sea Convention.
The most important demands were: -the adoption of rules by the European Commission for limiting the use of single- hull oil tankers as well as prohibiting the use of such tankers for transporting heavy oil, -the support of initiatives launched to establish – within the IMO – a supplementary fund for the compensation of victims of oil pollution incidents from tankers, -the designation of PSSA, and -the introduction of compulsory use of pilots in particularly sensitive areas.
It has turned out that the fact that the BSPC has intensively dealt with the topic of maritime safety in the past two years has led to an acceleration of discussion processes and measures that in the final analysis have improved maritime safety.
The EU member states and the candidate countries now unanimously support additional demands that are to be implemented at international, European, national
42 and regional level. If Russia were to go along with these demands, this would represent considerable progress because if all the Baltic Sea countries speak with one voice within the IMO, this will give more weight to their demands and increase the likelihood that their demands will be implemented.
In view of the strained ecological situation of the Baltic Sea as well as the expected increase in maritime traffic and the risks posed by this increase – ultimately also for Russia – politicians from all the Baltic Sea countries must live up to their responsibility yet more effectively than in the past. In that respect, the BSPC could once again assume a pilot function if the necessary demands were adopted unanimously here in Oulu.
ASTRID THORS
In the last years the European Parliament (EP) has been debating quite many times about Baltic Sea questions. Last month we adopted a report for the conservation of the marine environment at various places where the Baltic Sea was of course mentioned. It was emphasised that we need a regional adjustment and we talked about the need to make arrangements and agreements with third countries so that we can bring about better classifications of the vessels and pinpoint the trade routes. At the same time we should also start the phasing out of single-hull tankers. In the 'Prestige Package' we also stressed the need to strengthen the security of transportation at large and that is part of the European Parliaments proposal.
If you look at the strategy of the EP there is the need of the EU and the EP itself to try to strengthen its efforts and its presence in the region and that is why I was so happy to hear that the Standing Committee will come to Brussels in November. I hope that this visit will even strengthen the efforts of the European Commission and the EP in this co-operation. Ms Chairman Outi Ojala mentioned another area where we should try to strengthen this parliamentary dimension and that is the co- operation within the CBSS.
During the day we have mentioned many of the EU's typical titles and acronyms, one thing we haven't given enough attention to in our work yet is the so called Wider Europe. I think it is time for us to realise strategically that this is where the money from the EU resources at the outer borders is going to and I believe many of us think that the Northern Dimension has always been seen as one part of a wider Europe. But within this Wider Europe programme there will also be new initiatives new instruments and I think it is absolutely correct that the Northern Dimension can be part of this Wider Europe.
I appeal to you here to look at the problems with stronger pragmatism and go against the environmental crimes that happened in February/March. I think we have to strengthen our co-operation in terms of surveillance and also raise the sanctions. So I hope that you go to your national parliaments and look at these things with new eyes and bring those to book who don't follow the rules.
I would also like to say that the Baltic Sea is both for people and for nature and we should not forget that it is man who has brought culture to these regions and I think that minister Ojuland mentioned the excellent heritage that we have around
43 the Baltic Sea which we should conserve. I hope that we can all work towards these goals.
ASMUND KRISTOFFERSEN
Let me start by thanking the speakers and contributors for an interesting session this morning. I would also express my appreciation to the organisers for addressing environmental problems in the Baltic Sea region at this conference and the resolution. I would also express my gratitude to the ministers present at the HELCOM meeting in Bremen earlier this year for their work to make the Baltic Sea a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area under IMO. I am the chairman of the Environmental Committee in the Nordic Council, and a member of the Norwegian Parliament.
I would like to use the topic of the conference as a back drop of my comments. In my opinion the knowledge-based society is a necessity and prerequisite for sound management of our common natural resources. Exchange of knowledge and flow of information are the corner stones of a knowledge-based society.
I could give many examples of how important knowledge and information flow is in resource management, but I think all of you here understand the importance. You also appreciate the importance of co-operation for a good exchange in information and knowledge.
I'll say some words about the work the Nordic Council is involved in regarding the marine environment of the Baltic Sea. In May the Environment Committees of the Nordic Council and the Baltic Assembly signed a Memorandum of Understanding to co-operate on improving the Baltic Sea environment and shipping. We both support the Baltic Sea as a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area, and I think the ministerial level is on the right track in this case as was evident from the meeting in Luleå on August 29th.
The co-operation between Nordic Council and Baltic Assembly environment committees marks a closer tie between the parliaments involved. I believe we will continue co-operation on how to manage our common natural resources. I can assure you that I will continue to work on these matters until we have managed to protect the Baltic Sea and any other natural resource we depend upon, in the best possible way, and I am sure we will succeed better if we all are on board.
Ladies and gentlemen! I really do hope that we can agree to solve the question of pollution and oil transport in the Baltic Sea. This is only one problem that we are facing. But trust me, there are other problems waiting ahead of us. Allow me to recall the tragic accident of the submarine in the Barents Sea only two weeks ago. In this accident human lives were lost and the accident also showed that we have a challenge ahead concerning nuclear waste in our region.
Ladies and gentlemen! We have many problems ahead of us, but it is important for me to underline that the issue this morning is the maritime safety in the Baltic Sea and it is my hope that we can agree to recommended the Baltic sea to be designated a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area within the framework of IMO.
44 VATANYAR YAGYA
Thanks to all of you who have spoken here today and especially those who mentioned Russia and St. Petersburg. And I would also like to say that in the Estonian Foreign ministers speech it came out how wonderful St. Petersburg is and the fact that we are celebrating the cities' 300th anniversary. The CBSS and the BSPC have undertaken a great number of different measures and organised events in honour of this 300th anniversary and in the wake of these events we had a lot of discussions, high-level talks, we had summits, and people coming from 45 different states.
The conference itself within the framework of the BSPC, where the Standing Committee did a great deal of work particularly regarding parliamentarian contacts and ties between various Baltic Sea states, St. Petersburg and Russia as well. Within the framework of the celebrations in St. Petersburg there was a declaration made on the importance of preserving the culture of the various Baltic Sea states and I think this is a very important declaration which makes it possible for us to preserve the very best of what we have. And we should look at what our ancestors have done and how this can enrich our lives.
Within the framework of this meeting in St. Petersburg we had bilateral discussions between the parliamentarians from Schleswig Holstein in Germany and between the State Parliament of Tallinn, Hamburg and various others. We felt that there was a need to have a Baltic Sea Parliamentarian Conference, that concentrates more on common goals, such goals must be analysed, for example the issue of education within the regional development. It is also necessary to mention education at the university level. I personally think it is time to turn to the idea the CBSS had in the very beginning in 1992 which was to have a unified university region.
I want to draw your attention to the way the EuroFaculty has been set up by the CBSS and in 1992 the idea was born to also have a EuroFaculty in St. Petersburg. And I would like to draw your attention to the fact that Russia along with others supports the development of education but of course there is a difference between supporting a process and actually getting it going, those are two different things.
One fact that this is not acknowledged and recognised is a fact we talked about in the St. Petersburg Dialogue, President Putin and Chancellor Schröder also discussed this issue last year but the problem remained: there hasn't been anything beyond discussing, acknowledging and recognising.
I would like to point at the idea that we talked about earlier on and that is the creation of a Baltic Sea Youth Fund. I think this idea is very good, I read at this university that there are 400 students of the university where we currently find ourselves who in a course of a year go and visit Russia for 2-3 weeks sojourns. This is a very small number and it is only when we no longer have visa requirements between Russia and the EU or at least some kind of movement in this process, that the figures can increase also outside the universities - because students can get visas without any problems at least, so that we can talk about a flow of students between our countries and a flow of cultural values.
I am only going to give my last comment now, that concerning the environmental issue that we have examined here and discussed intensely, we need to bare in
45 mind that nobody is a saint. In the Baltic Sea there is a huge number of chemicals, great dumps created by various people for example the allies not only after WW II. I think the BSPC in 1992 had a representative of St Petersburg who spoke to the parliamentarians to draw their attention to the fact that this has been silenced.
Yesterday evening I went for a walk on the shores of Oulu and it seemed to me as if you can smell the chemical weapons coming out of the bay, but then I noticed that it was just this paper mill that is on the other side of the bay and here we are talking about preserving the Baltic Sea environment.
ANKE SPOORENDONK
I am happy to speak here today as a representative of the Danish minority in Schleswig-Holstein. As a representative from Schleswig-Holstein I would like to express my gratitude that the chair of the standing committee Ms. Ojala reported on the importance of the engagement with the new framework convention of the Baltic Sea where we intensify the work between parliamentarians.
I believe that this includes the response to the question of which consequences it will have for Baltic Sea parliamentarian co-operation that the meeting of the ministers of the Baltic Sea states will only take place every other year in the future. I am talking about this now because our experiences in Schleswig-Holstein have shown, that relationships between minority and majority population is a sign for how much democracy is flourishing and therefore democracy needs to be something that is lived. Parliamentarian co-operation is symbolic of this. Because it is only through this co-operation that we can see that minority policy is always also social policy.
In Schleswig-Holstein we also experienced that human rights and minority policy are two sides of the same coin and against this background I am extremely concerned that the mandate of the commissioner on democratic development is going to end by the CBSS. This means that we are losing a voice at a time where it is absolutely crucial for the Baltic Sea states that democracy is not to be understood as a system but as a way of life. That really should be questioned politically, it ought to be examined and discussed in advance.
OLE STAVAD
In light of the short time I will content myself with two brief points of view and that is firstly to underline what Mr. Enestam said and that is that the Baltic Sea area is the most vulnerable sea area that we have. Therefore I want to express a strong call to all colleagues that when we all go home to our parliaments to make sure that we exert the maximum pressure on our governments that we can get PSSA status as quickly as possible for the Baltic Sea. As has been said already if we are going to have that status from 2004 it is by December at the latest that we should have applied to the IMO. I think that it is extremely important given the initiative we have been taking when we are talking about the Baltic Sea, to remember that we ought to get it into a right international perspective. The IMO is the right place to make these decisions, it is great that we can work together. What we do in HELCOM is extremely important and that the EU takes the initiative but if we are going to secure safety irregardless to what nationality these ships have I am sure that under international
46 rules it is the UN organisation, the IMO, that we should go to. So I call to all colleagues here that we should do our homework and that we should not forget these speeches that we hold here.
The other thing I wanted to say here is on what is happening in the CBSS at the moment? Do we parliamentarians have any control or feeling for it? We heard a very interesting speech from our current president Ms Ojuland, but in that speech there were some signals that I can't interpret. We know that at the ministerial level they have decided to end the commissioners mandate. But last year we had the commissioner with us at the BSPC and all that happened without any sort of contact to the parliamentarians at least as far as I know.
So I want to propose to the Standing Committee that when we are planning the meeting next year in Bergen, we should think of inviting as many of our ministers as possible to enhance the dialogue between the parliamentarians and the ministers as to what we are going to use the CBSS for in the future. It was clear from Ms Ojulands speech that the ministers and the governments are considering changes and I think that is right. But I think it is decisive that these changes should take place in close co-operation with the parliamentarians. So I hope that the Standing Committee will take up this work and hopefully identify it as a priority and the ministers should be present and involved in our next year's discussions.
FOLKE SJÖLUND
As a representative from the Åland Islands which are situated in the middle of the Baltic Sea, the Gulf of Bothnia, I would like to make a few short comments and focus on the environmental co-operation in the Baltic Sea region. There are two main problems, one problem is the nutrification of the Baltic Sea the other is the Maritime Safety.
I am not going to deal with the nutrification we could keep a separate conference on that. But I must say that we are most pleased and grateful to the progress and development of the BSPC resolution concerning the maritime safety and the environmental state of the Baltic. Especially I want to mention the statement in the resolution about the Baltic Sea as a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area within the IMO.
This measure will considerably increase our potential to protect the Baltic Sea of maritime accidents by setting higher demands on the ships and also on the competence of the crews on the ships, all this will have a positive effect on maritime safety. The minister of environment in Finland, Mr. Enestam talked about the measures that Finland is taking in order to diminish the risk of oil accidents. We strongly support this development.
Everybody can imagine what a catastrophe an oil tanker accident in the northern part of the Baltic Sea would be in the vast archipelago of south-west Finland, the Åland Islands and the Stockholm archipelago which consists of more than 30.000 islands. It would be an enormous catastrophe. The cleaning up and sanitation of for example 1000 tons of oil would require an enormous amount of work and a cost which is huge. It is impossible to estimate the costs but it would be many millions, perhaps even hundred millions of EUR. But from our point of view the absolutely most important measure is the work on strengthening the maritime safety maximally, thus hoping that maritime accidents never will happen in the Baltic Sea
47 especially where oil tankers are involved. Therefore we strongly support the project designating the Baltic Sea as a Particularly Sensitive Maritime Area.
ELENA KALININA
It is a great privilege and pleasure for me to participate in the 12th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference. Let me read the message of greetings from the government of St. Petersburg to the participants of the conference.
I would like to express our great satisfaction with the fact that the Nordic countries Council of Ministers has made a decision to hold the 4th Conference on Women and Democracy in St. Petersburg in 2005.
I am the Rector of St. Petersburg Social and Economic Institute. Our Institute has great experience in organising international conferences. We have conducted the "Women in the Changing World" conference since 1994. This conference is the event that unites women of Russia, CIS countries and Europe. The conferences are followed by exhibitions and presentations of "women projects" which are the real proof for the potential of business women. These conferences give us an opportunity to combine words and deeds: not only to discuss problems of democratic integration but to implement real projects aiming at practical solutions.
Thus, the project "Business-to Business" aiming at establishing business contacts between entrepreneurs of St. Petersburg, the Leningrad region and Finland has been implemented with the support of the Finnish Ministry of Labour and of Economics and Trade.
Another project that is being implemented with financial support from SIDA, aims at setting up Resource Centres for small and medium business development in three districts of the Leningrad region. "Network across borders" is the name of one more project for establishing business contacts between women in Denmark, Estonia and St. Petersburg which has been recently accomplished.
Realisation of all those projects could not be possible without broad discussion of the gender equality problems, without finding proper forms and mechanisms for realisation of the policy of equal rights and opportunities for men and women. The institute has great experience of collaboration with well-developed democracies of the northern countries and we have real results of using progressive foreign experience.
It is important that the conference of the year 2005 is to be aimed at prospective strategies promoting women into all the spheres of public life. I should emphasise that the conference will take place in the year of the 10th anniversary of the Beijing World Conference on Women at which obligations of the Russian government were declared. Unfortunately Russia is still on place 74 regarding the realisation of the policy of equal rights.
Therefore our task for the following two years is not only to prepare and conduct the conference itself but to ensure a constructive dialogue between the authorities, public organisations, politicians, journalists and scientists, between all those who can influence and form the public opinion. I have already mentioned our annual international conference "Women in a changing World".
48
In a month, during October 3rd-5th the 10th conference will be held in St. Petersburg. This year the conference has a new name: "Women changing the World". It is expected that there will be over 700 participants. This conference will summarise results of the previous forums and open new co-operation horizons. We hope that the conference will help to harmonise human and business relations to facilitate favourable development of Europe in the 21st century. Welcome to St. Petersburg!
SECOND SESSION Knowledge Society in the Baltic Sea region
Knowledge Society – What does it mean? INGE LØNNING
All societies require specific knowledge, skills and competence of its members or citizens for the society to function. What is then characteristic of and what are the aims for the Knowledge Society? In its communication on the role of the universities in "The Europe of Knowledge", the European Commission gives the following definition:
"The Knowledge Society depends for its growth on the production of new knowledge, its transmission through education and training, its dissemination through information and communication technologies, and on its use through new industrial processes and services".
The identity of the university as an institution circles around knowledge; the production of knowledge through research, the transfer of research-based knowledge through education, the diffusion of knowledge through publishing and libraries, and not least, the cultivation of critical judgement through scholarship and a fostering of an anti-authoritarian attitude.
With the widespread adoption of new Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in teaching, research and administration of the education sector, we see that core activities in systems of higher education and research are being structured by and around ICTs.
Indeed the speed of change of information and communication technologies spearheaded by the Internet and the World Wide Web is unique in history. As late as in the mid 1990s, few of us could have imagined the enormous explosion of communications world-wide over the Internet. In advanced industrialised countries in particular, computers and the Internet are now pervasive features of everyday life and increasingly affect the organisation and functioning of society.
The requirements of the Knowledge Society have led to reforms at various levels of education, training and research in many countries, and in some cases to repeated reforms. In these sectors, the following factors are inherent parts of the Knowledge Society:
A stronger emphasis on formal education, as seen through the important increase in the levels of formal education in the population as a whole. The proportion of the
49 population in any given age group with secondary or higher education qualifications or even doctoral degrees has increased quite significantly in most European countries over the past decades.
As a result of the massification of higher education, and consequently a growth of research, there has been a decline in the confidence in scientific knowledge. What explains this paradox is that the society becomes more and more knowledgeable, it is more capable of testing assertions based on so-called scientific truths and also to make science socially and morally accountable.
We see a development of information and communication technologies as a powerful tool in so many contexts, including the changing role of teachers and the methods of learning. We observe more co-operation between education and training systems, research, and the society and the economy at large. We have a growing focus on life-long learning, comprising questions related to access to education and training, irrespective of age, social or geographic background, and to recognition of prior knowledge, skills and competencies, whether formal or informal.
The development of basic skills, or key competencies, as a basis for future learning is equally important. We need a comprehensive strategy to deal with this, where basic education and continuing education will complement each other. Our policy should be based on a broad concept of knowledge, where theoretical and practical knowledge and the promotion of creativity, initiative and social skills are integrated parts. The policy must be based on co-operation between many actors: public authorities, social partners, providers of education, private and public institutions, organisations and enterprises. We need to have a long-term perspective, and all parties involved should make an active contribution.
The output of education and training, and the significance of knowledge for a country's economy, are receiving increased attention. As many governments become more concerned with how universities can serve the economy in a globalised world, more emphasis is put on accountability. In many countries this has led to a focus of attention on production efficiency in terms of student flow, publication frequency, and product quality in terms of students' achievements. At least in Anglo-Saxon countries, these pressures have led universities to seek to compete for lucrative foreign high-fee students as to get less dependent on public funding. It was in fact such pressures in the Anglo-Saxon world that prompted the emergence of a global market for educational services in the 1990's, something that has put education on the agenda in the WTO negotiations on trade in services.
For all the above mentioned reasons, in Europe at large, a multitude of initiatives have been set in place in the fields of education, training and research, and I will briefly mention some of the most important ones:
-In March 2000 the Heads of states of the European Union, meeting in Lisbon, stated that they were aiming at becoming "the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion". This is an aim we all share, members of the EU or not. We need a skilled workforce to fulfil this goal, as well as informed and enlightened individuals for social and cultural development. Education
50 and training is a main element in the Lisbon process and the follow-up activities have already changed the focus of co-operation in education.
-The Council of Europe's and UNESCO's higher education recognition convention, with its Diploma Supplement.
-The Council of Europe's reference of threshold levels in language learning, and its language portfolio.
-The unique Bologna Process in higher education, involving more than 30 European countries, and aiming at more compatible and readily understandable degree systems (including recognition through the generalisation of the Diploma Supplement). The aims of the Bologna Declaration are to increase student and teacher mobility and through this create a genuine European area of higher education.
Let me give a couple of examples of what is possible to achieve through regional co-operation within education and research. The Nordic countries have through the Nordic Council during the last 50 years co-operated in this field. We have established some Nordic institutions in fields where each country is too small to have a viable institute, like the Nordic Institute for Asian Studies, the Nordic Institute for Women's studies and Gender Research, or the Nordic Institute for Theoretical Physics. The Nordic countries have also since a few years back an agreement on the common educational market. That means that the students when they have finished secondary school can apply to enter at any university or technical high school in any Nordic country on equal terms. In helping the students to finance their studies we have established financial support schemes mainly on a national basis, but in addition we have certain Nordic financial programs to encourage the students to study in another Nordic country.
We should have more of these arrangements in the Baltic Sea area. Students and researchers must be able to maximise the opportunities available to them, notably through the promotion of university exchanges and the use of virtual learning facilities. Let us promote the creation of a "knowledge-based region" through joint projects, networking and mobility in the fields of education and training, research, culture and youth.
This is well in line with the EU Commissions Second Northern Dimension Action Plan 2004-2006. The Action Plan also says that the Northern Dimension partners will work to improve communication and information exchange among all sectors of the scientific community in Russia and in the enlarged EU. This will improve the dissemination of information to the scientific community at large in the region and create a mechanism for stimulating co-operation between the many scientific institutes and universities in the north.
What about the concept 'quality' in our education systems? In which ways can quality be documented, and how can we measure improvements? Participation in international studies can help us to find answers to these questions, and the exchange of good practice can give us ideas on how to improve our education systems. We must use the opportunity to be tested and compared. If you want to be a world champion, you have to participate in the world championship. Quality always implies comparison.
51
It is absolutely necessary to participate in international analyses and comparisons, to get qualified and objective information on the status and standard of our education. Facts are a prerequisite for taking informed decisions about reforms or new initiatives.
To understand the development of the Internet revolution it is important to look at the inherent qualities of technology and see how these instigate and enable human activities and social organisation. Very briefly: according to one of the leading analysts of ICTs from a social science point of view, Manuel Castells, the Internet does not only entail a communication revolution but he contends, "the Internet is the technological basis for the organisational form of the information age: the network".
Let me give you an example of network building in the Baltic Sea region. The eleven Prime Ministers in the Baltic Sea region and the President of the European Commission in April 2000 established the CBSS Task Force on Communicable Disease Control. In a letter endorsing the general plan for collaboration, the Estonian Prime Minister underlined the need for training in public health. The capacity of the existing schools and training programmes, all over the region, are far too small to effectively deal with the present and emerging health problems.
The Task Force has established a powerful and flexible network of committed staff in schools of public health. Such a network is cost-efficient and supports sustainability. It builds on existing national, academic resources. A secretariat has been set up in Tallinn and an Interim Council will be replaced by a permanent structure on January 1st 2004.
The network mobilises an immediate effort to attack dangerous health threats: HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, antibiotic resistance and hospital infections. It will focus on health economy, health care management and development. The countries in the Baltic Sea region spend between 5-10% of GNP on health care. How to prioritise the limited resources we have? Academic and administrative collaboration across the borders can help all of us to find more adequate answers.
There are today unacceptable differences in living conditions and health between close neighbours in our region. To strengthen education and establish "knowledge societies" it is a most important step to fight barriers to collaboration. I believe this network in public health training is a practical example and a model that fits the resolution we will adopt during this conference.
Let me sum up my contribution in one sentence: The Knowledge Society in the Baltic Sea area - our societies – is made of societies that are more and more dependent on knowledge, in research and education, in economic production, in political regulation and in all aspects of everyday life.
The Baltic states on the move towards a Knowledge Economy ALGIRDAS KUNCINAS
I am going to talk about information technology in the Baltic Sea and I am going to take examples from three countries. I am going to talk about Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania which as you can see on the one side have the same neighbours and on
52 the other side they don't. I must say that three years ago we had a meeting with the ministers and were looking at the area of information technology in the Baltic Sea region, this was under the auspices of the European Commission, and we came out with a plan of action as a result of this and I would like to touch on a few of these points.
The Northern eDimension action plan that we came out with has to be seen as a regional initiative in which the CBSS plays a leading role and different entities, regional authorities and governmental institutions, businesses and regional communities are part of it. The Northern eDimension action plan promotes new kinds of joint efforts for regional integration through Information Society activities. This plan intends to create synergies and to bring EU policies for the Information Society together such as eEurope and eEurope+ and national e-initiatives. The Northern eDimension Action Plan aims to provide added value to the regions that are increasingly involved in cross-border co-operation dealing with IT relevant projects and actions.
Now let us look at the situation in the Baltic's. In Estonia the number of engineers and the export of IT products, higher education high technology products and the number of people who use the Internet and the number of IT as a part of the GDP. Naturally we have to look at the situation in a wider sense, the situation seems best in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are on the same level. Let us now look in detail at the situation through the percentage of Internet users in the Baltic Sea states and we can see that the percentage differs hugely between the countries. It depends as well on prices, how much you have to pay for access to the Internet and if we look at the one-minute price-ranking of Internet access you can see that where it costs a lot you have less users which makes sense.
If we look at business entities and the situation of the Baltic Sea states basically you can say that in the year 2002 enterprises used IT a lot for business purposes where Estonia is at the top of the list, Lithuania is in between and Latvia is a bit further down the scale. This gives you an insight on the situation regarding the turnover of information communication technologies and you can see that the Baltic Sea states are very similar. But if you compare them to Finland you see there is still room for improvement and we hope to achieve better results in the future.
Let us look at Baltic societies in terms of the successes in various cultural areas, particularly in innovation. One of the first reasons for the success in innovation is a coherent culture, then there is the competitiveness of neighbouring countries, compliance of regulations, real belief in education and in technology and I believe that the Baltic states make use all of these aspects.
I am very proud that Lithuania has worked together with the World Bank to create a World Bank Report which looked at the chances for Lithuania in achieving a knowledge economy, after China, Lithuania was second to have a World Bank Report and we see that life-long learning is crucial for a knowledge economy. We see the that the innovative system is useful but what we really have to tackle is the question of how we can build an Information Society. If we look at the situation in Lithuania in terms of its performance of developing a knowledge economy from 1995 to 2000 or 2002, we should look at four of the main parameters which are innovation, education, information infrastructure and economic incentives. On the whole you can see that the situation has stayed much the same and I think that in
53 the future the government and industry joined forces which will change the situation.
First we have to improve the co-operation between the business community, the public sector and educational institutions. We need to reform and offer support to public authorities for building a knowledge economy, we need to promote innovation and co-operation in an Information Society and we need to tailor training to the labour market, we need to develop a legal framework as well so that there are equal opportunities for business in e-communications and e-transactions.
An important aspect is also the dynamics of the number of telephone users as a percentage of the total population, mobile and landline, and in Lithuania we can see a dramatic rise in use of mobile communications up to 2002 and landline figures have gone down which has to do with the fact that many people are only mobile and don't buy the landlines anymore. This means that if you are collecting mushrooms in the forest you can take your mobile with you which is far more convenient.
If we look at e-commerce in the year 2002 only 3% of the population in Lithuania buy services online so 5% look for information on goods online but shop offline. In Lithuania it tends to be used more as a means of communication than as a tool for finding information.
Now let us look at the educational institutions. At the end of 2002 we had four computers per school, but I have to say that half of the computers we found in schools and universities were there for Internet services. And if we look at where people look at the Internet the main place of access was at the workplace in 2002. So 7% access the Internet from their workplace and quite a low number of people access the Internet from where they study or from their homes, only 5%. And if you consider that so few people have computers at their homes, the establishment of public access to computers is very important, such institutions being public libraries, distance learning centres, that are using PHARE 2000 funds and their development programmes. These funds provided about 300 PCs with Internet access, I think that now we have about 55 public access points and by the end of 2003 there will be about 1000 PCs with Internet facilities.
Now some figures on E-banking and E-payment. In 2002 the number of users of E- banking grew by five times and by 2003 we think this number will rise even more. The number of payment cards issued has risen a lot and we expect a similar development to continue. But we have seen that there is the phenomenon of illegal software, which accounted for about 53% of total software use in the country in 2002 so the level of piracy is very high. The level in Estonia is about the same and in Latvia and in western countries illegal software is about 35%.
Let us look at the ICT market in Lithuania, where we can see that the sales of the 20 largest Lithuanian ICT companies increased by 17%. Exported Lithuanian ICT devices exceeded 100 Mio LIT in 2002. About 120 000 computers were sold in Lithuania last year which makes it about 60% more than in 2001. The strategic goals that we are aiming at in Lithuania in information technology is first and foremost to speed up the modernisation of management of public, local and economic sectors by relying on these information and communication technology tools. We hope to achieve this by 2015 namely we want to achieve that the
54 manufacturing and the sales in ITC products, goods and services, should account for 20% of the GDP and we want that no less than 50% of these products will be exported.
One of the indicators of this is how much public investments we find in Information Society projects and I can see there was a growth in 1997 and then there was a drop because of the environmental crises until 2000 and now we see increased public spending on Information Society since the Baltic states have become accession countries. Let us look at public funds for ICT on how they are invested and we can see that most of the money goes into hardware, 59%, and in terms of funding of software we have got 34%, we think that these proportions ought to change as well.
In terms of the structure of administration in achieving a Knowledge Society we see that these structures are under the President of Lithuania, under the Parliamentary Committee for Information Society development and the commission of the government, and we think that all of the ministries should be involved in putting the goals in this respect into practice. One of the key prerequisites for achieving a Knowledge Society is a stable legal framework which means we need long-term commitment on the part of the government in terms of what they want to do and what they don't want to do in this area. We have to see them coming up with clear strategies and there are some draft documents that are being approved by our government, we think these documents need to be approved and examined in order to achieve an Information Society.
At the end of August at the World Information Technology Forum in Vilnius, where about 700 people took part from a vast range of countries we didn't talk so much about Information Society but about what we previously spoke about, which is how to use these technologies in the social sphere. We had eight commissions at this forum which came up with the Vilnius declaration preparing the ground for ICT building, infrastructure, economic opportunities and how to empower the civil society and achieve participation, to help the educational, social end ethical aspects of the Information Society. We think that this is just a new thought that needs to be used by all parts of the society.
And if we look at the post-integration problems of the Baltic states economies, we can say that one of the problems we will be facing is equal footing in the development and dissemination of new technologies and we have to be sure that our countries don't lag behind economically either, that is a large scale issue. Enlargement will be completed by 2010 which means that by that time the development of large base economic sectors should be achieved. And we need to say that by 2010 the development toward a knowledge-based society should have moved from extensive to intensive.
Soon the Baltic States accession will be achieved but the time will come when also other states will join and the situation will then be different. So we try to work out what the recipe of success is for the Baltic states and we can say that it is based on three main aspects that are business agreements, agreement within the Baltic states on the importance of a knowledge economy and of course public-private co- operation. I will conclude and remind you of something that Bernard Shaw once said: "If I have got an apple and you have an apple we can eat apples together and exchange these apples". This also counts for our ideas: If I have a good idea and
55 you too and we exchange our ideas we will have twice as many ideas as we had before. I wish you all a productive conference and hope that you use it for exchanging ideas.
Bottom-up Strategies to the Knowledge-based Society - Meeting the Future in the Baltic Sea region BERND HENNINGSEN
The knowledge-based society is the most appropriate term for the society of the future. That is so, because neither agriculture nor industry nor services will any longer determine the wealth of the nations but skills deriving from research and knowledge will. Even though we are today experiencing an overflow of information – information is not the source of creativity, surplus and wealth but it is the tool. Additionally one should say, that the knowledge-based society is no longer the vision of the society of the future, so to speak the community of our grandchildren, but a reality we are experiencing in our everyday life. Knowledge is represented by us and is not a product, not virtual but real, the knowledge-based society is already in existence.
The further development of the educational space, of research, of teaching, of learning and other instruments which will and can improve the innovation and reformation of our society will be successful, if it is not only – as people today may feel – a process from above but if it is implemented from the bottom. What does this mean?
Let me illustrate this strategy with a historical example – a very successful strategy, to those, who do have some knowledge to the specific Scandinavian trademarks related to education and training, this example is well known. The Scandinavian Volkshochschule / Folkhögskola / folk-high-schools founded by the Dane N.F.S. Grundtvig in the middle of the 19th century. It was propagated and realised with the explicit goal of reducing and eliminating vertical disadvantages in the time of upcoming democracy and parliamentarism: If the farmers, the lower class of the pre-modern society, wanted to get into power, they had to catch up with the educational deficits they had in comparison to their urban and bourgeoisie counterparts, they had to learn to read, to write and count, but above all they had to learn how to discuss things in an argumentative manner. The acquisition of cultural techniques as well as the acquisition of simple economic strategies and methods belonged to the curriculum of these educational boarding-schools for the rural population, but also singing and praying were included – the basis for a cultural and political community.
The successful application of these skills and techniques presupposed faith in the fundamental changeability of society and state – a concomitant of Grundtvigianism, that was first met by scepticism among the workers' movements, until they in the end adapted the strategy and made it their own as well: Associations and finally schools for workers education and the 'People's Houses' (Folkets Hus) contributed to a sustainable and peaceful transformation of the Scandinavian societies in the 20th century and made them immune towards ideological promises of political mass movements. The folk-high-schools – exported to the whole world – became integral parts of the growing Scandinavian welfare state, were means and tools in one. The poorest countries of Europe became the most advantaged and developed countries: democratic, stable, educated, and wealthy.
56
The example shows that sustainability is a term that is not only to be used in the context of ecology and environment but is also profoundly political. It originates in the political culture of a community. The Scandinavian societies have shown since the 19th century, that political sustainability can only be reached on the basis of cultural tradition and that the techniques of transmission – that is education, research and other cultural inventions – can only be successful within the framework of one's own culture: language, history, the passing on of one's own political ideas play a crucial role. In other words: cultural sustainability is a matter of practice and education; is to be built up from the bottom.
And it is more than a by-product of deeply rooted tradition of the folk-high-schools in the political culture of the Scandinavian countries. That is the fact that up until our days there is a consensus in this part of Europe, that education and research – that means: the basic tools of the knowledge-based society – are not in threat of budget cuttings in hard times. In Sweden for example, the welfare measures have been cut down, unemployment measures, health insurance, social benefits are lowered – but not education and research. F & D are not given to the disposal of the ministers of finance. The result of this traditional consensus is obvious: The Scandinavian countries are the most developed concerning knowledge-based skills – and the overall economic data are better than those of, let's say, Germany.
Now, if the concepts of cultural complexity, security and sustainability can be applied to any human invention, then to the university: in the Mediterranean of the classical ancient period, universities were founded first in form of libraries and academies, then in their present form in the high middle ages in southern and central Europe, at locations we are all still familiar with. From there they developed to the most influential education centres in the 19th and 20th century and – especially after the Humboldtian turn at the beginning of the 19th century, when scholarship was discovered as a factor of productivity and a force for social integration – they came to be export goods to the eastern and western world.
I assume that with the historical role that the university plays for the development of our culture and civilisation it will continue to have a main function within the Knowledge Society of the future; it will continue to be the destination for the transmission of knowledge and education. On the other hand, though, I have my doubts about the present condition of our universities, as to how it will be possible to attain this future and fulfil the expectations.
It would be inexcusable to underestimate this important regional aspect for the transformation process in the Baltic Sea region states: the universities and other institutions of higher education will have a decisive position in the adaptation and modernisation process – be it culturally in the wider sense described previously, or in educational and research policies in the stricter sense. By the way, this is not only valid for the transformation states but also for the former western countries – they are confronted with new topics, with new forms of socialisation and milieus. With the variety of disputes and questions aroused through the end of the East- West-conflict – cultural, political, economic and environmental – a wide spectrum of challenges for university-based research has been introduced.
57 What would now be the practical advice? We can identify different bottom-up strategies for the development of the knowledge-based society. Some of them are easy to implement, others require a lot of work.
One strategy could follow the example of the initiatives taken shortly before the collapse of the socialist regimes for establishing an East-Middle-European Institute for Advanced Study, which was in fact realised, it would be urgent to think of founding an institution that I preliminarily and in lack of a better term would call "Baltic Sea University". This institution would be a regional Centre of Excellence, whose task would be the political, economic, societal and cultural transformation processes of the region, it would have to guarantee the education of a regional elite to make the region fit for the reality of the Knowledge Society. The Baltic Sea University would be a European endeavour.
Another could be the improvement of mobility – and I will come back to that issue later: With the help of scholarship and mobility grants the region, that was divided for forty years, can grow together again; common projects, common study- programs and even common research networks will consolidate the sustainability of the development, will create trust and interdependencies, that are of use for all and should therefore be in everyone's interest – as it used to be in the early modern age.
Why should we improve the skills and strategies towards a knowledge-based society especially in this region? Data collected over the last several years point to an economic, social, political and certainly also cultural development potential in the Baltic Sea region – to a large extent arising from the enormous need of the former states of the eastern block to catch up. Leave aside the economic data we can already now take for granted that our region is on its way to a region marked by considerable indices of research and teaching potentials.
The region possesses the necessary characteristics for a global research centre – over 100 universities and research institutes are located here. Nowhere else in Europe there are so many universities and colleges in one region. At the Öresund a medical-technical, biomedical and service-oriented centre is being established (currently with 30,000 jobs in biotechnology alone). There are eleven universities with 13,000 students here, plus 10,000 scholars. An above average number of highly educated young people live in the Baltic Sea region; the potentials already developed by information technology in recent years are world-class.
A Baltic Sea region where good schools, equal and easy access to universities or other institutions of higher education and a mobile and flexible attitude towards research dominate the political decision-making is an ideal scenario. Many of these aspects being already realised on the northern shores of the Baltic Sea region, there are a lot of desiderata at the southern shores (including Germany!). Education and research has to be made popular and fought for in the national budgets wherever one looks. With the Baltic Sea area we have the case of an innovative and active region where Knowledge Society could be made a trademark for the future development within Europe: The Baltic Sea region could emerge to become a 'model Knowledge Society', where education, training and academic life are treated as most valuable assets of sustainable development.
58
A communication from the European Commission entitled 'Towards a Europe of Knowledge' from 1997 set out the guidelines for the policies which should gradually implement the knowledge-based society (KS) from year 2000 onwards within the whole of Europe. The Commission suggests here, that education, research, innovation and training are the core fields in which new policies should be pursued for the emergence of a knowledge-based society. 'Building a Europe of knowledge' is stated to be the essential tool regarding Europe's competitiveness and the continuation of sustainable development in the 21st century.
The guidelines presented in the communication can be applied to a future 'model Knowledge Society' called the Baltic Sea region, making the region an 'observatory' for the implementation and development of the necessary measures. This 'observatory' could carry out individualised observation, characterisation and classification of the implementation process and set standards for future actions on the European arena. Experimenting, modifying and different forms of training in the educational and academic framework would be high on the agenda of Baltic Sea co- operation and would draw the European eyes towards this region where sustainable development is not only an empty political term.
Within this context, corresponding to the EC communiqué, there are four overall objectives for the development of the Knowledge Society in the Baltic Sea region to be identified:
1) Increasing the access of the Baltic Sea region citizens to the full range of educational resources. 2) Innovation in resources. 3) Wide dissemination of good practice in education. 4) Enhancing regionalism for the purpose of a balanced and sustainable development and progress.
Furthermore the added value of improving the Knowledge Society in the Baltic Sea region is a chance to utilise it as a strategy of region-building and of balanced and sustainable modernisation – as already mentioned.
These four objectives should be pursued through increased co-operation: Physical mobility, virtual mobility, promotion of language and cultural skills and the development of co-operation networks.
One of the most obvious actions the Commission points out for improving the Knowledge Society is increasing physical mobility. This concerns in particular mobility and exchange of students and researchers whose role in propagating the knowledge-based society is essential. A number of exchange programmes already exist; however, the CBSS-partners should promote establishing a special charter for the visiting scholars and research fellows. In particular, payment of grants and salaries should be organised in a uniform system so that an impression of a unified social area is born – and a bottom-up identity can grow.
As a second step towards increased physical mobility, visas for the researchers and students should be free of charge and the waiting time should be reduced to the minimum. As for today a lot of differences and obstacles exist – especially between the citizens of the EU and those of other countries in the region. For instance, in
59 Germany a compulsory 50 Euro stamp-fee for issuing the residence permit is required from the scholars and students from Poland and the Baltic states, while an EU citizen gets the residence permit for free. Another issue in this respect is the visas which citizens of CEEC must receive before leaving their home country. The waiting time should be reduced to the minimum and visas (as long as they have to be issued) should be granted on the spot. Additionally it should be considered whether exchange students and -researchers could be given a 'tax-free-status' for at the minimum of one year while they are staying abroad (white-card-policy). We need this (future) elite and should treat it according to its level of high potentiality.
The second action suggested by the EC communiqué is promoting virtual mobility. This is to guarantee broad access to communication and information networks. A necessary initiative in this regard is providing training of skills for using the equipment. Computer literacy is, in general, higher among the younger generation, though unevenly distributed with regard to different areas in the Baltic Sea region.
The third means of improving chances for the regional knowledge-based society is promotion of language skills and the understanding of different cultures. In due course knowledge of two or three further languages apart from the native tongue will be the result of enhanced physical mobility. No better bottom-up strategy is to be found. Students and scholars staying for a longer period of time in another country of the region and wanting to make full use of the local resources will be forced to learn the local language and to integrate in the local community. It seems advisable that a series of language summer schools in all countries of the region should be supported as an institutionalised part of the exchange programmes.
The fourth action to be expanded and modified in the academic world is building up co-operation networks in order to permit and promote exchange of experience and good practice. At present this seems to be a problem insofar as the obstacle at the moment is a significant difference in salaries and grants received by the academics in the EU countries on the one hand, and the Baltic states, Poland and Russia on the other. In the latter case mostly two or three jobs are necessary for the academics to have a decent income – which leaves little time to pursue high quality research. An enhanced physical mobility supported by the external means of funding could alleviate this discrepancy. In this regard it seems also relevant to establish, support and particularly promote pan-regional centres of excellence.
In the future it could be feasible to join these efforts and establish both a virtual and a real educational and research Baltic Sea Centre of Excellence. By definition this institution should be less dependent on the national educational and research priorities of the regional actors and promote a pan-regional view. This idea follows the suggestion above, making the Baltic Sea region to an 'observatory' for the implementation of the knowledge-based society. In an institution made out of bricks and mortar the process could be guided, monitored and vitalised as to prove the true determination of the political actors to create a regional model case scenario for an enlarging Europe.
We all know which role universities play for the economic development of regions, Sverker Sörlin has voiced his view extensively on that issue1, the detailed studies on this question are innumerable: universities are economic factors and they are
1 Sörlin, Sverker: Universiteter som drivkrafter. Globaliseringen, kunskapspolitik och den nya intellektuella geografin. Stockholm 1996.
60 motors of regional development with decisive importance- in regard to the economy especially for the reason that they are normally the biggest employer for a town or a region. Therefore most of the universities founded in the seventies were influenced by regional considerations, in Bamberg as well as in Umeå.
It would be inexcusable to underestimate this important regional aspect for the transformation process in the Baltic Sea region states: The universities and other institutions of higher education will have a decisive position in the adaptation and modernisation process – be it culturally in the wider sense described previously, or in educational and research policies in the stricter sense. By the way, this is not only valid for the transformation states but also for the former western countries – they are confronted with new topics, with new forms of socialisation and milieus. With the variety of disputes and questions aroused through the end of the east- west-conflict – cultural, political, economic and environmental – a wide spectrum of challenges for university-based research has been introduced.
The Baltic Sea region is predestined for sustainable bottom-up strategies: Hardly any other region has such a diverse and substantial flora of political, economic, academic, cultural and societal co-operation, governmental and non-governmental, to show as the our region. City and university partnerships are the least among them. On the one hand they make it difficult for politics to develop conceptual strategies in their field of work and to implement policies; on the other hand one could say that there is no need for clear political concepts just because of the blossoming flora of NGOs (Note: such a variety of co-operation below the central, state guided level does not exist in the Mediterranean region!).
When the different activities which are now being initiated or have been established already by scholars, universities and other academic institutions all around the Baltic Sea, or those that are in a planning phase, will have come to full life and expand – as I assume – then the Baltic Sea region will not only be a real 'laboratory of modernity' in regard to economy and politics, but will also be an outstanding scholarly region that can measure up to the global competition. That Stockholm and Helsinki are the IT-capitals of today, that the Öresund region is an outstanding competence-centre for medicine and medical technology, that the scholarship agglomeration in and around Berlin has become a strong regional and trans- regional magnet, does not only show the potential of the region, but can also show the transition countries, which potential they have at stake, which possibilities they have and where the future development is going to, where it can go.
With the help of scholarships the region that was divided for forty years can grow together again; common projects, common study-programs and even common research networks will consolidate the sustainability of the development, will create trust and interdependencies, that are of use for all and should therefore be in everyone's interest – as it used to be in the early modern age. Thank you for your attention.
State policy of the Russian Federation in Information and Communication Technologies ANDREY KOROTKOV
I love the Russian language, but bearing in mind that even our hosts chose to speak in this vulgar Latin of the 21st century allow me to speak English. I have the
61 great pleasure to convey to you on behalf of the Ministry of Communication and Information Technologies of the Russian Federation the best wishes and a successful conference.
I would like to start my short presentation with some explanations. I tried to give my presentation a name and the name was 'Beyond the Cyber Revolution – the state policy of the Russian Federation in Information and Communication Technologies'. What does that mean, beyond the cyber revolution? I think it is high time to speak about the cyber revolution and how it is connected to the development of the Information Society. The evolution of silicon objects moves much faster than the evolution of biological ones. We can see the penetration of biological objects into the microchips, the DNA molecules invented by nature. At the same time biological objects are already loading some microchips. Quite frankly when I am contacting my junior I feel that I really need updating.
To create a kind of a policy in ICT is a demanding task. In the 19th century the technologies changed every forty years, in the 20th century every forty months. In the very beginning of the 21st century every forty weeks. May I ask you whether you have ever read the manuals for your gadgets from the very beginning to the end? The only thing we know is, that we know nothing about the future of the new technologies. But we have the knowledge of the history of science and we have the experience of creating huge and unfortunately very expensive projects.
But we are all that many people and in Russia we have 150 million pairs of eyes looking at your and our steps in creating the Information Society. The most important lesson of this information was manifested in five key points. The Information Society can not exist without: 1) electricity, 2) the infrastructure for the network, 3) terminals for telecommunication 4) services, 5) skilled people. The President of the Russian Federation emphasised the importance of developing domestic information technology industry on many occasions and it was reflected in the strategy of social and economic development for Russia after 2010 and the medium-term programme between 2003-2005.
The development of the Information Society is a priority area for Russia. We consider that to be the means for ensuring Russia's entrance into the world of the information environment, being a tool for a wide range of problems and tasks arising in science, education, health care and social skills. The programme for the years 2002-2010 approved by the government of the Russian Federation in January 2002 has become one of the fundamental documents determining the main measures for introducing information technology in Russia. Although the programme was adopted a little earlier than one year ago, the first results of the implementation are already available. Socially important projects are being put into life such as telemedicine networks which are operating in 40 regions of the country. It is very complicated and at the same time very important for Russia. Because when Europe is speaking about the problems of the last months, we are speaking of the problems of the last 500 months.
The conception of the development of such kind of services is to connect all health institutions throughout the country to telemedicine networks. Automatic systems for the population register are successfully developed. A standard register for each regional subsistent is almost ready. This year the operation of these systems will be started in Moscow and Jaroslavl regions in the cities of Moscow and St. Petersburg
62 and the Hantij Mansisk autonomous area in the north of the country as well as in the Kaliningrad region. A lot of effort is put into installing electronic systems for a big part of the activities of the State Duma and the Legislative Bodies of the subjects of the Russian Federation.
Some methods were developed to design efficient technological information networks. And of course high educational institutions were connected to the basic telecommunication networks. Let me use an example of using ICT in the European and Central Asian region. In 33 subjects of the Russian Federation we installed the so called 'cyber hosts project'. Internet access was provided by the Federal Postal Services. On the whole about 2600 community access points are in operation, now 800 of them in rural areas. Over 2,5 million people use these services. The implementation of cyber press projects was started in order to make electronic versions of central newspapers accessible to remote regions of the country.
According to the forecast of experts high growth rates of information technology will be reality in the future, the total volume of the information and telecommunication market should increase more than 1,5 times within four years. This is a very good rate not only for Russia but also according to the world standards. Besides, the main portion of the growth will fall on the regions and this is very important because the significant divide in the development of levels of the subjects of the Russian Federation according to this indicator is not desirable from the economic or the social point of view. I should say that more than 50.000 Russian villages do not have a phone. So the observed tendencies can only make us happy.
Firstly the high growth rates in the ICT markets have caused steady demands for these products from Russian Companies. Secondly, maybe even more important, we are acquiring competitiveness on a high professional level by Russian specialists. The scientific potential that is available allows us to implement interesting science projects for the ICT area. The Russian ICT export will increase three times by the year 2005 in comparison to 2001. Nevertheless we have considerable possibilities to achieve these goals. The matter depends on creating mechanisms to create the stimulation of the realisation through available potential with this aim in view.
I would like to say some words about the Kaliningrad Region. We have signed the important papers with the administration concerning the development of communication and information in Kaliningrad this year. Due to the geo-political localisation Kaliningrad occupies a special place in relation to Russia and accelerates the development of ICT infrastructure. In our opinion it seems to be one of the priority areas making it possible to resolve issues ensuring the ability of the region. The signed agreement helps us to create the regional state population register contacting joint efforts to build the territorial information system. And we have already had negotiations about this with the Republic of Lithuania to make the equal steps for this vision. It will give us good opportunities in this region and it will attract ICT representatives from all regional countries.
Speaking generally about the implementation of the programme, it will certainly give priority to the governmental bodies: among this are for example administrative reforms, civil service reforms, budgetary reforms and educational
63 reforms. These are the points of departure to determine the main efforts which should be concentrated upon within the framework of eRussia.
Dear participants, humanity is going through another periodical phase of big social development. Now we are on the verge of constructing a society of a new type, a society in which state boundaries are becoming merely a visual line on the map. It could be a kind of society where people, goods, money and knowledge would really circulate around transparent state boundaries. It could be a kind of society where intellectual power could combat such dreadful diseases such as AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria and where knowledge could also fight starvation, poverty and wars. I can only dream about such a society because life does not work according to such stereotypical patterns even if they are nice ones.
The UN millennium summit developed quite a good goal for all of us to reduce the poverty indicator by 2015 by half. Three years have passed, have we made great progress in this respect? The World Bank, Private Funds and Public Organisations spend a lot of money to bridge the digital divide. But what is the digital divide really? According to the UNESCO, more than 50 countries turned poorer than they were before 1990. What should be done to transform the Information Society to a society that is not only for selected members? Are we able to stop the race for consumption? What steps could be taken so that the Knowledge Society could make steps towards those who really need prosperity and assistance. It is my hope that this could be some result of discussions here and it could help us on the road to constructing the Information Society and the knowledge-based economy.
The development of technological and economic spheres in advanced regions generates experience in the fields of education, investment, scientific research, success for subcontractors, and all of this in a positive spirit. Our neighbours in the northern countries have created telecommunication networks and local computer centres, modern work stations equipped with Internet and telecommunications. We learn from each other. In the Russian programme that was adopted and it is being implemented. We have established access points in libraries, schools and post offices. Are we looking for a secure and sustainable world for us and our kids? Yes we are. You will find a strong support from the Russian government in this issue.
BRIEF COMMENTS
DOROTHEE STAPELFELDT
I would like to speak about the Knowledge Society. But first I want to mention, that the Baltic Sea region is of strategic importance for Hamburg. The BSR is the most promising region in Europe and it is a region of knowledge and knowledge transfer. The success of the Baltic Sea story is its bottom up approach. The main impact and the strength of the co-operation stems from the activities of the people here, professors, scientists and students. In the education sector various bi-lateral and multilateral and various project networks give a continuous impact to the further development of contacts of the people of our Baltic Sea region.
Let me give you some examples of existing co-operation projects with Hamburg to underline that education is an important issue in the Baltic Sea region and also in the City of Hamburg. The exchange of students and scientists has increased considerably in the last years. A German and Baltic university exchange conference
64 took place last year between Germany, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in Bonn in May 2002 with the participation of the Hamburg universities concluding that there is an increased interest in this exchange.
The six public universities maintain 22 partnerships with universities of the Baltic Sea region and furthermore Hamburg universities have already traditionally been involved in co-operation within the region. The regional main emphasis is the Öresund Region with manifold and partly very intense contacts between the universities of Hamburg, Copenhagen and Lund. The co-operation reaches out to common study programmes as in cultural management between the University of Hamburg and the Latvian University in Riga.
As a good example for EU-projects, the high-quality tourism project was implemented between 1999-2001 under German auspices with four Baltic Sea resident state partners. High-quality tourism is tied towards long-lasting tourism strategies with the protectorates Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, southern Sweden, Poland and Latvian. The project was scientifically accompanied by the University of Hamburg, department of economic geography as a think-tank and was so successful that the successor High-Quality Tourism II project, also accompanied by Hamburg, has already been started.
I would also like to mention the Baltic Environmental Information Dissemination System as another example. Discussions on education policies have achieved a new climax since the PISA study and all eyes are looking at Finland and Sweden. Pupil and teacher exchanges have already been a part of Baltic Sea co-operation for a very long time. Approximately 30 school partnerships exist between Hamburg and its partner city St. Petersburg. Hamburg also has two dozens of school partnerships connecting into Poland. And to mention the last project, the Baltic Sea region as a region of culture and civilisation with partnerships in Denmark and Poland. I would like to underscore that with our resolution the Baltic Sea region has very good chances of becoming a pilot region for the knowledge-based society.
EKKEHARD KLUG
I have some critical remarks on the text of our resolution, especially to those of us referring to a knowledge-based society in the Baltic Sea region. I agree with the draft version of the resolution, but in my opinion we should not reduce the output of our conference to general declarations without a clear demand for specific programmes which we conceive as necessary.
Our parliaments should demand from regional and national governments comprehensive information about projects concerning the promotion of language skills and the improvement of cross-border mobility of students, scholars and pupils as well as the establishment of jointly operating scientific networks and cultural activities of special importance for the whole Baltic Sea region.
Reports and proposals in this direction should be discussed in detail in our parliaments at home as well as in future Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conferences. Better co-operation in science and culture is of special importance for the Baltic Sea Region and we have to make sure that real progress will be achieved in the years ahead.
65 ARJA ALHO
I have some short comments concerning the presentation we just heard. I want you all to remember that two out of three human beings alive today have never made a telephone call. Therefore it is very important that we count how many computers we have, but in a global context this is quite inadequate. Nevertheless I agree that it is very important to scrutinise the opportunities in new technology and promote sustainable growth of societies and I find these presentations in that sense very excellent.
My first point is, already underlined by Mr. Henningsen, that technology is always instrumental, it is a tool. The second point is on how to govern the World Wide Web and the answer is unfortunately a very sad one because it is not possible, since in this case the public sphere of the digital age is commercial. The ownership of network technology is private, it is only moderately regulated and it is accumulated and commercial. It is also not a domain of freedom and brotherhood because these global conglomerates are mastering the WWW. As someone has put it, which I find very excellent, the problem is, you cannot have less government interference and less Gates at the same time.
However, I find that there are also many benefits that we gain from new technology and it can promote democracy in our societies also on the local levels when I think about the services organised by the communities on how to get more feedback from their patients or customers to develop these services. But I find that the public sphere, vital for democracy is not a sphere for buying and selling but of argumentation and critical debate. For citizens I find it is essential to think about how to guarantee free access to this sphere and how to guarantee quality of discourse.
So what is the message? The knowledge-based society is a challenge for the political system on how to govern the possibilities of how to give legitimacy to our democratic societies, therefore I think it is always important to have a dimension of democratic decision-making and power-exercising when we are discussing about the knowledge-based society.
THIRD SESSION
Knowledge-based society and its impact on the labour market in the Baltic Sea region
Co-operation between science and industry MARIE EHRLING
TeliaSonera is the leading telecommunications operator in the Nordic Countries and the Baltic Sea area. We have about 80 million customers and a turnover of 81 billion SEK with 29.000 employees. We have great competence in regard to resources and experience to meet the most demanding customers of this region in the future, since we are very IT intensive and technologically oriented. TeliaSonera is a company today in full competition, our home market is concentrated on the Nordic countries and the Baltic Sea Region. We like to grow in this area. We are
66 whole or partial owners of companies in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Russia, these are all growth markets in our sector.
Knowledge, innovation and development and industrial activity are preconditions for each other. Only a lively industry with sustained growth can fully ensure the development of knowledge and welfare in the country. The business side is the basis for activity. Small companies and big companies are dependent on each other. Competition creates the preconditions for innovation and the will to invest in development. The countries with the best growth policy have the greatest growth prospects, be it with small or big companies. The biggest force for a company is people with ideas.
There are two ways to get at these ideas: 1) Alliances and partnerships with actors who have business ideas which can support one's own ideas and to realise this idea together without competing with each other with the help of innovation and competence, this means taking risks. If this doesn't succeed this means that it might be closed down but if one does succeed this means it can lead to profits which can be invested in new products. This often leads to sustainable development.
2) The other way is to realise ones ideas via subsidies and aids, this is not sustainable. And history supports this idea. Strong companies like Ericsson and Nokia have created development ideas for Finland and Sweden in the 20th century these companies developed their strengths and created the basis for growth, innovation and development.
Ericsson entered the telecommunication branch by collaborating with the Stockholm Telephone company in the 1910s, and developed co-operation with telecom operators all over the world. Nokia grew from the forest industry and only entered the telecom industry in recent times. First it co-operated with Finnish operators and then expanded to the whole world. Characteristic for this was the will to work together with researchers and educational system which gave them the competence and the operators which brought innovations to their customers. Setting up an infrastructure and telephone networks takes a lot of time and money to become profitable and the setting up stage is difficult to price. The actors that are setting up an infrastructure need stable rules and need to be able to get in the money that is needed to make profits. State owned telephone companies have been alone over the last 80 years and an activity which has been alone on the market for a very long time can also put a break on innovation.
With the help of legislation which creates the basis for profitability of competition, the right incentives for the playing field can be given. There is a risk of innovation being pampered. The EU has now a common legislation regarding telecommunication. This is good and will hopefully lead to normal competition rules eliminating those rules that have acted as a brake for development. There still is though the risk that there will be different rules in different countries, so that those countries that can have normal competition laws as quickly as possible will be able to create new and genuine innovation and sustainable development.
Research and development will be directed towards areas that are the best for each country. Sustained growth is created in co-operation with science, research and companies often in co-operation with smaller and large companies so that we can
67 have a good innovation climate, which is stimulating for large companies. Growth means that both small and big companies exist on the market and that they develop relations with each other, with research and with the education system.
The current set of rules tends to favour small companies before large companies. The co-operation that has been set up between small and big companies has always led to sustained growth and now globalisation has driven this development, which means that a big company grows beyond its borders and makes requirements to their educational institutions. Nokia and Ericsson are a good example between politics, education and sustainable growth and there are other sectors for example the pharmaceutical sector where there has been similar co- operation. This means that politics can support these processes with successful educational policy and that again helps growth.
It is not enough that the educational system is world class it is also necessary that there is a educational system which is required by the companies otherwise there is a risk that educational institutions and companies are going into different directions. For innovation it is also important for various countries to stimulate big companies to set up research centres in their framework. Big American companies such as IBM and Microsoft have done that in Ireland, which has definitely been an advantage for the development of Ireland.
This is in tight connection to a countries' expansive growth policy. The realisation of growth can not be achieved by small companies alone. The rolling back of rules in the telecom market is genuine, very often rules are interpreted very differently in different countries. Now the markets are going together and all rules are now going to interfere in a companies' soul. Rules can be necessary but over-regulation leads to a distortion of the market and this can mean that investments become unattractive.
One example is the '3G Networks' which are built up in many countries. Since the frequencies are different the licenses have been issued under different criteria and this happened at the peak of the market. But this has shown to be a false hope because the market and the technology haven't developed as expected. It is better to set things up on the basis of needs and demands and not according to general plans. The development of mobile telecommunication in the Nordic countries started on a small scale and on the basis of the operations and the industry, which has led to the situation that we have now. I believe that '3G networks' should be based on the demand and the demand for rapid development has led to dissatisfaction.
A similar example is the Internet and broadband access based on the demand and not on a plan. I have run through several areas and am convinced that good business ideas and competition on the playing fields are the basis of innovation. Big companies are also important for growth and stability they must also get incentives in the educational and growth policies. In our countries all interference with rules creates insecurity and lowers the willingness to invest.
Those countries with the best growth policy based on their values and their willingness will attract the biggest growth forces. This will lead to more investment in schools and educational systems. Many factors will effect this. Co-operation within the EU but also co-operation with neighbouring countries with common
68 values and history. A common currency will support this and it is my hope that the referendum that will take place on Sunday in Sweden, will show that there is a clear will in our country to take an active and positive role in European development. But the best way for Sweden to do this is to become part of the European currency.
The company I represent, TeliaSonera, operates in a sector with full and equal competition and this will give us the preconditions to continue and to contribute to the sector and the societies at whole. We are dependent on co-operation with high- schools and universities. We are looking forward to a policy which creates the pre- condition for development, the most important basis for sustained growth. Vital big companies play an important role in this process.
Labour market in the Baltic Sea region – future perspectives KRZYSZTOF KRYSTOWSKI
Poland participates in a programme concerning labour market within the CBSS. Our initiatives have been particularly valued for occupationally activating unemployed and creating alternative jobs as well as supporting protection of the environment. These initiatives have gained the support of our partners in the region, which gives us a chance to pursue new projects in the future.
The social development of the Baltic Sea region and the policy on the labour market should be seen today within the context of the European Economic Area and the European Union.
In spite of epoch-making discoveries and the rapid social development of the industrial era, it was never achieved that all societies developed at the same rate and achieved the same benefits from that development. The assumption, therefore that we all shall achieve that same level of implementation and benefits of the information technology some day is an ambitious challenge but also an unattainable mirage.
I do not negate the impact of information technologies on job creation and the need for a thorough approach to building economic advantage through participation and winning the competition in this field by European societies. This is obvious when we deal with global economy. I have however, some remarks to make about how the social policy should behave and what it should have in mind.
Being a minister responsible for the labour market, I look at the problem from many points of view simultaneously and I have to monitor many aspects of development not only economic, to which refers first of all the idea of Information Society.
Being the one whose task it is to take care that the employed did not lose their jobs and the unemployed regained them, I cannot overlook the danger of social strata emerging, resulting from newest technologies that are understandable to a narrowing group of users and differences between regions and countries do not disappear.
69 Therefore we deal: -With an irresistible avalanche of new technologies causing slightly less problems for those who know their earlier version and grave problems for those who use them for the first time, -A multicultural and never fully technologically educated society, -A thin layer of specialists and fans understanding these developments. -A slightly thicker layer of those taught to use a few (definite) technologies, -The remaining members of the society who react selectively and unpredictably to new proposals of changes.
These facts will exert an important and rather negative impact on attempts of local and national labour markets to balance the demand and supply of qualifications and to complement the active labour force with an intense exchange on an international scale. It is only a matter of time when we come to the conclusion that possibilities of head hunting are equally restricted in time and space just like other methods of fulfilling this gap.
I see a solution to the problem in a general programme international in nature and regional in impact aimed at a harmonised development of a "common" labour market of Baltic Sea countries. The programme should be partly educational and partly supporting individual effort and stimulating development of the awareness about the unavoidable change and the need to accept it. It seems that we can talk about certain features of the market and its position causing that our co-operation in its harmonisation should be strengthened. This co-operation conducted according to the European Economic Strategy and European Employment Strategy will exert a significant impact on development of competitiveness and productivity of the whole European Economic Area.
Opening national labour markets of the region to certain specific professions and to certain groups of employees coming from countries in accession is absolutely sure in spite of negative reactions of some politicians declaring their support for restrictions and transitional periods.
The decision on opening the market will be enforced by the increasing demand for certain professions related to demographic and social processes and to the need to fill gaps in employment in certain professions, sectors or specialisation. I suggest, therefore that we should consider whether our close neighbourhood on the Baltic Sea should be used to create a mini zone of equalising basic differences in social development, and what follows, on the labour market.
Such a programme could be composed of many modules prepared for individual groups of beneficiaries selected not for their age or education but for their personal characteristics enabling them or making it difficult for them to find their place in Information Society. It should cover the whole society starting from kindergarten to oldest members of the society. That would evoke a strengthened impact based on the feedback effect of teachers to children, from children to parents, from parents to employers, etc. It is for us to decide whether human resources of the region will be dispersed or if we shall try to keep them in the region and determine their role in the future.
I personally think that it's in the field of environmental protection that we should expect intensification of co-operation on the regional labour market. The creation of
70 "green jobs" represents a unique marriage of the wealth of the natural environment and the needs of the labour market. What I have in mind is employment on environmentally friendly farms, in waste recycling, production of clean energy, agro-tourism, construction of local infrastructure, etc. Over 4 million people are employed in sectors related to environmental protection in the European Union. According to forecasts, the renewable energy sources sector alone (sun- and wind- driven power plants) will generate about a half a million new jobs by 2010.
Poland has a large role to play in this region, especially in the area of broadly conceived social policy. Thanks to the experience we have acquired in transplanting western solutions in the course of systemic transformation as well as our knowledge of the realities of eastern and central Europe, our country can largely contribute to build co-operation between our eastern neighbours and the united Europe. Over the last several years, thanks to the support of our Danish and German partners, Polish experts have been able to provide advisory assistance to institutions supervising the labour market in the Kaliningrad Region.
The labour market in the Baltic Sea region is highly differentiated. This stems from different employment policies and strategies which take into account different macro-economic, educational and demographic factors. In addition to unemployment, which affects over 180 million people around the world (according to MOP statistics), some countries in the Baltic Sea region are suffering from labour shortages in certain sectors of the economy. This process could intensify due to the ageing of the population. In fact, this phenomenon has become a world-wide problem. It has generated a need to formulate appropriate strategies, on the international as well as domestic levels.
The problem of ageing population mainly affects Europe and North America. This is why the matter of ageing populations has been included in the European Social Agenda. Under the European Economic Commission, the UN has undertaken the task of developing a regional strategy, adapted to the specific conditions of Europe, for implementing the International Action Plan on Ageing adopted in Madrid in 2002.
Over the two decades the ageing of the Polish population has proceeded relatively slowly: at the beginning of the 1980s over 13% of the Polish population was age 60 or older, by the year 2000 this figure had risen to 16%. But in 30 years some 26% of Poles will be over the age of 60. The process of occupational de-activation of older and even middle-aged people has proceeded much more dynamically. In 1980, retirees and pensioners accounted for 18% of the country's adult population. Currently, every third adult has retired or is living on a pension.
The introduction of flexible and gradual transition to retirement and the creation of better opportunities for lifelong learning and training can extend the length of time older people remain on the labour market. Labour shortages on certain markets can be solved by means of temporary emigration. A serious obstacle, however, could be the mobility of the potential emigrants, which is often limited by subjective factors as well as the housing market, transport infrastructure and climatic factors. Moreover, migration cannot solve the problem of labour shortages if they occur throughout the united market. This is why it's important to increase the efficacy of the economy by shifting production in the direction of goods and services that use a
71 high level of technology and investments in human resources. Taking into account the above mentioned problems, the Polish government implemented a programme "Entrepreneurship-Development-Labour", an important part of which is a programme for labour activation of graduates entitled "First Job". This programme will embrace more than 100 thousand graduates of secondary schools.
In analysing the labour market of the Baltic Sea region we cannot overlook the phenomenon of social marginalisation, a problem which – owing to its ubiquity – is now being addressed by concrete programs at the European level. One of them is the Community Action Programme to Fight Social Exclusion, which was adopted by the Council of the European Union in March 2000 as an element of the so-called Lisbon Strategy.
The goal of the programme is to strengthen co-operation between member countries and improve the efficacy of efforts to combat social exclusion by, among other means, specifying common indicators, exchanging information on the progress of programs implemented, supporting institutions engaged in fighting poverty and social exclusion and facilitating dialogue on the national and regional levels. Responding to the appeal of the European Council at Gothenburg in June 2001, Poland, as a candidate country, prepared the Joint Memorandum on Social inclusion.
In the course of negotiating Poland's membership in the European Union, much controversy has been generated by issues related to the free flow of labour. This is borne out by the numerous reports, assessments and forecasts as well as polemics and discussions among the citizenry of Poland as well as EU member states. As is generally known, the main difference of opinion in this issue is the lack of agreement concerning the real effects for the EU of the free flow of new member states' citizens.
The thesis accepted in a majority of materials published outside Poland that mass migration from the candidate countries would destabilise labour markets in the current 15 EU member states, is not justified in the light of scientific research made by demographers. Some member states like for example Great Britain, Ireland, Holland, Denmark and Sweden, have decided to open their labour markets upon enlargement of the EU, which will take part on May 1st 2004.
We are convinced that the free flow of workers can result in desirable changes on the labour market for both sides. By removing these limitations, current member states will be able to take advantage of cheaper (though necessary for economic growth) labour power which is needed to perform work that, for various reasons, the local populace is not willing to do. Different benefits can be derived from the migration of highly qualified workers in occupations experiencing shortfalls which, if not addressed, will make it very difficult for modern economies to function. Another important consideration is the fact that labour resources will be allocated better within the EU as a result of migration.
Furthermore, the financial transfers that will result from labour migration will remain within the Union, thereby contributing to an improvement in the average standard of living and growth in competitiveness throughout the entire economy of the EU.
72 Differences in incomes between the candidate countries and the current 15 members of the EU will remain for a long time after reunification. But this disproportion will be gradually reduced. This means that the number of people leaving the new member countries in search of employment in the current member states will decline regardless of current estimates of the scope of this phenomenon.
On the other side, current EU countries will be forced by the generation changes on their labour markets to reconsider their own immigration policies. Owing to the insufficient flexibility of the EU labour market, current member states will be forced - if they wish to maintain economic growth and, more importantly, keep their social security systems solvent – to fill the gaps in the local labour force with workers who come from less affluent countries. This situation already exists.
We should not overlook another, non-economic aspect related to the flow of people between countries. Expectations concerning this freedom are strongly shaped in the context of a feeling of freedom and justice, which is much stronger in this sphere than the other three basic freedoms guaranteed by the European Union. After all, freedom of movement, freedom to choose where one lives concerns people and not their products, services or capital. The Polish people who have painfully experienced restrictions on their freedom in the not-so-distant past, largely understand the rights that are to be granted to them under the EU in terms of their freedom to work where they choose to.
Migration policy in Russia and its impact on the labour market IGOR UNASH
At the beginning of my talk I want to inform you a little bit about the labour market in Russia and the steps the government is taking in this respect. The situation on the labour market of the Russian Federation in the course of 2002 is very much influenced by a positive dynamism in the micro-economic system. The number of population active in the economy increased, the question of unemployment improved which is particularly important for us because in the 1990s the GDP in Russia declined drastically and in connection with this the average number of employment was 9,1 million people and the fact that so many of these workers were overqualified for the jobs they were in, meant that there is room for improvement here.
In addition there were about 100,000 highly qualified people working abroad and the greatest loss was highly qualified specialists working in industry, construction, agriculture and transport. A very important problem is people working in Siberia and northern parts of Russia. It seems that Russia is facing a disaster here, and it would have been a disaster earlier if it not were for migration.
In the period under review the CIS and Baltic states generally had around 10 million immigrants which formerly were active parts of the labour market. These were highly qualified people. For the first time in many years we found that we were relying on migrants and immigrants to cover our deficits on the labour market especially in regard to agriculture. And the immigrants basically had a higher proportion of people who could work in the labour market, namely 71% compared to 60%. In addition to this we could say that around this period there is a drop in the number of migrants to Russia so if in 1994 there were 904,600 people in 2001 it was only a 123,700 under these conditions
73
Russia was beginning to rely increasingly on foreign workers. So the migration office in 2002 registered 359,000 foreign workers and there were about 3-5 million people who came to work temporarily in Russia. So for Russia like for many other countries illegal immigration is an important issue. There is a lot of foreign workers particularly from China, Korea and other places as well. Legalising these people and creating a proper situation for them is a difficult thing. The main area is transport, where about half of the foreign workers work, many of these work in bad situations in which the local population doesn't wish to work at all.
There is around 2% of people from places that we used to call abroad during Soviet times, these are mainly managers, they are highly qualified and work in the area of business, teach foreign languages or work in services. The situation on the labour market of the north-west part of Russia is also very much defined by the situation of the northern countries of the EU. We can say that the movement of workers between the countries of the Baltic Sea and the north- western part of Russia is perhaps not so significant in terms of numbers. We have a certain amount of Finnish workers as well, these are mainly working for the lumber and pulp mills etc. We have both Finnish and Russian organised workers. We can say that the number of foreign workers in north-west Russia is not so huge, in Carelia for example there are about 1389 people and in Murmansk 1016 foreign workers of which 23 are Norwegian and 14 are Finns. The migration office of Russia registered 180 million workers from the EU and the Baltic states.
Regarding foreign workers compared to Russians working abroad there is no organisation that looks after our workers abroad, they tend to work in the Baltic Sea states but there is no systematic care of these workers. The main reasons for this is that Russians tend to not work in their fields of speciality but to go as helpers in agriculture and harvesting for example. In 1997 in Carelia there was work for young people between 18 and 25 collecting berries in Finland. As result of the co- operation between the two countries more than 2000 students have had the opportunity to go to Finland to work there temporarily.
In the Leningrad area for example there were 1839 who came from the EU to work in Russia. The co-operation between the north-west of Russia, the Russian Federation and other Baltic Sea states is increasing.
I can say if we had visa-free travel between the EU and Russia this would improve the situation and this is why the Russian delegation has insisted on visa-free travel here and elsewhere. The Baltic Sea states could be pioneers in visa-free travel. It would certainly ease the situation if we were to recognise each others diplomas and certificates as well.
Our countries are very different but I think that one of the most important aspects of our work has to be an improvement of the information exchange. What we need is some kind of electronic database on vacancies of our labour markets. I think if we had such a database we could really help each other in terms of labour shortages. And we need to increase co-operation on all levels in the Baltic Sea region.
In consideration of the pace of the world economy it is extremely important for Russia to take a place in the world economy. And the migration policy of Russia is
74 crucial for this process to take place properly. The draft concept was recently passed by the Russian Federation it was approved in March 2003 and it is looking at the question of migration. The aim of the state regulation is to secure stable social, economic and demographic developments in the countries involved in the Russian economy, mostly those involved in trading. But also looking at important aspects of the Russian economy such as resources and movement of population on the territory of the country using and harnessing the intellectual potential of our labour market and many other goals.
It is extremely important as well to take care of foreign workers that are living in Russia. The government regulation of the immigrant labour force in Russia is one of the most important aspects of this regulation, convening to monitor and control this labour force flow. As it has a huge impact on the labour market in Russia and the neighbouring areas.
It is also important to renew, and to develop the mechanism of the state regulation of this issue. It is important to come up with a good legal basis and this is a complicated, difficult task since Russia has not yet solved the problem of creating a comprehensive immigration legislation, an effective system of state control of the movement of people within its country. And we also have to deal with the problem of people coming to Russia to work as well as Russians going outside of the country to work. We need to have a differentiated immigration policy that looks at the categories of foreign workers, there needs to be responsibility as well towards foreign workers within Russia and we need to ensure that foreign workers within the country are properly protected.
We also need to ease the difficulties that we currently find concerning visas, particularly for people coming to Russia in order to invest or going out of the country to invest. And we need to help the situation that investors keep personnel in companies, foreign companies, and all of this has to take place in accordance with the Russian accession to the WTO. We also need to increase the possibilities of mutual qualification of our labour forces and foreign labour forces.
One of the problems is illegal immigration to Russia and this has a huge impact on migration in relation to the labour force. We need to ensure that we have an appropriate control over people that are coming into and leaving Russia, so that we do not have too much illegal immigration. There need to be appropriate sanctions for companies employing illegal workers and we need to ensure that those who hire illegal workers are properly punished. It would help combating illegal immigration if we could come up with a database. And we have to make sure that we punish those people who systematically break the law in this respect.
The movement of illegal migrants from Russia into the Baltic Sea states is also a serious problem. This is why we have a series of agreements that we have made with a number of states to ensure to prevent this and we think that coming up with a strategy to combat illegal immigration is very important. We need to increase our work in this area. In conclusion I would like to say that immigration policy in Russia is crucial. We need to respond flexibly and quickly before there is some kind of negative impact on the situation because we want Russia to take its place in the international community.
75 Demographic situation and influence of education and competence on economic growth TOIVO ROOSIMAA
Now we are in Oulu and we have seen how necessary and useful co-operation between the countries in the Baltic Sea is. We need this co-operation between various states, state bodies and various institutions and national groups.
I represent a co-operation body of Baltic Sea Trade Unions or rather a network. It was set up officially four years ago but there has been various types of co-operation between Baltic Sea Trade Unions from the beginning of the 1990s. The network includes the organisations of salaried employees from all the Baltic Sea countries and we have only over 20 million in our various organisations. The presidency of the network revolves according to the presidency of the CBSS. I come from the current presidency country, Estonia, and I am the chairman of the academic employees organisation TALO.
We have at least three main goals in BASTUN: 1.) We have seen it to be necessary to systematically bring together the various professional interests in our countries by serving the interests of our members in a better way. This task has become more important in regard to the enlargement of the European Union. 2.) We want to enhance co-operation to carry out joint projects and to secure broadly-based financing for these projects. From the middle of the 1990s, BASTUN has carried out various EU-projects on vocational education, legislation in working life, social security and employment policy. In addition to the substantial aims we have had procedural aims, we have improved tri-partite co-operation and we have improved interaction in the Baltic countries. 3.) By co-operation and joining forces we want to raise our profile in various arenas and bodies, particularly towards the CBSS.
The parties in the labour markets are the experts in their own labour markets and their working life questions, so it is important that we are heard in connection with various joint projects in our field whether they have to do with the EU's Northern Dimension, co-operation between states or between parliaments. This conference is important not only in improving co-operation but also in terms of topics. I come from a very small population, I have seen that the free movement of workers is very important, the ageing of the population and the reduction of people in the working age is not the problem of one country alone it is the fate of the countries in all the Baltic Sea area.
The population figures suggest that the population data in the Baltic Sea countries will in a few years, according to forecasts, start to resemble a mushroom. In Finland at the moment there is a so called golden age because there are relatively few children and old people and you can see that in all graphs. What we see in the candidate countries compared to the 1990s, is that the birth rate in Estonia has declined two times over. The demographic growth in the number of working people and the people that have to be supported should be forecasted and the effects should be analysed so that we can forecast the number of workers that can do dutiful jobs. But in fact we can't direct population processes.
I think it is not quite like that. First of all there is the need to have a general survey on the health of the population and the demographic situation so that we can get answers to important questions for our state. How many healthy people are there
76 in the future and now? Who will be able to do the jobs necessary for our country? And how can we improve the working time of working people? We also have to take into account the willingness of ageing people to stay in their jobs if people don't continue in working life, what will happen? For example the birth rate in the US is the highest, it is lower in Japan and it is falling in the EU constantly. Where will the people come from? There are possibilities: the level of education, adding to skills, bringing various educational programs in different countries at various educational levels.
But there is the question here, are companies willing to use these types of skills? States use a lot of money for education but can we integrate the people into working life? In some areas there might be some oversupply experts in that sector at that particular time. This should be the internal matter for every country that these people should not move to other countries for salaried work because the cost of education will then be in vain. There will be the additional costs of social benefits.
Technical and humanistic education should be balanced. People in those two sectors help to keep life in balance and support various sectors of working life. Universities also often import experts on certain issues even if they can be found in the own country. We shouldn't undervalue various educational areas, we have to add skills in the future and at least once in every five years all workers have to go to employment education so that they maintain their skills. If this educational system does not work we will have more and more unemployed people. Companies won't be able to use this pool of unusable workers.
To solve this problem we can use the following system: we use up the skills we have available at the moment, we use the free movement of workers and we import the people we require. But where from? The free movement of workers in the EU is a good thing as such but it could work in that way that all member states could equally benefit from the redistribution of work. We can't rely on market forces being able to reach that aim themselves and therefore we need measures to reach that goal. In fact we need measures in the labour markets. The unions in the BSR want to be actively involved in realising these goals.
Therefore we are aiming to improve the functioning of the labour markets through dialogue, to increase co-operation between the actors on the labour markets. Three years ago we already discussed free movement of workers in the Nordic countries, because many educated people went to other countries and we have a need of 20.000 people a year. At the moment our birth rate is only 12.500 per year. So who are the winners and who are the losers?
It is obvious that workers leave from countries with low salaries and low social benefits to other places with better conditions. The great differences in living standards lead to rapid movement of workers, the so called loss of brain capacity. It starts with the big loss of experts – which is a big disaster for every country because they quickly adapt to the requirements of other countries. So we don't want to risk the loss of our skilled people. Unions have to defend the rights and the interests of their workers and we have to work to improve employment, to maintain jobs and create new job opportunities.
77 Our great interest is, that the availability of labour is qualitatively in line with the needs of our area and the whole of Europe. Increasing skills is an area for co- operation of governments and the actors in the labour market, BASTUN identified this need at the end of the 1990's and at the moment we have decided to increase projects improving education and skills. We need to have trust in each other, we need to have co-operation with other countries, between other countries. This is where co-operation between professional organisations comes in. More people move to other countries if there isn't any work available – I don't think so. If the economic situation and the level of wages isn't unbearable, if there aren't such big differences in living standards then people will rather stay and develop their own economy and develop better social systems for themselves and future generations.
Finally as a summary of all that I have said above on behalf of BASTUN and all the unions: universities should not be self-centred, they have their duty in solving the problems of society, they shouldn't just concentrate on their academic task of disseminating knowledge. Secondly, scientific education has encouraged academics to write high-quality specified articles and broad based research is not so much in focus any longer.
In the shadow of globalisation we have the integration of economies which has improved peoples living standards. This is a question we have to solve. The globalisation of economies will lead the globalisation of cultures. We only have to take on board what is valuable because not all the things that are available necessarily are valuable. So again, who are the winners, who are the losers? In a situation of free movement of labour the winners are those countries who have good conditions anyway, and the others have to get a grip with social and economic questions. Therefore we need co-operation in the economic questions we need proper co-operation within science, social and educational questions. Participation in democracy must become part of social benefits which will encourage people to acquire better knowledge and improve their skills.
DISCUSSION
TRIVIMI VELLISTE
My question to Mr Igor Unash is about the partner countries in migration from Russia and into Russia. What are the most important countries for migration from Russia and also if possible what are the countries from which most people try to migrate into Russia?
IGOR UNASH
The most citizens tend to want to go to states such as Germany, the USA, Canada and a number of different European countries, the more developed ones. But regarding immigration we tend to see people wanting to come and work and live in Russia from the former Soviet Republics, primarily from the Ukraine, Tadshikistan, Moldovia and recently with events in Turkmenistan, we see people from there wanting to come.
But also our compatriots that live outside the country, about half of them want to come back. And if we talk about temporary workers we could add those already
78 mentioned like Korea, Vietnam, China and we are seeing a regular flow from Afghanistan, Pakistan, India but that tends to be transit sojourns, people come and look around and don't think its necessary to stay in Russia and they then move to western countries.
OUTI OJALA
I was interested in Mr. Krystowski's presentation. He mentioned that with the Knowledge Society there is a risk that a large part of the population will be left outside of this new development even though in the libraries and schools in all of our countries there are more and more opportunities to use the Internet. I can tell you for example that even small villages in Finland have been able to set up information centres where all sorts of age groups have been able to use the Internet and learn new technologies - but also to deal with the authorities through the Internet. I was just thinking if that could offer opportunities. You mentioned that best practice is the aim, maybe you could give us some examples on that? I think it is important that the whole population, all citizens, independent of their age and their opportunities have the possibility to use these sources of information.
KRYSZTOF KRYSTOWSKI I know about the very strong position Finland has in relation to establishing a knowledge-based society and it is important to understand the differences between our countries in this respect. For example the USA spent about 1000 USD per capita for research, compared with Poland which only spent 66 USD per capita for the same purpose. Another example is though the fact that they have 30% of citizens with tertiary education and about 70% of people with secondary education and in Poland we have only 15% with tertiary education, but even seven years ago we only had 7-8% with tertiary education so we are looking for some best practice to use it in our countries. We know about the Finnish solutions and are looking at it but I think it is important to know that the road for us as a former communistic country is very long to reach this goal, this high level of education.
GIEDRĖ PURVANECKIENĖ
I wanted to mention that in Lithuania just recently the government launched a project on EU funds which was able to set up 100 Internet points in the countryside. This of course does not exceed the amount of people but we still hope it will raise the IT literacy in the countryside.
OLE STAVAD
I have a question to Igor Unash. You mentioned the problem of illegal immigration which we in Denmark did not see before we opened borders and I want to ask whether you can see any other solution to these problems? Because looking ahead I can see it will become a problem for all our countries. I would also like to have a comment on what restrictions there are in Russia concerning immigration, what do you do to uncover illegal immigration, what are the fines?
79 IGOR UNASH
At the moment we are trying to reform our legislation regarding illegal immigration. The criminal code is being re-adjusted towards combating that problem. We are trying to strengthen our administrative bodies according to that, we have already changed the legal code to protect the deportation of illegal immigrants and we are carrying out immigration waves if you like, immigration inspections under the auspices of the Ministry of Home Affairs.
We have got police allowed to conduct immigration control if necessary within the Russian Federation, if the immigration service sees it to be necessary, not only at the borders but in the country itself. In particularly populated areas there is something new, centres where we can control illegal workers, we can make controls if we suspect that there is something there and we can return them to their countries of origin.
We are also seriously working on intensifying international contacts. We have seminars with the Ministries of Home Affairs with the CIS countries, working on the issue of combating illegal immigration. And apart from everything else at the moment, in addition to the migration service we have, there are a number of services and they are not all under the Ministry of Home Affairs. We are increasing our co-operation with partners in issues such as trafficking in human beings, prostitution, slavery. We are trying to work together with all the Ministries of Home Affairs on these issues to intensify this work. The representatives of all CIS are working on this and we have come up with a concept, a programme if you like for combating illegal immigration. We hope that this kind of programme will be implemented by all the states.
We are trying to set up a database of foreigners in Russia, this has never existed before in Russia and we hope that within a year we will have completed this so that we will have the possibility to exchange data on illegal immigration.
BRIEF COMMENTS
CHRISTOPH ZÖPEL
Political co-operation in the BSR remains necessary, this conference is proof of that. But I think it becomes particularly clear when we look at the issues we have touched upon here. Migration is one of these, I think there is nothing so complicated with respect to the growing together of societies as migration. Co- operation in the Baltic Sea states is generally something that we need to do because natural boundaries are not necessarily state borders. The integration within the EU and the concept of a Wider Europe give us an opportunity to look at natural borders being more important than politically founded borders. What remains necessary as well is to have parliamentarians working together. What our colleague, the Commissioner on Democratic Development, said was entirely right, and I support her. For developed democracies it remains crucial to think about the role of parliaments.
Something I find hard to accept is that the position of the Commissioner has been dismantled by the CBSS and perhaps we parliamentarians should think about the fact that it is crucial for us to have such a Commissioner on Democratic
80 Development. This is my appeal to all the parliamentarians that we have to think of a way of financing such a position.
The states along the coasts have different degrees of population densities. Some of the countries that haven't got so many people require more co-operation. But also countries with higher population figures such as Russia and Germany need this. It is important for Germany that representatives form the Länder parliaments are here. I am saying this as a member of the Bundestag. I sometimes have to answer the question why Bavaria should be interested in the Baltic Sea when the Alps are at the doorstep. It is of course absolutely understandable that the parliaments of Schleswig-Holstein and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern are interested in the Baltic Sea and the actions that are taking place there. The same is true for Russia, Vladivostok is very far from the Baltic Sea, and this is why it is so important that parliamentarians from Russia are here today.
Another thing about Russia, something that we talked about today, the issue of the labour market and migration. It was very interesting to hear that the Russian government wants Russians to be able to work outside Russia and Mr. Roosimaa was talking about how there were declining labour market figures in Western Europe. These two things should be compatible and yet it is extremely difficult to combine migration, labour market migration in a way that there is not too much resistance in the native population, so that it is socially acceptable.
Regarding the Baltic Sea region I think particularly with respect to the labour market in information technology that we need to bear in mind that the World Wide Web of information requires hubs of information, global cities if you like, and if we ask what a global city is in the region we have to say St. Petersburg, if we go by population. And I think this is an extremely interesting point if we look at migration in the Baltic Sea region which can only be accepted if there is an exchange between all of these states. And if there are people trained that come from different parts of the Baltic Sea region to St. Petersburg. If St. Petersburg can attract this kind of IT specialists that Finland maybe needs.
This is something we maybe need to talk about in the future: How can a regional labour market work in itself and how can migration work with it and then, how can St. Petersburg work as a global city? How can the governments and parliaments address this issue? I would therefore like to appeal to my colleagues to reflect about St. Petersburg because we have to secure a steady development of this region.
SØREN VOIE
Recognition and transparency in education and training are keystones in the relations between labour markets. Willingness and openness to accept skills and qualifications acquired in other educational systems are essential. Skills and qualifications must be asserted and measured on a European basis.
In Norway we have established a comprehensive strategy for lifelong learning. The basic education and continuing education are meant to compliment each other. The main objective in this is the so called 'competence report', which is to help to read the need for competence in society, at the work place and for individuals. The target group for the report are workers and people who, for different reasons, are
81 outside of working life. The report is based on the broad concept of knowledge where theoretical and practical knowledge and the promotion of creativity, initiative and social skills are all looked at. The report is based on co-operation between many actors public authorities, social partners, educational institutions, public and private institutions and enterprises, which all have to make an active contribution.
The documentation of the skills is an essential part of the competence report in Norway, it runs under the terms 'realkompetanse' and includes many aspects of knowledge such as attitudes, abilities, insights. The competence report is an ongoing process. As new challenges arise we hope to find new solutions. Our priority is to open the workplace for becoming a learning area for speakers of minority languages. And we recognise the 'realkompetanse' for immigrants. To enhance this we have a series of projects that aim at combining language training and work of immigrants.
After this conference we are proposing a new act to the Storting giving immigrants the possibility to have their occupational skills tested and documented. This can be of great importance for a better integration of immigrants into the labour market. Research tells us that the workplace is the most important learning arena for adults. We need a more systematic approach to opening up the learning arena to more persons and to assure quality for the learning process. I think the time has come now for us to look at different tools for the system. The project of making more systematic use of the workplace as an area of learning for immigrants represents such an approach.
This concept could be used for other groups too, for example people with reading or writing problems, senior citizens etc. I see no reason why the experiences we have and the results we have achieved at the national level should not be useful at an international level. It is all about the same thing, to find some common denominators in real life and try arrange these steps in line with such criteria. It is important to develop standards and systems and to implement them at the local level looking at the best solutions. Diversity might be a pre-requisite to quality in itself.
The main lessons to be learned from the implementation of the competence report and 'realkompetanse' projects is that there must be the will to make priorities in a certain field and then to gain political support for implementing them. Concrete measures must be decided and I believe that it is of utmost importance to put these measures into reality before all the aspects are fully developed within a complete framework. If we would wait for everything to be perfect we would never get our act together. Somehow we must be willing to gamble and it is the challenge to policy makers as myself to dare to try.
That is why confidence is so important. We need to trust in partners otherwise we can not succeed. It is also necessary to monitor the processes constantly so that we can detect mistakes and adjust directions. Actually reforming is very much like life itself. We can not have all at one time but we can try to optimise our possibilities according to our beliefs.
MANFRED RITZEK
82 The speeches of this conference have been very interesting and I would just like to focus on a few things. I think these speeches are not dogmatic, they are ideas that will stimulate further discussion in our countries. I appreciated the fact that Ms. Ehrling and Mr. Krystowski mentioned the societal components. I think that if we speak about sustainability we should not only speak about economic growth and ecological issues. We should also speak about progress in society. Investments must have a mental basis.
Mr Krystowski, you mentioned one problem, you gave a reason why the current EU countries ought to be very prepared to migration. The birth rate does not promise a sustainable living standard in the current EU countries and questions the possibilities for maintaining our social systems. I am just wondering don't you have more of a need to keep these high qualified workers in the new EU countries in order to build up the living standards? Mr. Unash mentioned doing away with visas for qualified workers. That is right.
I wanted to mention the necessity of integration, Mr. Zöpel just did that. I think that when we talk about qualified workers from other countries, new EU countries and others, we must require language levels because we should not be left alone with the integration problems. That must be dealt with beforehand and the language is an essential key to integration. I think in all our countries we are discussing these issues in more depth.
Adoption of the Resolution
KENT OLSEN
The Drafting Committee had two meetings on this resolution and we have got seven different amendments from different directions and I think we have managed to take the amendments into account. I would like to thank you for your trust, for sharing this resolution.
First, when the proposals came in we thought how can we take all these different positions into consideration? But I have to say that the work in the drafting committee has been very constructive, with lively, friendly and stimulating discussions in the best parliamentarian spirit and the starting point always was that we should agree.
Everybody was willing to find common solutions. The result of our work is that we all stand behind this document which clearly shows our countries the increased efforts on the issues that have been discussed during this conference. This means what we can do to create a Knowledge Society which can help us to grow. Movement across borders and what we can do to visit each other to develop travel and increased contacts. And finally, the protection of the very sensitive environment of the Baltic Sea. And we can say that in the resolution there are proposals improving the living conditions around the Baltic Sea, concerning a safe environment, decreasing the risk of oil catastrophes which we are all looking forward to. We have made a lot of progress and we have taken big steps towards the improvement of the environmental status of the Baltic Sea.
83 HEINZ-WERNER ARENS It is astounding on how many points we agreed upon in this resolution and one point is that the 13th BSPC will take place in Bergen/Norway. We thank you for the invitation! ANNEX I
The Baltic Sea region – an area of Knowledge and Maritime Safety in the Baltic Sea region
Resolution adopted by the 12th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC), assembled in Oulu, Finland, 8-9 September 2003
The participants of the Conference concentrating on
1. KNOWLEDGE-BASED SOCIETY in the Baltic Sea region as well as on its impact on the LABOUR MARKET,
2. MARITIME SAFETY in the context of transport and environment in the Baltic Sea region referring to point 1 taking note of
- the globalisation and the rapid change of society from an industrial over a service-oriented towards a knowledge-based society, founded on gender equality
- the internationally recognised Information Society Index, indicating that no European Region is as well prepared for the knowledge-based society as Northern Europe
- the OECD definition of lifelong learning, which embraces individual and social development of all kinds and in all settings – formally, in schools, vocational, tertiary and adult education institutions, and non-formally, at home, at work and in the community, focusing on the standards of knowledge and skills needed by all, regardless of age call on the CBSS and their governments to
- use the great chance which a knowledge-based society and its corresponding network offers for the region-building process in the Baltic Sea area, especially by creating an efficient and secure IT infrastructure for the benefit of all citizens in the region
- improve chances for the knowledge-based society by promoting language skills, including native languages, and the understanding of other nations cultures
- promote the mutual recognition of diplomas and the creation of multi-institutional degrees in the Baltic Sea region based on harmonized educational standards and programmes, thus establishing the requirements for cross-border mobility of labour resources
- increase physical mobility by means of establishing a special charter for the visiting scholars and research fellows, including the vision of long-term goal of ultimate visa-free travel between Russia and the EU
84 - agree on a common strategy for the development of a knowledge-based society in the Baltic Sea region, implementing such a strategy by joint projects, joint educational programmes and jointly operated scientific networks, such as distance learning, distance teaching, Baltic Sea summer schools and virtual networks of Baltic Sea universities
- make the Baltic Sea region a pilot area for the knowledge-based society implementation process, carrying out observation, characterisation and classification of the measures under review, and setting up standards for future actions in Europe
- consider the possibility of establishing a data base of job vacancies in the Baltic Sea region in order to provide mutual exchange of labour force, and to use the existing data bases on job vacancies and to develop them in a way which is useful for the Baltic labour market
- organise, apart from studies and joint research projects, much deeper processes of communication and learning, focusing on a series of activities in the field of culture and citizenship
- attach priority emphasis to a much more effective interrelationship between education, vocational training and employment
- increase skills and lifelong learning in order to ensure employability, competitiveness and welfare in the labour market and in the society in the Baltic Sea states
- strengthen the social dialogue in the labour market, promoting access to the labour market with equal treatment for all, and developing conditions at working places
- bear in mind that the Baltic Sea region can only flourish if there are well-functioning labour market structures and a qualified labour force
- support technology transfer institutions in order to stimulate innovation mechanisms agree to
- support the development of a network of schools of public health around the Baltic Sea, in order to improve the societies' capacity to prevent and control serious threats to people's health and with the aim of coordinating new technologies and training programmes
referring to point 2 taking note of
- a growing number of shipping accidents in the European region, which already have brought about devastating damage to the population, the environment and the economy and the great danger that the Baltic Sea can also be affected anytime by a similar ecological catastrophe
- part II "Maritime Safety and Security" of the resolutions adopted by the participants of the 10th and 11th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Greifswald (2001) and St. Petersburg (2002) and the ongoing process of its implementation
- the results and approaches of the HELCOM/IMO/EU workshop held on 11th and 12th March 2003 in Rostock-Warnemünde (Germany)
- the decision, as well as the related resolutions, adopted at the 24th regular HELCOM Session, the HELCOM Ministerial Meeting, and the First Joint HELCOM/OSPAR Ministerial Meeting held
85 on 25-26 June 2003 in Bremen (Germany), as an important, though not yet sufficient European step on the way towards recognising maritime safety and security as an priority, and hence, as an important prerequisite for the protection of the marine environment call on the CBSS and their governments as well as on HELCOM to
- step up their efforts in all relevant organizations, including the framework of IMO, to improve maritime safety and security all over, especially by giving their full backing to:
- the efforts towards designating the Baltic Sea as a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area (PSSA) within the IMO and introducing stricter rules for the prevention of pollution from ships
- introducing on the international level within the framework of all appropriate institutions, including IMO, uniform rules to restrict access of substandard ships, and imposing a ban effective immediately prohibiting access of category-1 single-hull oil tankers, to European waters and ports
- looking into the possibility for unified application of rules for the ice classification of ships and arrangement of icebreaker services during the winter period in the Baltic Sea area
- supporting the European Commission in implementation of its proposals for improving maritime safety and security in accordance with the international law of the sea
- establishing and identifying, as soon as possible, places of refuge and intensifying co- operation among Baltic Sea countries in order to implement the European Community's places of refuge concept, and making additional efforts to quickly implement the procedure for directing damaged ships to ports, and providing compensation for irrecoverable losses
- a speedy ratification by the Baltic Sea states of the new IMO convention on increased liability levels of the oil funds as agreed this year
- giving priority to ratifying the conventions on civil liability for bunker oil pollution damage and damage caused by dangerous goods, and to signing and ratifying a convention on the removal of wrecks
- developing a "Baltic Sea Memorandum of Understanding" among the Baltic Sea countries which will guarantee environmentally sound maritime transport in the entire Baltic Sea region by reducing emissions from shipping operations, in particular exhaust emissions in ports
- work for the most efficient coastal patrol and airborne surveillance possible, and for the establishment of special zones in dangerous areas of the Baltic Sea in which large sea-going vessels (especially oil and chemical tankers) will not be allowed to sail without pilots
- systematically supporting the ratification of important international conventions, so that as many conventions as possible will be applied by the Baltic Sea countries agree to
- stress the importance of BSPC to be active in following the development of the Wider Europe initiatives
- call upon the Standing Committee to follow the assessment of the work of CBSS and to strengthen the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference as the Parliamentary dimension of CBSS
86 - convey their particular thanks to the Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern for its significant contribution in preparing this resolution
- ask the Standing Committee, together with the BSPC observers in HELCOM, to pursue its engagement in the issues related to maritime safety
- thank all those involved in combating the consequences of the latest tanker accidents accept
- with gratitude the invitation of the Norwegian Parliament Stortinget to hold the 13th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference on 29 - 31 August 2004 in Bergen.
87 ANNEX II List of Participants
Speakers and chairpersons
Arens, Heinz-Werner MP, Speaker of the Parliament of Schleswig-Holstein, Germany Unash, Igor First Deputy Head of the Federal Migration Service, Ministry of Interior, Russia Biondi, Alfredo Adrian – Ionian Initiative AII, Deputy Speaker of the House of Deputies, Italy Degn, Helle CBSS Commissioner on Democratic Development Ehrling, Marie President of the Profit Center TeliaSonera, Sweden Enestam, Jan-Erik Minister of Environment, Finland Henningsen, Bernd Prof. Dr., NEKON Korotkov, Adrey First Deputy Minister of Communication and Information Technologies, Russia Khripel, Gennady MP, Council of Federation, Russia Kuncinas, Algirdas Chairman of the Development of Information Society Committee, Parliament of Lithuania Lipponen, Paavo Speaker of the Parliament of Finland Lohikoski, Mikko Union of Baltic Sea Cities and NGO-Forum Lønning, Inge President of the Nordic Council Matinpuro, Hanna International Co-ordinator, Finnish Association for Nature Conservation Mälly, Marko Baltic Sea Commission – Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions Nenonen, Kari Mayor of Oulu Ojala, Outi MP, Chair of the BSPC Standing Committee, Finland Ojuland, Kristiina Minister of Foreign Affairs, Chair of the CBSS, Estonia Olsson, Kent MP, Sweden Oviir, Siiri Baltic Sea Women's Conference Purvaneckienè, Giedré MP, Lithuania, Chairperson of the Baltic Assembly Roosimaa, Toivo BASTUN, Baltic Sea Trade Union Network Salmin, Oleg Parliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Economic Co- operation, PABSEC Ervelä, Risto BSSSC, Chairman of the Assembly of the Regional Council of Southwest Finland Krystowski, Krzysztof Vice-Minister, Ministry of Economy, Work and Social Policy, Poland Vaidere, Inese Chair of the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission, HELCOM; Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Parliament of the Republic of Latvia Weidemann, Sandra Baltic Sea Youth Forum
Parliamentary Delegations and Organisations
Baltic Assembly Golde, Silva MP, Latvia Oviir, Siiri MP, Estonia Pietkevičs, Mihails, MP, Latvia Purvaneckienè, Giedré MP, Lithuania
88 Reirs, Jānis MP, Latvia Solovjovs, Igozs MP, Latvia Taimla, Andres, MP, Estonia Velliste, Trivimi, MP, Estonia Zommere, Ērika MP, Latvia
Conference of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region Jaakonsaari, Liisa MP, Finland
European Parliament Thors, Astrid MP, Finland
Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation Council of Federation Khripel, Gennady MP State Duma Piskun , Nikolay MP Pivnenko, Valentina MP
Nordic Council Bjartmarz, Jónína MP, Iceland Kristoffersen, Asmund MP, Norway Lønning, Inge MP, Norway Ojala, Outi MP, Finland Olsson, Kent MP, Sweden Saarikangas, Martin MP, Finland Wegendal, Lars MP, Sweden
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Adam, Ulrich MP (represents also Parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany) Parliament of Åland Erlandsson, Ragnar MP Sjölund, Folke MP Wiklöf, Lasse MP
Parliament of Denmark Hastorp Andersen, Sophie MP Stavad, Ole MP
Parliament of Finland Alho, Arja MP Kerola, Inkeri MP Hautala, Heidi MP Hemming, Hanna-Leena MP Kaikkonen, Antti MP Lipponen, Paavo MP, Speaker Sasi, Kimmo MP Tiusanen, Pentti MP
Parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany Adam, Ulrich MP
89 Zöpel, Christoph MP
Parliament of the Free and Hanse City of Bremen Arnold-Cramer, Ursula MP Günthner, Martin MP Oppermann, Karl-Uwe MP Schön, Silvia MP
Parliament of the Free and Hanse City of Hamburg Frank, Günter MP Hardenberg, Gerd MP Harlinghausen, Rolf MP Müller, Farid MP Rümpf, Ekkehard MP Stapelfeldt, Dorothee MP
Parliament of the Karelian Republic Jershov, Nikolai P. MP Shegelman, Ilja R. MP
Parliament of Lithuania Kunčinas, Algirdas MP
Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Bretschneider, Sylvia MP Caffier, Lorenz MP Holznagel, Renate MP Jarchow, Hans-Heinrich MP Schwebs, Birgit MP Grzadko, Pawel Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern / Sczeczin City Youth Council, Poland
Parliament of Norway Gaundal, Aud MP Nistad, Thore A. MP Tørresdal, Bjørg MP Voie, Søren Fredrik MP
Parliament of Poland Czaja, Gerard MP Piekarska, Katarzyna MP Sieńko, Jan MP Walendziak, Wieslaw MP
Parliament of the City of St Petersburg Yagya, Vatanyar MP
Parliament of Schleswig-Holstein Arens, Heinz-Werner MP, Speaker Klug, Ekkehard MP Ritzek, Manfred MP Spoorendonk, Anke MP
90
Parliament of Sweden Berg, Heli MP Bohlin, Sinikka MP Forslund, Kenneth G. MP
Observers
Adrian – Ionian Initiative AII Biondi, Alfredo Italian Chamber of Deputies, Deputy Speaker of the House of Deputies Gazzetta, Peterenrico Italian Chamber of Deputies, Protocol Officer Solia, Alberto Italian Chamber of Deputies, International Department Officer
Baltic Sea Commission CPMR Mälly, Marko
Baltic Council of Ministers Puisyté, Lyra Baltic Council of Ministers MFA of Lithuania, Secretariat of BCM
Baltic Sea Forum e.V. Steinfeld, Jens Managing Director
Baltic Sea Youth Forum Alsuhail, Faiz Weideman, Sandra Secretariat
Baltic Sea States Sub-regional Cooperation BSSSC Ervelä, Risto Chairman of the Assembly of the Regional Council of Southwest Finland
Baltic Sea Trade Union Network BASTUN Roosimaa, Toivo Vaigur, Kristjan
Barents Parliamentary Forum Fortygin, Vitaly The Arkhangelsk Regional Assembly of Deputies, Chairman
CBSS Commissioner on Democratic Development Degn, Helle H.E
Council of Baltic Sea States CBSS Halinen, Hannu Director of the Secretariat Naber, Tiit Chairman of CSO
European Commission Rogeberg, Marianne Information Society Director-General
91 Finnish Association for Nature Conservation Matinpuro, Hanna International Co-ordinator
Helsinki Commission HELCOM Vaidere, Inese Chairman
North-European Knowledge Network of Excellence NEKON Henningsen, Bernd Prof. Dr
North-West Parliamentary Association of Russia Sazhinow, Pavel Chairman Shmatkova, Marina
Parliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Economic Co-operation PABSEC Manoli, Panagiota Salmin, Oleg
State Legislative Leaders´ Foundation Schoeps, Alfons
St. Petersburg Social and Economic Institute Kalinina, Elena Director
TeliaSonera Ehrling, Marie President of Profit Centre
Union of Baltic Sea Cities Lohikoski, Mikko
Invited Guests
Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions, SAK Bergman, Turo Secretary for International Affairs
City of Oulu Yypänaho, Jorma Chairman of the City Council Pikkarainen, Matti Chairman of the City Executive Council Nenonen, Kari Mayor Pennananen, Matti Deputy Mayor Hiironniemi, Silja Deputy Mayor
Finnish Commission for Local Authority Employers, KT Tast, Marja Confederation of Unions for Academic Professionals in Finland, AKAVA Lemmetty, Markku Confederation of Finnish Industry and Employers, TT Hemilä, Kalevi Chief Executive Officer
Corps Diplomatiques Lonardo, Pietro Ambassador, Embassy of Italy in Finland Anisimov, Leonid Counsellor, Embassy of Russia in Finland Jankowski, Adrzej Counsellor, Embassy of Poland in Finland
92 Finnish Federation of Salaried Employees, STTK Nikula, Pirkko
Ministry for Communications and Information of the Russian Federation Fontanov, Yuri Deputy Director General
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Finland Krokfors , Karl Johan Chief of the Nordic Secretariat
Nordic Teacher's Council Lillemor , Darinder
Parliament of Baden-Württemberg Staub, Peter MP, Speaker Sopper, Helmut Chief of Protocol
Secretariats
Baltic Assembly Jankauskaite, Renata Secretary of the Lithuanian Delegation to the BA Laizāne-Jurkāne, Marika Project Manager of the BA Molnika, Baiba Secretary of the BA Putnina, Ingrida Secretary of the Latvian Delegation to the BA Röngelep, Ene Secretary of the Estonian Delegation to the BA
BSPC Lindroos, Päivikki Senior Advisor Fredriksson, Kristina Secretary
European Parliament Ramstedt, Sten
Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation Council of Federation Dakhova, Nadezda
State Duma Zaitseva, Arina
Nordic Council Nokken, Frida Director Angell, Christian Hagemann, Henrik Nikolajsen, Mads Nytoft Rasmussen, Jens Smekal, Eva Stenarv, Gunnar Sørensen, Torkil Widberg, Jan Zilliacus, Patrick
93
Parliament of Åland Holm-Johansson, Marine
Nordic Council of Ministers Peltonen, Carita
Parliament of Finland Tiitinen, Seppo Secretary General Ahvenainen, Marjo Enckell, Liisa Eriksson, Magnus Hissa, Jaakko Huurinainen, Katarine Kuusinen, Katriina Lindström, Guy Pekkola, Tapio Salo, Kari
Parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany Meier, Silke
Parliament of the Free and Hanse City of Bremen Krause, Walter Higher Executive Officer
Parliament of the Free and Hanse City of Hamburg Wagner, Reinhard Director
Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Bahr, Bodo Gutzeit, Gerald
Parliament of Norway Andreassen, Bjørn Delegation Secretary Myhre-Jensen, Kjell Head of the Secretariat Slåke, Øyvind Political Advisor
Parliament of Poland Januszewski, Andrzej Chancellery of the Senate of the Republic of Poland
Parliament of the City of St Petersburg Terekhovsky, Sergey Chief of the Department of External Relations
Parliament of Schleswig-Holstein Schöning, Jürgen Director Schmidt-Holländer, Jutta
Parliament of Sweden Hjelm, Eva
94 Interpreters Concilio, Maria Serena Fleischhacker, Karin Johnson, Catherine Kopteva, Irina Perkhofe, Elfriede Repin, Aleksei Talvitie, Jussi Larsen, Stein Lightfoot, Andrew Summala, Liisa Tolonen, Tarja Virtanen, Hans
Rapporteur (Editor of Summary Report) Williams, Leena-Kaarina
95