Hearing of Janusz Wojciechowski

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Hearing of Janusz Wojciechowski COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATED COMMITTEE: COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, PUBLIC HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY HEARING OF JANUSZ WOJCIECHOWSKI COMMISSIONER-DESIGNATE (Agriculture) TUESDAY, 1 OCTOBER 2019 BRUSSELS 01-10-2019 3 1-002-0000 VORSITZ: NORBERT LINS Vorsitzender des Ausschusses für Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung (Die Anhörung wird um 14.30 Uhr eröffnet.) 1-003-0000 Der Vorsitzende. – Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, sehr geehrter Herr designierter Kommissar, sehr geehrter Herr Wojciechowski! Meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Ich begrüße Sie, verehrter Herr Wojciechowski, im Namen aller Mitglieder des Ausschusses für Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung. Ihre Anwesenheit ist zweifellos ein Höhepunkt für unseren Ausschuss, und Sie befinden sich ja nicht auf unbekanntem Gebiet. Sie waren zwölf Jahre lang Mitglied dieses Ausschusses und hatten in der ganzen Zeit auch den Vize- Vorsitz dieses Ausschusses inne, bevor Sie dieses Parlament verließen, um für die letzten drei Jahre Mitglied des Europäischen Rechnungshofs zu werden. Bevor Sie sich auf EU- Angelegenheiten konzentrierten, hatten Sie wichtige juristische Funktionen in der Justiz Ihres Landes inne – vom Richter am Bezirksgericht bis zum Richter am Obersten Gerichtshof. Sie spielten auch eine bedeutende nationale politische Rolle als Mitglied und stellvertretender Sprecher des Parlaments der Republik Polen, als Staatssekretär unter anderem im Kabinett für legislative Angelegenheiten. Ich muss diesen Ausschuss daran erinnern, dass das Parlament gemäß den in unserer Geschäftsordnung festgelegten Leitlinien für die Genehmigung der Kommission designierte Kommissionsmitglieder auf der Grundlage ihrer allgemeinen Kompetenz, ihres europäischen Engagements und ihrer persönlichen Unabhängigkeit bewertet wird. Die Mitglieder bewerten auch das Wissen über ihr potenzielles Portfolio und ihre Kommunikationsfähigkeiten. Ich möchte Sie auch daran erinnern, dass der designierte Kommissar Wojciechowski vor dieser Anhörung einen vorbereiteten Fragebogen schriftlich beantwortet hat. Die schriftlichen Antworten wurden in allen Sprachen an die Mitglieder verteilt. Abschließend möchte ich daran erinnern, dass der Rechtsausschuss keine Einwände gegen die Abhaltung der Anhörung erhoben hat. Bevor wir in die Debatte einsteigen, möchte ich Sie auf einige wesentliche Punkte in der Struktur der Debatte aufmerksam machen. Der designierte Kommissar wird gebeten, eine mündliche Eröffnungsrede von nicht mehr als fünfzehn Minuten abzugeben. Am Ende des Meetings erhält er fünf Minuten Zeit für eine Abschlusserklärung. Vielen Dank, lieber Herr Wojciechowski, dass sie Ihre Redezeit entsprechend respektieren. Nach seiner Einführung wird es Zeit für fünfundzwanzig Fragen von Abgeordneten geben. Die Aussprache wird im Zeitrahmen von jeweils fünf Minuten abgehalten – eine Minute für die Frage und zwei Minuten für die Antwort von Herrn Wojciechowski. Bei Anschlussfragen sollte die Frage und die Antwort nicht länger als eine Minute plus eine Minute dauern. Vielen Dank, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dass Sie diesen Zeitplan einhalten werden. Die erste Runde, mit sieben Fragen, wird von den Koordinatoren der Fraktionen gestellt. Die zweite Runde, von achtzehn Fragen, basiert auf der Gesamtverteilung der Fragen zwischen den Fraktionen, einschließlich eines Vertreters der fraktionslosen Mitglieder. Bitte beachten Sie, dass die Übersetzung in dreiundzwanzig Sprachen angeboten wird. Alle Sprecher können daher ihre eigene Sprache verwenden; Sie werden jedoch daran erinnert, 4 01-10-2019 dass das was Sie sagen, verdolmetscht werden muss – deshalb sollten Sie nicht zu schnell sprechen. Dann können wir jetzt in unsere Arbeiten einsteigen. Herr Wojciechowski, Sie haben jetzt die Möglichkeit für eine fünfzehnminütige Präsentation. Sie haben das Wort! 1-004-0000 Janusz Wojciechowski, Commissioner-designate. – It is a great honour and also a great challenge for me to be here in front of you. As the Chair mentioned, I was a Member of the European Parliament for 12 years, a member of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and Vice-Chair of this Committee. I was cooperating with many of you, and then I spent the last three years in the European Court of Auditors where the area of agriculture was also my responsibility. Last year, I presented here the Court of Auditors’ reports about the Young Farmers’ Scheme and rural development programming. I also had contact with the ENVI Committee. I presented reports about food safety. The last time, because of my candidature for the Commission, my report about cross-border healthcare was presented by one of my colleagues from the Court of Auditors. My next report to be presented will be about anti-microbial resistance, linked also to agriculture. During the presentation of my report about the Young Farmers’ Scheme in this committee, I presented the shocking information – shocking at least for some audiences – that during one decade, from 2005 to 2015, we lost four million farms in the European Union. The number of farms was almost 15 million, and after a decade there were fewer than 11 million farms. If we lose four million per decade, it is 400 000 per year. More than 30 000 per month. More than 1 000 per day. Our debate is scheduled to last three hours, which means that during this debate more than 100 European farmers will probably lose their farm and their job. For many of them it will be a tragic, shocking situation because it not so easy to be a farmer today and then tomorrow to do something different – to be a taxi driver, for example. In many cases, this is a dramatic situation for European farmers. We know that in France, for example, there is the problem of suicide among farmers. There is currently a movie being shown based on a true story entitled Un homme de la terre. This is the tragic story of a French family who lost their income. They lost their farm. Maybe I’m being too pessimistic at the beginning of my speech, and I promise that further into my presentation I will be more optimistic. But there is a saying that is relevant here. ‘What is the difference between a pessimist and an optimist? The pessimist is generally better informed.’ It is very important to have the real picture of the situation in European agriculture. One of the reasons that I decided to be the candidate for the position of Commissioner for Agriculture, that I responded positively to the proposal, is that this is a chance to create a long-term vision for European agriculture, a long-term strategy. This is one of my tasks, which President von der Leyen sent to me in my mission letter. One of my tasks – if I am approved by Parliament, of course – is to create a long-term vision for European agriculture. We have a long-term vision for climate policy, a long-term vision for energy policy, but we don’t have a long-term vision for the future of European agriculture. It is important to have such a vision because farmers are asking us ‘What will be our future, what will be the future for our children?’ It is important to give the positive answer that there is a future for European agriculture. 01-10-2019 5 Leaders like President de Gaulle, Chancellor Konrad Adenauer and Prime Minister Fanfani, for example, who were European leaders when the common agricultural policy started – in 1962 – had such a vision. The common agricultural policy is a success story in the European Union. Thanks to the Common Agricultural Policy, we have agriculture, and, generally, we have food security which is ensured. Of course, there are a lot of weaknesses and a great need for reform of the common agricultural policy, but it is a success story. It was a long-term vision at the time, the vision of European politicians who decided to create the common agricultural policy. Now we need a long-term vision on how to reform this policy. How to ensure a future, not only for European farmers but also for the common agricultural policy, is not a problem for farmers alone. It is a problem for all of society. For farmers: we have to protect them, to save European farms. But for all of society the problems are food security, food supply security and food safety. And agriculture is also very important for the planet. Agriculture is important for climate protection, for the environment, for the protection of biodiversity and in terms of animal welfare, which is an important issue for me because, in this Parliament, I was also Chair of the Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals. To create a long-term vision for agriculture, it is important to have a true picture of the current situation. One of my first actions, if I am approved by Parliament, will be to prepare a special report about the current situation in European agriculture: a report presenting where we are and where we are going, how many farms we have now, how many farmers, and what the generational situation is. We know from the report on the Young Farmers’ Scheme, which I presented in this committee, that there is a big problem with generational renewal in European agriculture. We should compare the situation over, I propose, the last decade: between what we had 10 years ago and we where we are now. It is very important to have a true picture about this current situation. It should provide a good base for programing the future development of European agriculture. Another important thing is that we have the European Green Deal programme. I’m convinced that green agriculture – environment-friendly farming – is the best solution for the future of agriculture. This is our chance to propose support for the farmers who protect the environment better, who protect the climate better, and who improve animal welfare standards. In rural development programing, we should spend a minimum of 30% for the environment and climate. This is a big chance, especially for small family farms in the European Union. I can promise that, if I become the Commissioner, I will strongly support all actions that will be helpful for small and medium-sized farming, especially for family farms.
Recommended publications
  • Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej
    CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ SEKRETARIAT 629 - 35 - 69, 628 - 37 - 04 UL. ŻURAWIA 4A, SKR. PT.24 OŚRODEK INFORMACJI 693 - 46 - 92, 625 - 76 - 23 00 - 503 W A R S Z A W A TELEFAX 629 - 40 - 89 INTERNET http://www.cbos.pl E-mail: [email protected] BS/185/2004 ZAUFANIE DO POLITYKÓW W LISTOPADZIE KOMUNIKAT Z BADAŃ WARSZAWA, LISTOPAD 2004 PRZEDRUK MATERIAŁÓW CBOS W CAŁOŚCI LUB W CZĘŚCI ORAZ WYKORZYSTANIE DANYCH EMPIRYCZNYCH JEST DOZWOLONE WYŁĄCZNIE Z PODANIEM ŹRÓDŁA ZAUFANIE DO POLITYKÓW W LISTOPADZIE ¾ Pierwsze miejsce wśród polityków najbardziej powszechnie darzonych zaufaniem zajmują w tym miesiącu ex aequo Aleksander Kwaśniewski oraz Zbigniew Religa (po 63% deklaracji). Na kolejnych pozycjach tego rankingu - ze znacznie słabszymi już notowaniami - znaleźli się: Lech Kaczyński (48%), Jan Rokita (47%) oraz Jarosław Kaczyński (45%). Zaufaniem około dwóch piątych pytanych cieszą się: Donald Tusk (42%), Marek Borowski (41%), Danuta Hübner, Zbigniew Ziobro (po 40% deklaracji) oraz Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz (38%). ¾ Spośród polityków uwzględnionych w listopadowym sondażu największą nieufność badanych budzi Leszek Miller (67% deklaracji). Znacznie mniej osób, aczkolwiek również bardzo dużo (50%), deklaruje nieufność do Andrzeja Leppera. Do ścisłej czołówki polityków najczęściej budzących nieufność badanych niezmiennie należą także Leszek Balcerowicz (44%) i wicepremier Jerzy Hausner (43%). Blisko dwie piąte respondentów (38%) nie ma zaufania do premiera Marka Belki. ¾ Listopad przyniósł głównie niekorzystne zmiany w dotychczaso- wych notowaniach polityków. Stosunkowo najbardziej pogorszyły się oceny Józefa Oleksego (spadek zaufania o 8 punktów i wzrost nieufności o 6 punktów procentowych), a nieco mniej - Jerzego Hausnera (spadek zaufania o 6 punktów i wzrost nieufności o 5 punktów procentowych). Pogorszyły się również notowania Zbigniewa Ziobry (spadek zaufania o 6 punktów i wzrost nieufności o 3 punkty) oraz Marka Balickiego (spadek zaufania o 5 punktów i wzrost nieufności o 3 punkty).
    [Show full text]
  • Special Report
    SPECIAL REPORT Key points for the 8th term of the European Parliament (2014-2019) Madrid, November 2014 BARCELONA BOGOTÁ BUENOS AIRES LIMA LISBOA MADRID MÉXICO PANAMÁ QUITO RIO J SÃO PAULO SANTIAGO STO DOMINGO KEY POINTS FOR THE 8TH TERM OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT (2014-2019) 1. THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 1. THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 2. THE LATEST ELECTION The European Parliament has, since its creation in 1962 in the 3. MAIN ISSUES IN THE context of the evolution of European integration, become the LEGISLATIVE AGENDA European Union (EU) Institution to have gained more power and 4. SPANISH DELEGATION relevance in the decision-making process of the Union. Indeed, over the years, it has gained increasingly important powers, legitimized 5. CONCLUSIONS and differentiated by the fact that it is the only EU Institution to be 6. APPENDIX 1: COMPETENCES elected by universal suffrage. 7. APPENDIX 2: CURRENT COMPOSITION OF THE It has evolved from being a mere advisory body to having the COMMITTEES power to co-legislate, together with the Council, in more than 85 legislative areas, exercising legislative powers as well as powers 8. APPENDIX 3: THE CURRENT of budgetary and political control. It also wields a considerable BUREAU OF THE EUROPEAN amount of political influence, and its competences include those PARLIAMENT of electing the President of the European Commission, vetoing the 9. APPENDIX 4: EUROPEAN appointment of the College, and even forcing the resignation of the PARLIAMENT DELEGATIONS entire Commission after a motion of no confidence. AUTHORS The official headquarters of the Parliament are in Strasbourg, where the main plenary sessions are held.
    [Show full text]
  • Studia Politol. 31.Indd
    STUDIA POLITOLOGICZNE VOL. 31 STUDIA I ANALIZY Daniel Mider Political Participation of Poles – Structure and Trends KEY WORDS: political participation, political sociology, violent forms of political participation, non-violent forms of political participation, legitimacy of the political system, democracy STUDIA I ANALIZY The evaluation of the structure and trends of political participation of Poles requires a multidimensional approach that enables the assessment of as many aspects as possible, as well as a synthetic one – focusing on the key elements necessary for a democracy to function and develop. Such an analysis is made possible thanks to the most popular approach in the study of political participation called the Political Action Approach1. It emerged in the 1960s in American political science and is strongly associated with behaviourism, in particular with the works of Sidney Verba and his associates. The Political Action Approach – in the simplest terms – focuses on the observation and analysis of repetitive and characteristic patterns of activity of a particular political culture directed at influencing political processes. Typical activities under 1 Apart from the Political Action Approach, political science also applies (although mar- ginally) the Institutional Approach and the Problems Approach. The Institutional Approach focuses on studying the political activity of individuals in institutions, such as the workplace, trade union, religious and other voluntary organizations, as well as local community groups. The Problems Approach, on the other hand, focuses on the study of problems, issues and needs that motivate individuals to take up actions which influence policies. More on the topic: H.E. Brady, ‘Political Participation’, [in:] J.P. Robinson, P.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Janusz Wojciechowski's Hearing
    21 – August-September 2019 Summary Janusz Wojciechowski’s hearing (p.2) Editorial & Key figures ..................................................... 1 New agriculture Commissioner ? ..................................... 2 Antidumpings duties on Thai sweetcorn ......................... 2 Nitrogen fertilisers ........................................................... 2 > Editorial – In favour of real competition WTO news........................................................................ 3 In its international trade relations, the European Union has NBT citizen’s initiative...................................................... 3 Bee Guidance Document ................................................ 4 perfected the art of sabotaging itself. This is even truer in Meetings of CEPM and its members ............................... 4 agriculture, where distortions already began in 1962! It was at this time that the EEC – in order to be authorized by the GATT (the KEY FIGURES : ancestor of the WTO) to create the common grain market - granted to the USA (and the main operators) the right to export without Total EU corn imports from 01/07 to 29/09 duties cereal substitutes (soybean meal, corn gluten feed). This 6 supposedly minor concession has totally destabilized European 5 agriculture as a whole. The proliferation of free trade agreements - 4 recently the CETA and MERCOSUR - improved access to the EU 3 market for primary agricultural products, thereby increasing the Mt existing strains on domestic prices, going as far as to turn
    [Show full text]
  • Official Directory of the European Union
    ISSN 1831-6271 Regularly updated electronic version FY-WW-12-001-EN-C in 23 languages whoiswho.europa.eu EUROPEAN UNION EUROPEAN UNION Online services offered by the Publications Office eur-lex.europa.eu • EU law bookshop.europa.eu • EU publications OFFICIAL DIRECTORY ted.europa.eu • Public procurement 2012 cordis.europa.eu • Research and development EN OF THE EUROPEAN UNION BELGIQUE/BELGIË • БЪЛГАРИЯ • ČESKÁ REPUBLIKA • DANMARK • DEUTSCHLAND • EESTI • ΕΛΛΑΔΑ • ESPAÑA • FRANCE • ÉIRE/IRELAND • ITALIA • ΚΥΠΡΟΣ/KIBRIS • LATVIJA • LIETUVA • LUXEMBOURG • MAGYARORSZÁG • MALTA • NEDERLAND • ÖSTERREICH • POLSKA • PORTUGAL • ROMÂNIA • SLOVENIJA • SLOVENSKO • SUOMI/FINLAND • SVERIGE • UNITED KINGDOM • BELGIQUE/BELGIË • БЪЛГАРИЯ • ČESKÁ REPUBLIKA • DANMARK • DEUTSCHLAND • EESTI • ΕΛΛΑ∆Α • ESPAÑA • FRANCE • ÉIRE/IRELAND • ITALIA • ΚΥΠΡΟΣ/KIBRIS • LATVIJA • LIETUVA • LUXEMBOURG • MAGYARORSZÁG • MALTA • NEDERLAND • ÖSTERREICH • POLSKA • PORTUGAL • ROMÂNIA • SLOVENIJA • SLOVENSKO • SUOMI/FINLAND • SVERIGE • UNITED KINGDOM • BELGIQUE/BELGIË • БЪЛГАРИЯ • ČESKÁ REPUBLIKA • DANMARK • DEUTSCHLAND • EESTI • ΕΛΛΑΔΑ • ESPAÑA • FRANCE • ÉIRE/IRELAND • ITALIA • ΚΥΠΡΟΣ/KIBRIS • LATVIJA • LIETUVA • LUXEMBOURG • MAGYARORSZÁG • MALTA • NEDERLAND • ÖSTERREICH • POLSKA • PORTUGAL • ROMÂNIA • SLOVENIJA • SLOVENSKO • SUOMI/FINLAND • SVERIGE • UNITED KINGDOM • BELGIQUE/BELGIË • БЪЛГАРИЯ • ČESKÁ REPUBLIKA • DANMARK • DEUTSCHLAND • EESTI • ΕΛΛΑΔΑ • ESPAÑA • FRANCE • ÉIRE/IRELAND • ITALIA • ΚΥΠΡΟΣ/KIBRIS • LATVIJA • LIETUVA • LUXEMBOURG • MAGYARORSZÁG • MALTA • NEDERLAND
    [Show full text]
  • EAPM Bulletin: Issue 54, September 2019 Von Der Leyen Moves to Build New Commission
    EAPM Bulletin: Issue 54, September 2019 www.euapm.eu Von der Leyen moves to build new Commission Greetings, and welcome to the September newsletter from EAPM. Back to work we all go, and hopefully you’ve all had a In the EAPM pipeline: good break. Busy times lie ahead… • 27 September: EAPM roundtable at ESMO Certainly very busy at the moment is incoming European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who is assembling Congress, Barcelona the College that will form her top team for the next fve years • 28 September: Pioneer roundtable (as above) And, of course, Brexit took yet another turn this week with the decision by UK premier Boris Johnson to prorogue Parliament • 16 October: MEP Roundtable, Brussels during a signifcant chunk of the run-up to Britain's departure from the EU on 31 October. • 4-5 December: EAPM 3rd annual But more of all that later as we’d frst like to draw your Congress, Brussels attention to an important document that the Alliance has put together recently. We already know that the drivers of personalised medicine are It takes the form of an MEPs briefng and aims to inform clear for each stakeholder group: patients; the pharmaceutical both new and returning Members of the European Parliament industry; and for healthcare systems and payers. But many ask about the background to personalised medicine, where things whether innovation is really giving us value for money. currently stand in the sector, and what’s expected and/or required as we go forward. The debate has focussed to a large extent on the cost of “doing something” – the spiralling cost of developing drugs, the extra At 50+ pages it’s pretty comprehensive while still being written cost of providing innovative diagnostics, the hidden costs of as much as possible in layman’s terms.
    [Show full text]
  • Sprawozdanie Nt. Obsady Stanowisk W Parlamencie Europejskim 2014-2019 Bruksela, 8 Lipca 2014 R
    Bruksela, dnia 8 lipca 2014 r. Sprawozdanie nr 64/2014 Sprawozdanie nt. obsady stanowisk w Parlamencie Europejskim 2014-2019 Bruksela, 8 lipca 2014 r. Metodologia Podstawą rozstrzygnięć pomiędzy grupami politycznymi, jak i wewnątrz grup politycznych dotyczących obsady kluczowych stanowisk w PE jest system d’Hondta. Cały proces przebiega w toku negocjacji politycznych, w których ścierają się interesy grup politycznych oraz delegacji narodowych. W grupach politycznych, w zależności od liczby uzyskanych mandatów, tworzy się specjalny system punktów, przy wykorzystaniu którego dokonuje się podziału konkretnych stanowisk. W całym procesie dba się o zrównoważoną reprezentację dużych delegacji krajowych we wszystkich gremiach – np. także na stanowiskach wiceprzewodniczących PE (stanowiska reprezentacyjne o mniejszym znaczeniu politycznym, ale ważne dla prestiżu całego PE). I. Przewodniczący PE Martin Schulz (S&D/Niemcy), kadencja lipiec 2014 – grudzień 2016; uzyskał poparcie 409 eurodeputowanych; Wyniki pozostałych kandydatów: Sajjad Karim (ECR/Wielka Brytania) – 101 głosów; Pablo Iglesias (GUE/NGL, Hiszpania) – 51 głosów; Ulrike Lunacek (Zieloni/EFA, Austria) – 51 głosów. Przewodnictwo PE w kolejnej 2,5 letniej kadencji przypadnie przedstawicielowi EPP - spekuluje się, że będzie to Alain Lamassoure (Francja). 1 II. 14 Wiceprzewodniczących PE1: kadencja lipiec 2014 – grudzień 2016. EPP 1. Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz (Węgry): 400 głosów, wybrany w I turze 2. Mairead McGuiness (Irlandia): 441 głosów, wybrany w I turze 3. Antonio Tajani (Włochy): 452 głosy, wybrany w I turze 4. Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso (Hiszpania): 406 głosów, wybrany w I turze 5. Adina Ioana Valean (Rumunia): 394 głosy, wybrana w I turze 6. Rainer Wieland (Niemcy): 437 głosów, wybrany w I turze S&D 1. Corina Creţu (Rumunia): 406 głosów, wybrana w II turze 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Waldemar Pawlak Deputy Prime Minister of Poland
    Curriculum Vitae Waldemar Pawlak Deputy Prime Minister of Poland Prime Minister of Poland 4th and 6th Prime Minister of the Third Republic of Poland In office June 5, 1992 – July 10, 1992 President Lech Wałęsa Preceded by Jan Olszewski Succeeded by Hanna Suchocka In office October 26, 1993 – March 6, 1995 President Lech Wałęsa Marek Borowski Deputy Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz Preceded by Hanna Suchocka Succeeded by Józef Oleksy Deputy Prime Minister of Poland Incumbent Assumed office November 16, 2007 Lech Kaczyński President Bronisław Komorowski Prime Minister Donald Tusk Minister of Economy of Poland Incumbent Assumed office November 16, 2007 President Lech Kaczyński Prime Minister Donald Tusk Deputy Adam Szejnfeld Preceded by Piotr Woźniak 2nd and 5th President of the Polish People's Party In office 1991 – 1997 Preceded by Roman Bartoszcze Succeeded by Jarosław Kalinowski Incumbent Assumed office 29 January 2005 Preceded by Janusz Wojciechowski Member of the Sejm Incumbent Assumed office 18 June 1989 Constituency 16 – Płock Personal details September 5, 1959 (age 51) Born Model, Masovian Voivodeship, People's Republic of Poland Political party Polish People's Party Spouse(s) Elżbieta Pawlak Profession Mechanician, farmer, teacher Deputy Prime Minister W. Pawlak at the World Economic Forum on Europe and Central Asia in Istanbul 2008 Waldemar Pawlak [valˈdɛmar ˈpavlak] ( listen) (born 5 September 1959 in Model, Masovian Voivodeship) is a Polish politician. He twice served as Prime Minister of Poland, briefly in 1992 and again from 1993 to 1995. Since November 2007, he has been Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Economy. Pawlak is the only person who held the office of Prime Minister twice during the Third Republic (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • The New European Commission 2019-2024
    The New European Commission 2019-2024 September 16, 2019 EU Public Policy On September 10, Ursula von der Leyen, President-elect of the European Commission, presented her new team. If approved by the European Parliament, they will take over from the Juncker Commission on November 1, 2019. This Alert outlines the proposed structure of the new Commission, each Commissioner’s portfolio, and the key regulatory priorities that the President set for each member of her team. A Three-Tier Commission The new President of the Commission was confronted with the same problem as her predecessor: each Member State sends a Commissioner to Brussels, but there are not 27 substantive portfolios to dole out. (The UK does not intend to send a Commissioner to Brussels, reflecting Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s stated aim of leaving the EU on October 31, before the new Commission takes office, “come what may”.) President Juncker addressed the issue by establishing a “cluster” system, with seven Vice Presidents and 20 “simple” Commissioners. In practice, however, Juncker’s Vice Presidents were not given control of specific Commission Directorates General (“DGs”), meaning that they were often relegated to “coordinating” the work of other Commissioners, without the support of officials needed to develop their own policy priorities. President von der Leyen has only slightly modified this structure, and focused on restructuring the various Commissioners’ competences to fit her “political guidelines”—the new Commission’s policymaking priorities. The new College will effectively have three “tiers” of Commissioner: 1. Three “Executive Vice Presidents”, and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign and Security Policy, who is ex officio a Vice President of (the “HR/VP”).
    [Show full text]
  • Europeanization and Euroscepticism: Xperiences from Poland and The
    Europeanization and Euroscepticism: Experiences from Poland and the Czech Republic Søren Riishøj Associate professor Department of Political Science and Public Management University of Southern Denmark Email-address: [email protected] Poli tical Science Publications No. 25/2010 This publication focuses on the phenomenon Euroscepticism and its manifestations in the EU countries from the East. The scholary interest in Euroscepticism grew substantially after the Danish, Irish, French and Netherland “no’s” at EU-referenda and the manifestation of “soft” Euroscepticism in most new EU member countries from the East. Special sections are devoted to EU policy and Euroscepticism in Poland and the Czech Republic. The presentation begins with a brief presentation and clarification of the concepts of national and European identity and after that the phenomena of “Europeanization” and “Euroscepticism” including the most relevant classifications and types of Euroscepticism. Some of those concepts and classifications will be included in the sections dealing with manifestation of Euroscepticism in the region as a whole and in Poland and the Czech Republic in particular. Special emphasis is laid on state strategies and party-based Euroscepticism As we shall see in the following, the manifestations of “Eurorealism” and “Euroscepticism have differed much between the countries, also between the two rather “soft” eurosceptic countries, Poland and Czech Republic – and that before as well as after the two countries accession to the EU in 2004. Key words: National and European identity, Europeanization, Euroscepticism, Poland and the Czech Republic 2 National and European identity The concept “national identity” was the object of several scholarly studies already back in the 1950s and 1960s, e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Agribusiness | IEG Policy Food & Agriculture Outlook 2020 Contents
    Agribusiness | IEG Policy Food & Agriculture Outlook 2020 Contents 3 Welcome to our Food & Agriculture Outlook for 2020 US FOOD POLICY ❱ 4 Increased enforcement, produce safety expected to dominate FSMA in 2020 7 All eyes on FDA as food and supplement makers await regulatory pathway for CBD 10 FDA to implement updated Nutrition Facts, define ‘healthy,’ tackle ‘natural’ EUROPEAN FOOD POLICY ❱ 13 Airbus tariffs on agri-food products: a new chapter in EU-US trade disputes 16 Food labelling under pressure 19 A busy year for novel foods US AGRICULTURE POLICY ❱ 22 EPA’s moves continue to be a focus for biofuels sector 25 Hazy outlook for hemp in 2020 28 The elections and what lies ahead EUROPEAN AGRICULTURE POLICY ❱ 32 Under pressure, but still fighting: The World Trade Organization and global farm trade 35 How the glyphosate debate is shaping agrifood policy and practice 38 Post-2021 Common Agricultural Policy: Towards further delays in the reform process? 41 New European Commission banks early success on its Green Deal 44 EU-Mercosur deal to fuel further debate about sustainable trade Editor: US Food Policy Analyst: US Food Policy Consultant: European Agricultural Policy Joan Murphy JR Pegg Chris Horseman (contributor) Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Editor: European Food Law Analyst: US Food Policy Analyst: European Food Law Peter Rixon Margarita Raycheva Sara Lewis (contributor) Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Analyst: US Agricultural Policy Analyst: US Agricultural
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook on CSDP
    Handbook on CSDP The Common Security and Defence Policy of the European Union Volume I 4th edition HANDBOOK ON CSDP THE COMMON SECURITY AND DEFENCE POLICY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION Fourth edition edited by Jochen Rehrl with forewords by Josep Borrell High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice President of the European Commission Klaudia Tanner Federal Minister of Defence of the Republic of Austria This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. Disclaimer: Any views or opinions presented in this handbook are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the European Union and the Federal Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Austria. Publication of the Federal Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Austria Editor: Jochen Rehrl Idea and concept: Jochen Rehrl Layout: Axel Scala, Andreas Penkler, Armed Forces Printing Centre, Vienna Published by: Directorate for Security Policy of the Federal Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Austria Picture credits for the front page: EUTM Mail, EUMM Georgia, EULEX Kosovo, Dati Bendo, Johan Lundahl Printed and bound by: Armed Forces Printing Centre, Vienna/Austria, 2021 21-00677 © Federal Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Austria and Jochen Rehrl ISBN: 978-3-902275-51-6 Printed according to the Austrian Ecolabel for printed matter, UW-Nr. 943 CONTENTS 1 COMMON SECURITY AND DEFENCE POLICY 1.1. History and Development of the CSDP (Gustav Lindstrom) ....................................... 16 1.2. The EU Global Strategy ................................................................................................ 21 Graphic: Peace and Security ............................................................................................ 26 Factsheet: European Defence Action Plan ........................................................................
    [Show full text]