DOCSLIB.ORG

A Difficult Position for Jerzy Buzek's Government

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Difficult Position for Jerzy Buzek's Government CBOS SEPTEMBER '99 ISSN 1233 - 7250 A DIFFICULT POSITION FOR JERZY BUZEK'S IN THIS ISSUE: GOVERNMENT In September evaluations of HOW WOULD YOU EVALUATE THE PERFORMANCE Jerzy Buzek's government were the OF JERZY BUZEK'S GOVERNMENT SINCE ITS COMING Ø A DIFFICULT lowest in its history. Opinions on the INTO POWER? (%) POSITION FOR government have been deteriorating 70 JERZY BUZEK'S steadily since June, and during the last GOVERNMENT two months the cabinet has lost 60 almost one quarter of its supporters. 50 The respondents' current evaluations of the government, formed by the 40 Ø ATTITUDES AWS (the Solidarity Election Action) 30 TOWARDS ETHNIC and UW (the Freedom Union) MINORITIES coalition, are not only the lowest in 20 the two years of its history, but also 10 exceptionally low as compared with 0 opinions on the four previous VII '98 VIII IX X XI XII I '99 II III(1) III(2) IV V VI VII VIII IX governments. It should be noted, Well Badly Difficult to say Ø OPINIONS ON however, that in September the THE WORK OF increase of negative opinions is not accompanied by a corresponding decrease of positive THE POLICE ones. It may mean that the main reason for the decrease of the government's rating recorded in the last month is the bad publicity recently associated with Jerzy Buzek's government. The protests against the government's policy reported in the media (e.g. ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH THE FACT THAT JERZY BUZEK IS THE HEAD OF THE GOVERNMENT? farmers' demonstrations) and internal Ø DO WE SUFFER problems (such as the resignation of BECAUSE OF (%) 60 Deputy Prime Minister and the NOISE? Minister of Internal Affairs Janusz 50 Tomaszewski), together with growing criticism on the part of the opposition, 40 may encourage people who have had 30 no opinion on the government so far to express negative opinions. PUBLIC OPINION 20 Over two fifths of respondents RESEARCH CENTER (43%, 4% more than in August) - CBOS - 10 consider themselves opponents of Jerzy Buzek's government. This is 0 4a ¯urawia VII '98 VIII IX X XI XII I '99 II III(1) IV V VI VII VIII IX the highest percentage of opponents 00-503 Warszawa Yes No Difficult to say of a government ever recorded (i.e. POLAND since the beginning of 1993, when we started measuring it). Supporters of the government are now clearly a minority - only one quarter of our respondents declare their support for the present government (25%, a decrease Ph: (48 22) 629 35 69 by 1%). (48 22) 628 37 04 At the moment, almost two out of every three respondents (64%) evaluate the (48 22) 693 58 94 government's performance negatively, while only one in four (25%) expresses a positive opinion. None of the previous cabinets (our data allows us to track changes in the opinions on Fax:(48 22) 629 40 89 the policies of the last five governments) obtained so many bad evaluations and so few good ones. Previously Waldemar Pawlak's government was evaluated the lowest (in February E-mail: [email protected] 1995). Negative opinions outnumbered positive ones by 23% then, while now this difference is as big as 39%. Nor did the crisis last so long in the case of any previous government. http://www.cbos.pl Almost half of the respondents (55%, an increase of 2%) are not satisfied that Jerzy Buzek is the Prime Minister, compared to only slightly more than one quarter who accept him © COPYRIGHT BY CBOS 1999 (28%, an increase of 1%). These are the worst evaluations that any Prime Minister has obtained throughout the whole decade. No Prime Minister since 1989 has been evaluated so ALL SOURCES MUST BE CREDITED badly, and none of them was disliked by the majority of respondents. Waldemar Pawlak, the WHEN ANY PART OF THIS PUBLICATION IS REPRODUCED least liked Prime Minister so far, during the worst period during his term was approved by 34% of respondents (at the same time 48% declared their disapproval). 2 09.99 Pessimism still prevails in opinions on the show that we tend to overestimate rather than economic prospects of our country. Over two thirds of underestimate the presence of ethnic minorities in Poland. respondents (67%, an increase of 3%) believe that the The sizes of the Jewish and Gypsy minorities are policy of the government does not give any cause for overestimated the most. A large part of respondents hope that the economic situation will improve. Less than consider them as the biggest minority groups in Poland. one quarter (23%) express the opposite opinion. Among On the other hand, the ethnic minorities which are really the different areas of the government's activity, agrarian the biggest (German, Ukrainian and Belorrussian) are policy is evaluated the lowest - almost three quarters of assessed correctly. respondents consider it unsatisfactory. The social policy As far as different ethnic minorities are concerned, of the state, health care and the way the government takes we like the Czech and Slovaks the most. Lithuanians, care of its citizens' safety are also evaluated negatively. Germans, Belorussians and Russians are less liked. The As compared with the situation at the beginning of the most disliked are those minorities whose size is year, evaluations of government policy decreased the overestimated the most, i.e. Gypsies and Jews. Negative most with regard to the proper management of public feelings also prevail in the case of Ukrainians, although to money, economic policy and state administration. a lesser extent. More information on this subject can be found in the CBOS report HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE YOUR FEELINGS TOWARDS "The attitude to the government in September.", September 1999. POLISH CITIZENS OF THE FOLLOWING ORIGIN: '94 38% 45% 9% Czech ATTITUDES TOWARDS ETHNIC '99 43% 47% 6% MINORITIES '94 42% 43% 7% Slovak Polish society is ethnically homogeneous. It is '99 42% 48% 5% estimated that around one million Polish citizens belong to ethnic minorities, which constitutes a very small '94 32% 42% 18% percentage of the population (3-4%). The largest Lithuanian '99 34% 50% 11% minorities are the Germans (around 700,000), Ukrainians (around 250-300,000) and Belorussians (around '94 28% 36% 30% 250,000). Slovaks, Lithuanians, Roma (Gypsies) and German Jews are less numerous. Polish citizens of Russian, '99 32% 41% 24% Czech and Greek nationality form even smaller groups. Therefore, the opinions of most residents of Poland on '94 26% 47% 18% Belorussian ethnic minorities are probably shaped by the media and '99 28% 53% 14% common stereotypes, rather than by personal contact with representatives of these communities. '94 23% 41% 30% Russian '99 24% 45% 26% WHAT NATIONALITYARE THE POLISH CITIZENS WHOSE '94 16% 35% 42% NATIONALITY IS OTHER THAN POLISH? PLEASE CHOOSE Ukrainian THE THREE LARGEST ETHNIC MINORITIES '99 19% 44% 33% (%) German 72 '94 18% 38% 37% Jewish 56 Jewish '99 16% 45% 35% Gypsy 42 Ukrainian 41 '94 11% 30% 54% Gypsy Belorussian 28 '99 16% 42% 39% Russian 21 like indifference dislike Lithuanian 21 "Difficult to say" answers were disregarded. Slovak 4 Respondents who believe that a particular ethnic Czech 3 minority is large tend to dislike this minority. Persons who Difficult to say 6 overestimate the size of ethnic minorities in Poland at the same time present a much less positive attitude towards We asked our respondents to estimate the number these minorities. of citizens of other than Polish nationality who currently As compared with five years ago, the Poles' feelings live in our country. In the opinion of the respondents, they towards Gypsies changed the most. The percentage of those constitute a slightly bigger part of our society than is who declare their positive attitude towards them has grown actually the case. The largest group of respondents (35%) a little (by 5%), while the percentage of negative opinions estimate the percentage of ethnic minorities correctly (3 to has decreased significantly (by 15%). We like the Czechs 5% of the total population). However, other indications more now, too. Our negative feelings towards PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH CENTER - CBOS - 09.99 3 Lithuanians, Germans, Ukrainians, Russians and the inadequate training of policemen, and their passive Belorussians have also decreased a little. On the other attitude towards offenders (14%). In connection with the hand, our attitude to Slovaks has not changed. We are insufficient (in the respondents' opinion) number of more indifferent to Jews now than five years ago. policemen respondents mentioned their low salaries and the permanent deficit of funds allocated to financing police More information on this subject can be found in the CBOS report "The operations (14%). They also said that policemen are not attitude to ethnic minorities", September 1999. adequately protected from threats made by the criminal world, which leads to fears connected with their own safety OPINIONS ON THE WORK and the safety of their families. OF THE POLICE HOW DO YOU EVALUATE THE WORK OF THE POLISH POLICE? According to the results of opinion polls, the view Well of Polish society on the law and obeying the law seem relatively strict. However, faith in the effectiveness of the firm actions of the police and stricter laws is easy to 43% understand, taking into account a significant increase of crime in the last ten years, accompanied by the decreasing effectiveness of the police and a tendency to punish 9% offenders less severely. In an earlier survey, respondents Difficult mentioned the following obstacles to fighting crime most 48% to say frequently: too gentle laws; too much tolerance towards offenders; and too humane conditions in prisons. In the Badly respondents' opinions, the crime rate could be decreased if more severe sentences were passed and conditions in prisons were harder.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Northeast Asia: Obstacles to Regional Integration the Interests of the European Union
    Zentrum für Europäische Integrationsforschung Center for European Integration Studies Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn Discussion Paper Ludger Kühnhardt Northeast Asia: Obstacles to Regional Integration The Interests of the European Union ISSN 1435-3288 ISBN 3-936183-52-X Zentrum für Europäische Integrationsforschung Center for European Integration Studies Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn Walter-Flex-Straße 3 Tel.: +49-228-73-4952 D-53113 Bonn Fax: +49-228-73-1788 C152 Germany http: //www.zei.de 2005 Prof. Dr. Ludger Kühnhardt, born 1958, is Director at the Center for European Integration Studies (ZEI). Between 1991 and 1997 he was Professor of Political Science at Freiburg University, where he also served as Dean of his Faculty. After studies of history, philosophy and political science at Bonn, Geneva, Tokyo and Harvard, Kühnhardt wrote a dissertation on the world refugee problem and a second thesis (Habilitation) on the universality of human rights. He was speechwriter for Germany’s Federal President Richard von Weizsäcker and visiting professor at various universities all over the world. His recent publications include: Europäische Union und föderale Idee, Munich 1993; Revolutionszeiten. Das Umbruchjahr 1989 im geschichtlichen Zusammenhang, Munich 1994 (Turkish edition 2003); Von der ewigen Suche nach Frieden. Immanuel Kants Vision und Europas Wirklichkeit, Bonn 1996; Beyond divisions and after. Essays on democracy, the Germans and Europe, New York/Frankfurt a.M. 1996; (with Hans-Gert Pöttering) Kontinent Europa, Zurich 1998 (Czech edition 2000); Zukunftsdenker. Bewährte Ideen politischer Ordnung für das dritte Jahrtausend, Baden-Baden 1999; Von Deutschland nach Europa. Geistiger Zusammenhalt und außenpoliti- scher Kontext, Baden-Baden 2000; Constituting Europe, Baden- Baden 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Pierwsze Notowania Rządu Ewy Kopacz
    Warszawa, październik 2014 ISSN 2353-5822 NR 145/2014 PIERWSZE NOTOWANIA RZĄDU EWY KOPACZ Znak jakości przyznany CBOS przez Organizację Firm Badania Opinii i Rynku 14 stycznia 2014 roku Fundacja Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej ul. Świętojerska 5/7, 00-236 Warszawa e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] http://www.cbos.pl (48 22) 629 35 69 Okoliczności powołania rządu Ewy Kopacz są nietypowe. Dotychczas do zmiany premiera w trakcie kadencji Sejmu dochodziło zazwyczaj w efekcie negatywnych zjawisk i procesów na scenie politycznej, np. takich jak podważenie osobistej wiarygodności szefa rządu, brak stabilnej większości parlamentarnej czy wyczerpanie się społecznego poparcia dla ustępującego gabinetu. Tym razem powołanie nowego rządu nastąpiło w wyniku awansu premiera z polityki polskiej do europejskiej. Oprócz prezesa Rady Ministrów z rządu odeszła wicepremier Elżbieta Bieńkowska, która została unijnym komisarzem ds. rynku wewnętrznego i usług, przemysłu, przedsiębiorczości oraz małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw. Mimo tych zmian skład personalny nowego rządu jest zbliżony do składu poprzedniego gabinetu, większość ministrów bowiem zachowała swoje stanowiska. Wprawdzie odejście Donalda Tuska z krajowej polityki – w przekonaniu nie tylko wielu komentatorów politycznych, ale także znacznej części opinii publicznej w Polsce – osłabia Platformę Obywatelską i współtworzony przez nią rząd1, ale jednocześnie stwarza szansę na kolejne „nowe otwarcie” i odbudowanie nadwyrężonego wizerunku rządzącej partii. Rząd Ewy Kopacz budzi umiarkowanie pozytywne reakcje2. W to, że sytuacja w kraju się poprawi w wyniku działań nowego gabinetu, wierzy 36% badanych. Niepokój przed pogorszeniem wyraża 15% ankietowanych. Prawie jedna piąta (19%) uważa, że nic się nie zmieni. 1 Por. komunikat CBOS „Polska polityka po nominacji Donalda Tuska na szefa Rady Europejskiej”, wrzesień 2014 (oprac.
    [Show full text]
  • European Parliament Elections 2019 - Forecast
    Briefing May 2019 European Parliament Elections 2019 - Forecast Austria – 18 MEPs Staff lead: Nick Dornheim PARTIES (EP group) Freedom Party of Austria The Greens – The Green Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) (EPP) Social Democratic Party of Austria NEOS – The New (FPÖ) (Salvini’s Alliance) – Alternative (Greens/EFA) – 6 seats (SPÖ) (S&D) - 5 seats Austria (ALDE) 1 seat 5 seats 1 seat 1. Othmar Karas* Andreas Schieder Harald Vilimsky* Werner Kogler Claudia Gamon 2. Karoline Edtstadler Evelyn Regner* Georg Mayer* Sarah Wiener Karin Feldinger 3. Angelika Winzig Günther Sidl Petra Steger Monika Vana* Stefan Windberger 4. Simone Schmiedtbauer Bettina Vollath Roman Haider Thomas Waitz* Stefan Zotti 5. Lukas Mandl* Hannes Heide Vesna Schuster Olga Voglauer Nini Tsiklauri 6. Wolfram Pirchner Julia Elisabeth Herr Elisabeth Dieringer-Granza Thomas Schobesberger Johannes Margreiter 7. Christian Sagartz Christian Alexander Dax Josef Graf Teresa Reiter 8. Barbara Thaler Stefanie Mösl Maximilian Kurz Isak Schneider 9. Christian Zoll Luca Peter Marco Kaiser Andrea Kerbleder Peter Berry 10. Claudia Wolf-Schöffmann Theresa Muigg Karin Berger Julia Reichenhauser NB 1: Only the parties reaching the 4% electoral threshold are mentioned in the table. Likely to be elected Unlikely to be elected or *: Incumbent Member of the NB 2: 18 seats are allocated to Austria, same as in the previous election. and/or take seat to take seat, if elected European Parliament ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• www.eurocommerce.eu Belgium – 21 MEPs Staff lead: Stefania Moise PARTIES (EP group) DUTCH SPEAKING CONSITUENCY FRENCH SPEAKING CONSITUENCY GERMAN SPEAKING CONSTITUENCY 1. Geert Bourgeois 1. Paul Magnette 1. Pascal Arimont* 2. Assita Kanko 2. Maria Arena* 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Association of Accredited Lobbyists to the European Parliament
    ASSOCIATION OF ACCREDITED LOBBYISTS TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT OVERVIEW OF EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT FORUMS AALEP Secretariat Date: October 2007 Avenue Milcamps 19 B-1030 Brussels Tel: 32 2 735 93 39 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.lobby-network.eu TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction………………………………………………………………..3 Executive Summary……………………………………………………….4-7 1. European Energy Forum (EEF)………………………………………..8-16 2. European Internet Forum (EIF)………………………………………..17-27 3. European Parliament Ceramics Forum (EPCF………………………...28-29 4. European Parliamentary Financial Services Forum (EPFSF)…………30-36 5. European Parliament Life Sciences Circle (ELSC)……………………37 6. Forum for Automobile and Society (FAS)…………………………….38-43 7. Forum for the Future of Nuclear Energy (FFNE)……………………..44 8. Forum in the European Parliament for Construction (FOCOPE)……..45-46 9. Pharmaceutical Forum…………………………………………………48-60 10.The Kangaroo Group…………………………………………………..61-70 11.Transatlantic Policy Network (TPN)…………………………………..71-79 Conclusions………………………………………………………………..80 Index of Listed Companies………………………………………………..81-90 Index of Listed MEPs……………………………………………………..91-96 Most Active MEPs participating in Business Forums…………………….97 2 INTRODUCTION Businessmen long for certainty. They long to know what the decision-makers are thinking, so they can plan ahead. They yearn to be in the loop, to have the drop on things. It is the genius of the lobbyists and the consultants to understand this need, and to satisfy it in the most imaginative way. Business forums are vehicles for forging links and maintain a dialogue with business, industrial and trade organisations. They allow the discussions of general and pre-legislative issues in a different context from lobbying contacts about specific matters. They provide an opportunity to get Members of the European Parliament and other decision-makers from the European institutions together with various business sectors.
    [Show full text]
  • Ms Mairead Mcguinness European Commissioner for Financial Services, Financial Stability and the Capital Markets Union Mr
    TO: Ms Mairead McGuinness European Commissioner for Financial Services, Financial Stability and the Capital Markets Union Mr Valdis Dombrovskis European Commission Executive Vice-President for An Economy that Works for People CC: Mr Frans Timmermans European Commission Executive Vice-President for the European Green Deal Ms Kadri Simson European Commissioner for Energy Brussels, 13 April 2021 Dear Executive Vice-President Dombrovskis, Dear Commissioner McGuinness, We are convinced that the Taxonomy Regulation is crucial for the European Union to achieve both the new greenhouse gas emissions reduction target for 2030 and climate neutrality by 2050. Additionally, the Regulation should help strengthening the European Union’s strategic resilience and global economic competitiveness, maintaining its energy security and affordability, boosting growth and job creation and supporting a just and inclusive energy transition that leaves nobody behind. However, to what extent the Taxonomy Regulation will ultimately meet these expectations depends primarily on the technical screening criteria (TSC) defined in the Delegated Act on climate change mitigation and adaptation. We understand the European Commission will publish it later this month, whereupon the European Parliament may make full use of its scrutinizing prerogatives under Article 290 TFEU. In advance of its publication, we would like to share with you some of our major concerns regarding the revised draft version of this delegated act. Firstly, it is indispensable that the Taxonomy Regulation takes into account transition at the energy system level and supports the most cost-efficient decarbonisation pathway for each Member State in line with the principle of technology neutrality. In this context, it is key to acknowledge the role of gaseous fuels.
    [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]
  • WIRE Draft Programme 23 05 12Www
    Draft Programme of the WIRE2012 Conference as of 23.05.2012 DAY 1: Monday, 4 th June 2012 Venue: Krakow Opera, Lubicz 48, Krakow 10:30-11:00 Welcome: Moderator: Andrzej Siemaszko, National Contact Point for Research Programmes of the EU (Poland) Speakers: Marek Sowa , Marshall of the Malopolskie Voivodship, Poland Barbara Kudrycka , Minister of Science and Higher Education, Poland Bogusław Sonik, MEP Lambert van Nistelrooij, MEP 11:00 – 12:30 Opening session 1: Delivering the Innovation Union at the regional level Moderator: Andrzej Siemaszko, National Contact Point for Research Programmes of the EU (Poland) Máire Geoghegan-Quinn , Commissioner for Research, Innovation and Science, European Commission – video message Johannes Hahn , Commissioner for Regional Policy, European Commission – video message, Iwona Wendel , Undersecretary of State, Ministry of Regional Development, Poland Clara de la Torre – Director, DG Research and Innovation, European Commission Jerzy Buzek, MEP Roberto Sanchez Sanchez, Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, Spain Gernot Klotz , Director R&I Department of CEFIC 12:30 -14:00 Lunch/Poster session 14:00 – 15:30 Plenary session no. 2: Challenge of smart specialisation for European regions • Can the European policies be tailored to meet the regional innovative specificities? • How regions see the challenge of smart specialisation? • Smart specialisation in practice 1 Moderator: Clara de la Torre – Director, DG Research and Innovation, European Commission Rapporteur : Colombe Warin - DG Research and Innovation, European Commission Speakers: Lambert van Nistelrooij , MEP, Rapporteur to General Regulation Ales Gnamus, DG JRC, European Commission Christina Diegelmann, Assembly of European Regions Philippe Vanrie, European Business & Innovation Centre (BICs) Network Sarka Hermanova, Czech Technology Platform 15:30 - 16:00 Coffee Break 16:00 – 17:30 Parallel sessions Parallel session no.
    [Show full text]
  • WHY EUROPE NEEDS a NEW GLOBAL STRATEGY Susi Dennison, Richard Gowan, Hans Kundnani, Mark Leonard and Nick Witney
    BRIEF POLICY WHY EUROPE NEEDS A NEW GLOBAL STRATEGY Susi Dennison, Richard Gowan, Hans Kundnani, Mark Leonard and Nick Witney Today’s Europe is in crisis. But of all the world’s leading powers, SUMMARY It is now a decade since European leaders none has had so much success in shaping the world around approved the first-ever European Security it over the last 20 years as the European Union. The United Strategy (ESS), which began with the States provided the military underpinning for a Europe whole memorable statement that “Europe has and free, but its record in other parts of the world has been never been so prosperous, so secure nor mixed at best. Russia is still lagging behind where it was when so free”. But Europe and the world have the Cold War ended. Japan has stagnated. Meanwhile rising changed so dramatically in the last decade that it is increasingly hard to argue that powers such as China have not yet sought to reshape global the EU can simply stick to the “strategy” it politics in their image. But since the end of the Cold War, the agreed in 2003. Many of the approaches that EU has peacefully expanded to include 16 new member states worked so well for Europe in the immediate and has transformed much of its neighborhood by reducing aftermath of the Cold War seem to be ethnic conflicts, exporting the rule of law, and developing ineffectual at best and counter-productive economies from the Baltic to the Balkans. at worst in an age of power transition and global political awakening.
    [Show full text]
  • Fr Fr Procès-Verbal
    Parlement européen 2019-2024 Commission de l’industrie, de la recherche et de l’énergie ITRE_PV(2020)0604_1 PROCÈS-VERBAL Réunion extraordinaire du 4 juin 2020, de 13 h 45 à 15 h 45 BRUXELLES La séance est ouverte le jeudi 4 juin 2020, à 13 h 45, sous la présidence de Cristian-Silviu Buşoi, président. 1. Adoption de l’ordre du jour ITRE_OJ(2020)0604_1 L’ordre du jour est adopté. 2. Communications du président Néant 3. Approbation de procès-verbaux de réunions 8 mai 2020 PV – PE652.284v01-00 15 mai 2020 PV – PE652.365v01-00 Les procès-verbaux sont approuvés. *** Vote à distance ouvert jusqu’à 16 h 30 *** 4. Proposition de règlement du Parlement européen et du Conseil portant établissement du programme-cadre pour la recherche et l’innovation «Horizon Europe» et définissant ses règles de participation et de diffusion ITRE/9/03005 PV\1206912FR.docx PE653.720v01-00 FR Unie dans la diversité FR ***I 2018/0224(COD) COM(2018)0435 – C8-0252/2018 Rapporteur: Dan Nica (S&D) Fond: ITRE Vote sur la décision d’engager des négociations interinstitutionnelles La décision d’engager des négociations interinstitutionnelles est adoptée par 76 voix pour, 1 contre et 0 abstention. (Vote par appel nominal: voir page 6) 5. Proposition de décision du Parlement européen et du Conseil établissant le programme spécifique d’exécution du programme-cadre pour la recherche et l’innovation «Horizon Europe» ITRE/9/03006 ***I 2018/0225(COD) COM(2018)0436 – C8-0253/2018 Rapporteur: Christian Ehler (PPE) Fond: ITRE Vote sur la décision d’engager des négociations interinstitutionnelles La décision d’engager des négociations interinstitutionnelles est adoptée par 76 voix pour, 1 contre et 0 abstention.
    [Show full text]
  • Top 10 Polish Politicians on Twitter – a Revolution in Politi‐ Cal Communication? – Reconnaissance Research
    Tomasz Gackowski TOP 10 POLISH POLITICIANS ON TWITTER – A REVOLUTION IN POLITI‐ CAL COMMUNICATION? – RECONNAISSANCE RESEARCH Keywords: politics, Twitter, political communication, content analysis, automatic analysis Introduction – political impact of Twitter In December 2013, a few days before Christmas Eve, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Republic of Poland published an interview with Radosław Sikorski, Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs1, summing up the year 2013. In this interview the minister – inter alia – expressed his thoughts about activity of the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs in social media (mainly Twitter). He has said that nowadays Twitter seems to be one of the most effective tools in modern diplomacy. Sikorski boasted that his ministry is perceived as being the third most active institutions in social media in the whole world, after the External Action Service of the European Union, but before the British or French Ministries of Foreign Affairs. He stressed that the activity of the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Twitter has been an effect of a cultural and informational breakthrough in Polish diplomacy. He directly connected being on Twitter with running a diplomacy service. He said – Thanks to Twitter we are able to spread our statements quicker and wider, to many people and institutions at once. 1http://www.msz.gov.pl/pl/aktualnosci/wiadomosci/minister_spraw_zagranicznych_podsumo wuje_rok_2013_i_mowi_o_planach_na_przyszlosc, 8.01.2013 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtMWgWTWha4#t=15, 8.01.2013. 132 Furthermore, we can – through the social media – create the global platform of informational confrontation in diplomacy. Next – a day before the New Year’s Eve of 2014 – Donald Tusk, Prime Minister of Poland, decided to sum up the passing year with users of Twitter during an hour – between 3 and 4 pm on his Twitter account.
    [Show full text]
  • European Parliament 2014-2019
    European Parliament 2014-2019 Committee on Industry, Research and Energy ITRE_PV(2018)0903_1 MINUTES Meeting of 3 September 2018, 15.00-18.30 BRUSSELS The meeting opened at 15.08 on Monday, 3 September 2018, with Jerzy Buzek (Chair) presiding. 3 September 2018 1. Adoption of agenda ITRE_OJ (2018)0903_1 The agenda was adopted in the form shown in the minutes. 2. Chair’s announcements None. 3. Approval of minutes of meetings 18-19 June 2018 PV – PE625.486v01-00 The minutes were approved. * * * 4. Education in the digital era: challenges, opportunities and lessons for EU policy design ITRE/8/13342 2018/2090(INI) Rapporteur for the opinion: Tamás Deutsch (PPE) PA – PE623.921v01-00 Responsible: CULT* – Yana Toom (ALDE) Opinions: EMPL*, ITRE Consideration of draft opinion PV\1163879EN.docx PE628.391v01-00 EN United in diversity EN Speakers: Andor Deli, Carlos Zorrinho, Caroline Nagtegaal, Benedek Jávor, Patrizia Toia, Anusca Ferrari (European Commission, DG EAC). 5. Reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment ITRE/8/13554 ***I 2018/0172(COD) COM(2018)0340 – C8-0218/2018 Rapporteur for the opinion: Barbara Kappel (ENF) PA – PE625.401v01-00 Responsible: ENVI – Frédérique Ries (ALDE) PR – PE623.714v01-00 Opinions: ECON, ITRE, AGRI, PECH, JURI Consideration of draft opinion Speakers: Barbara Kappel, Maria Spyraki, Dominique Riquet, Xabier Benito Ziluaga, Carlos Zorrinho, Hugo Schally (European Commission, DG ENER) * * * From 16.00: *** Electronic vote *** 6. Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and
    [Show full text]
  • CCUS: Time to Incentivise Carbon-Removals Technologies to Achieve Climate Neutrality
    14 June 2021 To: Frans Timmermans, First Executive Vice-President of the European Commission CC: Kadri Simson, Commissioner for Energy Thierry Breton, Commissioner for the Internal Market and Services Virginijus Sinkevičius, Commissioner for Environment, Oceans and Fisheries Dear Executive Vice-President Timmermans, CCUS: Time to incentivise carbon-removals technologies to achieve climate neutrality The ambition of the EU regarding both the 2030 and 2050 climate targets is now confirmed. Stakeholders ranging from the UNFCCC and the IEA to other global economies, including the US and China, recognise that reducing CO2 emissions to net zero by 2050 cannot realistically be achieved without deployment of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) / Carbon Capture and Utilization (CCU). Model scenarios that limit global warming to 1.5 or 2°C rely on large amounts of CO2 removals from the atmosphere. Capturing and permanently storing the CO2 from different industries across Europe, including cement, fertilizers, steel, refining, chemicals and waste facilities can help achieve this. For instance, CCS deployed with Waste-to-Energy does not simply curb the release of CO2 emissions; through the burning of unrecyclable and otherwise untreatable biogenic waste, it actually removes emissions from the atmosphere. It is a game changer, and part of the climate and circular economy solution. We believe that environmentally safe and socially beneficial CO2 removal technologies are a key complement to the EU’s existing climate change mitigation tools. In particular, bioenergy combined with CCS (BECCS) provides opportunity of CO2 removals to be stored with a degree of permanence that nature-based removals of CO2 alone can rarely offer.
    [Show full text]