Resolution Booklet Lah1 L-..1·ti _201 9 o National Session of EYP Finland 2nd to 6th of January Lahti 2019 National Session of EYP Finland Lahti 2019– National Session of European Youth Parliament Finland General Assembly, 6th of January 2019 Programme of the General Assembly 08:30 Opening of the General Assembly 08:45 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) 09:25 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) 10:05 Coffee break 10:20 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Development (DEVE) 11:00 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Human Rights (DROI) 11:40 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) 12:30 Lunch 13:15 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) 14:00 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Consumer Protection and Internal Market (IMCO) 14:45 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on International Trade (INTA) 15.30 Coffee Break 15.45 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) 16.30 Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) 17.15 Break 17.25 Closing Ceremony 1 Lahti 2019– National Session of European Youth Parliament Finland General Assembly, 6th of January 2019 Procedure of the General Assembly General rules The wish to speak is indicated by raising the Committee placard. Each committee may use only one Committee placard. The authority of the Board is absolute. Procedure and time settings 1. The Board reads out the topic of debate. 2. Defence Speech (3 minutes) 3. Two Position Speeches (2 minutes each) 4.Response to Position Speeches (1.5 minutes) 5. Open debate (3 to 4 rounds) 6. Summation Speech (2 minutes) 7. Voting procedure 8. Announcing the votes Point of Personal Privilege Request for a Delegate to repeat a point that was inaudible. Failure to understand the language being spoken does not make for a Point of Personal Privilege. Direct Response Twice per debate, each Committee may use the Direct Response sign. Should a Delegate raise the sign during the open debate, they will immediately be recognised by the Board and given the floor as soon as the point being made is concluded. A Direct Response can only be used to refer to and discuss the point made directly beforehand. If two or more Direct Responses are requested at once, the Board will decide which Committee to recognise. In this case, the second Direct Response shall only be held if it can be referred to the first Direct Response, so on and so forth. 2 Lahti 2019– National Session of European Youth Parliament Finland General Assembly, 6th of January 2019 Point of Order These can be raised by the Chairperson if a Delegate feels the Board have not properly followed parliamentary procedure. Ultimately, the authority of the Board is absolute. Defence Speech One member of the Proposing Committee delivers the Defence Speech from the podium. It is used to explain the rationale of the overall lines of the Resolution and convince the Plenary that the Resolution is worthy of being adopted. This speech can last a maximum of two minutes. Position Speech Two delegates are given the chance to hold a position speech through which they can express support, opposition, or a combination of the two, for the Motion for a Resolution. The speech should be constructive in its approach and can last a maximum of two minutes per person. Summation Speech One member of the Proposing Committee delivers the Summation Speech from the podium. It is used to summarise the debate, respond to main, selected criticism and to once more explain why the chosen approach is the most sensible. This speech can last a maximum of two minutes. 3 Lahti 2019– National Session of European Youth Parliament Finland General Assembly, 6th of January 2019 MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS The voting rate in the European Parliament elections in 2014 was the lowest so far, only 42,61% of the EU citizens used their right to participate. Should EU countries follow the Swiss example and expand their tools of direct democracy? Submitted by: Jędrzej Cader (CH), Margherita Carlon (Ressun lukio), Alexandra Bethel Engle (DE), Susanna Lundell (Gymnasiet Lärkan), Andree Martinez (FI), Benjamin Stephenson (CH), Tim Benjamin van Woezik (Chairperson, NL) The European Youth Parliament, A. Recognising that most referenda and citizen initiatives are non-binding, B. Deeply concerned by the lack of citizen involvement in representative democracies, resulting in citizens having a decreased interest in politics, as seen in the drop of 12.76% of the voter turnout from 2012 - 2017 in France and by 8.23% drop from 2016 to 2015 in Croatia, C. Noting with concern that a recall mechanism may lead to politicians fearing to take important decisions, such as banning smoking in public areas or raising taxes, D. Regretting that the bar for the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) has been set at a minimum of one million signatures spread out over at least a quarter of the Member States, resulting in only four initiatives passing since its introduction 12 years ago, E. Conscious of the fact that direct democracy may not negate the voter turnout issues as it will demand more effort from the individual, as seen in Switzerland where the number of referenda negatively correlates with the voter turnout rate, F. Bearing in mind that referenda may make minorities more subject to the will of the majority, as was the case in the Brexit referendum where less than 35% of minorities voted in favour of Brexit, G. Alarmed by the high free press index numbers in some European countries, for example in Serbia, Poland and Italy, H. Profoundly concerned by the fact that the implementation of mechanisms for direct democracy may lead to populist movements gaining more influence in the democratic process, such as in the 2017 Turkish constitutional referendum in which the Turkish public decided to give significantly more power to their president, 4 Lahti 2019– National Session of European Youth Parliament Finland General Assembly, 6th of January 2019 I. Deeply conscious of the lack of youth participation in democracy, as only 28% of youths voted in the 2014 European parliamentary elections, J. Concerned about the EU citizens’ declining trust in their national governments, K. Pointing out the lack of accountability of politicians after they have been elected, L. Regretting that many EU citizens do not feel accurately represented by their governments; 1. Recommends Member States to implement a recall system, modelled after the recall system implemented in California, where any elected official may be removed from office if a 3/4th majority votes to remove said official in a referendum; 2. Instructs the European Commission to decrease the number of required signatures needed for a European Citizens’ Initiative to pass to 750.000; 3. Directs the European Commission to expand the ECI so that a binding referendum will be held once the initiative reaches the threshold for the required signatures; 4. Asks the European Commission to assign the European Commission legal service to assist in adapting any ECI’s that pass 250.000 signatures into proper legislative language; 5. Proposes the European Commission to set up a committee of experts with the power to veto any ECI that does not adhere to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; 6. Requests Member States to implement a Citizens Initiative mechanism modelled after the ECI or adapt their existing Citizens Initiative concepts after the ECI; 7. Suggests that referenda concerning a Member State’s constitution be non-binding; 8. Appeals to Member States to make voting in one’s first election compulsory upon turning 18, enforced by a fine of 5 times said Member State’s average wage; 9. Encourages Member States to introduce a ‘none of the above’ option to election ballots; 10. Demands the European Parliament to introduce a ‘none of the above’ option to election ballots; 11. Desires the Erasmus+ to help set up local youth councils, in cooperation with local governments, which will give advice on local policy and further the interests of local youths, such as holding events where students can, among other things, meet local politicians; 5 Lahti 2019– National Session of European Youth Parliament Finland General Assembly, 6th of January 2019 12. Further appeals to schools to hold election simulations during election season where local politicians visit the school and tell students about their party; 13. Invites schools to give their students free on-school access to the top 4 most read newspapers nationally; 14. Urges Member States to adopt a politics programme in their school curricula that contain lessons about one’s duties as a citizen, involvement in politics, analysis of political concepts, the dangers of extremism and case studies on politics; 15. Welcomes and further encourages the work done by brilliant.org and similar online platforms in teaching people about the functioning of democracies. 6 Lahti 2019– National Session of European Youth Parliament Finland General Assembly, 6th of January 2019 MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS Rivaling Russia? Considering the tensions between the EU and Russia in recent years, mainly caused by Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, what stance should the EU take when developing their diplomatic relations with Russia in the future? Submitted by: Jasmin Alanko (Perhon lukio), Venla Arosara (Jyväskylän normaalikoulun lukio), Kasper Kankkunen (Turun normaalikoulun lukio), Susanna Lehtonen (Ressun lukio), Joar Robertsson (CH), Ivan Shkulepa (Kannaksen lukio), Wilma Summanen (Sammon keskuslukio), Kirsten Young (DE), Martin Örn (Chairperson, FI) The European Youth Parliament, A.