European Parliamentary Research Service Blog

With European elections coming up in May 2019, you probably want to know how the European Union impacts your daily life, before you think about voting. In the latest in a series of posts on what Europe does for you, your family, your business and your wellbeing, we look at what Europe does for online shoppers.

Twitter Hashtag #EUandME

Like many of us, you probably shop online. The use of devices connected to the internet like computers, mobile phones and tablets to buy goods (e.g. clothes and toys), access digital content (movies, e-books), and book services (e.g. hotel booking, car rental) online is increasing. More than 65 % of European internet users shop online, and e commerce is a growing phenomenon especially amongst young people.

© Stanisic Vladimir / Fotolia

However, EU internet users often complain that they cannot access what they want because geo-blocking practices restrict access to websites, content and services offered online in another country. As a result, on average two in three cross-border online shopping attempts made in the EU fail, and online shoppers must accept different conditions and prices for the same product or service, depending where they live.

The EU supports e-commerce and ensures European consumers can buy the goods and access the digital content and services they want online with less restrictions. Since April 2018, EU internet users benefit from new rules on cross-border portability for streaming their favourite TV series online when they travel, or are on holiday in another EU country. Furthermore, thanks to the EU, many geo-blocking practices restricting access to websites and online services are prohibited. By 2019, if you’re shopping online, you will be able to buy gifts for Christmas, book a hotel, or rent a car online, wherever you live in the EU without being blocked or paying unfair prices.

Further information

• EPRS publication, E-commerce: Ban on unjustified geo-blocking and discrimination practices among customers, 2018
• European Parliament, press release Parliament votes to end barriers to cross-border online shopping, 2018
• European Commission, factsheet Ending unjustified Geoblocking to boost online shopping in the EU, 2017

With European elections coming up in May 2019, you probably want to know how the European Union impacts your daily life, before you think about voting. In the latest in a series of posts on what Europe does for you, your family, your business and your wellbeing, we look at what Europe does for cyclists.

Twitter Hashtag #EUandME

As a means of transport over short distances, cycling helps reduce congestion and pollution, lessens our dependence on fuels, brings new jobs and improves public health. It also involves some challenges, such as improving cyclists’ safety, coordinating mobility planning and securing financing for cycling infrastructure. While in some EU countries, people use their bikes for more than a third of their daily trips, in others this is the case for less than 5 % of journeys. The proportion of regular cyclists is higher in cities.

© archimede / Fotolia

Cycling policies are a national – not EU – matter, each country providing its own regulatory framework in addition, in many cases, to country-wide cycling programmes; practical measures are generated mostly at local or regional levels, notably in cities.

Despite this, the EU takes an active role in favour of more cycling. EU support consists principally of guidance, exchange of best practice, and financial support, for instance in helping to build the European cycle route network Eurovelo.

European countries and the European Parliament have called on the European Commission to develop an EU Cycling Strategy to get more people to cycle more often. Cycling organisations have recommended measures that can make a cost-efficient impact, including more EU investment in cycling projects, vehicle regulations which would make motorised vehicles safer for people walking and cycling, and giving Member States the possibility to introduce reduced VAT for bicycle purchases through a reform of EU law.

Further information

• EPRS publication on a coordinated approach to cycling for local and regional authorities in the EU: Moving cycling forward, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2016/582033/EPRS_IDA(2016)582033_EN.pdf
• European Commission’s Directorate General for Mobility and Transport website, https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/urban/cycling_en
• European Cyclists’ Federation webpage, EU Cycling Strategy, https://ecf.com/what-we-do/eu-cycling-strategy

With European elections coming up in May 2019, you probably want to know how the European Union impacts your daily life, before you think about voting. In the latest in a series of posts on what Europe does for you, your family, your business and your wellbeing, we look at what Europe does for young chess players in school.

Twitter Hashtag #EUandME

The benefits that school pupils can reap from learning chess are numerous and well-documented. Chess can help children to develop essential cognitive skills, such as concentration, memory, logical and critical thinking, and enhance their creativity, through problem solving. Playing chess also teaches planning, determination and sportsmanship – all positive aspects in a child’s personal development.

EU countries are solely responsible for organising their educational system and its content. Nevertheless, those countries agree that the EU should contribute to the development of quality education, by encouraging cooperation between countries. This means that it supports or supplements national education systems, and develops an exchange of experiences on common educational topics.

© spass / Fotolia

The social virtues of chess in schools, like helping social integration, were emphasised in a March 2012 European Parliament declaration, endorsing the introduction of the ‘Chess in School’ programme in all EU countries. This programme is a cooperation between the European Chess Union (ECU), an independent association with 54 national federation members, and the Kasparov Chess Foundation Europe. Since then, according to ECU, the number of pupils learning chess at school is expanding.

As this game is classified as a sport, it is more accessible to pupils as an option during sports periods at school. It is also eligible for funding under the not-for-profit sport events strand of Erasmus+, the EU funding programme dedicated to education, youth and sport.

Further information

• Official website of the European Chess Union, http://www.europechess.org/board/ecu-profile/
• EPRS publication on ‘Chess teaching in schools in the European Union’, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/bibliotheque/briefing/2011/110223/LDM_BRI(2011)110223_REV1_EN.pdf
• European Commission Erasmus + programme guide, https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/sites/erasmusplus2/files/files/resources/erasmus-plus-programme-guide_en.pdf

With European elections coming up in May 2019, you probably want to know how the European Union impacts your daily life, before you think about voting. In the latest in a series of posts on what Europe does for you, your family, your business and your wellbeing, we look at what Europe does for young people involved in politics.

Twitter Hashtag #EUandME

Young politicians have recently been elected to the highest positions of power in several EU countries, yet many young people still choose to stay away from politics.

If you’re a young activist, or simply follow politics, the European Union has taken steps to encourage your participation in political life, in line with the obligation introduced by the Lisbon Treaty. European cooperation in the youth field aims at promoting young people’s participation in representative democracy. The Erasmus+ funding programme finances youth exchanges and projects to promote participation in democratic life and active citizenship in Europe, particularly through its youth chapter. Encouraging young people to take part in politics comes from the highest EU levels.

© juan_aunion / Fotolia

To involve young people in decision making, the EU has built specific channels. The EU provides numerous young people with opportunities to make their views known on selected policy topics during 18-month policy cycles. Do you want to take part? Have a look at the Youth Portal (Have your say!).

European young people are also involved in shaping EU external policies, together with their counterparts from Africa or the Eastern Partnership.

The European Parliament has also launched its own initiatives. The Euroscola Day allows high school students to experience first-hand what it means to be a parliamentarian for a day in Strasbourg. The biennial European Youth Event (EYE) provides young Europeans with the opportunity to share their ideas on the future of Europe.

Further information

• European Commission website, Youth Portal, https://europa.eu/youth/EU_en
• European Commission website, Erasmus + projects, http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/projects/eplus-projects-compendium/
• European Parliament, Euroscola, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/euroscola

Written by Marcin Grajewski,

© Daniel Berkmann / Fotolia

The discussion on how to deepen and improve the functioning of Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) continues on several fronts. Issues under discussion include euro-area governance, the role of the European Central Bank (ECB), the fiscal rules, debt-mutualisation, risk-sharing, and the nature of, and political compromises between, French and German perspectives within the system. The dispute between Italy and the European Commission over the former’s budget for 2019 is now a major topic for discussion at Eurogroup meetings, as are Banking Union and the sustainability of economic growth, notably in light of the expected tapering of the ECB’s bond-purchase programme. In a separate development, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has proposed increasing the international role of the euro, which some analysts say could replace the US dollar in certain international transactions, given the volatility of US economic policies.

This note brings together commentaries, analyses and studies by major international think tanks and research institutes on challenges facing the euro area and related issues. Earlier publications on the topic can be found in a previous edition of ‘What Think Tanks are Thinking’ published in June 2018.

Euro area reform: An anatomy of the debate
Centre for Economic Policy Research, Bruegel, November 2018

Steuer über Bord? Die schwierige Debatte um eine EU-Digitalsteuer
Jacques Delors Institute Berlin, November 2018

European fiscal rules require a major overhaul
Bruegel, October 2018

Commission rejection of Italian budget may be justified, but what comes next?
Centre for European Policy Studies, October 2018

A better European Union architecture to fight money laundering
Bruegel, October 2018

Europe’s search for a safe asset
Peterson Institute for International Economics, October 2018

A European safe asset? Perceptions from France and Germany
Jacques Delors Institute Berlin, Bertelsman Stiftung, October 2018

The international use of the euro: What can we learn from past examples of currency internationalisation?
Bruegel, October 2018

The Italian budget: A case of contractionary fiscal expansion?
Peterson Institute for International Economics, October 2018

Reform of the international monetary system and new global economic governance: How the EU may contribute
Egmont, October 2018

The problem is not EU’s fiscal rules, but Italy’s economic strategy
LUISS School of European Political Economy, October 2018

Should central European EU members join the euro zone?
Bruegel, September 2018

Financial stability implications of increasing interest rates
Centre for European Policy Studies, September 2018

High public debt in euro-area countries: Comparing Belgium and Italy
Bruegel, September 2018

Europe’s payments revolution: Stimulating payments innovation while protecting consumer privacy
Centre for European Policy Studies, September 2018

The German government’s strategy for the euro area in view of Italy’s instability
LUISS School of European Political Economy, September 2018

Italien als Belastungsprobe für den Euroraum
Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, September 2018

Excess liquidity and bank lending risks in the euro area
Bruegel, September 2018

ESM reform: No need to reinvent the wheel
Jacques Delors Institut, Bertelsmann Stiftung, August 2018

Italian risk spreads: Fiscal versus redenomination risk
Centre for European Policy Studies, August 2018

Real and imagined constraints on euro area monetary policy
Peterson Institute for International Economics, August 2018

Recovery and Resolution of CCPs: Obsessing over regulatory symmetry?
Centre for European Policy Studies, August 2018

Greek bailout: IMF and Europeans diverge on lessons learnt
Chatham House, August 2018

The German barrier to a global euro
European Council on Foreign Relations, August 2018

A supervisory architecture fit for CMU: Aiming at a moving target?
Centre for European Policy Studies, August 2018

Les raisons du ’miracle portugais’
Institut Thomas More, August 2018

Le futur de la zone euro: Perspective croisée franco-allemande
Institut Jacques Delors, July 2018

Sovereign debt restructuring: Rules versus discretion
LUISS School of European Political Economy, July 2018

L’urgence d’une réforme de la fiscalité en Europe
Confrontations Europe, July 2018

ECB non-standard policies and collateral constraints
Centre for European Policy Studies, July 2018

The future of the Economic and Monetary Union
Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies, Clingendael, June 2018

The Meseberg declaration and euro-zone reform
Bruegel, June 2018

Towards a more resilient euro area
Centre for European Policy Studies, June 2018

Is the European Semester effective and useful?
Bruegel, June 2018

How to exit the euro in a nutshell: ‘Il Piano Savona’
Centre for European Policy Studies, June 2018

Comment consolider la zone euro?
Fondation Robert Schuman, June 2018

Economic convergence as the cornerstone of EMU resilience
LSE Ideas, June 2018

The future of the European Central Bank
LSE Ideas, June 2018

It’s business models, stupid!
Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft, June 2018

A review on ESBies: The senior tranche of sovereign bond-backed securities
Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, June 2018

Welcher Weg zur Euro-Reform?
Heinrich Böll Stiftung, June 2018

Fiscal implications of the ECB´s Public Sector Purchase Programme
Institut für Weltwirtschaft Kiel, June 2018

A stabilization fund can make the euro area more crisis-proof
Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik, June 2018

Read this briefing on ‘Challenges for the euro area‘ on the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Clare Ferguson,

© European Union 2014 – Source EP / Eve VAN SOENS

The European Parliament agenda this month is dominated by some of the big set-pieces of the EU calendar: the latest in the continued debates on the Future of Europe; the EU budget; the award of the LUX prize to this year’s winning film; not forgetting the campaign now well under way to select nominees, known as ‘Spitzenkandidaten‘, for the election of the next Commission President.

The Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, attends Parliament for the latest debate on the Future of Europe (at 15:00 on Tuesday afternoon) in what may be the last chance that Parliament, at least in its current make-up, gets to hear this particular German Chancellor’s ideas on the way forward for Europe and its democratic institutions. Cyril Ramaphosa, President of the Republic of South Africa will also address Parliament in a formal sitting on Wednesday morning.

On Tuesday morning, Members will discuss the interim report on the Commission’s proposals for a new multiannual financial framework for 2021-2027, which sets out the next EU budget. In the light of the commitments the EU has already undertaken, the report criticises the proposal to cut the EU’s resources as a share of post-Brexit EU-27 GNI. However, it also welcomes the opportunities to increase financial flexibility and the move towards ambitious reform of EU resources and revenue. On the basis of the position agreed during the session, Parliament would be ready to begin negotiations with the Council. In respect of spending under the current budgetary period, Parliament will consider mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Latvia. The country could receive some €17 730 519 for reconstruction of the regions affected in floods in 2017, subsequently qualified as a ‘major natural disaster’.

More generally, a Commission statement on Monday evening on floods in Europe will look at responses to the recent series of floods in a number of European countries. Preparing the governance of the energy union to face the challenges of climate change and meeting international commitments on reducing emissions is the subject of a joint debate later on Monday evening, on a clean energy package for the EU. Following negotiations between the EU institutions, Members will consider three proposals, which include a binding 32 % target for use of energy from renewable sources by 2030, and indicative targets on national contributions and on a 32.5 % improvement in energy efficiency.

The LUX prize, to be awarded on Wednesday lunchtime, has become the recognised label of a good film. Nevertheless, whichever laureate wins this year, European filmmakers continue to struggle against fierce competition from the USA and beyond. The LUX prize award continues to support EU cinema through help with distribution and translation costs, allowing winners to break through the barriers of largely national distribution markets, to reach film fans throughout the EU.

Those travelling to the plenary session in Strasbourg by train may unfortunately be familiar with the difficulties of obtaining compensation when booking sections of the journey with different carriers. On Wednesday evening, Members will discuss a Transport Committee report on Commission proposals to strengthen rail passengers’ rights and obligations that deal with this specific issue, as well as others, such as accessibility and assistance. Carriers’ rights to claim force majeure have been a subject of disagreement to date. Should Members endorse the report, this will decide Parliament’s position for negotiations with the other EU institutions.

Migration issues are a persistent priority on the EU agenda. Following Council and Commission statements on EU Member States’ support for the UN Global Compact for migration, the final agenda item for Tuesday evening is discussion of a proposal to establish a system of humanitarian visas in the EU, to give people a clear procedure to follow when in need of international protection. This system would allow non-EU nationals whose lives are in danger to apply for a visa, following appropriate security screening. The comprehensive proposals intend to deal with the issue of irregular migration in the EU, a favourite topic in the influence of foreign actors in recent political campaigns. With the upcoming EP election campaign firmly in their sights, Members will take part in a topical debate on Wednesday afternoon on ways to increase EU resilience in the face of disinformation.

Looking further afield, a joint debate is scheduled for Tuesday evening on the implementation of the EU Association Agreements with Georgia and Moldova. Parliament’s Foreign Affairs (AFET) committee reports that implementation of the 2014 Association Agreement with Georgia is largely positive. While dealing with some foreign interference from both Russia and Turkey, the country is nevertheless making good progress on rule of law and human rights issues, with some exceptions for high-level corruption and the protection of vulnerable groups. Moldova, a priority country for Parliament’s democracy support within the Eastern Partnership, on the other hand, appears to be experiencing some serious backsliding on democratic values and electoral reform.

EU arms-export licences almost doubled between 2014 and 2016. A motion for resolution is tabled for Tuesday evening calling for strict interpretation and full implementation of the EU Common Position on arms export. The EU’s unique position ensures transparency and information-sharing on conventional arms exports by setting common minimum standards for individual Member States to assess export licence applications for military technology and equipment. The motion calls for increased parliamentary and public oversight of national arms exports from the EU, which go to destinations such as the United Arab Emirates, India, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

Parliament will discuss the package of telecoms proposals, to establish a European Electronic Communications Code and develop the mandate of the corresponding regulatory body, known as BEREC, in a joint debate on Wednesday morning. The proposals for a lighter regulatory regime seek to boost investment in high-capacity networks, improving use of radio frequencies and providing access to broadband services for all citizens, as well as reinforcing consumer protection. A cap on charges for phone calls at 19 cents and 6 cents for text messages inside the EU has already been agreed, and the file now awaits Parliament’s final decision.

Parliament is also expected to take an initial position on a proposed multiannual plan for Adriatic fisheries later on Monday evening. Anchovy and sardine stocks are overfished in this part of the Mediterranean, and the current fisheries management is criticised as ineffective. Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries (PECH) is opposed to Commission proposals to radically change the way allowable catches are set, preferring to strengthen the current measures instead.

Written by Didier Bourguignon,

© andreusK / Fotolia

Through its environmental policy, the European Union (EU) has been improving Europeans’ well-being since 1972. Today, the aim of EU environmental policy is to ensure that by 2050 we are living well, within the limits of the planet. To reach this goal, the EU is striving to move towards a low-carbon, resource-efficient economy, to safeguard biodiversity and to protect human health through legislation on air quality, chemicals, climate, nature, waste and water.

Although this policy is delivering concrete benefits (such as a wide network of Natura 2000 protected areas, lower greenhouse gas emissions, increased resource recycling, and cleaner air and water), the outlook for the European environment 20 years from now shows a bleaker picture. Yet transitioning to sustainability could deliver a number of benefits beyond environmental protection, from jobs and economic activity to well-being and health.

In a recent poll conducted for the European Parliament, three quarters of EU citizens expressed support for increased EU action on environmental protection.

Since 2014, efforts have been made in a number of areas, including waste management (for example new recycling targets, restrictions on plastic carrier bags, action on plastics, measures to tackle marine litter); climate (for example the 2030 greenhouse gas emission targets, and measures to decarbonise the transport sector); nature (primarily to improve the way EU rules on biodiversity protection are implemented); and air quality (new rules on maximum amounts of five key air pollutants that EU countries can emit into the atmosphere). The European Parliament has advocated ambitious policies in many of these areas.

In the future, EU environment and climate spending is expected to rise. The Commission is proposing to boost the share of EU spending contributing to climate objectives from 20 % to 25 %, while Parliament has called for this share to be set at 30 %. In the coming years, policies are expected to focus on climate action, nature protection, air quality, the circular economy and pesticides.

Read the complete briefing on ‘EU policies – Delivering for citizens: Environmental protection‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Click to view slideshow.

Written by Ionel Zamfir,

© iberoz / Fotolia

From the outset, the European Union (EU) has been an integration project directed at preserving peace among its Member States – a fundamental objective that it has succeeded in achieving for over 60 years. As a community of like-minded states, the EU is also based on certain fundamental values, such as democracy and the rule of law, which the Union aspires to promote, both internally and externally, and which guide all its policies.

In line with this vision, the EU has developed specific policies to support democracy and peace in the world. It also aims to integrate the pursuit of peace and democracy with all its other external actions in areas such as trade, development, enlargement and neighbourhood policies, its common foreign and security policy, and political and diplomatic relations with third countries and multilateral institutions. The EU has established a reputation as a soft power organisation guided by a normative vision and as an effective actor for peace and democracy.

Strengthening peace and democracy globally has never been an easy task, however, and today’s geopolitical context poses new challenges. The proliferation and increasing gravity and duration of conflicts – some in the EU’s immediate neighbourhood, the emergence of new threats, such as terrorism or nuclear proliferation, and the crisis of liberal systems have driven the EU to widen and intensify its efforts. They have also led to a new vision for action revolving around the concept of ‘resilient societies’ based on the mutually reinforcing pillars of peace and democracy, and a special emphasis on fragile states. Against this background, recent surveys have shown that citizens expect the EU to be even more active in promoting peace and democracy externally – something that should surely strengthen its resolve to make further progress in this crucial area.

Read the complete briefing on ‘EU policies – Delivering for citizens: EU support for democracy and peace in the world‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Click to view slideshow.

Written by Laura Tilindyte,

© European Union 2014 – Source EP / Eve VAN SOENS

Originally, the nomination of the President of the European Commission was firmly in the hands of national governments, with the influence of the European Parliament (EP) initially non-existent and later only limited. However, inspired by the changes introduced by the Lisbon Treaty, in the run-up to the 2014 European elections, the Parliament announced that ‘this time, it’s different’: by voting in European elections, European citizens would not only elect the Parliament itself, but also have a say over who would head the EU executive – the European Commission. What became known as the ‘Spitzenkandidaten process’ is a procedure whereby European political parties, ahead of European elections, appoint lead candidates for the role of Commission President, with the presidency of the Commission then going to the candidate of the political party capable of marshalling sufficient parliamentary support.

Establishing a direct link between EP elections and the Commission President is intended to increase the legitimacy of the Commission and the EU as a whole, foster transparency in the nomination process and encourage increased turnout in EP elections. However, the procedure has not been without its critics, who have raised concerns about both its legal and political implications. The Parliament remains firmly committed to repeating the process in 2019 and, with EP elections now only months away, attention is shifting to the European political parties. Which parties will nominate lead candidates and when, and who will be their nominees?

Read the complete briefing on ‘Election of the President of the European Commission: Understanding the Spitzenkandidaten process‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Turnout in European Parliament elections, 1979-2014

Written by Maria Niestadt (1st edition),

© vege / Fotolia

The movement of goods in the European Union has increased by almost 25 % over the last 20 years, and this growth is projected to continue. A large amount of information accompanies this movement, exchanged mostly in paper format. Yet the digitalisation of information exchange could make the transport of goods much more efficient and reliable, and yield significant savings.

As one way to speed up the digitalisation of freight transport, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a regulation on electronic freight transport information on 17 May 2018. The aim of this regulation is to provide for a fully digital and harmonised environment for information exchanges between transport operators and authorities. The legislative proposal is part of the Commission’s third ‘Europe on the Move’ package, which is designed to complete its agenda for the modernisation of mobility.

In the European Parliament, the file was assigned to the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN). On 25 October 2018, the TRAN committee rapporteur published her draft report on the Commission proposal, in which she proposes to extend somewhat the scope of the regulation.

Versions

• November 2018: ‘Electronic freight transport information‘ (1st edition)

Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on electronic freight transport information Committee responsible: Transport and Tourism (TRAN) COM(2018) 279
17.5.2018 Rapporteur: Claudia Schmidt (EPP, Austria) 2018/0140 (COD) Shadow rapporteurs:

 

  Isabella De Monte (S&D, Italy)
Kosma Złotowski (ECR, Poland)
Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE, Spain)
Jakop Dalunde (Greens/EFA, Sweden)
Merja Kyllönen (GUE/NGL, Finland) Ordinary legislative procedure (COD) (Parliament and Council on equal footing – formerly ‘co-decision’) Next steps expected: Vote in committee

 

Written by Eric Pichon (1st edition),

© Xavier MARCHANT / Fotolia

On 14 June 2018, in preparation for the new multiannual financial framework (2021 to 2027 MFF), the European Commission published a proposal for a Council decision on the Association of the Overseas Countries and Territories, including Greenland, with the European Union. For Greenland the main source of EU funding is currently the EU budget, while for the other overseas countries and territories, it is the European Development Fund, a financial instrument outside the EU budget. The proposed decision would bring together the funds for all EU overseas countries and territories under the EU budget, as part of new Heading 6 ‘Neighbourhood and the world’.

Versions

• November 2018: ‘A new association of the Overseas Countries and Territories (including Greenland) with the European Union‘ (1st edition)

Proposal for a Council decision on the Association of the Overseas Countries and Territories with the European Union including relations between the European Union on the one hand, and Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark on the other (‘Overseas Association Decision’) Committee responsible: Development (DEVE) COM(2018) 461
14.6.2018 Rapporteur: Maurice Ponga (EPP, France) 2018/0244 (CNS) Shadow rapporteurs:

 

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D, Romania)
Eleni Theocharous (ECR, Cyprus)
Jan Zahradil (ECR, Czech Republic)
Charles Goerens (ALDE, Luxembourg)
Lola Sánchez Caldentey (GUE/NGL, Spain)
Maria Heubuch (Greens/EFA, Germany) Consultation procedure – Parliament adopts only a non-binding opinion Next steps expected: Publication of draft report

Proposed distribution of budgetary allocations to OCTs

© Luzitanija / Fotolia

Many citizens have written to the European Parliament expressing their unity in the face of acts of terrorism. They also ask the EU institutions to adopt measures to combat and prevent these crimes.

The European Parliament is actively involved in the EU fight against terrorism.

On 1 March 2018, the European Parliament adopted a recommendation on cutting the sources of income for jihadists – targeting the financing of terrorism. Among other things, it ‘calls on the Member States and the Commission to consider cutting the funding sources of terrorist networks as a key priority, as it constitutes an effective tool for hampering the effectiveness of those networks’. A summary of the Parliament’s recommendation is available in the press release on ‘Cutting cash flows to terrorists‘.

Special European Parliament Committee on terrorism

During its plenary session in July 2017, the European Parliament set up a Special Committee on Terrorism (TERR), whose remit is to draw up a report containing proposals for submission to the Council and the Commission. The Committee’s aim is to make a significant contribution to improving Europe’s capacity to respond to and combat terrorism and to consider possible ways forward.

European Parliament resolutions

A resolution on the implementation of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) was adopted by the European Parliament on 23 November 2016. Among other things, Parliament called for a revised and more robust CSDP, an integrated approach to crises, collaboration with NATO and other partners, as well as for European defence cooperation. Further information is available in the European Parliament press release ‘Defence: MEPs push for more EU cooperation to better protect Europe‘.

Furthermore, in its resolution of 25 November 2015 on the prevention of radicalisation and recruitment of European citizens by terrorist organisations, the European Parliament proposed, amongst other measures, to prevent violent extremism and terrorist radicalisation in prisons, to prevent radicalisation through education and social inclusion, and to promote exchange of information and good practices. More information is available in the Parliament press release ‘EP calls for joint EU strategy to fight radicalisation of young EU citizens‘.

EU strategy and legislation

The EU counter-terrorism strategy aims to combat terrorism globally, while respecting human rights, and to make Europe safer, allowing its citizens to live in an area of freedom, security and justice. It is based on four strands (prevent, protect, pursue and respond), and recognises the importance of cooperation with third countries and international institutions.

Directive (EU) 2017/541 on combating terrorism extends the list of offences to cover receiving terrorist training, travelling and attempting to travel abroad for terrorism, and funding or facilitating such travel, and includes provisions on the protection of victims.

An overview of EU law in the fight against terrorism is available in the EUR-Lex database.

Further information

The European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) provides publications and analyses on EU measures to combat and prevent terrorism. In particular, the 2018 study ‘The fight against terrorism – Cost of Non-Europe Report‘ identifies a number of gaps and barriers in measures combating terrorism.

The ‘News’ section of the European Parliament’s website includes articles, interviews, press releases and other materials on terrorism.

The 2018 infographic on ‘How to stop terrorism: EU measures explained‘ provides an overview of the EU’s counterterrorism policies aiming to prevent new attacks and to safeguard security.

Continue to put your questions to the Citizens’ Enquiries Unit (Ask EP). We reply to you in the EU language that you use to write to us.

Visit the European Parliament homepage on the fight against terrorism.

Written by Denise Chircop (1st edition),

© peampath / Fotolia

The Erasmus 2021-2027 proposal was published on 30 May 2018. Establishing a new programme would ensure the continuation of the Erasmus+ funding programme for education, training, youth and sport. The Commission claims its proposal would double the funds available to €30 000 million in current prices, from €14 712 million dedicated to Erasmus+. The proposal would also triple the number of participants. While Erasmus+ offered mobility opportunities to more than 4 million people, the new programming period aims to reach up to 12 million participants. The new proposal also aims at greater simplification for end-users, incorporates sports in the main structure of the programme, expands the use of digitalisation, supports new areas of knowledge and introduces Discover EU, a new mobility initiative. Stakeholders agreed that the current programme is highly beneficial but lessons need to be learnt to help the next generation programme run more efficiently and effectively.

Versions

• November 2018: ‘Erasmus 2021-2027: The Union programme for education, training, youth and sport‘ (1st edition)

Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing ‘Erasmus’: the Union programme for education, training, youth and sport and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1288/2013 Committee responsible: Culture and Education (CULT) COM(2018) 367
30.5.2018 Rapporteur: Milan Zver (EPP, Slovenia) 2018/0191 (COD) Shadow rapporteurs:

 

 

  Krystyna Łybacka (S&D, Poland)
Remo Sernagiotto (ECR, Italy)
María Teresa Giménez Barbat (ALDE, Spain)
Liadh Ní Riada (GUE/NGL, Ireland)
Jill Evans (Greens/EFA, UK)
Isabella Adinolfi (EFDD, Italy)
Dominique Bilde (ENF, France) Ordinary legislative procedure (COD) (Parliament and Council on equal footing – formerly ‘co-decision’) Next steps expected: Vote in committee

Written by Mar Negreiro (1st edition),

© Production Perig / Fotolia

The mid-term review of the digital single market strategy in 2017 identified the data economy as one of the top three priority areas for action in the second half of the strategy’s implementation, and announced a legislative proposal to improve access to and the re-use of publicly funded data. These data, which include geographical, land registry, statistical and legal information, are needed by re-users in the digital economy, and are increasingly employed by public administrations themselves.

On 25 April 2018, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a revision of the directive on the re-use of public sector information, which was presented as part of a package of measures aiming to facilitate the creation of a common data space in the EU. The directive addresses a number of issues and presents ways to boost the potential of public sector information, including the provision of real-time access to dynamic data, the supply of high-value public data for re-use, the prevention of new forms of exclusive arrangement, and action to limit the use of exceptions to the principle of charging the marginal cost.

Within the European Parliament, the file was assigned to the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE). The draft report was published on 12 September 2018.

Versions

• November 2018: ‘Re-use of public sector information‘ (1st edition)

Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the re-use of public sector information (recast) Committee responsible: Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) COM(2018) 234
25.04.2018 Rapporteur: Neoklis Sylikiotis (GUE/NGL, Cyprus) 2018/0111(COD) Shadow rapporteurs:

 

  Michał Boni (EPP, Poland)
Răzvan Popa (S&D, Romania)
Nikolay Barekov (ECR, Bulgaria)
Morten Helveg Petersen (ALDE, Denmark)
Julia Reda (Greens/EFA, Germany)
Dario Tamburrano (EFDD, Italy) Ordinary legislative procedure (COD) (Parliament and Council on equal footing – formerly ‘co-decision’) Next steps expected: Vote in committee

Written by Rachele Rossi (1st edition),

© Phils Photography / Fotolia

As part of the preparation of the EU budget for 2021-2027, the European Commission put forward a new set of regulations to shape the future EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) on 1 June 2018. The proposal for a regulation on the financing, management and monitoring of the CAP provides the legislative framework for adapting the financing, management and monitoring rules to a new CAP delivery model. This seeks to achieve more subsidiarity and simplification, with greater responsibility given to Member States, a shift from ensuring single transaction compliance to monitoring system performance in each Member State, and reduced ‘red tape’, among other things.

Versions

• October 2018: ‘CAP horizontal regulation: Financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy for 2021-2027‘ (1st edition)

Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 Committee responsible: Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI) COM(2018) 339
01.06.2018 Rapporteur: Ulrike Müller (ALDE, Germany) 2018/0217 (COD) Shadow rapporteurs:

 

 

  Michel Dantin (EPP, France)
Ricardo Serrão Santos (S&D, Portugal)
Beata Gosiewska (ECR, Poland)
Anja Hazekamp (GUE/NGL, the Netherlands)
Maria Heubuch (Greens/EFA, Germany)
Marco Zullo (EFDD, Italy)
Philippe Loiseau (ENF, France) Ordinary legislative procedure (COD) (Parliament and Council on equal footing – formerly ‘co-decision’) Next steps expected: Publication of draft report

Written by Christiaan van Lierop, 

Master Class of the European Week of Regions and Cities

Outreach with experts and the wider policy-making community represents a key part of our work here at the EPRS. That’s why we were delighted to be involved once again in the organisation of a specialist workshop as part of the European Week of Regions and Cities’ Master Class for early career researchers, which took place in Brussels from 8 to 11 October 2018.

This year’s workshop brought together 30 early career researchers from across the EU, specially chosen thanks to their expertise in regional policy. With the negotiations on the post-2020 EU cohesion package well underway, our workshop focused on three of the main legislative proposals under the future cohesion policy framework: the common provision regulation, the regulation on the European Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund, and the regulation on European territorial cooperation (Interreg). Building on the successful formula used in previous years, EPRS experts outlined the main challenges at stake in each of the proposals before handing over to the workshop participants for their input. Discussions were organised around three tables, one for each legislative proposal, with participants asked to take part in the debate at each table in turn, providing everyone with the opportunity to engage in the discussions on each proposal. This elicited a number of key findings, set out below.

Common provisions regulation VAN LIEROP Christiaan, EPRS

Participants considered that there was a need to identify alternative indicators beyond GDP and called for more simplification in programming rules, noting that although bureaucracy should be simplified, Member States still needed to be able to set their own rules, taking local circumstances into account. In this context, they highlighted the importance of empowering local stakeholders, to enable them to be more involved in decision-making about the content of operational programmes. Participants also stressed the need for more data transparency particularly in the case of micro-level data, and for more post-project evaluation.

ERDF and CF regulation

The workshop found that more clarification was needed regarding thematic concentration, and called for the use of a differentiated approach, aligned with country priorities, rather than a ‘one-size fits all’ model. In terms of the choice of indicators used to report results, participants questioned the need to focus on quantitative indicators, noting that qualitative indicators were missing when measuring cohesion processes. In particular, they felt that there was a lack of correlation between output and results, with a linear logic often not visible. Participants also called for a clearer definition of the terms ‘innovation’ and ‘smart’, which were potentially confusing and could lead to misunderstandings when applied.

European territorial cooperation (ETC) regulation SAPALA Magdalena, EPRS

Given the symbolic importance of ETC for the European project, participants questioned why only 2.5 % of the cohesion policy budget had been allocated to the Interreg goal, calling for it to be increased to 5 %. They also criticised the reduction to 52.7 % in the share of ETC resources allocated to cross-border cooperation, as well as the proposed reduction in the EU co-financing rate for Interreg projects from 85 % to 70 %. Participants felt that this reduction could put the participation of less developed countries at risk, calling for the 85 % rate to be retained for projects involving less developed countries, including candidate or other non-EU countries.

This Master Class for early career researchers provided interesting food for thought and an insightful and timely contribution to the current debate.

MARGARAS Vasileios, EPRS

Written by Katarzyna Sochacka and Clare Ferguson,

© European Union 2018 – Source : EP

The highlights of the October II plenary session were the debate on the conclusions of the European Council meeting on 17 and 18 October 2018 and the presentation of the European Commission’s 2019 work programme, the last of the current legislature. Parliament also held debates on the use of Facebook users’ data by Cambridge Analytica and its impact on data protection, and the Cum-Ex trading scandal. The series of debates on the Future of Europe continued, this time with Klaus Iohannis, President of Romania, urging European unity. Parliament voted on legislative proposals, inter alia, on drinking water; marine litter; the Schengen Information System; import of cultural goods; veterinary medicinal products; charging of heavy goods vehicles; and energy-efficient road transport vehicles. Members also adopted Parliament’s position on the EU general budget for 2019 and declined to grant discharge for the 2016 budget to the European Council and Council.

Quality of water intended for human consumption

Members debated and adopted a position on proposals to improve EU water quality standards through a revision of the Drinking Water Directive (by 300 votes to 98, but with 274 abstentions). Over 98.5 % of drinking water tested in the EU meets the standards today. However, not least in response to the first successful European Citizens’ Initiative, ‘Right2Water’, Members want to improve the quality of tap water, promote access for all European citizens to clean and safe water, and encourage consumers to drink tap water, which is much cheaper than bottled water and better for the environment. Measures approved include reducing toxic substance levels, and incentives to provide free water in public places and restaurants. Interinstitutional negotiations can begin once the Council reaches a position on the file.

Reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment

Marine litter, most of which is plastic, is a major threat to marine and coastal biodiversity with significant socio-economic impacts. Parliament adopted its position on the Commission’s proposal to reduce marine litter: single-use plastics and fishing gear by a large majority (571 votes to 53, 34 abstentions). The measures target the top 10 single-use plastics found on European beaches, as well as fishing gear.

Import of cultural goods

While no EU legislation currently exists on the import of cultural goods (except from Iraq and Syria), Parliament backed proposals to simplify EU customs rules, and to ensure that trade operators and buyers can be certain of the legality of the artefacts they purchase. Parliament is aiming to strike a balance between curbing the illegal import of cultural goods, particularly in view of their sale to finance terrorism, and avoiding a disproportionate burden for licit art market operators and customs authorities.

Charging of heavy goods vehicles for use of certain infrastructures

The EP is keen to apply the ‘user’ and ‘polluter pays’ principles in transport, particularly in the charging of heavy goods vehicles for using road infrastructure. Parliament adopted its position on the ‘Eurovignette’ report pushing for greater harmonisation of the currently ineffective road toll charges for such vehicles, by a large majority (398 for, 179 against and 32 abstentions). Parliament thus amended the mandate of the Transport and Tourism Committee which had been confirmed during the June 2018 plenary session. Interinstitutional negotiations can begin once the Council has reached its position on the proposal.

Promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles

Parliament debated and adopted an Environment, Public Health & Food Safety committee report on proposed measures aiming to encourage the promotion of clean and energy-efficient vehicles for use by public services – which has met with limited success to date. The committee can begin interinstitutional negotiations once the Council has reached a position.

Schengen Information System

Following an informal agreement with the Council on a package of measures on the use of the Schengen Information System, Members discussed and voted on three reports on proposed regulations on the use of the database. Conscious of EU citizens’ demands to better address migration and security challenges, and to counter terrorism and serious crime in the EU, Parliament is however, also determined not to strengthen security measures at the expense of safe treatment of personal data. It is in favour of stronger centralisation of data such as fingerprints, and calls for further harmonisation of alerts on refusals of entry to the Schengen area. Members are also concerned about the ineffectiveness of the current EU policy on returning unsuccessful asylum candidates to third countries. The measures now await final approval by the Council.

Veterinary medicinal products

Three texts agreed with the Council in trilogue on authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use, on veterinary medicinal products, and on medicated feed, were debated and adopted. The animal medicines package includes improved rules on authorisation of medicinal products for human and animal use, veterinary medicinal products and the manufacture, sale and use of medicated feed. The changes to the current framework seek to ensure that medicines are used when needed, without abuse leading to, for instance, raised antimicrobial resistance. Parliament insists that EU food standards are reciprocal, and that trading partners respect EU rules on antibiotics and antimicrobials that aim to protect citizens’ health. The Council will now give final approval to the three acts.

COP24 and COP14

Following a joint debate on the EU’s position in advance of the UN Climate Change Conference in Katowice, Poland (COP24) and the 14th meeting of the Convention of Biological Diversity (COP14), Members adopted a resolution (by 239 votes to 145 with 23 abstentions). A key supporter of the Paris Agreement, Parliament seeks significant progress, including raising the EU emissions reduction target from 40 % to 55 % by 2030 and pursuing the more ambitious limit for a global temperature rise target of 1.5°C.

General budget of the European Union for 2019

Parliament decided to amend the Council’s position on the 2019 draft EU budget. The adopted report reverses almost all of the cuts proposed by the Council. Furthermore, it increases appropriations for a number of Parliament’s priorities linked to sustainable growth, competitiveness, security, migration and young people, and reduces the EU budget contribution to financing of the Facility for Refugees in Turkey. With the Council subsequently notifying that it cannot accept all Parliament’s amendments, the three-week conciliation period for the two institutions to seek common ground will start on 30 October.

Discharge 2016: EU general budget – European Council and Council

Parliament debated and adopted resolutions, following second Budgetary Control Committee reports on the remaining EU institutions awaiting budgetary discharge for 2016. As in previous years, Parliament insists that the expenditure of all EU institutions is scrutinised in exactly the same way, and accordingly refused to grant discharge to the Council and the European Council, due to the ongoing lack of transparency in spending, particularly on buildings. It also refused discharge to the European Asylum Support Office.

EFSI Management appointments

The renewal of the appointment of Wilhelm Molterer (Austria) and Iliyana Tsanova (Bulgaria) to the posts of Executive Director and Deputy Executive Director, respectively, at the investment committee of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), the financial arm of the ‘Juncker’ plan, was approved. Both candidates, in position since October 2015, saw their mandates renewed for a second period of three years.

Opening of trilogue negotiations

Six parliamentary committee decisions (from TRAN, IMCO, INTA LIBE) to enter into interinstitutional (trilogue) negotiations were confirmed. Only one vote was held, on an AGRI committee report on unfair trading practices in business-to-business relationships, where the committee’s decision to enter into intersintitutional negotiations was approved.

Read this ‘At a glance’ note on ‘Plenary round-up – Strasbourg, October I 2018‘ on the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

With European elections coming up in May 2019, you probably want to know how the European Union impacts your daily life, before you think about voting. In the latest in a series of posts on what Europe does for you, your family, your business and your wellbeing, we look at what Europe does for victims of cyberbullying.

Twitter Hashtag #EUandME

Cyberbullying is verbal or psychological harassment carried out via electronic means of communication, usually repetitively and mostly via social media. It can take various forms such as insults, threats and intimidation, gossip, exclusion, stalking or identity theft. The internet offers anonymity and a sense of impunity to perpetrators, and aggravates the victimisation, as the harmful content is spread instantly to a far wider audience. While cyberbullying also affects adults, it occurs at an alarming rate among children and young people.

© Photographee.eu / Fotolia

One problem with cyberbullying is that information remains online for a long time and can be difficult to remove. New EU data protection rules introduced a ‘right to be forgotten’ that allows victims to request the erasure of their personal data. There is no specific EU law on cyberbullying but some aspects are covered, for instance expressions of racism or xenophobia or sexual harassment of a victim under 18. Europe is also funding action on the ground to prevent violence against women, children and young people (including online). To protect children and teenagers and arm them with the skills and tools they need to use the internet safely and responsibly, the EU has adopted a Better Internet for Kids strategy and co-funds Safer Internet Centres in all EU countries (forming a pan-European network – Insafe). Each national centre operates a helpline, providing advice and assistance for children and teenagers confronted with harmful online content or conduct (cyberbullying is the main reason for contacting helplines).

Further information

• Network of Safer Internet Centres, links to services in your country,https://www.betterinternetforkids.eu/web/portal/policy/insafe-inhope
• Better Internet for Kids, ‘Cyberbullying revisited’, 2017, https://www.betterinternetforkids.eu/web/portal/practice/awareness/detail?articleId=1733931
• European Parliament, study ‘Cyberbullying among young people’, 2016, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/571367/IPOL_STU(2016)571367_EN.pdf

With European elections coming up in May 2019, you probably want to know how the European Union impacts your daily life, before you think about voting. In the latest in a series of posts on what Europe does for you, your family, your business and your wellbeing, we look at what Europe does for victims of cybercrime.

Twitter Hashtag #EUandME

Like 70 % of EU citizens you probably use the internet every day. Maybe you are one of the 86 % of Europeans feeling increasingly worried about cybercrime. Indeed the scale and sophistication of cyber-attacks have reached unprecedented levels. In some European countries, cybercrime accounts for half of all crimes committed.

Cybercrime takes various forms. Criminals can gain control over your devices using malware, with ransomware attacks being one of the main threats. They can steal or compromise your data and your identity, notably to commit online fraud. They also use Darknet to sell illicit goods and hacking services. Some cybercrimes, such as child sexual exploitation, cause serious harm to their victims.

© Antonioguillem / Fotolia

To prevent and combat cybercrime, the European Union has developed a comprehensive cybersecurity policy (which has been undergoing an ambitious reform since 2017). A new cybersecurity law designed to enhance Europe’s cyber-resilience entered into force in May 2018. Specific EU laws criminalise online child abuse, attacks against information systems and non-cash payment fraud. A European Cybercrime Centre (EC3) helps EU countries to investigate online crimes and dismantle criminal networks. Together with private partners, the EC3 launched an initiative to help victims of ransomware to regain access without paying: www.nomoreransom.org. Through its Internal Security Fund, meanwhile, the EU contributes to the fight against cybercrime by funding concrete action around the EU (training, operational cooperation, the acquisition of equipment and setting up of IT systems).

Further information

• Europol, ’15 ways you could be the next victim of cybercrime’, 2018, https://www.europol.europa.eu/newsroom/news/15-ways-you-could-be-next-victim-of-cybercrime
• European Commission, ‘EU cybersecurity initiatives’, 2017, http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/image/document/2017-3/factsheet_cybersecurity_update_january_2017_41543.pdf
• EPRS publication on ‘Cyber-attacks: Not just a phantom menace’, 2018, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2018/614759/EPRS_ATA(2018)614759_EN.pdf

With European elections coming up in May 2019, you probably want to know how the European Union impacts your daily life, before you think about voting. In the latest in a series of posts on what Europe does for you, your family, your business and your wellbeing, we look at what Europe does for migrant children.

Twitter Hashtag #EUandME

Children are particularly vulnerable during migration, and need careful protection against the dangers of people trafficking and abuse. The number of children arriving from third countries in the EU has increased significantly, particularly since the migratory crisis in 2015. About one in four people currently seeking asylum in the EU are children. In April 2017, the European Commission proposed to reinforce the protection of all migrant children at all stages of the migration process, complementing national efforts in this area.

© Lydia Geissler / Fotolia

The proposed measures include: swift identification and protection upon arrival; adequate reception conditions for children; rapid status determination and effective guardianship; durable solutions for early integration; and addressing root causes and protecting children along migrant routes outside the EU. Current proposals to reform the common European asylum system and strengthen EU borders contain specific provisions on the protection of children. For example, a new Schengen alert will be created for ‘missing children’ to enable authorities to identify such cases.

Education plays an essential role in preparing immigrant children to participate in society and the labour market. The European Commission facilitates the exchange of good practices on integrating migrants, and funds projects promoting inclusive education. Giving migrant children opportunities to fully develop their potential is vital for future EU economic growth and social cohesion.

Further information

• Communication on priority actions needed to reinforce the protection of all children in migration, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1524055031459&uri=CELEX:52017DC0211
• Unaccompanied migrant children in the EU, https://epthinktank.eu/2016/01/20/unaccompanied-migrant-children-in-the-eu/
• Vulnerability of unaccompanied and separated child migrants, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2016/595853/EPRS_BRI(2016)595853_EN.pdf