Cooperating with developing countries on promoting good governance in tax matters (short presentation)
The next item is the report by Mrs Joly, on behalf of the Committee on Development, on Tax and development - Cooperating with developing countries on promoting good governance in tax matters.
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is with some satisfaction that I present this report on tax and development to you tonight.
It represents an important stage in a battle that began a long time ago, which I am now pursuing in the European Parliament. I would like to thank my colleagues in the Committee on Development, with whom the work has been extremely productive. I hope that it will find confirmation during tomorrow's votes.
Developing countries have been very badly hit by the financial and economic crisis and the rising prices of agricultural materials and now need substantial new sources of funding more than ever. Amid this context of global crisis, tax revenue, which is the oldest source of development funding, is a major issue and a genuine challenge.
Effective taxation systems not only provide funding for vital public services. By promoting the transparent, responsible use of government revenue, they are also one of the foundations of a responsible democracy. Contributing towards raising equitable, progressive and transparent taxes should in no way lead to removing or reducing official development assistance (ODA). It should not provide a further excuse for Member States that are increasingly inclined to reduce their share of GDP which is devoted to ODA.
Whilst ODA may be imperfect and have much room for improvement, it is no less vital for countries that have been severely affected by both economic and climate-related crises. It is not a question of replacing aid, therefore, but of redirecting it towards developing effective taxation systems, to which the multinationals must contribute on the basis of their actual profits. In this way, poor countries will be able to take ownership of their development once again, reduce poverty and compensate for the loss of customs revenue caused by the liberalisation of the markets, so that in the long term, they will be able to manage without foreign aid.
However, the countries of the South are not only victims of their own ineffective taxation systems. They are also victims of the tax dumping imposed by the Bretton Woods bodies, of the cost of illicit capital flight, and of tax havens. Every year, they sustain colossal losses of tax revenue estimated at over ten times the amount of aid they receive from rich countries.
This report emphasises this fact. As for the OECD guidelines, far from being adequate, they actually pose a threat. By allowing non-cooperative jurisdictions to be taken off the grey lists simply by signing cooperation agreements without imposing any automatic exchange of information, they are creating the illusion that tax havens are legitimate and conferring credibility on a system that is harmful to public finances in North and South alike.
Putting an end to tax havens is a vital step towards these countries' development, and the European Union must make it an absolute priority. The EU must shoulder its responsibilities as the United States has done and produce clear, binding legislation coupled with genuine sanction mechanisms in order to put an end to tax havens, which are like weapons of mass destruction for the development of poor countries. The EU must prevent profit and transfer price manipulation by companies, especially European companies, which both benefit from and abuse detrimental taxation systems. It must impose the introduction of a transparent, binding international mechanism that will place a duty on all multinational companies, especially those in the extractive industries, to automatically declare the profits they make and the taxes they pay in each of the countries in which they operate.
This is a vital first step towards stopping those who are getting rich on the back of the Southern countries' misery. It is also a vital step towards restoring the European Union's credibility.
(RO) Mr President, against the background of the current economic crisis, promoting good governance on tax matters is a necessity at both EU level and outside it. I should point out that every state is responsible for deciding its own fiscal policy. In this context, the practice of putting up obstacles must be avoided and cooperation between countries encouraged.
Combating tax havens is a key priority. They help detract from the quality of the political system in developing countries. They also encourage economic crime, making it more profitable. This in turn helps increase the inequitable distribution of tax revenues. Another measure involves increasing the exchange of information between all Member States. At the same time, there needs to be a greater level of participation from developing countries in the relevant international forums.
Mr President, tax and taxing is an extremely important topic when we talk about development policies. It is a crucial topic for policy coherence for development because, without a proper tax system, without proper policies on tax havens, we will never be coherent in our development policies and, at the moment, we are not. Therefore, I very much welcome this report and I hope that tomorrow, you, the Members of this House, will not water it down.
We need to complement the Commission communication, which has serious shortcomings, for example, by not addressing problems within the OECD and by not addressing the impact of tax competition on tax revenues. If we want to comply with the Lisbon Treaty, if we want our development policies to be coherent, we need to take action now and I ask you to support this report in full.
(PT) Mr President, while cooperation in the field of tax is important and necessary, we should not ignore the fact that tax policy is a crucial instrument of economic and social policy, on whose definition obvious political criteria and evaluations have an impact. Therefore, it does not fall to the European Union to export so-called 'good governance in tax matters', as the rapporteur quite rightly mentions. Developing countries' sovereignty, choices and options must be entirely respected, whilst paying attention to their specific situation and conditions.
I have two observations about two hot topics. Firstly, the so-called Economic Partnership Agreements, which we have been imposing on developing countries despite their resistance, and which severely constrain these countries' tax systems, along with causing other severe damage. Secondly, tax havens, which continue to exist and lead to losses of revenue equivalent to USD 800 billion every year according to the report. These two examples are paradigms of the inconsistency of the European Union's policies regarding its stated development cooperation objectives.
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, on behalf of the Commission, I would like to thank the European Parliament, and especially the Committee on Development, for this report.
I am pleased to see that Mrs Eva Joly's report highlights, and gives added strength to, the message of the Commission's communication on tax and development. It also sets very ambitious targets and provides powerful guidance for the European Union to strengthen revenue mobilisation in developing countries. Domestic resource mobilisation is central for sustainable growth, poverty reduction, good governance and the provision of public goods needed to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. We need to improve synergies between tax and development policies and assist developing countries in building better tax systems and administrations.
We face a serious problem. I was personally impressed by your figures stating that the amount of illicit outflows is about ten times the amount of aid money going into developing countries. This is really striking.
So we must work simultaneously at two complementary levels. First, we need to support effective domestic tax systems and, secondly, we need to work towards a transparent, cooperative and fair international tax environment to help developing countries fight against tax evasion and harmful tax competition.
Your report calls on the Commission firstly to take better account of the impact of trade liberalisation and, secondly, not to be limited to the OECD principles in the fight against tax evasion and harmful tax competition. I would like to refer to these challenges.
Concerning the first matter, I can assure you that we are fully committed to supporting successful fiscal transition through increased support for capacity building, demand-driven regional and international capacity development initiatives, and better donor coordination at EU and international levels.
Concerning the second matter, the Commission considers tax evasion and harmful tax competition as major obstacles to domestic resource mobilisation. Therefore, we are helping developing countries to develop capacities to address these challenges and also promoting better international cooperation in tax matters.
A lot of work has already been undertaken since the adoption of our Communication. Concrete action has been made possible by the Parliament's financial support. Your 2010 allocation of EUR 708 000 has allowed us to fund a series of important activities in order to promote tax governance. These activities include technical seminars of the African Tax Administration Forum, support to the extractive industries, transparency initiatives and the financing of a side event at the United Nations on domestic resource mobilisation. We will also provide technical assistance to implement tax information exchange agreements.
Moreover, the Commission is preparing a Communication to assess the feasibility of introducing a country-by-country reporting requirement into EU legislation. We had a public consultation, which ended last January, and now we will continue with an impact assessment on this important issue. This could help developing countries to combat tax evasion more effectively.
I sincerely want to thank Parliament for your support and your commitment on these issues. I am convinced that much progress can be made to strengthen tax governance and I am glad to see that these topics have also been included in the agendas of the G20 and the G8.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place at midday on Tuesday, 8 March.


EU external policies in favour of democratisation (debate)
The next item is the report by Mrs De Keyser, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on EU external policies in favour of democratisation.
Madam President, allow me first to thank my fellow Members who have widely contributed to this report on democratisation to the extent that at times, I struggle to keep up. However, they did it in an extremely positive spirit and their contribution helped to enrich the report.
Now, what does this report contain? Firstly, it was largely inspired by what happened in North Africa and by these Arab revolutions. Indeed, all this has created a problem for us, the European Union. Has what we have done in relation to past regimes and the use we have made of the instruments at our disposal really helped us to support democracy to any real extent? The first answer is no. We did not support democracy, we supported what we hoped to be stability in the region, but stability without democracy can also lead to a police state.
Therefore, a complete rethink was needed and today, this report proposes a few suggestions. The first suggestion is slightly philosophical, but it is fundamental: let us rebuild our policies towards our neighbours according to our values, values that we share and, in particular, democracy. That is what must come first.
The second suggestion is to dare, to dare play the card of political democracy a bit more. We played the democracy card by telling ourselves 'As long as there is development and economic growth in a country, democracy will follow'. No, democracy does not always follow. Of course, wealth can be distributed very unevenly. Therefore, we must also be able to support political and democratic structures in those countries and act as a political guide.
At present, with these transitions and the world undergoing massive changes, we come to realise that we may not have all the necessary instruments to precisely provide political support to these democracies. We have election observation missions, but these are not enough; we must follow up on things, we must do more follow-up and the report mentions this.
The third point that the report raises is that we must support the civil societies and the influential stakeholders within these civil societies, and there is no shortage of examples to show that there are many new civil stakeholders who can play a decisive role in these democratic transitions, such as a free press, the Internet, women, unions, youth associations and so on.
Those are the main elements of the report. Now, have we got the required instruments? We have numerous instruments. Currently, there are many instruments that can be used in a more consistent and effective way for democracy.
We have the instrument of the Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights, but we also have, as per the Treaty of Lisbon, the ability to make better use of our trade agreements; we have the stability instrument, we have a whole range of instruments. Now, is all that enough? Are these instruments effective? Do they go straight to the point? Are they reactive, proactive, fast-acting? Well, they may not be proactive enough and fast-acting enough, and we probably need to strengthen and improve them. Should we create new ones? I needed a great deal of persuading and we, or rather the Polish Presidency, came up with a splendid project: 'Endowment for democracy'. I said to myself 'Yet another instrument, when we have not even made full use of all the others!'
So, in the end, what is the outcome of these thoughts today? We are not against. We are not against this splendid project of the Polish Presidency. Poland has a long history and fine examples of democratisation to show us. Only, we do not think that this should replace what is there already. We believe that all this should remain under the European Parliament's control, if money from the budget has been used to fund it. We believe that this project should not be too unwieldy, that it should not add an extra administrative burden, but that it can be interesting, used in an ad hoc fashion, to fund some stakeholders who are difficult to fund through the current instruments.
That is, in a nutshell, the approach we have taken in our work. While for us, this project still has some way to go, we have made progress on both sides before achieving a final outcome today; we think that it is a worthwhile project which needs to be taken up, but at present, we are still not quite in agreement as to the European Parliament's positions nor as to the Polish project. However, we need to continue the negotiations and I am sure that they will be conclusive.
Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. - Madam President, can I begin by thanking Véronique De Keyser very much for her work. In her report, she says human rights must be central to all EU policies. I agree so much with that. I should also like to put on record my thanks to Heidi Hautala, who has now gone off to a new job but who did such a fantastic job as Chair of the Subcommittee on Human Rights.
The report is very important. It is a great commentary on what we were able to do in terms of foreign policy and democracy, but it also enables us to consider the responsibilities we have to ensure that people in all countries benefit from the same rights as us. We cannot take those rights for granted. While, of course, the Middle East and North Africa are in the spotlight, we know that in Belarus, President Lukashenko continues to suppress any form of opposition, and that is why we led a cross-regional initiative to record our condemnation of Belarus at the June meeting of the UN Human Rights Council. The resolution was adopted by an overwhelming majority.
I raise that example to show that this policy of engagement, a policy where we work with the people on the ground but are clear in our stance against regimes, is very important. At the UN, we were very active last year, not least because of the review of the UN Human Rights Council. We had some real successes in Geneva, including the renewal of the mandates of various UN Special Rapporteurs - on Burma, DPRK, Sudan, Somalia, Cambodia and Haiti - and resolutions on the DRC, Guinea, Kurdistan and freedom of religion, a very important issue that is often raised in this Chamber.
We also reached all our objectives at the Third Committee of the General Assembly in New York. The resolution in favour of a moratorium on the death penalty was passed with great support, and a resolution against religious intolerance was adopted by consensus.
We celebrated, too, in 2010 the tenth anniversary of Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security, and we adopted a set of indicators to monitor our progress on it.
All these are examples of what can be achieved when the EU speaks as one. The fact that we speak at the UN as one now offers even greater potential.
It is right, too, that we review our policies to ensure, as Ms De Keyser says, that 'values, consistency and a genuine culture of results' are absolutely at the heart of them.
The report goes on to stress the need to develop further the political dimension of our work, to match what we do on development. We have a good basis for doing that, though I am sure it will not be easy. These strands were brought together in the policy of 'democracy support' set out in our Council Conclusions of November 2009. We went on to designate 12 countries for pilot implementation of our 'Agenda for Action'.
So, too, when we think about the idea of a 'European Endowment for Democracy', for me the capacity to help young people, in particular, to join that democratic dialogue by using new technology, will play an important part in advancing that process.
Sometimes we have to be bold, and I think that is essential in terms of how we now approach the report and take this work forward. I believe that we have to choose stability and democracy; I believe that we need to be creative in our response to these rapidly evolving challenges. No simple task to deliver, but I think this contribution enriches our debate and helps us move towards achieving it.
rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality. - Madam President, I agree with Véronique De Keyser that women are a vital part of a well-functioning democracy. They can play an important role in establishing a democratic culture, deeply rooted in society.
The recent revolutions in North Africa and the Middle East sent a strong message that the empowerment of women and their equal and active participation in decision making and conflict resolution is a crucial element and a prerequisite for a successful democratisation process and for the socio-economic development of third countries.
We therefore stress the crucial role of the EU in promoting gender equality and mainstreaming in its external relations with third countries. This can be done through various programmes and the exchange of best practices and know-how and by assuring the availability of necessary funding for education, training, awareness-raising and empowerment for women, as well as for the continuous fight against gender violence, stereotypes and discrimination.
Madam President, when we talk about democracy, it is not merely a humanitarian responsibility; it is, in fact, our duty under the EU Treaty to work for democratisation. Sometimes our eagerness for democratisation has perhaps been presented as if we are pursuing some sort of cultural imperialism, to put it strongly. That is obviously not the case, but rather every individual, irrespective of religion, culture and tradition, has an inviolable responsibility. To use a word that Baroness Ashton used, I would like us to be a little bolder in this area and to work a little more vigorously precisely to bring about democratisation. The fact is, this is not about a kind of democracy that brings freedom alone; it is specifically about democracy that involves respect for an individual's inviolable worth and dignity.
on behalf of the PPE Group. - Madam President, first of all, sincere thanks to Ms De Keyser for all her good work in preparing this report.
I am glad that we are having this discussion at a time of democratisation changes in many places in the world. Democracy is Europe's core value. Yet its role in the EU's external relations has been somewhat less tangible. The revolutions in North Africa and the Middle East give us a chance to learn and design new policies more focused on democracy support. To be honest, it is not only the southern neighbourhood where democracy needs to be supported. Our efforts have a much broader reach. We should not forget our eastern neighbours. EU democracy support should develop through a new range of instruments, built on the EU's past experience, including that of Central Europe. The benefits could be clear and straightforward.
The latest reforms at institutional and policy level raised expectations, especially in partner countries where the lack of a more coordinated and coherent EU voice is often perceived as a serious shortcoming. This is the reason why the report calls for the shift of paradigm in EU democratisation in external policy.
Finally, in the report, we are calling for the establishment of the European Endowment for Democracy. This could be a good and useful tool. It is necessary to be more flexible in the allocation of external funds and respond more rapidly to democratisation trends in third countries. However, if the endowment is to bring added value, it should not overlap with existing instruments. All in all, I believe that the report will be a good base for reflection on changes which should take place in order to have a more effective democratisation policy in the EU's external relations.
on behalf of the S&D Group. - Madam President, this is a report which is not about saying we support democracy, but how we do it. We support the idea, originally put forward by the Socialist and Democrat Group in this Parliament in the human rights report for a European Endowment for Democracy.
We are concerned with proposals from the Polish Presidency which seem to replicate the European initiative for democracy and human rights (EIDHR). I support those. High Representative Ashton herself this afternoon argued that a network amongst existing organisations rather than a new heavy-handed or expensive agency is preferable in creating the endowment. If democracy can come from Facebook pages and tweets by the young people of North Africa, Europe itself could use virtual technology to achieve our own aims for democratisation.
Second, election observation missions really are some of the most successful external actions we as Europe make. But we need to understand that we are sometimes blocked where we are most needed, including, I regret to say, currently by the military government in Egypt. We can do better targeting missions where we can most make a difference as well as in the follow up of the recommendations in the final report in our other country-specific actions.
Finally, to those who are worried about those who would use democracy to defeat democracy, let us acknowledge that this is a problem in many of our countries. Which is why we designed the rules of the EIDHR carefully, to allow us not to choose for people of third countries but to directly support reform and opposition movements to ensure that there is a choice to be made.
This is difficult territory, but we asked the European External Action Service and Commission to exploit these rules to full effect. Let us agree with the axiom, 'democracy cannot be imported or exported, but it can be supported'.
Madam President, I, too, wish to thank the rapporteur, Mrs De Keyser, for her excellent report. This report has a normative section and an operative section. In the normative section, we try to establish a European consensus on what, from our point of view, constitutes democracy, what it absolutely must encompass. The Council has been unable to come to such agreement for years, because the Member States have very different traditions. Nonetheless, I believe that we can all agree that what we have included in recitals C to O are clearly elements of democracy which must be taken into account when promoting democracy.
The operative section deals with the instruments. What instruments are available to us? The EIDHR has been mentioned. We find that it is often too slow, too bureaucratic, too complicated and has scope for improvement. The Instrument for Stability could also be faster. The report states that we always react in an immediate and integrated manner to situations; however, it took weeks before election workers could be sent to Tunisia to provide technical assistance under the Instrument for Stability. There is still a lot of work to do here. That is why the European Endowment for Democracy is being discussed, because we want a faster, more flexible instrument. I believe - and this is important and applies to all the groups - that there are some who are more enthusiastic, while others are somewhat more reticent. We need clarification from the European External Action Service, from the Commission and from the Polish Presidency of the Council, which considers this an important project. Where are the boundaries between the instruments that we have and what a European Endowment for Democracy is supposed to do? Who does what with which instruments and when?
Mr Howitt addressed the question of election observations in this context. I believe that this is very important. Please look at paragraphs 60 to 63: they contain this House's view on election monitoring. We want stringent criteria for selecting countries; we are of the opinion that they are not always stringent enough. We want comprehensive political concepts. We want recommendations to be followed-up. I think these are some of the points that need to be highlighted.
What happens next? This report contains numerous calls for action, by the EEAS and by Parliament. How can we make sanctions more effective? How can we make the instruments more effective? What are we doing for women and democracy, for gender equality? What are we doing in the EEAS delegations across the world? There are numerous calls for action to be drawn from this report. Let us get to work.
Madam President, Baroness Ashton, this report contains a host of sensible measures to promote the process of democratisation and deserves our full support.
However, in this context, I should like to discuss the establishment of a foundation to foster democracy, the European Endowment for Democracy, which is also intended to support societies in upheaval. However, we are not absolutely clear here as to what the precise remit of this new foundation should be. We witnessed a comprehensive debate on this issue in the Subcommittee on Human Rights, but again we were not clear as to what the added value is, compared to the application of the Instrument for Human Rights and Democracy. Certainly, the Instrument for Human Rights and Democracy needs to be improved, for example, in terms of flexibility or the facility for faster response. However, I think that it would be of no help to anyone if we were to agree to set up an Endowment for Democracy in what is still an unclear situation. We must, come what may, avoid creating overlaps.
We also discussed the fact that we want to set up a mechanism to promote civil society. When we asked, no one could explain or perhaps no one has worked out what this monitoring mechanism will entail. Thus, there is a lack of clarity here too. Until such time as these questions have been answered, we are unable to agree to an Endowment for Democracy. Obviously, we are worried about what the financing will involve. As it is assumed in the concept that individual Member States will finance this Endowment for Democracy and this may not succeed, this begs a second question: will it be at the expense of existing instruments? If this were to prove to be the case, we would again reject it.
Madam President, firstly, I should like to thank the rapporteur once again for the spirit of cooperation which she demonstrated towards us. I think that the report rightly calls for the European Union to revise its stand on its external policy, especially in the sector referred to as the promotion of democracy, so that there are no double standards on the part of the European Union.
In other words, a binding precondition to any agreements with the Union must be real respect for human rights and the people in third countries.
We support the view that democracy and security cannot exist without full and universal respect for human rights. We stress the need to promote respect for rights in the face of economic and political expediency. We, too, therefore underline the responsibilities and mistakes of the Union such as, for example, the mistaken insistence on restricting immigration from the countries of North Africa and on cooperation with the regimes there.
I should like to mention our reservations:
Firstly, there are limits on the European Union's external policy. Unfortunately, our policy is often interventionist and creates situations in third countries in various ways, without promoting human and democratic rights.
Secondly, we place particular emphasis on the question of funding for political parties in third countries. It is a form of intervention, especially when political, economic and other interests arise.
Thirdly, unfortunately, the report does not refuse - as we would have wished - to accept EU external policy agencies and instruments to which our group is opposed, in principle, on account of the fact that these instruments are of a military nature.
on behalf of the EFD Group. - Madam President, there is a grey area in ethical judgment called cultural relativism. What is revered in one country may be abhorred in another. Even within Europe, there are vast cultural differences. The British would never allow bullfighting, and our laws mean it is illegal to produce foie gras. Who are we, therefore, to not only dictate terms of trade but roll out costly projects to tell third countries how to think and behave?
The Commission evidently fancy themselves as the new UN. The EU may talk about democracy promotion, but what about democracy here? The EU ignored the results of five referendums it did not like: the Danish vote on Maastricht in 1993, the Irish vote on Nice in 2000, the French and Dutch votes on the EU constitution in 2005 and the Irish vote on Lisbon three years ago. Then the EU spends handsome amounts monitoring elections in Afghanistan and Kosovo, to absolutely no avail. It is sheer hypocrisy and arrogance.
(PL) Madam President, the events of the Arab Spring, which have been eloquently described by Mrs De Keyser, and the provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon on the promotion of, and support for, democracy, human rights and the rule of law throughout the world, mean that we should redraft EU policies on support for democratic processes across the globe.
There is a lack of economic stability and a lack of social stability in countries, since the priority is, and should be, the observance of human rights and democratic rules. The De Keyser report takes a very positive approach to supporting democratic processes, not only when they begin or are in progress, but also wherever we are dealing with underground activities by opposition movements, for example. Such activities can be seen in Belarus and Syria, for example, but also in Cuba. If it were not for the Sakharov Prize, we would certainly not be as aware of events in all these countries.
We frequent have to deal with social discontent. The economic causes are important, but it is primarily the lack of democracy that means that we are dealing with events such as those in North Africa. I am pleased that the report includes a provision supporting the creation of a European Endowment for Democracy, which is a Polish initiative that will expand the instruments available to the EU for long-term support of democratic processes.
If this endowment had existed a few years ago, we would certainly not have experienced so many problems in terms of supporting such processes, for example, in Syria or Egypt. This proposal aims to supplement existing instruments, rather than to act as competition for them. We want this instrument to be set up by means of a convention. It looks like the European Parliament will be heavily involved both in supervising measures under the endowment and monitoring its budget. I would wholeheartedly urge Members to support Amendment 11, which relates to this project.
Madam President, there are a number of paradoxes within the report. It calls for EU measures to be made more individual, by tailoring them to each country, but, at the same time, it also calls for double standards to be removed from European policies. This is something I, too, also support wholeheartedly.
(RO) Madam President, I would first of all like to congratulate my colleague, Mrs De Keyser, for this report, which is absolutely necessary in the current context. I hope that the proposals put forward in this report will be implemented. It would really mark great progress if we managed to make the issue of social justice and the fight against inequalities key objectives of the European Union's external policy.
As both Lady Ashton and Mrs De Keyser have pointed out, the revolutions in the Arab world highlight once again that poverty goes hand in hand with the restriction of freedoms. Just like any society, the more prosperous it is in economic terms, the more extensive the rights it offers its citizens and the more democracy they have.
Breaches of fundamental rights, such as the right to work, education and health, unfair distribution of incomes, marginalisation of women and ever-growing poverty and disparities are some of the factors causing the changes taking place recently in the world and especially in North Africa. However, these states must realise that it is not enough to get rid of the tyranny of dictatorship.
As someone who comes from a country which, two decades ago, still lived under dictatorship, I would like to say that democracy without social justice is never complete. Indeed, dictatorial tendencies, abuses and intimidation are still possible, especially in impoverished societies because, as I have said, poverty and inequality seriously undermine progress towards democracy. This is why I believe that it is appropriate for us to place greater emphasis on respect for citizens' rights, not only political but socio-economic as well. I hope, Commissioner, that the new Human Rights and Democracy Directorate within the European External Action Service will also bear in mind this aspect of the process of establishing democracy.
Madam President, like others, I would like to congratulate Veronique De Keyser who produced an extremely comprehensive and helpful report. I would also like to address the question of the European Endowment for Democracy.
Just to recall, some 20 years ago, after the revolution in Central and Eastern Europe, I founded the EIDHR as a mechanism that was not part of the EU, but it was financed by us. It was at arms length and it remained so for about ten years until it was taken in-house by the European Commission and then became, for a period, very safe, very bureaucratic and almost totally useless.
Fortunately, in recent years, under the people who were here present in the Chamber, it has improved considerably. But it still cannot do everything that we need it to do, especially in the Arab world. So many people have mentioned this and I will do so too.
So I would ask colleagues to keep the door open to a mechanism which is capable of doing things that EIDHR cannot do and should not do. That is why it is so important that there is some sort of compromise tomorrow on this report, on paragraph 35, to encourage the thing to go forward.
(RO) Madam President, I, too, would like to congratulate Mrs De Keyser. The existence of a democratic system is essential to relations between the EU and third countries as a shared value. The report being discussed today promotes the consolidation of this aspect as part of the future agreements negotiated on the basis of the Treaty of Lisbon. I should mention that the EU is a leading global player in the protection of human rights and respect for conditionality helps spread these principles.
With this in mind, I support the clearer wording in the clause on democracy featuring in the text of trade agreements with third countries. I also think that a mechanism needs to be introduced for monitoring the proper implementation of these provisions. The budget support offered by the EU must target the same aim: local development of civil society. Only democracy that has been built within the state is viable. This is the way to ensure long-term, sound, effective cooperation with the European Union.
(FR) Madam President, I thank and congratulate Mrs De Keyser for her excellent and relevant report.
Today, I would like to emphasise two points. Firstly, let us be careful to avoid the 'paternalistic and pretending to know what is best' behaviour that Europeans have often been criticised for. I believe that we have the duty, when promoting democratisation outside our borders, to respect the customs and traditions of each country. Simply copying and pasting cannot work. History is indeed there to remind us of that. Our model of democracy should not be lived like a sanction and has a duty to be integrated harmoniously within the host country. A word of warning, however: impunity should be fought against.
My second point concerns the crucial role of election observation missions and their monitoring. The Union has at its disposal here a unique instrument that democratically approves, if I may say so, a democratic process. The European Parliament is entitled to observe the process. It needs to be more involved in this monitoring.
Baroness Ashton, I am cautious about any idea of new instruments. I think that it is more important to make more operational and yet more effective the provisions that already exist, as well as all the mechanisms at our disposal in the Treaties.
(PL) Madam President, thank you very much for allowing me to take the floor. I read the De Keyser report very attentively. It really is a very interesting and very well-written report. Yet one of the things it shows is that we are dealing not only with positive trends, but also with problems, which must be a cause for concern to all of us in this Chamber. As far as the positive trends are concerned, I believe that what is most important is that it is abundantly clear that the EU has been paying a great deal more attention in recent months to extending democratic values outside the territory of the EU. It is abundantly clear that the EU is reconstructing its Neighbourhood Policy. However, we cannot agree whether the instruments to be used are good or excellent. I would therefore like to lend my wholehearted support to Poland's initiative to create an Endowment for Democracy, and to encourage others to do the same. This is a good idea, and it should be supported.
Madam President, I do not take democracy for granted because, for the first 21 years of my life, I lived under dictatorship. So I know the importance of support for those forces who want to fight against oppression and of democratic support for building capacity for the financial and organisational support. That is the reason why, already in 2010, I proposed, in the context of the Annual Report on Human Rights of this Parliament, an amendment talking about an endowment for democracy.
So I welcome this report by Véronique De Keyser, which is so comprehensive and so good, and which contains this particular proposal. In my opinion, this endowment needs to be something that will be very flexible, very quick, and which will not compete with the funds allocated to the Instrument for Human Rights and Democracy. That will be new money. And it will not be duplicating what, for example, the European political foundations are already doing. It requires strong cross-party parliamentary control on the part of this Parliament and obviously it is meant to support all these young people, all these brave women, all those brave men, and all those political parties in the independent media who are trying to be established in our neighbourhood.
(SK) Madam President, I would like to begin by saying that the pro-democratic orientation of European external policy is an entirely understandable and legitimate aim. In today's complex world, however, it will not be that easy. Mrs De Keyser has already stated in her introductory speech that we have previously promoted stability rather than democracy. We should, however, ask whether democracy can emerge at all in a divided political environment. If so, then it can only be in exceptional circumstances. I therefore think that the decision to promote stability was a good one, although it is important, following the stabilisation of the political environment, to take the next step of promoting democracy, if this has not happened already during the stabilisation process.
European foreign policy activities must not, therefore, end once the political environment has been stabilised, but must continue with the further aim of democratising society. I firmly believe that the EU instruments currently used for supporting European policy may be very effective in achieving this objective. We only have to learn how to use them better and more consistently so that they can fulfil the tasks for which they are required.
(DE) Madam President, Baroness Ashton, we know that, as Europeans, we should naturally have a vital interest in the gradual democratisation of Eastern Europe, Asia and the Middle East. The influence of the European Union helps to further this democratisation process, as we have seen in the Balkans. However, as regards Turkey, with which we are still in accession negotiations, the situation is quite different.
After the Turkish elections, we have seen once again that the half-hearted belief of the EU that the problems will disappear into thin air simply at the prospect of EU accession, is a dangerous fallacy. The withdrawal of the mandate of an elected Turkish member of parliament is simply incompatible with the principles of democracy and the rule of law. That Turkey's democratisation process is at a crossroads is clear from the fact that international election observers in Kurdish areas identified massive state interference in the elections on 12 June. This disregard for democratic principles alone is, in my opinion, reason enough to suspend accession negotiations with Turkey.
Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. - Madam President, I would like to thank Ms De Keyser for the work that she has done. I just want to bring up three very brief points.
First, that building democracy means we need to build deep democracy. We need to make sure that democracy takes root and is not just a process of one electoral cycle, but it is about all of the institutions that go alongside it. As Ms De Keyser says, it is linked to all of the other elements, such as development, where we need to make sure that we are helping the societies build a flourishing democracy for the future.
Second, our electoral observation missions play an important part in making sure that democracy can do that. A number of Members have participated in those and I thank all of you for the work that you have done, not least, again, Ms De Keyser for her work in Sudan. Not an easy mission by any means, but one accomplished extremely well.
Third, with regard to a proposal for an endowment for democracy: a number of times I have thought of ideas and ways in which I believe we can support the people of the region only to be told that I cannot do it, because supporting some of the political processes is impossible under the instruments of the European Union.
Most importantly, I want to see ways in which we can support young people to continue to be in touch with each other using the new media, using the chat rooms, Twitter, Facebook and so on. These are the ways in which they already have been in touch and the ways in which they work together in the course of changes and revolutions. These situations require new things, things that are offshore, if you like, and ways in which they can add value.
So it is not about replacing what we already do well; it is about doing things we simply cannot do under the instruments we currently have, but which we can identify as being of great value.
The challenge for us will be to show and explain to Members that this is exactly what we have done. So please do not rule it out, but test us on the proposals that we bring forward.
Madam President, the very wide convergence there is today in the political groups on this report is not at all down to my work. It is really due to the fact - and we have heard this in the various speeches - that this question of democracy is at the heart of European history.
When I hear some of my fellow Members point out that they have lived under Soviet occupation, Salazar's and Franco's dictatorships, and that they fought against these, one feels there is something that unites us, and that is what creates the unity and the real interest of this report. We want this richness, which is the European richness, to benefit others. Of course, Mrs Nedelcheva is right, not by patronising other countries, not by practising a postcolonial policy, but by respecting diversity. I believe that the report's content ran along those lines. I wish you good luck, Baroness Ashton. You are about to leave for South Sudan; once again, we have a textbook case here, just like the countries that have been through the Arab revolutions this summer and earlier this year are a textbook case for us.
What needs to be done so that this new country where we observed the elections ends up resisting this transition, which will be very difficult and which is now bringing echoes of war with it, unfortunately? I simply suggest then, Baroness Ashton, other discussions concerning South Sudan which will serve as testing grounds and I hope that this report, which was drafted in Sudan - since I was there - will enable us, in any case, to implement this.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Thursday, 7 July 2011.


10. Montenegro (vote)
- Motion for a resolution


Participation of Switzerland in the 'Youth in Action' programme and in the action programme in the field of lifelong learning (debate)
The next item is the recommendation by Mrs Pack, on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education, on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Swiss Confederation establishing the terms and conditions for the participation of the Swiss Confederation in the 'Youth in Action' programme and in the action programme in the field of lifelong learning (2007-2013) (12818/2010 - C7-0277/2010 - 2010/0231(NLE)).
Mr President, I am very pleased that we have the opportunity to lead this debate today because I remember that we both always cooperated with Switzerland in the European Council and are therefore both aware of how important it is for Switzerland to participate in these programmes. In 2006, before these programmes were renewed, we, the European Parliament, were naturally aware that we do not exist in isolation, but that we should try to bring everyone else onboard with us. Although Switzerland is not part of the European Economic Area, it was interested in participating in the field of training and education. Like everyone else, I was very pleased with this development. In 2004, I was part of a delegation that visited the Swiss Parliament's Committee on Training. We discussed the relevant issues in detail, for example, mobility and cooperation between schools and universities. It was clear to me at the time that this motion would eventually be forthcoming and I welcome it now.
In drawing up these programmes, we were not just thinking of our own interests, but also those of all neighbouring countries, such as the countries of the Western Balkans and Switzerland itself, situated in the middle. That is why we have made some good progress today. Concerning the previous debate, I can tell you now that Switzerland also intends to issue a request to join in the cultural programme. It is also interested in participating in the cultural heritage labelling scheme, something it can only do if it participates in this programme.
Ladies and gentlemen, what is it that we need to do today? We can either say 'yes' or 'no'. None of us would dream of saying 'no' because we have always been in favour of Switzerland coming on board. I should add that by 'coming on board', I mean that it will also pay its share. According to Article 218, our only choice is to say 'yes' or 'no', and, of course, we are going to give a clear yes to this.
What are the key points of this agreement with Switzerland? Naturally, the conditions, rules and procedures for projects and initiatives involving Swiss participants will be the same as for participants from the Member States and the projects they propose. Switzerland will have to set up a national agency, just as we all have done in our respective countries, that will coordinate the implementation of the programmes at national level and that will be required to make a financial contribution to each of the programmes each year. In 2011, this would amount to EUR 1.7 million for the 'Youth in Action' programme and EUR 14.2 million for the Lifelong Learning programme. With reference to the financial controls and audit provisions, Switzerland will be required to adhere to the provisions of the European Union, including those relating to the controls by the institutions of the EU and by the Swiss authorities. The agreement will remain in place until one of the parties pulls out. However, I do not believe that anyone would enter into a programme like this with the intention of ever withdrawing again. It is in the interests of the younger generation in Switzerland and, of course, of the young people from the countries surrounding Switzerland who would like to participate in school exchanges with Switzerland as part of the Comenius-Regio programme, or in individual school partnerships, as well as the Erasmus programme.
Naturally, representatives from the Swiss authorities will be able to attend our committee meetings on points which concern their country. Let me say one thing here: we are anxious that Switzerland should take the plunge with this step. It has expressed an interest in such an arrangement for a long time. It is our hope that European awareness in Switzerland will be strengthened when the younger generation has an opportunity to interact with other young Europeans. Perhaps this will mean that future referenda will have a different outcome from those in the past. We are placing our faith in the younger generation and in these two marvellous programmes. I am confident that the cultural programme will be added in three years' time.
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, according to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the conclusion of this agreement between the European Union and the Swiss Confederation needs the consent of Parliament before the agreement can come into force.
I want to thank the Committee on Culture and Education, and particularly its chair, Doris Pack, for their constructive approach to the agreement.
Since Switzerland refused to join the European Economic Area, no agreement, until now, has allowed direct or indirect cooperation in education between the EU and Switzerland.
However, Switzerland has, for a long time, shown interest in our education and youth programmes. It has even developed a national support system to encourage partnerships with EU Member States' organisations active in these programmes. Furthermore, Switzerland has participated in the Bologna Process and the creation of the European Higher Education Area.
Switzerland has also followed closely, albeit from the outside, the debate on education policies in the European Union. Switzerland will be the first country to take part in our programmes that is neither an EU Member State nor a member of the European Economic Area, nor a current or potential EU candidate.
The Commission welcomes the participation of Switzerland in the two programmes. The agreement will allow Swiss education and youth organisations, as well as individual students, teachers and young people, to participate in the EU's Youth in Action and Lifelong Learning programmes on completely equal terms with EU citizens. Projects and initiatives submitted by participants from Switzerland will be subject to the same conditions, rules and procedures that apply to projects from Member States.
Switzerland has established a national agency to coordinate implementation of the programmes at national level. It will make an annual financial contribution to each of the programmes and will attend programme committee meetings as an observer for the points that concern Switzerland.
Thank you, honourable Members, for the good work you have done in this case.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, other than the Commission, I should also certainly like to thank the Chair of the Committee on Culture and Education, Mrs Pack, for the work and dedication that she has lavished on this dossier.
What we are talking about today is important because it is an instrument like 'Youth in Action' that creates the spread of ideas, closeness and friendship amongst the countries of the European Union, but also, and above all, amongst those that are not part of it, such as Switzerland or other countries besides.
It is the great richness of our multiannual programmes that, through actions such as 'Youth in Action', 'Erasmus', 'Erasmus Mundus', 'Permanent Education', 'Media', 'Media Mundus' and many others, they allow relationships to be built between the countries of the European Union and third countries.
Through these programmes, you see, we have brought the European Union to life, allowing many citizens - primarily young people - to meet, swap experiences, come to know others and to become known themselves. We have given teachers and workers in general the chance to improve their professional skills and we have given directors, producers and associations of various countries the chance to do better work.
Hence, these programmes are important and so we were a bit concerned when we did not see them on the Commission's Work Programme for next year. Today, therefore, today we are approving an important step, which makes the EU grow, strengthens citizenship on our continent, and - given that we spoke about it a little while earlier regarding the European Heritage Label - it is a step that contributes to creating this European identity of ours.
on behalf of the S&D Group. - (PL) Mr President, on behalf of the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament, I endorse the rapporteur's draft report on agreeing to the participation of the Confederation of Switzerland in the 'Youth in Action' programme and in the action programme in the field of lifelong learning. The agreement has been appropriately negotiated and protects the EU's interests, and the legal bases for European programmes in fields relating to education, training and youth provide for Switzerland's participation. The principles governing this participation have been outlined in detail, which guarantees that the programmes will be implemented appropriately and fairly. Switzerland is keen to cooperate with the EU in the field of education, training and youth, and so our agreement should be self-evident.
We are delighted that the EU's education programmes are so attractive and effective that other countries are joining them. The latest European Commission research shows that the 'Youth in Action' programme increases young people's linguistic abilities and their chances in the labour market. The opportunities for adult education are still not being fully exploited, however, even though there is enormous potential in this area.
on behalf of the ALDE Group. - (FI) Mr President, right from the outset, I wish to thank our committee's excellent Chair, Doris Pack, who also drafted this report. I might say that when this proposal was in the hands of Doris Pack, it was in good hands. As our worthy Commissioner knows very well, Mrs Pack has much professional experience and expertise in these very areas of lifelong learning and youth programmes. When preparations were being made regarding this issue, it was a joy to observe how well this work progressed. It is excellent that young people in Switzerland are also to share in the success stories that we in the European Union have created.
It is quite true that even those who take a critical view of the European Union, who are even opposed to it, nevertheless unanimously agree that the European Union does indeed have success stories, such as the programmes that relate to lifelong learning, youth and culture. This is one of the best aspects of the European Union, and one which we should do much to ensure remains visible.
It is because of the European Union and these programmes that we have been able to encourage young Europeans to pursue a path of education and training and to increase their personal capital. It has also, however, increased the capital of nations.
In this connection, it is very important that Switzerland is not in any way excluded from this system of cooperation, even though it is not a member of the EU or the EEA. Instead, young people in Switzerland should be given the opportunity to participate in the programmes and things should therefore be taken forward on a reciprocal basis. I believe that that will generate added value in all respects.
Mr President, finally, I wish to thank our rapporteur. I hope that this programme will be a success story for the Swiss too, as it has been for us, the citizens of the Member States of the European Union.
Mr President, Commissioner, this report was adopted unanimously in the Committee on Culture and Education, where everyone acknowledged that it was a good idea. It really is a good idea which should be entirely uncontroversial, since it exemplifies the values we are discussing. In fact, this may well be one of those reports to which the Chamber can lend its unanimous support, even if Switzerland's situation is a unique one, as the Commissioner said. It is a very interesting country which is very special in political terms, and which engages in very interesting forms of cooperation with Europe while not being party to many European agreements, and for this very reason, it is worth building links with this country by means of uncontroversial and universally accepted programmes of this kind.
Mr President, even though Switzerland has not yet decided to become a Member State of the European Union, it has long shown a serious interest in broad cooperation with the EU in the area of education and professional training for young people. After the establishment of the Youth in Action and Lifelong Learning programmes in 2006, a legal foundation was put in place for cooperation between Switzerland and the EU in this area.
The European Commission, in accordance with the recommendations of the European Council following talks with Swiss counterparts, has drawn up an agreement making it possible for us to develop effective cooperation with our Swiss friends in the area of education and professional training of young people, as well as in the area of lifelong learning. The agreement is correct, balanced and expresses the interests of both signatories to expand mutual cooperation and support the exchange of knowledge and expertise in the interests of improving the quality of the education process.
In my opinion, Commissioner, this agreement between the EU and Switzerland therefore represents a step in the right direction.
(LT) Mr President, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur, Mrs Pack, and I agree entirely with her recommendations on the 'Youth in Action' and Lifelong Learning programmes and the participation of Switzerland in these. I would say that Switzerland is not just a beautiful and orderly country; it is of great interest to the European Union due to its direct democracy, the confederation of cantons. On the other hand, the European Union must also be of interest to Switzerland, because Switzerland is entirely surrounded by EU Member States. Finally, Switzerland is tuning its pulse of life to the European Union. I believe that once this programme has been adopted, it will be possible to do this even better. Switzerland will come even closer to the European Union, and the EU will understand Switzerland better; as our colleague Doris Pack mentioned, we will be able to anticipate better results in referenda.
Mr President, I welcome the moves for Switzerland to increase its cooperation with the EU in the fields of education, training and youth. The Youth in Action programme is a very important programme for young European citizens. It is a programme that needs to be highlighted more, and its aims and objectives need to be realised, in particular, with regard to the European Voluntary Service's activities under the Youth in Action programme.
Given that next year is the European Year of Volunteering, it is particularly significant that the European Voluntary Service - which supports young people's participation in voluntary activity and aims to develop solidarity and promote active citizenship amongst young people - is strengthened.
In Ireland, volunteering in grassroots sports organisations offers sporting and leadership opportunities to thousands of young people. These organisations encourage active citizenship amongst young people, while promoting health, fitness and an active lifestyle. The programme and its voluntary measures should be enhanced and strong links should be forged with Switzerland in this regard.
There are many possibilities under the Youth in Action programme, and any measures to enhance its aims and to encourage and support young people in the EU should be sustained and strongly encouraged.
(LT) Mr President, rapporteur, I would like to thank you for your work and say that I really support your recommendation that the European Parliament should approve the Council decision on Switzerland's participation in the 'Youth in Action' and Lifelong Learning programmes, because the Commission's agreement with the Swiss authorities meets all the requirements, provisions and conditions. Furthermore, the Swiss National Agency will cooperate on the implementation of the programmes at national level and will contribute financially to each programme on an annual basis. This bilateral agreement is very important both for Switzerland itself and the European Union, because the young people of Switzerland will be able to take advantage of various opportunities according to the 'Youth in Action' programme and vice versa. The European Union's young citizens will be able to participate in all projects alongside Switzerland's young people. I am therefore delighted that although it is not part of the European Economic Area and is not an EU Member State, Switzerland is nevertheless cooperating closely with the European Union in the fields of education, training and youth affairs.
Mr President, ever since I came to the European Parliament, I keep asking myself why Switzerland and Norway have not joined the European Union, and I wonder if it is because they have the best of both worlds. The benefits of being in the European Union without the obligations. Here today, I am a bit dubious as well. The Commissioner mentioned they will have to pay. Of course they will have to pay, but normally non-members pay more than members of clubs.
However, I will bow to the superior wisdom and experience of Doris Pack in saying that this may be the way forward. It may help create greater European awareness among the citizens in Switzerland and they may one day join the European Union. If that happens, which I hope it will, I think all the credit will have to go to the Commissioner and Doris Pack for their enlightened approach. In this season of goodwill, I am prepared to go along with the proposals.
(HU) Mr President, Commissioner, European youth is a generation that has been given the privilege to grow up on a peaceful continent almost free of boundaries, which is characterised by mobility and multilingualism, and which also offers a wide range of cultural and economic opportunities. In order to ensure that more and more young people engage in active citizenship, we need to establish stable aid schemes in the field of youth policy. It is true that Switzerland is not a member of the European Economic Area, but it closely cooperates with the European Union, and it does so not only in the fields of education, training and youth. Since 2008, Switzerland has participated in, and financed, several projects that aim to reduce economic and social differences within an extended Europe. Switzerland has expressed solidarity with, and commitment to, the enlargement of the European Union, and aims to establish firm economic and political relations with the new Member States. I agree with the key points of the agreement on the participation of Switzerland in the programme, which would make it an equal partner ...
(The President cut off the speaker)
(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, if this programme is brought to fruition today, it is thanks to the determination of Mrs Pack and the will of Commissioner Vassiliou.
As an Italian-Swiss citizen, I am happy that Switzerland is the first country from outside the European Union to participate in EU education programmes for young people, both in higher education and continuing skills training. Indeed, let us remember that even if Switzerland is not part of the European Union, it has made a major contribution to building the values and freedoms that are a shared heritage of the European continent.
It is a symptom of the success of programmes such as 'Youth in Action' that Switzerland requests that the mobility of our European programmes be extended to their young people and therefore, it is of significant importance that Switzerland is not only requesting a larger economic area but also a larger educational area. I believe that it will be very interesting for the young people of the European Union and Switzerland to get to know each other better, and I am sure that this will lay foundations that will also have an influence on the future of the European Union.
(DE) Mr President, understandably enough, Switzerland, which provides some of the financial backing for the 'Youth in Action' and Lifelong Learning programmes, now wishes to participate in these programmes. However, in the spirit of learning, it would also be good if the EU were to take a leaf out of Switzerland's book when it comes to direct democracy. When the Swiss population decides against the erection of minarets, this decision is accepted. Likewise, the recent initiative on the deportation of foreign criminals. The Swiss authorities are aware that when the people say 'no', they mean 'no', so that they do not simply continue to hold ballots until they get the result they want, as has happened in the EU in the case of Ireland, for example.
The fact is that the original rejection of the constitutional treaty for Europe at that time may have made it easier for some Swiss to vote in favour of the Schengen and Dublin Agreements. They might find it easier to form an alliance with a loose federation of states than with a centralist European Union. This is something that cannot be concealed by the voices currently being heard in Switzerland calling for accession to the EU. Not everything in the European Union garden is rosy; centralising tendencies are on the rise and developments are moving inexorably in the direction of a transfer union.
(The President cut off the speaker)
(PL) Mr President, I would like to extend my very warm thanks to Mrs Pack and the Commissioner for taking this initiative. I think that Switzerland, an enclave surrounded on all sides by EU Member States, does, in fact, need to be open to the programmes. I think that young people are not always aware that, since they are not yet part of the European Union, they cannot benefit from this supranational European programme, which provides an excellent way to integrate young people and exchange best practices, and which really does ensure that cooperation and lifelong learning can be truly European.
I would also, and most importantly, like to offer thanks for the fact that today, we will be able to transfer a model of European programmes to a country which is not a European Union Member State. In the same spirit of acceptance and invitation, I would also like to encourage Mrs Pack and the Commissioner maybe to extend similar schemes to include other countries that are willing. I am thinking here mainly about the Eastern Partnership and also the Balkans, or, in other words, countries that are not yet formally European Union Member States.
(DE) Mr President, like everyone else here, I have the feeling that Switzerland may come increasingly closer to Europe in this way, eventually, and hopefully soon, becoming a full member of the European Union, something that is certainly greatly to be welcomed. We should be encouraged by this small white spot in the middle of the map of Europe.
According to our estimates, the 'Youth in Action' programme will reach about one million people. The important prevailing aim is that youth organisations should take part. This is a signal to the next generation that their active participation is very welcome. I would also like to express my appreciation to Mrs Pack for her efforts.
We need to reach out from the Union to other countries, in this case Switzerland, as this is the only way that we can achieve success. Simply waiting for the Swiss to ask to join the European Union will probably not be enough in times like these. In addition, we must not forget that financial support for the Committee on Culture and Education in particular gives us reason to hope that Switzerland will also join in other programmes soon.
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, I should like to thank everyone for warmly welcoming this initiative. It was my pleasure to have signed this act between the European Union and the Swiss Confederation as my first act as Commissioner for Education, Culture and Youth. I welcome this development, and I wish Switzerland was also in a position to join us in the culture programme, which they cannot for internal constitutional reasons.
As many speakers stress, we welcome the creation of closer relations between the youth of Switzerland and the youth of the EU Member States. We see it as a means of paving the way for greater support for the European project in Switzerland, which we hope will change its mind in future and decide to join us in the European Union.
I also take note that honourable Members encourage other non-EU members to join this programme, something which we shall, of course, promote. Thank you very much for your support.
Mr President, I am very pleased to see that some of my fellow Members from the ranks of the Euro-sceptics have voted in favour of this motion, agreeing how wonderful it is that Switzerland is to join this programme and that there will be greater European cooperation on education. This will open up horizons perhaps also for the Members themselves, but certainly for the younger generation in Switzerland. We are pleased with this.
Mr Mölzer is no longer here, but I note that he did not mention the fact that Switzerland did not hold a referendum on this cooperation. It is indeed remarkable that Switzerland decided against such a step in this area in particular. After all, it can be sure that the younger generation has been waiting a long time for the opportunity for such cooperation. Mr Mölzer obviously failed to notice that a referendum did not take place in this case. The people do not need to be consulted on every single issue. Good things, such as accession to the European Union, will be self-evident. I hope that the younger generation will benefit from the fruitful cooperation in these education and youth programmes and that they will become real Europeans who, at some stage, will say: 'Now is the time for us also to join the European Union, sharing with the rest of Europe in all other policy areas. We are a single continent, and should also agree on these questions'. I am certain that these education programmes will play an important role in enhancing European awareness among the people throughout Switzerland.
Thank you, Mrs Pack, I would like to congratulate you, not only on this report, but also on your hard work and enthusiasm, and also for being in Madrid at the weekend to promote the LUX Prize. I am not going to be able to be with you on the 17th, although I would very much have liked to be there. On the 18th and 19th, I will be able to participate in the meetings. Thank you, the truth is that Parliament needs people like Mrs Pack in order to achieve the effectiveness that we all need.
(Applause)
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place today at 12:00.
Written statements (Rule 149)
I find it encouraging that Switzerland wants to participate in the European Union's education and youth programmes, especially as this country is not yet a member of the EU or of the European Economic Area either. This involvement in EU programmes is also important from the perspective that we have not had, until now, a direct cultural and education agreement. However, Switzerland's participation in the Bologna Process and the creation of the European Higher Education Area guarantee that we can create together the conditions for achieving the 2020 strategy's objectives, establishing in the process a strong link between Member States and third countries. Meetings between young people, exchanges of experience between teachers and researchers and increased opportunities for lifelong learning will help us create a common European identity. However, I want to stress that we also need to consider including the other countries bordering the EU in our programmes because education and culture should not stop at our borders. This will enable us to rebuild the continent of Europe and encourage young people to become actively involved in shaping our common future.
The participation of Switzerland, a country that chose not to be a part of the European Union, in the 'Youth in Action' programme and in the action programme in the field of lifelong learning cannot be ruled out a priori, but should be carefully evaluated. I therefore support the terms of the agreement reached between the Commission and the Swiss Government, so I am voting for the report by Mrs Pack. It is right to grant the benefits of the programmes to Switzerland, but it is also right to safeguard all the financial and other interests of the European Union.
The aim of the Lifelong Learning programme, which is included in the Seventh Framework Programme, is to develop various forms of learning throughout people's professional lives, by supporting cooperation between education and training systems in countries participating in the programme. The programme's target group is not only students or secondary school pupils, but also adults, thanks to the Grundtvig programme, and training staff, for whom study visits are provided. The year-on-year increase in the budget earmarked for this programme, which amounts to nearly EUR 1.028 billion in 2011, is a sign of the justified need for development and cooperation in this field.
In a time of such high youth unemployment due to a lack of education adapted to the needs of the labour market, and a lack of appropriate professional training for graduates, we must concentrate on making the maximum possible use of the opportunities afforded to us by the Lifelong Learning programme, and find a solution for such a difficult situation. I welcome the initiative to include Switzerland in cooperation in this area. I hope that the joint exchange of experience will help raise employment levels and increase the mobility of the labour market.


Opening of the sitting
(The sitting was opened at 09.00)


2. Completing the internal market for e-commerce (
(DE) Mr President, I would like to apologise. I have left my card in the meeting room of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. Someone is fetching it for me. There are so few votes and I have been here since the first one. I just wanted to explain that.


Voting time
The next item is the vote.
(For results and other details of the vote: see Minutes)


Verification of credentials: see Minutes