AMENDMENTS
proposed by the delegation of the Romanian Chamber of Deputies’ European Affairs
Committee, to the CONTRIBUTION of the LI COSAC
ORIGINAL TEXT:
1.1 COSAC welcomes the successful conduct of the 8th European elections, held from the
22nd to the 25th of May 2014. Although the average turnout in the elections was higher than
expected, COSAC expresses its concern about both the poor turnout in certain member
states and the rise of euroscepticism, extremism and xenophobia, as reflected in the results;
it therefore urges the respective governments, political parties, as well as the European
institutions to reflect on their share of responsibility for these phenomena and act promptly
in order to tackle them.
AMENDMENT to 1.1:
Add the expression “...and by far the more damaging and worrying rise of…”, in line 4,
with “euroscepticism”.
COMMENT:
The poor turnout does not prove a stance against the EU, while euroscepticism is not
necessarily caused by bad feelings towards the Union, therefore they are less detrimental to
the EU. On the contrary, extremism and xenophobia go against the core values of the EU and
are targeting the dismantlement of the EU itself, so that this phenomenon cannot be compared
with euroscepticism or poor turnout.
PROPOSED TEXT of 1.1:
1.1 COSAC welcomes the successful conduct of the 8th European elections, held from the
22nd to the 25th of May 2014. Although the average turnout in the elections was higher than
expected, COSAC expresses its concern about both the poor turnout in certain member states
and, the rise of euroscepticism, and by far the more damaging and worrying rise of
extremism and xenophobia, as reflected in the results; it therefore urges the respective
governments, political parties, as well as the European institutions to reflect on their share of
responsibility for these phenomena and act promptly in order to tackle them.
ORIGINAL TEXT:
1.2 In this regard, COSAC welcomes the expressed will of the Heads of EU states to place
growth and job creation on top of their priorities, together with pursuing further progress
in the area of freedom, security and justice and coping with the major challenges of climate
change and energy efficiency.
AMENDMENT to 1.2:
Eliminate the reference to ”...growth and job creation, pursuing further progress in the area
of freedom, security and justice and coping with the major challenges of climate change and
1
energy efficiency” and replace them with a general reference ”safeguard the European
project”.
COMMENT:
All EU agenda items listed in paragraph 1.2 may improve the public sentiment but the roots
of the EU rejection are deeper, some being spread in areas where neither the EU, nor the
member states have competences. On the other hand there are other high importance topics,
that were not mentioned, like the EMU reform or the Banking Union. It would be preferable a
reference to all topics under a general notion.
PROPOSED TEXT of 1.2:
1.2 In this regard, COSAC welcomes the expressed will of the Heads of EU states to place
growth and job creation on top of their priorities, together with pursuing further progress in
the area of freedom, security and justice and coping with the major challenges of climate
change and energy efficiency. safeguard the European project.
ORIGINAL TEXT:
2.1 COSAC notes that the economic recess and its impact, such as high unemployment,
combined with reduced social spending and downgrading of living standards have proved
critical for the diminishing popularity of the European Union. COSAC is, in this regard, of the
view that the EU's democratic credibility has been seriously harmed over the past five years,
as the need to swiftly address the effects of the economic and financial crisis and to
coordinate fiscal policies has led governments or Council formations such as the Eurogroup
to delegate more competencies to technocrats and to make decisions -partly or completelylacking democratic legitimacy.
AMENDMENT to 2.1:
Replace the expression “...seriously harmed..” in line 4, with ”challenged”.
Eliminate the reference to ..”governments or Council formations such as the Eurogroup to
delegate more competencies to technocrats and to make decisions -partly or completelylacking democratic legitimacy”, with the expression: ”bypassing the regular decisionmaking in the EU.”
PROPOSED TEXT of 2.1:
2.1 COSAC notes that the economic recess and its impact, such as high unemployment,
combined with reduced social spending and downgrading of living standards have proved
critical for the diminishing popularity of the European Union. COSAC is, in this regard, of
the view that the EU's democratic credibility has been seriously harmed challenged over the
past five years, as the need to swiftly address the effects of the economic and financial crisis
and to coordinate fiscal policies has led governments or Council formations such as the
Eurogroup to delegate more competencies to technocrats and to make decisions -partly or
completely- lacking democratic legitimacy. bypassing the regular decision-making in the
EU.
2
COMMENT:
The democratic credibility of the EU has not been ”seriously harmed” as a result of adopting
emergency measures to save the Euro and the Union. In fact the Eurozone has been
safeguarded and the economic crisis is almost ended. A Treaty revision is indeed adamant to
allow special measures to be taken in case of emergency or serious threats, but even if such
provisions lack, one cannot expect the EU and member states not to react. The democratic
legitimacy is after all, better served by allowing the best type of democracy in the World to
continue, than replacing it with an unknown and untested product.
ORIGINAL TEXT:
2.2 Moreover, COSAC notes with regret that macroeconomic adjustment programmes were
not characterised by sufficient democratic legitimacy and accountability, as stated by the
vast majority of respondents in the Bi-annual Report. COSAC stresses that, in the future,
genuinely democratically accountable institutions should be primarily involved in designing
and implementing such programmes in order to guarantee transparency and political
ownership.
AMENDMENT to 2.2:
Replace the expression “...were not characterised by..” in line 1-2, with ”could not ensure”.
Replace the expression “...COSAC stresses that” in line 3, with ” …encourages launching a
Treaty revision consultation with a view to facilitating…”.
PROPOSED TEXT of 2.2:
2.2 Moreover, COSAC notes with regret that macroeconomic adjustment programmes were
not characterised by could not ensure sufficient democratic legitimacy and accountability, as
stated by the vast majority of respondents in the Bi-annual Report. COSAC stresses that,
encourages launching a Treaty revision consultation with a view to facilitating in the
future, genuinely democratically accountable institutions should to be primarily involved in
designing and implementing such programmes in order to guarantee transparency and
political ownership.
COMMENT:
The mare fact that respondents stated that macroeconomic adjustment programmes were not
characterised by sufficient democratic legitimacy and accountability may be just admitting to
a fact, not blaming that action. Without a Treaty revision would be impossible to solve the
problem.
ORIGINAL TEXT:
2.3 COSAC reaffirms the willingness of national Parliaments to engage in a public debate over
the European institutional architecture in the context of the existing Treaties. COSAC strongly
believes that ways to achieve democratisation of the decision making process should be explored
without putting into question the community method. In this respect powers vested by the
3
Treaties to the European Parliament should be fully exercised and its cooperation with national
Parliaments should be further developed.
AMENDMENT to 2.1:
Add the expression ”and in Treaty revision process”, in line2, after ”the existing
Treaties”.
PROPOSED TEXT of 2.1:
2.3 COSAC reaffirms the willingness of national Parliaments to engage in a public debate
over the European institutional architecture both in the context of the existing Treaties and in
Treaty revision process. COSAC strongly believes that ways to achieve democratisation of
the decision making process should be explored without putting into question the community
method. In this respect powers vested by the Treaties to the European Parliament should be
fully exercised and its cooperation with national Parliaments should be further developed.
COMMENT:
As a Treaty revision is adamant it should be mentioned even if it would start at a later date.
New paragraph after 2.7
COSAC acknowledges that the first proposal under the new Citizen Initiative
procedures at the Union level - namely Right2water, was successfully launched and asks
the European Commission to give full consideration to the reasons and objectives of
initiatives under this scheme, reporting on the successes and shortcomings revealed by
this exercise.
ORIGINAL TEXT:
4.2 COSAC expresses its satisfaction over the first signs of a recovery in economic activity in the
European Union throughout 2013, in terms of both productivity and competitiveness. However, it
underlines that the continued pursuit of fiscal consolidation policies is recognised as ineffective
and prolonging the economic crisis unnecessarily (IMF, 2013), as well as impeding recovery in
employment prospects.
AMENDMENT to 4.2:
Replace the expression “...is recognised as..” in line 3, with ”may be”.
Add the expression “...in the absence of a well balanced and fact oriented approach.” at
the end of the paragraph.
PROPOSED TEXT of 4.2:
4.2 COSAC expresses its satisfaction over the first signs of a recovery in economic activity in
the European Union throughout 2013, in terms of both productivity and competitiveness.
4
However, it underlines that the continued pursuit of fiscal consolidation policies is recognised
as may be ineffective and prolongeing the economic crisis unnecessarily (IMF, 2013), as
well as impeding recovery in employment prospects, in the absence of a well balanced and
fact oriented approach.
COMMENT:
The expression ”is recognized as” is an assumption that could be exaggerated since it implies
that IMF would dump fiscal consolidation policies under any circumstances . Besides, not all
stakeholders share the IMF opinion and the context in which the IMF assessment was made is
not clarified.
Fiscal consolidation policies can still produce beneficial effects if well tailored. It would be
contradictory to say in paragraph 3.1 that ” genuine fiscal and economic union is seen as a
natural next step to the budgetary coordination framework”, and that ”the continued pursuit
of fiscal consolidation policies is recognised as ineffective and prolonging the economic
crisis unnecessarily (IMF, 2013), as well as impeding recovery in employment prospects”, in
paragraph 4.2.
New paragraph after 4.2
COSAC highlights that focusing on the economic side of the recent crisis may obscure
other causes of the crisis, having roots far back in the past, notably the continuous
widening of the gap between the educational concepts, or pedagogy and the overall
societal demands. Any separate evaluation by member state, of the causes of difficulties
encountered by the education systems cannot be sufficient, as long as the common cause
remains unsatisfactorily scoped and debated. COSAC notes that approaching the end
of the crisis should not result in removing education from the top of the priority list and
calls for a more conclusive and fruitful debate of this topic at European level.
ORIGINAL TEXT:
5.6 COSAC draws attention to the worrisome trend of high unemployment rate of young adults,
aged 25 - 34, who were the first to face job losses due to their lower seniority and job protection
provided to older employees. COSAC, acknowledges that young adults often cannot benefit from
youth labour market programmes or retraining to improve their skills and employment prospects,
making return to employment for this age group particularly protracted. Therefore it calls on the
Commission to take up concrete and imminent initiatives in order to tackle the problem.
AMENDMENT to 5.6:
Delete the phrase ” who were the first to face job losses due to their lower seniority and job
protection provided to older employees”, in line 2-3.
Replace the expression ” often cannot” in line 3-4, by ” should”
Delete the phrase ” making return to employment for this age group particularly protracted” in
line 5.
5
Replace the expression ” to tackle the problem”, ay the end of paragraph, by ” facilitate such
actions.”
PROPOSED TEXT of 5.6:
5.6 COSAC draws attention to the worrisome trend of high unemployment rate of young
adults, aged 25 - 34, who were the first to face job losses due to their lower seniority and job
protection provided to older employees. COSAC, and acknowledges that young adults often
cannot should benefit from youth labour market programmes or retraining to improve their
skills and employment prospects making return to employment for this age group particularly
protracted. Therefore it calls on the Commission to take up concrete and imminent initiatives
in order to tackle the problem facilitate such actions.
COMMENT:
The statement is hard to be proven since in most European companies criteria for granting
seniority to adults, aged 25 – 34 are mainly professional. Any company would be more
interested to keep a younger employee having the same or a better level of skills as an older
employee. It is not clear what is preventing young adults to benefit from youth labour market
programmes. On the contrary, as a rule, is easier for young adults to resume the learning
process, than for old adults.
New paragraph after 5.6
COSAC highlights that accompanying measures are nevertheless necessary to
complement the Youth Employment Package, Youth Guarantee and Youth
Employment Initiative, inter alia facilitating the use of emerging and cutting-edge
technologies by relevant start-ups. Creativity and scientific progress must continue to be
placed at the heart of the most successful economic ventures, as they have always been.
New paragraph after 5.6
COSAC acknowledges the opportunity for job creation brought about by the Youth
Guarantee Scheme. However, poor rural areas may not be sufficiently prepared to
make full use of the Scheme, given the extreme poverty in many cases, a not-so-well
developed local market or other similar causes that may differ by member state.
Therefore, COSAC calls for addressing the enforcement of the Youth Guarantee
Scheme in the rural areas, starting with a focused debate at the European Union level.
New paragraph ahter 6.1
COSAC invites all stakeholders to consider furthering the process of political
integration of policies in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, particularly
through re-thinking the concept of ”mutual trust” and through gradually reducing the
present predilection for ”minimum rules”, in drafting EU legislation. COSAC believes
that a Treaty revision should encompass extending the ordinary legislative procedure to
all policy areas in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice and remove the opt-out
regimes.
6
COMMENT: the concepts of ”mutual trust” and ”minimum rules” are relics of the
intergovernmental logic, still being used extensively in the field of Justice and Home Affairs,
even if the former IIIrd pillar in the previous Treaty has been abolished, more than 5 years
ago. It would be inconsistent to ask ”that ways to achieve democratisation of the decision
making process should be explored without putting into question the community method”, in
paragraph 2.3 while not asking the completion of using the same community method in the
AFSJ. The opt-out regimes are fragmenting the AFSJ and are inconsistent with the principle
of solidarity requested in paragraph 6.1.
7