Europaudvalget 2013-14
EUU Alm.del Bilag 251
Offentligt
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CHAIRPERSONS OF COSACAthens, Greece, 27 January 2014AGENDA:1. Welcome address by Mr Vangelis MEIMARAKIS, Speaker of the GreekVouliton EllinonIntroductory remarks by Mr Ioannis TRAGAKIS, Deputy Speaker andChairman of the Special Standing Committee on European Affairs of the GreekVouli ton Ellinon2. Adoption of the agenda of the Meeting of the Chairpersons of COSAC,procedural issues and miscellaneous matters3. Re-connecting Europe with its citizens: the role of the institutions-keynotespeaker: MrMaroš ŠEFČOVIČ,Vice-President of the European Commission incharge of Inter-institutional Relations and Administration4. Exchange of views on relations between the European Parliament and nationalParliaments-speaker: Mr Carlo CASINI, Chairman of the Committee onConstitutional Affairs of the European Parliament5. Priorities of the Hellenic Presidency of the Council of the European Union-keynote speaker: Mr Evangelos VENIZELOS, Deputy Prime Minister andMinister of Foreign Affairs of the Hellenic RepublicPROCEEDINGSIN THE CHAIR: Mr Ioannis TRAGAKIS, Deputy Speaker and Chair of the Special StandingCommittee on European Affairs of the GreekVouli ton Ellinon.1. Introductory remarks by Mr Ioannis TRAGAKIS, Deputy Speaker and Chair of theSpecial Standing Committee on European Affairs of the GreekVouli ton Ellinon;welcome address by Mr Vangelis MEIMARAKIS, Speaker of the GreekVouli tonEllinonMr TRAGAKIS welcomed the delegates to the meeting of the Chairpersons of COSAC andinvited Mr Vangelis MEIMARAKIS, Speaker of the GreekVouli ton Ellinon,to open themeeting.Mr MEIMARAKIS welcomed the delegates to the Hellenic Parliament and to Greece - thecountry which gave birth to democracy. He recalled the Interparliamentary conference oneconomic governance of the European Union (EU) in Brussels on 20-22 January 2014. Thisconference, he said, was the best starting point for the parliamentary dimension of theHellenic Presidency of the Council of the EU, as it addressed the issues most important to theEU.Mr MEIMARAKIS pointed out that the agenda of the meeting of the Chairpersons of COSACincluded very important topics, such as re-connecting Europe with its citizens, as,unfortunately, Europe was witnessing how distant its citizens were from the EU.
1
He continued by pointing out that that was the 5th Hellenic Presidency of the Council of theEU and that this was a critical period for the EU and for Greece.The Speaker presented the priorities of the Hellenic Presidency, which reflected the needs ofEU citizens. Parliaments had to give convincing solutions to citizens' concerns. To that end,national Parliaments needed to be more active and more involved in shaping decisions. Thereshould be more cooperation and communication between the European Parliament (EP) andnational Parliaments, as they had distinct, as well as complementary roles. This cooperationshould give convincing guarantees that the citizens would come and vote in the elections tothe EP in May.Referring to the crisis, Mr MEIMARAKIS stressed that, although Greece was perceived as anegative symbol for some time, it could now turn into a symbol of resilience and hope, as ithad found ways of solving the problems, for which it was not even responsible. According tohim, more Europe, more democracy, more communication and better cooperation amongParliaments were solutions to this situation. It was proved that emergencies could be handledmore effectively when united. Solidarity was the key answer, he underlined.He emphasised that the crisis allowed the questioning of democratic institutions, which had tobe redefined through a dialogue between members of the EP and of national Parliaments. Thecrisis was an opportunity to correct mistakes and address omissions and weaknesses, as theEU proved to be incapable of taking decisions within the existing mechanisms. In this regard,he made reference to the countries subject to economic reform programmes and, emphasisingthe mistakes of and the haste with which these programmes had been prepared, underlined theimportance of the "Troika's" accountability.Mr TRAGAKIS made his introductory remarks. He started by mentioning the situation inUkraine, where clashes and unrest were continuing and intensifying. The EU could notremain indifferent. Insecurity and uncertainty persisted both in the Southern and in theEastern neighbourhoods of the EU. The EU, he said, had the obligation to assume a leadingrole in international developments.He continued by reminding that COSAC had celebrated its 50th anniversary in Vilnius theprevious year. During the years, COSAC had evolved to a great extent, however not enough.The Bi-annual Report that the Hellenic Presidency was going to prepare would raise thisissue.The Chair talked about the democratic deficit and the need to fix the crumbling foundations ofthe EU. It was important, he stressed, to convince EU citizens to turn out massively at theelections to the EP in May. It was the duty of parliamentarians to convince the citizens.Finally, Mr TRAGAKIS welcomed the Chairs attending the COSAC meeting for the firsttime: Mr Ondřej BENEŠÍK,CzechPoslanecká sněmovna,Mr Michele BORDO, ItalianCamera dei Deputati,and Mr Karlheinz KOPF, AustrianNationalrat.2. Adoption of the agenda of the Meeting of the Chairpersons of COSAC, proceduralissues and miscellaneous matters.Mr TRAGAKIS informed the meeting that the draft agenda of the Meeting of theChairpersons of COSAC had been approved the previous evening by the Presidential Troika.2
He presented the topics and the speakers of the meeting. The agenda of the meeting wasadopted by the Chairpersons without amendment.Mr TRAGAKIS presented the procedural issues. He briefed the participants on the results ofthe Presidential Troika meeting held the day before. The Chair presented the agenda of the LICOSAC, the draft outline of the 21st Bi-annual Report and the letters received by thePresidency.He presented the topics on the draft programme of the Plenary, which included the following:1. State of play of the Hellenic Presidency of the Council of the European Union; 2. Sharing avision on Europe 2025; 3. Democratic legitimacy and European leadership: the day after theEuropean elections; 4. Rethinking the European employment Strategy; 5. Youth GuaranteeScheme: Best Practices; and 6. Encouraging Creativity and Young Entrepreneurship.Mr TRAGAKIS informed that the questionnaire prepared for drafting the 21st Bi-annualReport would be distributed within the forthcoming days and that the deadline for the replieswould be 28th March 2014.Furthermore, he informed that the Presidential Troika had agreed that the Statement oncurrent events in Ukraine proposed by the LithuanianSeimasshould be adopted, as amended,by the Chairpersons of COSAC.Then Mr TRAGAKIS asked Mr Averof NEOFYTOU, CyprusVouli ton Antiprosopon,topresent the Meeting of the Chairpersons of the Committees on European Union Affairs of theParliaments of the EU South, which took place in Nicosia on 24-25 January 2014.Mr NEOFYTOU announced the establishment of the Meeting of the Chairpersons of theCommittees on European Union Affairs of the Parliaments of the EU South, which wouldmeet twice a year in order to contribute in a substantial manner to the proceedings of theCOSAC meetings. He presented the adopted declaration and briefed about the results of thefirst meeting.In the debate that followed, 7 parliamentarians took the floor.Mr Edmund WITTBRODT, PolishSenat,proposed a debate on the situation in Ukraine at theCOSAC meeting. This proposal was supported by Mr Nico SCHRIJVER, DutchEersteKamer,and Ms Eva KJER HANSEN, DanishFolketing.Mr Dominic HANNIGAN, IrishHouses of the Oireachtas,and Ms Zanda KALNIŅA-LUKAŠEVICA,LatvianSaeima,expressed their support to the proposal from the LithuanianSeimasto adopt the COSACChairpersons' Statement on current events in Ukraine.Mr SCHRIJVER endorsed the letter from the ItalianSenato della Repubblicaon theoverlapping of the dates of several important international assemblies and requested to takethis issue into account when planning COSAC meetings.Ms Anne-Wil LUCAS, DutchTweede Kamer,suggested holding a side event during theplenary meeting of COSAC in June, on accountability of the EU funds and sharedmanagement. Ms KJER HANSEN supported this suggestion and Mr TRAGAKIS agreed tohold the meeting. On the other hand, Mr Herman DE CROO, BelgianChambre des
3
représentants,expressed his concern that side events could overshadow the main COSACmeetings in the future.3. Re-connecting Europe to citizens: The role of the institutions - keynote speaker MrMaroš ŠEFČOVIČ,Vice-President of the European Commission in charge ofInteristitutional Relations and AdministrationVice-PresidentMaroš ŠEFČOVIČunderlined the vital importance of the well-known ancientGreek saying "United we stand, divided we fall", a phrase that, according to him, continued tohave great resonance, in particular in relation to the EU. This principle had to be reaffirmedabove all this special year, when the elections to the EP and the two Constitutional renewalswould take place. An EP electoral campaign focusing on discussions on the Europeanresponse to the economic crisis as well as on the way the Union was run, with specificreference to the imbalances between its institutions' responsibilities, could be the way tointroduce divisions and to undermine European achievements. In deep discontinuity with thepast and due to the economic crisis and citizens' dissatisfaction, the electoral campaign wouldtherefore turn around Europe. He stressed the fact that the citizens' lack of trust andconfidence towards Europe partly depended on the perception of its disconnection anddistance from people's "ordinary" lives. Moreover, the complexity of the European decision-making process, characterised by seeking consensus among different players did not help inreducing the distance between the citizens and the European institutions. He noted that thefunctioning of the EU should have been explained to citizens also at national level. Citizens,according to him, seemed to be negative on the solutions both at EU and national level. Heurged the European institutions and national Parliaments to encourage citizens to vote in the2014 elections avoiding the negative tendency to reduce the recognition of the positive roleplayed by the European Union through the "nationalisation" of the successes and the"Brusselisation" of the failures.He stressed the need for young generations not to forget the crucial role that the EU played infostering peace and development and in promoting fundamental rights, above all in countriesthat had for 40 years suffered under totalitarian regimes. He underlined the role the EU hadplayed in inspiring the principle of freedom also to third countries like Ukraine.He praised the efforts undertaken by the EU in the enlargement process and referred to theeuro as one of the most remarkable achievements of the last decade.Vice-PresidentŠEFČOVIČsaid that the positive economic indicators in Ireland, Spain,Portugal and Greece showed the effectiveness of the European recovery plans put in place inthose countries. In that respect, he praised Greek citizens for their enormous efforts andsacrifices to help the country out of the economic emergency, urging them not to lose hope, as2014 was showing some first signs of economic growth.He then referred to some examples of EU positive actions acknowledging that for smallMember States the EU had represented, thanks to the Internal Market legislation, the concretepossibility to compete in the European and global markets. In this regard, he also mentionedthe financial benefits for the UK and the Netherlands.Mr ŠEFČOVIČ stressed the necessity for the EU to keep improving in the crucial fields oftransparency, democratic accountability and in cutting red tape. This specific objective couldbe tackled more properly in cooperation with national institutions through an adequate4
process of transposition of EU law in national law. He emphasised the importance of usinginstruments for direct involvement in the decision-making process, such as the EuropeanCitizens' Initiative (ECI) and the participation in public consultations.In the debate which followed 26 speakers took the floor.Mrs Eva KJER HANSEN, DanishFolketing,distributed a report of the European AffairsCommittee of the DanishFolketingand briefly presented the 23 recommendations on how tostrengthen the role of national Parliaments in a changing European Governance and asked forfeedback. Mr Michele BORDO, ItalianCamera dei Deputati,emphasised the risks of an anti-European Parliament emerging from the May elections to the EP and supported the priority ofrecreating a strong link between citizens and the European institutions. In order to reconnectcitizens to the European integration, the EU should promote economic growth through aconcrete engagement in giving more time to Member States willing to undertake structuralreforms and to admit a more flexible interpretation of the Stability Pack for States andRegions using the European funds. Mr Luboš BLAHA, SlovakianNárodná rada,agreed onthe importance of the tools that enabled citizens’ direct involvement in the EU decision-making process as the ECI and the so called participatory budget, through which citizens wereinvolved in crucial financial decisions. He highlighted that trade Agreements between the EUand third countries should be discussed also with national Parliaments. He agreed upon thedecision taken by the Commissioner on Trade De GUCHT to exclude the clauses that couldhave been given too much power to international corporations from the Agreement with theUSA.Mr Gediminas KIRKILAS, LithuanianSeimas,expressed the view that the negative polls onthe lack of trust and confidence towards European institutions may be linked not only to theeconomic crisis, but also to the increasing social frustration generated by the limitedpossibilities to influence the shaping of the European decision-making process.Mr Miguel Angel MARTÌNEZ MARTÌNEZ, European Parliament, pointed out theimportance of connecting Europe to citizens through the very concrete instrument ofmultilingualism, as nolingua francaever existed. He underlined the need to raise citizens'awareness on their ownership of the European project. He argued it was a paradox that theEU project was more necessary but more threatened than ever, and urged national Parliamentsto join the EP's efforts in communicating and informing citizens, warning that otherwise thedemocratic identity of the European project would be threatened.Lord Timothy BOSWELL, UKHouse of Lords,made reference to members of the EuropeanCommission (Commission) being less responsive to the "yellow card", expressing hope thatthose members of COSAC who felt the importance of the procedure was minimised anddisregarded, would take active role in representations to the new Commission. In this respect,he emphasised the importance of collective action in putting national Parliaments' viewsacross. He highlighted the input of the Dutch and Danish Parliaments on how to strengthenthe role of national Parliaments informing that the House of Lords would be making its owncontribution in good time for the elections to the EP. He expressed hope that the COSACSecretariat would have a role in collating and coordinating the work done by nationalParliaments and the EP with the aim to prepare a paper for COSAC's June meeting.Vice-PresidentŠEFČOVIČthanked national Parliaments for what they had been doing inorder to address the common reflection on democratic accountability; he noted that all the5
initiatives and ideas coming from them on these documents would be seriously taken intoconsideration by the Commission, in the framework of the Treaties and the political dialogue.He stated that the definition of the future relationship between national Parliaments and theCommission would be one of the most important political issues for the new Commission.As to the criticism raised by several speakers about "Troika's" activities in some MemberStates, he reminded that this innovative mechanism had been a national Governments'decision and that the EU paid the highest political price for its unpopularity. He stated that themost crucial challenge for the next future would be the financing of the economy togetherwith the completion of the banking union. He stressed his disappointment to see that crucialEU instruments designed to finance the economy were picked up with reserves by the nationalFinance Ministers.Referring to the ECI, he noted that the Commission had to make this instrument more user-friendly. As to the trade Agreement with the USA, he pointed out the importance ofevaluating its convenience for the EU. He underlined that, in order to encourage people tovote at the elections to the EP, candidates should focus on precise and concrete goals,particularly in the fields of youth employment, digital agenda and free trade.He also agreed on the importance of languages to create a real link with the citizens,informing that the Commission's services had been extended to the summaries of the impactassessment studies and to public consultations.On the "yellow card" procedure he admitted that there was some room for improvement fromthe Commission’s side. As to the specific case of the proposal for a Council Regulation on theestablishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (COM/2013/0534), he noted that theCommission decided not to withdraw it because of the need, as stressed by many nationalParliaments, for the EU to have a more efficient tool against financial fraud.Mr Nico SCHRIVER, DutchEerste Kamer,Mr Gunter KRICHBAUM, GermanBundestag,and Mr Karlheinz KOPF, AustrianNationalrat,encouraged national Parliaments to put moreeffort in restoring citizen's confidence in Europe. Mr SCHRIVER shared the good practice ofthe DutchEerste Kamerof posting questions addressed to the Commission, in the frameworkof the political dialogue, on the website ofEerste Kamerand criticised the delays of theCommission's answers asking it to ensure more timely responses to reasoned opinions andpolitical dialogue submissions made by national Parliaments. Mr KOPF encouraged nationalParliaments to cooperate better with national governments and with the EP. He alsomentioned that the Austrian public radio station constantly informed about European issuesand recommended that all EU Member States use their State radio stations "to bring theEuropean idea closer to people".Regarding public information on EU matters, Mr Simon SUTOUR, FrenchSénat,suggestedestablishing a special radio station which would facilitate better provision of information tocitizens on EU matters. He also underlined the need for wider inclusion of women in politicsand in leading roles in EU institutions. Mr Richárd HÖRCSIK, HungarianOrszággyűlés,highlighted the importance of informing citizens about the measures taken at EU and nationallevel to tackle the consequences of the economic crisis for the outcome of the upcomingelections to the EP. Mr Herman DE CROO, BelgianChambre des représentants,agreed andcalled for citizens to be made aware at a larger scale of the achievements reached by and thechallenges of the EU as well as its future prospects.6
Ms Anne-Wil LUCAS, DutchTweede Kamer,shared some ideas on how the role of nationalParliaments in the process of European decision-making could be strengthened. She suggestedsetting up a "Group of forty-one" of political representatives of Committees on EuropeanAffairs of national Parliaments. Accordingly to her, the group could have a role in carryingout or improving the "yellow card" procedure or in practical elaboration of various new ideas.Vice-PresidentŠEFČOVIČ assured that the Commission had implemented special measures(i.e. installed a new IT system) to ensure more timely responses to reasoned opinions,contributions and political dialogue submissions made by national Parliaments. He welcomedthe initiative of DutchEerste Kamerto make public all communication (exchange of letters)with the Commission on the website of the Parliament and informed the Commission did thesame. Mr ŠEFČOVIČ agreed that future legislative efforts should focus on prioritiesand onimportant issues. He explained that the way the Commission Work Programme was preparedhad been changed. Amongst others, impact assessments had been introduced for delegatedand implementing acts with relevance to the citizens and several ways of better informing thelegislator and the Member States on acts currently explored. The Vice-President agreed thatthe social dimension, education and employment measures for young people were of thehighest importance. He suggested developing the existing network of radio stations("Euranet") for it to provide more EU information to citizens. Mr ŠEFČOVIČgave data ongender balance to illustrate the positive trend in EU institutions. While talking about the ideaof a "Group of forty-one", he suggested that national Parliaments should not focus on "yellowcards" as a restrictive instrument, but should participate more in dialogues with EUinstitutions and among each other sharing ideas for the future. Mr ŠEFČOVIČ pointed outthat communication among institutions had improved: the Commission sent to nationalParliaments all the information that was sent to the Council. He stressed that ownership of theEuropean project in Member States was important and called national Parliaments and EUinstitutions to act jointly on EU affairs.Mr Rainer ROBRA, GermanBundesrat,emphasised that the Committee of the Regions,composed of regional and locally elected representatives, developed into a very professionaland important institution. He suggested greater engagement of members of the Committee ofthe Regions into the dialogue on EU affairs.Ms Danielle AUROI, FrenchAssemblée nationale,pointed out that, in view of the elections tothe EP, the social dimension of the Economic Monetary Union (EMU) was of crucialimportance, in the context of increasing poverty and persisting unemployment. She suggestedproviding clear explanation to EU citizens about the mechanisms and actions taken to tacklethese challenges.Mr Edmund WITTBRODT, PolishSenat,pointed out that good communication (letters,documents, decisions) with the Commission and other EU institutions was very important. Hesuggested that Commissioners visited national Parliaments to exchange views with nationalparliamentarians. He mentioned the 10th anniversary of the 2004 enlargement of the EU andthe public opinion poll showing that 70 per cent of the population of Poland was satisfied withEU membership. Mr WITTBRODT highlighted the importance of education and proposed tostart discussions about the EU in schools.Mr William CASH, UKHouse of Commons,pointed out that the role of national Parliaments,especially in scrutinising their governments, was of the highest importance. He referred to the7
Protocol on the role of national Parliaments of the Treaty of Lisbon and, stressing the role ofnational Parliaments in scrutinising the government, underlined the crucial question ofprimacy in the UK. He warned that talk of "more Europe" and "more integration" wasdisconnecting people from the European concept and could cause new disorders, as well asthe further rise of the far right.Mr Vitalino CANAS, PortugueseAssembleia da República,criticised the "Troika" for notbeing transparent and flexible. He pointed out that the elections to the EP would be focusedon EU affairs for the first time and that the issue of democratic accountability was of crucialimportance.Mr Dominic HANNIGAN, IrishHouses of the Oireachtas,agreed that the disconnectionbetween the EU institutions and citizens had been growing in recent years. He said that therecovery of the economy was fragile and depended on how EU Member States would dealwith debt issues.Ms Agnieszka POMASKA, PolishSejm,regretted that EU laws were controversial and notfully understandable to citizens or even some EU Member States.Vice-PresidentŠEFČOVIČ agreed with the suggestion to involve members of the Committeeof the Regions in the dialogue on EU affairs not only with the Commission, but also withnational Parliaments and COSAC in the future. He pointed out that elected members of theCommittee of the Regions could forward to citizens valuable information concerning thedecisions of EU institutions. Mr ŠEFČOVIČ mentioned that crises often required swiftmeasures and actions, which could explain the feeling of "de-parliamentarisation ofdemocratic processes in Europe" experienced by national Parliaments. He assured that therecovery of the economy would allow coming back to the democratic standards and thatactions would be much better understood by citizens. The Vice-President emphasised that thesocial dimension, poverty, unemployment and the level of debt were issues that would remainat the top of the agenda of the EU for some time and that would be tackled by the newCommission.4. Exchange of views on relations between the European Parliament and nationalParliaments - speaker: Mr Carlo CASINI, Chair of the Committee on ConstitutionalAffairs of the European Parliament, rapporteur of the EP on relations between theEuropean Parliament and national ParliamentsMr CASINI pointed out that national Parliaments were part of a European parliamentarysystem having as one of their main tasks to bring citizens closer to Europe. He stressed thatthe EP had devoted much attention to the role of national Parliaments in order to deal with theissue of democratic deficit in the EU and to find valuable allies in the construction of aEuropean consciousness. He inquired to which extent the provisions of the Treaties onnational Parliaments had been implemented and how to integrate national Parliaments in thecontext of European institutions, as foreseen in the Treaty of Lisbon. In the light of theseprovisions, the relationship of the EP and of national Parliaments could not be one ofcompetition or contradiction, but of collaboration. Mr CASINI identified two main tasks fornational Parliaments according to the Treaty of Lisbon: scrutiny of national governments andan advisory role, within the framework of the political dialogue. In this context, he stated thatit was of utmost importance for the democratic legitimacy of the EU that nationalgovernments reflected the positions of national Parliaments in the Council. Mr CASINI8
strongly emphasised that national Parliaments did not constitute a third chamber in theconstitutional structure of the EU, but that they were the bodies that scrutinised theirgovernments and rendered the second chamber, i.e. the Council, democratic.At the sametime, he added, the subsidiarity check should not be perceived as a blocking instrument or as anegative indication of what the EU should not do, but rather as a positive suggestion of whatit needed to do.Mr CASINI stated that the political dialogue between national Parliaments and the EP had tobe structured and regulated. He acknowledged the added value of established conferenceswith specific subjects that had taken place. However, he underlined, these meetings’ goodresults did not deprive COSAC of its functions, which should be, amongst others, to verify theprogress of the work towards integration. COSAC should be thought as the place where thedialogue on the state of the Union would be developed. Furthermore, he mentioned thatreciprocal information between the EP and national Parliaments could facilitate thetransposition of EU law. In view of the upcoming elections to the EP, Mr CASINI underlinedthe responsibility of national Parliaments to enhance citizens' European consciousness.During the debate that followed, 5 speakers took the floor.Ms Nadia GINETTI, ItalianSenato della Repubblica,noted that it was important to reinforceparliamentary cooperation by putting forward to other European institutions, through COSACand other interparliamentary meetings, the common positions of national Parliaments and theEP. Ms Eva KJER HANSEN, DanishFolketing,urged for a clear purpose and a clearoutcome of the interparliamentary meetings organised by the EP, so that these would becomemore appealing to national parliamentarians. Mr DE CROO, BelgianChambre desreprésentants,asked for the inclusion of regional Parliaments in the framework ofinterparliamentary cooperation, whereas Ms Danielle AUROI, FrenchAssemblée nationale,underlined, amongst others, the importance of introducing the European dimension intoaspects of national competence, such as budgetary and social issues. Finally, Mr MarcANGEL, LuxembourgChambre des Députés,asked for a balanced representation of nationalParliaments and the EP in the parliamentary control unit for Europol.5. Priorities of the Hellenic Presidency of the Council of the European Union - keynotespeaker: Mr Evangelos VENIZELOS, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of ForeignAffairs of the Hellenic RepublicMr VENIZELOS stated that the Hellenic Presidency attached particular importance to thecooperation with the EP and national Parliaments and underlined the strengthened and criticalinstitutional role of national Parliaments in the functioning of the EU architecture. He referredto the previous four Hellenic Presidencies, linked to the two major enlargement waves in1995 and 2004 and the issue of the European Constitution which had paved the way for theTreaty of Lisbon.Answering to the objections referring to Greece's legitimacy to exercise the Presidency, MrVENIZELOS said that the rotating Presidency was an institutional obligation provided for bythe Treaties, which symbolized the fundamental principle of equality of all Member States.The Presidency was also of great national significance, as it would be an opportunity toproject the post-crisis profile of the country, due to the major fiscal achievementsaccomplished in Greece following four years of harsh sacrifices by the people. The DeputyPrime Minister referred to the close cooperation of the Hellenic Presidency with the9
permanent Presidencies, the Secretariat General of the Council, the Commission and the EP,as well as the complexities of the semester due to the elections to the EP and the intensifyingpan-European debate on the future of Europe. He pledged that Greece, as Presidency, wouldbe playing a coordinating and consensus-oriented role so that the European Council could saymore alluring and specific things for European citizens.Mr VENIZELOS summarised the priorities of the Greek Presidency in three main domains:returning to growth rates for Europe, responding to the problem of unemployment andrestoring social cohesion, underling the need for immediate implementation of the decisiontaken by the European Council and the EP; deepening of economic governance, with specialfocus on the banking union; protecting European boarders, managing migration flows andpromoting mobility. Integrated maritime policy constituted the horizontal priority of theGreek Presidency. Mr VENIZELOS announced that, along with the Italian Presidency, 2014would be a Mediterranean Year, highlighting issues such as energy sources, protection of theenvironment, maritime spatial planning, fisheries, implementation of the International Law ofthe Sea and delimitation of maritime zones in the Mediterranean.On the level of CFSP and CSDP the major problems of the Southern Neighbourhood, as wellas the acute crisis in Ukraine and the Central African Republic were high on the list ofpriorities. Referring to the enlargement policy, Mr VENIZELOS expressed his satisfaction forthe opening of Serbia's accession negotiations and of chapter 22 in the accession negotiationswith Turkey, underlining the importance of complying with the Copenhagen criteria and therespect of international law. He also stressed the importance attached to the re-examination ofEU-Russian relations and the completion of the Transatlantic Trade and InvestmentPartnership (TTIP).During the debate, 16 speakers took the floor.Mr Gediminas KIRKILAS, LithuanianSeimas,recalled that the main results of the LithuanianPresidency were interlinked with several priorities of the Hellenic Presidency (developmentof the Strategy for the Western Balkans countries, border security and immigration, the EUcommon internal energy market, the development of the EMU and the banking union). MrMichele BORDO, ItalianCamera dei Deputati,inquired about possible initiatives of theHellenic Presidency on issues that would be a priority for the Italian Presidency, namely theEU's political integration and foreign policy, dealing with the sovereign debt, European sharesand refocusing EU's economy. Mr Jožef HORVAT, SlovenianDržavni Zbor,deplored that theenlargement policy was not one of the Presidency's priorities and recalled that theThessaloniki agenda for the Western Balkans confirmed the accession perspectives for thesecountries. Mr Simon SUTOUR, FrenchSénat,recalled that combatting deficit should becoupled with measures to support growth, preserve social cohesion, consolidate the Eurozoneand democratic legitimacy; he hoped the Presidency would manage to strike a balancebetween North and South. Mr Richárd HÖRCSIK, HungarianOrszággyűlé,saw the launch ofofficial negotiations with Serbia as a milestone in relations between the EU and the WesternBalkans; regarding migration, he reaffirmed Hungary's support to the Presidency for commonsolutions based on the principle of burden sharing and recalled the alarming situation at theHungarian land borders. Mr Miguel Angel MARTÍNEZ MARTÍNEZ, European Parliament,inquired how the Presidency intended to ensure that the fragile growth benefits reached thosein need, by making use of the cohesion policy, as studies showed that 0,3% of EU's GDPinvested in cohesion created 1% additional growth; he also asked what measures had foreseento counter the enormous level of fraud and tax evasion, particularly by the main Internet10
companies, rendered possible by the lack of coordination and harmonisation of tax legislationin the EU. Mr DE CROO, BelgianChambre des Représentants,inquired about thePresidency's lack of proactivity on the Cyprus-Turkey dispute and whether Greece displayedsufficient openness towards Member States regarding taxes on immovable property andmilitary expenses. Mr Vitalino CANAS, PortugueseAssembleia da República,stressed thatthe time was ripe for discussions on the imbalance of the EMU that had generated some of theproblems Member States faced.In his intervention, Mr VENIZELOS explained the Presidency's focus on pending issues atCouncil and European Council level (management of migratory flows, the banking union, theEuropean social state) and its choice of adding new input with the horizontal maritime policy.These priorities were also relevant for the upcoming Italian Presidency with which anintegrated agenda for the Mediterranean Year was established. He added that enlargement wason the EU institutional agenda and that the Presidency had to implement the frameworkestablished by the EU decisions which were the result of common negotiations. He expressedGreece's support for all Western Balkans states and Turkey to join the EU, specificallymentioning that Greece was in favour of extending candidate status to Albania, thatMontenegro could move rapidly ahead, that in Bosnia and Herzegovina European prospectswere not foreseeable as long as the institutional system was highly fragile, and welcomed thenegotiations under way with Serbia recalling the repercussions on Kosovo and the negotiatingframework requirements in this respect. Concerning FYROM, a country with many economicties with Greece, he stressed that the name issue was not a bilateral dispute, but aninternational one, which had to be addressed as foreseen in the decisions of the UN. Herecalled that, beyond the unresolved name dispute on which the Greek position wasconstructive and moderate, other EU Member States were opposed to FYROM's accession toEU and NATO, due to the situation of fundamental rights, press freedom, democracy,neighbourly relations etc.On migration, Mr VENIZELOS deemed the Dublin framework inappropriate for borderMember States and assured that the Presidency would take important steps in this field, thatItaly was expected to build upon. In his view, tackling the problem at the root in countriessuch as Syria or Libya would help end human trafficking in the Mediterranean; whilereminding Greece's efforts to deal with migrants that did not belong to the categories ofasylum seekers or refugees, he also urged for an EU approach based on solidarity.As for the energy market, he emphasised the necessity of common European negotiations onthe cost of gas imported from third countries in order to have a single European price, theimportance of interconnecting energy grids and the need to develop links with countries likeCyprus, Israel and Egypt. He deplored that the focus of European integration policies oneconomic matters, the EMU and the banking union was unmatched by similar efforts aimingto develop further EU's political body and that the EU was not playing a more assertive roleon the international scene.On Cyprus and Turkey, Mr VENIZELOS stated that, as a country, Greece supported apolitically and institutionally stable European Turkey and recalled in this respect the opendiplomatic channels between the two. The Cyprus issue was however a pending internationalmatter, described by the European Court of Human Rights judgements as a case of invasionand occupation, a challenge to international law and an infringement to the decisions of theUN Security Council. While he hoped for new momentum for discussions, provided PresidentANASTASIADES' proposal on issuing a common press release providing for a settlement in11
line with theacquis communautaireand as described in the decisions of the UN SecurityCouncil and the high-level agreements was accepted, he stressed that Turkey's position, whichdid not recognise Cyprus, was the underlying crucial factor.Mr Christopher FEARNE, MalteseKamra tad-Deputati,reminded the marked increase in theburden that would be placed on Mediterranean states after the introduction of the CommonEuropean Asylum System in 2015 and underscored the need for the EU to do more torepatriate failed asylum seekers, to amend the Dublin II Regulation and to ensure increasedmobility of the refugees within the EU once refugee status granted. Ms Aylin NAZLIAKA,TurkishBüyük Millet Meclisi,a member of the Republican People's Party (CHP), the mainopposition party, that considered full EU membership for Turkey to be imperative, stated thatthe Gezi Park events and the December 2013 anti-corruption operations brought Turkey closerto the EU. She proposed opening Chapters 23 and 24, as they were crucial for addressingcorruption and democratising the judicial system. Ms Danielle AUROI, FrenchAssembléenationale,inquired on the negotiation prospects between the EP and Council on the SingleResolution Mechanism and on whether a specific intergovernmental treaty was foreseen; shealso asked for more details on possible progress on own resources and the financialtransactions tax. Mr Janvit GOLOB, SlovenianDržavni svet,focused his intervention onextending transport infrastructure between the states in South-eastern Europe and on theeconomic importance of the Adriatic and Ionian Macroregion for Southern countries. MsCarlota RIPOLL, SpanishCortes Generales,believed Greece was an example of how the EUcould overcome the economic and financial crisis, but warned that the EU had to learn fromits mistakes in dealing with the crisis. Mr Hajrula MISINI,Sobranieof the Former YugoslavRepublic of MacedoniaAssembly,although regretting enlargement was not a Presidency'spriority, hoped nevertheless for negotiations for membership to start during this Presidencyand for Greece's support to FYROM's accession. Mr Averof NEOFYTOU, CyprusVoulī́ tōnAntiprospōn,recalled the importance of stability in the Middle East for Europe and forenergy. He stated his country would not have any problem with the opening of anynegotiation chapter with Turkey provided the country implemented its European obligationsas foreseen by the Additional Protocol, arguing that the EU accession of Western Balkancountries and of Turkey was a solution to the EU's energy security problem. Mr EdmundWITTBRODT, PolishSenat,suggested a mid-term assessment of the progress achievedtowards the Strategy Europe 2020, in order to avoid a scenario similar to the collapse of theLisbon Strategy.In reply to the second round of questions, Mr VENIZELOS stated that combating tax evasionwas a European and national priority and mentioned Greece's major legislative interventionon internet gambling, on raising banking confidentiality and on off-shore companies. He alsooutlined the importance for Greece of shipping capital and the need to ensure that stricttaxation terms would not make operators discontinue shipping activities in Greece. Hereiterated that Turkey's progress towards Europe depended on Turkey itself and that all EUMember States were ready to open new chapters wishing to see Turkey on a stable,democratic path. However, fundamental matters needed to be settled first and, in this respect,he recalled that Cyprus was ready to discuss a viable solution.On FYROM, Mr VENIZELOS mentioned the existing open communication channel andGreece's efforts for finding an agreed solution on the name (a compromise solution of acomposite name with a geographical determinant to be applied to the name ‘Macedonia’).On the legal nature of the Single Resolution Mechanism, he stressed that, if it could be dealt12
with through a regulation under the Lisbon Treaty which would ensure the EP's involvement,the Presidency would be favourable, but should there be an aspect that required anintergovernmental approach, this issue would need to be addressed. On the financialtransactions tax, the Minister said he would address the Plenary of the EP in Strasbourg inFebruary and reminded the audience that Greece supported it, but that resistance came fromother countries; on the own-resources he explained they represented very little in terms of therequirements of the European integration. On the Trans European links, a topic addressedalready in 1994 under the Hellenic Presidency, he announced Greece's intention to exploitthese networks, as access to land roads to and through Europe was a crucial aspect. MrVENIZELOS assured the audience that Greece attached great importance to the Ionian -Adriatic question and the Europe 2020 strategy. He concluded by thanking Europe for itssolidarity which came at great political and social cost.Mr Ioannis TRAGAKIS, GreekVouli ton Ellinon,put to discussion the proposed amendmentson the COSAC Chairpersons' Statement on current events in Ukraine. The new paragraphsuggested by the Spanish delegation was accepted, as was the change of the word "order"suggested by the Irish delegation. Mr DE CROO, BelgianChambre des représentants,suggested adding the words "on all sides" to the amendment proposed by Ireland. Theamended Statement was adopted unanimously.In his concluding remarks, Mr TRAGAKIS stated that the meeting had provided theopportunity for a fruitful discussion and mentioned that the COSAC Secretariat wasestablished during the last COSAC meeting held in Greece. In the context of the upcomingelections to the EP, he stressed the need for more Europe, growth and employment,underlining the historical duty of all parliamentarians to present a new narrative to theirsocieties and a new future after the crisis.
13