European Development Agency Act
-
With all due respect, Councillor Roscoe, no. War torn countries may very well have a GDP per capita above this some - if I am in fact correct, Alkharya in fact does. At the same time, a country with over dependence on an all industry - a good example of this is Vayinaod - should be able to, if necessary, receive at least some aid from the Union for the purpose of transition or diversification. There is also the issue of regional investment. We have seen rich countries with regions of them In depression; in certain cases, it would be legitimate for the Union to lend money on this basis. Finally, a nation in depression may not have such a low GDP per capita, but may still need subsidies.
The amendment proposed would continue the sickening trend in which a minority benefits from a majority that is locked from ever receiving those benefits, regardless of how dire their situation may be.
You do raise a good point about waste, but neither Commissioners nor Councillors are stupid. We will know a wasteful request when we see one.
As is clear, I am in full support of this bill.
Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen.* -
Debate begins NOW and will last until 12:07 GMT on July 14th, 2021.
Donald Tusk
Deputy Speaker and Councillor for Spain -
[Cllr. Lallana gets up from her seat and provides the Act with a 6-minute standing ovation, clapping enthusiastically for the entire 6 minutes.]
This is the most meaningful and important piece of legislation that has ever been proposed in the European Council, and we owe it to the ever-wise and thoughtful Premier Čikarová, who has already established herself as the most glorious and competent Premier Commissioner the European Union has ever had.
I encourage Cllr. Mizrachi-Roscoe to reconsider his position on the matter. His amendment would essentially mean that only 3 member states of the entire European Union would be eligible for development grants or loans, which would be Nofoaga, North Diessen and Pravoslaviya. No other member state could use the agency. This is such an arbitrary distinction which would weaken the agency significantly. As Cllr. Tilkanas has pointed out, there are many reasons why developed states may need loans or grants. The idea that developed countries don't use or need loans is not based in any sort of reality, as most developed European states are in massive debt and rely on them frequently. The European Council has already given a loan to Leagio as well, if you may remember.
With the climate crisis ongoing, it is imperative that all states - including developed states, which tend to pollute the most - transition to green economies. This agency could play a very important role in that. If there's ever to be a Green New Deal, then it starts with the European Development Agency.
This Act has my full support.
Bp. Karinn Lallana
Councillor for Inquista -
I am willing to reconsider the ammendment but there must be a way to stop grants going to projects that could easily be afforded by rich countries and some control to make sure funds are spent wisely. I can accept there may be circumstances when rich nations may need support but perhaps instead of full support only 50% of the project is funded in nations over 20,000 Euros per capita with a feasability report showing economic and social benefits of any project before it is approved. My concern is this could lead to blank cheques being given out and money wasted.
James Mizrachi-Roscoe, Councillour for United Duchies
-
Cllr. Mizrachi-Roscoe, can we not already deal with this ourselves? The Council is given the power to decide with this act; if the number of applications becomes an annoyance, then certainly, we can add the nation in question to the list of high risk of misuse or mismanagement.
Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
Thank you very much Premier Čikarová for coming today to the home of millions of Europeans, but also the home of the European sovereignty and where the important decisions are taken. I would also like to congratulate you for your recent victory in the Commission Elections, and wish you the best of luck during this term.
Today, a new term starts for the European Progressive Alliance. A new term in which I will be on the head of the Eurogroup and try to deliver to this Council what the Europeans think and would like to come true. This opposition to your Commission, which has a Party of the European Left majority, will be responsible and we will act accordingly. I would to announce you, Ms. Čikarová, that my office door will be open to negotiate any important bill and reach important agreements for Europe and our Union. But this is not a blank cheque to you or your Eurogroup, but being responsible with Europe and overall, with the Europeans.
Consequently, after reading this bill and debating with my European Progressive Alliance collegues about what should be done with this bill, we have come to the decision, or at least I have, to vote for it. This bill will help the European states to develop when in need, and so we should start working for countries like Nofoaga in which grants should be given instead of loans. I would like this bill not to affect the current loan that was given a year ago or so to the Commonwealth of Leagio, as the terms were agreed and we might lose money, and that's why I will also propose a minor amendment to this act, as we need to understand that the European Council needs to listen those who give the highest amount of money to the European Union and not make them angry. Setting a fixed interest per year does the opposite, and so I believe that should be arranged by the Commission and then the Council should either accept or change the interest per year. The rest of the bill is frankly ok, so I don't think any other amendments will be needed.
Finally, I would like to remember Councillor Mizrachi-Roscoe that one of the Union's principles is solidarity, and even if some people would love to destroy these principles and make us all forget about it, the European values are key and essential for the European Progressive Alliance, which is why I won't support your amendment. With that said, here's my amendment:
SECTION II. - TYPES OF SUBSIDIES
III. Low-interest loans
(i.) Funds loaned by the European Development Agency to a member state that are paid back with an interestup to 1,8% per annum.per year that will be arranged by the European Commission and then proposed to the European Council, which should give its approval or either change the interest percent.
Debate is now over. It is time to vote on amendments. There are TWO amendments, one proposed by Cllr. Mizrachi-Roscoe and another proposed by myself, Cllr. Tusk. The amendments are thus:
Amendment I - Proposed by Cllr. Mizrachi-Roscoe
I. Any member state with a GDP per capita of under 20,000 Euros per capita may issue a subsidy request to the European Commission.
Amendment II - Proposed by Cllr. Tusk
SECTION II. - TYPES OF SUBSIDIES
III. Low-interest loans
(i.) Funds loaned by the European Development Agency to a member state that are paid back with an interestup to 1,8% per annum.per year that will be arranged by the European Commission and then proposed to the European Council, which should give its approval or either change the interest percent.
Voting on amendments will commence NOW and will last until 22:57 GMT on July 17th, 2021. If Premier Čikarová needs to answer to any of the Councillors, she will have 3 minutes to answer to them before the Councillor for Czech Slavia delivers the vote.
I vote AGAINST Amendment I and FOR Amendment II.
Donald Tusk
Deputy Speaker and Councillor for Spain -
First of all I thank all of you for the debate. Councillor Roscoe many of your concerns have already been addressed brilliantly by Councillors Tilkanas and Lallana. The European Commission and the European Council have would have control over what the money can be lend for, no loan can be granted without the approval of both of these institutions. Also please direct your attention to Section III. Paragraph II., it is stated there that member states requesting a subsidy must, among other requirements, provide justification for their request.
Councillor Tusk, thank you for your welcome and for being constructive. To address your concern, the loan provided to Leagio won't be affected in the slightest by the creation of European Development Agency, for the loan to Leagio wasn't provided by the EDA, so there is no need for concerns. Moreover, the EDA doesn't seek to become a sole agency responsible for providing loans. It would only provide two types of loans, interest-free and low-interest loans as its goal is assisting member states in their development. If it is evaluated that a member state requesting a subsidy should not receive a low-interest loan, their request can be denied and the member state has the possibility to request a loan from the EU outside of the EDA. Your proposed amendment, with all due respect, would make the low-interest loans low-interest in name only and would entirely change the aim of the agency. I hope I addressed all of your concerns and it is now clear why I disagree with your proposed amendment and appreciate your constructiveness.
Once again thanks to all of you and I hope that you will pass this Act without the amendments that have been proposed so that we may all work for the betterment of the Union. Thank you!
Sofie Čikarová
Premier Commissioner -
I think a debate extension probably should have been order, especially considering a new amendment was proposed mere seconds before voting began, so I will keep my piece short: I just don't think these amendments are necessary, useful or help the aim of the legislation. Therefore...
I vote AGAINST all amendments.
Bp. Karinn Lallana
Councillor for Inquista -
On behalf of United Duchies I vote against both amendments. I have been convinced that richer nations should get some funds at least in low interest loans.
James Mizrachi-Roscoe, Councillour for United Duchies
-
The Empire of Inimicus votes AGAINST both Amendments.
Cllr Nicholas Benfield
-
On behalf of the Independent territorial collectivity of the Nofoaga Islands, I vote FOR both amendments.
Mrs. Paul-Gabrielle Muzhare
EU Councillor for the Nofoaga Islands -
I vote AGAINST Amendment I and FOR Amendment II.
Emma Granger,
Councillor for Montenbourg -
The Six Unions of Gadalland and Aspern votes against Amendment I and for Amendment II.
-
On behalf of the Democratic Republic of Czech Slavia, I vote AGAINST all amendments.
Václav Kohout
Councillor for Czech Slavia -
On behalf of the Republic of Istkalen, I vote AGAINST all amendments.
Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
Voting on amendments has ended.
With 1 vote FOR, 7 votes AGAINST, and no Abstentions, Amendment I has FAILED.
With 3 votes FOR, 5 votes AGAINST, and no Abstentions, Amendment II has FAILED.Final voting begins NOW and ends 24 July 2021 at 12h00 GMT.
I vote FOR this Act.
Charles Michel
Council Speaker and Councilor for Fremet -
On behalf of the Most Blessed State of Inquista, I vote FOR this Act.
Bp. Karinn Lallana
Councillor for Inquista -
The Empire of Inimicus votes FOR this Act.
Nicholas Benfield
-
On behalf of the Nofoaga Islands, I ABSTAIN from voting.
Mrs. Paul-Gabrielle Muzhare
EU Councillor for the Nofoaga Islands -
On behalf of United Duchies I vote FOR this act
James Mizrachi-Roscoe, Councillour for United Duchies
The Kingdom of Spain
