Internal Affairs Commissioner Debate, October 2021
-
Good day people of Europe. I'd like to firstly thank Lex Burnley for hosting this Internal Affairs Race Debate, for the nice introduction, and for allowing us candidates to show who we really are and what we fight for. To introduce myself further, I am Joe Biden and I am here as an independent candidate for Internal Affairs Commissioner. Last elections, I failed to win the race for the same position. But now, we will do everything to win for the betterment of Europe. It's time we reform Europe, because Change is Coming.
When I resigned from my position as Chief Secretary to the Royal Household, I have been observing the European Union and how it had been behaving recently. And I felt its oppressiveness, I felt how overpowered it has become. With that, I knew that its member-states are slowly hating it. People are wanting their nation to withdraw from the union, seeing that it has no more chance of changing itself.
But here I am, offering myself and my services to all of you. I am here to establish the correct reform and changes for Europe. We don't need the malarkey that had entangled us into a messy union. It's time we listen to the voices of the nations. It's time we let the nations decide. It's time we make sure that promises are fulfilled. It's time that we act and not just speak. So if you vote for me in the coming European Elections, I will make sure that my words will be my actions and we will do it in four months. We will save Europe without lengthening our term. Thank you and have a great day to everyone!
Thank you for the question Charlize. My stand on this is simple, they are all operating in malarkey. There's too much eurocracies and it's time to decrease them or limit their powers. In my administration, we will study the establishment of an institution classification in which some are only opt-in and some are required for membership. We will also look into the ways we budget these institutions so that we don't give the money of the people of Europe to simple plain malarkey. As Ilmaras just said, we need to decentralize the EU. Although I think we don't just need to decentralize the EU, we need to also declutter it from too much unnecessary bureaucracy. That is all for now, thank you.
-
Mr. Biden, do not misrepresent my words. When I speak of decentralization, I speak, in part, of cutting the fat - removing functions from EU bureaucracies that national-level ministries are perfectly capable of handling. I have stated this explicitly before, and implied it quite heavily here. I believe, as I said, that this may be accomplished by turning EU bureaucracies into confederations of national-level ministries - the whole explanation of which I will not repeat again.
I would, then, like to ask you the following questions: What is malarkey? Which of our EU bureaucracies is so unnecessary that it must be abolished wholesale, rather than merely being pared down and decentralized as I suggest? And why is this?
-
I oppose Ilmaras' principle of making ministry confederations from agencies. Europeans pay taxes to fund their national level ministries, and you want them to pay again for confederations.
Malarkey, for me, is anything unnecessary that exist but do not benefit the people. For your second question, the ESA is the first one to be abolished, it only wastes money for something that member-states can do through themselves or in cooperation with other member-states. The ELE may also be abolished and its powers merged with that of the EDA. The EPO may also be abolished and that all patents registered in any nation be recognized by the EU as a whole. And finally, the EAA may be transformed into a more general agency which would handle highway numbering, aviation standards, and other national standards.
These are just our initial plans, and we will study other steps we may take. Thank you.
-
Please stop misrepresenting my positions. It is getting very annoying. I do not intend to make anyone pay again for these reformed agencies; that will obviously be paid through the European budget. Secondly, none of these agencies need to be abolished. Yes, as a space exploration agency, the ESA can be abolished; but it may also be reformed into one coordinating scientific development in space - for example, facilitating an agreement giving slots to independent researchers for research that must be conducted in space. With regards to the ELE, it has no relation to the EDA. I don't even want to think of the chaos that would very obviously result from your proposal for the EPO. Finally, your proposal for the EAA would make it an unwieldly bureaucracy that would, in that unwieldly-ness, further detach it from the member-states.
We need sane, informed policy that protects the nations, not this.
-
Lex Burnley: Thank you, everyone! Onto our next question. Josefina Álvarez from Pamplona, Spain, wants to know "what would be your first measure if you won the race? Why?"
((OOC: You'll have ~36 hours to respond.))
-
My first action would be to begin the process of drafting a Sovereignty Charter, which will be created by representatives of member-states and which will delineate the powers of the EU and define sovereignty. Possibly included could be a mechanism allowing member-states to adapt legislation to national conditions, although perhaps this would be better done separately.
Why is this so important? Some of the one-size-fits-all legislation passed by the Council have profoundly damaged the lives of many workers and the economies of many nations, or in others forced the adoption of regulations completely nonsensical due to cultural and other differences. We need to limit this, and, where completely impossible to do so, allow member-states breathing room, to preserve their independence, prosperity, and dignity. However, we cannot do this without possessing clear definitions - that would merely result in political opportunism and demagoguery, ending in such disastrous policies such as that Mr. Biden proposes for the EPO.
In essence, we need to protect sovereignty in all its forms, political, cultural, and economic in a rational manner - and this is the perfect place to start.
-
First of all, my team and I are not going to make a very direct decision, that is, one that does not affect the work that is being done and the one that was done. We are going to open a dialogue table, so that all states can express their concerns, proposals, visions, along with a deep and detailed analysis of the operation, effectiveness, etc. I repeat, we will not take hasty decisions, we will put various issues on the table such as tourism, the economy and also human rights. And this is where I will make special emphasis, reflecting on violent demonstrations, repression among others, but I also want it to be known that in human rights I will not make a distinction between countries, because currently in my country the Federal Republic of Gania, a terrorist attack that occurred recently that It causes a serious situation of social crisis that it is currently facing. As a commissioner, there will be no impunity or silence, Europe deserves an agile and serious commissioner.SPANISH:
En primer lugar yo y mi equipo no vamos a tomar una decisión muy directa es decir, que no afecte el trabajo que va haciendo y el que se hizo. Vamos a abrir una mesa de dialogo, para que todos los estados pueda expresar sus inquietudes, propuestas, visiones, junto con un análisis profundo, detallado del funcionamiento la eficacia etc. Repito no tomaremos daciones precipitadas, pondremos varios temas en la mesa como turismo, economía y también los derechos humanos. Y es aquí que hare especial énfasis, reflexionando sobre manifestaciones violentas, represión entre otros, pero ademas quiero que se sepa que en los DDHH no hare distinción de países, por que actualmente en mi país la Republica Federal de Gania, ocurrió recientemente un atentado terrorista que provoca una grave situación de crisis social que actualmente esta enfrentado. Como comisionado no habrá impunidad ni silencio, Europa merece un comisionado ágil y serio.
-
Lex Burnley: Iconic. We're now reaching the end of the debate. Before we finish, you each have 2 minutes ((OOC: 300 words)) to pop off and let Europe know why you're the best choice.
-
I want to tell Europe that we have lived through very difficult times, times of silence, of impunity, times where those who used repression, lack of compassion, went unpunished; I inform all those who are in hiding, they will be tried or else they will have to submit to responsibility, to listen to those who have no voice. Europe deserves to change in various aspects, economy, tourism, laws, human rights and also socially. Keep in mind that I cannot make this change alone, we have to do it together in a big way, I will work with the Europeans to improve and achieve what we all want, a great Europe. Thanks!SPANISH:
Quiero decir a Europa que hemos vivido tiempos muy difíciles, tiempos del silencio, de la impunidad, tiempos donde aquellos que usaban la represión, la falta de compasión quedaron impunes; informo a todos aquellos que están detrás o escondidos, van a ser juzgados o de lo contrario deberán someterse a la responsabilidad, a oír a aquellos que no tienen voz. Europa merece cambiar en varios aspectos , economía, turismo, leyes , derechos humanos y también en lo social. Aviso que este cambio no puedo hacerlo solo debemos hacerlo juntos a lo grande, trabajare con el pueblo europeo para mejorar y lograr lo que todos queremos, un gran Europa. muchas gracias!
-
Europeans, my vision is simple: it is one of independence, dignity, and justice for all. Where nations and peoples can be free of interference in their affairs by any actor; where they may go about their normal lives. A Union which encourages self-reliance, self-development, but also mutual aid; a Union of partners free and equal in respect and dignity. A decentralized Union, a democratic Union, where institutions are close to the nations and the people, where both can actively participate in them. A more flexible Union, as well, which adjusts to the conditions of the member-states, to their cultures, to their wildly different economies, rather than forcing on them one thing. A Union which is more specialized in its functions, instead of being broad and unaccountable. A Union which is a genuine community of independent and cooperating nations. A Union constructed in a methodical and pragmatic way, rather than through sudden bursts of ideology.
A democratic Union, a liberated Union.
This will take many years to accomplish; those who say that it can be done quickly are lying to you. However, I hope, more than anything else, to be able to lay the first gleaming stone in the construction of this new Union.
