Commission Debate, Feb/March 2022

[Istkalen]

Ms. Porter, please answer the questions I asked. Where will you get your proposed 15 billion from, why should 40% of the fund be reserved for only the poorest member-states, and what do you think the aim of EDA loans should be?

[BrumBrum]

Sara Porter:I will look at working with amenable councillors in the Council to introduce an emergancy request for extra money for the EU to go to the EDA so we can keep some of the FIA just in case working with the premier who controls this aspect. As for why 40% should go to the poorest member states only is they need the most simply put UD don't need as much per capita for example and neither do richer countries like Spain and Leagio but if we want to help all transition to a green sustainable economy poorer nations like Nofoaga , like Galland and Aspern need alot of extra help garunteeing 40% goes to nations like them and North Diessan and Pravoslaviya ensures this happens. It directs money to where it is most needed not the one with the best ability to write bids and hire people to put bids for money in.

[Vayinaod]

"Do you support a 'European Green Deal', and if so what does that mean exactly for you? How will you help countries whose current industries would be devastated potentially by rapid transition across Europe such as Vayinaod and the Duxburian Union?"

You have two minutes to answer, as well as rebuttals for 90 seconds. (((300 words: 200 words).

((OOC: you have 24 hours to submit answers. So until 2100 GMT March 04))

[BrumBrum]

Sara Porter:I support the European Green New Deal. Is it enough on its own ? No and certainly nations need to look how to go further in a way that fits their society and economy. Also I believe funds from the EU should be available particuarly to poorer nations to make sure they can also go carbon neutral before 2040 , this shouldn't be a luxury only rich nations can afford and rich nations should step up and provide the funds to help poorer nations who may I remind them are often poor because of exploitation in the past by these big nations like the Duchies , Spain and Reitzmag among others fomerly are the reason they cannot afford to do things on their own today. I want to be clear I am in no way singling out those nations since its the way things were back then, but we must provide more aid to develop the poorer economies in a sustainable way from the richer nations of the union using European brotherhood and sisterhood.

[Spain]

Yes, I support a European Green Deal, yet that means everyone should be compromised with them and that no nation should be left behind. When the talks were held in Bergen, many nations did not attend the summit, for example Vayinaod, the Duxburian Union, Angleter… The Green Deal summit began as a failure and ended up as a failure, due to a lack of agreement and participation. To me, the EGD should be something we all commit to, and that is not an imposition but rather a compromise with the European society and our citizens. Every nation must have its different rhythm and we just need to set 2 goals: when the whole region is transitioning to non-polluting vehicles and when are we achieving zero emissions. The rest should be decided and managed by the nations and not by the European Union, we cannot pretend that everyone acts at the same time.

Now when it comes to countries like the Duxburian Union or Vayinaod for example, Europe needs to be there and we need to guarantee funding for the projects to foster development towards this area. We can’t allow that a states-made fund is able to give money to projects while the European Union isn’t. And that takes me to the point that we were discussing before, not only contributions should go back to their previous level, something Mr. Biden’s friends in the Council gutted; but also we should raise the budget so the European Union can afford funding projects like the one proposed in Azrekko. The EDA will play a big, crucial role in the future of the EU and we must protect it at all costs, encourage its use and more importantly, convince every single country that investing in the EDA is investing in their citizen’s future.

[BrumBrum]

Sara Porter:So okay if you don't want a state fund to overtake the EDA then why not allow state donations to the EDA like the GEF does? Surely that is part of the solution.

[Spain]

Ms. Porter, did you know that until your friend, the Duchian Councillor gutted and sabotaged the budget, we had enough money to increase the European Development Agency’s budget? You just propose state donations to the EDA, but we already donate money to the European Union to pay for the budget! It’s extremely nonsensical to propose donations when, yearly, we pay for the budget! I am now starting to understand why the ELSS and similar groups want sovereignty to go back to nations, because they are not able to manage Europe as they should! Listen up taxpayers, this people want to make you pay double when you have the chance to only pay once. Does it have sense to you? To me it doesn’t.

In fact, it has the same sense than denying King Juan Carlos I of Spain did not use the Spanish Intelligence Services to spy on me, even if they deny it. He clearly did it! The same happens with your proposal Ms. Porter: it makes no sense and makes the European taxpayer pay double, because the donated money will come from the taxpayer, won’t it?

[BrumBrum]

Sara Porter:Then how do you propose the EDA gets equal ability to raise funds. We know from accounts the GEF gets 20 billion Euros per year from just United Duchies and Reitzmag alone. Unless you allow donations you will never match those amounts or get even close. If a nation wants to donate extra to the EDA or any other EU institution what exactly is the issue there? Some nations want to contribute to other nations development more yet are denied by stupid laws banning donations from nations above the 0.1% of GDP.

[Spain]

There's is no need for donations, Ms. Porter. Just use the budget surplus and stop your friend, Cllr. Mizrachi-Roscoe from fiercly resisting any attempts at restoration of the old budget. You are part of the group that decided to cut it, and we now understand why other nations supported it: the ELSS and similar groups want and keep wanting to use the European Union for their own profit. They proved it with the cut of the budget, they wanted to do the same with the European Enterprise Penalties Act.

By the way, Mr. Biden just defends the raise not because he agrees with it, but rather cause not supporting it would mean the end of his campaign and his chances to become Premier. Nothing further than that.

[BrumBrum]

Sara Porter:Once again you lie he is not fiercely resisting any attempt to raise it. He is saying he will vote yes if 80% of it is garunteed to be spent. In essence he is asking for assurance that EU will remain high for years to come and not be dependent on the whims of premiers. That is a good thing as it ensures the EU will actually spend what it gets, he is also requiring the main bit would be an FIA allocation only given back at the end of the year if not spent which would provide more flexibility. Presumably if you want EU flexibility you would support having that cash on hand for the whole year.He just wants an effective EU as do the whole of the ELSS and many others in Europe and one that is well run and provides nations with a say in how they are run and input into the laws of Europe. This should be something all nations support.

[Kingdom of Reitzmag]

"I do indeed support ways to protect the environment, this is even part of my 5 category-based intervention principle. However, I believe we need more actions instead of just plain treaties. The European Green Deal was a good idea, however there are better ways such that we could achieve our green goal quickly. Instead of a treaty that imposes the same policies on all nations, we could instead opt for a committment treaty where nations list their commitments and decide their courses of action for fighting climate change. This will serve as the EU's general mission and vision."

"We will consult member-states on their needs to achieve their plans through legislation or EU-wide programs. As part of our EDA reform, we'll also legislate that a separate reserve be created for Green Development Funds from which nations can borrow from. After the new EDA budgeting is fixed, it will be left on its own to grow its reserve from interests in loans. We will only provide funds to the EDA for its operations and if its reserves have depleted."

"Now, on the topic of nations that will be heavily affected by too quick transition. We will focus on nations that need more help, especially bigger nations like DU and Vayinaod. I believe that if these nations are able to catch up without hurting their economies, we would be able to quickly help other smaller nations that also need help. However, if we can through enough funds help everyone at the same time to also successfully transition at the same time, we will do so as much as possible."

"Time doesn't matter much here, what's more important is we are able to achieve things together. With the right deadline, and goals, our mission and vision for a better Europe will come true."

[Istkalen]

I am in support of a European Green Deal. What does this mean to me? Funding and coordinating at a European level, through contacts with research organizations, the development of technology to decrease emissions, especially in technology and agriculture. Development associations will also be encouraged to promote and implement green practices and construct green industry.

I will also hold a second meeting with as many member-states, in addition to labor unions, as possible to renew and expand the Bergen Agreement to develop a united front to control desertification and sea level rise, to prepare for major climate disasters, and to reduce emissions through further industrial investment and renovation across the EU, to be funded at least partially through the fund established by the Agreement, as well as possibly by the EDA. I will also seek to negotiate supply agreements in order to maintain a constant flow of the goods needed for these projects. The intention is to develop a cheaper alternative to fossil fuels in non-supplier nations, making oil and gas production economically nonsensical, while driving significant construction of alternative green industry in those supplier nations in particular in order to replace mineral exports. While it will be to the member-states to determine what form this will take, the progress of both will follow a rough timeline agreed upon by consensus, in order to ensure that the number of new jobs in supplier nations and new exports are roughly equal to the number of jobs and goods exported lost by "greening" in other nations. It will be member-states and to a lesser extent labor unions which determine everything beyond this framework at this meeting. Perhaps this will seem like overreach; but in a globalized world, to maintain economic stability during a transition, an international approach is necessary.

---

Ms. Porter says that, in order to correct the past, the former exploiting states must heap aid on the developing world. What a shame that this is so much of the time merely further exploitation. The way in which aid is given denies these states any chance to develop their own innovation, their own industry; it leaves them continuously dependent on copious amounts of exports from the outside world, while themselves exporting much less. The countries which they import from may then demand from them all manner of things. The goal should be to help the developing world construct economic sovereignty, rather than to maintain the current state of things.

[BrumBrum]

Sara Porter:I disagree aid is exploitative. Without aid Nofoaga would have had to take a great deal of debt on instead they got roughly 100,000 Euros per citizen to help with rebuilding from the Duchies and were able to spend it on projects as they saw fit generally. Aid is a useful things, the Green European Fund is helping the green transition throughout Europe yes it does have conditions to ensure its not wasted and doesn't fund something stupid like a gadgetbahn ensuring that any technology chosen is proven but that's important right now. We cannot afford for green funds to be wasted on unproven or unlikely to succeed technologies , we need to move forward to cut carbon as quickly as possible with proven technologies. WE don't need stupid stuff like hyperloops being funded when they are likely just to fail or proprietary transport systems like monorails with limited manufacturers for example.Its not a time for experimentation but instead action.

[Vayinaod]

To Biden from Silly Clues: "During the last campaign you promised carrying out a constitutional reform, which was not carried out. What has been done to fulfill this promise, why has it not yet been carried out and what will you do to fullfil it if elected."

To Larsen from Silly Blues: "Do you agree with how your opponent, the current internal affairs commissioner, handled crises that arose during his term? Will you seek to maintain the status quo of the Red Strait question or will you seek to reopen this issue?"

To Porter from Silly Spruce: "What are the main benefits of paying for a Commissioner without any concrete plan?"

To Kalessed from Serious Sirius: "In the past you spoke about adopting a Sovereignty Charter which would clearly outline the powers of the member states and the European Union, is this still your goal?"

You have two minutes to answer, as well as rebuttals for 90 seconds. (((300 words: 200 words).

((OOC: you have 24 hours to submit answers. So until 0400 GMT March 05))

[BrumBrum]

Sara Porter:I have got a concrete plan and thats consult the nations but the benefit of this is simple you the nations set the agenda. I'm not going to force some grand agenda on you but instead visit your parliaments reguarly like I already have , visit your governments and have a big meeting of all heads of state or government. Your nations will be involved all the way unlike now. So the benefit is you'll get an EU that consults , gets a concensus then act.

[Spain]

I clearly do not agree with how Joe Biden has managed the crises which arose around the European Union during his term. As I said on an interview I gave to the Europolis Post a month ago or so, “Sleepy Joe is snoring at his office”, and he was when the crises arisen and he will be if more crises arise and wins the election. Mr. Biden is unable to do something correctly, because he doesn’t want to become an “European policeman”. “Two countries close to killing each other? Don’t worry, they will solve it by theirselves!” The people of Europe should know that letting this old man win means giving the EU free roam to attempt destroying itself, he is too afraid of breaking his sovereignty principles that he needs a pill to have a good sleep.

And about the Adventuranza, Red, Corinna Strait or whatsoever, I will seek to keep it calm and to avoid a conflict there once again. As long as the nations there do not start hostilities against each other, the Commission will not have to act. It is easy as that, if nations don’t want the European Commission to act and enter what some consider their “internal affairs”, do not get into trouble! Did, for example, Reitzmag had to build those islands on the Caspian? No, they didn’t, yet they did, and the Commission acted accordingly. What cannot and shouldn’t be allowed is that the Commission stays there as a sort of doll that you come to when you want a budget to be passed or certain European projects but never acts when it is needed, as the pro-sovereignty guys, which again refuse it when they are in their bedrooms with somebody and the temperature goes up, I have seen many of those, wish.

[Istkalen]

While I am still in support of a Sovereignty Charter, it will no longer take the form I previously spoke of. I have recognized that both the EU and member-states require flexibility, and while there should be limits, strictly delineating them all would restrict the powers of both member-states and the EU in differing crises. My new proposal for such a charter will still involve a general convention of all member-states, will still seek consensus, but will instead be a listing of some of the rights - far from exhaustive - that member-states are entitled to, particularly a wide degree of cultural integrity - meaning in my opinion that the EU can no longer force on the Duxburians concepts of race, or on my own nation marriage as a whole, although it can still pursue policies ensuring equality within existing cultural institutions - some form of economic sovereignty, preventing colonialist behavior aimed towards any nation, and finally some degree of political sovereignty, dependent on what nations themselves define it as.

The Sovereignty Charter will not be exhaustive; it will define certain rights, but will not deny the nations rights which it does not name. Areas not defined by the Sovereignty Charter will continue to exist as they do now, although, as stated previously, I intend to introduce a mechanism to allow nations to re-interpret and adjust regulations and laws according to national culture and customs.

---

Ms. Porter, I will ask you what you intend to consult the nations on. Will you act reactively to issues, or proactively? Do you have any pre-planned topics of discussion? On top of that, you have stated multiple positions during this debate that I doubt quite a few nations would agree with; would you let these positions override this policy, or no? You also said previously that you oppose concrete plans; have you changed your opinion now?

[BrumBrum]

Sara Porter:I will of course raise topics such as the Green New Deal and possibly with some nations the Neurodivergent Act for example and ask them what they'd like to see different. Other than that it would be open forum for them to tell me what issues thay have and what they want changed. I would take into account what all nations want for the EDA. My policy will entirely depend on what the nations want, there is no point proposing a reform nations won't vote majority for.

[Istkalen]

Please also answer my question on your stance on concrete plans.

[BrumBrum]

Sara Porter:I oppose concrete plans yes I have a vision but its subject to change based on what nations tell me they want. I will not impose my will on the nations.