Commission Debate, Apr/May 2020
-
Thank you Ria for your question.
We've to point out some interesting facts to answer this question. First of all, we haven't actually had an EU budget in years, so it'd be of utmost that we actually first draft a new one before we begin looking at expanding programs.
Secondly, the EU have tended to have pretty big budget surpluses, so there hopefully should be room for these programs. I'd like to add that the EPA is committed to repealing old pieces of legislation and programs that we don't use, like the European Institute of Culture and Education, which should open some extra revenue, which means getting even more funds than we expect.
And last but not least, I only support programmes which are truly beneficial to all member states, especially which are supported by big countries like the Duxburian Union who contributes a large sum of money to the budget and which is a very important member state.
-
Karl looked a bit confused
"I knew that we would have to set limits on the lengths of your responses, but not on the time that you'd have to initiate your response. We have alot to get through tonight, and as such, I'm going to get moving."
((OOC: There was a two day response period. We have to move this debate forward.)) -
My next question is for all the candidates, straight from Vayinaod.
Erik from Nyetthem asks, "How do you pronounce Vayinaod? How will you seek to balance preservation of our national cultures and bringing us together?"
-
Thank you for your question Erik.
About your first question, I pronounce it like this: Vayinaod (Which he pronounces as Vaiyinood)
Attending your second question, I'm not planning to get into any member state government, others can't say that. (Juncker looks at Winston) Every culture will be preserved and will have the same relevance than other European culture, as every single one is special on its own. We've remained united the last years and we will, we just need to work together and coloperate in everything we are able to.
We know that bringing up together it's difficult, and sometimes is tough, but we can do it if we want and we really try to. We don't need to surrender on these ones, we need to be determined on that. Respect will be a very important tool, because if we don't respect each others, we aren't going to be respected, so we need to respect, have determination and also, cooperate with other member states.
-
Excellent questions, Ethan.
Firstly, I pronounce your country as Vay-in-ood.
Your second question is very important and is something I've actually been discussing on the campaign trail. Diversity is very important, because it’s both a strength and an asset. All our nations and cultures have certain strengths. All of our nations and cultures bring something to the table. That’s precisely why we are stronger together in the Union. It’s our region’s diversity which makes us strong. That’s why I believe that we need to expand our Union and allow even more states into it.
Even though there are differences in our cultures, there is a lot of common ground between us. Conflict only damages and weakens us. We are all better off living harmoniously and cooperatively. We are all human and we are all fundamentally born equal. We also all share a common home, which is Europe. It’s from this viewpoint of commonality that we should be working together where we can, such as by working together to defend the region from invaders.
I believe we should allow our common ground and common humanity to guide us, but we should embrace what makes each of cultures unique and strong.
-
Erik, I'll tell you how I pronounce it; I pronounce it correctly, OK? I've been to Nordsyen and I've been to Nyetthem, and you folks have such a beautiful country.
Folks, I am so proud to be Pravoslaviyan. And everywhere I go, all over Europe, I find so many people are so proud of their countries, and it's so beautiful. People don't want to be what they're not, OK? People like their countries, and they want to keep their countries.
But the globalists in Europolis, they don't want that. They're globalists, OK? These guys don't get into politics for you, they do it for the illegal migrants and the global corporations. That’s it, essentially. They want to suck so much money out of your countries, you wouldn’t believe; it’s why they didn’t like that question about spending.
I like governments that put their citizens first. And when I'm on the Commission, I'm going to support them, and I'm going to protect them – and all legitimate governments, let’s make that clear – against the coups.
We have Communist coups, and we have globalist coups, and both those – what do you call it – ideologies, they’re against nations. It's simple. And we all know the globalists in Europolis, like Whiteford, keep losing to the Communists, and we can't keep losing if we want to have our countries, because the Communists don’t want our countries to be countries.
And one thing we have to do, if we want to keep our countries, is repeal the Refugee Protection Act, which is so bad. With that Act, our countries don’t have borders, and how can you have a country without borders, it doesn’t work! So we need to repeal that and restore our borders. I’m in this to help you all take your countries back, OK?
-
Thank you for this wonderful question Mr. Erik!
So, I pronounce your country's name as Vayinaod* when I made a campaign rally there. [* = Vae-yee-naud]
On the aspect of preserving our diverse cultures and at the same time uniting us all. This is the challenge to us on how we would fulfill and show the EU Motto in our administrations. And I agree to Mr. Juncker that we need respect, but that's not enough. We need cooperation, we need virtues, we need ethics. Reitzmag, my home country, is home to diverse religions which were mostly based in former E. Moreland county together before it was bombed. We managed to do this by enforcing laws against discrimination to ensure that everyone respects each other. The use of religion in our courts to charge cases or defend is not tolerated and is considered racism. That's what Europe needs, prevent racism so that we would all be developed both socially, economically and culturally, and that we will of course be United in Diversity!
Thank you and God Bless!
-
"Thank you for the question! I speak 3 languages but I am clueless - in Icholasen we normally say 'Vay-i-nod'. I guess that's just our weird Nicoleizian accent. Some people say we speak as if we're have onions in our mouth - and for me that definitely is the case as just I love onions.
But to answer your question, to do this we need to balance the powers of the EU and define what exactly they are. We can't preserve our national cultures and sovereignty if the EU is free to legislate on literally everything. The EU Council could turn around one day and legislate a way to say Vayinaod, legislate to ban Fremetian furniture or to tell the DU to speak Pravoslaviyan. Having something consistent in terms of what the EU can legislate on is important and is something I'd like to see as Premier.
As for bringing us all together, I think cultural events such as Eurovoice and other competitions are great for bringing Europe closer, and I'm very much looking forward to the next EV in Angleter. There are songs that bring Europe together like nothing else could do, like the one that Post Malone sang. That song brought Europe together in mutual disgust, and I applaud Post Malone and Vayinaod for that.
-
Thank you for your responses. On to the next question...
We have another one from the DU: Erling Ives, Master-General of Commerce, asks, "Equality and unity in the EU have been frequently discussed. The Union of Duxburian Dominions currently contributes 24.4% of the entire EU budget, but only holds 6.7% of Council voting power. Much smaller countries such as the Ottoman Empire have the same voting power while contributing 0.002% of the budget. DU plus Inquista contribute more than half the entire budget, while holding only 13.4% of the voting power. Do you think this is a fair situation that leads to equal outcomes and promotes unity in the EU?"
-
Thank you for your question, Irvine.
I firmly believe in the principle of 'one country, one vote'. In the European Council, the voice of every nation, regardless of their size, wealth or any other factor, should be equal. Beyond principle, especially in terms of Foreign Affairs, I feel strongly that is an especially attractive draw for new nations to join the European Union, where they know they'll be treated as complete equals. This was certainly the case for my own country when it joined the EU.
Countries make proportional contributions to the European budget because they, in theory, at least, would also utilize proportionally the largest sums of that money, especially when you think of EHIC. That isn't always the case though, I know. However, large countries, especially Angleter and Inquista, have already completely ignored and shunned laws passed by the European Council that they do not like, and they use their budgetary contributions as a bargaining chips. Gay marriage hasn't been legalized in those countries, for instance. I actually think this is dangerous. The EU budget contributions, which are only 0.1% of your national budget, are supposed to for the EU-wide common good, not just the strong and powerful.
-
Thank you Irvine for your question.
As a candidate for Internal Affairs I must say that the budget contributions are equally distributed in order of the economical capacity of each country. This means that everyone pays what they should pay in order to many factors like population, economical conditions and finally, how much can they afford to pay the European Union budget every year. But we need to say that we haven't had one for years. And also, the budget is supposed to help all the Europeans Nation, so that money is returned to you in some way.
And I'm a defender of the one nation, one vote system, as it makes our nation equal and also very attractive to those newcomers. It is true that this voting system puts in risk some very good proposals for the Union or can make some dangerous persons to vote for someone that it's very dangerous for the European Union, but that's democracy. What we need to do is try to find some way to go on with this equal treatment for nations but also, solve this problem of risking the Union.
-
Well, Erling, first of all, how does it feel to have someone get your name right? I'm listening to these guys, and I'm thinking 'who's Irvine? Who's this Irvine they keep talking about, have I missed something?' And I never miss anything, so I'm thinking that's strange. But they got your name wrong, OK? Jean, I think you're having a bad time over there.
And they got your name wrong because they don't care about you. OK? The globalist politicians see people like you and they just see Euro signs. They want to take more of your money for crazy spending projects, and then they want to tell you what to do. And these countries – Duxburian Union, Angleter, Inquista, so many more – great, beautiful countries, and they're putting so much money in and the globalists in Europolis are giving them nothing in return. It's crazy, OK? It needs to stop.
We're only going to have a European Union if it can bring everybody along with it. If not, as Antoni said, everyone just ignores it, and then we have no European Union. I like having one vote for each country on the Council, OK – I’m from Pravoslaviya, so I would, right? But the Council has to show restraint. It’s got to have restraint, or it’s so undemocratic.
The Council needs to restrain itself, OK? With Firoux, and the globalist EPA in charge, it’s gone too far, and it needs to step back. We need to repeal some of the laws that Europolis is imposing on countries, like the crazy Refugee Protection Act. If we don’t, then, maybe, we have to look at changing things up, but I think with me in charge, they will.
-
Thank you for that question Mr. Ives,
First, the answer is that this case is not fair for me. The solution I found is to give the decision on voting power to the hands of the people. And I think we can achieve that by fixing the European Council and put back the European Parliament. Generally, this would give way to have people decide on how many seats the parties would have, regardless of nationality, and that would mean equal and fair representation while boosting the democracy in the European Union. The budget contribution of each country rely on their GDP, while the GDP is affected by the population. Therefore, more people would mean more voting power and more budget contribution. That is what I found to be the relationship of factors affecting the European Economy when I studied economics back then. So, I suggest that increasing the voting power of the people would aid in this problem rather than decreasing the European budget.
-
Thank you for your question. I believe that the EU is founded on equality between its member states, with 1 member 1 vote being the norm since the EU's foundation. I don't think this should change. The disproportionate spending is, as my friend Antoni pointed out, because larger states will use more services than their smaller neighbours. This spending only amounts to 0,1% of each nation's national budget.
I do however think that there should be a sensible level of spending. 0,1% of national budgets is a sum we should never go over with any big projects or anything else. I don't believe that the EU level , is the place for far-fetched and expensive ideas such as a pan-European railway. That's up to member states to do on a bi or tri lateral basis. This is why we need to define the areas that the European Union can legislate on. These projects that would disproportionately take money away from the richer nations of the EU should never have been allowed to be proposed, and would not be under the EPA's plan that I have sponsored for more definition of the EU Council's powers.
-
Candidates, as tonight draws to a close, I want to thank all of you for your participation in this debate and helping Europe in their decision.
Our final question comes from New Zealand. Melissa Tran, 34, from Auckland, asks:
“There are many nations in our European Union, and while there is energy coalescing behind a greater integration, it is also clear there are fears around others. How will you address the both sides: pro EU and anti EU? What will you do to mend the issues of trust beyond regular platitudes?”
-
Melissa, you are so right, and the globalists, you wouldn't believe how wrong they are. They are pushing things so far, there's a chance we don't have a European Union if you let them back in. This energy behind more integration, more rule from Europolis, doesn't have everyone on board. And you need everyone, more or less, on board if you're going to have a European Union. It doesn't get simpler than that.
These guys are talking about crazy spending projects, they're talking about controlling your education and your trade and your healthcare, they're talking about doing so much that it becomes undemocratic, the way the Council's set up, and there's so much danger with these folks that they'll destroy the whole European Union. In fact, we're already seeing it; there's coups, there's countries ignoring EU laws, there's so much chaos, it's crazy.
Jean keeps saying – and this is why he's the single biggest liar on this stage, OK; Whiteford is the weakest person on this stage, Jean is the biggest liar – he keeps saying I want to destroy the EU. That's so ridiculous, OK? I want to Make Europe Great Again, and when I'm on the Commission, that's what I'm going to do, by making the Council restrain itself.
With Juncker, and Whiteford, and Winston, and all the globalists, you're just going to get more of the same – more integration, more division, more coups, more chaos. We need to change, and we need to Make Europe Great Again, and with me, we will. The globalists won't know what's hit them, they'll stop, and we'll start making Europolis work for countries and citizens again, not just the elites in Europolis. We're going to Make Europe Win Again, folks.
-
Great question Miranda,
Your question fundamentally comes down to why people would trust or wouldn't trust the EU in the first place. For many people, the EU simply isn't working for them. Considering how little Europolis does, I can understand why some people might be skeptical. So going beyond platitudes, I'd like to address this divide by achieving legitimate and quantifiable results for all Europeans, and by proving that Europolis can work for absolutely everybody.
I hope to achieve this in Foreign Affairs by collectivizing security, expanding our Union, and by deepening our relationships and opportunities with our allies abroad, all for our own collective benefit. I will work to achieve this by establishing the Eurocorps to defend all European territories from invaders, to continue the outreach and recruitment efforts which have been accelerated in recent weeks, and by creating constant streams and channels of communication open between the EU and our allies.
A strong Foreign Affairs stands to benefit everybody.
-
Thank you for your question Melissa, and I must recognise it's a good one!
Europeans need to know something. Commissioners work for every single citizen, which means that it doesn't matter if you are a Communist or a capitlist, if you believe in Socialism or you believe in a centre-right government. I will work for you all, without even thinking on which ideology do you believe in. That's why we need to think on cooperation, respect, integration. We need to know that everyone is welcome to the European Union. And that's what I'm fighting for, and I'm sure some Anti EU people believe on that. We need to hear them, talk with them and whink: What are we doing bad? Once we've found the mistake, we'll need to fix it together, and that's it's what I'm going to do.
And about your second question, what we do need to do it's getting into the centre of the matter. If we have a problem, we can just fix some things and let others grow. We need to cut the problem from the start, solve it entirely. And we need to trust on this elections. Because this elections are bringing Europe the chance to choose the candidates they trust. And I've run for Commission because I think I'm ready to manage my region. I hope I can be the Commissioner Europe's need, to finally solve our problems. Thank you.
-
Thank you Ms. Tran!
Europe has faced its worst crisis ever when coups and violence were used to enforce ideologies such as communism and fascism. Mr. Juncker here is telling that pro-EU and anti-EU is only limited to specific ideologies such as communism and socialism. And that's the problem, we think that these ideologies would immediately mean pro-EU or anti-EU. We must separate these ideologies with opinions and not combine them.
I as a candidate for Internal Affairs Commissioner respect these ideologies and opinions and do not combine them as one. I don't care if you support the EU or not as long as you don't use violence, and that is Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Speech.
For your second question, this had been an issue that I'm dealing with due to the recent activities that destroyed my country's reputation. And I have found this to be solvable by simply apologizing. I want to use this opportunity to apologize in behalf of my entire country due to the recent events such as the kidnapping of Min. Sanders from Icholasen. And I still respect them despite their ideologies and even if they supplied the communist forces during the rebellion.
-
((OOC: As I am about to post the voting thread, I want to give candidates a solid last chance to speak. If you have already answered the question, go on, but if you have not, just include your answer in with your closing statement))
Thank you candidates for your participation this evening and your dedication to the European cause. I know all of Europe appreciates your efforts to help them make their decision in the coming days.
I now open up the stage one last time for your two minute ((OOC 300 words)) closing statements.
As a reminder, Herr Winston, you will have 30 seconds less time due to your overage on your opening statement ((OOC Do not exceed 194 words.)). Herr Juncker, you will also be deducted time as you too went over in your opening statement ((OOC Do not exceed 264 words.)). Though these deductions were meant to occur in the rebuttal period, due to time constraints I'm afraid we had to omit that section of the debate. As such, the penalties moved to the next time-limited portion of the debate.
I thank you one last time for coming out to Fremet and Rhodenheim tonight to present yourselves, your policies, and your ideals to the whole of Europe. May the odds be ever in your favour!
The Kingdom of Spain
