Commission Debate, Feb/March 2022
-
Sara Porter:I don't think it should be up to the nations to decide if they want the EU to regulate warhead numbers in the region or not and same with military regulations. A top down approach from the EU forced on them will not work any legislation or policies on this should be done on a basis of the nations supporting it or not so my answer is it depends on whether the nations want this sort of thing regulated by EU or not.
-
"My primary concern, with respect to the sovereignty of member-states, is the safety of civilians and humanitarian operatives such as medical personnel and the like anywhere at anytime. That is why one of the agenda in our campaign is the creation of a codified Law of War that expands the Hospital Ship classification act to ensure that human rights are still respected even at war. And this is very timely, as indeed I do believe that there has been rapid militarization across Europe which must be tackled."
"We have seen the rise of various new European powers with the expansion of their militaries and its influence inside and outside their territories. This rapid militarization may only stop if there is mutual understanding among all nations to cooperate and unite in joint efforts to develop together rather than poke sticks at each other. However, as our motto says, all member-states have "United in Diversity" under this organization. This diversity is what hinders the prevention of this concerning rapid militarization, as nations have different values and principles."
"Considering all this, I believe that the best way we can do is to prevent or at least limit the presence of Weapons of Mass Destruction which I am very much against due to its effects to civilians. This is why the ENAA and EBCWA exist as they should, for the sake of humanity. The ENAA should indeed limit nuclear warheads for all nations across Europe, however it would be more suitable if the European Council which represents the member-states decide on this instead of me."
"In conclusion, yes I do believe that the rapid militarization must be tackled and that the ENAA must keep on doing its job. But I still do believe that these must be referred to the EU Council instead."
-
I stand consistently for the sovereignty of all nations, and thus against unjust war. Militarization is a danger to the welfare of the people and the continued protection of sovereignty.
The Union must present to the repeated conflicts that drive militarization a diplomatic recourse. The office of the IAC must remain always open, and must actively offer to mediate conflicts, rather than merely confining itself to making powerless statements. Over the past few months, we have seen none of this, and as a result we have seen a significant increase in the use of military force to solve problems. Look to the Caspian crisis, and then to the Strait crisis, and this is extraordinarily clear. Such a course of action alone should reduce militarization, simply by offering an alternative to conflict.
The issue of nuclear weapons specifically is more difficult to answer. Reducing conflict through diplomacy should reduce the desire for further proliferation for now. Some have suggested nuclear arms control, but in the current environment, it is impossible - no one will agree with it. Once the current conflicts are ended, however - something years away - it might be possible, but would necessitate a consensus of all states with nuclear weapons both in the drafting and in ratification, rather than merely the ENAA, to be created.
-
Concerning the second question, the ENAA should not set a cap for nuclear warheads for the entire region. Nuclear warheads nowadays are used as deterrence, and are given to countries that have proven theirselves capable of managing them properly. The ENAA uses its own criteria, so trusting them is the only thing the Commission should do. As of today, they haven’t given us arguments to stop or amend their work, and I grant them that I won’t change any point from the act that regulates them.
We’ve all seen how rapidly militarization is rising across the region, mostly nothing has been done. I remember those times when the Commission got involved and intervened, now the IAC didn’t do a thing, even if he claims he has. He was snoring at his Europolis’ office guys! I wish militarization stopped, but there is no real aim from anybody to stop it because the other side does not give enough reasons to make them stop. The European Union should grant security to member states, and if our mediation is needed, I will be there.
How should militarization be tackled then? Dialogue and mediation between states to avoid war. When things are hard, I usually tend to make them soft in a few minutes, and that is what I am going to do if I become Europe’s Premier. But what we cannot pretend to do is telling states how far can they go, how many equipment they cannot but, that is literally an interference from the Commission and what we aren’t supposed to do. The Commission must offer guarantees, help states, not telling them to fight or control their military development and progress. This is not about sovereignty, it’s about common sense and we all know doing that would end up being a disaster.
I like the way Biden’s unofficial spokesperson and sleepy Joe would like to handle things: as she confesses “she doesn’t know what to do”, our sleepy man actually proposes something but at the same time says “states choose”. Both of you are more undecided than King Juan Carlos the day he proposed to me, having to choose between Queen Sofía and his family or myself, didn’t go to far sadly. To my point of view, if you want to rule Europe you need to know how to act and do it fast.
And Joe, for the love of God and Mary, limiting weapons of mass destruction will lead us to nowhere. Your friend from the UD has already angered the Duxburians, to whom I would like to show my full support against these people; do you want them to be even more angry? Do you want nuclear superpowers to ignore and get angry at Europe? Now I understand why you don’t need nukes, you cause mass destruction by yourself! Listen up, citizens like me are sick of your bureaucratic mess, we want action like I do every night. You were going to end with malarkey, yet you became malarkey.
The Kingdom of Spain
His Majesty the King, Felipe VI
President Alberto Núñez-Feijóo
Councillor and Council Speaker Donald Tusk -
Sara Porter:With respect there is a difference between one saying they would listen to nations and take all views into account than I don't know what to do as you say. Maybe if Europe listened more to the nations and their leaders and people the EU wouldn't be in the mess it is in now. I don't have a specific plan simply because I want the nations to decide on key issues not an EU commission.
-
"My concern is the safety of civilians in conflict. And I think that any weapon of mass destruction is a threat to the lives of innocent civilians if it falls to the wrong hands. Yet, you're here Ms. Larsen wanting to forcefully intervene with nations' affairs and supporting the widespread presence of these weapons that could harm ordinary people. I mentioned also that all these plans will go through the European Council and that I would rather support what they have decided on this issue rather than force it myself. But then you come here telling people that this is what you want. Isn't that the true malarkey I have said all along? My primary principle throughout my campaign is for intervention only in five categories, namely Organization-wide foreign relations, Environmental Sustainability, Human Rights, International Finance and Development, and Warfare. What I want to achieve here is intervention under Human Rights and Warfare, to protect the people of Europe who have long sought peace and not war. Member-states have the right to defend their country in different means due to the variety of threats that might face them, our mission is to keep these weapons away from threatening innocent civilians."
-
Ms. Porter, I ask what you plan to do during a crisis. It is the responsibility of the IAC to mediate; how will you act? In my opinion, decisive and principled action is necessary, especially at the brink of war; any hesitation, and we might very well arrive at apocalypse.
-
I would contact the nations involved in any conflict and bring them to the table as soon as possible. I would get both sides issues and come out with a compromise. Much as was done in the Islands crisis but it would also highly depend on the situation sometimes it would be better not to intervene right away, the last thing we need is the EU to be seen as a European policeman. We must work in cooperation with nations not overriding them.
-
Time for questions submitted to the debate from across Europe.
From Inimician Major-General Ettore Stuart to Biden: “How can Biden possibly say he solved the Adventuranza crisis when it was several nations' decisions to de-escalate that, well, de-escalated the situation?”
From a concerned Inimician citizen to Sarah Porter: “It’s all well and good you value national sovereignty, but you have thus far not mentioned a single concrete policy point you would attempt to achieve during your time in office. I dare you to name three.”
From Anon. to Larsen
“You have no elected or even government experience, do you view that as a positive and negative? What do you plan to do to overcome that lack of experience?”From Anon. To Kalessed
“What current European Agencies do you seek to reform and update? How will decentralization of some of these agencies improve their efficiency in a Europe whose respect of EU organizations is already low?”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 1600 GMT March 02)))
Arch-Konsul: Kristian Nylund (Greens)
Ruling Coalition: Greens, Moderates
EU Councillor : Carita Falk (Greens-Independent) -
Sara Porter:I respect that you ay want a concrete policy. There is actually two or three I would say is a strategy rather than a policy though the first thing is I will tour the parliaments of Europe asking them what they want , I will also meet the heads of state or governments of Europe in a meeting in Europolis and thirdly I will continue the current European Constitutional Committee possibly turning it into a pernament forum but definitely adding more nations. This will allow me to get input from the nations over what they want. I think this is the way to go forward not being a EU dictator to the nations setting the agenda but the nations setting the agenda with me as the servant. "
-
Thank you for the question. The primary objects of my initial reforms will be the EHO, the ESA, and the Arts Collaboration Fun. All are relatively bureaucratic organizations which are not completely necessary in their current positions, which sometimes actually overstep legislative bounds, which can be limited to merely coordinating the work of agencies or of independent national-level research institutions, such as those I propose the EU actually sponsor the creation of, but not interfere in. I will later focus on overhauling certain financial and monetary institutions in conjunction with the Premier Commissioner, but this will be mostly to get them to work, although we will explore the feasibility of adding a degree of popular participation in order to prevent corruption. Finally, although these are not really agencies, I want to increase the degree of popular participation that we see in institutions like the Commission and the Council. Citizens should be able to send to us directly their proposals, their petitions, and their comments on our proposals, in a single platform. This will be implemented using existing 'infrastructure,' such as Juncker's app.
Now, regarding decentralization: it will reduce inefficiency. It will reduce redundancy and overlap between EU and national-level agencies and make bureaucracies more accountable - not merely to the EU but also to a wide extent to member-states, as it will be they who under such proposals will have a greater degree of control. There will in general be more streamlined coordination due to this reduced redundancy, but also a far greater degree of autonomy and control for member-states than before. Doing this will almost certainly rehabilitate both the activity and position in the eyes of the people and the nations of these agencies.
-
"I'd like to clarify, that I did not solve the situation in the Adventuranza Strait. But what I did is call for de-escalation, and a peaceful resolution. I put my trust in all member-states, and that is why I did not intervene in the conflict. These nations have self-control and they know what they're doing, the EU doesn't need to lecture them on what to do. Member-states are sovereign and they have the right to do what they want, this is why I set-up the 5 category-based intervention principle I will implement if I win the Premiership."
"From the last term, I focused more on entrusting member-states as well as reforming the EU. This term, my focus will be expanded into the Rights of the European People, as well as draw the first traces of the Line of Sovereignty that the EU must limit itself to. I know that many people thought I did not do anything from my last term, even jokingly saying I was sleeping in my office at the Commission Headquarters. However, I'd like to remind everyone that change comes in many ways. Some populist eurofederalist malarkey want you to feel there's change when there really is nothing happening, but I don't need you to feel change to know that it really is happening. Folks, I hope that this is clarified. We must understand that true change need not to be bragged or felt, change simply needs to work and it will make you feel it is working eventually."
"I hope that with this, Europeans know that their money was not was not simply wasted by the EU and had been used efficiently for the betterment of everyone."
-
It is indeed true that I have no previous experience in politics, but I do not believe that will be a huge problem for me. I think it is something positive because that will allow me to learn more than I already know about. I joined the business sector with a little idea about it, now my enterprise succeeds. I'm able and will do the same for the EU. If we judged people in elections for their experience, no new politicians would take over from the old ones. Our current Premier, Ms. Čikarová, had only had journalist-related employments and she even was a journalist before becoming Premier. Has that made her a bad Commissioner? Absolutely not.
When it comes to tackling my lack of experience, I'll keep doing what I have done so far, that being meeting with former politicians, friends of mine, receiving some lessons from them. I have also started to read several books, which I finished recently and I have taken lessons on debating and communication. My business' sector experience also forced me to take lessons in law, and I have a Masters Degree on European Political Studies. Real experience is the only thing I lack of, but I can guarantee the person that sent this question and every single European citizen I will be a great Premier Commissioner who delivers, who makes her promises become true and that will do the best for the European Union. Nothing far away from that. Mr. Biden, during this four months, has done nothing for you, he has not done anything for the Europeans, he became everything he criticised and decided to ignore European affairs arguing he does not want to become a sort of "European policeman". I will not be like Biden, I'll be there for all of you.
-
Mr. Biden is hurt one of his predecessors dared to do something about his nation’s islands projects in the Caspian and that’s when he became pro-sovereignty. However, his sovereign principles vanished when he managed to win an election, then he became invisible and just followed the policies Ms. Čikarová implemented and gave his approval. But here I’ve the list of shame for Mr. Biden, the list of things he has done. Listen up, “folks”:
During Mr. Biden’s Commissionship, he just made a statement on the Strait Crisis, appointed the directors of certain EU institutions in an opaque way, created a constitutional convention that has not yet released any important information, we don’t even know if they have met already and created a magazine that hasn’t published anything! That is everything he has done.
He claims change “need not to be bragged or felt, change simply needs to work”, because if we had to feel it, I assure you Biden would have already been given the sack. The only things he cares about are sovereignty and sleeping. Europe’s about to enter a war? He doesn’t care. We need someone who speaks and delivers, not someone who just speaks and does nothing.
The Kingdom of Spain
His Majesty the King, Felipe VI
President Alberto Núñez-Feijóo
Councillor and Council Speaker Donald Tusk -
To all the candidates from….ahem…. “Silly Moose”….
“The European Development Agency currently has the budget of 100 100 000€, how will you act if its budget gets depleted? How much from the Future Initiative Allotment would you be willing to allocate to the EDA?”
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 1700 GMT March 03))
Arch-Konsul: Kristian Nylund (Greens)
Ruling Coalition: Greens, Moderates
EU Councillor : Carita Falk (Greens-Independent) -
Sara Porter:I would like to thank you for this great question. While I do not normally have a policy nations have decided they want an European Development Agency. The only problem? Its so unfundeded it might as well be a chocolate teapot. The DU asked for a few billion Euros to do a solar project just the sort of thing the EDA should be able to support m what did they offer a pathetic 600 million Euros. So the GEF funded it all in the end. I would set a budget of over at least 15-20 billion euros per year or support that. I think this is the necessary amount if we are to meet the green transition goals and to level up development of nations so poorer nations in this union can become more prosperous and quickly transition. This is all currently in the budget already and this should be priority. I will also seek to make sure that at least 40% is reserved for nations with below 25,000 euros per capita GDP. This should help turbocharge the LEDC's to become middle income and rich countries. We must do more to support our poorer members and quicken a green transition to save the planet and beat poverty.
-
I am in favor of expanding the EDA budget alongside the provision of "startup" funds for the related democratized research and development institutions I propose the EU sponsor, which may be pursued under the same umbrella, and will seek to cooperate with the Premier Commissioner to accomplish this. All of this in total will come up to roughly 20 billion, all of which will be used not on bureaucracies but instead completely returned to the people in the form of infrastructure. I am in support of allocating 5 billion from the future legislative allotment as of now for all of these projects in total, as the budget will be proposed in the term after this one, although not more due to a fear of excluding other potential projects from receiving funding.
Ms. Porter, I cannot comprehend why some must be shut out of using 40% of such a fund. Everyone should be able to access the development funds if their project is within and meets the requirements of the act itself, especially when just transition is so necessary. I also ask whether you are in support of Cllr. Mizrachi-Roscoe's cuts to the surplus, which make expansion of the EDA difficult at best. I also ask how you will fund an increase to 15 billion.
I finally ask you how significant of a role should the EDA play in development? I believe funds from the EDA should be used primarily but not solely to help build the infrastructure needed to begin development and transition - electrification, transportation, and the like, as well as education, complemented by the other half of my development plan, the creation of independent research and development institutions, building the social infrastructure needed to continue development independently of international institutions, and ensuring continued economic sovereignty, preventing exploitation. But, again, what is your opinion?
-
Thank you, Silly Moose, for this amazing question! First things first, I have to make clear that whoever is elected on this election to become your Premier Commissioner won’t be able to change or pass a new budget. I wish I could, because the European Development Agency needs more money and that has been proven with the time. The current Future Initiative Allotment is set on 11 billion Euros, so the Commission would be able to allocate up to 5 billion Euros to said institution. If I am lucky enough to be elected twice and have the budget done my way, I swear I will give the EDA more funds and resources.
I now would like to ask Ms. Porter, the unofficial Biden’s spokesperson and I believe, a friend of her country’s Councillor, Mr. Roscoe, if she is supportive of the amendment the European Council passed and that her country’s Councillor proposed. He did not only gut the budget, not allowing the European Union to progress in the foreseeable future, but also trying to reduce the amount of money that comes to Europe. Sovereignty, is the only excuse we heard. We need to bring back the original contributions, because the Europeans need more money to be sent to the several institutions and organisms we have within the European Union. And to those thinking that the non-spent money is kept in Europe, let me tell you all guys those are blatant lies. Europe gives the surplus back to member states per law. If anybody tries to ever convince you about that, tell them they are lying and show them the proofs!
The Kingdom of Spain
His Majesty the King, Felipe VI
President Alberto Núñez-Feijóo
Councillor and Council Speaker Donald Tusk -
Sara Porter: If the money wasn't being spent on a regular basis it wasn't needed . Even with the cut the EU still gets 49 billion euros projected and could fund a 15 billion euro EDA and still have 2 billion euros left over. So why would there be a need to increase the contribution. I'm not against the contribution being raised but if it is then it should be spent not just held for while then passed back to the member state , by the time the state gets it back they may have budgeted already for the next financial year and if they had to borrow that money they have paid unnecessary interest. I do think if contributions are raised then it should mostly be spent a 10% or 20% FIA that can be returned at the end of the year is fine but when you have a 60 billion euro surplus spending 33 billion euros only out of 93 billion euros either the spending was too low as was argued at the time or the money is not needed especially when those types of surpluses are regular.
-
"If elected, some of the key goals I want to achieve are reform of the budget contribution system, redistribution of the budget, and the enhancement of the EU's loan systems. On Budget System Reform, we have and will continue to seek the advice of financial experts as well as member-states on what budget system they see as fair. Some ideas that we have come up was a population-based budget, return to the 0.1% system, and a few other ideas we could implement. I do not support the current 0.05% of GDP contribution system and would rather support returning the former system of 0.1%."
"For redistribution of the budget, yes I do believe that the EDA needs more funds. We will prioritize and divert funds into more useful institutions, such as the European Development Agency. Currently, we are looking at reducing the spending of the European Commission and other institutions that had big surpluses and divert these funds to institutions like the EDA as I said."
"Finally, the enhancement of the EU loan system. We are looking at merging all loan agencies of the EU into one big loan agency. This will allow for centralization of loan funds and affairs. This will also allow for flexibility of the funds and easier auditing when necessary. We will also look into a better interest rate system to that based on the inflation rates which will be measured by the European Central Bank."
"With all these in mind, how much of the FIA should be transferred to the EDA? The answer is not simple, because the FIA is not the only part of the budget where we can take funds to replenish the EDA. But we can estimate, about 5 Billion Euros or more if we follow the 0.1% system we support."
