Uusi suunta Euroopalle? Euroopan unionin tulevaisuuden kehitysnäkymät

Requires registration
Kimmo Sasi Kimmo Sasi
Peter Nyman Peter Nyman
Maria João Rodrigues Maria João Rodrigues
Teija Tiilikainen Teija Tiilikainen
Carl Haglund Carl Haglund
Heikki Patomäki Heikki Patomäki
The panel The panel
Miapetra Kumpula-Natri & Mikael Pentikäinen Miapetra Kumpula-Natri & Mikael Pentikäinen
Christina Gestrin & Tarja Cronberg Christina Gestrin & Tarja Cronberg
Jouko Jääskeläinen & Sirpa Pietikäinen Jouko Jääskeläinen & Sirpa Pietikäinen
Simon Elo & Kari Uotila Simon Elo & Kari Uotila

Wed 5.3.2014 at 10:00-12:30
Pikkuparlamentin auditorio
Arkadiankatu 3, Helsinki

Euroalueen ja EU:n talouskriisi on johtanut laajaan keskusteluun Euroopan unionin tulevaisuudesta.
EU:n jäsenvaltioiden ja kansalaisten parissa on suuria näkemyseroja siitä, miten Eurooppaa ravisteleviin
mittaviin haasteisiin tulisi vastata. Joidenkin mielestä integraatiota tulisi entisestään syventää siirtäen
kansallista päätösvaltaa EU:lle Brysseliin. Toiset taas haluaisivat karsia EU:n tehtäviä ja palauttaa päätösvaltaa
Brysselistä jäsenvaltioille. Ehdotukset unionin uudistamisesta eivät ole näin mustavalkoisia.
Integraatiota saatetaan syventää joillakin politiikan osa-alueilla ja keventää toisilla. Mitkä ovat EU:n keskeiset
kehitysvaihtoehdot? Millainen unioni olisi Suomelle paras? Mihin kysymyksiin politiikkojen tulisi vastata
Euroopan parlamenttivaalien alla?

Puhetta johtaa Peter Nyman

Tervetuliaissanat: Kimmo Sasi, Folktingetin varapuheenjohtaja

I. Uusi suunta Euroopalle?

New Pact for Europe
Maria João Rodrigues, professori, Université Libre de Bruxelles

Kysymykset Euroopalle
Teija Tiilikainen, johtaja, Ulkopoliittinen instituutti


Carl Haglund, puolustusministeri ja Suomen ruotsalaisen kansanpuolueen puheenjohtaja
Heikki Patomäki,  Helsingin yliopiston maailmanpolitiikan professori ja Vasemmistoliiton eurovaaliehdokas


II. Euroopan unionin tulevaisuus – Paneelikeskustelu

Tarja Cronberg, Vihreät
Simon Elo, Perussuomalaiset
Christina Gestrin, Suomen ruotsalainen kansanpuolue
Jouko Jääskeläinen, Kristillisdemokraatit
Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Suomen Sosialidemokraatinen Puolue
Mikael Pentikäinen, Suomen Keskusta
Sirpa Pietikäinen, Kansallinen Kokoomus
Kari Uotila, Vasemmistoliitto

Seminaari on osa eurooppalaista New Pact for Europe –hanketta. Hankkeen tavoitteena on edistää keskustelua
Euroopan tulevaisuuteen liittyvistä suurista kysymyksistä ja käsillä olevista vaihtoehdoista. Hanketta johtaa
brysseliläinen tutkimuslaitos European Policy Center ja sitä rahoittaa eurooppalaisten säätiöiden konsortio.
Suomessa hankeen toteuttavat yhteistyössä Folktinget ja Ulkopoliittinen instituutti.

Tilaisuudessa on simultaanitulkkaus (suomi-ruotsi-englanti). 

Seminaarin tiivistelmä (englanniksi)

Kimmo Sasi, MP and Vice President of Folktinget, welcomed the audience to the seminar. He opened the seminar with a few words about the Finnish government’s report on EU policy from last year. 

Sasi stated that too often the EU-discussion in Finland is too black and white, focusing on whether we want a federal state or not. At the seminar five different scenarios were discussed where the options varied from giving up the euro to forming a federation. 

After Sasi, Dr Maria Joao Rodrigues introduced the New Pact for Europe –project in more detail.

According to Rodrigues we are on the verge of important decisions, which will define the future of the EU and Europe and its citizens in the long run. Rodrigues said that there is no perfect solution for a better Europe. Rodrigues asserted the necessity to have a new pact for Europe. She stated that the challenges Europe faces can be separated into economic, political, societal and cultural and external challenges. 

Rodriguez claimed there is a quite high level of unemployment in Europe as a whole. The large diversity between the member states is also a problem, when the unemployment rate is varying from regions with 5 % to areas with 50 % of unemployment.  The economic situation in many states is between low growth and recession. There are signals of recovery, but the base is still relatively fragile. The key political challenge is the legitimacy of the EU. In many occasions European citizens feel they cannot have real influence in the decisions that affect their lives. The political system is perceived as too complex and not transparent enough, which leads to a democratic gap.

In her concluding remarks Rodrigues emphasised that the appeal of the European project is not strong enough, if we do not share a common identity and narrative. 

Subsequently Teija Tiilikainen, Director of the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, raised four fundamental and substantial questions into debate about the nature of the EU. Tiilikainen hoped the candidates would discuss the following four issues: 1) the division of power between the EU and its member states 2) the relationship between the EU and its citizens 3) the Democracy in the EU and 4) external guarantees. Does the EU have a status of a sovereign state? Does the EU have instruments to tackle large economic issues? Does the EU have political power vis á vis individual states? 

Afterwards Carl Haglund, the Minister of Defence, commented the speeches based on the report of the project New Pact for Europe. He stated that "going to back to basics”- and "giving up the euro”-scenarios are unrealistic. To Haglund starting this debate is comparable to opening the Pandora’s Box. The "À la carte” model, where everyone gets to choose whatever they please, would not work. The European Union is an on-going project, and it has to keep moving forward. Futhermore Minister Haglund highlighted enforcing the legitimacy of the EU. In his conclusion he stated that the EU’s critical voices have grown during the last years. 

The final speaker Heikki Patomäki, professor at the University of Helsinki, presented his own alternative for Europe’s future development. In his vision the EU should be built into something completely different than what it is. He stated that the euro crisis is the second phase of a global financing market crisis. There is a long path to a complete and functional Europe. Thus there are two alternatives left. Either to leave the EU that does not currently work or build a one that works. However, the question is about legitimacy. The foundation of democratic decision-making is social solidarity. 

The presentations were followed by a panel discussion with the candidates of all parliamentary parties for the European elections. 

In the end Rodrigues held the final comment about the project.