European Union

http://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/684674d4-83ac-11e5-b349-bc764e084e2e_34_thumb_169_1446721611_1446721611_129_97shar_c1.jpg

EU Ministers of European Affairs, Industry, Research and related areas meet in Brussels on 9 November 2015 to discuss the competitiveness situation of the steel sector.

Download this video here.

Britain has more job vacancies than can be filled by the native workforce. That, in a nutshell, is why we need migrants.

The country has a chronic skills shortage and without migrants helping to fill that gap, Britain – and Britons – would be poorer.

Britain now has more people at work than ever before. We also have a record number of job openings – around 750,000 vacancies in August alone. It’s no wonder that in line with that, immigration from the rest of Europe is also at a record high.

Why? Because migrants mostly come to Britain for jobs, and if there were not so many jobs, there would be little reason to come here, and therefore, not so many migrants.

Of course, none of this is any consolation to the 1.77 million people currently unemployed. But unfortunately, many of the unemployed do not have the skills now needed by employers. Britain, of course, should be spending billions in upskilling our workers, and especially the unemployed.

Similarly, we shouldn’t blame migrants that parts of the country lack sufficient schools, hospitals, homes, or that many are struggling on zero-hour contracts. For that, we should blame our political masters.

It’s too easy for the government to scapegoat migrants for our problems, when the fact is that without migrants, the country would be poorer. If all migrants went home, we wouldn’t have more schools, hospitals and homes. We would simply have a bigger shortage of teachers, doctors, nurses and builders.

In the meantime, British businesses are hungry for more skilled workers. Without them, our economy would stagnate and die. That, actually, is one way to stem the flow of migration to Britain – to trash our economy. But who would seriously advocate such a policy?

The fact that Britain now has record numbers at work, record numbers of vacancies, and unemployment at a 7-year-low of 5.4%, is a sure sign that the country is steadily climbing out of its economic downturn. And helping to propel that recovery are migrants, most of whom are in gainful employment, working hard, paying taxes and spending most of their earnings here, in Britain.

And yet, Britain still doesn’t have enough workers to fill the profound skills gap the country is facing.

Yes, of course, we should be training more people.

But in the meantime, the government has compiled a long list of skills the country needs – now, urgently. It’s called the UK Shortage Occupation List. We need, for example:

Scientists, such as geologists; nuclear medicine experts; mechanical engineers, such as for the oil and gas industries; electronic engineers for the motoring industry; software developers for 2D/3D animation; contaminated land specialists; medical practitioners, such as psychiatrists, anaesthetics and radiographers; specialist intensive care nurses; maths and science teachers; social workers; contemporary dancers; orchestral musicians; overhead lines workers; skilled chefs..

..And the list goes on and on. Skilled workers that the country needs now.

In addition, many farms, catering establishments, hotels, care homes and builders categorically state that they simply could not survive, let alone thrive, without EU migrants. Not because they are cheaper (can you really find a cheap Polish plumber these days?). No. It’s because these establishments have more vacancies to fill than British people either can or want to fill.

Eurosceptics say they are not against migration, but want the country to have fewer migrants, and to be able to choose who can come here, based on the skills needed. And they don’t want EU migrants to come here unless they have a job in advance.

But that just creates another bureaucratic barrier to EU migrants coming here at all. And in any event, the country already does choose which migrants to employ – the decision is made by British businesses, who want the right to choose their workforce from across our continent.

If an EU migrant can’t come here without having a job first, then chances are they will go to another country, and help their economy instead. That will be our loss.

EU regulations state that any EU citizen can move to another EU country to seek a job, so long as they have the means to look after themselves and don’t become a burden to the state. And what’s wrong with that? If they come here and don’t find a job, they usually go back home.

It’s a Daily Mail myth that migrants can simply come here and immediately start claiming benefits. It simply isn’t true.

The fact is that most migrants here have jobs; jobs that British businesses desperately need them to do. Britons shouldn’t complain – especially since more Britons are now in work than ever before. Migrants are not taking the jobs our unemployed could do. Migrants are coming here mostly to do the jobs that Britons can’t all do.

Britain needs migrants. They are not a threat; they are a boon. Our message to them should be, “Welcome, and thank you.”

 

*Join the discussion about this article on Facebook.

_______________________________________________

Related stories by Jon Danzig:

• Why is Britain so against migration?
• Fact: Most migrants come to work or study
• The free movement of people: it works both ways

To receive regular updates on this and other ongoing stories, please click the ‘Like’ button on my new Facebook page: Jon Danzig Writes

_________________________________________________

#Britain needs #migrants because of a chronic skills shortage. Read and share my blog today: https://t.co/Yfiz0ZThBw pic.twitter.com/kcBykzUgTi

— Jon Danzig (@Jon_Danzig) November 8, 2015

 

• Comments are welcome – but please read ‘The rules of engagement’ 

The post Why Britain needs migrants appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

The evening of June 7, 2015 – election day – must have been one of the worst nights in Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s political life. The Justice and Development Party (AKP), which he had led until August 2014, lost its majority in Parliament, shattering his dream of introducing a Presidential system in Turkey. However, in the aftermath of the June elections, Mr. Erdoğan managed to reverse the electorate’s verdict. Fully exploiting the prerogatives of his office and his considerable influence over his former party, he blocked attempts to form a coalition government. Through a series of smart strategic moves and taking advantage of the ineptitude and disarray of the opposition parties, he succeeded in forcing a repeat election on the country.

In a carefully crafted electoral campaign that ran parallel to that of Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu’s, Erdoğan avoided overexposure but consistently vouched for the AKP without explicitly mentioning its name. He shifted the focus away from his aim to establish a Presidential system, emphasizing instead the importance of safeguarding Turkey’s domestic stability. In fact, the AKP propaganda machine systematically pushed the message that by denying the Party enough seats to rule by itself, the electorate would open Pandora’s box.

Chaos, they claimed, would ensue and the economic and political progress achieved during the 13-year reign of the AKP would be jeopardised. The strategy was successful: the AKP’s middle class electoral base, which owes its current prosperity to the AKP’s economic policies responded to the threat of an economic slowdown by closing ranks behind the party.

Most importantly though, the warning that chaos would result from an uncertain electoral outcome proved all the more effective against the background of a wave of terrorism, military responses and suicide bombings. The government abandoned its previous overtures to the Kurds and set itself on a collision course with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). For its part, the PKK responded by escalating violence. The prospect of an impending civil war was hugely worrying to the public. The violence peaked when, on 10 October, a pro-peace and democracy rally in Ankara became the scene of the worst terrorist attack in Turkish history.

Two suicide bombers associated with the so-called Islamic State (IS) took the lives of 102 citizens, most of whom were supporters of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), a pro-Kurdish Party. The government used this atrocity to claim that the attack had been a joint PKK and IS plot, and that Turkey was besieged by terrorist organisations.

The argument that the PKK and IS collaborated in carrying out the massacre, although not based on any evidence, struck a chord with the general public. The PKK’s escalation of violence in the summer had hardened the nationalist core of Turkish conservatism. The PKK’s violence also alienated the mostly conservative middle class Kurds that defected from the AKP in the June elections and supported the HDP. The election results show that the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and HDP both lost millions of voters to AKP.

The AKP’s strategy of fomenting fear among voters was compounded by a systematic campaign of verbal and physical attacks against independent media. The building of the country’s most important newspaper Hürriyet was attacked twice in three days by AKP-affiliated thugs, led in one instance by an AKP member of parliament. The newspaper’s most popular columnist was assaulted in front of his apartment building and his ribs were broken.

The judiciary increasingly worked as an extension of the executive and acted in line with the President’s wishes. Four days prior to the elections, a conglomerate affiliated with Mr. Erdoğan’s nemesis, the Gülen movement (that also owns a media group), was taken over by the government in the context of an ongoing investigation. It is highly likely that the arrests of individuals within the police and the judiciary and the attacks against entities associated with the Gülen movement will continue unabated.

It was under these conditions that on November 1, on the 93d anniversary of the abolition of the Ottoman Sultanate, in an election that was clean but held under extremely unfair conditions that the ruling AKP won nearly 50 percent of the vote securing a comfortable majority in Parliament. However, the AKP’s 317 seats do not provide the necessary majority to change the Constitution. Nonetheless the issue of constitutional reform to establish a Presidential system is very much back on the agenda.

A lot depends on what the PKK will do and whether or not the government will allow the jailed leader of the organisation, Abdullah Öcalan, to communicate with representatives of the HDP. Mr. Öcalan may be amenable to a deal and encourage the HDP to cooperate with the AKP on constitutional reform. Alternatively, it would not be too difficult to lure some deputies from the sinking MHP to AKP and reach the 330 threshold that is necessary to change the constitution in Parliament and put reforms to a referendum.

Although nominally Mr. Davutoğlu won the elections, it is clear that the real figure behind the victory is Mr. Erdoğan. He dominates the political space and the agenda. He inspires awe and fear. So far, his policies of polarisation and intimidation have worked and rallied almost half the public behind him. He is unchallenged as a political leader. The two major opposition parties, the MHP and the Republican Peoples’ Party (CHP), are badly beaten and face a period of internal turmoil.

Based on his past performance, one can assume that Mr. Erdoğan will probably continue consolidating his rule and build an illiberal political system where the AKP is predominant, particularly if he manages to introduce a Presidential system. He is also certain that the Europeans, motivated by the pressing need to stem the flow of refugees through Turkey, will happily do business with him. However, the AKP’s victory has not eliminated any of the structural economic and political problems that Turkey must confront while at the same time facing an increasingly destabilised regional strategic context.

Soli Özel is Lecturer at Kadir Has University.

 

 

 

My first weeks as an intern in the technology team at FleishmanHillard have been a whirlwind, to say the least. As a Politics and Law student, I am very passionate about the work that me and my team do, and this has been the best educational experience for me so far.

For instance, I have become very interested in the Digital Single Market (DSM) and in issues such as data protection. The hot topic on data protection in Brussels over the past weeks has been the European Court of Justice’s decision regarding the Safe Harbour data transfer agreement between the EU and the US. Now, that might not mean a lot to people outside the Brussels bubble – but it should. The news strongly impacts both businesses and regular people, as it will, for instance, have an impact on e-commerce and online purchase. This has made me realise that perhaps not many people know very much about the Digital Single Market (DSM) either, and about the Commission’s work and how it impacts our everyday lives. So – here’s your crash course on the Commission and its DSM strategy!

What’s all this – digital single market?

Our world is changing as a consequence of technology, but online barriers mean we are not quite embracing the change yet. The European Commission is trying to break down online barriers and make the online and digital world more accessible through the Digital Single Market. Perhaps what interests young people the most is the availability of online goods and services – who doesn’t enjoy a little bit of online shopping?!? However, we still live at the border between the two worlds, the online and offline world, still with one foot in the other, not fully immersed in the wonders that the online world can offer us. We are the generation that is breaking down the barriers keeping us from enjoying the real digital experience, and the DSM is the regulatory tool that aims to help us by making the digital, online environment more accessible.

It can help you!

If you need convincing, let’s take an example! I was born in Romania, but I’m studying in the UK, and now working in Brussels – roaming charges are a pain! I constantly have around 4 SIM cards with me, because it is much cheaper to constantly change your phone number and use a local provider than keeping one number, and using roaming. The Commission, through the DSM, will end all roaming charges as of 15 June 2017. It might seem like a trivial thing to get excited about, but for people who travel a lot, this is really exciting news!

Something else that the DSM is aiming to achieve is to make e-commerce easier (hurray!) and tackle geo-blocking. Geo-blocking is a particularly annoying part of the online world – it means that, depending on which part of the world you are in, you might not have access to every online service available to other countries. For example, for many young people, including myself, online music and films play a big part in our daily lives. However, in Romania it is often the case that when trying to access this type of content I would get a message that it is not available in my country. Seems a bit annoying, doesn’t it?

Digital skills – need to adapt or run away?

Another, very important, aim of the DSM is to advance digital skills, making it easier to live in such a digitalised world. Take teachers for instance. Most of them do not belong to the digital generation, but they have to teach children who were born in it and who are sometimes more savvy than they are. Digital skills have also become a huge part of the job market – in a job market that increasingly puts an emphasis on an applicant’s digital skills, it’s almost impossible to find a job if you’re not tech savvy.

“Back to the future”

Now- a little bit of geek time! October 21st was “Back to the future” Day! For all fans of the 1985 and 1989 movies, this was the day when the truth came out: is 2015 as the movie makers imagined it 30 years ago? Hover-boards are still not a real thing, although technology has matched the writers’ imagination with gadgets such as video glasses, the existence of video calls, or big screen TVs. I believe this is our “back to the future” moment and we have the opportunity to change the world as we know it– 5 years from now, will we live in the Digital Single Market world? I hope so.

Andreea Ghita

DRAFT RECOMMENDATION on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and Republic of Kosovo, of the other part
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Ulrike Lunacek

Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP

AMENDMENTS 256 - 420 - Draft report on the Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World 2014 and the European Union’s policy on the matter
Committee on Foreign Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP

Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP

Members of the Committee on Foreign Affairs will discuss the issue of proxy wars in the EU neighbourhood together with their counterparts from national parliaments. Special attention will be given to the foreign policies Iran, Saudi Arabia and Russia and their political and security impacts in conflict zones. The participants will also have the opportunity to look at the migration crisis, with a particular focus on the Western Balkan route. The meeting will take place in Brussels on 10.11.15.
Location : Brussels JAN 2Q2
Further information
Draft agenda and meeting documents
Fact Sheet on immigration policy
Fact Sheet on the Western Balkans
Fact Sheet on relations with Russia
Fact Sheet on relations with the Greater Middle East
Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP

General : Launched in 2011 Snapchat is currently the fastest growing social media network on the planet, its over 200 million users send almost 9,000 photos to each other every second. Roughly one third of Snapchat users come from Europe, and in Ireland, Sweden and Belgium, about 50% of teenagers use the app. In order to allow them to get a fun glimpse into the workings of the EU, Parliament set up its own account last May, and now has over 1,000 followers on the video messaging platform.

Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP

General : Launched in 2011 Snapchat is currently the fastest growing social media network on the planet, its over 200 million users send almost 9,000 photos to each other every second. Roughly one third of Snapchat users come from Europe, and in Ireland, Sweden and Belgium, about 50% of teenagers use the app. In order to allow them to get a fun glimpse into the workings of the EU, Parliament set up its own account last May, and now has over 1,000 followers on the video messaging platform.

Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP

Plenary session and committee meetings, Brussels

Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP