5Model European Union Strasbourg 201Strasbourg Snitcher

The smell of strong coffee permeated through the European Parliament this morning along with the almost palpable sense of excitement and nervousness from all the participants. This scene could only mean one thing: the 9th edi-tion of MEU 2015 was officially a-go.

The opening ceremony began with a video from the President of the Eu-ropean Parliament Martin Schulz. He calmly reassured us that the ‘process of finding current solution can be hard at times’ but that compromises and agree-ments will be reached and will ben-efit the European public. He noted that ‘your experience here will enrich your interest in European politics further’ and you will be part of ‘fostering a Eu-ropean identity’ which will ‘help you on your path to truly becoming European Citizens’. Schulz’s inspiring words were followed up by none other than the former Minister of Culture/Member of the European Parliament - Catherine Trautmann. Trautmann was particularly

pleased with the turnout of European youth interested in European politics, highlighting that she has noticed that, as last year’s elections proved, the public’s participation in politics keeps decreas-ing. The fact that we are all here this week shows that we are ready to make a change and undoubtedly we all will – we are the best and the brightest of Eu-rope and we will make our mark.

Our multilingual diversity was pointed out by Sophie De-La-Rue, an admin-istrator from the European Parliament office, along with the fact that we are a symbol of EU democracy and are re-sponsible for the future of the EU. As scary and daunting as that may have seemed at first glance, she kindly smiled and told us to never forget that the Eu-ropean Union is made for us. We may be playing a role in our week here, whether it be ministers, lobbyists, journalists, MEPs etc. –a role we ought to take it seriously, but we that we mustn’t forget to enjoy.

Philomena, Lia and Morten all gave wonderful welcoming remarks, remind-

ing us that this is a place where we are likely to make friends for life (or po-tentially a so-called Strasbourg baby) and that we need to cherish our week here. We will not only find excitement in discussions but will get an insight into a world with ‘borderless political views’ – a rarity in our modern society. Personally, I thought Leo Wilkinson captivated the audience with his witty jokes and excellent (or should I say ‘fant-abulous’?) likening of the conference to a ‘suited up Game of Thrones’ and an ‘elo-quent tragedy’. His speech epitomized, for me, what MEU is: the balance be-tween fun and hard work.

So, while we are all working hard in our roles, whether it be writing, interpret-ing, Ministering, MEPing, we should all take a moment to sit back and let the fact that we are going to be spending a week in an incredibly prestigious place, with incredible people, with wonderful food and drink and brilliant nights ahead of us - sink in. We have one week. Let’s make it count.

Monday, 13. April 2015

Opening CeremonyDaily News of Model European Union Strasbourg 2015

Issue No 02/15

Follow us: #MEUs2015

IN THIS ISSUE

BRAVE NEW DATA WORLD

In the coming two days the European Parliament will discuss the Data Pro-tection Regulation as proposed by the Commission.

Page 2

WARNING: DO NOT OVERSTATE FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT

If there’s one thing we are familiar with, well, that’s freedom of movement...

Page 3

13 NON-EU NATIONALS

Less than ten percent of the participants in the 2015-edition of MEU come from countries outside the European Union.

Page 4

Siân Maria Morgan

Issue No 02/152 | Monday, 13. April 2015 — Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —

Data protection is one of the topics that concerns Europeans the most, as is the right to be forgotten. Faction Leaders expressed their beliefs, dividing the group between those who consider the citizens needs first and foremost, and those who prioritize businesses, espe-cially Small and Medium Enterprises (SME).

Francesca Risso, speaker for the EPP, expressed the importance of considering Small and Medium Enterprises, finding balance between the rights of citizens and companies, asking the other political

groups to feel urgency in solving this is-sue. “Human rights are at stake” but the future of the economy is “as well”.

The leader of the ALDE faction, Pascal Nighl – Deryk, affirms how the group is looking forward to this regulation, but considers it necessary to weigh up the positives. The regulation, accord-ing to him, is about companies follow-ing the law, and he suggests an increase from 2% to 5% in the annual turnover from companies who breach the rules is necessary. This was suggested in the present article 79, with focus on multinational companies, not SMEs, to help prevent the misuse of data. The Greens are also aiming for balance, de-

fending the need for a case-by-case view and analysis, including the extraction of data, and protection of EU citizens, in not European territories, namely by American companies.

The current directive was established in 1995 and it is considered outdated for today’s world, as Ondfej Semerark, fac-tion leader for the Socialists & Demo-crats reminded the parliament. Freedom of speech is also a concern highlighted by the ECR group; Felix Fehling, the leader, reminded that most Europeans want data protection, but the cost for companies must also be at focus, for SMEs will “find hard to comply” to the regulation as it is today.

Debate Protection – Citizens, SMEs and BalanceNiko Wolf, for the NGL, says the direc-tive will create jobs, and exists to pro-tect citizens, not businesses. As for the EFDD’s faction leader, Donald de Vink de Winnezelle, he mainly stresses that this matter should be more commanded by the governments and authorities of Member States governments, and not Brussels. He expressed the opinion that the regulation, as it’s written today, makes the EU countries give up their national authority and power. The Data Protection regulation is to be subject of debate by the European Parliament in the course of the week.

Diana Tavares

In the coming two days the European Parliament will discuss the Data Pro-tection Regulation as proposed by the Commission. Commissioner Karolis Jonuška wants to ensure that the mem-bers of Parliament understand the im-portance and challenges of what he calls ‘the Brave New Data World.’ In 1995 the Data Protection Directive was revo-lutionary or as Mr. Jonuška calls it “a milestone in the history of Personal Data protection.” Fundamental principles such as the citizen’s rights to handle per-sonal data were enshrined in this Direc-tive. The Directive was, however, not applied universally, leaving the Member States with the possibility to apply it as they please. The increasing use of Inter-net in our daily lives also leaves more room for risks. 43% of Internet users say that they have been asked for more per-sonal information than necessary. Users are scared that their information will be misused and feel that they have to dis-close too much information. Europeans are displeased with the current system - 90% of the Europeans want the same Data Protection rights across the EU.

The new regulation updates the cur-rent framework. Mr. Jonuška wants to stress to the European Parliament what advantages the digital single market has. He notes that “we have a chance to make a huge leap into the future and have a competitive advantage.” For citi-zens, the goal is full protection of their rights to dispose over their own data. For businesses, a Digital Single Market provides economic benefits; “Data is a currency. It is exchanged and generates

much profit.” Same rules for all compa-nies will apply no matter where estab-lished, it is clear that legal certainty is good for investment by companies. The current regulation has been drafted with an eye for the future, claims Mr. Jonuška. “The regulation is technologically neu-tral. It does not tackle a specific type of technology.” Even technologies not yet invented will be subject to the new regulation.

The EP should pay special attention to particular issues with the regula-tion. Mr. Jonuška firstly stresses the European Data Protection Authorities. How will data protection authorities on national level cooperate with the Euro-pean level? The EP will have to decide what role they attribute to these author-ities. Secondly, the EP has to rethink the deterrence mechanism. Currently, the regulation includes the competition policy rule in which, companies will

have to pay 2% of their global turno-ver. It has yet to be discussed whether this is the right way to go and whether 2% is the right number. “There is a lot of concern with regards to article 79 on administrative sanctions in the EP,” according to Mr. Jonuška. “More rel-evant perhaps, would be the article 7 on conditions of consent and article 20 on profiling.” Thirdly, there are special cat-egories for Data Protection that have to be re-thought. There are exemptions to-wards public security for instance, in the current regulation health and political opinions are included, but Mr. Jonuška wants to make sure that all MEPs agree. A fourth point of possible discussion is the right to be forgotten: the bal-ance of public interest and the right to privacy will be a key point throughout the discussion. Lastly, the obligation for companies has to be considered and the burden of proof currently lies with

“Brave New Data World”

the company. Special regulations apply, however, to Small and Medium Enter-prises, for example the controversial exemptions. A fear arises that they will not comply with data protection and Mr. Jonuška especially wants to bring to the MEP’s attention that this regulation deals with business to customer protec-tion and should therefore avoid discuss-ing data processing in criminal matters.

What is especially important according to Mr. Jonuška is that the European Par-liament moves forward with the plan. “If not successful, other countries with jurisdiction will take over and Europe will lose its competitive advantage, plus citizens are not sufficiently protected.” The new regulation provides the Union with a minimum level of protection. The ball is now in the EP’s court to voice the opinions of the European citizens.

Alexandra van Walraven

Issue No 02/15 Monday, 13. April 2015 | 3— Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —

The turnout figure for 2014 European Parliament election was 42%, the low-est ever – just one point below the pre-vious, held in 2009. This datum reveals a truly deep restraint between the Euro-pean citizens and their institutions, es-pecially as; abstention data is more seri-ous in the Eastern-European countries, including three countries that joined the Union in the past few years. In this case, Poland, Slovakia (2004) and Romania (2007) had a total participation of be-low 30 percent. Nevertheless, Western-European countries cannot judge their turnout, seeing as it was announced that

young people are the segment of popu-lation less likely to get involved in the voting.

After all, Europe’s political class has motivated a time of reflection, which includes strategies to get European citi-zens involved in the political life of their community. This week, Strasbourg is embracing new parliamentary activity, including the debate of two new propos-als that can maximise EU enlargement, the Banking Union and the Data Protec-tion Regulation. There exists among the Euro Deputies in Alsace a unique idea: if citizens do not feel that the European Union has plans for the future - for in-stance, progressing in rights or methods to overtake the economical crisis–, they

will never trust the EU. According to David Caballero, the Croatian Minis-ter, “both proposals are beneficial for Europe and Croatia. Our main interest is that banks assume responsibility and be responsible for their own actions”. In regards to the other proposition; Cabal-lero believes that “the current regula-tion must be updated and include more rights. [He] strongly believe our citizens will get involved if [the EU] cares about their common problems”.

The Minister of Portugal, Laura Piel, adds that “these initiatives will create concern amongst citizens. The Banking Union, for example, is going to directly affect tax payers, as they will not have to pay rescue costs anymore. [Portugal]

Even though the Data Protection Regu-lation has been discussed at the EU level for a long time- since 1995 to be precise- the need for further discussions and a harmonized legislation was raised once again after the Snowden ‘incident’ in June 2013. Evidence of NSA surveil-lance on European citizens spurred widespread concern in the Continent.

It was under the surveillance pro-gramme named PRISM that much of NSA spying took place, including the collection of data held by American companies such as Google, Apple and

Facebook. Despite American govern-ment officials’ attempt to justify the value of espionage for the prevention of terrorism, the international response was ‘tense’. The lobbyist representa-tive of Google, Lois MacLatchen, urges to distinguish clearly between NSA malpractices and Google. According to her, Google’s “high ethical standards” remain faithful to the manifesto ‘Do No Evil’. Besides, as long as the freedom of speech of European citizens is respect-ed, and there is a clear definition of who is a public/private figure and how data protection applies to each person, they “will apply to it”.

These development heightened the im-

portance of raising awareness on the subject and on the consistent enforce-ment of data protection rules across EU member states. The Regulation aims at expanding its scope to companies and search engines outside the Eurozone. Data handling will be safer for consum-ers and fines up to 2% of companies’ annual worldwide turnover will be im-posed on companies that breach the law. However, disagreements on the amount of the fines is widespread. Pascal Nohl-Deryk, the ALDE faction leader, states that “we are in favour of amending the Commission’s proposal towards in-creasing the fees up to 5% for multina-tional organizations”.

Data Protection Regulation: Europe and the USPRISM has not only interfered with USA foreign relations with the Euro-pean Union from a ‘strategic alliance’ point of view, but has also damaged eco-nomic activities. American companies saw their overseas sales decline, since customers lacked the necessary trust to establish business opportunities. Concern about private data storage has impacted American competitiveness, when compared with foreign compa-nies. Therefore, there should be support from United States towards a European Data Protection Regulation. Compli-ance with such rules would certainly aid the difficult process of rebuilding trust in the United States and their role on modern communication networks. But the European Union also has something to loose – heavy regulation might affect technological innovation. Moreover, there is a need to increase large compa-nies costs. Nohl Deryk prefers to con-centrate on the protection of citizens, instead of the possible lack of enthusi-asm on the USA’s side.

But to what extent are European citi-zens really protected? The imposition of Data Protection Impact Assessments on companies helps regulate risks, enhanc-es safeguards, security measures and mechanisms to ensure the protection of personal data. However, other types of privacy are not covered by these as-sessments, i.e. behavioural privacy, loca-tion privacy and privacy for the person. Therefore, not all types of surveillance are regulated or condemned. Other grey areas exist. How far goes EU jurisdic-tion? Should stakeholders be consulted? Hope remains that further debates will enlighten such details.

Francisco Daniel Garcés

Maria Salomé Fernandez

suffered a deep banking disaster and the Portuguese people had to pay the rescue costs themselves. “Our duty is to serve our people and make their life easier”, she affirmed.

Swedish Minister Alba Espino thinks that “the EU has a communication prob-lem. All the MEPs should explain what it means to be a deputy, what we do and how we do it”. It is not easy to resolve, but Caballero strongly assures us, “we are working to recover the people’s con-fidence by presenting new initiatives to improve Europe’s life”. Both proposi-tions will be voted on Friday, 17. Next European election is expected in May 2019.

Can the Banking Union and the new Data Protection Regulation engage the citizens again?

Issue No 02/154 | Monday, 13. April 2015 — Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —

Editors Sian Morgan Isotta Rossoni

Journalists Francisco Daniel Garcés Maria Salomé Fernandes Anouk Heili Rikke Mathiassen Daniela Prugger Alessandra Sinno Diana Tavares Alexandra van Walraven

Photographers Marlene Stocker Petar Georgiev Santiago de la Presilla

Impressum

I started off my article in the pre-conference newspaper trumpeting the benefits of European interconnected-ness. If there’s one thing we are familiar with, I wrote, well, that’s freedom of movement. It’s so easy - not to mention, cheap- to jump on a plane to another EU country. Book a ticket with Easyjet or Ryanair and you can escape the chilly British or Polish spring in no time. Fast, easy and affordable: these are the key words to keep in mind when discuss-ing intra-European transportation. All this is well and good, but right now I am wondering… Am I guilty of count-ing chickens before they’ve hatched? Looks like I might well be. In the past couple of days, I’ve heard several narra-tions of not-so-smooth journeys. MEP Alessandro Dasara, keen as mustard to get to Strasbourg to join the Euro-pean Conservatists and Reformists

contingent, had his patience severely tested. What was meant to be a short trip from Italy to France turned into an extenuating 9 hour journey. His compa-triot, interpreter Francesca Giampaoli, saw her Lufthansa flight from Milan to Frankfurt delayed of one hour -believe it or not, Germans can make mistakes too!- and missed her bus to Strasbourg. She boldly ventured into Frankfurt for some sightseeing, but, alas, dazzled by the beauty of the city, lost track of time and risked missing the next bus. Even those who did make it to Strasbourg quickly and easily could hardly heave a sigh of relief. My colleague, Dutch jour-nalist Alexandra Van Walraven, was left stranded at Strasbourg rail station for several hours. Sceptical of the direc-tions provided by the staff at the station – ‘We are sorry Miss, you have been misinformed… Ibis Styles Strasbourg is not in Strasbourg; it’s actually in Ger-many!’ - She resolved to sitting down on a bench, praying for a Wi-Fi connection

and a fluke of fortune. It took journalist Maria Fernandez twelve hours to get to Strasbourg from Barcelona. MEP for the Europe of Freedom and Direct Democ-racy faction, Moritz Rehm, travelled for fourteen hours straight before reaching French soil. But in all fairness, MEP for the European People’s Party Ozcan Ay-kut probably had the worst luck of us all. Upon arrival in Strasbourg, he realized his suitcase had gone missing. No shirts, no suits or ties for a week. Turning up naked at the EU Parliament: definitely not an option. Luckily, since MEU is all about teamwork and cooperation, Head of Strasbourg Diplomacy, Guillame Pourquier came to his rescue! Him and Ozcan will be sharing clothes, so don’t be surprised if you see them switching outfits over the next few days. For those of you who encountered no real obsta-cles during your journeys, well guys, do thank your lucky stars! As for me, I’ve learnt my lesson. I promise I will try not to jinx it next time!

Isotta Rossoni

Follow us:

/user/MEUStrasbourg

/modeleu

/beta_europe

WARNING: Do not overstate freedom of movement within the EU.

Welcome fellow Europeans to the first day of MEU Strasbourg 2015! The Conference kicked off to a great start this morning with the Open-ing Ceremony, comprehensive of an inaugural video from the President of the European Parliament Martin Schultz. This year we are discuss-ing two hotly debated legislative proposals: the European Banking Union and the new Data Protection Regulation. Today’s edition of the Strasbourg Snitcher focuses on the Data Protection Regulation, with several journalists examining issues such as the right to privacy, freedom of speech and the internet as a human right. You can also find the Commis-sioner’s opening statement on page 2, and a lighter read on travel issues on this page. This edition of MEU Strasbourg promises to be ‘juicy’, so we hope you make the most of your freedom of information and keep up with our daily news!

By Sian MorganIsotta Rossoni

A WORD FROM OUR EDITOR...

The Internet has become a daily ‘habit’ for the majority of EU citizens. It now takes up a big part of users’ work lives, social lives and especially future. One could even compare the Internet to a basic platform for democracy, education and economic opportunities.

“The Internet gives us all the possi-bilities of human action – that is why connectivity is a human right. It is like a public service”, said Catherine Trau-tmann, French politician of the Social Democrats and former MEP. The Data Protection Regulation, which has been on the EU’s radar for a pretty long time, aims to adjust the processing of personal data. Hence, it is tightly related to hu-man rights law.

However, listening to the debates in the European Parliament today, it seemed

to me like it was mostly big companies, money and the economy that captured the MEPs’ attention. In fact, the citizens as data subjects did not appear to be the focus of faction leaders’ opening state-ments.

Especially Donald de Vinck de Winne-zeele, faction leader of the EFDD, made his mark by uttering a load of criticism about the Commission calling it “ar-rogant and unelected” and claiming the Regulation was “all about giving more power to the commission”.

“The problem is, that freedom of ex-pression and the protection of privacy clash”, said Irena Pavlickova, Lobbyist of the European Federation of Journal-ists. Her biggest concern refers to in-vestigative journalism and access to data for research purposes. “Indirectly this factor would also have consequences for Europe’s citizens, since uncovering abuses of power plays an important role

for society”, added Pavlickova.

“The data protection is completely in compliance with the right of freedom of speech”, replies Niko Wolf, the fac-tion leader of GUE/NGL. Actually, the Regulation would just concern personal data. “Historically, journalistic data is not affected by it. The only thing that we are going to introduce is the Right to be Forgotten, which will give people the possibility to delete articles who they find are offensive”, said Wolf.

But are worries and criticisms totally ill founded? “We know that there has to be a balance between the Right to be For-gotten and freedom of expression. Yet when it comes to the Right to be Forgot-ten, public interest will always be our main concern”, stated Maria Roberts, faction leader of the Greens and added: “We entirely support the regulation. But we cannot loose anymore time.”

Daniela Prugger

Access to the Internet : human right or privilege?

Issue No 02/15 Monday, 13. April 2015 | 5— Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —

The Right to be Forgotten has often been interpreted very sceptically, as a potential limitation to fundamental hu-man rights, such as freedom of expres-sion and freedom of information.

To cut a long story short, the Right to be Forgotten allows people to remove their personal data from search engines if they consider it inaccurate and irrelevant, or if it threatens to compromise both their private and public lives. Its theoretical and legal bases have been subjected to significant developments since 1995. These developments are still taking place and sometimes present particular

difficulties, due to the Right’s polyvalent nature. For example, as was mentioned today during the Opening Ceremony, the right in question is strictly linked to cultural factors, like cultural diversity, one of the most important aspects of our individuality, that we ought to fiercely defend. However, the Right to be For-gotten also aims to address issues of Eu-ropean security, which at times may be in conflict with individual privacy.

Precisely because of its ambivalent na-ture, the Right to be Forgotten cannot be considered as absolute. Public fig-ures, especially people who play very important roles in society and hold po-litical responsibilities, should expect less privacy than the average citizen.

Democratically, every citizen has a right to be informed about all politicians’ ac-tivities- even more private ones- espe-cially if they involve public money and resources. The ‘right to be informed’ must be considered as important as the ‘right to be forgotten’, if we want to promote a more equal and democratic society. The duty to provide reliable in-formation deeply regards journalists and affects their professional ethics.

First of all, they should be able to dis-tinguish between private and public: historically, their separation has often been ambiguous, especially in relation to politicians. They should be also able to distinguish private information, which ought to be shared with the public-e.g.

The Right to be forgotten from a ‘journalistic’ prospectivepoliticians’ involvement in economic scandals- from mere details of their daily routines and personal relations, which the community does not need to be informed of.

It is clear that the question is not just legal, but also ethical: an equal and fair balance with other democratic rights is always required, as was explicitly clari-fied by the Court; to find a unique and general rule seems almos impossible. That is why a “case-by-case” assessment is to be preferred to guarantee good re-sults. And this balance has to be decided not only legally, but also critically and ethically, and journalists’ responsibili-ties are no less important.

Alessandra Sinno

Issue No 02/156 | Monday, 13. April 2015 — Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —

We met Olav Mydland, lobbyist for the Association for Financial Markets in Europe. The association represents a broad range of participants in European wholesale financial markets and is in fa-vour of the European Banking Union.

“Europe needs a Banking Union, to se-cure the savings” Olav Mydland told us this morning. The proposition for a European Banking Union is being discussed this week in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, after the Commission made its proposal. The proposal is about a regulation of the Eu-ropean Parliament and of the Council. It would establish uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain invest-ment firms. This is all in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Bank Resolution Fund and would amend the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council.

With the creation of a single European Market with freedom of movements for goods, services, capital and freedom, European Institutions have been willing to create a Banking Union, with a com-mon set of rules for all European banks so that they can work together, across the borders, for a stronger Europe. After the 2008 financial crisis, national central banks and the banking sector in general were hardly criticized and therefore the European Union’s institutions have tried to come up with new ideas and new standards and new fundaments for a real Banking Union. This is a great am-bition for Europe since it would allow

more and more cooperation between countries in the banking and financial sector, but what do people working in these sectors think about the Banking Union?

For the Association for Financial Mar-kets in Europe, the EBU is truly impor-tant. It would not only secure the sav-ings but also boost finances in Europe, according to Mr Mydland.

However, the lobbying association does not agree completely with the Commis-sioners who made the proposal. “We need a longer transitional period; we need to give better supervision to the banks”. The lobbyists of the association are asking for a 5 years period of super-

vision which would allow a big action from the part of the Joint Supervisory Teams. This long period would also enhance the integration according to the lobbyists since it promotes a higher supervision. These Joint Supervisory Teams are cross-jurisdictional teams led by the European Central Bank per-sonnel. This also includes staff from the different national competent authorities which would help harmonizing the dif-ferent rules and types of works of the different countries.

We will see this week if the lobbyists are going to underline their ideas and manage to convince the Members of both Parliament and Council to find a

“Europe needs a Banking Union” : financial markets lobbies and EBU

compromise upon the proposal.

Furthermore, the proposal needs to take into account countries that have decided to take a stand against the Banking Un-ion like the United-Kingdom. The UK wants guarantees over voting rights, which has led to frustration among other member states. It also needs to integrate countries that are not in the Euro-Zone by establishing close-operations with the European Central Bank for them to have influence on the Supervision Sys-tem.

Involving different interests, from fiscal union to political integration, the pro-posal discussed this week is going to be a challenging one.

Less than ten percent of the participants in the 2015-edition of MEU come from countries outside the European Union.

When 19-year-old Mariam Bibilashvili is passing through the security check at the entrance of the Louise Weiss build-ing, she is one of the few who is flashing a passport from a country, which is not a member state of the European Union.

“As I am interested in international rela-tions I decided to try to apply and I was lucky”, she says.

When she is not playing the role as a German MEP in this year’s MEU

simulation, Mariam is studying Interna-tional Relations in her home city Tbilisi, Georgia:

“I saw a great chance to travel to France, to explore a new country, to meet new people, and get an interesting experi-ence”, she explains.

It is the first time during the 9-year history of the Model European Union in Strasbourg that that the application process has been open for people from outside the EU’s 28 member states and the EU candidate countries. In total, 13 people from outside the EU have been admitted to this year’s conference and nationalities expand from Georgian and Ukrainian to Turkish and Chinese:

“The main goal of the MEU is to stimu-late interest in EU affairs. I think it would be unfair to close that off to non-Europeans”, says Josef Williamson, Head of Participants at the MEU 2015.

When sorting through the 533 online applications submitted to the MEU this year, Josef and the other organisers saw several applications from applicants of countries as far away as Israel, Indone-sia, and Taiwan.

Josef says that the non-EU nationals are bringing fresh perspectives to the debates in the Parliament and in the Council:

“The countries that they are from all have different stances on the data protec-

13 non-EU nationals in this year’s EU-simulationtion act, and they are all affected differ-ently by the banking crisis in 2008. So everyone is bringing something differ-ent”, he explains.

For Mariam, the conference in Stras-bourg is her second visit to an EU coun-try. She enjoys having the chance to tell her MEU colleagues about her own background and culture.

“I can make my country known by oth-ers, I can tell them about my culture and the dishes as well”, she says, adding that the churchkhelas (traditional Geor-gian sweets made of nuts and pineapple juice) she brought for the Euro-feast on Sunday evening got a lot of positive re-sponses from the other participants.

Anouk Heili

Rikke Mathiassen