Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Vice-President and myself, we are delighted to welcome Jüri and his government here today to lay the foundations for the first ever Estonian Presidency. It is a good moment in the Estonian history and it will be a good moment for the European Union.

I have my experiences with Presidencies. I had to chair the Council and the European Council five times in my life, and so I know that the Presidencies of smaller countries are by far more successful than those of big countries. And I am really impressed by the good preparation we have noted today of the Estonian government for this major task. 1,300 Estonian officials are involved in the Presidency. That is a huge number because that is 1% of the entire population of Estonia – and so I am sure that this Presidency will be a success.

Estonia is a country I like very much. I paid two official visits to Estonia: the first time I was there, Mart Laar was the Prime Minister. The second time I was there, Andrus was the Prime Minister. And what I do not like in Estonia is that the policy-makers are as young as they are. Mart Laar was young; Andrus – who is my good friend – is closer to me when it comes to this stupid comparison. And now Jüri is the youngest Prime Minister we have in Europe. He was born in ’78, and I got married in ’79. You do not remember it, but I remember it. So I am very happy to go back to Estonia by the end of June.

I like Estonia and the Prime Minster, because he is like his country: young, forward-looking, pro-European, digital, and ahead of his time. You have to prove it.

Estonia has great ambitions and rightly so. Estonia, in many respects, is an example for the other Member States of the European Union. And although Estonia only joined in 2004, Estonia is behaving like a founding member of the European Union, whereas some founding members are behaving like brand new members of the European Union. So we are looking to this Presidency with great hope and great expectation.

We have seen in our conversation today that the Estonian government – as far as its agenda and programme is concerned – is very much in line with the ideas and the initiatives of the Commission, is ready to deliver on the Working Programme the Commission, the Council and Parliament have concluded. And we would like Estonia to focus on digital, because Estonia has a real outstanding expertise when it comes to digital, and so we are in safe hands. The same applies to energy efficiency and renewable energy where Estonia too is a model for others.

I would leave it with Jüri to explain what he has in mind and then to Andrus to explain what we think about that.

Questions and Answers

Q1. Which one of these two do you think is the greater challenge for the Estonian Presidency: reforming the Common European Asylum System – in which we have not seen much progress in the past two Presidencies – or keeping the Brexit negotiations on track? How big do you think the Estonian influence will actually be?

President Juncker: I think that digital is the most important performance Estonia could give as a gift, knowing what is what, to the European Union. Brexit is an important issue, but we have a Chief Negotiator, so there will be no negotiations between the Presidency and the British in a direct, intimate way; this will be done by the Chief Negotiator. The second point you mentioned was the asylum reform – that is important.

Q2. To the Prime Minister: this morning, the Brexit Minister David Davies threatened – or suggested, maybe I should say – that he might walk out of negotiations. Will you be able to keep the EU 27 together and supporting the Chief Negotiator, Michel Barnier? President Juncker, yesterday Theresa May said: ”The next person to find out that I am a bloody difficult woman will be Jean-Claude Juncker”. I was wondering if you have any response to that sort of rhetoric.

President Juncker: I am not using this rhetoric, because in different translations it could mean different things. I deeply respect the British Prime Minister; I like her as a person. I have noted that she is a tough lady – so this is not for the future, this is a real-time description. And I do not think that David was right when he was threatening that he would be ready to go out. My experience in politics always was that those who were going out had to come back.

88% of respondents felt it important that the EU fund humanitarian aid activities and 90% said it was important that the EU help to coordinate the response to disasters in the EU through its civil protection role. Most EU citizens (56%) do not think their own country has sufficient means to deal with all major disasters on their own.

“The 2017 results show a continuing and overwhelming level of public support for EU action on humanitarian aid and civil protection. The European Union is a global humanitarian leader. When a disaster hits, there are no borders and the public support the EU helping in emergency response both at home and abroad. I am determined that the Commission will continue to deliver on this vote of confidence by European citizens”, said Christos Stylianides, Commissioner for Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Management.

Key results

• Humanitarian Aid: 88% of respondents felt it important that the EU fund humanitarian aid activities. Asked about the current pressure on Europe’s public finances, 84% supported the continued funding of EU humanitarian aid (a similar result to 2015), and 66% felt the humanitarian aid was more efficient provided by the EU than by individual countries. An overwhelming majority (91%) also believe that EU should fund education for children and young people caught up in crises, and 86% support the sending of EU volunteers abroad.

• Civil Protection: 90% of Europeans said it was important that the EU help to coordinate the response to disasters in the EU through its civil protection role and 80% feel that if the emergency were to occur in their country, they would expect another EU country to help. 86% also believe that the EU should help any country in the world hit by disasters by sending experts and equipment. A large majority (87%) also believes that there should be an EU civil protection policy, as crises can have an impact across borders, and 81% think that a coordinated EU action in dealing with disasters is more effective than actions by individual countries – a stable result since 2015.

• Prevention and preparedness for disasters: almost half of Europeans (49%) do not think that enough is being done at a regional level or within their own countries to prevent or prepare for emergencies.
• Public awareness: EU citizens also show a high level (71%) of awareness of EU humanitarian aid activities and significant awareness (55%) about EU’s coordination role in response to disasters in the EU.

Background:

The EU as a whole — the European Commission together with the Member States — is the world’s largest humanitarian aid donor. The European Commission provides life-saving assistance around the world. This assistance is carried out in partnership with UN agencies, NGOs and international organisations such as the Red Cross.

In addition, the EU helps to coordinate the response to disasters. The EU Civil Protection Mechanism facilitates cooperation in disaster response, preparedness, and prevention among 34 European states (EU-28 plus Iceland, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey). With the support of the Commission, the participating states pool the resources that can be made available to disaster-stricken countries all over the world. When activated, the Mechanism coordinates the provision of assistance.

The special Eurobarometer surveys on humanitarian aid and civil protection (reports 453 and 454) were carried out in the 28 EU Member States between the 26 November and 5 December 2016. Some 27 929 respondents were interviewed face-to-face.

For more information:

Report/Summary/Country Factsheets for 2017 Eurobarometer on humanitarian aid

ECHO Factsheet – humanitarian aid

Report/Summary/Country Factsheets for 2017 Eurobarometer on civil protection

ECHO Factsheet – civil protection

ESMA’s statement outlines the work it has undertaken in relation to the Credit Rating Agencies (CRA) Regulation and provides an update on the state of play on a number of initiatives, these include:

• European Ratings Platform;
• Fees;
• Transparency on structured finance instruments;
• Reducing over-reliance on credit ratings;
• Competition issues;
• Sanctions; and
• the endorsement regime.

World Press Freedom Day is marked every year on 3 May, but there is little reason to celebrate as journalists continue to be repressed and persecuted all over the world. The challenges facing the press are discussed by Parliament’s human rights subcommittee on Thursday morning, with a special focus on the growing threat of disinformation. Check out our handy guide on how to spot fake news.

The internet has created new opportunities for the media, but it has also made it easier to deliberately spread  fabricated news stories to fool readers. Parliament President Antonio Tajani called attention to the issue in a statement: “When we consider press freedom, we also have to look at the internet. It is a source of knowledge as much as it is a source of concern. Almost half of all Europeans get their news from social media. This has made spreading fake news far too easy. There are mounting concerns over disinformation and hate speech, used to promote radicalisation and fundamentalism, particularly among young people.”

During the debate on 4 May, members of the human rights subcommittee are to discuss the World Press Freedom index compiled by Reporters without Borders as well the European Endowment for Democracy (EED) activities in the field of media freedom and how the EU is reacting to disinformation and fake news.

Private security companies must respect minimum requirements on accountability, the screening of staff and reporting on misconduct, while staying away from tasks usually reserved for the military said committee MEPs on Tuesday.

Foreign Affairs Committee and Defence Sub-Committee MEPs advocate EU-wide rules on private security companies (PSCs). The use of private contractors must be limited to logistical support and the protection of installations and only EU-based PSCs should be contracted for protection tasks abroad, say MEPs.

MEPs suggest drawing up an open list of contractors complying with EU standards on transparency, criminal records, financial and economic capacity, licences, strict vetting of personnel, and adhering to an international code of conduct,. This could be followed by a single set of rules for EU institutions that use PSCs to protect EU staff, modelled on UN or NATO practices.

Quote

“More than 70% of EU citizens say that security and defence should be a European Union priority,” said Parliament’s rapporteur Hilde Vautmans (ALDE, BE), urging “the Commission and the Council to come forward with EU standards for private security companies in order to enhance transparency and democratic control”.

Next steps

The resolution on private security was approved by 50 votes to 6, with 1 abstention. The full House is to vote on it at the June plenary session in Strasbourg.

Background information

The EU numbers some 40,000 private security companies (PSCs), employing more than 1.5 million people and supplying services that range from logistical support, through running prisons or providing protection, to combat support and supplying military technology (2013 figures). They are also used to guard EU delegations in third countries and provide security for the premises of EU missions and operations

PSCs, which are used by EU member states to compensate for shrinking armed forces or to avoid limitations on the use of troops, have been accused of human rights violations and even of causing casualties. This has revealed gaps in accountability and has negative implications for the EU’s foreign policy aims.

Work on regulating private security companies is under way in many international fora, including the Montreaux Document Forum, which defines how international law applies to PSCs, and the International code of conduct for private security service providers, which sets industry standards. The EU does not have uniform rules on PSCs, while member states’ practices on the use of PSCs vary widely. The lack of common penalties means there is little to prevent abuses, which can have a major impact on how PSCs operate in multilateral interventions and conflict regions.