Sanatarkat istuntoselostukset

Maanantai 3. huhtikuuta 2017 - Strasbourg

16. Euroopan solidaarisuusjoukot (keskustelu)

  Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la discussione su:

- l'interrogazione con richiesta di risposta orale alla Commissione sul Corpo europeo di solidarietà di Petra Kammerevert, a nome della commissione per la cultura e l'istruzione (O-000020/2017 - B8-0210/2017), e

- l'interrogazione con richiesta di risposta orale alla Commissione sul Corpo europeo di solidarietà di Thomas Händel, a nome della commissione per l'occupazione e gli affari sociali (O-000022/2017 - B8-0211/2017).

Preşedinte: IOAN MIRCEA PAŞCU
Vicepreşedinte

  Petra Kammerevert, Verfasserin. – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar Navracsics, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist erfreulich, dass so viele junge Europäerinnen und Europäer Interesse daran zeigen, sich als Freiwillige solidarisch für unser gesellschaftliches Zusammenleben zu engagieren: 25 000 Jugendliche haben sich bereits auf der entsprechenden Online-Plattform für das Europäische Solidaritätskorps beworben. Die Kommission hat mit der Veröffentlichung ihrer Online-Plattform und der Entsendung erster Freiwilliger jedoch Fakten geschaffen, ohne dafür eine gesetzliche Grundlage zu haben und vor allen Dingen ohne die Finanzierung geklärt zu haben.

Die Initiative der Kommission, Jugendliche mehr in den Mittelpunkt der europäischen Politik zu rücken, wird vom Ausschuss für Kultur und Bildung grundsätzlich begrüßt. Gleichzeitig stellen wir uns aber einige Fragen im Zusammenhang mit dem Format, der Funktionsweise, der Finanzierung und der langfristigen Tragfähigkeit des ESC. Wir weisen daher in unserer Entschließung auf die vielen Schwächen und Fehler der Initiative hin und zeigen auf, welche Bedingungen erfüllt werden müssen, um den ESC zu einem Erfolg werden zu lassen. Die Träger der Jugendarbeit und der Freiwilligendienste müssen künftig eng an der Entwicklung und Umsetzung des ESC beteiligt werden. Über ihr Engagement beim Freiwilligendienst verfügen sie über umfangreiche Erfahrung und Fachwissen. Es wäre geradezu fahrlässig, dieses nicht für den ESC zu nutzen. Es muss daher sichergestellt werden, dass die bisherigen Errungenschaften im Hinblick auf den Europäischen Freiwilligendienst nicht geschwächt werden.

Der Aufbau von Doppelstrukturen wäre nicht nur ineffektiv, sondern sogar schädlich. Neue Initiativen benötigen frisches Geld. Erasmus+ ist trotz der Mittelaufstockung chronisch unterfinanziert, gute Projekte – gerade im Bereich der Jugendarbeit – müssen massenhaft abgelehnt werden, weil das Geld fehlt. Erasmus+ jetzt auch noch mit einer neuen Idee zu überfrachten, ohne zu sagen, wo die erforderlichen Mittel herkommen sollen, kann vom Parlament nicht hingenommen werden. Der ESC darf nicht zulasten von bestehenden Programmlinien in Erasmus+ gehen, und auch die Jugendgarantie muss sakrosankt bleiben.

Es könnte ein positiver Nebeneffekt des ESC sein, die Beschäftigungsfähigkeit junger Menschen zu erhöhen, aber er ist kein arbeitsmarktpolitisches Instrument. Deshalb muss sichergestellt werden, dass reguläre Arbeitsplätze nicht durch billige Freiwilligentätigkeit ersetzt werden.

Wir erwarten von der Kommission ein überzeugendes und nachhaltiges Konzept für den ESC. Der Enthusiasmus der jungen Menschen kann sonst schnell in Frustration umschlagen, insbesondere dann, wenn klar ist, dass in diesem Jahr nicht mal die Hälfte aller Interessierten zum Zuge kommt.

Vor diesem Hintergrund stellen wir folgende Fragen: Erstens: Wie könnte der ESC den Europäischen Freiwilligendienst weiter stärken? Wie werden diese beiden Initiativen parallel koexistieren und sich kurz- und mittelfristig ergänzen? Wie sollen unnötige Überlappungen zwischen den beiden Initiativen vermieden werden, und wie werden die derzeit im Europäischen Freiwilligendienst involvierten Organisationen am Prozess beteiligt?

Zweitens: Mithilfe welcher EU-Förderprogramme wird der ESC in seiner Anfangsphase umgesetzt, und was sind die Budgetauswirkungen auf diese Programme? Was sind die Absichten der Kommission hinsichtlich der kurz-, mittel- und langfristigen finanziellen Nachhaltigkeit des ESC?

Und drittens: Wie wird die Kommission dafür Sorge tragen, dass die Freiwilligentätigkeit nicht systematisch ausgenutzt wird, um reguläre Arbeitsplätze zu ersetzen – egal, ob Vollzeit oder Teilzeit?

Ich freue mich auf die Antworten der Kommission.

  Marita Ulvskog, author. – Mr President, on 7 December 2016 the Commission adopted a communication on a European Solidarity Corps. By voluntarily joining the European Solidarity Corps, these young people will be able to develop their skills and get not only work but also invaluable human experience. That is how it was spelled out by Mr Juncker.

In this communication the Commission states that the European Solidarity Corps will bring together two complementary strands: volunteering and occupational. The occupational strand touches upon subjects that fall directly within the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs’ areas of competence, and this committee wishes to put a couple of questions to the Commission.

How does it intend to differentiate between volunteering – which can provide very valuable experience but is unpaid – and traineeships or apprenticeships, which should be paid? How does it intend to ensure that volunteering is not misused to replace regular paid forms of employment? How will it guarantee that the initiative reaches out to all young people, in particular those in more vulnerable situations? How will it guarantee that the traineeships and apprenticeships offered under this scheme are of a good quality? How will formal and informal skills be recognised? How will it rely on, reinforce and complement existing initiatives such as Erasmus+ and the Youth Guarantees that have already been mentioned?

Which share of the Employment and Social Innovation Programme and the Youth Employment Initiative and what additional funding does it envisage to allocate for the ESSC? Existing funds are already much needed given the social and employment situation in Europe. Does it consider resorting to other funds and programmes such as, for example, the ESF? How does it intend to avoid the duplication or replacement of existing programmes and tools such as Erasmus+, the European Voluntary Service and the European Youth Guarantee?

We also have concerns that this is replicating already existing grassroots initiatives. The Commission has to consider already existing initiatives and respect their autonomous organisation. It is not the role of civil society to act as cheerleaders for the European Union or any governmental body. Strong, independent grassroots organisations are at the heart of European values.

Finally, we would like an explanation of how it is possible that the initiative is already running, recruiting young people without the legal instrument. These questions I would like to have answered.

  Tibor Navracsics, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, the European Solidarity Corps is at the heart of the Commission’s focus on youth. I am therefore pleased to discuss this important initiative with you today.

As we debate the future of the European Union, I think it is appropriate to talk about an action which addresses young people. They have a key role in building the Europe of tomorrow and in strengthening central European values, such as engagement and solidarity. The European Solidarity Corps is a unique opportunity to put European youth, their commitment to solidarity, and their potential at the very centre of our EU agenda.

Within a few months, as Ms Kammerevert mentioned, more than 26 000 young people have signed up and the first placements have started. But as with all decisions, we need to make sure we have considered all options and heard all voices. The Commission therefore welcomes your questions and your draft motion for a resolution which raised relevant concerns. These are shared by many of the stakeholders we are consulting. Let me reassure you that we take these concerns very seriously. They are part of our ongoing reflections as we prepare the legislative proposal, setting up a dedicated framework for the Corps. We have to make sure that our proposal is spot-on and meets the expectations of young people and participating organisations.

Regarding your question about how the different programmes interact within the Corps, the European Solidarity Corps currently builds on a broad range of programmes: Erasmus+; Employment and Social Innovation; LIFE; the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund; Europe for Citizens; the European Regional Development Fund; Health; and the Agricultural Fund for Rural Development. There is in a sense no need to reinvent the wheel. We want to use this experience and the existing structures of these programmes as a basis. Our aim is not to duplicate actions or discontinue what works well. On the contrary, we want to build on the strengths of existing programmes, to increase their visibility, create synergies and offer more opportunities, because the whole is more than the sum of its parts.

Most of the volunteering activities will build on the European Voluntary Service, which looks back on 20 years of experience in developing high-quality volunteering placements for young people. All stakeholders involved consider the European Voluntary Service a major success. Solidarity jobs and traineeship placements will build on the success of ‘Your first EURES job’ and are currently mainly supported by the Employment and Social Innovation Programme. A special call for proposals has been launched to get proposals from consortia that will provide solidarity-related placements.

The future legal base for the European Solidarity Corps will further improve, innovate and simplify the current approach. The Corps will bring together the activities available under the current programmes, add new activities addressing unmet needs, and use synergies wherever possible. The European Solidarity Corps portal as a single entry point for interested participants and organisations will ease access to volunteering opportunities, and it will provide digital tools to connect youth eager to express their solidarity with organisations looking for committed young people.

The key point is that with the Corps we create more opportunities for young people and make it easier for them to access these opportunities. The Corps will thus help to meet the real societal needs for solidarity across Europe, both within individual Member States and across borders. It will also harmonise and modernise the support services on offer. This includes, for example, preparation courses, language training, insurance packages and quality labels for organisations. It also includes participation certificates, as well as tools to recognise the skills acquired by young people during their placements.

We share your concerns about reaching out to young people in vulnerable situations. We believe that the European Solidarity Corps should be accessible to all youth. To reach out to those from less privileged backgrounds the Corps will ensure equal access and cater for the needs of under-represented groups by providing targeted and tailored additional support.

The forthcoming legislative proposal will be accompanied by appropriate communication and outreach measures. As for the risk of using placements as unpaid work, let me reassure you that organisations wanting to participate in the European Solidarity Corps need to be accredited. The arrangements to apply under the second phase will be proposed in the draft legal base. What I can tell you at this stage is that for the second phase we are currently considering three different types of placements: volunteering placements, job offers and paid traineeship placements. This way, the Corps will also complement the efforts made by Member States to implement the Youth Guarantee. It will provide additional opportunities for young people to make a start on the labour market by engaging in solidarity jobs or paid traineeships.

As to skills recognition, participants in the European Solidarity Corps will be entitled to receive a certificate when they have completed their placements. This could be complemented by a youth pass certificate. The Commission will work towards the recognition of the European Solidarity Corps certificate and related certificates at all levels.

You also raised the issue of the quality of placements. This is as important an issue to me as it is to you. Participating organisations have to comply with criteria that ensure that they provide only quality offers. In particular, organisations must commit to respecting the European Solidarity Corps Charter in which they pledge to foster the personal, socio-educational and professional development of participants; that they guarantee safe and decent working conditions; and that they provide adequate training for participants.

Employment offers under the occupational dimension are real jobs that will comply with national laws, regulations and collective agreements. Moreover, the principles outlined in the quality framework for traineeships will guide trainee placements offered under the Corps. Finally, the appropriate funding for the second phase of the European Solidarity Corps covering the period 2018-2020 is currently assessed by the Commission as we prepare the legal basis.

Honourable Members, in conclusion let me thank you again for your interest in this initiative. We can only make it a success together for the benefit of the many enthusiastic young people all over Europe eager to make a difference.

  Sabine Verheyen, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Ich begrüße grundsätzlich den Vorschlag der Kommissionsspitze, ein Europäisches Solidaritätskorps einzuführen, welches bis 2020 mehr als hunderttausend junge Menschen motivieren soll, sich ehrenamtlich für Projekte einzusetzen und mit anzupacken. Diese Solidaritätsprojekte werden Gemeinden und Menschen in ganz Europa zugutekommen und sollen sozialen Gemeinschaften dabei helfen, auf Krisensituationen oder in Notfällen besser agieren und reagieren zu können. Wir als EVP teilen und unterstützen selbstverständlich das Ziel des Europäischen Solidaritätkorps, das Gefühl der Solidarität unter jungen Menschen in Europa zu fördern und eine inklusivere Gesellschaft zu schaffen.

Gleichzeitig möchte ich aber drei Hauptpunkte anmerken: Erstens, darf es nicht zu einer Konkurrenz zwischen dem ESC und dem bereits bestehenden Europäischen Freiwilligendienst, der bereits eine effiziente Beteiligung junger Menschen in der Freiwilligenarbeit geleistet hat, kommen. Die Europäische Kommission muss das Ziel und den Rahmen des Europäischen Solidaritätskorps rasch klären und sicherstellen, dass sie das gut laufende Programm des Europäischen Freiwilligendiensts nicht beeinträchtigt. Zweitens: Als Programm, das der Jugend gewidmet ist, halte ich es für dringend notwendig, die Jugendorganisationen in die Erarbeitung des Regulierungsrahmens stärker mit einzubeziehen und mit ihnen gemeinsam den Verwaltungsrahmen festzulegen. Drittens ist die Finanzierung des Europäischen Solidaritätskorps unseres Erachtens noch völlig unklar. Für dieses neue Programm muss meines Erachtens auch neues Geld zur Verfügung gestellt werden, und es darf nicht aus den Mitteln genommen werden, die bereits jetzt schon durch den mittelfristigen Finanzrahmen stark unter Druck stehen. Unsere Sorge ist, dass die Finanzmittel aus dem Erasmus+—Budget genommen werden. Das ist „linke Tasche, rechte Tasche“ und führt auf Dauer zu Frustration, denn wenn die Programme im Erasmus+—Bereich gekürzt werden, hilft uns auch das neue Solidaritätskorps keinen Schlag weiter.

  Silvia Costa, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, commissario Navracsics, abbiamo accolto con favore la proposta di un corpo europeo di solidarietà avanzata da Juncker nel suo discorso sullo stato dell'Unione, come risposta all'esigenza di rafforzare il senso comune di appartenenza e responsabilità dei giovani europei nelle situazioni di aiuto, di impegno sociale, di risposte a esigenze specifiche di comunità territoriali o di emergenza, sulla base di un appello pubblico rivolto direttamente ai giovani e in collaborazione con le ONG nazionali ed europee che però abbiano maturato una specifica esperienza nel campo del servizio civile o della protezione civile, o del volontariato, e che consentano loro di vivere un periodo di impegno in paesi, io spero, diversi dal loro o, per una quota, anche nel loro paese.

Ma ricordo che le conclusioni del Consiglio sotto la Presidenza italiana avevano auspicato la nascita di un servizio civile europeo aggiuntivo allo SVE, ma distinto, per il quale nel 2016 era stato avviato già un progetto pilota, con l'acronimo IVO, che vede tre paesi partecipanti e quattro paesi osservatori. Forse sarebbe utile vedere questa esperienza come base del nuovo corpo. È importante ascoltare le ONG europee, come scriveva la nostra risoluzione, prima di definire la natura e compiti.

Noi chiediamo, con la nostra risoluzione, che questa iniziativa sia avviata con una base giuridica definita, come già ricordato, con risorse dedicate, auspicabilmente in collaborazione, credo, anche con le agenzie nazionali dei giovani, senza togliere fondi a programmi vigenti che hanno anche una sottostima economica, come invece sta avvenendo nella sperimentazione in corso che ha visto effettivamente – e questa è una risposta importante – oltre 25 000 giovani rispondere alla call. Ritengo però che il corpo, se è un corpo di solidarietà, non si possa confondere con il volontariato del servizio di volontariato europeo, che nei suoi 20 anni di storia ha rappresentato un quadro di riferimento per il volontariato europeo ed extraeuropeo, in collaborazione con ONG nazionali e accreditate, e nemmeno con gli EU Aid Volunteers.

Penso che sia anche importante che si specifichi la natura diversa di questo corpo, che naturalmente deve mantenere un profilo di servizio civico, anche se con rimborsi e garanzie assicurative, ma tenendo conto – e finisco – di specifiche vocazioni e anche eventualmente di occupabilità che si mette in gioco. In Italia, per esempio, si usa anche in parte come una delle tante opzioni della Garanzia Giovani, come lei ha citato. Ma deve essere molto chiaro che questo deve essere finalizzato soprattutto alla promozione della cittadinanza e della solidarietà europea.

  Jana Žitňanská, za skupinu ECR – Vážený pán komisár, v úvode mi dovoľte poďakovať sa za túto iniciatívu, ktorá, verím, pomôže tisícom mladých ľudí zapojiť sa do dobrovoľníckych projektov alebo si nájsť stáž či pracovnú pozíciu. Ako pri spustení tejto iniciatívy odznelo a teraz ste to, pán komisár, aj potvrdili, projekt chce osloviť aj mladých ľudí zo znevýhodnených skupín vrátane mladých so zdravotným postihnutím.

Ako som však už bola upozornená, samotná webová stránka, kde sa môžu záujemcovia registrovať, nie je dostupná v posunkovom jazyku pre nepočujúcich ani preložená do ľahko čitateľného štýlu pre ľudí s mentálnym postihnutím, pričom je zrejmé, že bezbariérovosť musí byť zabezpečená na všetkých úrovniach, a teda nielen v rámci projektov, ale už aj pri samotnej registrácii účastníkov. Rovnako musí komisia zabezpečiť efektívnu kampaň, aby sa komunity, ktorým je iniciatíva adresovaná, dozvedeli o všetkých možnostiach.

Do programu sa už prihlásilo – bolo to tu povedané – viac ako 26-tisíc mladých ľudí, ktorí čakajú na ponuku stáže, učňovskej prípravy, pracovnú pozíciu alebo dobrovoľnícku činnosť. Toto číslo bude narastať a je nevyhnutné, aby bolo čo najskôr doriešené aj financovanie celého programu bez toho, aby ohrozil už dobre fungujúce programy ako Erasmus plus či európsku dobrovoľnícku službu.

Verím, že Komisia pri tvorbe svojho legislatívneho návrhu už teraz spolupracuje s tretím sektorom, najmä so zástupcami dobrovoľníckych centier, ktoré majú skúsenosti priamo z terénu. Aj týmto spôsobom môžeme ustriehnuť, aby si dobrovoľníctvo zachovalo svoj charakter a nebolo zamestnávateľmi zneužívané namiesto platenej práce.

  María Teresa Giménez Barbat, en nombre del Grupo ALDE. – Señor presidente, queridos compañeros, el nuevo Cuerpo Europeo de Solidaridad amplía y renueva el actual Servicio Voluntario Europeo creando oportunidades para que los jóvenes trabajen como voluntarios y colaboren en proyectos que beneficien a comunidades y ciudadanos de toda Europa.

Desde el punto de vista del contenido, no encuentro novedades significativas. Así que, como ha expresado antes la señora Kammerevert, desde la Comisión de Cultura nos hacemos algunas preguntas sobre cómo va a funcionar esto y cómo se va a financiar —las declaraciones del señor Navracsics tampoco nos han dado muchas pistas sobre esto—.

Nos preocupa el hecho, que han subrayado algunos compañeros, de que puedan salir de otros programas, por ejemplo Europa para los Ciudadanos, ya infrafinanciado y para el que acabamos de pedir un aumento considerable de presupuesto.

Quisiera manifestar, en todo caso, mi admiración por la filosofía del Cuerpo Europeo de Solidaridad. Tal vez sus motivaciones parecerán ingenuas, pero considero noble y necesario reafirmar el valor de la «solidaridad» en los momentos difíciles que vivimos. La Unión Europea representa la ampliación del círculo moral a nivel supranacional y, por lo tanto, esto es un logro extraordinario.

El principio europeo de solidaridad está en la raíz de los valores que fundan nuestra Unión, y no debemos dejar de afirmarlo a pesar de las heridas que nos haya podido dejar el brexit, los egoísmos de algunas naciones o nuestra torpeza general con la gestión de la crisis de refugiados.

Este organismo dirigido a jóvenes voluntarios es un paso en la dirección correcta si queremos afianzar nuestros más básicos compromisos y nuestros principios fundamentales.

  Tania González Peñas, en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señor presidente, parece una broma, y de mal gusto, que la misma Comisión que impide la entrada de refugiados en Europa y que ha condenado a toda una generación a un futuro de precariedad diga ahora que quiere que, en 2020, cien mil jóvenes sean voluntarios europeos cuando, en todo caso, el objetivo debería ser que estos jóvenes tengan trabajo y tengan futuro.

Después de haber diezmado el sector de la cooperación, quiere crear un nuevo cuerpo de voluntariado, además del que ya existe, que va a ser financiado con partidas destinadas nada menos que a combatir el desempleo juvenil. Ciertamente, queremos una Europa más solidaria e inclusiva; el problema es que todo esto parece más bien una farsa que sustituye trabajo remunerado y profesional por voluntariado gratuito.

Esta debería ser una ocasión para impulsar parte de ese empleo juvenil que tanta falta nos hace, a la vez que respondemos a otras de nuestras responsabilidades, como por ejemplo la de garantizar el derecho al asilo, ofreciendo un servicio profesional. Empecemos a construir puentes y dejemos de levantar muros.

  Reinhard Bütikofer, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bin den Kollegen dankbar, die diese Diskussion initiiert haben, weil das European Solidarity Corps in der Tat auch unserer Meinung nach ein Vorschlag ist, mit dem wir viele junge Menschen für Europa begeistern können. Und die Tatsache, dass sich schon in den ersten Wochen so viele gemeldet haben und signalisiert haben, sie wollen mitmachen, unterstreicht ja, dass dieser Vorschlag des Präsidenten Juncker in die richtige Richtung geht.

Allerdings sollten wir aufpassen, dass wir nicht nur eine neue Schaufensterdekoration produzieren, hinter der das alte Angebot steht. Und wir sollten sehr aufpassen, dass der Vorschlag sich nicht in bürokratischem Overkill verläuft, so wie das der Kommission leider mit der wunderbaren Idee des Interrail Pass für Jugendliche gelungen ist.

Es sind noch viele Fragen offen, die geklärt werden müssen. Und wir sollten diese Fragen nicht nur unter uns diskutieren, sondern – das wäre mein Appell – gerade auch mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen in den nationalen Parlamenten darüber diskutieren, wie deren Vorstellungen sind, und das gemeinsam tragen.

Zwei rote Linien sehe ich. Die eine heißt: Es geht nicht ohne frisches Geld. Und die zweite heißt: Es darf keine Konfusion von arbeitsmarktpolitischen Instrumenten und Freiwilligenarbeit geben. Jenseits dessen aber, was im Moment schon diskutiert ist, wäre mir wichtig, dass die Kommission noch mal der Möglichkeit besondere Aufmerksamkeit schenkt, wie wir durch dieses European Solidarity Corps Jugendliche nicht nur engagieren können, sondern auch empowern, auch die Jugendorganisationen empowern können, damit sie sich in ihren eigenen Initiativen aktiv für Europa engagieren können.

  Dominique Bilde, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, dans son discours du 14 septembre 2016 sur l’état de l’Union, le président Juncker a déclaré au sujet du corps européen de solidarité: «Les jeunes de toute l’Union pourront proposer leur aide là où elle sera le plus utile pour répondre aux situations de crise». Je crois que cette affirmation est un aveu d’échec de la part de cette Union européenne qui, depuis sa création, n’a eu de cesse de parler de solidarité que pour mieux l’abolir.

Comment pouvez-vous sérieusement, au fil de votre texte, vanter la solidarité de l’Union alors même que la concurrence sauvage qu’elle a imposée a dévasté des milliers de PME, mis au chômage des millions d’Européens et asservi plusieurs États membres aux diktats économiques et budgétaires de Bruxelles? Ce constat d’échec est également révélateur de l’impuissance totale de l’Union Européenne à résoudre les crises qu’elle a elle-même engendrées, puisque le corps européen de solidarité fait peser le défi de l’intégration des réfugiés, par exemple, sur les épaules des jeunes générations.

Mais je vous rassure, les jeunes ne vous ont pas attendus pour tenter au quotidien de recoller les morceaux d’une cohésion sociale que vous avez brisée. Dans l’Union européenne, un jeune sur quatre a pris part à une activité de volontariat organisée au cours des douze derniers mois. En France, plus de 136 000 jeunes se sont engagés dans le Service civique depuis sa création en 2010, particulièrement après les terribles attentats qui ont frappé notre pays.

Chers collègues, vous invoquez le mot solidarité comme on invoque un esprit d’outre—tombe. Retournez donc dans les campagnes et provinces de vos pays respectifs! Vous y verrez que la solidarité entre voisins ou entre concitoyens n’a pas attendu les grands humanismes de l’Union européenne pour œuvrer et combler les défaillances dont fait preuve Bruxelles depuis trop longtemps.

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Mr President, the initiative of the European Solidarity Corps raises many questions, as we are hearing now. Although we all agree that the idea of the Corps is good, many misunderstandings could have been avoided if the Commission had consulted on its intention in time with youth volunteer organisations. I hope that in the preparation of the legislative decision the Commission is directly cooperating with the youth organisations.

Our committees rightly ask how the Corps will be organised and financed. We fundamentally disagree with the notion that the European Solidarity Corps could swallow other European programmes, for example the European Voluntary Service, which has more than 20 years of successful existence. The Commission’s communication is very unclear on this matter. To make the project acceptable for us, it needs fresh money from the budget.

It is also not clear how the occupational strand would work: what are the financial links between the ECS and the Youth Guarantee, and will the provided job for young people be a truly rewarding experience?

My last question is about whether the Commission has already prepared concrete activities for the more than 25 000 young people who have already signed up to the Corps, in order to prevent their frustration if the Corps does not fulfil their expectations.

  Julie Ward (S&D). – Mr President, volunteering experiences and mobility offer citizens, especially young people, opportunities to broaden their horizons and grow as a result of new encounters. This not only leads to the development of skills, competences and knowhow but most importantly opens the door to other cultures and different visions of the world. Volunteering can equip people with the necessary skills and attitudes to become active, responsible citizens open to intercultural dialogue, which is much needed in the turbulent times we live in.

Volunteering is particularly interesting in a broader context of occupational literacy. I agree, though, that in order to be successful the initiative proposed by the Commission must provide clear objectives and build on existing local grassroots organisations, so a close cooperation with NGOs, civil society and youth workers is needed. Citizenship and solidarity cannot only be piloted centrally, it must happen on the ground. Sport and arts must also be part of this and we must maintain a gender perspective. And we must reach out to the excluded young people as well as refugees and migrants. This, then, would be true solidarity.

  Marian Harkin (ALDE). – Mr President, I have been a strong, consistent supporter of volunteers and volunteering both before I came to this Parliament and since. So, was I overjoyed when I heard this proposal on the European Solidarity Corps? Initially yes, but there are many serious questions that need to be answered. How can we make a clear distinction between the volunteering and the occupational strands? What criteria do you intend to use, Commissioner? How can we ensure that there are no abuses in the system and that young, energetic, idealistic young Europeans do not find themselves on the fringes of precarious work?

Funding is a critical issue but we have no details. The target seems to be 100 000 volunteers. That needs real resources. I agree with you Commissioner, young people will play a key role in promoting and strengthening solidarity. It is crucial that the programme delivers a quality experience for volunteers and the communities they serve. You spoke of many different programmes –LIFE, Erasmus, European Citizens, rural development to name a few – but I need to know where is the coherence? We need that detail. You have used a lot of fine words and your intent is good but I am concerned that this is a rush job. It is not fully thought out and the clear parameters have not been set and sufficient funds are not in place. I want it to succeed but I am concerned that we have not yet put the proper structures in place.

  Curzio Maltese (GUE/NGL). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, fra le tante trovate e annunci con i quali la Commissione Juncker cerca di mascherare il suo sostanziale vuoto politico, questa proposta dei corpi di solidarietà europei ha almeno il merito di avere incontrato la risposta entusiastica di migliaia di giovani cittadini europei.

Per non deludere queste speranze bisogna che la Commissione elimini molte ambiguità e molti pericoli da questa proposta. Ne hanno già parlato i colleghi, e non ripeterò: il rischio di fare doppioni, il rischio di offrire strumenti per l'ennesimo sfruttamento della manodopera giovanile.

Infine, non è in alcun modo accettabile che questo nuovo corpo venga finanziato con i fondi dell'Erasmus. Non è possibile spargere fiumi di retorica sulle meraviglie dell'Erasmus e poi usare le già scarse risorse di questo programma come un bancomat per finanziare altro.

  Milan Zver (PPE). – Nova pobuda o vzpostavitvi evropske solidarnostne enote bo mladim prinesla še dodatne priložnosti in izzive pri njihovi integraciji v družbo.

Ker gre za vseevropski projekt, ima zato še posebno dodano vrednost. Združevanje mladih iz različnih koncev Unije pri humanitarnih dejavnostih, ki krepijo vrednote, na katerih temelji Unija, je dobro zanjo in za vsakega mladega posebej.

Kljub temu, da pobuda veliko obeta, pa bi rad izpostavil sledeče: Komisija predvideva, da se evropska solidarnostna enota v prvi fazi vzpostavi s pomočjo finančnih in človeških virov iz že obstoječih programov, med drugimi tudi programa Erasmus+ in sorodnega projekta evropska prostovoljska služba, ki že deluje v njegovem okviru vsaj dvajset let in o tem smo danes že govorili.

Zato delim skrb s svojimi kolegi, da se z vključevanjem evropske solidarnostne enote v program Erasmus+ otežuje učinkovito izvajanje tako enega kakor tudi drugega.

Namreč, v nedavno sprejetem poročilu o izvajanju programa Erasmus+, ki sem ga pripravil, sem opozoril, da program nima dovolj sredstev za financiranje vseh svojih osnovnih dejavnosti, kaj šele da bi bil zraven financiran še ta projekt, ta pobuda, kot je evropska solidarnostna enota.

  Krystyna Łybacka (S&D). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Ja w pełni doceniam intencje twórców tego programu, ale mam cztery uwagi. Sprawa pierwsza: finanse (mówili o tym wiele moi przedmówcy). To nie może być finansowanie, które osłabia inne doskonale działające programy cierpiące na brak środków. Sprawa druga: istnienie lokalnego wymiaru tego programu jest ogromną szansą dla środowisk mniej aktywnych, dla środowisk osób niepełnosprawnych, dla tych osób, które mają opory przed mobilnością transgraniczną. Ale żeby zaktywizować te środowiska, muszą one być należycie wynagradzane. To nie może być darmowa siła robocza. Zaniepokoiło mnie zdanie, które Pan Komisarz powiedział, że będą staże i praktyki, w tym niektóre płatne. Czy to oznacza, że będą także staże i praktyki darmowe? Kolejna kwestia to skoordynowanie tego programu z innymi istniejącymi programami, przedstawienie go na przykład na platformie EURES. I ostatnia kwestia: zwrócenie uwagi na następcze działania po odbyciu wolontariatu, żeby nie tracić jego efektów.

  Bogdan Brunon Wenta (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Europejski Korpus Solidarności – o czym tu już wszyscy mówili – to szansa dla młodych poprzez wolontariat, staże i pracę. Ale uważam za istotne, aby działania związane z wolontariatem były jasno oddzielone od tych przewidujących zatrudnienie. Organizacje zaangażowane w działanie Korpusu nie mogą wykorzystywać młodych ludzi jako darmowych wolontariuszy – jak przed chwilą mówiła pani prof. Łybacka – w sytuacji, gdy będą dostępne dobrej jakości miejsca pracy. Ważne jest również, aby kwalifikacje zdobyte w ramach wolontariatu były później uznawane na rynku pracy.

Niewątpliwym plusem programu jest możliwość zwiększenia mobilności młodych ludzi i zdobycia przez nich doświadczenia niezbędnego w przyszłej pracy, jak również kształtowanie aktywnej postawy obywatelskiej. Program ma skłonić większą liczbę młodych do angażowania się w różne działania solidarnościowe. Kluczowe jest jednak jasne określenie ram – o których tu wielu kolegów wspominało – i finansowania programu, zwłaszcza że Komisja rozpoczęła już fazę wstępną realizacji Europejskiego Korpusu Solidarności. Przeniesienie środków z dobrze funkcjonujących programów takich jak Erasmus + czy Europa dla Obywateli nie jest – jak zauważył kolega Zver – dobrym rozwiązaniem. Europejski Korpus Solidarności powinien opierać się na istniejących inicjatywach, wzmacniać je i rozwijać, a nie je zastępować.

Podkreślić należy również, że wolontariat europejski to program z dwudziestoletnim stażem, który okazał się dużym sukcesem. Tworząc Europejski Korpus Solidarności, powinniśmy czerpać wiedzę i doświadczenie z działania wolontariatu europejskiego i zapewnić komplementarność tych programów.

Procedura „catch the eye”

  Csaba Sógor (PPE). – Mr President, there are various benefits of such involvement: it can reinforce civic participation, social cohesion, and solidarity. In an EU context, it can also increase a common sense of belonging. But it can also have a strong impact on the volunteers themselves by contributing to their self-fulfilment and their professional development.

Considering the level of EU youth unemployment, the suitability of volunteer action to respond to many of our time’s challenges, as well as the need to give visibility to EU engagement, I think the Commission’s initiative would be most welcome. A well-coordinated and adequately financed programme could also enable the spillover of positive examples from countries with longstanding volunteering traditions to ones where such involvement is less developed.

The new initiative should be set up and financed in a way so as not to have a negative impact on existing successful tools and programmes, such as Erasmus and the European Voluntary Service.

  Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'Europa ha bisogno di immaginare nuove modalità per soddisfare le ambizioni dei suoi giovani. Il corpo europeo di solidarietà dovrebbe costituire un ponte tra il mondo della formazione e quello del lavoro, offrendo tirocini formativi ed esperienze preziose per chi vi partecipa, ma va pensato bene, per evitare abusi del sistema.

Il mondo del lavoro è costellato da fenomeni di sfruttamento mascherati da percorsi formativi, fenomeni che alimentano la precarietà, il divario salariale e che minano ulteriormente la fiducia dei giovani nel futuro dell'Europa. E ciò accade con particolare frequenza nei luoghi dove la disoccupazione giovanile è più elevata.

L'istituzione del corpo europeo di solidarietà è un'occasione importante per strutturare un programma europeo trasparente ed al passo con i tempi, ma dobbiamo lanciare un messaggio chiaro: l'Europa è dalla parte dei suoi giovani e il problema dell'occupazione e della equa distribuzione del lavoro è la priorità tra le priorità.

  Ruža Tomašić (ECR). – Gospodine predsjedniče, poticanje solidarnosti važno je za izgradnju odgovornih društava koja se brinu za svoje najugroženije. Bez solidarnosti nema društvene kohezije, nema građanske i nacionalne svijesti, a na posljetku ni očuvanja naše kršćanske civilizacije kojoj je ona jedan od temelja.

Iza osnivanja europskih snaga solidarnosti stoji pozitivna namjera. O tome ne dvojim, ali čini mi se da će u ovom slučaju izvedba biti traljava. Postavlja se pitanje trebaju li nam snage solidarnosti kao zaseban program ili se njih moglo uklopiti u neki od već postojećih programa, poput europske volonterske službe. Moramo voditi računa da novi program, ako je doista potreban, ne bude dodatno opterećenje za porezne obveznike.

Komisija to, čini se, razumije, ali želi uzeti novac kvalitetnim programima poput Erasmusa. To nije dobro. Ima dovoljno neučinkovitih programa koji se mogu ukinuti, umjesto da se oduzimaju sredstva onima koji predstavljaju dodatnu vrijednost.

  Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, tijekom ove rasprave prisjetio sam se svoje mladosti. Prisjetio sam se omladinskih radnih akcija koje smo imali u Hrvatskoj, koje su bile na području tadašnje čitave Jugoslavije. Prijetio sam se onoga entuzijazma i volje, neovisno o ideologiji, i prijateljstava koja postoje među mladim ljudima koji su različiti i koji su dolazili iz raznih krajeva tadašnje države.

Ovo doživljavam kao nešto što daje mogućnost da mladi ljudi u Europskoj uniji upoznaju sebe, upoznaju svoje bližnje, upoznaju vrijednost solidarnosti, vrijednost prijateljstva i zato ga podržavam, neovisno o nekim kontradiktornostima, ali očekujem da će se stvoriti sinergija sa svim drugim programima koji postoje i da će ovaj program zato i uspjeti.

  Isabella Adinolfi (EFDD). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, parlare di volontariato e del corpo europeo di solidarietà è senza dubbio qualcosa di positivo. Chi può dire il contrario? Tuttavia, non posso non rilevare l'esistenza di un grande velo di ipocrisia nell'affrontare questi temi, nonché un profondo scollamento dalla realtà, soprattutto se penso alle condizioni di vita di milioni di cittadini europei, soprattutto del sud.

Nella risoluzione, per esempio, si sancisce solennemente il principio di solidarietà, che significa condivisione dei vantaggi e degli svantaggi, e si indica come obiettivo quello di creare un senso di comunità, solidarietà e responsabilità sociale. Si tratta di parole bellissime ma smentite da quanto però accaduto nel recente passato, e da quanto continua ad accadere tuttora, nel sud Europa.

Io non ho dimenticato quanto capitato alla Grecia, stritolata dalle imposizioni della troika, né i dati allarmanti riguardo alla disoccupazione giovanile e al tasso di rischio di povertà, che è del 17 %. Si stima che in Europa ci siano 40 milioni di poveri. Il volontariato è un'attività sicuramente nobile, ma il nostro compito...

(Il Presidente interrompe l'oratrice)

  Γεώργιος Επιτήδειος ( NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η ιδέα της δημιουργίας Ευρωπαϊκού Σώματος Αλληλεγγύης είναι θετική και φαίνεται να ικανοποιεί την επιθυμία των νέων να προσφέρουν στο κοινωνικό σύνολο, παράλληλα όμως, να αποκτήσουν και τις προϋποθέσεις εκείνες που θα τους επιτρέψουν να βρουν μια αξιοπρεπή εργασία στο μέλλον. Για να έχει, όμως, επιτυχία αυτή η πρωτοβουλία, πρέπει να στηρίζεται σε πραγματικό ενδιαφέρον για τους νέους. Όπως γνωρίζετε, σε όλη την Ευρώπη και κυρίως στην Ελλάδα, που πλήττεται από τα μνημόνια, η ανεργία των νέων ανέργων ευρίσκεται σε πολύ υψηλό επίπεδο.

Αυτή η δημιουργία του Σώματος Αλληλεγγύης είναι δεδομένο ότι θα προσελκύσει το ενδιαφέρον των νέων. Το ενδιαφέρον αυτό, όμως, δεν πρέπει να γίνει αντικείμενο εκμεταλλεύσεως. Πρέπει να δώσουμε στους νέους τη δυνατότητα να αποκτήσουν προσόντα που θα τους βοηθήσουν στη μετέπειτα σταδιοδρομία τους και να μην αφήσουμε να γίνουν θύματα μιας απαιτήσεως για εξεύρεση εργαζομένων οι οποίοι θα εργάζονται με μισθούς πείνας, μόνο και μόνο επειδή έχουν ανάγκη να δουλέψουν.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Mulțumesc, domnule președinte. Domnule comisar, cred că ați constatat din dezbaterile de până acum că nimeni nu critică inițiativa. Și eu o susțin, inițiativa este foarte bună, dar întrebarea vine la timpul potrivit: de ce lansați o inițiativă pe care nu o și explicați, nu o bugetați, nu explicați de unde vin banii, nu evaluați, nu spuneți cum veți evalua acest lucru, pentru că este o investiție și, până la urmă, din orice investiție trebuie să scoatem ceva. Este exclus să luați din alte programe, pentru că dacă ai într-un buzunar bani pentru pâine și îi muți în celălalt buzunar, nu poți să iei carne, tot atâția bani ai. Aici trebuie să lămurim: dacă nu bugetăm, este o inițiativă moartă. Și vreau să vă întreb, concret, care este bugetul? Care sunt criteriile de alocare? Cum le distribuiți pe țări, că ați spus că suplimentați la bugetele naționale și cum faceți evaluarea?

  Νότης Μαριάς ( ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, όταν ανακοινώθηκε η ιδέα για την ίδρυση Ευρωπαϊκού Σώματος Αλληλεγγύης, ακούστηκαν μεγάλες κουβέντες, πολλά λόγια: ότι θα ενισχύσει την κοινωνική συνοχή, ότι με τη συμμετοχή των νέων θα υπάρξει ένα αίσθημα του ανήκειν, ότι θα ενισχυθεί η έννοια της ευρωπαϊκής ιθαγένειας, ότι θα υπάρξει αλληλεγγύη στην πράξη, ότι θα υπάρξει προσφορά στο κοινωνικό σύνολο και ότι ουσιαστικά επρόκειτο για ενέργειες εθελοντισμού και αλτρουισμού. Βλέπουμε, λοιπόν, ότι υπάρχουν 25.000 εθελοντές. Και ξαφνικά ανακαλύπτουμε ότι εδώ πρόκειται για ένα σύστημα με το οποίο κάποιοι θα βρουν δουλειά. Αυτό εμφανίζεται πλέον στη συζήτηση.

Τελικά, είναι άλλο πράγμα το Ευρωπαϊκό Σώμα Αλληλεγγύης, που έχει μια συγκεκριμένη κατεύθυνση για τους νέους που επιθυμούν να βοηθήσουν και να συμμετάσχουν, και άλλο πράγμα τα προγράμματα απασχόλησης. Αυτά ανήκουν στο Εrasmus. Πρέπει να σταματήσει η διγλωσσία, παρακαλώ.

  Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Mulțumesc, domnule președinte. Corpul european de solidaritate este o inițiativă importantă pentru tinerii din Europa. De altfel, tinerii sunt cei mai proeuropeni cetățeni ai Uniunii Europene. De aceea, este important, mai ales în contextul discuțiilor despre viitorul Europei, să dezvoltăm astfel de programe care să arate încă o dată avantajele oferite de o Europă unită. Dar trebuie să spun că cunosc foarte mulți tineri care au aplicat pentru acest program și așteptările lor, domnule comisar, sunt foarte mari. Trebuie să oferim tinerilor care participă la program sprijinul și încadrarea necesară pentru experiențe de calitate. Voluntariatul și schimbul de experiență nu trebuie să devină o sursă de abuzuri și de limitări ale drepturilor sociale. Trebuie să avem o finanțare adecvată și specifică, și sunt în Comisia pentru bugete și nu am observat-o, de recunoaștere a pregătirii prin certificate recunoscute pe piața muncii, de coordonare cu celelalte programe europene, de creștere a accesului la program pentru tinerii din toate mediile. Este important să facem din acest program unul de succes. Nu trebuie să ne oprim la birocrație, dar trebuie să fie foarte clar ceea ce propunem tinerilor, pentru a nu-i dezamăgi. Mulțumesc.

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Mr President, the launch of the Commission’s registration platform for potential young volunteers has spurred a tremendous amount of interest among young Europeans, including in my country, Romania. Yet this initiative could quickly turn into general frustration if the Commission does not present a convincing and sustainable approach soon. In view of the high number of registrations, the Commission needs to make sure that sufficient funding is dedicated to the initiative and that all stakeholders are sufficiently involved in the development and implementation of the European Solidarity Corps. We cannot reallocate funds from priority programmes, such as Erasmus+, often lacking sufficient resources to finance new policy initiatives. We need fresh money, and we cannot create a new initiative which goes against well—established and well—functioning programmes.

(Încheierea procedurii „catch the eye”)

  Tibor Navracsics, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I really appreciate this very fruitful exchange of ideas and let me first thank you for the support, the broad support, you have shown for the general objectives of the European Solidarity Corps. If we do it well the European Solidarity Corps can contribute to both European economic growth and the stability of European societies, because the volunteering part of the European Solidarity Corps can give the experience of living in a community for young people and working for the public good at the same time. And I think it is a very important issue from the point of view of stability of society, of the future society.

On the other hand the occupational side, the occupation pillar, can contribute to the employability of young people, the employability which is probably the most important virtue, the most important skill, for young people to get a proper job on the labour market in the future. So we really take it seriously, and that is why I appreciate all of your concerns, all of your feedback and all of your opinions because we will put it into the construction of the European Solidarity Corps.

But beyond the broad consensus let me address some of your concerns as well. First the funding, because definitely this is the most sensitive issue of the project. During this phase of implementation the European Voluntary Service funding was increased from EUR 62 million to EUR 89 million, out of which we estimate that EUR 58 million will be used for activities which fall within the scope of the European Solidarity Corps. The Commission continues funding Erasmus+ activities as foreseen in its legal base and financial programming, so no change in that. In other words, funding for volunteering has increased while there are no negative effects on Erasmus+ activities. Regarding the second phase covering the period 2018-2020 discussions on the appropriate funding for the new legislative proposal are still ongoing.

Let me thank Ms Žitňanská for her concerns on the accessibility of the portal. We are working on a more accessible format of the portal, because it is our personal mission as well to make it accessible for handicapped and fortunate people as well.

I agree with Ms Grapini’s remarks. Yes, I think the European Solidarity Corps is really an investment, an investment in the future, and that is why we would like to do it very well. Actually it is happening, the first action of deployment happened last week. So the European Solidarity Corps is already in operation. However, we know that we have to improve in the future to make it more efficient.

The second sensitive issue is the difference between the European Solidarity Corps and the European Voluntary Service. The difference at the moment is mostly procedural. The European Solidarity Corps is needs-driven and builds on the synergies of the programmes involved. Most importantly it will offer new opportunities that do not yet exist under the current programmes. It offers a single, easily accessible entry point through the European Solidarity Corps portal and aims at the widest possible outreach to participating organisations and the young people involved. It will also develop an enhanced training, available before a placement, and recognition of learning outcomes after placement. Basically the European Solidarity Corps will not compete with national volunteering schemes. The European Solidarity Corps will enhance what is already on offer at national level, adding opportunities that were not available before. In this sense it complements national schemes and creates new synergies with them.

And, last but not least, the application procedure will be easier in the European Solidarity Corps portal and that is why it will be more accessible for young people, hopefully for handicapped people as well. So thank you once again for your feedback, for your support and for your opinions and I am really looking forward to working with you in the future as well on this project.

IN THE CHAIR: MAIREAD McGUINNESS
Vice-President

  President. – The debate is closed.

The vote will take place on Thursday, 6 April 2017.

Written statements (Rule 162)

  Tunne Kelam (PPE), in writing. – The European Solidarity Corps (ESC) is a welcome and timely initiative. It is not only designed to complement and build synergies with other youth engagement and employment programmes. First of all, we have to catch the special nature of this programme as important promoter of European spirit, solidarity and citizenship. The future legal EU framework should prevent ESC becoming a mere substitute to creating jobs, or a sort of auxiliary to the European Voluntary Service. ESC should perform the role of a European civic service, engaged in public, private and NGO sector. Before launching the ESC on the large scale, the Commission has to come forward with a clear legal basis, also taking into account the views of youth organisations, networks and voluntary organisations. We have to ensure that young people who sign up to ESC will know about their rights and obligations, that their certificates would be globally recognised across Europe. The ESC’s goal should be to reach out, as much is possible, to all young people, targeting especially vulnerable young people. In parallel, we must do our utmost to prevent both unnecessary bureaucracy as well as obstacles presented by national boundaries. I encourage the Commission to come forward with solid legislative proposal, including a solution for sustainable funding.

  Ilhan Kyuchyuk (ALDE), in writing. – There is no doubt that the EU and its Member States need more solidarity particularly in the wake of financial and refugee crises that hit Europe. Namely in this context, the setting up of a European Solidarity Corps (ESC) has been seen by many politicians and analysts as the right initiative that will put into practice EU values of solidarity. This is so because the ESC aims to create opportunities for young people to volunteer or work in projects in their own country or abroad that benefit communities and people around Europe. Nevertheless, the ESC should not replace existing, successful initiatives like the European Voluntary Service (EVS) but rather, to reinforce and complement them. Expressed in other words, the ESC should avoid duplication or replacement of existing programmes and tools. In addition, I would like to stress that the ESC should ensure that volunteering, despite the fact that can provide valuable experience, will not replace paid forms of employment. I warmly welcome the intention of the ESC to spread solidarity among young Europeans (particularly young generations) but we should bear in mind that our prime goal is to create sustainable long—term employment opportunities for many unemployed young Europeans, the EU’s lost generation.

  Dominique Martin (ENF), par écrit. – Le Corps européen de solidarité (CES) a pour vocation d’aider les jeunes européens à développer leurs compétences et à obtenir un emploi. De prime abord, c’est un projet sain auquel il serait difficile de s’opposer ! Or, ce projet de CES est né dans le contexte de la crise migratoire et nourrit des objectifs bien différents, comme constituer une opportunité pour les communautés marginalisées (comprendre les migrants), ou encore développer chez les jeunes l’esprit fédéraliste de Juncker... En outre, le CES comporte plusieurs risques au sujet desquels la Commission n’a pas su donner de réponses satisfaisantes. D’une part, les volontaires (non rémunérés) risquent de remplacer, à terme, les stagiaires et apprentis, développant ainsi la précarité de la jeunesse. D’autre part, alors même qu’il existe plusieurs programmes tels qu’Erasmus+ et l’Initiative pour l’emploi des jeunes (IEJ), le CES risque de complexifier cet ensemble au lieu de le rationaliser. Ainsi, plus qu’un outil pour lutter contre le chômage des jeunes, c’est un outil de propagande européiste, que nous ne pouvons soutenir. Ce projet souhaite donner un cadre légal au CES, ainsi qu’un budget propre. Nous nous y opposons.