A letter to Commissioner Gabriel regarding the situation in the Slovenian film industry

On Thursday,  12th of November a group of MEPs, with the primary signature of  MEP Irena Joveva, addressed a letter to the European Commissioner for Innovation, Research, Culture, Education and Youth, Mariya Gabriel, regarding the situation in the Slovenian film industry with the intent to warn and call for help to unblock the financing of Slovenian national film productions.

The crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has severely affected the film and audio-visual sector resulting in the loss of income for this sector’s employees throughout the whole European Union. With constant reminders of the problematic situation some Member States have taken a positive step towards damage control by releasing and increasing funding for the film sector. Despite all  efforts; numerous warnings, good practice examples, appeals by various members of the Slovenian parliament to the Prime Minister, to the Minister of Culture and to the Minister of Finance, the Slovenian government continues to block the financial state budget transfers intended for the Slovenian Film Centre, which has led to the standstill of the film industry in Slovenia, including projects of international cooperation throughout Europe. Moreover, the industry employees have not yet received remunerations for their supplied services since November 2019.

The Country’s political actors are postponing the issue and constantly evading the responsibilities, and so the film industry employees are drowning in unbearably difficult personal and social circumstances. Due to the government’s ignorance, and as the film and audio-visual industry is based on creativity, cultural expression and also on promotion for European ideas and values, we have sent a formal appeal to  European Commissioner Gabriel for help in resolving this issue of blocked funds for  Slovenian national film production.

The letter: Letter on film industry in Slovenia

/0 Comments/by

“There will always be manipulators among us; it’s up to us whether we’ll be stupid enough to believe them”

On Friday, 6th November, MEP Irena Joveva was a guest on the Slovenian Radio Ptuj’s show ‘Slovenia, the European Union and the World’. The conversation covered issues around the pandemic, such as the current situation, disinformation, and the negative impact of disinformation and this sphere’s regulators within the EU – where the Digital Services Act will play a key role.

“This mandate is truly unique. First the exit of a member state and then the pandemic. Only for the short period of six months could we work normally. In March, everything came to a standstill, including our work and after that, everything changed,” began the MEP.

How successful was the first year of her mandate? What were her priorities and her achievements? Joveva is a member of four parliamentary committees and a shadow rapporteur responsible for numerous opinions, from the Digital Services Act and artificial intelligence to the strengthening media freedom and the European Solidarity Corps. Soon she will cooperate in her capacity as the general rapporteur on the opinion of the Committee on Culture regarding the citizens’ participation in the decision-making in the EU.

“I am building credibility with my colleagues, they trust me with more important reports, they ask for my opinion and my support … But you should know that most of the results are only evident later on because the legislative process is long-running and one can hardly attribute it to only oneself,” explained the MEP, emphasizing the importance of networking to gain influence and to achieve goals.

Joveva and the journalist also discussed briefly the current situation regarding the pandemic and in the second part, the MEP spoke about fighting against disinformation, especially in current times.

I believe there has been too much disinformation going around since time immemorial, even only one is overmuch and it’s getting  increasingly dangerous in these times. On the one hand, because of the digitalization of our age, and, on the other,  – which is even worse – because it is dangerous to human health and lives.

As a result, the Digital Services Act, according to Joveva, has never been more important. Although the EU and major online platforms have already taken some steps, it is still insufficient: “Twitter removes or flags certain misleading records, and Facebook removes dangerous groups, but we need clear, legal regulation. Rules for moderating online content, including disinformation, illegal content, hate speech, and the spread of conspiracy theories…”

According to the MP, it is crucial to find out, who is behind the disinformation: “I find it most problematic that politicians deliberately use these methods, fear and people’s sense of helplessness, to achieve their goals. Politicians, on the other hand, are diverting attention away from the real problems that people face, which they should address together. And that is precisely the problem that makes people feel excluded and disappointed, prompting them to seek explanations on dubious-credibility websites.”

At the same time, she was particularly critical of Slovenian government’s (non)communication. “If you listen to something a politician says every day, then to something another speaker says on another day, and then again to a leader from whatever group, at some point everything starts to seem suspicious, and you ‘switch’ to deceptive information because everything appears to be much simpler at first glance,” Joveva observes.

Is there anything else we can do? The Digital Services Act by itself, as well as increased platform responsibility, will not suffice. “Manipulative policies or systems will always exist, but it will be up to us to decide whether we will – and I apologize for my choice of words – be so stupid as to believe in something that is so obviously manipulative. Education and awareness-raising are critical here, not only from educators, but also from those of us who co-decide and co-shape decisions, and we must be the first to set an example,” the MEP concluded.

/0 Comments/by

Importance of the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy to achieve the objectives of the European Green Deal

The Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union (CAP) is one of the most important policies, representing a partnership between agriculture and society. It aims to support farmers,  improve agricultural productivity,  ensure constant food supply,  provide farmers with adequate income,  maintain the rural  landscape in the EU, and  help cope with climate change. It was launched back in  1962 and designed as one of the first common politics of the European Union. The first draft of the new CAP reform was introduced by the European Commission on June 1st, 2018 but, due to the CAP’s direct dependence on the new multi-annual financial framework, no further negotiations were launched until July 2020 when the EU leaders at the European Council agreed on a new 2021-2027 budget.

A fact we must be aware of is  the agricultural reform is that of an extremely complex policy, consuming a large part of the EU budget, as it directly concerns a large portion of the population but also indirectly every individual EU citizen. The complexity in which the reform frames itself reflects also in the fact that we had to discuss three legislative resolutions in the European Parliament: the first  was regarding the rules on support for strategic plans prepared by state members; the second, about financing, management, and monitoring the CAP; the third, about establishing a common organization of the agricultural products markets. At the beginning of the debate, we saw numerous criticisms from NGOs and environmental activists, who  accused the commission’s proposal of obsolescence, non-compliance with the objectives of the European Green Deal (EGD), and even that adopting such a kind of reform is a ‘kiss of death’ to our common fight against climate change. It is true that the first proposal, which was presented in 2018, was not ambitious enough in terms of worrying about the environment and tackling climate change, we, the MEPs also acknowledged that. So, a massive of 1941 amendments were collectively filed with the existing resolutions. I supported a number of amendments that would make the CAP more in line with the EGD and set higher targets for reducing pesticide use and protecting biodiversity. Unfortunately, not all have been accepted, but I believe that this reform brings the greatest paradigmatic change since the introduction of the environmental dimension into the farm subsidy scheme.

Despite numerous complaints and lobbying pressures by some environmental activists, all three legislative resolutions were adopted by a large majority at this year’s second European Parliament plenary session, in October. The compromise texts cover a number of amendments, but I will mention just the most important ones. So-called eco-schemes will be introduced. These are mechanisms to encourage more environmentally friendly agricultural practices; as a new way of financing those farms that will focus on environmental and climate protection. Eco-schemes will receive 30% of direct funding from the first pillar of the CAP budget and will be binding on Member States, while farms will have to meet economic targets whilst increasing green spending from 30% to 35% of the rural development budget. Member States will now also have to include detailed agricultural objectives in the preparation of their national strategic plans, which will have to be in line with EU priorities. In addition, we have also agreed that the European Commission can comment and make recommendations or even introduce changes when reviewing the prepared national strategic plans, given that the prepared plans do not make sufficient efforts to harmonize the CAP with the adopted objectives of the EGD. According to the provided information the Commission is expected to continue its plans on the European Climate Law in the coming year, to which the CAP Strategic Plans will have to respond, as countries will be responsible for achieving the objectives of both important pieces of legislation and their inter-linkages. The reform also allows 15% of the funds from the first pillar to be transferred to the second pillar, as long as the funds are aimed for climate and environmental objectives. Member States will have to earmark at least 30% for rural development and a total of 40% (with all the above) to tackle climate change. The reform also includes a concern to create better conditions for young farmers and smaller farms, the aim of which is to reduce pesticide use and create better working conditions for those working in the sector.

Regarding the financing; I do regret that in the report on financing, governance, and monitoring an amendment has been adopted which introduces a hybrid model into the reform that will reduce flexibility, increase the administrative burden, will not improve supervision, and will also not penalize failure. I have advocated the adoption of a performance-based delivery model that would provide all Member States with an opportunity, within the nine key objectives, of a common set of indicators and the approval of the plans by Member States and the Commission, while ensuring the continuation of full control of all expenditure in line with the EU Financial Regulation. This would be done through performance-based reporting and monitoring to promote the actual use of ecosystems, and the achievement of the higher climate change and environmental ambitions of the Green Deal while reducing access to finance for simple land ownership.

This reform also adopts the Nutri-score system for labelling the nutritional value of products, their origin, and production method, which will now also apply to bottled wines. Whereas, the debate on the possibility of banning the use of the terminology burger, sausage, milk, yogurt, butter and cheese for plant-based products has caused quite a stir when labelling and naming food. The controversial nature of the debate stems from the view that this terminology is only intended for products of animal origin. I think it is pointless to change terms that have been used for decades. While the ban was not accepted by the majority, an amendment was adopted that will restrict the use of terms for plant-based dairy substitutes, which will have to use alternatives such as “cheese substitute” or “yogurt product”.

To achieve a level of sustainable, regenerative farming and to strive towards climate neutrality targets, the CAP reform also introduces the concept of so-called “carbon farming”, which we have already seen in the Climate Change Act. It is the use of CO2 emissions during the restoration of degraded agricultural land, the top layer of which contains around 14 billion tonnes of carbon in the EU. The use of soil carbon has a positive effect on the recovery of organic matter in arable soils by increasing the soil’s bio-fertility, which means that crops grown on such soils can act as “sinks” for CO2, removing around 51 billion tonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere each year and storing it in the topsoil. If successful, it will have a significant impact on environmental protection, but many scientists still believe that reducing livestock farming, which accounts for 10% of all emissions in Europe, will be key to reducing CO2 emissions in the future.

I would have liked to see the adopted agricultural reform to be more ambitious in terms of environmental protection, and the drive to achieve the Green Deal objectives, but the reform does include targets that will help achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. It should also be considered that the adoption of legislative resolutions by Parliament does not mean that the procedure is complete or that the text is final. According to many experts’estimations we are only half way there. The legislative resolutions texts are merely the starting points of the European Parliament for trialogues – further negotiations with the representatives of the European Commission and the Council, where they will have to adopt a new, final text by consensus. Negotiations are a protracted process, and the last CAP reform involved 56 meetings over 18 months. According to senior diplomats, the first negotiations are expected to start this time as early as the end of November.

Although there is no legislative guarantee in the CAP reform to align policies with the adopted EGD objectives and the Biodiversity Strategy, they are not mutually exclusive but go hand in hand. Agricultural activity is directly dependent on environmental protection, biodiversity conservation, and access to water. The fact is, if we do not ensure quality conditions for pollinators, reduce the use of pesticides, and reduce emissions we will reach a point where farming will no longer be possible, the CAP will be irrelevant, and we will be left without vital food production. I am confident that by realizing these facts we will take a step in the right direction – not only EU policy but also all farmers, business people, and citizens, each in their capacity to reduce the negative impact on the environment because taking care of the environment means fighting for a better tomorrow.

Foto: Shutterstock

/0 Comments/by

Digital Services Act – A step toward a safe online environment for everyone

The digital legislation that we are preparing inside  European Institutions is necessarily complex and cannot be explained in only two minutes, so I would like to offer you a more extensive and detailed background on the subject.

Over the last few decades, we have been overwhelmed with the prodigious technological progress on the internet that has  influenced our way of living (how we access information, how we communicate and interact with each other, etc.). The line between real-world and virtual reality has been blurred, and the current health crisis has only accelerated the digital transformation. Every technological revolution brings new possibilities and thus has a significant impact on the structure of society. Gutenberg’s printing press helped create a wider literate reading public and contributed to society’s growth of culture and literacy. Radio offered an instant information transition directly to citizens, although it was also abused as Goebbels’ propaganda tool, just as Berlusconi’s ownership of the television network made it possible to change the Italian political landscape.

Every technological revolution has not only brought advantages but is persistently challenged with restraining potential exploitation by various lobbies, and with the implementation of regulations for each new technological progress into our system.  Not so rarely in our history have  governing parties usurped the propaganda tools to systematically spread false news. Yet the situation here and now is becoming far more bizarre and extremely alarming as the “tools” become remarkably more efficient, while the regulations – or better said the democratic control – evidently cannot keep up with the technological progress of private internet companies. Some technology giants control a large part of our lives and directly threaten the democracy of our societies, which in a way is a paradox, as these networks have enabled a plurality of opinions, the possibility of public expression, and for  politicians to directly inform citizens.

Cases like the interference in the last US presidential election, the referendum vote on Britain’s exit from the European Union, the organized spread of false news, and the undermining of trust in the European Union by state actors such as China or Russia must not be forgotten. In the most extreme case of interference, the incitement to violence led to ethnic cleansing in Myanmar, where the military used social media to spread their messages. And also a more recent incident in Ethiopia, where false news and hate speech spread after a musician’s death, leading to violence in which at least 160 people lost their lives. The spread of a message also led to the recent assassination of French teacher Samuel Paty. One of his students’ father published his disapproval of the teacher’s lesson on freedom of speech, which was seen and spread by Islamist extremists culminating in one of them beheading him.

What do all these tragedies have in common? Hatred spread throughout social media. Sadly, these publicised horrific cases are merely extreme forms of consequences. In my opinion, the whole concept of the sole nature of social media or rather the implementation of the “business model” to track users, analysing our data and selling our “personalities” to the highest bidder is completely misguided. The internet has become a global control machine managed by the abuse of personal data on an industrial level and is being propelled by constantly updated advanced algorithms that offer a targeted audience to the advertiser. One very concerning result of this is that the algorithm itself systematically offers fake news, conspiracy theories, or incitement to hatred to those who are more susceptible to it, and mostly abuse the user’s fears or self-image to sell products or services. Needless to say, fake news or disruptive far-right populism is spreading several times faster than verified media information. The key element of this is that every individual is presented with a customized world according to his online interests. Meanwhile, popularisation is spreading, distrust in the profession and independent institutions is increasing, and information manipulation with enormous consequences in the “real world” is present at every turn.

This week, the European Parliament accepted three Digital Services Act reports that address the issues at hand. The European Commission will prepare a legislative proposal in early December, based on our starting points. The main highlights of the reports include requirements for algorithm transparency, labelling of (political) advertising, labelling of misleading and false information, identification of advertisers, and rules for moderating and removing controversial content. Before the European elections, online platforms voluntarily entered into an agreement with the EU for self-regulation under the EU Code of Conduct on Disinformation. Additionally, they are gradually adjusting to the demands and the appeals of legislators and public debates on the subject of more rapid elimination of illegal content. They are adapting their algorithms with the intent to reduce the swift spread of hate speech and false information, and to mark controversial information, harmful conspiracy theories and harmful information, such as QAnon, Holocaust deniers or harmful information to public health. Removal of such is also performed, even if in the past they constantly avoided responsibility and have hidden behind freedom of speech.

But what stays online and what doesn’t, should not be solely in the hands of private corporations, so in the DSA we suggest transparent rules for online content moderation and demand an appeal mechanism option for users and individuals to assert control over the algorithms. The removal of legal content by private corporations in a censor role is inadmissible. It was often the case that social platforms successfully removed the content of ISIS Propaganda in Syria, but due to the imperfections in algorithms, the evidence for crimes against humanity was also erased and the investigators could no longer access them. It is more than difficult to find the right balance between fundamental human freedoms, such as freedom of speech, freedom of reporting, and the right to privacy on the one hand, and protecting people from hate speech, misinformation, and manipulation on the other. And the fact remains that private corporations cannot make decisions on this whilst holding the monopoly over all our data. For the time being, they are carefully keeping the data to themselves for  a market monopoly (which is also controversial), but we do not know how authoritarian governments could abuse it for their own interests if they had to disclose user identities to governing structures – and what this would mean for freedom on the Internet. This (more and more increasingly dominant) monopoly over public space must be returned to the people, and they must regain control over their data , have the option of anonymity, and must demand transparency over the individual presentations of the world and the various actors’ attempts of manipulations of an individual.

The DSA is a step in the right direction and is followed by the addition of the Digital Market Act, which will provide the tools to break the market monopoly of some dominating corporations and allow other smaller and medium-sized companies to grow. In other words: to ensure equal opportunities and conditions for competitiveness. Into the bargain, the intent is also to ensure researchers and public institutions access to, and use of, the anonymized data for the public good. Unfortunately, the current structure of the savage online capitalism itself, which prays over our weaknesses and ensures manipulation, stays firm. The same goes for the motives of various actors, including countries straining for geopolitical influence, the private sector for material benefits, and political parties who exploit people’s fear, anger, or disappointment for their benefit – with no moral reservations -by intentionally inciting hatred through national division and imaginary battles with the ghosts from the past. Possible is also the fair taxation of digital giants and the introduction of the digital tax, for which we are waiting on an agreement at the OECD level, although the US is doing everything in its power to ensure that no agreement is reached. Some European countries have already tried to introduce a tax on a national level until they were forced to yield under pressure. Loans for “non-refundable means” borrowed by the EU from member states will have to be paid back, whereas the digital tax would not be a direct burden to EU citizens. There is also the agreement between digital giants and publishing media to invest part of their profits into the quality media content that is regularly published on their platforms. France and Germany are coming close to an agreement, but it would be necessary to introduce statutory stipulations suitable EU-wide.

For too long we have merely observed alarming trends and acted far too late. The current situation will become more and more unbearable in the long term, but we must ask ourselves for what reasons do people tend to reach for simple explanations for their poor living conditions like poverty, rising inequality, abuse of power, and exclusion from society.

Maybe some ideas might seem too utopian or naive. But in the history of humankind, many who have pushed the limits were labelled as naive. In my opinion, the only way is to do everything we can (emphasis on doing and not just talking about it) to create a safe online environment for all  people, and to build and preserve democratic boundaries for those holding too much power.

Irena Joveva

/0 Comments/by

“LABOUR MARKET CHALLENGES: What has COVID-19 brought us, and what are the demographic changes bringing us?”

MEP Irena Joveva organized a round table on the labour market challenges affected by COVID-19 and demographic changes. Her interlocutors were Jana Javornik, PhD, Associate Professor at the University of Leeds, researcher and former Director-General of Higher Education, the Republic of Slovenia at the Ministry of Education, Science, and Sport, Government of Slovenia; Ksenija Klampfer, M.A., former Minister of Labour, Family, Social Affairs, and Equal Opportunities; Jure Knez, PhD, President of the Slovenian Entrepreneurs’ Club, and co-founder and Technical Director of Dewesoft; Marjan Šarec, President of the LMŠ.

Facing the pandemic has led to rising unemployment in the European Union. MEP Joveva and her colleagues were looking for answers on how to increase the value per employee and the resilience of the workforce to possible new turbulences and digital and green industrial revolutions in the process of economic recovery.

Marjan Šarec pointed out that Slovenia is still heavily involved in the field of services and as an exporter in the automotive industry. He also added: “It will be important to see where Slovenia finds itself in the challenges of green nature and how it will cope with this transformation. On issues that are not ideological, an agenda should be set several mandates in advance, at least twelve years, and should also be followed through.”

The labour market has responded quickly to the pandemic. Still, the situation has also exposed the full extent of the problems of precarious employment situations and further demonstrated how dangerous it is, as it can quickly plunge individuals and their families into social hardship. They agreed that subsidizing part-time work and reducing waiting times are measures that have already proved their worth during the recession but that active employment and lifelong learning policies are even more important.

“The economy is moving from a knowledge economy to an economy of skills. We are entering a time when a degree will no longer be enough. Technological development is brutal, and if a worker cannot keep up with it, it will be difficult to keep a job,” Ksenija Klampfer stressed, and was also critical of employers: “It is shocking that employers in Slovenia invest very little in staff training, and no longer train people over the age of 43 at all.”

Jure Knez explained that Dewesoft continues to train its engineering staff for three to five years, so if employees left, it would be costly for them.

Wage inequality is also becoming more and more exposed, as the pandemic has affected those parts of the economy that employ a high percentage of women: trade, hospitality, tourism, services. Jana Javornik also sees the problem in the general climate in Slovenia, which is becoming very hostile to gender equality and equality in general. “At the same time, the epidemic raises, very radically, the question of care work — which algorithms cannot regulate, but has actually to be done by someone. So there is still a need for female labour in particular, and politics must ensure that working conditions in this sector improve,” she added.

Irena Joveva also pointed to demographic change: ‘The old continent is ageing. Europeans are expected to account for only 4% of the world’s population by 2070. On the European Parliament’s Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL), where I am a substitute member, we are advocating the upskilling and retraining of older and vulnerable groups so that they can adapt to the labour market.”

Jana Javornik’s opinion is that the ageing population can be a challenge of its own, with young people bringing the agility and older people bringing knowledge and wisdom, but we just need to adapt our ways of working. The so-called ageism in our society is not only directed against the old, but also the young. The agility of the employment and retirement system is crucial, but unfortunately, it is still very rigid in Slovenia.

As Knez pointed out, we have made it harder for the elderly to be employable themselves by not offering older workers the chance to stay happy. As an example of adaptation, he cited the four-day working week he allows one of his top (senior) engineers.

“The Employment Service is becoming a bridge between employment and waiting for retirement,” added Ms Klampfer, who sees trust between worker and employer as the holy grail of current HR policy: “We need to adapt the ergonomics of workplaces, eliminate stereotypes against older people, improve workplace attitudes, and introduce an HR policy that provides training for older people,” she summarized.

In the part of the conference devoted to finding solutions for increasing added value, Joveva mentioned the paradoxical fact that the Jožef Štefan Institute has an international centre for artificial intelligence, recognized by UNESCO, while the country as a whole is lagging behind the European average in digital development. Jana Javornik sees brain drain as having positive consequences, as workers acquire additional competencies abroad, but the brain has to circulate: “For this to happen, we need to be an immigrant-friendly society, which Slovenia is not, and we do need to have a labour market that is properly adapted for the highly skilled segment.” Knez also sees more added value in linking the economy with the education system: “We can anticipate and adapt to trends and developments five to seven years in advance. These are specific skills that cannot be acquired only in universities.” Finally, Jana Javornik pointed out another stereotype: “The modern labour market employs at least four generations, and it is time to stop talking about digital illiteracy in Slovenia. We need to be aware that the internet was invented by the boomer generation, who is now finishing their careers and working life.”

 

/0 Comments/by

“RULE OF LAW MECHANISM, MEDIA AND SITUATION IN SLOVENIA: RoLLER COASTERS INSTEAD OF ROLE MODELS”

On Thursday, April 15, 2021, MEP Irena Joveva hosted a round table on the topic “Rule of Law mechanism, media and situation in Slovenia: RoLLER COASTERS INSTEAD OF ROLE MODELS”.

The discussion was divided into two parts. In the first part, the interlocutors of MEP Irena Joveva were; the Vice-President of the European Commission and Commissioner for Values and Transparency, Vera Jourova, the Slovak MEP Michal Šimečka, and the Professor of European Law, Alberto Alemanno. They discussed the broader picture of Europe, sought answers to issues concerning the rule of law mechanism, and, on this basis, discussed violating countries and the alarming situation in the media. The debaters of the second part were; the president of LMŠ (List of Marjan Šarec) and former prime minister of Slovenia Marjan Šarec, deputy director of the International Press Institute (IPI) Scott Griffen, professor of journalism and media policies Marko Milosavljević, and lawyer and media law specialist Jasna Zakonjšek. Together with Irena Joveva they searched for and replayed scenarios of possible solutions regarding the current situation in Slovenia.

European Commissioner Vera Jourova expressed concern about the decline of fundamental European values. She sees the mechanism of the rule of law as a tool that will fulfil its task. She explained that the Commission was speeding up the preparation of guidelines for the application of the discussed mechanism, as they did not want the possible initiation of the mechanism to to fail to withstand the judgement of the European Court of Justice. The concept of the state governed by the rule of law is not limited to the functioning of the jurisdiction but covers broader aspects of a democratic society, such as the fight against corruption, the protection of human rights, and the freedom and pluralism of the media. “The report on the rule of law in Slovenia covers several positive aspects, such as a good anti-corruption system. However, the Commission expressed concern about the freedom of the media, some attacks on journalists, and especially the events related to the financing of the Slovenian Press Agency (STA).” she summed up the situation in Slovenia, adding that they were monitoring the pressure on the media exercised by the capital, as well as by politics, and added the following: “All member states must recognize the role of the media as one of the pillars of democracy. Instead of making their work difficult, they should be provided with better working conditions.” She commented on the recent offensive tweets of the Slovenian Prime Minister, Janez Janša, who had labelled her as a supporter of the red star as follows: “I am always pleased to respond to an invitation to discussions where opinions meet, and where I can explain the work of the Commission. Values will not defend themselves, and it is our job to do so. I am always prepared to talk and cooperate, with all cards on the table, even when I am invited by someone else.”

Among other things, MEP Irena Joveva pointed out it is important to mention that the rule of law mechanism is not intended against certain countries, but is applied to all based on objective criteria. However, it is also true that in some member states there are several breaches of the rule of law: “The question of the rule of law is neither a national policy nor an ideology.”

MEP Michal Šimečka emphasized that the situation in the field was getting worse: “Those who do not want the rule of law work much faster than we who are trying to stop them with our tools. The precautionary approach is simply not appropriate. If we allow undemocratic regimes to be established in one or more member states, it will be the beginning of the end for the EU. For the EU to work, we must have the same policies and the trust in the notion that all member states are democracies.” He added that it is difficult to protect the freedom of the media if the rule of law mechanism cannot be used: “It is very important whether a national media is independent, whether the government is discriminating against minorities or not, whether it tolerates hate speech or not. We can see that in Poland and Hungary going hand in hand. The President of the European Commission said that the Commission is looking for ways to protect the media; so I am waiting for that to happen, and, finally also for financial support for independent media at all levels. The best thing we can do for journalism is to buy a good local newspaper.”

Professor Alberto Alemanno was also harsh on the European Commission, saying he was overly cautious about losing the case before the European Court of Justice: “The Commission does not use all its powers to enforce the rule of law. I see the problem in the fact that the Commission does not have sufficient political support, but at the same time, it could rely on civil society and non-governmental organizations. Stakeholders in the economy, who could become much more political, could also play their part.”

“Rule of law is the basic postulate of the European Union, and Slovenia has never had any problems with that. Until the current government,” said the president of the LMŠ, Marjan Šarec. “I have been attacked since I joined the presidential company, and for journalists, such an attitude towards them is a shock. The purpose of this shock is to scare them away and get them to quit. Exhaustion of the Slovenian Press Agency is like the siege of a city that you exhaust and starve until it subsides. Journalists should not show fear. There is not that much extremism, but it is loud. We have to act self-protectively and get involved when there are elections.”

“It is hard to say that Slovenia is a copy of Hungary, but we see the same ways in which it tries to discredit journalists, also by politics. They are insulted as being traitors, enemies of national values, and the big problem is that people will start looking at them as targets,” said IPI spokesperson Scott Griffen. As public institutions are closely tied to public funding, it is easier for governments to undermine them; that is why it is important to fight for the existence of independent public media and agencies. Journalists are under constant attacks from leading political positions, which is affecting their work. Therefore, an atmosphere of a coalition of democratic institutions in a democratic society needs to be established, he stated.

Lawyer Jasna Zakonjšek explained that harsh criticism was allowed regarding the journalists’ work, however, the moment criticism shifts to the private sphere, this is no longer something that journalists should suffer. The current government is far from being the only government to which journalists are in the way. Because of the nature of their work, they are a thorn in the side of each government as they also address unpleasant issues. However, due to social media and direct access to the electoral base, the intensity of the attacks has increased significantly. She emphasized that democracy does not stand and fall only on free journalism, but also on the judicial system and the trust in it. Attention must be paid to all institutions of democracy.

In the discussion, Professor Marko Milosavljević paid a lot of attention to the current prime minister’s vulgar and harmful communication to the public, which is not surprising. However, he pointed out the tendencies of media subordination: “The first step is public television and the Slovenian Press Agency, followed by agreements with private media owners – either to intimidate them, to silence them or to reduce their level of criticism.” In his words, the entire Slovenian critical and democratic public should step up consistently and show its democratic position. “We live in the EU, we live in a democracy, and the days of autocrats are over. This requires determination and the absence of fear. The success of aggressive people is threatened when we are not afraid of them.”

/0 Comments/by

Our mutual dependency is increasing so we should solve global problems together

Today, 14 April, 2021, Irena Joveva MEP participated in a virtual conference on renewing relations and the future between Africa and Europe, organised by the Renew Europe political group. She discussed the creation of post-pandemic health synergies. The COVID-19 pandemic has once again demonstrated the need for continued and high-quality cooperation between the European Union and Africa within the health sector. The discussion focused on the ongoing management of the pandemic, lessons learned, and future cooperation between the EU and Africa.

MEP Joveva stressed the importance of vaccination, which is the only way to contain a pandemic, but unfortunately, the slow supply of vaccines is a major obstacle and Africa is in a particularly bad position. This situation is increasing inequalities between countries and economies. Africa also has problems producing its own vaccines – there are still many challenges in trying to establish a sustainable vaccine industry in Africa. “Vaccine production is complex, requires large financial investments, and a long-term vision. The focus should be on issues such as innovative financing to ensure quality. According to the World Health Organisation, hundreds of thousands of people on the African continent have died from infectious diseases such as yellow fever, Ebola, cholera, tuberculosis, and malaria. There is, therefore, a clear need to strengthen African health systems and to build national and community health systems that are accessible, sustainable, resilient, and of high quality,” she added.

She also pointed out that the European Union was one of the largest donors of the Covid-19 vaccine and that majority of the vaccines and protective equipment for Africa comes from Europe. The MEP also expressed her concern about whether the Serum Institute of India would deliver the promised doses of vaccine to Africa, as India might prioritize the use of these doses for its own population. It is ‘vaccine nationalism’ or protectionism that presents a serious threat of overcoming the crisis.

“A few weeks ago, there was a lot of insinuation in the press that the European Union was also advocating such a position, which is not true. Unlike some other parts of the developed world, the EU is still one of the largest exporters of vaccines and is committed to the Covax scheme. The EU is also a strong advocate for open trade and global efforts,” said Joveva, listing some of her successful humanitarian projects. “Health is at the heart of the new EU-Africa strategy.”

She also spoke about challenges in other areas, such as combating climate change, preserving biodiversity, and the potential of green growth. Europe’s development objectives in Africa must be accompanied by engagement and dialogue, and a genuine partnership. Joveva believes that the EU could do much more in partnership with Africa. The exchange of good practices and information should be stepped up and African countries should be given the conditions to fully exploit their potential. “Not only because it’s the right thing to do, but also because it helps us all. We are increasingly dependent on each other, and we should tackle global problems together. Because once the health crisis is over, the more complex and longer-term crisis of global warming will have to be tackled,” she concluded.

The full second part of the event can be found here.

/0 Comments/by

Irena Joveva and Klemen Grošelj’s response to the allegations regarding the so-called non-paper on the Western Balkans

Statement by Renew Europe/LMŠ MEPs, Irena Joveva and Klemn Grošelj on the so-called non-paper on the Western Balkans.

“As part of its Presidency of the EU Council, Slovenia should first and foremost advocate for the further integration of Western Balkan countries into the EU, playing the role of a sincere mediator, rather than cheering for concrete, partial solutions that are detrimental to the region and Slovenia itself. This should also be done in accordance with European values, principles, treaties and agreements, and above all, without any Euroscepticism or – even worse – any desire to change the borders between the countries in the region. But Janez Janša’s destructive policy seems to be taking us in a completely different direction in foreign relations.

Unfortunately, we do not know what the current government is advocating in diplomatic circles towards the region, but it is true that there has been talk in these circles for some time about a change in Slovenia’s policy towards the Western Balkans. In any case, it should be clear to all that changing the borders between the countries in the region, or changing the territorial arrangement in BiH, would lead only to bloodshed. In the future, we want a BiH that is not based on the ideology of ethnic divisions, but on the European values of transcending ethnic divisions and sectarianism. Yet, let us reiterate that the desire to redraw borders along ethnic lines is unjustified and contrary to European values, which advocate strengthening regional cooperation by ensuring equal rights for all citizens of the Western Balkans, regardless of where they live. Therefore, any ideas in this regard are unacceptable, unjustified, and also harmful to Slovenia and its vital interests in the region, and in Europe. Peace and stability in the Western Balkans are of strategic importance for Slovenia, both in terms of security and economic development.“

/0 Comments/by

A conversation with students of the Novo mesto Grammar School: “You are the future of a better Europe.”

On Tuesday, 6th April 2021, as part of the European Parliament Ambassador Schools project, students from the Novo mesto Grammar School organized a Zoom talk with MEP Irena Joveva. The main focus was on how the EU is managing the current challenges.

At the beginning, MEP Joveva gave them an overview of her regular working hours in Brussels (before and during the pandemic) and technology used in remote work during the pandemic. The students were particularly interested in the MEP’s life so far, from her multicultural upbringing and first job to her career in journalism and her decision to become active in politics.

During the one-hour debate, the most topical issues of vaccines and vaccination, the lack of communication, and the phenomenon of infodemic could not be overlooked. Joveva said that the European Union’s vaccine strategy was good and quite ambitious, but it only looks good on paper. Unfortunately, its implementation in practice is far from optimal, starting with the lack of sincere communication — both from the profession and, in particular, from politicians — with citizens. The different information on vaccines: the number of vaccines supplied; changes in national vaccination strategies; age limits; side effects – which changed from day to day – caused discomfort and mistrust.

“For citizens to have confidence in vaccines and the vaccination process, there needs to be honest two-way communication, and unfortunately, there is not; not only in Slovenia but also at the European level. Since decision-makers were mostly unable to clearly explain what was happening, people started to believe all kinds of misinformation and conspiracy theories circulating on social networks. That is why we in the European Parliament are going the extra mile for transparent information about current events to restore confidence in vaccination because it is our only lifeline for a return to, so to speak, a normal life.”

The students then turned the discussion on the pandemic toward digitalization and asked the MEP to comment on the rapid shift towards distance education and the use of technology used at work. Joveva admitted that she had quite a few problems with different apps, even though she is a member of the younger generation.

“Technology is advancing so fast that it can be challenging to keep up. The sudden increase in the use of technology in work and education has highlighted the fact that in many countries, we still have inadequate digital conditions in the 21st century — from a lack of access to computers or the internet to a lack of digital competencies. Since the pandemic, the European Parliament has adopted several resolutions on tackling the inequalities identified and on the future development of European education systems in the context of Covid-19. Gaps in digital education need to be bridged, as we in the EU were already aware before the pandemic. The Commission has been working with the profession to reform education at the EU level. The result of this collaboration is the Digital Education Action Plan, which will have a very significant impact on the functioning of established education systems in the future, in line with the digitization of the EU,” explained Joveva. She then continued that the coronavirus epidemic has indeed led to a significant leap in transferring learning activities to online tools. “In the future, it will be crucial to continue to raise young people’s awareness about the safe use of the internet. We have addressed this in the Digital Services Act, which significantly improves mechanisms for removing illegal content, protecting users’ fundamental rights online, flagging misleading and false information, and making algorithms transparent.”

At the end, Joveva asked the students to be curious, to ask questions, and, above all, to be actively involved in politics even after the Ambassador School project is over. “After all, you are the future of a better Europe for us all!” Two students summarized their impressions of the roundtable: “The conversation with Irena Joveva was very informative and interesting. We covered a wide range of topics, from the workings of the European Parliament, technology and the current situation, to the problems caused by the epidemic. I was very impressed by her sincerity and attitude towards us students.” (Anteja Ratajec)

“A conversation with Irena Joveva opened the door to the European Parliament. She briefed us on the work of the EP as well as on her work. During the discussion, we touched on some topical issues such as the fight to contain the epidemic, the work of MEPs “from home”, the position of women versus men in politics, and media freedom. She also openly presented her views on these topics and encouraged us to be curious, interested, and critical.” (Ajda – Lea Jakše)

 

/0 Comments/by

Open discussion with students of Nova Gorica Grammar School: use your head and stay active

On Tuesday, 6th April, 2021, students of the Nova Gorica Grammar School, who participate in the EPAS programme, organized an online conversation “OPENLY with Irena Joveva”. The discussion was about the current situation in the EU relating to the pandemic, climate change, and other pressing issues.

In the opening remarks, everyone pointed out that the pandemic has changed priorities, while also highlighting some of the EU’s shortcomings. For more than a year now, the situation has brought severe economic and social hardships that will further stratify society. The effects of the pandemic on the labour market show striking inequalities between jobs. The students were interested in whether the stratification of both Slovenian and European societies will increase or whether this will be an opportunity for reform and solidarity. MEP Joveva expressed concern that the former would happen.

Certain sectors have been closed for too long. Certain micro and small enterprises are subject to revenue losses. In the long term, this means an erosion of jobs and entrepreneurial capital. A strong focus on tackling inequalities is needed, and in the EU many measures have been taken in the last year to mitigate the effects of Covid-19. The Recovery and Resilience Fund, for example, is truly historic and probably by far the most important in this context.

She made it clear that this is not just a sign of solidarity and unity between the Member States because this fund is changing the very fabric of the Union. “Those countries that make better use of these opportunities and resources by preparing good national plans will be in a much better position. The ‘fiscal stimulus’ as we have it now is the biggest and most important for the next decade, and is precisely designed to prevent greater social disparities from arising.”

At the students’ request, Joveva also provided some information on the environment. “Today, in many places — also thanks to Covid-19 — we are indeed breathing fresher and cleaner air, but unfortunately, at least in my opinion, this will not be maintained once the pandemic is over. History shows that a sudden drop in emissions has always had a short-term impact and has only increased back to the same level or even higher as the economy recovers.” However, she also expressed  hope that the “corona crisis” would provide a further boost towards a  green, sustainable economy. The Commission has made the environment a key priority since taking office and presented a Green Deal to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050. “Also to continue achieving the goals of this agreement, we have clearly defined in the Recovery and Reconstruction Fund that 37% of the national plan must be dedicated to climate. This is a safeguard that countries will simply have to respect.”

The MEP concluded her talk with a call to young people to be honest, curious, and active: Ask questions! And, unlike too many Slovenian politicians, use cultural dialogue. Use your head and stay true to yourself.

/0 Comments/by