Background

The EU legal framework does not provide EU-wide legal protection for the families of same-sex partners. There are still EU Member States where registering same-sex partnerships is not possible. (1.)

The lack of tolerance and legal protection of people and families due to their sexual orientation runs contrary to EU values. It also carries high human and economic costs for the EU. Such policies lead to involuntary migration: LGBTIQ people and same-sex couples leave to form families in countries where their families are legally protected.

To ensure the equality of EU citizens, the EU could create a legally binding arrangement of automatic mutual recognition of partnerships and marriages of (rainbow) families within the EU.

For

Implementing this fundamental right throughout the EU will promote feelings of fairness, dignity, and equality among EU citizens. It will provide better opportunities for a wider range of EU citizens.

Against

There are diverse arguments against the recognition of the families of same-sex partners. For example, the Catholic Church maintains the view that marriage is exclusively a union between a man and a woman. (2.)

References

1. https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/family/couple/registered-partners/index_en.htm
2. Pope Francis responds to dubia submitted by five cardinals, https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2023-10/pope-francis-responds-to-dubia-of-five-cardinals.html

Background

An increasing number of European citizens hold dual citizenship in two EU Member States. Due to the growing geopolitical strain and Russia's unjustified war in Ukraine, some European countries are reintroducing or activating military service for their citizens. The rules of military service vary from country to country. Holders of dual EU citizenship may be subject to military service in two different EU Member States.

For

This could allow European citizens holding dual citizenship to choose to fulfil the military service requirements in one EU Member State. By doing so, they can contribute to ensuring the Union’s defence capabilities while devoting the rest of their time and efforts to strengthening Europe’s economy, innovation capacities, and civic resilience, just like other EU citizens.

Against

It can also be argued that dual citizenship entails double privilege and hence warrants requiring a commensurate commitment to civic duties imposed by both countries.

Background

All EU Member States are part of the Bologna Process, which seeks to bring more coherence to higher education systems across Europe. However, graduates of higher education institutions still face lengthy recognition procedures for their qualifications and have to pay related costs. This also causes uncertainty as to whether their qualification will be valid in another EU Member State where they wish to work or continue their studies.

Since 2021, Benelux countries (Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg) and the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania) have agreed on the automatic mutual recognition of professional qualifications. (1.) This means that anyone who has earned a higher education degree covered by the Treaty in one of these countries is guaranteed that the level of their degree will be automatically recognized in the other countries. Such automatic arrangements should be extended across the EU.

For

This measure will facilitate a more competitive job market in the EU and remove cumbersome administrative procedures for individuals. Graduates – mobile Europeans – will avoid lengthy recognition procedures and related costs when working or studying in another EU Member State.

Against

A uniform standard of higher education has not yet been achieved in the EU. Although all EU Member States are part of the Bologna Process, the award of academic degrees is a national prerogative and there are traditional differences that have not been overcome.

References

1. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/42/the-mutual-recognition-of-diplomas#:~:text=The%20Benelux%20(Belgium%2C%20Netherlands%20and,diplomas%20on%2027%20September%202021.

Background

The above question is about whether the EU should propose free movement and ordinary-procedure legislation (with Article 21(2) TFEU as the main legal basis) requiring all Member States to recognise same-sex spouses and registered partners from another Member State. (1.)

'Rainbow families' – same-sex couples with or without children – still face many obstacles while exercising their free movement rights in the EU. (2.) Some Member States fail to recognise same-sex couples (whether married, registered, or unregistered), who have come to their territory from another Member State as couples. In many cases, when crossing the border between EU Member States, the couple ceases to be legally a couple, becoming instead two unrelated individuals. Moreover, their child(ren) goes from having two legal parents to only one or no legal parent at all. (3.)

For

Apart from the emotional significance of the continued recognition of legal relationships, it is important from a practical and legal perspective. This is the only way that persons can have legal obligations towards each other and can claim rights arising from these obligations. (3.) Implementing this fundamental right throughout the EU will promote feelings of fairness, dignity, and equality among EU citizens. 

Against

As same-sex partners and their marriage are still a sensitive issue, placing these regulations on individual Member States from the EU level could be used by populists to influence local politics adversely and alienate countries from the EU.

References

1. This is based on a recommendation on page 3 in this report: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/671505/IPOL_STU(2021)671505(SUM01)_EN.pdf
2. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2023)749768#:~:text=If%20you%20live%20in%20a,is%20no%20discussion%20about%20this
3. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/671505/IPOL_STU(2021)671505(SUM01)_EN.pdf

Background

Many mobile EU citizens (diaspora) assemble in civil society organisations - diaspora associations. These associations help mobile EU citizens to maintain their linguistic and cultural heritage and to strengthen their civic participation. They also facilitate cooperation with the country of citizenship or heritage of mobile EU citizens - all while they are settling in the host country and enriching its cultural diversity.

Yet the EU tends to overlook their contribution to European civic space and instead focuses on supporting civil society organisations working transnationally. This makes it difficult for diaspora associations to attract EU funding for their core tasks.

For

Tailored funding programmes for European diaspora associations would acknowledge the importance of diversity for EU integration, and strengthen these organisations and their contribution to the European civic space. This would be a particularly important support for diaspora associations that assemble expats who are not supportive of Euro-sceptic policies of governments of their country of EU nationality.

Against

-

Background

Mobile EU citizens have to exchange their driving licence if: (1.)

• their licence is lost, stolen or damaged, 
• (in some Member States:) after 2 years of residence, if they have a driving licence with an indefinite validity period,
• they commit a traffic offence in the country of residence.

At the same time, mobile EU citizens are still confronted with inconsistencies between national approaches to renewing or replacing driving licences issued in another EU country. This affects their driving rights. (2.)

To simplify the recognition of driving licences between EU Member States, the European Commission has proposed the introduction of a digital driving licence. The proposal will now be considered by the European Parliament and the Council. (2.)

For

The digital driving licence will be easier to replace, renew, or exchange since all procedures will be online. It will also be easier for citizens from non-EU countries with comparable road safety standards to exchange their driving licence for an EU one. (2.)

Against

The European Data Protection Supervisor seems to imply that there might be a risk of improper sharing of personal data if an EU-wide digital driving licence is introduced. The Supervisor has reacted to the European Commission’s proposal to introduce a digital driving licence valid throughout the EU by stressing that “access to driving licence data by public authorities should be properly defined and limited to what is strictly necessary and proportionate”. (3.)

References

1. https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/vehicles/driving-licence/driving-licence-exchange-recognition/index_en.htm#:~:text=%D0%94%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B0%20%D0%84%D0%A1%20%D0%A3%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%97%D0%BD%D1%96-,Driving%20licence%20exchange%20in%20the%20EU,of%20residence%20if%20you%20wish
2. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_1145
3. https://edps.europa.eu/system/files/2023-05/EDPS-2023-05--02_Road-Safety-and-Privacy_EN.pdf

Background

The EU provides common rules to protect EU citizens’ social security rights when moving within Europe (EU 27 + Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland). (1.) However, European citizens living outside these areas, in so-called third countries, sometimes face problems with access to healthcare. People who cannot afford private insurance may be left without care (especially elderly who have difficulties accessing private insurance).

For

The EU could improve access to healthcare for EU citizens by negotiating agreements on social security with third countries. A concerted EU approach could lead to more consistent and efficient social security processes.

Against

Social security rules and healthcare coverage for citizens living outside the EU vary across the EU countries. This makes it hard to find an EU-level agreement, and some nationalities may see their benefits reduced.

References

1. https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=849&langId=en

Background

Teleworking (1.) has become more popular since the Covid-19 pandemic. However, EU Member States have different regulations for teleworking, which can be complicated for both cross-border teleworkers and their employers. (2.) This could be addressed by introducing common simplified rules for all EU Member States about cross-border teleworking, including regulation of tax and social coverage. (3.)

For

This arrangement could make the job market in the EU more flexible. Simplified teleworking rules could ease access to high-skilled employees and increase the international competitiveness of European companies. (4.) Empirical evidence also shows that increasing teleworking levels can boost staff productivity within firms. Improved job matching is also expected to contribute to productivity as, with distance between workers and firms becoming a less binding factor, employers can choose out of a larger pool of employees. (5.)

The European Economic and Social Committee recommends that a one-stop shop could help simplify cross-border teleworking. It would require the employer to report the number of days teleworkers worked in their country of residence and in the country where the employer is located for cross-border teleworkers. With this information, tax authorities would be able to assess in which country income would be taxable, and what part of the income would be taxable in each country. (6.)

Against

Insufficiently developed agreements and institutional differences between EU countries may lead to tax avoidance and other types of fraud. In the case of widespread teleworking, it may lead to decreased state income and less ability to implement the obligations of states towards their citizens.

Empirical evidence shows that productivity climbs with a larger share of staff working more days per week remotely, but drops as soon as the level of teleworking becomes excessive, especially due to negative repercussions on teamwork and creativity. (5.)

References

1. Telework | Eurofound. https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/telework
2. Telework in the EU: Regulatory frameworks and recent updates - Eurofound. https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2022/telework-in-the-eu-regulatory-frameworks-and-recent-updates
3. Taxation rules on cross-border teleworking must be updated and... https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/news-media/news/taxation-rules-cross-border-teleworking-must-be-updated-and-simplified
4. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/covid-19-makes-the-benefits-of-telework-obvious/
5. https://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/Assessing-teleworking-strategies-for-local-development-PAT.pdf
6. https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/news-media/news/taxation-rules-cross-border-teleworking-must-be-updated-and-simplified

Background

Currently, Europeans do not have a unified document that identifies them as EU citizens. A European citizen card could supplement the national ID cards of mobile EU citizens, so they can access public services to which they are entitled where and when they want. Currently, EU Member States may, on a voluntary basis, recognise national electronic identification schemes in their Member States. Yet, there is no requirement for Member States to develop a national electronic identification and to make it interoperable with those in other Member States. This has led to discrepancies between countries. The new European Commission proposal for a Regulation on digital identity aims at addressing these shortcomings.

For

A European citizen card can gradually evolve into a personalised key for access to diverse services throughout the EU, such as healthcare, social security, voting, banking services, and employment formalities. The existence of such a card could simplify a wide array of administrative functions, such as the right of access to emergency health care in case of an accident (i.e., indicating your blood group) when travelling in the EU, proof of personal and family status to facilitate the process of claiming permanent residence in another EU Member State, a European-wide social security number to facilitate the rapid verification of social security rights and medical insurance, proof of professional and academic qualifications to facilitate their recognition, and easy access to the signature of European citizens’ initiatives, petitions to the European Parliament, and e-voting in European elections if/when such voting is introduced.

Against

Every mandatory personal document that is issued by authorities can be used to exert additional control over the personal liberties of a person. If such a card is developed, data protection should be a key consideration. The personal data of the cardholder should be protected under all circumstances, including while being issued or used. Moreover, interoperability is an equally important matter, in particular, if the European ID card is adopted as an addition to national ID cards, in which case it would need to be made interoperable with the electronic identification schemes of Member States where these are used. (2.)

References

1. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/electronic-identification
2. European Parliament (2016). The Legal and Political Context for Setting Up a European Identity Document. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/556957/IPOL_STU(2016)556957_EN.pdf

Background

In 2022, the European Parliament (EP) has proposed to elect Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) through transnational electoral lists. (1.) Out of 705 MEPs, 28 would be elected from the transnational lists. They would form a European constituency, with geographical balance ensured between small, medium and large countries. (2.) You would vote as usual for candidates from your own country to send to the EP, but you would also be asked to choose from a transnational list headed by the candidate for the President of the European Commission. 

Your views matter because, so far, only a few consultations with the voters have taken place on this topic!

For

EP elections are frequently criticised for focusing mainly on domestic political considerations and less so on the EU project as such. This proposed reform could be a step towards the Europeanisation of EP elections. (1.) In the long-term, this could allow voters to express their preference for a candidate for the European Commission President (now nominated by the European Council and elected by the EP). (2.) Transnational lists may also help to build the political arena, as they would oblige European political parties to present themselves to citizens with a single political programme and a joint pool of candidates. (3.)

Against 

The proposal could be perceived as complicated by ordinary people, who are used to voting in a certain way, for national candidates. The reform has not received unanimous support in the European Parliament. (4.) Transnational lists are criticised for potentially increasing the distance between voters and their representatives, as MEPs elected through transnational lists would not have a bond with a constituency, and for the difficulties surrounding the organisation of a European electoral campaign in different languages and a large territory. (5.)

References

1. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2022/729403/EPRS_BRI(2022)729403_EN.pdf
2. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2023/749776/EPRS_STU(2023)749776_EN.pdf
3. https://revdem.ceu.edu/2022/02/08/revdem-thread-transnational-lists-and-beyond-how-to-democratise-europe/
4. Parliament adopted the legislative proposal aiming at repealing and replacing the current Electoral Act of 1976 on 3 May 2022, by 323 votes in favour, 262 against, and 48 abstentions. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2023/749776/EPRS_STU(2023)749776_EN.pdf
5. European Parliament. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/679084/EPRS_STU(2021)679084_EN.pdf

Background

In the majority of EU countries, dual citizenship is allowed. Nevertheless, in several Member States, acquiring national citizenship automatically leads to the loss of the citizenship of the country of origin. (1.) This is an obstacle to naturalisation (for a foreigner to acquire citizenship) and frequently causes numerous administrative hurdles, especially for families with several nationalities.

Currently, the procedures for acquiring citizenship differ depending on where you come from, ethno-cultural connections, the type of ties you have with the country (e.g. family links)and the length of time you have been a resident. (1.) There are also differences in costs and citizenship tests.

For

The citizenship of the country of residence could give mobile citizens more rights in some Member States, such as the right to vote and run for office in national elections and could decrease bureaucratic hurdles (“red tape”).

Against

In the case of dual citizenship, you become bound by the laws of two nations. This may lead to conflicting situations in cases where legal and tax requirements in both nations differ, and individuals must comply with these double requirements (e.g. double taxation). (2.)

References

1. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2018/625116/EPRS_BRI(2018)625116_EN.pdf
2. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/031315/advantages-disadvantages-dual-citizenship.asp

Background

EU Member States are free to set their minimum voting age for European elections. The voting age in the EU varies from country to country. Austria, Belgium (currently contested), Germany and Malta set this age at 16 and Greece at 17. In the remaining Member States, the age limit is set at 18. (1.) Discussions about lowering the voting age are ongoing in various Member States. The EU can facilitate this discussion.

In May 2022, The European Parliament tabled a proposal to harmonise the age for voting at 16 across the EU (with exceptions allowed) to ensure equality and avoid discrimination. (1.)

For

Young people should have more say in politics and the perspectives of future generations should be represented in politics. 16-17 years olds participate in elections more actively than, for example, 18-24 years olds. (2.) At a younger age, voters have less attachment to certain political parties and are more sensitive to political and social trends, thus forcing politicians to notice and react to the changes in society. (3.)

Against

People at 16 years of age may not have sufficient competencies for responsible voting since they can be "more easily influenced by their environment and more prone to impulsive behaviour”. (4.)

References

1. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2023/749767/EPRS_ATA(2023)749767_EN.pdf
2. https://www.youthforum.org/topics/vote-at-16
3. Young trendsetters: How young voters fuel electoral volatility - ScienceDirect
4. https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2008/09/the-teen-brain-html

Background

The freedom of movement is a fundamental EU right. However, mobile EU citizens cannot vote in the national elections of the country where they reside, unless they first acquire the citizenship of that country. In several member states, they also lose their right to vote in national elections of their country of origin, when they have lived abroad for too long. (1.)

For

The loss of democratic participation rights due to the exercise of free movement rights is contrary to the spirit of EU citizenship. (1.) Granting mobile EU citizens the right to vote in national elections would give full meaning to European citizenship and the principle of equality for all Europeans. An EU national within the EU is not a foreigner and must not be treated as such. (1.)

Against

Some commentators assert that the right to vote should be linked to citizenship, especially in national elections. (2.) Others suggest that it is more urgent to improve the current situation regarding participation in municipal and European elections, and prudent to limit the demand for new rights for Europeans to regional elections. (1.)

References:

1. https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/22754
2. https://www.jstor.org/stable/764684

Background

EU citizens have the right to vote in European Parliament (EP) elections in their Member State of residence (even if that is not their Member State of nationality). (1.) Yet, many barriers to exercising this right still exist. These include a lack of accessible information, burdensome registration processes, and deregistration in the Member State of origin. (2.)

For

Online voting could facilitate the participation of mobile EU citizens in EP elections. (3.) Citizens could vote directly from home instead of going to a polling station. They could easily get information in their own language, instead of having to navigate through registration procedures and voting information at the polling station in a foreign language. Online voting for mobile EU citizens has already been tested in practice: France allows expats as the only group of the electorate to vote online. (4.)

Against

Academic studies show that the introduction of online voting does not guarantee an increased turnout. In one of the few countries where online voting is a reality - Estonia - the turnout has not grown. (5.) E-voting also requires a lot of resources committed to the system's reliability, in particular, to secure the vote and to verify identification. (6.)

References:

1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=celex:31993L0109
2. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2023/739331/EPRS_ATA(2023)739331_EN.pdf
3. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpos.2023.982558/full
4. https://www.france24.com/en/france/20220527-mapped-expats-kick-off-french-legislative-elections-with-online-voting
5. https://skytte.ut.ee/sites/default/files/2023-02/E_voting_in_Estonia_Solvak_Vassil_2016.pdf
6. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/five-takeaways-from-the-estonian-elections-where-security-trumped-inflation-by-a-landslide/