On Wednesday the 27th June 2018, The Red House debated the effectiveness of the European Union’s funding schemes, asking whether it makes sense to relate the allocation of funds to the extent to which a member state adheres to European values.
Will the European Commission’s proposal to restrict access to funds for countries that do not respect the rule of law achieve its objectives? Should there be a special fund to finance projects which support European values, as proposed by the European Parliament? Or, to put it more concisely – can European money create European values?
In recent years, we have repeatedly seen how European money has been used to finance anti-European policies or sponsor corruption schemes. Will the new European Parliament and European Commission proposals succeed in stopping these practices and ensuring that European funds are invested in improving the processes of European integration?
To find out more either watch the full-length Bulgarian-language video (which you can reach by clicking here) or proceed to our media section below, where you can find out how to keep an eye out for our English-language highlights video, which will be produced post-debate.
Boryana Dimitrova is a sociologist, university Lecturer & and the founder and director of one of the largest independent agencies for social and marketing research in Bulgaria, Alpha Research
Tomislav Donchev is the Deputy Prime Minister of Bulgaria and a former Minister for European Funds and Economic Policies (2014-2017).
Apostol Dyankov is the regional head of Green Economy for WWF’s Danube-Carpathian Programme. Apostol Dyankov’s work is dedicated to promoting more sustainable and transparent public and private funding structures for environmental and climate policies. He is involved in consultations with the civic sector for the development of the new EU Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for the period of 2021-2027.
Vihar Georgiev works as a lecturer in the Department of European Studies at The University of Sofia. Vihar Georgiev also writes for the Journal of European Public Policy, the Journal of Common Market Studies and European Security and is a member of the Academic Association for Contemporary European Studies (UACES) and the American Political Studies Association (APSA).
Andrey Novakov is an MEP for GERB (part of the EPP group) & the current chief negotiator of the European Parliament on the EU’s cohesion policy post-2020.
Polina Paunova works as a talk-show host for BITelevision & as a journalist at Mediapool.bg
A full-length, Bulgarian-language recording of this debate can be accessed by clicking here.
English-language video highlights of the discussion will also be produced and uploaded to this page post-debate and to keep informed of upcoming media content from this and all other TTT debates, you can follow us on our social media and/or media platforms, where we regularly publish and keep followers up-to-date about new recordings
Furthermore, you can stay informed about all recordings and live streams from The Red House by subscribing to their YouTube channel, which you can reach by clicking here.
This debate will take place in Bulgarian in The Red House’s Red Hall (see full address below).
Entry to this event is free, but we recommend reserving a seat to ensure attendance and this can be done either by calling +359 (0)2 988 81 88 / +359 (0)885 828 532 or emailing email@example.com. Reservations are valid up to 15 minutes before the start of the event.
This debate is part of a series of debates which have looked at important EU topics from a variety of perspectives as part of an international project entitled Trans-European Debates on the European Parliament (TEDEP).
These TEDEP debates have taken place with the support of the European Parliament and have been organised by the Time to Talk members, The Centre for Cultural Decontamination (Belgrade), deBuren (Brussels) and The Red House (Sofia).
Although the European Parliament supports these debates, it has nothing to do with their content and cannot be held responsible for any theses, comments and/or opinions expressed during the discussions.