Event report

This report presents a summary of the findings and suggestions presented by the participants of the online panel organised within the framework of the Conference on the Future of Europe on economics, social issues, sport, culture and digital transformation. The panel was carried out between 24 January and 8 February, consisting of two parts, on the one hand, a weekly collection of inputs in written form, where respondents on a daily basis reflected current challenges in individual areas. This part was followed up by a joint online discussion in the form of a participatory workshop. The panel was composed in such a way that the representation of participants roughly replicates the basic demographic characteristics, but the inputs from the participants cannot be seen as conclusions representing the attitudes of the entire population. In addition to basic socio-demographic indicators (sex, age, education, region, size of the municipality), other criteria such as diversity of political orientation or attitude towards the EU were taken into account in the panel. In order to achieve maximum inclusion, the event was organised in the mother tongue of the participants, at a time that enabled the participation of persons in and outside the employment relationship. The meeting was also organised online so that the widest possible range of participants (e.g. maternity leave, carers, people with disabilities) could participate. The combined form of both the written and the discussion sessions was another mechanism to ensure that all participants could be involved on an equal footing. Demographic composition of participants: Gender Men 5 Women 6 Education Primary Schools + Learning 2 Secondary Schools 6 Universities 3 Ages 18-29 3 30-44 2 45-59 4 60+ 2 Summary The basic economic logic of the Czech Republic’s membership in the EU is mostly understood positively. The subject of criticism is the alleged restrictions on Czech industry and consumers and excessive bureaucracy. There are differences in public opinion as to whether the EU’s objectives should go beyond the economic level. Women, persons belonging to minorities or persons with disabilities are the most affected by unequal opportunities in the labour market. The solution could be incentives for employers to encourage the development of flexible working hours, part-time work or teleworking. According to some respondents, the EU could be involved in this area, as well as in the guarantee of core labour standards. Social support should focus in particular on young families, single parents, people with disabilities or severe illnesses and retired persons. The social system should help those in need. It should treat all citizens equally, with particular emphasis on motivation and efforts to re-engage receiving people in the labour force. The system should be built on community and local ties. Respondents agree that the European Union should establish the same rules for agricultural producers across the EU and should not favour producers in specific commodities in selected countries. Regulations regulating supply are considered inappropriate. The EU as a whole should address the competitiveness of its own products on global markets. At the same time, the EU should develop its own production in strategic sectors to ensure its power and economic independence. Economic protectionism is seen as a valid tool for supporting these sectors. There is a need for further development of online literacy as well as protection of personal data, but this should be user-friendly and not impose additional administrative burdens on citizens. The digitalisation of the state administration should be further developed in such a way that there is no need for a visit to the authorities. The relationship between the panellists and the EU is mainly shaped by two factors — economic rationality and requirements for sovereignty, which is perceived as autonomy of decision-making. Only one respondent mentions the importance of the CFSP, in particular the strengthening of negotiating power in the international environment. A large majority of respondents positively reflect the economic rationality of membership, often even in cases where they are otherwise rather critical of the EU. Negative feelings vis-à-vis the EU stem mainly from a sense of loss of sovereignty. This is often seen at a very practical level as a set of bureaucratic, unjustified measures that are particularly reflected in consumer behaviour (ban on spread butter, sparking cigarettes, etc.) or even in the sphere of economic production (ruling of vineyards, too little work with added value). More generally, the debate is about extending the EU agenda beyond the economic community (in terms of the EEC) and moving it towards a wider spectrum of common objectives. Social Issues Sociodemographic Changes and Their Consequences Among the most significant changes in lifestyles affecting state spending according to respondents include a longer period of student life, followed by a later age of marriage and subsequent reproductions. Changes include the extension of LGBT rights. It is also reflected on the prolonging length of working life, which also entails negative aspects of work at an advanced age. These can lead to poor pre-retirement and retirement provision. In the area of lifestyle, there is especially mention of a higher opportunity to travel, emphasis on healthier lifestyles, greater opportunity to make public appearances, but also a higher pace of life or less respect for the law. At the same time, a large majority of respondents are aware that demographic changes are a significant financial burden on the state. In particular, rising expenditure on pensions, health care as a result of its improvement and ageing of the population are seen as key. Some respondents also consider negatively perceived lower employment rates and unjustified absorption of various contributions. In the area of solutions, some respondents are particularly interested in ways to improve the quality of life of older people, for example through various integration or educational programmes, or to offer transition housing options (or integration into sheltered housing, for example, with young people). On the other hand, as regulatory mechanisms, other respondents oppose the idea of insurance payments during studies, e.g. the introduction of employment obligations. Social Equality In the question of equality of chances, most respondents perceive differences arising from family background (family completeness, family relationships, children’s homes) and material security of the family. Most respondents refer to women’s unequal chances in the labour market, especially in relation to employment opportunities and pay. Other disadvantaged groups are members of ethnic minorities, people with disabilities, foreign workers or people with different religions. In the labour market, according to some respondents, people with no work experience are also disadvantaged, immediately after leaving education. At the same time, however, there is also a view that presents legislative equality as sufficient protection and accentuates in particular the importance of an individual’s own initiative. In a social context, several respondents mentioned the absent possibility of LGBT marriages and the adoption of children. Basic needs As basic human needs, the fulfilment of which should be guaranteed by the state, most often appeared: education, housing, work and health care. Only a few respondents also mentioned the availability of food (in particular food banks were discussed as a proposal for improvement and improving the usability of donated food by further processing or educating recipients) or personal safety, but this tends to suggest that these needs are more often perceived as met, while previous areas may appear problematic. In the case of education, particular emphasis was given to its unconditional accessibility in basic stages and non-ideologicality. In some cases, loans or scholarships were proposed as a social measure to ensure higher education. On the other hand, the opposite approach was to make it free of charge after several years of work in the Czech Republic (e.g. brain Drain). Certain conditionality has also been attributed to health treatment, and according to respondents, only basic treatment should be available to all, and the quality of wider healthcare should be conditional on payment of health insurance and appropriate prevention. In particular, old-age or basic social security was mentioned as other basic needs. However, a relatively significant proportion of respondents also mentioned the need to meet higher human needs (family relations, respect, belonging, self-realisation) and stressed that the state should contribute to the overall prosperity of individuals in all areas (investment in social policy, leisure opportunities or culture). In the opinion of the majority, the primary responsibility for such security rests with the State. The position on the EU then differs as to whether the EU should provide a common value framework or support projects that will further develop rights. Fundamental rights Respondents agree on the adoption of basic human rights. Women’s right to abortion is strongly supported on specific issues. The promotion of equal rights for homosexuals is also supported by majority support. In the other, respondents, on the one hand, draw attention to the persistent restrictions in the Czech context — marriage, adoption, blood donation. On the other hand, they draw attention to the fact that, in particular, the subject of marriage is unnecessarily politicised or that they approve same-sex cohabitation, but do not agree with excessive public or political expressions. The question of the EU’s guarantee of fundamental rights is polarising. The majority of respondents, including those partially critical to the EU, are inclined to intervene, whether diplomatically, by exerting pressure on the Member States, through sanctions or in extreme cases of exclusion, in the event of violations of fundamental rights in the Member States (interruption in Poland). In particular, the importance of intervention in this area is placed in the context of interventions in less critical areas. On the contrary, respondents with a critical stance towards the EU, or those who understand the EU as a purely economic community, believe that the EU should not intervene in this area and that decisions should be left to individual Member States. The social system Respondenti agrees that the state should support people in difficult situations who cannot help themselves at the moment. In particular, the situation of young families, single mothers, people with disabilities, severe illnesses or pensioners should be improved. The social system is criticised as unclear and partly unfair. Insufficient motivational setting of the system is considered a major weakness. In addition to simplifying the benefit system and reorienting it towards a stronger incentive effect, respondents see today’s challenges in particular in the recovery of the social sector. The social sector should work more with local links. They advocate ideas of incentives to increase the involvement of the local community in this issue, or e.g. the occasional involvement of experts from other areas. Where appropriate, support for care of elderly people in the family through tax deductions or increases in pensions. The sector should also be more effectively funded. In particular, at the beginning of the year, the amount of funds to be allocated to a specific social service institution in a given year should be known. The financing of the sector should be stimulated through the tax depreciation of donations from the profitable sector, which will be allocated specifically to this area, or by making the depreciated donations conditional on the share of the contribution to the social sector. Most respondents also support social pay increases. At the same time, respondents agree that fraud in the implementation of the aid should be avoided to the maximum extent possible. In particular, the maximum possible limitation of cash benefits and their replacement by services or products (e.g. school equipment, lunches) have been proposed as methods. Other procedures proposed by respondents were the mandatory retraining and placement of jobseekers linked to incentives for employers. Some also propose conditionality of benefits, such as the length of previous employment. Untaxed income in certain professions (e.g. tips) is also criticised, accompanied by a requirement for state compensation. In the field of pension provision, some respondents stress the importance of state support for pension savings, complemented by a more evenly assessed pension benefits (linked to nominal indexation). The departure from the ongoing financing of the pension system is considered problematic. Respondents also often wish to have part of their finances directly linked to the support of their own relatives in receipt of a pension. The good functioning of democratic institutions, which should themselves be able to respond to social problems or, where appropriate, the consistent taxation of the income of large employers in the country where the activity takes place, is also seen as important. Labour market Equality of employment opportunities and working conditions Unequal conditions in the labour market, according to respondents, are the most affected by women. In addition, members of minorities, persons with disabilities, without practice or people of pre-retirement age. A specific situation is the issue of employing people who take care of a child or an incapacitated member of the household. Excessive and unjustified formal education requirements are also mentioned. Another problematic area is unequal opportunities for foreigners, in particular excessive red tape linked to employment or the lack of flexibility for employers, e.g. with regard to teleworking or part-time work, which prevents the full integration of all applicants. The last aspect mentioned was the problem of poor infrastructural accessibility of places for people from small municipalities. Respondents agree that problems are particularly present for less qualified professions. These positions may be undervalued and some employers may have unsatisfactory working conditions. There is a shortage of employees in technical fields or even craftsmen. In turn, low financial appreciation leads to these positions being filled mainly by Eastern European employees, who often do not require conditions guaranteed by the Labour Code. Quotas are generally not considered an appropriate tool to address unequal access to the labour market. In the case of disadvantaged women, some respondents (women) support the reduction of parental leave too long. Furthermore, support for alternative work organisation and incentives for employers to enable this type of work is an option. In this area, some respondents believe that there is room for support programmes implemented by the EU. As a solution to the shortage of workers, some respondents report the arrival of employees from abroad, but under very strict immigration conditions. It is precisely in the possibility of guaranteeing equal working conditions and opportunities for all candidates that are not sceptical to the EU that respondents see the potential for EU intervention. One of the respondents also mentions the ineffectiveness of retraining programmes (she participated in two), which, on the one hand, are not perceived positively by the potential employer and provide limited skills. Alternative work organisations Respondents welcome the possibilities of alternative work organisation. In particular, it sees as the main benefits the possibility of including people who would not be able to work full-time in the labour market, in particular those caring for another person (children, family member) or who are, for example, at the beginning or at the end of their careers (students or seniors). As the main positives, they see the possibility of choosing a working rhythm that corresponds to the needs of the employee (and his/her other duties), the time-saving of the trip to work, the possibility to combine the activity with, for example, care for another person. On the employer’s side, they also perceive time-savings when travelling to work, savings for work equipment and the operation of buildings, higher job motivation and performance of employees. The main negatives are lower earnings in the case of shorter working hours or the same amount of work as full-time work. Furthermore, increased professional responsibility, the presence of intrusive factors in the home environment, the absence of a manager, or support from the working team, little possibility of mutual coordination or lack of people-to-people contact. Some respondents favour the possibility of EU incentives to promote this type of employment. The employment of persons with disabilities Respondenti tends to agree on insufficient opportunities for people with disabilities. In particular, the absence of suitable offers to accommodate people with disabilities, for example through part-time work, home-office or adaptation of workplace conditions, sees major shortcomings. The alleged income caps resulting from the overlapping of contributions and employment were perceived as very restrictive and unjustified. On the contrary, several respondents criticised from their personal experience the abuse of the current system of incentives for employment for people with disabilities, where the employer, for example, creates places for PWD that does not actually want to fill, to receive a contribution. Another practice mentioned was the reduction of hourly rates of OZP during the same work. Or also practices that are generally contrary to the Labour Code (e.g. changing the place of work compared to the employment contract or a sudden reduction in pay). A possible solution was seen by respondents in modifying the incentive system so that it could not be misused. Some also considered the development of sheltered workshops or other establishments focusing on the employment of disadvantaged applicants as a possible solution. On the contrary, quotas were seen as an inappropriate solution that would not lead to the creation of real jobs. A number of respondents, including some who otherwise tend to be opposed to the EU, saw an opportunity in this field for possible EU involvement, precisely through appropriate incentives or the development of suitable employment opportunities. Work-life balance The question of combining work and personal life is not particularly difficult for most respondents and assumes the possibility of finding a suitable balance. Irregularly organised shifts, shifts interfering with periods of public holidays or excessively long working hours in the performance of demanding work are problematic. Long and problematic commuting or caring responsibilities may be other obstacles to working and personal life. The solution for exchange traffic according to respondents may be sufficient financial compensation. In the case of commuting or caring responsibilities, in particular the provision of greater flexibility on the part of the employer. At the same time, some respondents stress that they have seen a social climate change, with more emphasis on finding a suitable work-life balance. At the same time, however, the belief remains that workers should be able to cope with existing requirements and meet set standards. Industry Industry is understood as the dominant component of the Czech economy. In addition to car manufacturing, the main areas mentioned are mechanical engineering, but also the chemical or steel industries. New sectors are also mentioned, e.g. 3D printers, IT, or high-end scientific and research outputs. In particular, the food sector (e.g. brewing) is another important, frequently mentioned sector. On competitiveness, respondents mention in particular the post-revolutionary decline of traditional enterprises (ČKD, JAWA, SONP, SOLO Sušice, AMATI Kraslice, etc.) and the negative consequences of privatisation. Some point to the perceived negative effects of the common European market, in particular the decline in food production and increased import rates of food products. In particular, the need to diversify the economy (not relying solely on the automotive sector) is seen as major challenges for competitiveness. Furthermore, the competitiveness of the European markets is problematic in the context of the uneven subsidy conditions under the common agricultural policy. In the case of food products, the lack of identification of the origin of the product is also often mentioned, which prevents consumers from prioritising a local (Czech) product. In this context, the actual designation of origin from specific supermarket chains (Lidl — Our Kraj) is also mentioned positively. Given the markets outside the EU, this is particularly the unequal production conditions created by the emission allowance system, where EU countries cannot compete in particular with the Chinese market which is not governed by the system. Modernisation As the main options for modernisation, respondents perceive a range of measures throughout the production process. Production is particularly concerned with robotisation and digitisation, but also draws attention to the need to develop, in particular, an industry with high added value based on expert activity (more professionals, less ‘mount houses’). As a way to this development, some mention in particular incentives for applied research linked to industrial projects. At the same time, they draw attention to the need to properly reform education in order to better prepare future employees for expert activities in the field of industry with the need for critical thinking. At the same time, some respondents draw attention to the need to encourage the economy as a whole, especially in the context of the pandemic. It mentions the removal of administrative barriers for small exporters, the promotion of tourism and the services sector, or the problem of labour shortages. The issue of the financial market, in particular inflation concerns, was also mentioned, linked to the unavailability of loans and mortgages or high bank charges. There are also concerns about the increasing government deficit due to various offsets linked to COVID 19. These factors were mentioned by some respondents as possible causes of the decline in economic performance in the near future, with possible personal impacts on respondents. Single European Market Most respondents, as well as those who are sceptical about the EU, appreciate free trade and intra-EU movement. In addition to travel, price savings for consumers, simplification of cross-border financial operations, the elimination of customs duties and related administrations are mentioned in particular. An increase in imports, which may harm the Czech industry, is perceived as a disadvantage. Introduction of the euro The introduction of the euro is a very controversial issue. On the one hand, respondents sceptical to the EU agree that this would significantly support Czech exports (savings from financial transactions, elimination of risks arising from exchange rate changes), on the other hand, all respondents, without exception, fear a significant increase in ordinary products for end consumers. These are both personal concerns and concerns about the impact of society as a whole. Slovakia and the significant rise in consumer basket prices in the country following the introduction of the euro, as well as the persistent higher price level for basic consumer goods, are repeatedly cited as a negative example. The symbolic value of the crown is mentioned, but the fear of getting expensive is quite dominating. Development of strategic sectors Most respondents support the development of strategically important industries in the EU. In particular, the power of political and economic independence from China (or possibly in other markets) is seen as key. Concerns arise mainly from possible foreign policy developments, power competition, lack of supply at times of crisis, but also from risks related to global market volatility, global transport or environmental impacts. In these circumstances, a larger proportion of respondents, even if opposite views appear, are willing to accept price increases, as they perceive the resulting safety guarantees as well as guarantees of availability of products in times of crisis. The potential for the development of new jobs is also mentioned repeatedly. Agriculture is seen as an area which has not only an economic dimension, the preservation of farmed land, the protection of primary resources (waters, forests, mineral resources) and, in some cases, rural development. Variable climate effects are also seen as a key factor. Therefore, respondents mostly support a reasonable subsidy policy. These should be targeted in particular at small farmers (e.g. programmes reducing input costs, lending of agricultural equipment). It should support local production and consumption at the place of production (e.g. aid through the purchase of production by institutions set up by local self-government — schools/hospitals of social services). As well as the development of further processing of agricultural primary production (again, e.g. joint processing capacity), the regulation and additional treatment of agricultural waste. At the same time, this subsidy policy should promote the maintenance of agricultural land and its quality (promoting planting of different plants, adequate use of fertilisers while maintaining yields). On the contrary, older CAP mechanisms regulating supply (sugar, wine-growing) or unequal subsidy mechanisms, which put farmers in a particular commodity at a disadvantage in different countries, are subject to considerable criticism. These approaches are seen as undermining the principles of free market and fair economic opportunities within the EU. In addition, increasing requirements for organic product quality (bio, pesticide reduction) have been raised, which can lead to a decrease in yields and a further decrease in food self-sufficiency. Development of the online environment and protection of personal data Protection of personal data Respondenti differs in view of the availability of sensitive data about yourself in the online environment. That discrepancy is due, in particular, to the different perceptions of what constitutes sensitive data and to the varying degree of awareness of personal data that can be retrieved online. Some respondents see as sufficient protection the fact that they are not active on social networks. Most often, personal data are perceived as problematic as birth number, residence or property data such as credit card number, land register, insolvency register, execution. Respondents generally consider that sensitive data are not sufficiently protected institutionally, although some respondents report that the data protection situation is gradually improving. As an important part of solving the situation, they generally suggest, in particular, the appropriate behaviour of private individuals. There is a fragmented view of whether the EU should do more to protect personal data. In most cases, however, the GDPR is understood as a sub-optimal solution. Digitalisation of government Some respondents use digital tools for contact with state authorities, while others do not yet, but usually consider this option positively and often consider it in the future. However, a disadvantage is often seen as a complicated or incomplete possibility of digitalisation by the administration, which often leads to the need to visit the office in person in the same way. Automatic deployment of an online interface for new citizens (e.g. automatic setting up of a data box) is proposed as a significant step towards digitalisation. Respondents agree that if digitalisation is appropriately implemented, citizens will naturally gradually prefer this way of interaction with the state. The opinion on EU involvement reflects in particular the respondent’s overall attitude towards the EU. Unsubstantiated data on social networks In the issue of removing unsubstantiated or false Internet contributions, several dominant approaches can be traced. Many respondents are aware of the issue of targeted spread of false and manipulative reports (hoaxes) and agree to remove them or, for example, draw attention to the importance of mentioning the date of origin of the material. However, the issue is the determination of the truthfulness of the contribution, a process that completely disqualifies the removal of problematic content for many respondents. Emphasising freedom of speech and the right to freedom of expression and dissent also appears in part. In particular, the removal of non-informative material such as content inciting violence, racism, pedophilia or vulgar content is more unequivocal. The importance of the correctness of the process during which the content is removed, which should include both a clear identification of the defective points and the ability of the author to oppose removal, is also mentioned. The opinion on EU involvement mostly reflects the respondent’s attitude towards the EU as a whole.