Friday, 19th November 2010

YFJ General Assembly: My Election Speech

Dear delegates, chères amis,

First of all I want to express my gratitude to my nominating organisations for their support and would like to thank all my friends for encouraging me to stand here before you today as a candidate for the position of YFJ president.

Ever since I visited Israel and the Palestinian Territories as a volunteer in a youth camp back in 1999 I followed Mahatma Gandhi's words: “be the change you want to see in the world”. After eight years of involvement in European youth work and youth policy I believe I have the knowledge, skills, experience and motivation to step up my commitment and serve the YFJ as its humble president.

In the last four years in which I've been active in the YFJ I've seen a lot of good things being done towards improving the internal and external work of the platform. For this I want to thank Bettina and Tine and their respective teams for doing a good job.

But regardless of how well an organisation is doing there is always room for improvement. And if elected President I want to build on the good work done and enable young people to be the change they want to see.
The first crucial issue I want to focus on is organisational culture. YFJ's organisational culture needs to be build on equal participation, open, transparent, inclusive and democratic decision-making processes and promotion of cooperation and mutual respect at all levels.

By equal participation I mean equality between member organisations in terms of access to information and means of participation. But also creating the possibility of greater involvement of MOs by using their experience for the work of YFJ without taking over their sphere of influence and work. If elected president I want to make sure that everyone can participate to the fullest extent possible in the YFJ’s work and policy discussions, regardless of the size of the organisation or whether it has a full-time staff or not. In practice this also means providing support where needed to enable this equal participation.

The second crucial issue I want to focus on is how the YFJ can bring added value to its members and young people in Europe by being a strong advocate on their behalf. An important added value of the YFJ lies in offering all its members a chance to voice their concerns and gain access to advocacy possibilities at European level, for example on the EU2020 strategy or the future YiA programme.

The YFJ has proven to be a strong and credible advocate on the underlying and cross-cutting issues shared by all its members. I believe that youth participation, youth volunteering and the rights and well-being of young people are such underlying issues of our work and key areas that concern every single one of us in this room.

Participation is key. Be it in the existing form of the co-management system in the Council of Europe as the highest level of participation of young people in decision-making. Be it in the institutionalised structured dialogue within the EU youth field. Or be it by lowering the voting age to 16. I want to focus on how the YFJ can use the available tools to best take advantage of them as well as change and improve them when needed to achieve our set goals.

I believe volunteering is the oxygen for youth NGOs to breathe and flourish. Therefore we should make the most out of the 2011 European Year of Volunteering and the 10th anniversary of the UN International Year on Volunteering properly, using the momentum to advocate for better recognition of youth volunteering and non-formal education and informal learning that accompany it.

Regardless of what the outcomes of the discussions on youth rights are, there are important areas of work that correspond to the needs of young people and our MOs, which need YFJ's full attention: youth employment, quality education, securing of funds at European level for youth organisations and youth-led projects and full recognition of non-formal education and of youth organisations as providers of these skills.

I'm convinced that developing youth perspectives on all issues that concern and affect young people's lives should remain in the forefront of our efforts in trying to make Europe a better place for young people. In this respect I believe the YFJ needs to be an agenda-setter towards institutions and if elected I will make sure that the YFJ will be a strong stakeholder in setting those agendas.
To achieve it advocacy will be crucial. I believe that my experience of having worked in the European youth political and policy field from a non-partisan perspective and cooperating with all colours of the political spectrum can be of an advantage. But in order to successfully advocate for something, we all need to pull at the same end of the rope.

In practice this can be achieved with a professional and accessible YFJ Secretariat and its Policy and Advocacy Department and a more strategic involvement of MOs where they have the expertise and lobbying experiences - we must capitalise on the assets we have.
The time of fighting for the right of young people to be heard is by no means over. But in areas where it has been achieved it is time to move on to the next step: focusing on what we want to say as a platform, what added value we can bring and what YFJ can make itself indispensable in. The YFJ is and has to remain the one organisation in Europe legitimately speaking on behalf of young people.
To conclude, I want to ensure that YFJ is a platform for exchange, a support mechanism for the members relying on it and a single channel for advocating youth issues at European level.

By setting up a proper team-work spirit, by leading and motivating a team of dedicated volunteers that this GA will elect, by keeping the big picture in mind, by being aware of all the facts and by keeping the focus and guaranteeing continuity of action, by keeping little distance between the leadership and the members and by working closely together with member organisations I want to ensure the YFJ does that in a way that we can all feel ownership of the work done.

Allow me to finish with the most important principle we have: work done “by young people, for young people and with young people”. In this respect the path that we walk on is as important as the goal we are trying to achieve. And with your help and support I promise to do my best in ensuring that the YFJ reaches its goals by walking up the right path.

Thank you! Merci bien.
Wednesday, 17th November 2010

Let the the YFJ General Assembly in Kyiv begin!

After months of campaigning and five weeks of blogging, tweeting and exchanging views with YFJ member organisations in person, via email, phone and even Facebook messages it is now time for the big showdown in Ukraine's capital Kyiv.

There are still many topics concerning young people in Europe I wished I had the time to explore on this blog, such as the question of youth employment, multiple discrimination, intergenerational dialogue, demographic change, migration, poverty, the millennium development goals (MDGs) and many more. The list can never be properly exhausted but I hope that with the blog entries I did make I managed to spark some interest, provided some food for thought and shade some light and my perspective on the topics discussed.
I'm very glad that the readership of the blog surpassed 3000 visitors in a relatively short time but I was hoping for more direct feedback and debate being developed via comments.

As of this afternoon I will be in Kyiv at the General Assembly of the European Youth Forum and available to answer any questions in person. Feel free to approach me!

Safe trip to everyone coming to Kyiv and see you there!

Saturday, 13th November 2010

Non-formal education: the added value we've got!

In my nine years of youth work involvement I've been regularly confronted with the question why am I spending my spare time involved in youth organisations and their activities. Bottom line was that most people thought that I was wasting my time trying to save the world instead of focusing on finishing my studies and getting a real job. My usual answer was that I'm actually gaining a lot of valuable experience by being involved in youth organisations and that thanks to the non-formal education - of which youth organisations are the main providers - I've managed to gain competences and skills I didn't get in my formal education.

Let us first have a quick look back in history to see when it all started and  the categorisation of education that emerged. Non-formal education became part of the international discourse on education policy in the late 1960s and early 1970s. There was concern about unsuitable curricula; a realization that educational growth and economic growth were not necessarily in step, and that jobs did not emerge directly as a result of educational inputs. Some forty years later some of these challenges still persist.

At around the same time there were moves in UNESCO toward lifelong education and notions of 'the learning society' which culminated in Learning to Be ('The Faure Report', UNESCO 1972). What emerged from these debates was the following definition of and distinction between the three different types of education:
  • Formal education: the hierarchically structured, chronologically graded 'education system', running from primary school through the university and including, in addition to general academic studies, a variety of specialised programmes and institutions for full-time technical and professional training.
  • Informal education: the truly lifelong process whereby every individual acquires attitudes, values, skills and knowledge from daily experience and the educative influences and resources in his or her environment - from family and neighbours, from work and play, from the market place, the library and the mass media.
  • Non-formal education: any organised educational activity outside the established formal system - whether operating separately or as an important feature of some broader activity - that is intended to serve identifiable learning clienteles and learning objectives.
Non-Formal Education (NFE), and the increase in its recognition, has been a top priority for the European Youth Forum (YFJ). It should continue to be so in the coming years until we achieve our aim: full recognition of NFE and ensuring sufficient financial support to youth organisations as the main providers of NFE activities.

The YFJ has already developed an extensive policy documentation and studies on the topic, most notably the study entitled Building Bridges for Learning – the Recognition and Value of Non-Formal Education from 1999, the policy paper on Youth organisations as non-formal educators – recognising our role [0618-03], the policy paper on Recognition of non-formal education: Confirming the real competencies of young people in the knowledge society [0716-05] and the policy paper on Non-Formal Education: A framework for indicating and assuring quality [0009-08].

It is important to remind ourselves that as youth organisations we are the prime providers of NFE and as such also responsible to ensure the quality of learning in the activities we provide. In the past two years the YFJ has been advocating for a quality assurance framework and defined a set of quality indicators as well as an objective of establishing a European Quality Assurance framework for NFE by 2015. An important YFJ activity linked to this process has been the annual Dialogue on NFE event, taking place for the fifth time this December. The aim of the 5h Dialogue on the recognition of NFE is to jointly explore, reflect and deepen the recognition process of NFE, focusing on the contribution of youth organisations towards well being and health of young people. This is especially important because we need to show that NFE is not only a goal in itself (except when fighting for its full recognition) but first and foremost a tool we use to tackle youth issues, such as health of young people.

To come back to what my family and friends have been wondering about in terms of  the added value of my involvement in youth organisations I can proudly show  the personal results achieved thanks to non-formal education as well as informal learning. It was mainly thanks to NFE that I've vastly improved my language skills, that I got confident in speaking in public, that I gained project management and financial management skills and many other things that represent an added value for me. And it is this added value that youth organisations can and should provide. And the YFJ as the largest platform of organised youth should help ensure that NFE becomes truly recognised and that its member organisations receive the necessary financial support to continue implementing numerous NFE activities that help change the life of millions of young people in Europe and beyond.
Monday, 8th November 2010

Regional, thematic and cross-pillar cooperation

Recently I was asked during exchange of views about my candidacy with a member organisations what I think about regional cooperation within the European Youth Forum.

I believe there is an added value to such cooperation and want to share my thoughts on the importance of cooperation between member organisations and elaborate some personal ideas on how similar cooperation could be done even better to maximise its value for MOs and the platform as a whole.

First we need to be aware of the specific nature of the YFJ as a platform based on two pillars, the National Youth Councils (NYCs) and international non-governmental youth organisations (INGYOs). Within these two pillars there are several cooperation initiatives of a more or less structured nature. On the NYC side we have four regional cooperations, namely:
  • the Nordic-Baltic cooperation featuring national youth councils from Denmark, Finland, Estonia, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and Sweden;
  • the Southern Youth Cooperation (SYC) featuring national youth councils from Catalonia, Croatia, Cyprus, France, the French-speaking Community of Belgium, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia and Spain;
  • the Bodensee-Benelux Cooperation plus (BBC+) featuring national youth councils from Austria, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Slovakia, Switzerland and the United Kingdom;
  • the Eastern European Youth Cooperation (EEYC) featuring national youth councils from Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Russian Federation and Ukraine;
On the INGYO side we have a few thematic or issue-based cooperations, such as the so-called “exchange group”, the cooperation between faith-based organisations or the party-political youth organisations (PPYOs). Moreover, we have a so-called cross-pillar cooperation initiative called CP2 that aims to promote exchange of views and ideas between the two pillars. Others might cooperate among them on a ad hoc basis.

I'm convinced that nobody will dispute the fact that cooperation is a good thing. But let's look at why different types of cooperation between MOs are not only beneficial to those participating in a given cooperation but also for the YFJ as a platform. Any type of cooperation has at it base a certain common understanding on the importance of the region in which and/or topic on which they are working together. They feel they are bound together by different ties, be it for geographical, cultural, linguistic and/or specific issue-based reasons. The good part of the different cooperation initiatives within the YFJ is that with their joint proposals and initiatives, common positions with regards to policy positions and activities of the YFJ, they help achieve a broader consensus within the YFJ on a given topic but also assist each other in ensuring their voice be heard better.

It is understandable that it might happen that different regional and/or thematic cooperations might have contradictory positions on a given topic between them. But despite apparent dialectics and differences among them, all MOs are not only pursuing the same or similar goals but are also complementing each other. This complementary function is not only within a cooperation initiative but also between the different groups. Personally I think it would be great if the different regional cooperation initiatives would explore the possibility of working together on a bilateral or multilateral basis. This is currently happening among and between many MOs on a more individual/bilateral basis. But just imagine an entire regional cooperation such as for example the BBC+ having a joint meeting with the EEYC on a set topic. It could create new synergies and increase the exchange of experience and knowledge between regions. Of course this is something that YFJ as such can only welcome and potentially assist with expertise and know-how on the chosen topic if asked to do so, while it is the MOs or regional groupings themselves responsible to explore such an idea.

At the moment the closest we come to inter-regional cooperation or inter-bloc cooperation within the YFJ framework is every two years prior the General Assembly in order to try to secure better chances of their own candidates for elections. Albeit understandable it shouldn't be the only reason for closer inter-bloc cooperation. Especially bearing in mind that many MOs, especially on the INGYO pillar are not in any specific group. It would be great if we could see more exchange and cooperation between MOs that might not come from the same region nor pursue the same issues but have certain basic values and ideas in common. This could be in terms of promoting active citizenship, youth participation, different experiences with youth volunteering or involvement in decision-making process.

A concrete example of where such cooperation would have an added value for the YFJ as whole is the discussion on the future of the Youth in Action programme. More exchange between different MOs but also different existing cooperation initiatives/groupings and more joint cross-pillar initiatives could provide a fresh impetus and contribute via better mutual understanding of our work and needs.

Friday, 5th November 2010
Council of Europe: youth's best friend with a challenge

Recently I've engaged in an interesting debate with other candidates on the YFJ intranet blog on the importance of the different institutional partners the European Youth Forum (YFJ) is working with, especially the Council of Europe (CoE), the European Union (EU) and the United Nations (UN).

Notwithstanding the importance of all three institutions I've argued that due to the obvious facts of being a European platform, having the vast majority of our member organisations working predominantly in the framework of the CoE and the EU, these two institutions merit a special relationship with YFJ. Bottom line is that thanks to the structured dialogue we have in the EU and the co-management system we have in the CoE the YFJ is THE voice of young people in these two contexts, while in the UN framework were are one of the voices.

Now I want to also make a distinction between the EU and the CoE and remind us of the importance and relevance of the Council of Europe, especially for youth work in Europe.

Let's start with the obvious: the EU covers only 27 states in Europe compared to 47 covered by the CoE; but still many people see the EU and Europe as one and the same thing. I constantly fight against this due to my background: before Slovenia joined the EU in 2004 I was already part of Europe in everything except having the rights linked to so-called European citizenship that is de iure a thing of the EU. The YFJ is a truly European platform including among its members national youth councils ranging from Iceland to Azerbaijan and covering almost everything in between. Nobody disputes the Europeaness of our colleagues whether they are part of the EU or not and this in itself is an important value we share – the dream of a united Europe to which the CoE is the next best thing (so far). The work of the YFJ should continue to reflect this fact.
Secondly, the CoE institutional framework recognises the YFJ as the representative platform of young people in Europe to the maximum possible extent, namely through the so-called co-management. What is this exactly? The co-management system involves representatives from youth non-governmental organisations (NGOs) sitting down in committees with government officials who together then work out the priorities for the youth sector and make recommendations for future budgets and programmes. These proposals are then adopted by the Committee of Ministers, the Council of Europe's decision-making body. According to the ladder of participation it is the highest possible level of involvement in decision-making. How does it work in practice? We have this special body called Advisory Council on Youth (AC) which is made up of 30 representatives from youth NGOs and networks who provide opinions and input on all youth sector activities. It also ensures that young people are involved in other activities of the Council of Europe. This shows that the CoE is the only institution that practices what it preaches when it comes to youth participation.
However, despite the CoE being an institution that already shares many of the YFJ values (respect for human rights, democracy, rule of law, etc), it is currently going through a profound reform process, and there is a legitimate fear that this reform process will interfere partly with the activities of the youth sector, including the European Youth Foundation, and partly with the co-management system. The European youth centres in Strasbourg and Budapest and the European Youth Foundation are unique instruments that we want to keep in the future, so is the training and multiplier-approach, especially in relation to combating racism, islamophobia, romaphobia etc in Europe, but if we want to keep them we need to be ready to defend them. It is now more than ever time that YFJ is not only the beneficiary of the co-management system in terms of raising the voice of young people but to use this voice and proactively engage in and contribute to the reform process. How? By showing the CoE that the youth civil society believes in it and is supporting it. But also by showing that the CoE needs youth if it is to survive and develop its distinctive value in the European context. At the same time the YFJ must fight to maintain the co-management system and advocate for keeping the funds available for the youth work development in Europe to which CoE has vastly contributed already.
And how do I propose the YFJ does this? First step is better awareness among all member organisations of the added value the CoE represents for our work. Acknowledging the fact that the above-mentioned AC – 2/3 of which are composed by members elected by YFJ – is an important tool for YFJ advocacy work as the main representative of youth organisations in the CoE context. Second step would be to better inform and prepare the 20 AC members elected by YFJ in terms of explaining them what YFJ wants and advocates for and how they as individuals can help contribute to the work of the AC. Moreover, by improving the exchange of information to make sure that all MOs know what is going on in the CoE context and by improving the ways of reporting back to the YFJ membership these 20 young people can be the perfect link between the CoE and YFJ MOs.

Despite the EU being a supranational institution and therefore more powerful in many respects we should not neglect the importance of the CoE nor see it only as the framework in which we want to fight for youth rights via a convention but foremost as the place where youth is co-managing youth affairs and where we can work on a truly European youth work development. We need a strong CoE but we need to recognise the fact that we are part of its decision-making and thus need to be strong ourselves and fight for maintaining and further improving the system.
Tuesday, 2nd November 2010

Gender equality: Europe's quality?!
This was the title of our JEF seminar back in March this year and I want to use this title/question to approach this important topic. Despite positive developments we still have a huge task ahead of us before we achieve proper gender equality in Europe as well as within our own organisations.

Gender equality both as a value and as a goal is enshrined in various European documents and legal provisions. Yet, the pay gap between men and women remains wide and the percentage of women engaged in politics and business in high-ranking positions remains dismal. The promotion of gender equality is considered as a precondition for achieving sustainable social and economic development.
The European Youth Forum (YFJ) has been actively involved in the gender equality policy debate and back in 2007 adopted the excellent “Policy paper on achieving equality between women and men” in which it stresses its belief that all policy areas must incorporate a gender dimension. This policy paper looks specifically at gender role division; the social and economic position of young women; gender and education; and gender and development – with an additional focus on the participation of women in political life, and the role of young men in the struggle for equality between women and men.

Moreover, this policy paper included a clear list of actions to which the YFJ had committed itself, and of demands to which it called on institutions to commit. In the wake of the new policy developments at EU level it will be important for the YFJ to check that list of actions and demands and see what has been achieved and implemented and where the work remains to be done.
On 21st September 2010 the European Commission adopted a five-year strategy for promoting equality between women and men in Europe entitled Strategy for equality between women and men (2010-2015). Championed by the Belgian Presidency, the new strategy is based around five key principles: (1) equality in senior positions, (2) getting more women into the job market, (3) promoting female entrepreneurship, (4) equal pay for equal work and (5) tackling gender violence.
YFJ has welcomed the new strategy but also rightly voiced concern about it. On the positive side are the focus on young women's access to entrepreneurial market in order to achieve economic independence as well as the recognition of the the need to pay special attention to the transition between education and the labour market and narrowing the pay gap. But as YFJ puts it the strategy lacks many vital elements, such as any effort whatsoever to promote gender equality in the field of sexual and reproductive health, or a focus on combating gender-based stereotypes.
I personally share this line of reasoning and join those voices (such as the European Women's Lobby and several female MEPs) that criticised the plan for being heavy on rhetoric but somewhat light on action. As long as the Commission calls for more women in power in the business sector but fails to give them power when it can do so itself (e.g. the recently established European External Service with only 6 out of 28 EU ambassadors being female) its credibility will be questioned.

Why does the topic of gender equality concern us and the YFJ?
Youth organisations have a unique chance and responsibility to not only discuss the issue of gender equality but also to act on this internally in its activities based on non-formal education and peer-to-peer education. It is seminars, exchanges, trainings and similar youth activities that help broaden our views and tackle difficult topics that touch upon sensitive understandings of gender roles in a given society.

The gap between women’s and men’s rates of participation at various levels within youth organisations still prevails and at the top level there is a vast imbalance. By many, this imbalance is often not noticed or perceived. Therefore, it could be fruitful for youth organisations to internally evaluate their work from a gender perspective, measuring the participation of women and men as well as analysing why there might be a discrepancy. It is also important to empower young women to take part in the different structures of an organisation. A particular regard has to be taken to young people that might face multiple barriers such as young women from minority backgrounds.
This is something that was agreed and adopted in the YFJ back in 2007, yet if we assess the situation today we will see that not much has changed. We are having elections in the YFJ coming up in 3 weeks time and the number of female candidates presenting themselves is not the desired half, it is even below 40%. We need to evaluate this situation and address the shortcoming that might arise from such evaluation. So that we lead by example and practice what we preach, otherwise our demands towards decision-makers to do so will be hollow.

Moreover, it is through youth work that we can enable a broad discussion on the quintessential nature of gender and its role in European societies, provide youngsters engaged in NGO activities basic information about the gender perspective and offer practical advice how gender equality can be promoted. Another important objective is to get a European perspective on the issue by getting an insight on the evolution of the perception of gender, by comparing different approaches and achievements to promote equality.

I am confident that our member organisations within the YFJ have the expertise needed to help us analyse and make proposals on how the principles of gender equality in youth work can be implemented in European youth policy. We should build on our previous policy papers and make sure that the youth voice we are defending is a voice in favour of proper gender equality backed by positive examples within our own ranks.


Wednesday, 27th October 2010

The Importance of Volunteering
In the wake of the International Year of Volunteering +10 (IYV +10) and the European Year of Volunteering 2011 we should take a moment to consider why we have these dedicated years and what are the issues to be considered and the challenges to tackle. To do this I want to open a discussion by asking important questions and try to answer some of them while remaining humbly aware that the topic is too wide to exhaust it within one blog entry.

What is volunteering and why is it important? What does it bring to us as volunteers on a personal level as well as professional level? Is voluntary work sufficiently recognised? Where is the link between youth work and volunteering? What is the importance of non-formal and informal learning in volunteering? Are youth organisations offering volunteering opportunities in an inclusive way open to all?

Many important questions open for debate but I want to first look at some of the hundreds of definitions out there and numerous interpretations as well as explanations why volunteering is important and to whom and then focus on the importance of volunteering for youth work and youth NGOs.

A volunteer is someone who gives time, talents and professional expertise on a voluntary basis and without any remuneration (NCSS, 1977b).

Volunteering is the commitment of time and energy, for the benefit of society, local communities, and individuals, outside the immediate family, the environment or other causes. They are undertaken out of a person free will, without payment except for the reimbursement of out of pocket expenses (Volunteering, Ireland, 2000).

Volunteering is an activity undertaken out of free will, where the motivation is not monetary gain and the action is of benefit to others (International symposium on volunteering, 2001).

Volunteering is about the professional or the volunteer offering a needed service by personal commitment without equivalent financial compensation (A Strategy for Scouting: The Proposed Concept, WOSM, 2002).
The concepts of free will, personal motivation and offering of an expertise and/or service without monetary gain are at the core of volunteering. These values should be the cornerstones of civil society engagement and the entire youth work should be based exactly on these basic principals.

We commit our free time as volunteers to a given cause, we become activists, we gain valuable experience, learn new skills and pass on know-how to our peers or to our target group in a given activity. Even though we do this without aiming at earning money we should have certain rights as volunteers and get a certain level of recognition for the skills learnt via volunteering and experiences gathered in this way. This is exactly the point in which I see a difference between youth volunteering and volunteering in a different age group.

Young people volunteer in a different way than older generations do. Older generations of volunteers might fit perfectly into the first definition mentioned above, namely offering their time and professional experience on a voluntary basis. Young people do that as well but many of them first and foremost develop their personal and professional experience thanks to being a volunteer. This is where the importance and link with the non-formal and informal education comes into play. A young volunteer not only commit his/her time and energy for the benefit of a given society and/or group and/or given cause but also gains valuable experience and acquires new skills that s/he would otherwise not.
I can testify with my personal experience and example that this is the case. I have been fortunate enough to take advantage off many volunteering opportunities such as getting involved in my local community as a child in a more traditional sense of contributing to society. But then thanks to my engagement in youth organisations and participating in the European Voluntary Service I have greatly benefited from non-formal and informal learning possibilities. This was how I managed to develop my managerial and leadership skills, improve my language skills, gain my team-work experiences as well as intercultural competences. All these things have never been offered to me in my formal education.
That is why I truly believe volunteering to be the oxygen needed for youth NGOs to breathe and flourish. It is namely youth NGOs that provide the above-mentioned possibilities that I was fortunate enough to benefit from. But are all youth NGOs offering equal access to these volunteering opportunities to all in an inclusive manner?

As a unique platform it is very important that YFJ celebrates the International Year of Volunteering +10 and the European Year of Volunteering 2011 properly, using the momentum to advocate for better recognition of youth volunteering and non-formal education that accompanies it. However, we also need to capitalise on the year, so that its achievements could lead to further improvement of the rights of volunteers beyond 2011 and across all Europe.
Wednesday, 20th October 2010

Youth on the Move: pros and cons
What is Youth on the move and why has it been such a hotly debated issue, especially among youth organisations? I will try to look at the pros and cons of this so-called flagship initiative of the Commission within the EU2020 strategy and what is left for us to do.
In his September 2009 Political Guidelines President Barroso announced the expansion of existing instruments like Erasmus into a new EU youth and mobility initiative. The reaction by civil society organisations and especially youth organisations was reserved, even critical, as fears arose of a possible unification of the current life-long-learning programmes and mobility programmes (e.g. Erasmus, Leonardo Da Vinci, Comenius with Youth in Action etc). Brining these programmes within the Education and Training field under one common initiative could mean less funding available – a legitimate fear in times of severe austerity measures due to the economic and financial crisis. In the end we received guarantees that the Youth on the Move initiative would remain just that – an initiative and not a new programme. Namely, a political initiative bringing youth to the forefront and making it a cross-sectorial issue within the Commission.

The Youth on the Move flagship initiative includes reference to actions under DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal opportunities' responsibility (i.e. Youth employment framework). There are also links to other DGs activities, such as DG Research (European Research Area), DG Internal Market and services (recognition of professional qualifications, Services Directive), DG External relations (mobility programmes outside the EU), DG Enterprise (Erasmus for entrepreneurs).

On 15th September 2010 Commissioner Vassiliou launched the Youth on the Move flagship initiative as part of the EU2020 strategy to achieve smart growth; the package proposes measures aimed at:
  • improving the job prospects of young people
  • making education and training more relevant to their needs
  • raising awareness of EU mobility grants to study, train or do a voluntary service in another country
The measures of YoM include a clear framework for Youth Employment and proposes a “Youth Guarantee” to ensure that all young people are in a job, further education or vocational training within four months of leaving school. This, together with the development of a European Quality Framework for Internships and the implementation of adequate social safety nets for young people, are crucial aspects of the improvement of youth access to the labour market.
Finally young people are put at the centre of the EU agenda and as such we should welcome this initiative.

But there is also a flip side to the story. First and foremost young people are not just the future but the present and the fact that this has not been truly recognised yet is reflected in the fact that youth participation is a concept alien to the YoM initiative. If the most visible and politically important initiative of the EU aimed at young people talks only about formal education and training and mobility aimed at increasing the employability of young people many important aspects of youth work, especially the questions of non-formal education (NFE) and volunteering are being left out or at least sidelined.

Moreover, given that the Commission is currently evaluating its Youth in Action programme and preparing a new version of it, the fact that political impetus is pushing (only) towards employability might hinder the discussion on the importance of NFE and endanger getting a youth programme that will continue focusing on active citizenship and participation of young people in society.
Back in September 2009 President Barroso said: "Youth on the Move" initiative would be a decisive contribution to the promotion of cultural diversity, intercultural dialogue and multilingual learning. Yet the YoM initiative as presented a year later does far less for cultural diversity, intercultural dialogue and multilingual learning than the Youth in Action programme, where these themes are considered as the cornerstone of all activities and touch upon and promote European values such as democracy, tolerance, human rights etc.
Tackling youth unemployment is an important task and the fact the Commission is taking on the challenge in a cross-sectorial manner and bringing youth to the forefront of its EU2020 strategy is a fact to be appreciated and welcomed. But at the same time we need to continue the fight for getting a new youth programme that will address the entire spectrum of needs of young people and youth organisations as providers of activities in which young people develop the same soft skills that are nowadays identified as contributing to a (young) persons employability (language skills, team-building, intercultural sensibility, management and leadership skills, etc.).
Friday, 15th October 2010

Why having a National Youth Council is a good idea?

A youth council or similar structure is a form of representation of young people through which youth express their voice and engage in community decision-making. Given that a precondition of a healthy democracy is the active participation of citizens, especially young people, and a vibrant civil society sector, including youth organisations, having youth structures representing and empowering young people to have a say and be heard is crucial.

Since working together in order to address the needs and defend the rights of young people in a given society and at a given level it makes sense that different youth activists, youth organisations and interest groups create an umbrella structure, such as a local, regional, national youth council.

A national youth council (NYC) should be led by young people and for young people and usually fulfils two main tasks: on the one hand it empowers young people to get involved in the things that are important to them and have a say in decisions that affect them; this is usually done by providing capacity building for individuals and member organisations via training workshops and volunteering opportunities. On the other hand a NYC is an important stakeholder in the structured dialogue with institutions and decision-makers; in practice this means doing advocacy and lobby work towards decision-makers to enable the youth voice to be heard but also serves as a consultation body for institutions regarding youth issues. There are other reasons why having a NYC in place is a good idea but the above-mentioned are key in my opinion.

Now that we established why having such structures makes sense let us have a look on what the situation is in Europe at the moment. From the 48 member states of the Council of Europe (if we include the suspended Belarus) we have national youth councils or similar structures in (in some cases such as Belgium and Spain due to their specificity even more than one) the vast majority of countries. Over thirty of them are also members of the European Youth Forum. But several countries, such as Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Hungary, Macedonia, Montenegro, Poland, Serbia and Turkey do not have an NYC yet in place or if they do they are not YFJ members.

YFJ has decided to put part of its youth work development focus on assisting the creation of new NYCs. However, it has become apparent that assisting in the setting up of new NYCs in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe is not an easy task. Unless a sufficient number of national branches of INGYOs that understand and promote the added value of having a structure such as a NYC in place is engaged in the process. 

Following the previous commitments made by MOs in past work plans and the agreed need for continued support to the development of new NYCs we should learn from experience of the past and try to make necessary improvements for the future. At the same time we should explore the possibilities of how we could help INGYOs strengthen their national branches wherever possible and applicable. Only by working together can we achieve the desired goals!
Wednesday, 13th October 2010
Participation of young people in democratic life: Vote@16
The European Union (EU) has completed a decade of institutional reform with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty that provides us with new tools (e.g. European Citizens' Initiative - ECI) and new opportunities (e.g. Article 165 - “youth article”) to bring youth participation in Europe to the next level.

What is the “youth article”? By this we refer to Article 165(2) of the Lisbon Treaty that states: “encouraging the development of youth exchanges and of exchanges of socio-educational instructors, and encouraging the participation of young people in democratic life in Europe”.
The interpretation of this paragraph will be pivotal for the work of the European Youth Forum and all youth organisations in the coming years. The first part of the paragraph in my interpretation provides a legal basis for the Youth in Action programme (YiA) and similar European programmes aimed at youth (be it mobility programmes, educational programmes and/or exchange programmes). This will be important to keep in mind when doing advocacy in favour of a YiA 2.0 in the coming two years. The second part of the above-mentioned paragraph is linked to political participation and participation of young people in decision-making processes. This aspect is important for two main reasons: 1) the right to vote and be elected, 2) the right to participate in decision-making by being heard and consulted as representatives of young people; key word = structured dialogue.
Exercising the right to vote and the right to get elected are at the very heart of each democratic system. But who has the right to vote, when and how are important questions to which each society in a given time has provided a different answer. The limitations on exercising the right to vote are usually different from the limitations on exercising the right to be elected. For example, in Slovenia one can vote and get elected once turning 18. In Italy however, the voting age for the Parliament is 18, while the voting age for the Senate is 25. Moreover, as Italian citizen you can only get elected for becoming President at the age of 50 or over. Recent developments have been to lower the voting age down to 16. In 2007 Austria became the first European country that gave 16 year olds the right to vote. Similar campaigns for lowering the voting age to 16 are wide-spread in Denmark and the UK.

If the EU and its member states are serious about encouraging the participation of young people in the democratic life in Europe they need to live up to their words and enable full and active participation of young people in decision-making processes. Young people are too often reminded that to be heard one must have a vote. In this respect a fundamental right, such as voting, is missing for many young people for them to fulfil their role as active citizens. If one can be held responsible for criminal acts and treated as an adult at 16 one should also be given the right to participate in democratic life at 16. Moreover, lowering the voting to 16 would strengthen our democracies and give young people a sense of ownership and responsibility. Including and involving young people more and better in the political life of a given society will enrich and benefit the entire society. 

We need to continue the fight for the right to full and active participation of young people at all levels!
Monday, 11th October 2010

Youth participation

Youth participation in shaping the world of tomorrow, but even more importantly the world of today, is at the very heart of youth work and the reason why we have youth organisations and youth representatives in the first place. Participation is a broad concept and active participation of all citizens in a given society is a vital part of a healthy democracy.

Youth participation manifests itself in many ways: from participation of young people in activities organised by, with and for young people, their civil-society engagement covering a very diverse range of issues and topics, to the participation of young people in decision-making processes. Mainly, but not exclusively, this happens via youth organisations as the framework enabling, facilitating and promoting youth participation. 
The Sociologist Roger Hart has identified eight degrees of participation illustrated by the following ladder:
 
In Europe we currently have different levels of youth involvement and participation and we need to strive to achieve the maximum levels in all spheres and at all levels. It is the role of the European Youth Forum and its member organisations to strive for the maximum and jointly climb to the highest rung of the ladder.
 
Thus, our continuous task is to offer support to democratic, independent, youth-led organisations and empower young people by equipping them with skills necessary for their personal and professional development.

In my next blog entry I will focus on the political aspects of youth participation in the democratic life of a given society, especially issues linked to taking part in elections.
Thursday, 7th October 2010

The State of Youth Rights in Europe
A personal account of the YFJ meeting in Strasbourg

The event took place from 6-7 October 2010 in Strasbourg and was organised by YFJ with the aim of preparing input to the report on the motion for a Convention on Youth Rights.

A total of 20 participants (11 representatives of MOs, 3 representatives of the Advisory Council of the Council of Europe (AC), 2 YFJ Board members, 2 guests and of course Sara as CoE coordinator from the YFJ Secretariat).

For myself and for JEF on whose behalf I was sent to Strasbourg it was important to be present in order to gain more insider knowledge and information on what has been done so far in the field, where the discussions are at internally within the YFJ and externally in terms of advocacy and lobbying in the CoE framework.

In the first part we heard two valuable contributions regarding youth rights in Europe and Latin America. Our colleague Mourad Mahidi (OJV) has namely just successfully defended his Master Thesis "The Young and the Rightless - the Protection of Youth Rights in Europe", the first such academic research on the topic in Europe. We can be grateful to have a real expert among our own members and his conclusions helped us better understand the situation as well as come up with evidence-based (legal) arguments in favour of youth rights.
The second valuable contribution was by Trinidad Garcia from the Ibero-American Youth Organisation (OIJ) who presented their experience with achieving and implementing the Ibero-American Convention on Youth Rights. She reminded us of the lengthy process that accompanies such an undertaking and that in their case it was a top-down approach with the initiative to have such a document coming from the states. In our case its rather the opposite.

The most important thing for me in this meeting is the broad agreement on the need for more debate within our platform between those that have been involved in this issue in the recent past and the rest. It was also important that regardless of previous reservations all participants present managed to agree that we can agree on supporting the fight for youth rights as long as:

1) youth rights are understood as "adding and enhancing the rights of young people" that are currently covered by the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Social Charter and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child; this means fighting for rights that will correspond to meeting the actual needs of youth as a special age group (e.g. right to autonomy, right to full and effective participation etc);
2) we continue a broad and open discussion on the issue of youth rights within the YFJ by informing and involving everyone before being able to decide on the next steps both in terms of content as well as strategy;
3) we ask for the maximum legally-binding document to achieve such rights.

In the second part of the meeting we exchanged views with Ms Elvira Kovács, a member of the Committee on Education within the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), who is rapporteur for the issue of youth rights in this framework. Moreover, we prepared the input for the meeting of this Committee and come up with a list of arguments in favour of youth rights. These arguments should also serve as a basis of further discussions among the YFJ members prior and during the General Assembly in Kyiv. 

The final act was the actual participation in the Committee meeting of PACE. Welcoming the fact that youth representatives had the chance to participate for the first time I was disgusted by the Chair of the Committee on Education of PACE telling youth representatives when cutting their speaking time and not allowing the diversity of four speakers: "we have urgent business to do (undertone being you are not urgent/important) & life is brutal". It was a shameful moment and we can only hope that the new Chair of this Committee Mr Flego from Croatia will improve in his dealing with youth. 

It was exactly these kind of moments and incidents that are symptomatic in the dealing with young people: we don't want to be considered as inexperienced bearers of future but as opinionated actors of the society of here and now. And the fight for the right to full and effective participation in political and social life and decision-making processes is a much needed and worthy cause to fight for. But to fight such a fight we need to stand united and that can only happen if we have everyone pulling on the same end of the rope, which in turn can only happen if everyone was given the chance to voice their opinions on the issue in an open and transparent manner and then take a final decision in due time that will stay binding not only for a year or two but for the entire lengthy process of this struggle for youth rights.

Having had individual and usually disconnected events on the issue of youth rights in the past is not a sufficient way of bringing the issue into the core of our future work. We need an action plan and clarifying debate on what we want, why we want it and how we plan to achieve it.
Wednesday, 6th October 2010

Board & Secretariat

The recent statutory changes have made it clear that the platform is moving in a direction of giving the Board more responsibility in terms of strategic development of the YFJ.  With more power also comes more responsibility. Thus the need for ever more transparent decision-making, especially in establishing non-permanent working structures will be crucial.

For me the Board needs to work as a proper team in which everyone has a place of his/her own, where each member can feel ownership of the work being done, cooperate in a cross-sectoral way and mutual assist each other. But this also means staying committed for the entire period of two years and living up to the electoral promises. As President I would ensure that all Board members can give input on all topics while maintaining the thematic responsibilities for the areas of work that are to be decided. I would also introduce a mechanism of internal monitoring of the progress made via regular reports and not shy away from getting my hands dirty if needed by confronting a given Board member that wouldn't be living up to his/her promises.

The Secretariat is the backbone of any organisation and having more than 25 employees the YFJ Secretariat is doing a great job in managing the daily affairs of our work and offers excellent support to its members. But there is always room for improvement like in anything else in life. However, the Board should not manage the Secretariat as we have people (s)elected to do that. But the Board should be able to critically asses the work of the Secretariat and voice those opinions and possible concerns to the Secretary-General as its manager and then work jointly to find solutions or implement improvements. The entire YFJ policy department is one of our platforms biggest assets as we have committed youth experts working daily on the issues that concern young people in Europe. The policy officer as experts should thus also be given more opportunity to speak up on behalf of the YFJ when an expert opinion is asked and not only work for the Board but rather with the Board on a given issue.

Having served in three Executive Boards of JEF-Europe I know what it takes to be in a properly European team with a diverse cultural and linguistic background and all the benefits as well as challenges that such diversity brings along. Moreover, I have a proven record of being a good motivator and with leading by example I'm convinced that I could build a proper team that would work towards a more inclusive and transparent platform for the benefit of all its members.

Tuesday, 5th October 2010

Organisational Culture and Structure

YFJ is an umbrella organisation offering its members access to the European youth sphere and providing a framework for exchange of ideas and opinions, while in exchange asking its member organisations to further its aims. In this respect the YFJ can only be as strong as its member organisations allow it to be.

Having been involved in European civil society for such a long time and based on my experience and seeing the reality of youth NGOs in different countries and settings – both as an activist, trainer and youth leader – I value the organisational culture of a given structure very much. Regardless of how well an organisation is doing there is always room for improvement and many times this doesn't require much effort, money or statutory changes – a good advice, a simple smile or polite gesture can do as well. This has at least two main aspects: one is working with member organisations within YFJ and the other is linked with the issues of transparency and organisational ethics.

But at the same time the YFJ has a persona of its own if you will, namely once a decision has been agreed by the MOs in the set decision-making processes it has the mandate to act. And MOs need also to be aware who acts on behalf of YFJ and how. What does the Board do, what does the Secretariat do, how they interlink and who bears responsibility for what? What is the role of other working structures within YFJ, where do they fit in and how are their outcomes and work communicated? 

This is just some initial food for thought. Tomorrow I will share my concrete proposals on how I envisage the work of the YFJ Board and Secretariat and thus try to answer on the questions mentioned above.