|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Meeting with the EU Commission’s representatives and the organiser of the Civil Forum in Italy held in Chania (Greece) on Saturday 3rdMay 03 (14h30 - 18h00) The meeting was organised on the initiative of the EU Commission´s representatives in Chania. It aimed to examine possibilities of co-operation between the "Platform" and the Foundation Laboratorio Mediterraneo, in the preparation of the next civil forum, planned on November 03 under the Italian presidency of the EU. Participants: Andrea Amato, président, Istituto per il Mediterraneo (Roma) Andreu Claret, director, Institut Europeu de la Mediterrania (Barcelona) Michele Capasso, director, Fondazione Laboratorio Mediterraneo (Naples) Caterina Arcidiacono, Vice-President, Fondazione Laboratorio Mediterraneo (Naples) Michael Webb, Deputy Head, in charge of the Barcelona Process, European Commission (Brussels) Rafael Dochao Moreno, External Relations, European Commission Gisela von Buxhoeveden, External Relations, European Commission Patricia Jimenez, representing the Platform Ameer Makhoul, representing the Platform Ghislaine Glasson Deschaumes, representing the Platform At the end of the meeting, we were joint by Isaias Barrenada Bajo, from the Confederacion Sindical de Comisiones Obreras (Madrid) Introduction Before starting discussing the modalities of a possible co-operation, the Platform representatives insisted on the fact that they were not in the position to decide about a final agreement. They said they will report to the Platform, which will take the decision about participating or not in the preparation of the Naples Civil Forum. They insisted on the importance of reciprocity in the negotiation processes, which are starting. They asked then to focus on the following questions: - What common agenda? How to decide about participants? What space and time will be given to the Platform within the civil forum? As an introductory word, Michael Webb expresses the wish of the Commission to open the dialogue between the Platform and the organiser of the next civil forum, Michele Capasso, who declared himself ready to reconsider his draft project. The main aim of the meeting is to see whether we may come to an agreement on a possible constructive scenario for co-operation, as the Platform may play a vital role to re-launch the civil forum, and as we have to take account of the decision already taken by the Italian government. We all agree, said Mr Webb, that the Civil Forums have to be organised differently. He asks Mr Capasso to answer to the Platform´s questions relating to the agenda, the participants, the space dedicated to the Platform during the civil forum, the links between the Platform and the national committee. A first part of the discussion focussed on basic principles related to a possible co-operation. Mr Capasso said that he shares and supports the content of the Platform strategy paper, but he reminded the participants of the meeting that voices were raised against it at a working group that morning concerning the way the Platform is being composed. He said that he is open for discussion, but he insisted on the fact that civil society includes the "professional organisations" (architects, traders, lawyers, etc,) and that the Foundation is in contact with thousands of NGOs that may be interested by the Platform. He said that his Foundation has to be open to every one, even to people who do not respect the freedom of expression. This last point ("to be open to people who do not respect the freedom of expression) was strongly contested by the Platform members. They explained that a precondition for working together was to refuse inviting people who do not respect the freedom of expression, association and creation, and to refuse to include the "very governmental NGOs". Mr Amato and Mr Claret agreed. Another precondition is that Mr Capasso should not interfere with the Platform´s debates or composition. The last precondition is that the Civil Forum should not be put at the service of one individual or one organisation (Michael Webb), but serves the purpose of strengthening the civil society dynamics, both in Italy and in the other countries, and reflect a collective effort. Proposals resulting from the debate 1. Creation of a "Comité de pilotage" (proposal of Mr Amato) in charge of the agenda, content, participants, methodology, visibility of the Civil Forum. It could be composed of 12 persons: 4 "former organisers" of the Civil Forum (including Mr Claret) 4 Platform members (with a majority from the south med.) 4 Italian members (incl. Mr Capasso and Mr Amato), but the Italian members could decide to give two sieges to partners from the South Content Michele Capasso suggested that the next civil forum should not repeat the same topics as the Greek one, and he announced that he was ready to renounce to the "dialogue of cultures" issue. The main priorities, proposed by Mr Amato, could be the following: Sustainable development (including the issue of employment); "Good governance" or "empowering of civil society" The Platform insisted on having a third topic, "civil societies of the Euro-Mediterranean area after the war in Iraq". Either this theme can be the headline of the whole Civil Forum, being transversal to all the debates, or it can be a separated third priority. The Platform representatives insisted on the need for debating about the consequences of the war on all the components of society. It seems that all the participants to the meeting agreed on the need for the Civil Forum to develop a cross-sector approach (human rights, culture, environment, women, trade unions, etc). The different sectors would of course have a period of time for working among themselves, but the general objectives would be the interaction on the thematic priorities. The Enlargement process should be a transversal priority of the Civil Forum in Naples. The participants Again, the Platform insisted on the fact that the organiser must resist governmental pressures to impose "official" "very governmental" NGOs. It is a matter of principle, and the lack of attention on this point will endanger the whole process of the Civil Forum. The Platform insists on two other major points: - Parity between men and women participants; - Strong participation of the South-Med civil society (in opposite to its poor participation in Chania) and youth. There is an agreement on the fact that participants from the new member states should be invited as well. The money for their travel and hosting costs could be funded by the enlargement budget lines that each Representation has in order to "promote" the enlargement reality in the member states. The average number of participants would be of 500 persons, the quotas of the Platform has not been discussed yet. The existing EUROMED university networks should not be invited, as they benefit from other frames and important funding within other programmes of the Commission. Once the main working themes will be defined, we may discuss on the participation of business men/women, as Mr Amato and Mr Barrenada Bajo consider it as needed, esp. if we discuss about employment´s issues. Mr Webb however thinks that it should not be a priority, as other frames for co-operation exist within the Commission. The visas The Platform insisted on the fact that the Italian government should give a guarantee as far as obtaining the visas for the participants from the South is concerned. Michael Webb mentioned that the EU´s delegations could play a major role in facilitating the visa procedures, if they are informed well in advance. Preparatory meetings There was a discussion about preparatory meetings. The agreement is that there is no added value in organising prestigious local Civil Forum’s meetings in the South, as the FLM has planed, and that the time schedule is to short for the committee to discuss extensively the preparation and contents of alternative meetings. A better solution, proposed by the platform, would be to promote local discussions within the networks, which would aim both at discussing the strategy papers and proposing participants to the Naples Civil Forum. Patricia Jimenez will write and send a proposal starting from the 1999 Environmental Civil Forum preparatory meetings. Deadlines Mr Capasso will integrate all the agreements reached into the description of the project and will send it to all the participants of the meeting. Following reception of this document, the Platform should take a decision before the end of May, having in mind that the Commission has to launch the financial procedures as soon as possible. Mr Capasso has very short deadlines imposed by the hotels for booking, and the organisation period is short. As a conclusion The Italian organizers of Naples CF gave the impression that they still have internal debate and no clearance regarding the openness in terms of the Naples CF organization, agenda and the process itself. It was clear that they want to get the credit from, for them selves, for their local policies. With the EU Commission as a witness, they committed themselves to share the agenda with the Platform. As negotiators of this meeting, we support the idea to join the CF as platform, and to take this opportunity to share the agenda of Naples CF, under the condition that the platform will get a clear guarantee that all the decision processes will be shared within the organization committee, and that the pre-conditions of the platform will be respected from the very beginning of the preparatory process until the very end of the Civil Forum in Naples. Mr Capasso’s written project for the Civil Forum in Naples, which is to come in few days, will give a clear picture of his understanding of our conditions and will orientate the platform for the coming decision. Patricia Jimenez, Ameer Makhoul, Ghislaine Glasson Deschaumes Torna indietro |
||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
