Speak Out! in Strasbourg

In July 2003 35 young Europeans met in Strasbourg as part of the Institute for Citizenship's educational project Speak Out! on European citizenship. This was the culmination of the on-line education programme www.citizen.org.uk/speakout, which invites young people to discuss topical issues around European citizenship, such as human rights, diversity, sport, and communications. To help teachers and youth workers prepare young people for the on-line discussions, the Institute for Citizenship has produced a user guide with background information on European institutions, European citizenship, discussion and debating techniques, and the topical issues. It was also the launchpad for the Speak Out! European Network project, which sought to adapt the existing resource for use in other European countries and hold local youth conferences on active citizenship in partner countries.

The meeting in Strasbourg gave the young people who had participated in the project the chance to meet and have face-to-face discussions with each other. The aims of the meeting were:

• To provide a forum where young people could meet with fellow Europeans to discuss issues that concern them, in order to help them explore different views and see issues from various perspectives, so highlighting the cultural diversity of Europe.
• To provide a channel for young people to speak out to European decision makers of today. The meeting included Question Times, meetings with MEPs and representatives from the Council of Europe.
• To encourage young people to learn and think about the issues relating to European citizenship and migration, such as the democratic deficit, tolerance, and a multicultural and diverse Europe.
• To prepare young "advocates" of active, informed and responsible European citizenship. Upon their return students have been encouraged to contact local decision makers and produce articles for the local press.

The themes of the week were Active and European citizenship, the future of Europe. The young people had discussions with MEPs and officials at the Council of Europe around these themes, and also observed a court case at the European Court of Human Rights. Following the discussions they split into groups and produced written conclusions, which are summarised below.

Active citizenship and European citizenship With Neil Kinnock and Maria Martens MEP

This discussion looking at the workings of the EU and how to engage people, particularly young people. The group considered what their understanding of active and European citizenship was, whether they felt like active/European citizens, and whether many opportunities existed at national level to be active citizens. The speakers were asked about the legal status of European citizens and how European citizenship affects national citizenship, the links between European and global citizenship, and how the EU communicated its work to citizens. The young people also considered what it meant to them and how they could become more involved, and broadened the discussion into other areas including the environment and the enlarging Europe.

Conclusions:

• European citizenship is difficult to identify with, particularly, but not exclusively, for those countries that have yet to join the EU, because "we haven't decided where Europe starts and where it ends". The aim is not so much to find a common identity but a community of understanding and sharing, with individuals taking pride in the diversity of their national identities and being open and tolerant towards others.
• European citizenship doesn't mean much to many people because the media does not convey a positive or relevant image of Europe - the overall impression is that Europe doesn't affect people's day-to-day lives.
• Opportunities exist in every country for participation, at a local, national and European level, but it's often difficult to identify such opportunities because they tend to be poorly promoted and only targeted at certain sectors of society.
• But it is important for citizens to know what's going on at a European level and to be aware of decisions taken on their behalf, because it really does affect us all. Politicians should do more to engage citizens because if people don't feel like they belong they won't be able to fully appreciate their European citizenship and all that that entails. EU institutions MUST get better at conveying their message to the citizens of Europe - and not to presume that people, especially young people, understand how the institutions and processes work. People can't engage with organisations that they can't understand.
• But it is important for citizens to know what's going on at a European level and to be aware of decisions taken on their behalf, because it really does affect us all. Politicians should do more to engage citizens because if people don't feel like they belong they won't be able to fully appreciate their European citizenship and all that that entails. EU institutions MUST get better at conveying their message to the citizens of Europe - and not to presume that people, especially young people, understand how the institutions and processes work. People can't engage with organisations that they can't understand.
• Active citizenship means being involved in the creation of your own life, and that means being involved in decision-making processes and the organisation of society. We all have a right to have our opinions heard, and people should take the opportunities that arise to voice their opinions to their representatives. People should vote because to not do so means giving up their right to make decisions about their future. Active citizenship also implies defending your rights and standing up for what you believe in.
• But active citizenship cannot be forced. It is something that individuals must pursue individually.

Future of Europe With Nick Clegg MEP

The discussion at this event was focused on how the young people saw Europe changing as it enlarged, the draft constitution of the European Convention, and whether there was currently a democratic deficit in the EU. Questions were asked about the role and workings of the Council of Ministers, and the potential impact of the proposed constitution on member states.

Conclusions:

• The enlargement of the EU will pose challenges for Europe, both economic and political, but EU membership will raise living standards and ensure common standards, and such benefits will outweigh the negative effects caused. The EU is strong enough to cope with these challenges provided that it continues to communicate and make every effort to accommodate the needs of its current and future members.
• The EU provides a much needed counter-balance to the power of the USA in economic and political terms, and must continue to gain political and economic strength and credibility in order to exert an effective influence in international affairs.
• A European dream of "welfare, diversity and democracy" will hopefully become a reality across the continent within the next two decades. To achieve this we need to "work, discuss, think".
• The eurozone is a market that can rival the US and Japan, and the euro has the potential to secure the EU's economic future.
• The Convention on the Future of Europe seems to have failed in one of its aims - to demystify the EU and make its processes transparent and accessible. In order to engage people, the EU needs to learn to communicate with people on their level, especially with young people who don't necessarily understand the technical details about how the EU makes legislation.
• Voter apathy is a problem for the EU and needs to be addressed - the European Parliament claims to have the best democratic mandate of all the EU institutions but voter turnout is low and declining.
• At what point does the EU stop increasing its powers? Countries must be able to refuse further and deeper integration and maintain their sovereignty whilst still benefiting from their membership of the EU.
• The inclusion of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the draft constitution ensures that the constitution will serve to protect individual freedoms and reinforce the founding principles of the EU, of importance and relevance to every European citizen.

Migration With Baroness Sarah Ludford MEP

This was a heated session, with a preliminary session chaired by members of the group, focusing on the advantages and disadvantages that migration presents. A fair proportion of the group considered that social problems often encountered in multi-cultural societies, such as racism, high crime rates and intolerance, would be avoided if immigrants were obliged to speak the language of the country of residence, and pro-actively integrate. Further discussion led to the view that migration presented opportunities for countries to prosper and that the obligation to promote integration did not rest purely on the shoulders of immigrants, that residents of a particular community ought to make the effort to reach out to immigrants and welcome them in, in order to minimise social tensions and with respect to the European Convention on Human Rights, the UN Convention on Human Rights, and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The discussion also focused on the likely impact of enlargement on migratory flows. Baroness Ludford also encouraged the group to consider the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers, seeking first to clarify the distinction between economic migrants and refugees and asylum seekers.

Conclusions:

• The free movement of people is one of the fundamental principles of the European Union and it must remain a priority. This provides all European citizens with the opportunities to achieve their potential under equal conditions.
• The EU should have an active and efficient organisation in charge of setting standards and regulations to offer migrants acceptable opportunities in the country they decide to inhabit, as well as to control the rate of movement and quality of the incoming workforce.
• With the forthcoming enlargement there is a risk that skilled workers will leave the poorer accession states in the hope of a better standard of living elsewhere in the EU, which could be detrimental to the health of their own economy.
• The EU has to ensure that the negative aspects of free movement of people aren't exacerbated by the increased migration following enlargement, such as contraband, drug and people trafficking. A Common Immigration Policy would help member states to tackle these problems and improve security.
• Integration of immigrants is key to alleviating social tensions, and immigrants should be encouraged to learn the language of the country of residence and live according to their laws. However, the "host community" must also bear responsibility for ensuring that immigrants are welcomed, that their culture, language, beliefs and traditions are respected, and that their human rights are protected.
• When there is severe inequality in the world, migration is a problematic phenomenon as people want to escape the deprivation of their own country and seek better life chances elsewhere. The EU must also deal with inequalities by improving trade relations with developing countries, reforming the Common Agricultural Policy and increasing its aid contributions. The accession of ten new member states to the EU should, in the long term, improve their economies and reduce the problems leading to high levels of migration.

Overall conclusions

The feedback received from the participants was, on the whole, very positive. For everyone, the highlight was meeting so many people from across Europe, and having the chance to learn and understand more about their countries.
As a learning experience, this was clearly a success. The participants greatly enjoyed seeing the institutions of Europe in action, and appreciated the opportunity to share their thoughts, opinions and concerns with the officials who make decisions affecting their lives.
However an oft-repeated sentiment was that the European institutions seem out of touch with citizens, particularly young people, and do not seem to realise that the average young person really understands very little about Europe and the EU, the difference between the Council of Europe and the European Union, for example, or what these organisations actually do. They all said that things became so much clearer to them when they saw the institutions and the officials with their own eyes, and that they were far more likely to become engaged in European issues as a result.
Our thanks go to all the people who gave up their time to speak to us, including:

Anne Peroi, Council of Europe Visitors Service
Mechtilde Fuhrer, Council of Europe Democracy and Citizenship
Neil Kinnock, Vice President of the European Commission
Maria Martens MEP
Nick Clegg MEP
Baroness Sarah Ludford MEP
Pervenche Beres MEP
Richard Corbett MEP

Written by Ray Kirtley
International Resource Centre for Schools and Colleges
University of Hull

Un Article ésrit par Amélie Gaillard, Strasbourg 2005

Au mois de mars, le magazine anglais Speak out ! a organisé un concours européen. Il était destiné aux lycéens âgés de 15 à 18 ans. L'objet du concours était d'écrire un article en anglais sur l'Europe. 29 européens, dont 4 français ont eu la chance de gagner à Strasbourg. Le voyage a eu lieu du 29 juin au 4 juillet.

Nous avons eu l'occasion de visiter le Conseil de L'Europe, la Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme, le Parlement Européen et bien évidemment, la magnifique ville qu'est Strasbourg. Des débats sur le rôle de l'Europe dans le futur et l'intégration de nouveaux pays au sein de l'Union Européenne ont également été organisés.

Ce voyage a été pour moi une formidable aventure humaine. C'était en quelque sorte un "Nice people" pour lycéens. J'ai beaucoup appris sur les différentes cultures que l'on peut rencontrer en Europe. J'ai découvert que malgré nos coutumes, parfois opposées, on pouvait tisser des liens d'amitié indestructibles avec des européens dont on ne connaissait rien. En effet, j'ai visité ces institutions européennes en compagnie de bulgares, de polonais, d'hollandaises, de lithuaniens, de roumains, de portugais, de suédoises et d'anglais.

A la fin de ce voyage, nous étions tous très fiers d'arborer nos certificats qui mentionnaient le fait que l'on avait gagné ce concours. Le moment le plus dur a sans aucun doute pour moi été le moment des adieux. J'ai passé de si bons moments avec ses personnes qu'il m'était inconcevable de les laisser. Grâce à tous ces gens, je peux désormais dire que je suis fière d'être européenne car j'ai quelque chose en commun avec chacun d'eux.

On s'est tous jurés de rester en contact et de se revoir dans nos pays respectifs. J'attend cela avec impatience. Peut être l'an prochain à la même époque, qui sait?