The European Youth Parliament
April 21st 2014
GB Session Report – Tbilisi 2013 Report by the Governing Body on the 74rd International Session of the European Youth Parliament
Introduction You are now reading the report on the 74rd International Session of the European Youth Parliament in Tbilisi, Georgia. This report has been produced by Anar Kučera, Member of the Governing Body on behalf of the 7th Governing Body of the European Youth Parliament. The idea of this report is to provide a review of the session, share best practise as well as new ideas and also focus on areas that might need further development in future sessions. Overall quality of the session was excellent for all participants of the sessions. The participants had the opportunity to experience the full programme of the EYP session with its unique concept combining education with social aspects. In addition the participants got to learn about the traditions, culture and daily live in their host city of Tbilisi in Georgia. Two members of the Governing Body were present for the whole or larger part of the session (Anar Kučera, André Schmitz). Furthermore two employees of European Youth Parliament International (Executive Director Krista Simberg, Project Manager Stefan Vandenhende) attended the session to provide support for the NOC. This report has been submitted to the Head-‐Organisers, Session President and Editor for review to avoid major misunderstandings.
I. Conclusions European Youth Parliament, Sophienstraße 28-‐29, 10178 Berlin, Germany. Tel.: +49 (0)30 97 00 50 95 Fax::+49 (0)30 280 95 150
Successes and Good Practices -‐
One of the highlights of the session was very well achieved balance between traditional session programme elements and cultural programme. The participants had several occasions when they had the possibility to get to know and engage with Georgian culture. The Georgian evening, Field trip as well as the Euroconcert performance had a high level of quality and offered valuable insights into Georgian traditions, food, art and culture. None of the events were a burden on the participants of the session or shortened the amount of time needed for the traditional session elements.
-‐
Another aspect of the session that was a full success was the opening ceremony in the historic building of the National Parliament Library. While the ceremony was reasonably long it featured several speeches by prominent guests including a video-‐message by the European Commissioner on Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy Mr Štefan Füle.
-‐
The level of accommodation and food was of a very high standard, both at the Teambuilding venue at Bazaleti Lake Hotel as well as in Tbilisi at the Bazaleti Palace Hotel and Astoria Hotel.
-‐
The session president Mr Jari Marjelund majorly contributed to success of the session with a very supportive and helpful attitude. Besides leading his chairsteam he was also always ready to provide help and guidance to the other participants of the session. With his unique humour he contributed to the very relaxed but professional atmosphere of the session.
-‐
Despite the slightly difficult conditions during the committee work the chairsteam of the session has done a very good job. Finding a right balance between the academic and social aspects of the work of the committee.
-‐
The editor of the session Mr Alexandre Narayanin together with his media team published several session newspapers, produced session videos and maintained presence of the session in the social media. Needless to say all of those in very high quality, despite a difficulty of
working as a smaller team than we are usually used to at International sessions. -‐
The session had good media coverage in both local and national media. Especially during the Opening ceremony several national TV and radio stations were present to provide a coverage including interviews prominently featuring the European Youth Parliament.
-‐
General Assembly of the session featured several procedural innovations such as higher number of attack speeches or no points of information. Both ideas were implemented successfully and were a positive change for the flow of General Assembly.
Areas of future development Following points are aimed primarily as learning points for NOCs, officials and staff of the international office of future International sessions. They focus on our commitment to continuously improve the quality of our sessions and should therefore be not seen as pointing out mistakes of the Tbilisi NOC. -‐
An aspect that was already brought to the attention of the Governing Body by the session president was the very tight time schedule of selection of officials for the session. As the officials were selected relatively close to the dates of the session, the prices for the tickets to Tbilisi were above average. This might have contributed to the overall low amount of applications for the officials’ teams. EYP strives to be an inclusive organization that enables participation for young people from different socio-‐economical backgrounds and therefore affordable height of the costs for session participations is essential. In the future if a session is to be organised in a destination were travel costs tend to be higher a selection timeframe needs to be chosen that allows enough time for the selected officials to book travel at affordable costs.
-‐
During one of the parties the owner of the venue did not follow the alcohol policy of the European Youth Parliament for the entire duration of the party due to a different interpretation of the policy. While the issue was addressed swiftly and directly by the Head-‐Organisers of the session, so that the policy was followed for a majority of the evening, it shows that a clear understanding with the owners of the party venues that doesn’t allow different interpretations is needed.
-‐
While in general the travel conditions at the session were of a good standard on some occasions (especially the field trip to Mtskheta) the buses were of a questionable technical condition. Fortunately nothing happened, but generally partners should be looked for that provides transport in technically perfect condition to minimise any risks for the participants.
-‐
The committee work venue was challenging for the work of committees. The venue was still under construction and therefore some of the committees had to work on their resolutions next to a building site. This had an impact on the work of the committees and presented a burden on the chairsteam. While the organisers tried to do their utmost to make the situation better on the spot, this should be avoided at any costs during our future sessions.
-‐
Several crucial aspects were still undecided just few weeks ahead of the beginning of the session. Some of the venues were changed at a very last moment and some of the programme elements were finished only few weeks ahead of the session. This brings unnecessary stress and burden on the officials teams and should be better coordinated in the future.
II. Discussion Destination It has been discussed internally in the organization whether the decision to host an International Session in Tbilisi has been a wise choice. While some of the issues than raised had a point, majority of the complaints have been based on prejudice. The session in Tbilisi was of a good standard we expect our flagship events to have. One of the issues raised was a safety concern. Both the international office and NOC took those concerns very seriously and would under no circumstances allow a session to happen if it might have any real impact on safety of the participants. On the spot the organisers took all the precautions necessary and Tbilisi ended being a safe destination and session for all participants. Unfortunately one delegation could not participate due to legal issues in their home country (schools would not consider Georgia a safe place for school projects). The international office will communicate any potential risks of that kind in advance and the Governing Body will consider this for future bids, should significant number of delegations be influenced in such a way.
Lastly, there are cultural differences in daily life between the different countries that should be respected. However some of them such as the acceptance for smoking indoors should be approached differently in the future. All venues for International Sessions should be completely smoke-‐free indoors and smoking should only be allowed in the designated outside areas where other participants cannot be harmed by passive smoking. Organization The NOC consisted of young and passionate organisers from Georgia and was led by a committed trio of Head-‐Organisers. The organisers followed a traditional structure of teamwork, with different portfolios that covered all the aspects of the session programme. What is important to note is the personal dedication and friendliness of each of the organisers. Organisers were always available when needed and were quick to resolve any issues that rose. One thing that was slightly unexpected was the initial difficulties with finding of the responsible head-‐organizers. Relatively long time after the Tbilisi bid was selected as the future International Session it was still unclear who the head-‐organizers will be. This must have put a lot of unnecessary pressure on the selected head-‐organizers who started with much less time for the pre-‐session organization than is usual. Additionally the issue of having rather young head-‐organisers made it especially in the beginning more challenging for the international office to provide good support and required lots of energy being spent on going through basics. Also for a relatively long time there was uncertainty if the session will be funded and organised, but thanks to a good cooperation between the NOC and the international office and also thanks to an incredible personal dedication and effort by the NOC and especially the head-‐organizers this showed not to be an issue at all. Challenging aspect was a relative inexperience of the organization team, many of the organizers at the session were organizing event of this scale for the first time, including the three head-‐organizers who have not had a chance to attend any of the previous International sessions as international organizers. Additional difficulty for the team was the political situation in the country and the presidential elections that were to happen after the session. The team did manage to prevail neutral stance and nonpartisan character of the session. Last point that I see worth mentioning is the situation of having two separate accommodation venues for the session participants. While there is sometime no other way how to arrange accommodation than at two different venues, it is always preferable to have everybody under one roof. Stakeholder’s cooperation
The cooperation between the international office and NOC in regards of the organizational support was excellent. The exchange of information worked very well to mutual satisfaction as stated above. The feedback on the cooperation was very positive from both sides and could serve as model for future sessions. Innovations The chairsteam initially requested a try-‐out for three changes in the procedure of the General Assembly. These were discontinuing the reading of operative clauses and points of information and allowing for two attack speeches instead of just one. The Governing Body carefully reviewed the request and worked out with the team a final decision for the Tbilisi session. The points of information were left out of the General Assembly procedure as they were considered not being very helpful but taking a considerable amount of time that could be rather spent on debate as such. This proved to be successful; the delegates were motivated to get the necessary factual knowledge in advance from other sources or their peers. Two instead of one attack speech were allowed with 2 minutes of time each and followed by a 90 seconds response by the proposing committee. The shortened duration of an attack speech was not considered as an obstacle and the possibility for more delegates to take up the floor from the front and deliver a consistent speech was seen as a full success. Overall it would be recommended to follow these changes at future sessions and the Governing Body will initiate a process to evaluate and possibly permanently change the General Assembly in the future, taking into account both Tbilisi and Zurich try-‐ outs.
III. Past International Sessions Zurich 2013 The Zurich report stated that: ”However in general it would be better to ensure the suitability and availability of all venues well beforehand”. This can be repeated also for Tbilisi, especially in regard of the committee work venue that changed very late in process to a rather unsatisfactory venue. However the rest of the venues were superb and ideal to host the session. The Zurich report stated that: ”Whilst the high academic quality of the session was without a question success, many participants felt that … there were too few parties”. The Tbilisi organisers managed to find a more or less ideal combination of academic and social aspects of the programme. The evening programme was rich and diverse in content.
Amsterdam 2012 The Amsterdam report stated that: ”Before and during the session the GB representative was advised of the NOC’s view that the NOC, Office and GB working relationship during the organizing process was unsatisfactory”. Luckily the issue of cooperation between the different stakeholders has significantly improved. The international office worked closely together with the NOC to ensure success of the session. The mutual cooperation had a structured manner and proved to be mutually beneficial for both sides.