THE DAILY TRACTOR
Editorial
Beware. This is the first time a press room is being revealed to everyone!
Our plans for the issues are being made on this board. Our super-cool class decoration.
Our Teambuilding Zone!
This is where you can find us 24/7. This is where the journos write their awesome articles.
the daily tractor - issue 1
Table of Content -Committee ArticlesENVI // You are what you eat. // Silja Tuovinen AFCO// European Integration: A Matter of Life and Death? // Tim Backhaus EMPL // Ghostlabour // Monica Maurelli INTA // Food Imports: A Global Dilemma // Gustaf Westin AGRI// Move On! // Tim Backhaus ITRE// Revitalizing Economies in the Member States // Emre Örendil CULT// Education First? // Lauri Lahtinen ECON// No Taxation Without Legislation // Giz Belkaya & Emre Örendil EMPL 2// Young McDonald had a Farm // Kira Lange And also... Have You Met the Organisers? // Silja Tuovinen
This Issue was brought to you by: Emre Örendil (TR) Giz Belkaya (TR) Gustaf Westin (SE) Kira Lange (DE) Lauri Lahtinen (FI) Monica Maurelli (IT) Silja Tuovinen (FI) Tim Backhaus (CH/FI) Olivier Rostang Rejdvik (FR/SE) Onur Can Uçarer (TR)
ENVI
you are what you eat Silja Tuovinen The world’s population is expected to double by the year 2050, making food safety one of the most important issues of the next couple of decades. The food production will need to preferably triple as the world’s population grows. This means that the current agricultural areas will need to be used more efficiently to provide the possibility to produce food corresponding to the additional food demand. Genetically modified (GM) food and feed have been claimed to solve the problem of growing food demand. Not only would the genetically modified (GM) food create an overall increase in the food supply, but also have the possibility to solve many of world’s hunger and malnutrition problems. Other pros of GM food is crops’ increased resistance to disease and pests as well as greater drought tolerance. Genetically modified food needs just as much effort to grow as non-GM food. Due to this GM food has no real economic value when compared to non-GM food, which is making some question its’ effectiveness and benefits. Even though GM food is rigorously tested, some of the effects of genetically engineered food and its’ allergens and toxins, may be unpredictable on human health. Genetically modified food and feed is also being criticized be-
cause of the irrevocable environmental damage it can cause through crossbreeding with conventional crops or food. So, what exactly is the genetically modified food? Plants and animals go through naturally occurring genetic changes in the nature, creating more desirable characteristics for food and feed. Thanks to modern biotechnology, also known as gene technology, modifying genetic material (DNA) of living organisms and cells artificially has become an option worth considering. Modifying the genetic characteristics of an organism aims at giving them a new property such as better nutritional value and enhancement in the food quality or resistance to a certain herbicide, disease or insect. Organisms whose genetic material has been artificially modified are called genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Genetically modified food and feed consist, contain or are produced from these GMOs. The most common genetically modified foods are soybeans, maize, cotton and rapeseed oil. The European Union has established a legal framework that regulates GM food and feed in the EU, in order to ensure that the development of modern biotechnology and GMOs take place in full safety. General framework for regulating GMs is provi-
ded by Regulation for genetically modified food and feed. One of the major objectives of the regulation is introducing a safety assessment of the highest quality before placing any GM food or feed into the market, in order to ensure a high level of protection of human and animal health on a global level. According to the regulation, ensuring clear labeling of GM food and feed in the EU aims at protecting consumer rights by responding to consumers’ concerns without misleading them and thus providing ideal conditions for a conscious choice. In addition, requirements for labeling GM feed have been imposed to guarantee that the farmers are provided with explicit information on the composition and properties of feed. The regulation also promotes efficient, time-limited and transparent procedures for risk assessment and authorisation of GM food. To make sure that there is no contamination between conventional crops and GM crops, the EU has composed guidelines on the co-existence of genetically modified, conventional and organic crops. So, is genetically modified food the solution for the growing food demand despite its’ tenuous economic benefits and concerns about safety? If we are what we eat, should we eat genetically modified food or not?
the daily tractor - issue 1
European integration has always been a very critical subject within the various European Union Member States. It has always split the Member States or even the European citizens behind the question, “yes or no for the European Union?” Nowadays the Euroscepticism is rising ahead in all over Europe and people in favour of European integration are scared of the upcoming elections because this new coming phenomenon of Euroscepticism. Its main origin has been that European integration would decrease the powers of the national states. The concept of Euroscepticism itself can still be divided into two groups: soft and hard. As
already mentioned in the Topic Overview, the soft ones support the existence of the European Union and membership to the Union but opposes further plans and ideas for federal Europe, whereas hard Eurosceptics again are in the opposition to membership or the existence of the European Union. The ideology of Euroscepticism can be found in both right and left parties. It is a general fear that the number of these supporters increases too much. They could add multiple points of view at the European Parliament but at the same time harm the work of the European integration and have a damaging effect on the work of done by now.
But is the rising Euroscepticism really that scary, or is it even a good thing for thinking how to develop the European Union to a better Union? Being a Eurosceptic might not always be a bad thing. Think about your own life. Would you not want to have a good review from an outsider of your work and in case something is not always going right, is it not good to get some constructive criticism? The European Union needs these common-sense thinkers and observers to be oppose of it, so it can develop in a better direction. The European Union is a big supranational organisation, with twenty-eight Member States that constantly influence and develop the
AFCO
European Integration: A Matter of Life and Death? Union’s policies and actions. Every Member State wants to have their own additions to this large and complex system with different level of institutions. The European Union might seem overly complex and inaccessible for the average European citizen, and that might push them in the direction of opposition to European integration. During the past years, the European Parliament elections have faced issues of low
voter turnout. In 2009 the turnout was lowest ever since the first direct elections held in 1979; it fell from 1979’s 67% to 2009’s 43%. Due to euro-scepticism, the level of turnout might even rise in the upcoming elections because of people’s interest on defending the Europe or being in favour of euro-scepticism.
Considered as the «Devil of the Republic» among his opponents, Jean-Marie Le Pen is the founder of the French «Front National». He advocates Euroscepticism.
What political and institutional reform does the European Union need to undergo in order to improve the relationship with its citizens? And above all, how can the Europe’s citizens be reassured that their opinions do matter, and that they do have the final say in the EU’s ever expanding federalisation?
Tim Backhaus
EMPL
Ghostlabour
Implicit undertone or explicit question, here it is, the crux of the matter for lots of young people looking for a job in Europe. Of course, and sadly, the answer is no: the statistics, depressing reading as they may be, currently show that 25 million EU citizens are out of work and more than 50% of young people are unemployed. Yet hopes for a rebalancing of the European labour market are whistling in the wind. The recent eastward expansion of the EU has had a positive effect on the labour market; workers now seem more ready to jump state and move a long way to find jobs. A big exception is represented by the central euro-zone, which remains a stay-at-home place even though this is where greater labour mobility is particularly needed in order to make adjustment to economic shocks less harsh. Considering that freedom-of-movement rules are at the heart of the European project, the general increased labour mobility across the Member States represents
an economic balancing mechanism and a real handhold for European economies, which lie at a breaking point. When one area suffers an economic downturn and unemployment rises, the surplus labour force that cannot be employed moves to another area, which experiences growth and thus increased demand for labour, helping to restore balance in both cases. This is the reason why, as the crisis persists, news of increasing movement of the European labour force across borders becomes more common.
‘‘
During the recent years, not only the possibility to travel across Europe has been boosted, but also the attitude of the young generation towards labour mobility has improved; the consciousness about the benefits in terms of personal enrichment – acquisition of competences and skills, knowledge of foreign languages, cultural broadmindedness – has been an encouraging factor in this field. But that is still not sufficient. Everything seems to be coherent with the process of economic growth, until we do not face
It’s absence would lead to a net loss around 5% of the GDP in the Euro area and a decrease in the annual income per head of about 4.500€
the significant barriers presented by the reality of the European single market. No good deed goes unpunished: the disturbing imbalance between the levels of unemployment, which currently range from about 5% in Austria and Germany to 21% in Greece, Spain and Italy, and the potential of skilled labour force, which is major in the former countries aforementioned, shows how labour mobility often has a only unilateral direction. It emerges that migrant workers are young scientists and researchers from the crisis-hit countries of southern Europe moving to the countries of the North. While in theory such a development should be viewed positively, the combination of a competitiveness deficit in the southern periphery of the Euro zone
and the unidirectional brain drain is a cause for concern. The fact that workers do not travel anymore by choice, but out of necessity, suggests that highly educated migrants from the crisis-hit countries have no intent to return boosting the economic potential of their home-countries - the so-called “reverse brain drain”. Unless this happens, labour mobility, normally a pre-requisite for the efficient operation of the Eurozone, could become one of the principal factors of its disintegration. Bearing in mind the potential of the single market – its absence would lead to a net loss around 5% of the GDP in the Euro area and a decrease in the annual income per head of about €4,500 - the hope is that greater flexibility in the labour market would also translate
’’
into a greater willingness to hire in an economic upturn. Europe needs a framework able to address the labour force towards a fully use of all possible job opportunities: labour mobility, if held with forward-looking efficiency, is the key to tackle economic disparities within the Member States.
Monica Maurelli
the daily tractor - issue 1
A T N I
Food Imports: A Global Dilemma If you go to Dakar, the capital of Senegal in Africa, and visit the biggest market of agricultural goods in western Africa, the Sandaga Market, you will find European fruit, vegetables, potatoes and other types of fresh produce alongside the same products produced in Africa. The difference? The European products cost a third of the price of its African counterparts. The consequence of this is that African farmers struggle to compete with European products. This is a result of the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy, or the CAP for short, and one of many aspects in need of consideration when talking of the global trade in food.
When speaking of the import of food, the European Union has been criticized for shutting out foreign goods through trade restrictions and trade barriers. The Common Agricultural Policy is a system of subsidies for European farmers and tariffs and quotas to restrict the import of food. A big problem with the CAP is that it distorts the market and creates incentives for farmers to produce too much food, a surplus that is then sold to other countries at a low price with the help of export subsidies, creating situations like the one in Dakar. Critics argue that by doing this, the EU is putting foreign farmers and producers at a disadvantage, and
in so doing denying developing countries the economic engine for growth and development that a successful agricultural sector could prove to be. Critics argue that subsidies to European farmers should be cut; trade barriers lifted and European and African farmers compete equally, something proponents of the CAP and the current trade policy argue could only happen at the disadvantage of European farmers who would not be able to compete and consequently not be able to sustain their businesses. One of the reasons the aforementioned supporters argue that European farmers would not be able to
compete is the relatively high levels of food security regulations as well as regulations concerning hygiene in Europe, and the higher production costs that come with it. There’s no denying the fact that it is easier to make sure the food on European plates are produced under adequate safety standards if the food in question is produced in Europe and not imported, and it is of course of utmost importance that the food we eat doesn’t contain anything dangerous. What also needs to be considered when talking about importing food is the effect it has on the environment. In the globalized world of today, the transport of food
is as effective and extensive as never before. More and more consumers are getting used to having almost whatever food they want available in supermarkets all year round, and this has resulted in a rapid increase in the global food trade. Kiwis from Italy line the shelves in New Zealand, and half of Europe’s peas are grown and packaged in Kenya. It is being debated whether or not this is positive. Many argue that the increased transports only lead to a massive increase in greenhouse gas emissions. While that in itself is true, many others argue that importing food actually is better for the environment, as the greatest environmental
effect of food is in its production and not transport. Growing tomatoes in a warm country like Mexico could for example be better than growing them in energy intensive greenhouses in northern Europe. It is no mystery why the trade in food and agricultural goods is perhaps the one most debated during international trade discussions. The agricultural sector in both developed and underdeveloped countries, a chance for economic development in the third world, food safety and the climate are all potentially at stake, and the EU has a, to say the least, substantial role.
I R G
A
Tim Backhaus
Move On!
With almost 114 people per km2, Europe is one of the most densely populated continents on the globe. The share of land used for settlement, production and infrastructure is the highest in the world. Yet, unlike people and their needs, terra firma is a rather finite resource.
The crowd after a normal business day in London. With more than 15 million inhabitants, London is one of the most crowded and densely populated cities in Europe. Metropolitan areas like London, Paris or Istanbul are the main consumers of agricultural goods produced in countryside.
Once upon a time, many ages ago, our ancestors came to Europe. Having seen the vast lands, they started the settling process. There was enough space for everybody, at least at the beginning. But then, the number of people would not stop growing. The tribes started fighting for better areas. Bigger areas. As the time went on, both the tribes and the inhabited land grew bigger. And the story kept on repeating since then. Nowadays, the fights for land have transformed. And as our land is limited, there might be nothing to fight for. Despite a number of attempts of getting some more, such as drying up seashores, none of the methods has proven especially effective or paying-off. At the beginning and through the Middle Ages, the farmers, feudalists, came to a forested piece of land, burned the trees down, merged the ashes with clay and created a piece of land that was highly fertile at least for a couple of years. After they took away all the land could have yield, they moved on and left behind a burned out, dried out area. And look at us now. Over 80% of the EU’s land is filled with something – buildings, be it towns or factories, forests that are renewed every few years as the trees are torn down to be processed. Endless fields of crops
are draining the land year over year. And it is not just about space. It is about the impact the consumption has on environment. About the competition between small producers add big concerns to the damage of nature. EU has, of course, set up some goals about the protection of biological species, such as halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010, which had not been met, or a number of directives, which are only optional to follow and it is on every MS to decide on their own. This is a good attempt, but rather ineffective. Of course it makes sense. There are more people, therefore there are higher needs to be met. More food. More houses. More factories. More highways. Yet, once again, the space is not getting any more spacious. Captain Jack Sparrow once said, that the world is no any smaller, there is just less in it. Well, to rephrase the wise man according to our needs, there is more in the world and it is not getting any bigger. And we cannot just move on as our ancestors used to do. Because, unless NASA or others are running a special, undercover, and realistic program on settling the other planets in our Solar system and beyond, we have no place to move to anymore. So if we cannot run away, we have to stay and deal with it.
the daily tractor - issue 1
Revitalizing Economies in the Member States IT RE
During the period of the Great Depression, the financial world was so helpless. Everywhere was so dark; people could not anticipate what would happen an hour later, how their lives would go on or when this uncertainty would end up. The term Black Tuesday, which refers to the date that stock market crashed, explains a lot about the despair of that decade. Within the first decade of the 21st century, the world encountered with a similar economic crisis, mostly known as the Great Recession. The humanity was a bit more fortunate and affected less this time because that the thrifts of the companies had changed. Today, more corporations keen on intellectual properties (IP) more than tangible properties. It is most likely because of the change in needs of the new era, the era in which human capital blends with the industrial machines and, consequently, long-lasting, durable, unique ideas or products are generated. In the knowledge based economies, statistics have shown that there are growing trends to focus more on IP related activities, as brand building or Research and Development (R&D). R&D intensity is 3.5% in the US, which means industrial countries within the US spend that amount of their revenues for research and development. Namely, Allergan tops the spending table with 43.4% investment followed by Ericsson (24.9%), Novartis (15.1%) and Merck & Co. (14.1%). However, the status quo is a little different at this coast of the Atlantic Ocean, in Europe. Europe 2020 identifies a strategy which proposes member states to achieve the target of investing 3% of GDP in R&D in order to improve the conditions for R&D investment by the private sector, and develop a new indicator to track innovation. Unfortunately only Sweden, Finland and Denmark have reached and also exceeded this target.
Besides, especially Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) should be instigated by the governments for their entrepreneurial innovations. Governments have a bunch of regulations to implement; such as reducing red-tape obstacles, simplifying the allocation of loans to entrepreneurs, enhancing the leadership skills within the community. Governments should offer both financial assistance and other types of support in order to encourage entrepreneurs to invest in their countries. What the new entrepreneurs need the most is experience. Several governments have already started to employ teams of experienced mentors, who are available to provide coaching service to improvise new entrepreneurs’ businesses. Special programmes are available that focus on helping businesses to achieve accelerated growth and cover essential bases such as market research, performance benchmarking, investment innovation and training skills for workforce. The European Union is on a very slender rope. We will either walk carefully by evaluating all possibilities or fall down because of the air current due to the economic fluctuations. With the help of new regulations and incentives in both public and private sectors, Member States will attain their objects that are especially denoted in Europe 2020 and Horizon 2020. Now, it is time for us to act as a body and overcome these financial and economic problems with solidarity and perseverance.
Emre Ă–rendil
C
T L U
Education First?
One cannot get a job as they lack work experience, but at the same time they cannot get the required experience, since they cannot get a job. This vicious circle is woefully familiar for a lot of young people, especially as a high level of education is not a guarantee of getting employed. By Lauri Lahtinen
the daily tractor - issue 1
‘In the times of economical crises, member states tend to heavily cut on expenses, education being viewed as one. Between 2008 and 2011, 16 member states did this, six of them going even further in 2012.’
In many European countries there is a lack of communication between the education and labour markets, which leads to a skills gap. This fact is highlighted by the problem of the vicious circle for young people. Some steps have already been taken in order to tackle the problem. EU’s Council of Minister recently adopted a Quality Framework on Traineeships, which is aimed at enabling trainees to acquire high-quality work experience. The Council Recommendation calls on Member States to ensure that national law respects the principles set out in the guidelines, and to adapt their legislation if needed. Traineeships can ensure a smoother transition from education to the labour market.
One of the main problems in this issue is that in the times of economical crises, member states tend to heavily cut on expenses, education being viewed as one. Between 2008 and 2011, 16 member states did this, six of them going even further in 2012. EU has called on its members to give priority to education and other growth-friendly expenditures, but with little effect. This goes to show how limited the power of EU can be in this issue. The main reason behind this is that each member state is in charge of its own education system, meaning that only they can decide how much is resources are spent. Arguably problematic is the lack of decisions in a common EU level. However, EU member states can differ greatly from each Unfortunately this will not be of much help for early school dropouts, 40% other, not the least in their education systems. of whose struggle to get a job. The Education and Training 2020 (ET2020) strategy aims to reduce the percentage of school dropouts to below 10% by Often forgotten is the fact that education is not just a cost, but rather an 2020. In 2012 the EU average was 12,7%, fortunately worse than previous investment that leads to better prospects, if done right. The amount of years. However, it is useful to notice that this percentage varies greatly within resources needed to be invested is nothing less than substantial, though. member states. In 2012, the percentage of early school leavers in Spain was Realising this, the EU offers help to its member states via both the Erasalmost 25%, while as a contrast, in Croatia it was only 4,2%. This variation mus+ programme and the European Structural and Investment Funds. Adcreates inequality, among other things, and can stifle the feeling of a common ditionally, country-specific analyses are carried out and recommendations European identity. are given. The EU aspires to be a knowledge-based society and economy. However, recent evidence suggests that 20% of the EU’s working age population has low literacy and numeracy skills. This adds to the growing mismatch between the skills people acquire and the skills demanded in the labour market. These factors cause unemployment and limited growth. Another aspect of this problem is that the concept of lifelong learning is underappreciated, as Europe is lagging behind in the development of Open Educational Resources (OER) and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs).
Labour markets and demands for skills are changing, but it is impossible to predict exactly how. Yet somehow, education systems need to adapt to this changing world. There is a need for more flexible education systems, and also more dialogue between the labour market and the education sector. Lastly, education and training can also support personal development, active citizenship and promote social inclusion and cohesion, which makes it an extremely important sector.
N O C
E
No Taxation Without Legislation Giz Belkaya & Emre Örendil
‘I like to pay taxes. With them, I buy civilisation.’ Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
One cannot deny the importance of taxes to a government and society. Taxes are the main sources of funding for the needs of community and the country. It is essential for the government to collect money from citizens in order to be able to maintain a high living standard and improve infrastructure. A disturbance in the collection of taxes may and probably will be devastating for a state. Malfunctioning of the tax collecting system foretells the indigent situation that the government will be in. That is the reason why avoiding it has a huge importance. Either through the holes of legislation or through illegal ways, ‘stealing’ money by not paying the right amount whıch ought to be paid is a common threat that EU Member States’ and other countries’ governments face. This conflict, like expected, has various complicated international solutions. Due to the discord in the legal systems of tax collection throughout the Member States, it is easier for the shrewd and ambitious businesses or companies to create fiscal gaps. If these semi-independent systems could be brought to harmony, their difference to abuse and to benefit from would be decreased. Another way is reducing the competitiveness among Member States. That might sound utopist since every country since the beginning of history aims to thrive and overpower the other countries. Can Member States really unite and set their differences and ambitions aside in order to eradicate this critical problem?
This is where the European Commission, a highly motivated organization that means to end this problem, comes in. By encouraging and providing Member States guidelines, their aim is to resolve this issue as soon and effective as possible. However it is not enough to collaborate only with the governments of these countries. The citizens, especially owners of the big entities, try to benefit from tax avoidance. Tax avoidance is not approved morally but it is legal since citizens intend to do it through a framework under national or international laws. On the other hand, there is a more crucial problem about the tax payments, which is named tax evasion. In contrary to tax avoidance, tax evasion is illegal and the corporations which intend to do it are punished by the laws because they do not fulfill their true tax liability. All the facts and status quo considered, it seems that maintaining justice regarding the tax payments seems a bit difficult. Because the importance of money and the enormous increasing gap between the poor and the rich, each individual and company searches both for legal and illegal ways to “avoid” paying their taxes. Although lots about this topic have been discussed, the question of ‘How can the European Union boost its measure searches to supply equality and justice for tax payments within the EU borders?’ still remains to be answered.
the daily tractor - issue 1
Young MacDonald Had A Farm!
EM
Pl
Kira Lange
The average farmer is older than forty years and is clearly not able to support our food supply until the end of this century. With that fact in mind, further problems occur, each of them displaying the need of younger farmers in the European Union. With young people from all over Europe growing up preferring the possibility to change and develop the modern world to additionally connect everybody and increase globalisation through their jobs, less families live outside of cities and thereby have no contact with the farm life, unless experienced in ‘FarmVille’. And yet constantly living in the city makes people also think about changing their
perspectives. Spending one’s holidays on a farm to simply relax and enjoy the unavailability for a week or two is a movement in the opposite direction from what was experienced during the growth of technology. Also it appears that younger people don’t see the endless opportunities given in the agricultural sector, which would certainly be impressively handled by younger farmers. They could be taking the initiative to make farming a suitable occasion to actually improve living in Europe by securing our food supply and working on a regular and safe basis themselves since more farmers are needed than there are available. Moreover current-
ly older farmers might not have the knowledge and required motivation to further advance their sector, which leaves them behind their opportunities. Bearing the previous in mind farmers will be under pressure in order to ensure biodiversity same as the maintenance of the landscape even though less farmers will remain active in the future and therefore fulfilling these tasks will be hard enough due to population growth without adding the upcoming reduction concerning the amount of farmers. This will not only be difficult for the reasons stated but also because the possible workload decreases as it happens with every oth-
er citizen in the world. The world changes. It changes constantly, but does it always change for the better? Will the agricultural sector even be part of this change? Or will the most important sector of them all, the one guaranteeing our food supply, be left behind? We don’t know what will happen, but we know that only a significantly small amount of people buys ice during a long winter, because it seems unnecessary to the majority. But it does matter to be on the safe side. The agricultural sector needs to be up to date and only new ways of thinking make that possible. As every problem the European Union faces, the ageing in the agri-
cultural sector cannot be stopped immediately. Existing farmers should not confront problems in the progress and possible programmes are obligated to be customized in order to fit regional, national and pan-European situations. A problem as general and at the same time extraordinarily different from region to region needs special treatment and deserves all the attention possible. In the end, it is our future we are talking about. Without farming as a more attractive job, our food supply will shrink to minimum levels, which could that leave lots of European hungry.
II
Anastasia Memorable EYP Moment:
Andreas Memorable EYP Moment:
Anna Memorable EYP Moment:
EYP-Interrail tour she attended in Ukraine in 2012.
Iberian forum in 2012 and singing “Imagine� in a big circle.
The closing ceremony of the EYP session I head-organized.
Jonas Memorable EYP Moment:
Jonathan Memorable EYP Moment:
Lewin Memorable EYP Moment:
International session in Frankfurt and the Mettwurstpogo(??).
The farewell party of Berlin Nationals in 2012.
A media team meeting in a Jacuzzi.
HAVE YOU MET......
the daily tractor - issue 1
Christian Memorable EYP Moment: When he chaired for the first time at the German Nationals in Munich.
Christopher Memorable EYP Moment: The Iberian Forum 2011 when the GA was live streamed. I went to give a long speech and I knew my father was watching. Exactly on that moment the live stream did not work.
Niklas Memorable EYP Moment:
Quynh Anh Memorable EYP Moment:
In general the feeling you get during the last hours of a session, it’s always unique.
A summer night at an EYP-training, when we all watched shooting-stars while cuddling with each other.
Jannik Memorable EYP Moment: Saying “European Onion” in the GA.
Veronika Memorable EYP Moment: When in Graz 2013 the whole media team slept all together in only 3 beds.
Fabian Memorable EYP Moment: Closing ceremony of Ahaus 2014 (soon to take place).
......THE ORGANISERS?
supported by:
Volksbank Gronau-Ahaus eG RC Gronau-Euregio