REPORT FORM
2nd round of National Consultations of the Structured Dialogue
Period: Trio Presidency Poland-Denmark-Cyprus
DEADLINE: Friday, 10th of February 2012.
Please find below a report form allowing your National Working Group to communicate the results of the national consultation to the European Steering Committee. The input you will provide through this form will serve as a common base for the discussions at EU level.
In order to allow the European Steering Committee to integrate the results of the national consultations in preparation for the EU Youth Conference in Sorø, Denmark, we kindly ask you to please send this report form filled in to the European Steering Committee for the implementation of the structured dialogue (mail to: , Cc. ) and to your national government by Friday, 10th of February 2012.
The European Steering Committee kindly asks you to fill out this form in English and return it in typed format (not as a PDF file, please).
Technical details of the consultation:
Please provide the requested information on your National Working Group:
Details of the contact persons:Name / Toms Malmeisters
E-mail address /
Institution / National Youth council of Latvia
Position / Board member, Structured dialogue coordinator
EU Member State / Latvia
Members of the National Working Group (number and names)
Youth Organisations / National Youth council of Latvia, National Student Union of Latvia, regional youth organizations
National Authorities / Ministry of Education and Science
National Agencies / Agency for International programs for Youth, National Centre of Education,
Others / Free Trade Union Confederation of Latvia, Youth workers from all around Latvia, students, school students
Level of the consultation (national, regional, local)
National / x
Regional / x
Local
Methodology / We had two main work methods :
1. E-questionnaire , where our goal was to get first expression of young people on particular questions as Vote16, financing of youth initiatives in future the role of youth organization in decision making process
2. Regional discussions. We held five regional discussions in Latvia, where youth, youth workers and decision makers made recommendations about following topics as Vote 16, role of youth NGOs , Role of youth participation and youth employment.
Suggestions/best practices / We recommend to other member states organizing regional discussions with young people involving youth organizations, youth workers and decision makers. During discussions young people recognize the essence and importance of Structured dialogue.
Estimated number of young people participating in the overall consultation / 375
Estimated number of young people represented in the results of the consultation / Results have been approved with National Youth council of Latvia and National Student union of Latvia
GUIDING QUESTIONS
Introduction to the guiding questions:
The overall theme for the second 18 month cycle of the Structured Dialogue during the Polish, Danish and Cypriot Presidencies is to increase youth participation in democratic life in Europe. Under this theme each country has also chosen national priorities for their Presidency. The Polish Presidency focused on cooperation between young people from the EU, Eastern Europe and Caucasus. The Danish Presidency will focus on the following national priority: fostering young people’s creativity, innovative capacity and talent as a tool for their active participation in society and increased employability on the labour market.
Although there are several answers and solutions to increasing youth participation and creativity, we have identified, and will focus on, two important aspects: 1) Youth participation in institutional democracy, especially in elections and 2) Youth participation in organisations, in particular regarding the reduction of administrative burdens and legal requirements to participation.
These two aspects were chosen on the basis of the Trio priority and national priority respectively. During the Danish Presidency, we will focus on participation on the two above-mentioned levels. The first being participation in democratic structures and the second being structures needed in order to enhance participation in youth organisations as a medium for creativity and innovation.
Under each topic an introduction to the challenges is given followed by questions relevant to the area. By the end of these national consultations, we wish to end up with concrete, focused and goal-oriented results contributing to the overall thematic priority.
1. Increase youth participation in elections
Challenges that lie ahead
Europe is currently facing a huge demographic challenge. It is an ageing continent as a result of the declining birth rate and increasing average age. The average age of Europe’s voters is rising year by year and the number of youngsters is proportionally shrinking. In 2000m 12.4% of the European population was aged between 15 and 24, whereas the group aged 65 to 90 made up 16.2%. By 2020, the group aged 15 to 24 will account for 10.9% of the population and the group aged 65 to 90 for nearly twice this: 20.6% in total[i]. At the same time, the vast majority of European countries are experiencing a decline in voter turnout and it is mainly young people in these countries who do not participate in democratic processes. On account of this, the topics of political debate are gradually being distorted, creating a huge democratic deficit. In order to strengthen the democracy and legitimacy of political decisions, it is important to involve a larger number of young people. A significant step in finding a solution to this challenge is to increase the amount of young people with the right to vote and participate in decision-making processes. The Council of Europe has emphasised the need to investigate the possibility of lowering the voting age to 16 years in all countries and for all kinds of elections[ii]. Likewise the European Youth Forum supports the lowering of the voting age to 16.
1.1 In terms of institutional democracy[iii], which concrete actions, could increase youth participation at;
a) Local elections
b) Regional elections
c) National elections
d) European elections
During the period of discussions and e-questionnaire we focused more on Vote16 issue and less on overall youth participation in elections. The results of those questions can be seen in section 1.2.
The general conclusion from regional discussions and e-questionnaire was that young people are divided in their opinions regarding the lower voting age – 50 % would be for it and 50 % would be against it. In our discussions three out of four working groups were against it, but one of the working groups was supporting lowering the age limit. Our respondents identified municipality elections as the most appropriate for lowering age limit. We also asked to discuss possible actions for establishing and sustaining a platform for much more serious debates on this topic. Some of the suggestions may be relevant to this question as well:
providing youth with more information through cooperation, face to face meetings, discussions with politicians, especially on the local and regional level;
organizing election simulations for youth;
teaching youth about the importance of each vote and their rights to use it.
1.2. Which actions would help increase a dialogue on lowering the voting age?
(Cf. the recommendation of The Council of Europe regarding investigating the possibility of lowering the voting age to 16).
Overall in Latvia youth think that there is a necessity to develop concrete actions which could prepare youth for much more serious debates in the near future regarding the voting age and they are:
- Increasing the role of political science related subjects in the education system
making it a compulsory subject in secondary education;
promoting that every school establishes a debate group as an out of school activity;
promoting a creation of political section in every school's newspaper.
2. Motivating young people to get to know more about politics by organizing different kinds of events , e.g.
- meetings with politicians;
- activities in which young people can learn more about national political situation (non-formal methods, simulations);
- non-formal meetings with youngsters from political youth organisations;
- video contest, essay writing contests etc. about political topics and issues.
- Letting youth to have a voice in the decision making process on municipality level on issues which affect their life and are actual for them
- creating an expert committee, whose main aim would be to determine if a concrete problem affects youth and is urgent for them (for example: regional changes, building up infrastructure, etc);
- based on experience, evaluating youth activities and their productivity, forming a strategy for continuation of the process.
Besides the above mentioned, youth expressed the need for carrying out surveys and researches, analysing the statistical data and best practices in the field of youth voting trends and preferences.
During our consultation process we also made a SWOT analysis for Vote16 process.
Strengths:- more attention would be given to youth;
- the total number of votes would increase;
- wider representation in elections;
- the interest in politics would increase;
- the number of youth organizations would increase;
- youth experience would increase;
- there would be an official opportunity to express the opinion of youth / Weaknesses:
- it is easier to manipulate with this social group;
- there is a lack of information about politics;
- just the most active youth will use this opportunity;
- we don't know what the 16 and 17 year olds think about these changes themselves;
- there are no objective political materials for youth;
- this social group does not have the feeling of responsibility
Opportunities:
- youth participation in politics would be promoted and more youngsters would like to become politicians in the future;
- young people would acknowledge themselves as adults sooner;
- politicians would need to pay more attention to youth problems
- new knowledge about politics would become available;
- this would allow a chance for radical changes;
- more young people would have a chance to be elected in municipality elections, parliament elections / Threats:
- the ''loudest'' would get the power;
- the possibility for corruption would increase;
- political views of 16 and 17 year olds could be radical;
- education system could become politicised;
- there's a chance that overall voter turnout will decrease;
- youth of this age could ask for more rights (for example, driver license, rights to buy alcohol, etc.)
In conclusion – this was one of the first times in Latvia to discuss this topic as widely as it was done throught the process of these consultations. There had been two debates among youth and political parties organized in 2011, where the conclusion was to start by lowering the voting age for municipality elections. Owerall it seems that youth is ready to engage more in discussing the Vote16 idea, but it is much stressed that there need to be prior changes in the political education process of the young people.
1.3. Which concrete actions are needed to engage non-organised youth in institutional democracy?
1. Promoting the cooperation of youth NGOs with regional municipalities and national institutions by holding meetings once in a quarter.
The aim of the recommendation is to ensure regular meetings between NGO's and institutions which would promote their overall cooperation and increase the productivity of the cooperation. Thus the situation when both sides are having meetings once or twice a year instead of constructive regular dialogue could be solved. Youth NGO's could thus become more engaged in institutional democracy and decision making process on both regional and national levels, raising the cooperation of state and non-governmental sectors to a new level, where openness, listening to each other and ability to have a dialogue on important issues would help to increase the quality of life of young people.
- Promoting the cooperation of non-organized youth with municipalities and institutions
- to organize excursions in municipalities and public institutions, to let youth to better understand the functions that institutions and municipalities are providing to youth;
- to promote non-formal meetings with authorities from institutions and municipalities, such as ''Coffee with politicians'' (we propose that youth could learn more about the hobbies of authorities and organise events that would be similar to the ''Coffee with politicians'', for example ''Readin a book with a politician'', etc.)
- Achieving tax discounts or other benefits for entrepreneurs or youth NGOs who employ young people
- Initially implementing this particular idea on municipality level by organizing a series of meetings with entrepreneurs and youth NGO's to discuss the mechanism of cooperation;
- If this is evaluated as successful, the scheme should be promoted also on national level.
- Achieving that each municipality is planning and implementing youth policy!
Ensuring that there is a youth worker or youth affairs coordinator employed and actively working in each municipality or region;
creating a youth council/ committee in each municipality or region;
helping to create non-formal youth initiative centres in all municipalities;
promoting the sharing of information and best practices among youth councils/ committees on national level
2. Fostering creativity and innovation in youth organisations
Challenges that lie ahead
It is of the utmost importance that young people show interest in and take an active part in civil society, for example through youth organisations. Participation in organisations contributes to the strengthening of democracy as well as developing young people’s creative and innovative skills. In a globalised world with increasing focus on intellectual ideas and innovative solutions, fostering creative young minds is crucial for the continued competitiveness of European countries. However, the participation of young people depends on stable financial support and the independence of youth organisations. Even though there is a wide range of possibilities in terms of financial support for youth organisations (e.g. Youth in Action, European Youth Foundation, other financial programs from governments or private funds), bureaucracy is often overly burdensome, forcing organisations to use time-consuming and complicated application forms and extensive evaluation schemes. In some cases the bureaucratic processes themselves limit the development of young people’s creative and innovative skills due to the overly burdensome focus on technicalities. Similarly, funding is often only awarded to short term, one-off activities creating an obstacle to long-term and sustainable youth activities and partnerships. In order to prevent youth organisations from drowning in administrative burdens and legal requirements, there is a need to develop youth financing so that the independence and freedom of youth organisations be strengthened.
2.1 What should be the main principles behind supporting and funding structures, if youth organisations should be able to engage their members in creative and innovative youth work?
(e.g. independence of youth work vs. transparency and monitoring of funds, one-off funding vs. sustainable funding, possibilities for private support, fundraising, self-financing).
From our consultation process the main principle what we identified was:
implementing a mechanism where funding structure is flexible and needs-based, which would hold a balance between support ---> bureaucracy ----> strict reports
2.2 During the Danish Presidency the future European financial structure will be discussed. How should a future youth programme be designed in order to be more youth-friendly and support the activities of youth organisations, structured dialogue and outreach efforts in Europe?
At first, we identified in our consultation process that the majority of young people and professionals support a separate European youth fund for non-formal education and initiatives of youth. We think that priorities of this fund should be:
developing volunteering;
promoting youth initiatives, which increase youth creativity and innovations;
promoting youth participation;
promoting youth employment;
improving health of young people.
A special set of activities should be implemented to render the youth fund more youth-friendly:
more inclusive project application opportunities (simpler application forms);
supporting more projects by giving less money to one project (defining standards for implement this);
establishing regional agencies that could provide with better access to consultations regarding the financing opportunities provided by the fund.
2.3 How can the next generation of youth programmes support an increase in the number of young people volunteering, voting or participating in organisations and thus increase active citizenship?
As we stated before it can be done by defining a priorities of the next youth programme, which should be developing volunteering, promoting youth initiatives, which increase youth creativity and innoations, promoting youth participation, promoting youth employment and improving health of young people. We believe that by these identified priorities will increase number of young people volunteering and number of participants in organisations.
2.4 How should the next generation of programmes be developed in order to support youth organisation and projects which aim to involve more non-organised youth? Please indicate concrete solutions
The suggested measures were:
defining the priorities of the fund in accordance with the EU Strategy for Youth, EU Strategy 2020 and the determined priorities of each presidency;
each youth NGO should be encouraged to implement at least two projects during the duration of the fund;
dividing funding by regions and supporting all regions equally;
granting 70 % of the funding to organizations with at least 5 year experience in the field and the other 30 % of funding to non-formal youth groups and new youth organizations
2.5 Which concrete actions are needed to foster young people’s creativity, innovative capacity and talent as a tool for their active participation in society?
- Encouraging the participation of young people in society by promoting approaches of non-formal education in schools
The goal of the recommendation is to support youth initiatives in schools. Goal can be approached by organising trainings for teachers about non-formal education and active participation in society, organising a social campaign ''A smart teacher tutors students to be smarter than himself'', where students are encouraged to be more involved in the study process, letting them to express their opinions about teaching methods used, which can help to increase the potential and talent of students and teachers. Further suggestions are to organize round table discussions between students and teachers and to invite teachers from schools to join youth committees of regional municipalities, thereby teachers could better understand the importance of youth active participation on society.