|
|
For debate in the Standing Committee — see Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure
Doc. 9617
4 November 2002
Youth policies in the Council of Europe
Report
Committee on Culture, Science and Education
Rapporteur: Mrs Cristina Agudo, Spain, Socialist Group
Summary
Four years after changes in the Council of Europe structures for youth co-operation, the Assembly assesses the situation.
In general the changes are considered to have given a positive impluse to co-operation in the youth field. The Assembly belives however that improvements can be added and proposes new initiatives in particular relating to youth participation.
I. Draft recommendation
1. The Assembly reaffirms the importance of young people for the future of Europe. The Council of Europe should therefore consider them as resources, not as sources of problems. Young people should be partners in all the Organisation’s activities.
2. Since 1968 and the establishment of the European Youth Centre in Strasbourg, the Assembly has drawn attention to the importance of youth participation in institutional and political life in its reports on: group participation by young people (1975), youth co-operation in Europe (1980), participation of young people in political and institutional life (1985), youth representation at national level (1990), the European Youth Centre in Budapest (1996) and European youth co-operation and recent proposals for structural change (1998).
3. The Assembly acknowledges the major role played by youth organisations in the opening up of central and eastern Europe and the promotion of the Council of Europe’s ideals, in particular in the campaign against racism, antisemitism, xenophobia and intolerance, and recalls the importance of their present involvement in the Euro-Mediterranean youth dialogue.
4. It is not unaware that only a small percentage of young people are organised in a traditional manner. However, large numbers of young people enjoy the benefits of the work done by youth organisations, in addition to their members. In 1980 the Assembly was already stressing the importance of also involving young people who did not belong to recognised youth organisations. In 1998 it considered that fresh efforts were needed to identify and reach a larger audience of young people, particularly youngsters from disadvantaged backgrounds, in order to involve them in the Council of Europe’s activities. In 2002 it took note of the work done in this field and encouraged its continuation.
5. In general terms, the Assembly would like to see a wider range of young people associated with the Council of Europe’s activities. It realises that this does not necessarily involve using traditional youth organisations as intermediaries. It confirms its active support of the Democratic Leadership Programme through its Committee on Culture, Science and Education, in co-operation with other organisations such as the International Institute for Democracy.
6. The Assembly recalls its own commitments towards young people and in particular its Orders Nos. 441 (1988) on the Assembly and young people in Europe, 454 (1990) on youth representation at national level and 523 (1996) on the situation of young people in Europe: marginalised youth. It wishes to increase its co-operation with the political youth organisations and the European Youth Forum.
7. It welcomes the holding in Thessaloniki of the 6th Conference of European Ministers responsible for Youth (7-9 November 2002) on the theme “Youth constructing Europe”.
8. Consequently the Assembly recommends the Committee of Ministers to establish its priorities for work in the youth field in the context of a long-term outlook on the place of young people in tomorrow’s Europe and, in particular, to:
methods:
i. maintain the principle of co-management (specific to the Council of Europe) by involving representatives of youth organisations in the decision-making process;
ii. consult the Advisory Council on Youth Questions on a more systematic basis and redefine its composition to leave actual decision making to young people alone; social workers, researchers and other experts working on youth issues may be consulted or invited as resource persons, but should not take part in decision making;
iii. strengthen co-operation between the youth sector and the other sectors of the Council of Europe, without setting up intermediary bodies, in order to give the whole organisation and the values it defends the full benefit of working in partnership with youth organisations;
iv. increase the resources of the European Youth Foundation, with emphasis on the co-financing of projects developed by youth organisations and networks;
new initiatives:
v. concentrate intergovernmental co-operation in the youth field in Europe on the exchange of good practices and the development of youth policy concepts and content;
vi. hold a conference with youth organisations and political parties in 2003, to analyse the causes of the low level of youth participation in political life and propose solutions;
vii. envisage resuming language courses for members of youth organisations;
viii. organise a new European campaign along the lines of the European Youth Campaign against Racism “All different, all equal” on a theme of interest to young people such as gender equality or participation in civic life;
ix. re-launch the Euro-Arab youth dialogue;
co-operation:
x. encourage the setting up of national youth councils in those member states where they do not yet exist and similar bodies at regional and local levels;
xi. encourage the opening of regional youth centres and foster the organisation of a European network of youth centres respecting certain standards of quality and practising an intercultural approach;
xii. strengthen co-operation with the European Union and enlarge the existing partnership agreement to include research, co-operation with the Mediterranean countries and co-operation between European Union member states, applicant states and other Council of Europe member states.
II. Explanatory memorandum
by Mrs Agudo
Introduction
The Council of Europe restructured its youth sector in 1998. At the time the Assembly expressed its concern about some of the proposed changes (in a report by Ms Plechata and Mr Jakič, two young parliamentarians from central Europe, “European youth co-operation and recent proposals for structural change”, Doc. 8016, as well as Recommendation 1364 and Resolution 1152).
The new structures have been in place for almost four years and should by now be operational. It is therefore a good moment for the Assembly to re-examine the youth sector and put the question: “is the Council of Europe taking full advantage of its youth sector?” and “how far have the structures established in 1998 helped overcome the problems faced at the time?”. We have asked the Advisory Council on youth for the opinion of the youth organisations on these questions and others we will be asking in the course of this report.
Our committee’s Sub-Committee on Youth and Sport held an initial exchange of views with representatives of political group youth organisations, the Advisory Council and the European Steering Committee for Youth (CDEJ) on 8 March 2002 at the European Youth Centre in Budapest. Last September the Chair of the Advisory Council attended our committee meeting to present the opinion of the Advisory Council on my preliminary draft report (see Appendix I). I note, however, that certain questions remain unanswered.
Youth organisations
The events of 11 September 2001 confirmed the urgent need for continuing co-operation with non-European countries and intercultural dialogue. This applies to the Council of Europe as well as to youth organisations. How are they reacting to this challenge?
In 1998 the Assembly was concerned that only a small number of young people were organised and capable of expressing their needs. This would still appear to be the case in 2002, because we are told that only 7% of young people in European Union member states are members of youth organisations. What is being done to reach out to the other 93%?
Alongside this question, doubt was cast on the representativity of youth organisations in some central and east European countries. Things must obviously have changed over the last four years, but is the situation there now comparable to that in western Europe? How do youth organisation representatives view this matter? It has come to my attention that certain countries of central and eastern Europe have reduced their youth budgets, which is regrettable.
Another increasingly urgent question is that of the relationship between young people and youth organisations in the 15 member states of the European Union, in applicant countries and in the remaining Council of Europe member states. A related question is that of regional co-operation.
The various questions can be broken down into three different sections: encouraging youth participation in political and institutional life in general, tackling problems affecting youth, and providing a framework for youth co-operation in the context of the Council of Europe.
Participation
Since 1968 the Parliamentary Assembly has been energetically supporting active participation by youth representatives in institutional and political life. At the European level this includes participation in the work of the Council of Europe and its Assembly. Where young people are concerned, the Assembly has focused mainly on participation, promotion of the European Youth Centres and the European Youth Foundation and their activities with grass-roots European youth organisations, training and joint management.
The work of the Committee on Culture, Science and Education has included the reports by Mr Vitter on group participation by young people (1975), Mr Foulkes on youth co-operation in Europe (1980), Mr Martinez on participation of young people in political and institutional life (1985), Mr Adriaensens on the Assembly and young people in Europe (1988), Mr Kollwelter on youth representation at the national level (1990), and Lord Russell-Johnston on the European Youth Centre in Budapest (1996).
While acknowledging that the youth organisations are the Council of Europe’s main partners in its youth policy, by virtue of the statutes of the European Youth Centres and the European Youth Foundation, in 1980 the Assembly was already stressing the importance of also involving young people who do not belong to recognised youth organisations. However, it does not subscribe to the approach of appointing a young person to “represent” non-organised youth.
Youth organisations and their European platforms CENYC and ECB nonetheless provided an effective means of reaching a representative cross-section of European youth in the past. On this basis, the Assembly Committee on Culture and Education organised five round tables of parliamentarians and youth representatives between 1988 and 1994. The two platforms have since merged into the European Youth Forum.
The Assembly’s promotion of initiatives concerning young politicians and its active involvement in the Democratic Leadership Programme are good illustrations of its interest in participation and training. The DLP also enables young people outside youth organisations to take part in Council of Europe activities. Another example is the OSCE “Success Generation” programme for young people in Bosnia and Herzegovina that was presented to us in June 2002.
Fresh efforts are needed to identify and reach a larger audience of young people, particularly youngsters from disadvantaged backgrounds. In general terms, the Assembly would like to see a wider range of young people associated with the Council of Europe’s activities. This does not necessarily involve using traditional youth organisations as intermediaries.
It is important to note in this connection that while the youth organisations already co-operating with the Council of Europe’s youth sector also use this channel to take part in other activities such as the Integrated Projects (action against violence, the functioning of democracy), it is important to pinpoint other organisations and networks capable of playing an active role, particularly at local and regional level. Under the follow-up to the 1995 campaign “All different - all equal”, the youth sector was opened up to groups of young people who had never before had access to international co-operation or human rights education at the local level, e.g. young migrants, Roma and minorities.
Some people regret that fewer than 10% of all young Europeans are members of youth organisations, even though other young people also participate in political and/or institutional life through other types of body. The youth organisations, that is to say young people who are organised, are certainly not to blame for this situation, any more than the political parties are responsible for the low level of participation in political life in general. The phenomenon of disaffection with politics is general, not specific to young people.
Where youth participation in political life is concerned, the Assembly must continue to encourage its political groups to invite members of their youth organisations to plenary sessions, as the Liberal Group currently does, so that they can familiarise themselves with the work of the Assembly and meet parliamentarians.
The Assembly might also recommend that the Committee of Ministers hold a conference in 2003 with the youth organisations and political parties to analyse the reasons for the low level of youth participation in political life.
Youth questions
The Assembly has also addressed a number of specific questions affecting young people. For instance, the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development drew up a report on youth unemployment in 1996; the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development worked on young people in the countryside, the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee turned its attention to children and the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography is currently drawing up a report on young migrants. The Committee on Culture, Science and Education, for its part, has drawn up reports on sport and education, and more specifically on youth exchanges (1980), youth mobility (1982) and marginalised young people (1996).
Are there any specific issues that the Committee on Culture, Science and Education should take up?
At this stage we might ask just what a youth policy is and how it can be justified. For instance, should youth unemployment or health be treated separately from general unemployment and health? Should all such matters be dealt with together at governmental level under a “Youth Ministry”-type structure? If so, how should such a ministry be co-ordinated with the other departments? The governments of Council of Europe member states have different points of view on these issues, on which a debate might usefully be initiated.
Co-operation structures
The “youth sector” within the Council of Europe governmental framework comprises the activities conducted by the Strasbourg and Budapest European Youth Centres (EYCs), the European Youth Foundation (EYF) and the European Steering Committee for Youth (CDEJ), as well as the DLP and partnerships with other organisations.
The Strasbourg European Youth Centre was created in 1971 and has been operational since June 1972. The European Youth Foundation was set up in 1973 and became a fixture in 1975. The Budapest European Youth Centre opened its doors in 1995.
The two EYCs are residential facilities aimed mainly at providing on-the-spot training for youth workers and leaders of youth organisations. The European Youth Foundation provides support for activities proposed by youth organisations or networks, usually conducted outside the aforementioned centres.
The Assembly has always argued that the Budapest European Youth Centre should not deal exclusively with activities in central and Eastern Europe, that it should not concentrate solely on its “home patch”. As Lord Russell-Johnston said in his report on the Budapest EYC, “care was taken not to describe it as a ‘second’ centre, or one for ‘second-class’ east European young people” (Doc. 7501). We note with satisfaction that this has not happened and that both centres really are on an equal footing.
In 1996 the Assembly asserted that local needs should be met within a European network of regional Youth Centres. This idea has only been very tentatively followed up, even though local needs should in fact take priority. A virtual network on the Web was considered, but too few member states were interested in the idea.
The centres’ programme of activities and the projects aimed at attracting support from the Foundation are decided on by the Programming Committee, which comprises equal numbers of representatives of governments and international non-governmental youth organisations (8+8). The youth sector priorities are established by the Joint Council, the body responsible for co-management, which reports to the Committee of Ministers.
The Joint Council is made up of representatives of the 48 governments sitting on the CDEJ and the 30 youth organisations making up the Advisory Council. Two non-voting representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly also sit on the Joint Council.
The body responsible for advising the Joint Council is known as the Advisory Council. This body has thirty members, twenty of whom are representatives of youth organisations belonging to the European Youth Forum, with ten “new partners” (organisations from outside the Forum, researchers, social workers, etc).
The European Steering Committee for Youth (CDEJ) was set up by the Committee of Ministers in 1988 to promote intergovernmental co-operation in the youth field and provide a forum for reflection on national youth policies. This committee is made up of senior officials from 48 countries, including the Council of Europe member states plus the other Contracting Parties to the European Cultural Convention. The Parliamentary Assembly may appoint two representatives to the CDEJ.
The CDEJ is currently working on the idea of setting up a European network of youth centres complying with certain criteria vis-ŕ-vis quality and interculturalism. This network should have independent legal status and might, if necessary, conclude a partnership agreement with the Council of Europe.
I would like to make a number of comments on these bodies.
Since 1999 all the Council of Europe member states have been contributing to the EYF. This is a positive development, although the budgetary resources of the Foundation - which is the only financial instrument available to youth organisations not qualifying for support under the European Union’s Youth Programme - are still nowhere near sufficient to meet the demands.
In our view the Advisory Council should be made up exclusively of representatives of youth organisations, whether members of the European Youth Forum or not. Bodies which are not exclusively youth organisations but have a youth branch might also be represented on the Advisory Council. The basic principle should be to encourage young people to organise, rather than to allow social workers, researchers or other groups to represent them. The latter might be consulted or invited to act as resource persons, but they should not take part in the decision-making process.
Youth participation must remain a major objective. It is important for young people to take part in the decision-making process. The Parliamentary Assembly has always defended the principle of joint management in the youth sector, which the youth organisations see as very important and in fact regard as something specific to the Council of Europe. According to the youth organisations consulted by our Sub-Committee on Youth and Sport this principle has survived the 1998 structural changes, a matter of great satisfaction to the Assembly.
The youth sector originally came under the Directorate of Education, Culture and Sport. This is why youth co-operation covers all countries signatory to the European Cultural Convention. In 1992 a separate Youth Directorate was set up to provide secretarial services for the EYCs, the EYF and the CDEJ. The Directorate of Youth and Sport has now been reintegrated into Directorate General IV - Education, Culture and Heritage, Youth and Sport. We are hoping that this loss of autonomy will not be an obstacle to effective co-operation between the youth sector and the other Council of Europe sectors, since that was one of the aims of the 1998 structural changes.
The youth sector is endeavouring to expand its co-operation with the Assembly itself, the CLRAE, the ECRI, the North-South Centre and the other sectors of intergovernmental co-operation. This will no doubt upgrade the visibility and impact of the Council of Europe’s activities.
It is regrettable that in its four years of existence the Advisory Council has never been consulted by any other Council of Europe body or sector. At the same time, however, the Advisory Council has never taken the initiative of issuing an opinion on Council of Europe policies affecting youth, as it is empowered to do.
On the other hand, we were not convinced of the need for a Steering Committee on intergovernmental co-operation in the youth field. However, both the Advisory Council and the Chair of the CDEJ (see Appendix II) informed us that they considered the committee useful. So perhaps the CDEJ might prepare a debate on the above-mentioned youth policies. It might also promote exchanges of good practice in its field of competence and support for actions to prevent the emergence of any more legal or other barriers between young people from European Union member states and other young people.
Finally, the youth sector should be granted the necessary human and financial resources. In allocating these resources the emphasis must be placed on joint financing of activities proposed by youth organisations, including assessment and follow-up.
Co-operation with the outside world
In 1998 a partnership agreement was concluded with the European Union on training for youth workers, a scheme which is operating to the satisfaction of both partners. The training scheme comprises courses on European citizenship and advanced training courses for training officers, and helps develop training kits and training materials for youth workers. However, in the new context created by the publication of the European Commission White Paper on Youth, it would be useful to broaden the scope of this agreement to three new fields:
- evaluating youth policies and researching youth problems;
- ensuring co-operation between Europe and the non-European Mediterranean countries;
- organising co-operation among EU member states, applicant states and other Council of Europe member states, particularly with a view to preventing discrimination among young people in Europe.
Furthermore, the youth sector has concluded co-operation agreements with the European Youth Card Association, the European Youth Information and Counselling Association and the International Railway Union (in the field of mobility for disadvantaged young people) which have expanded its capacity for action.
Appendix I
Opinion of the Advisory Council on Youth Questions
The Advisory Council welcomes the interest shown in the youth sector at the Council of Europe by the Parliamentary Assembly and in particular the Sub-Committee on Youth and Sport of the Committee on Culture, Science and Education. It congratulates the Rapporteur on her excellent work and thanks the Sub-Committee for this opportunity to comment on the Preliminary draft report and the elements for a recommendation contained in it.
Generally speaking, the aim of youth policy is to cater for the needs and aspirations of young people. The Advisory Council would point out that the resources allocated to European youth cooperation are not in line with the objectives sought after. Furthermore it notes that the report deals chiefly with the organisation of cooperation structures in the youth field.
1. The structures are a tool for European youth cooperation. The Advisory Council hopes that the necessary time will be allowed for structural reform to take full effect; this should also be the case for the European Steering Committee for Youth (CDEJ). That said, the Advisory Council notes that an interim evaluation of these structures' workings is fairly positive. Moreover, the structures are not an end in themselves but serve to implement a strategy. The Advisory Council believes it necessary to develop a clear view of the long-term challenges of European youth cooperation, based on broad consultation of young people that will establish the relevance of the Council of Europe's objectives and instruments in the youth sector. New challenges (greater mobility, changes in family structures, decline of traditional cultural values, development of a consumer society etc) will require adjustments to priorities in European youth cooperation in the spheres of non-formal education, youth participation, cultural expression of young people, solidarity with destitute young people etc.
2. Youth is a cross-sectoral challenge. Mindful of paragraph 6 of the "Elements for a recommendation" in the Preliminary draft report, the Advisory Council insists on the need to consider how European youth cooperation may contribute to activities in other Council of Europe sectors and vice versa. The Advisory Council encourages an approach to youth matters within the Council of Europe that also constitutes a trans-sectoral objective, to be taken into account in every Council of Europe policy area. In this respect the Advisory Council draws the Sub-Committee's attention to the Council of Europe priorities set by the Secretary General for 2003, backed by the Committee of Ministers in July 2002, which include the mainstreaming of "youth activities by developing the youth dimension across the whole range of programmes and activities of the Council of Europe" (cf doc. CM(2002)48). The Advisory Council is fully in favour of this approach and will do its utmost to support and ensure its implementation.
3. The Advisory Council approves of maintaining youth participation in the decision-making system (joint management system) and consequently concurs with the content of paragraph 7 of the "Elements for a recommendation". Furthermore, it backs the idea of distinguishing more clearly between the function of youth representation and that of expertise in youth questions. Generally speaking, theoretical analysis and research have featured strongly in the youth sector activities supported to date, and it should be ensured in future that research work is better integrated in priorities for action in the youth sector.
4. The Advisory Council stresses that partnership with youth organisations generates strong leverage compared with the funding committed, given that youth participation in activities is mainly on a voluntary basis. The Advisory Council wishes to see more activities directly addressing young people and enabling them to become involved at grassroots level.
In this connection, it emphasises the role of the European Youth Foundation (EYF) as the sole instrument for funding pan-European youth cooperation. For that reason the EYF is having to deal with a fast growing number of applications, particularly from South-East Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). The Advisory Council therefore urges both development of the EYF and increased use of joint funding for activities from other public or non-governmental partners. It should be noted in this respect that, at its 7th meeting in January 2002, the Advisory Council approved a proposal to double the EYF budget in five years, through annual increases of 20%.
5. Concerning paragraph 11 of the "Elements for a recommendation", the Advisory Council favours stepping up cooperation with the European Union and thinks it important to highlight the specific contribution of the Council of Europe in human rights education and democracy.
6. The Advisory Council approves of the idea of broadening the range of young people benefiting from Council of Europe youth activities, as proposed by the Rapporteur in paragraph 12 of the "Elements for a recommendation". In this connection it underlines the role of youth organisations in representation and mediation between institutions such as the Council of Europe and youth in civil society. Youth organisations are best informed as to the needs and aspirations of young people. They are also in the best position to mobilise young people, including outside their membership.
The Advisory Council believes that direct democracy on a European scale is illusory: bypassing the youth organisations would foster undemocratic participation with access to Council of Europe youth activities reserved for the young people initiated into them, regardless of their background. On the other hand the Council of Europe should give encouragement to youth organisations working with disadvantaged young people. Developing youth participation requires action in the youth field but also in other sectors, to develop youth training, educational resources, access of young people to information, youth mobility etc.
7. The Advisory Council backs the desire to debate youth policies (cf paragraph 9 of the "Elements for a recommendation") and reiterates that backing for framing and developing suitable youth policies is one of the strategic priorities for the youth sector for 2003-2005. It wishes the Council of Europe to propose guidelines for devising and implementing national youth policy and notes that such work, together with the development of common indicators for national youth policies, will be one of the priorities of the CDEJ for 2003-2005.
Appendix II
Letter from Bjǿrn Jaarberg-Hansen, Chairman of the CDEJ
To Mrs Cristina Agudo
Strasbourg, 16 September 2002
……………
At its meeting on 9-10th September 2002, the European Steering Committee on Youth (CDEJ) took note of the preliminary draft report on youth co-operation which you have drafted for the Parliamentary Assembly.
On behalf of the Bureau, I would like to thank yourself and the Parliamentary Assembly for the interest you show on the Council of Europe youth policy and to express my personal appreciation for the initiative you took in preparing the report.
The members of the Bureau are fully aware, due to the very nature of the report, it is not possible to provide a complete picture of the Council of Europe’s youth sector and more specifically of the intergovernmental co-operation in this field. However, they are of the opinion that the report could have further stressed the CDEJ’s role in the development of youth policies and the assistance it provides to governments, notably of new member states in this respect; as well as to the CDEJ providing the inherent exchange of information and good practices, as requested by the Parliamentary Assembly. In particular, paragraph 9 of the elements for a recommendation could have been formulated in a more positive spirit.
Indeed, as underlined in the draft report the educational and training activities supported by the EYCs and the EYF in co-operation with youth organisations and networks is a very important dimension of the Council of Europe’s youth policy. It should be stressed, however, that this policy is based on a fundamental principle, namely co-management and that this principle cannot be translated into practice without the full participation of the two partners which are the non-governmental youth organisations and the governments.
Needless to say, I am at your disposal should you wish to discuss in more detail your draft report.
………………….
Reporting committee: Committee on Culture, Science and Education
Reference to committee: permanent mandate
Draft recommendation adopted unanimously by the committee on 30 October
Members of the committee: MM. de Puig (Chairman), Saglam, Baronne Hooper MM. Prisacaru (Vice-Persons), Akhvlediani, Apostoli, Asciak, Bajrami, Banks (Alternate: Russell-Johnston), Barbieri, Berceanu, Berzinš, Billing, Braga, Mrs Castro, MM. Chaklein, Cherribi, Colombier, Mrs Cryer, MM. Cubreacov, Dalgaard, Mrs Damanaki, Mrs Delvaux-Stehres, Mrs Domingues, Mr Duka-Zólyomi, Mrs Fernández-Capel, MM. Gadzinowski, Galoyan, Gentil, Gierek (Alternate: Podgosrski), Mrs Glovacki-Bernardi, MM. Goris, Haraldsson, Hegyi, Higgins (Alternate: Mooney), Iannuzzi, Irmer, Mrs Isohookana-Asunmaa, MM. Jakic, Jarab, Kalkan, Mrs Katseli (Alternate: Skoularikis), Mrs Klaar, Mrs Kutraité Giedraitiené, MM. Lachat, Legendre, Lekberg, Lengagne, Libicki, Mrs Lucyga, MM. Maass, Malgieri (Alternate: Bianco), Marxer, Mrs Melandri, MM. Melnikov, Mestan, Mrs Milotinova, MM. Nigmatulin, O’Hara, Mrs Pintat Rossell, MM. Rakhansky, Rockenbauer, Rybak, Schellens, Mrs Schicker, MM. Schneider, Schweitzer, Seyidov, Shybko, Mrs Skarbřvik, MM. Sudarenkov, Theodorou, Vakilov, Valk, Wodarg, Yürür, Mrs Zaćiragić, Mrs Zafferini, ZZ… (Romania) (Alternate: Mr Ionescu).
N.B. The names of those present at the meeting are printed in italics
Head of secretariat: Mr Grayson
Secretaries to the committee: Mr Ary, Mme Theophilova, Mr Torcatoriu