on the Future of the European Greens

Considering

1. The high level of abstention and the lack of popular interest in the European elections;

2. The fact that the European elections have mainly been fought on domestic issues, and used by the respective political opposition forces to sanction the governments in power;

3. That with the exceptions of Spain and Greece, the opposition won the elections in most countries; 4. The strong results obtained by the anti-European and Euro-sceptic groups;

5. The success of the centre-right, the conservatives forces and the liberals in a large number of countries;

6. That the Greens were the only political force to focus their electoral campaign on European issues;

7. That everything indicates that where the Greens primarily campaigned on European issues and arguments, they were rewarded by the voters, and this independently of the fact whether Greens of the concerned countries were in government or in the opposition;

8. That the Greens have the greatest potential among young voters

9. That the results obtained by the Greens cannot, however, be considered as satisfactory overall. Excellent results were scored in Luxembourg, Germany, Austria, Finland and France, but these were offset by disappointing results in other long-time member States, especially in Southern Europe (with the exception of Spain). The latter area remains a matter of concern, as well as the acceding countries of the Union (with the exception of Malta), where Greens achieved dismal performance.

10. That although Greens managed to keep their position as the 4th political family in the European Parliament, with 34 MEPs and that thanks to our alliance with regionalist parties and the Danish SF , we were able to build a Group with 42 MEPs, their political weight has dropped in numerical terms since the Parliament has now more members than in the past;

11. The low level of women in EU political institutions, on contrast with the big involvement of women in favour of solidarity, ecology and social justice in Europe.

Whereas

12. The Rome Congress where the EGP formally was formally founded and the common electoral campaign launched was a success. It helped give credibility to the Greens as the thought leaders among the European political families;

13. The common electoral campaign built upon various previous Green initiatives such as the EFGP Council meeting of Luxembourg as well as other meetings held in Paris, Vienna, Milan, Warsaw, Praha and Brussels. It allowed our candidates to give the Green campaign a European dimension, which saw several Green leaders campaigning across borders. This was epitomised by Daniel Cohn-Bendit, who in less than two months visited about two thirds of the EU member states. All this contributed to give consistence to our common campaign and to get a positive reaction from the media.

14. In spite of the short time available, the efforts made by the leaders of the national Green parties, the managers of the respective campaigns, the press spokespersons, the advertising agency, as well as the work of the Co-ordinating Committee appointed by the EGP in Malta 2003, turned out to be positive and productive;

15. The European green parties have been working on gender issues from different points of view

The EGP Council, meeting in Dublin on Nov. 28, 2004 decides that

16. A decisive aspect for the strengthening of the Green movement in Europe and in particular in the European Union entails the acceleration and consolidation of the construction of the European Green Party founded in Rome. The primary mission of the EGP is to carry out political campaigns which means it must be focused on external initiatives, not internal business.

The common electoral campaign and the food safety campaigns are just examples of what must become the core activity of the EGP. Lessons from those initial campaigns must be drawn by the EGP and leveraged to ensure the success of future campaigns. A further analysis of the common Campaign and the results of European Elections is needed on a country by country basis as well as concerning the general trends.

In order to ensure the voice of Greens is heard at the paneuropean level they must speak with unity. This entails that topics of common Green campaigns will have to be selected in close cooperation between the EGP, the Green Group in the European Parliament (GGEP) and the member parties.

17. One of the duties of the EGP is to provide support to the construction of Green parties across Europe, and in particular in the new Member States, as well as in countries that will join the European Union by 2009, such as Bulgaria and Romania. In this perspective, the Council calls on the GGEP, the GEWD and the Green inspired Foundations to help to the best of their ability the weaker Green parties, in accordance with the regulatory restrictions in force; To achieve this goal we also call for a stronger and visible co-ordination among them.

18. In order to increase the political coherence of the Greens in Europe and to intensify the political articulation between the EGP and its members, the EGP will proceed to organize two ordinary Congresses during each legislative period of the Union, one during the first half of the legislature, the second before the European elections. The next ordinary Congress of the EGP should take place in the second half of 2006.

19. In order to increase the political profile of the EGP and in accordance with the financial, political and organizational possibilities, the EGP Committee will propose the establishment of thematic work groups on open or controversial issues. This work groups should prepare proposals to be submitted either to the Council or the Congress. They should be of a temporary nature, have a clearly defined task and be given a deadline for delivery of their proposals. They should be established in consultation with the GGEP, the member parties and the Foundations*

EGP should organize together with GGEP thematical seminar once a year on one important political issue.

20. Furthermore, the Council decides to establish a Working Group to prepare a report on the best way to organise European green common and/or co-ordinated internal member consultations or referenda of the member parties on a previous agreed common political theme, using the experience of internal referendums or consultations hold in some of the European Green parties and the proposal made by the French Greens. This working Group should make a report on the progress reached during the next Council meeting.

21. In the run-up to the 2009 European elections, European political parties might consider nominating candidates for the presidency of the European Commission. The EGP should be prepared for such a development. The Committee is requested to study and report on the possibility of nominating an EGP candidate for the Commission presidency, the future position of EU Minister of Foreign Affairs or other top-level positions.

22. The Constitutional Treaty, if approved, gives the European Parliament the right of initiative and consent regarding the redistribution of its seats. The EP might well try to use this new power to add force to its plea for electing part of the MEPs through transnational lists. The EGP should be prepared for such a development, since it would greatly raise the importance of European political parties and of their political coherence and legitimate decision-making. The Committee is requested to prepare a Council debate on the desirability of transnational lists and their implications for the EGP.

23. The Greens will focus more on involving the youth in order to secure the future of the Greens in a long term and will strengthen their work on youth topics in order to interest young people for green politics. The EGP recognizes the Federation of Young European Greens (FYEG) as an important partner in approaching young people and will support the work of FYEG. The EGP and FYEG will together set up a long-term youth involvement strategy aimed at strengthening organisations in the new member states. EGP and the GGEP will support FYEG in carrying out this strategy.

24. After Greens have weakened in Europe during last years, EGP should form a working group to make proposal how to strengthen EGP politically and organizationally. It should also think work division between EGP, EPGG, national parliamentary groups and parties.

25. EGP should form working group (could be same than in point 18) which makes plan how to start planning and organize common campaign in EP parliament elections 2009. Working group should also think how EGP can help parties in their elections. (f.x. best practices database, election campaign material archive, how EGP can give consultation help to parties when they are planning election campaigns)

26. The EGP will take as one of its political priorities gender issues, in order to co-ordinate the different positions of the European green parties and to work against woman discrimination.

27. The Committee should launch, together with sympathizing foundations and the Green Group in the EP an initiative to create a European Green Foundation or one close to the Greens at European level. The model to follow could be the one of the foundations close to the existing political families as they exist in Germany, the Netherlands or Sweden.

__________________________________________

* Among the issues that could be considered there is Turkey, the future of EU relations with the Balkan and South East Europe, Irak, asylum and immigration, the harmonization of tax systems and public services in the Union, the development of renewables , messures to strengthen prevention of climate changes, same sex partnerships and marriages, ethic aspects, etc. etc.