Ecofeminist scorecard

By Jane Kenny, WECF

We have witnessed groundbreaking environmental campaigns in recent years: Greta Thunberg’s #fridaysforfuture fervour, the #imadeyourclothes anti-fast fashion campaign and the #environmenstrual action, as well as the #breakfreefromplastic movement. Young womxn have mobilised in immense numbers for these environmental issues, but there is another call to action on the horizon.

The European Parliamentary Election 2019 is your next chance to stand up for the protection of equality, climate and our health. We, at WECF, decided to cut through the jargon in party manifestos and policy statements to bring you a manifesto scorecard which ranks party commitments to a gender-just and sustainable Europe. We want the #ecofeministsscorecard to be the next campaign championed by young womxn in Europe. As Greta Thunberg’s small beginnings have shown us, an enormous amount of impact can be made through collective action.

But what exactly are we demanding? Which ecofeminist issues are important to us? What more needs to be done?

  1. Stop tampons littering our beaches: We want a reform of the laws on sanitary products.

While it is welcome that some of us are already moving toward sustainable alternatives, the majority of us still rely on disposable products. All too often these end up being flushed away, making their way into our oceans and onto our beaches. A recent EU commission report provided the damning statistic that every fifth item of single use plastic on our beaches is a disposable sanitary product. If period taboos weren’t bad enough, we now also being branded plastic polluters.

The industry continues to resist attempts to accept responsibility for an ecological clean up; with threats that consumers would end up bearing the costs. To add insult to injury, we still have no EU-wide end to the tampon-tax. The EU has so far reached the unhappy compromise of basic labelling requirements on products. This is yet again shifts the responsibility and guilt onto consumers. Worse still, the whole debate on sanitary products has been dogged by discomfort and awkwardness around this “taboo” topic. Politicians have been unwilling to explore the topic in greater depth out of sheer embarrassment.

It’s 2019, period taboos cannot continue to hold back accessibility to sanitary products. We want to see a Europe in which sustainable alternatives like menstrual cups are made more affordable and accessible to all menstruators.

  1. No more messing with our hormones: We want to see stricter controls on the use of chemicals which threaten our reproductive health.

You might not have heard of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDC’s) but they’re everywhere in your daily life. They are found in your cosmetics, plastics bottles and the pesticides carried on your fruit and vegetables. A mounting body of evidence is showing how these chemicals are wreaking havoc with your natural hormones. Studies have shown links between exposure to EDCs and the increased risk of breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancers, not to mention impaired fertility and disorders such as endometriosis.

You might be shocked to know that the EU has been reluctant to address these health risks and have instead been prey to vicious lobbying by the chemicals industry. We want to see the EU responding with robust action against the use of these chemicals instead of further delays. Our politicians are not only thwarting protection for our reproductive health but also the well-being of the most vulnerable; unborn babies, with the impacts of EDCs being most detrimental for development of highly sensitive fetuses.

  1. Slower fashion for all: We want Europe to call time on lax controls on the fast fashion industry.

Another important ecofeminist issue is the fate of womxn in the fast fashion industry. In just a number of decades, European clothing consumption has gone up by 40%. Our insatiable consumption has made us turn to cheap, disposable clothing which often ends up being thrown away. With 80% of garment workers being womxn worldwide, womxn are bearing the brunt of our consumption. They work with toxic dyes, are confronted with sexual abuse and work cripplingly long hours – all for an unlivable wage.

EU importer’s exploitation of cheap labour and low environmental standards in the Global South is continuing to go unchecked. We still do not have any kind of multilateral agreement on human rights and business practices which could secure greater implementation of checks on outsourcing. An agreement must also be accompanied by a change to our linear model of “consume-wear-dispose”. Unless we mobilise for this change, we will continue to read outrageous headlines such as that of the Burberry scandal. The EU’s next step must be to “slow fashion”; to introduce greater checks on importers, to fund research into sustainable fabrics and to enforce collection schemes to further realise our circular economy.

If European consumers wore clothing twice as often as they currently do, emissions from the garment industry could be 44% lower. Simple actions from consumers can drastically improve this waste crisis. We stress, however, that much greater focus must be put on the actions of the industry itself. Not all the blame can be apportioned to consumers.

But let’s get back to what you can do right now: get informed and getting voting.

The importance of voting in this election cannot be overstated. With the total inertia and chaos in the midst of the Brexit mayhem, issues such as the endangerment of our reproductive health, our role in responding to the apocalyptic IPCC report on the impacts of a mere 1.5 °C rise in temperature and persistent underrepresentation of womxn in STEM sectors are being swept under the carpet. We are not powerless in this mess. Get informed by reading our scorecard and register to vote in this election to decide the fate of womxn not only across Europe but globally. #EuropeNeedsECOFeminism.

More information on: http://www.youngfeminist.eu/2019/04/how-to-vote-for-an-ecofeminist-europe/

CIRC4Life

By Make Mothers Matter

CIRC4Life is a project funded under the Horizon 2020 programme with 17 partners from across 8 EU countries. It aims to develop 3 business models in 4 sectors based on the circular economy. It will include:

  • co-creation of products and services,
  • sustainable consumption, &
  • collaborative recycling and reuse.

The co-creation of Products/Services model will bring end-users closer to the design and manufacturing phases by identifying consumer preferences via big-data online mining product reviews and evaluating product specifications and prototypes via Living Labs to customise end-user requirements.

The sustainable consumption model will develop a method to calculate the eco-points of products based on the outcome of FP7 myEcoCost project, assess product environment footprints (PEF), provide a traceability solution to monitor product’s sustainability along the value chain, and support end-users and stakeholders to actively implement the circular economy via awareness raising and knowledge sharing activities.

The collaborative recycling/reuse model will develop a system for stakeholders to interact with each other to facilitate the use/reuse of end-of-life products and reduce waste, and implement the eco-credits awarding scheme to encourage people to recycle/reuse.

This project will be demonstrated at a large scale in 4 sectors: domestic and industrial lighting products, vegetable farming and food, meat supply chain, and recycling and reuse of computer tablets. Demonstrations will be developed in the UK (Cornwall and Berkshire Counties) and Spain (the regions of Murcia, Basque Country and Valencia).

This project has received funding under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant agreement No. 776503.

For more Information please visit the project website

ABOUT THE FAIR TIMES CAMPAIGN

By FTAO

The Fair Times campaign is a pan-European campaign coordinated by five civil society network organisations FTAO (Fair Trade Movement), IFOAM-EU (Organic Agriculture), CIDSE (Catholic development agencies), ECOLISE (community led initiatives on climate change and sustainability), and RIPESS-EU (Social Solidarity Economy) calling for a fair and sustainable European consumption and production agenda. The campaign is centred on a special edition of ‘The Fair Times’ newspaper from 2024, the end of the next European Parliament term. The newspaper aims to provide examples of policies that the EU could implement regarding a sustainable consumption and production agenda and hopes to inspire candidates to commit to taking action if elected. The campaign launched in  mid-April and will run until the elections at the end of May.

You will be able to read ‘The Fair Times’ and find out more about the campaign on www.thefairtimes.eu.

HOW CAN YOU SUPPORT THE CAMPAIGN?

We welcome all organisations that are passionate about achieving sustainable consumption and production at local, national and European level to read ‘The Fair Times’ and share it. Feel free to share about the campaign on your various communications channels: website, newsletter, and social media. Please use the campaign hashtag #TheFairTimes so that your action appears on the campaign website. More info on the communication strategy of the campaign can be found here

WANT TO DO MORE?

If you would like to go a step further and contact MEP candidates in your constituency, you’ll find a detailed campaign guide via this link, which outlines how to find and contact MEP candidates, how the campaign is coordinated at European and national levels, and how to communicate about your meeting.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or require more information. Email advocacy@fairtrade-advocacy.org.

Alliance 4 Europe

By Omri Preiss

We would like to introduce you to a new initiative set up to facilitate coordination and collaboration among civil society, which may be of interest to you.

Alliance 4 Europe is a newly founded organisation that set out to be a service-provider and capacity-building platform for pro-European campaigns. Ahead of the European elections on 23-26 May, we aim to facilitate coordination as well as provide access to campaign tools, materials and information among pro-European campaigns and civil society groups in order to increase pro-European voter turnout. Please find more information in the link above.  We have a developed a series of platforms and tools we would like to share with interested organisations.

Alliance 4 Europe has set up a tool and content sharing platform for civil society partners to use, the EU Wiki. The platform enables partners to access campaign tools, content, and material uploaded by like-minded partners. This may be useful apps, toolkits, visuals, data and research, and a common calendar across a variety of different themes.

This would allow partners to extend their message and amplify their reach ahead of the elections, leading to a more democratic pro-European outcome in the elections, and greater civil society coordination and collaboration beyond. It would also allow activists to access tool and material they could use in their own activities. Material is shared based on a Creative Commons 3.0 framework,

For more information, and to request to join the Wiki, please get in touch and send an email to wiki@alliance4europe.eu with a brief outline of your activities and your plans ahead of the elections.

Feminists at UNEA-4 Continue the Call for the Right to a Healthy and Sustainable Environment

By Women’s Major Group

Reflecting on the outcomes of the 4th Meeting of the United Nations Environment

Assembly in Nairobi, Kenya (UNEA-4), the Women’s Major Group offered the following

Statement: Feminists at UNEA-4 Continue the Call for the Right to a Healthy and Sustainable Environment.

Nairobi, Kenya. The conclusion of UNEA-4 saw a landmark resolution to promote gender equality and the human rights and empowerment of women and girls in environmental governance. The Women’s Major Group welcomes the commitment to strengthen the gender dimension of environmental policy and the resolution’s recognition of the importance of protecting human rights. We are particularly pleased that the resolution specifically invites member states to establish gender criteria for national environmental projects and programs, to recognize gender equality and the role of women and girls as sustainability change agents, and to support capacity-building to enhance women’s active and meaningful participation in decision-making.

We welcome the mobilization of data requested of the UNEA Executive Director, but caution that this work must include access to information and participation by civil society and the Women’s Major Group, which is not currently stipulated in the text. As countries report back on their progress at the next UNEA meeting in 2021, we expect to see meaningful progress and accountability for their commitments made at UNEA-4.

We regret that member states could not agree on the importance of protecting women human rights and environmental defenders, despite this having been articulated throughout the negotiations. This formal recognition is long overdue. States must seize every opportunity, in UNEA and in other UN fora, including the Human Rights Council, Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the High-Level Political Forum, as a matter of urgency to protect environmental human rights defenders – including those who are women and indigenous peoples – and the right to a healthy environment. The persistent absence of this recognition undermines the vision and commitments otherwise agreed upon by member states, and UNEP’s 2018 environmental defender policy. We listened with extreme concern to the United States, in its closing remarks, as it refused to acknowledge any reference to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in the adopted resolution. The CEDAW is ratified by almost 190 UN Member States, with the exception of a few including the USA. Even Saudi Arabia and South-Sudan have ratified. This is a stain on the USA.

Unfortunately, in the resolutions concerning deforestation, geoengineering, and plastic pollution, issues that negatively and disproportionately affect local communities and women, member states largely maintained business as usual with weak or no meaningful commitments. We are dismayed at other resolutions that would have called attention to the harmful practices that affect women’s health, livelihoods, and planet. We strongly appreciate the draft resolution put forward by the EU on deforestation and agricultural supply chains. The US and Brazil undermined the spirit of this effort throughout until the moment it was withdrawn. It is past time to acknowledge that agricultural expansion is responsible for around 80% of deforestation, of which one-third is internationally traded. A strong resolution on that topic would have demonstrated political will and leadership in halting deforestation by 2020 – a target which has already been agreed under the 2030 Agenda and Aichi Target 5. We are thus deeply disappointed by the lack of ambition and obstruction in the negotiations on this issue, and the resolution’s ultimate withdrawal. If we don’t commit and take actions to halt deforestation and forest degradation today, we will not be able to ensure food security because healthy ecosystems are the basis for sustainable agriculture.

We are dismayed that due to strong resistance from a few high-emitting fossil producing countries, like the US and Saudi Arabia, UNEA-4 also lost a vital opportunity to reinforce precautionary global governance of geoengineering at the UN, building on existing moratoria in the Convention on Biological Diversity and London Convention/Protocol.

A resolution on marine plastic litter proposed by Norway, Japan, and Sri Lanka proposed ambitious language to halt the plastic crisis by strengthening international governance, including the consideration of a new legally binding agreement. However, strong opposition led by the US delayed progress at the scale and urgency that the plastic pollution crisis requires. Similarly, a resolution on single-use plastics proposed by India was weakened. We join vocal proponents – like the Pacific Islands States, Philippines, and Malaysia – in urging countries to take meaningful action to address plastic pollution between now and UNEA-5.

Women and people all over the world continue to suffer from the impacts of failed policies and lack of action in effectively tackling climate change, air, soil, and water pollution, and unsustainable consumption and production. At UNEA-4, we saw a continuation of business as usual. As feminists, we continue to advocate and interject our analysis for women and the planet.

We will continue to call for the Right to a Healthy and Sustainable Environment.

COMBATTING DISCRIMINATION AND HATE SPEECH IN ELECTION CAMPAIGNS

By Equinet

Ahead of European Parliament elections in 2019, as well as continuous elections happening at local, regional and national level around Europe, Equinet has developed a recommendation to be considered by political parties, candidates and media outlets (including social media) which focuses on the general principle of equality, prohibition of discrimination, tackling hate speech, addressing sensitive topics and promoting equal representation on electoral lists.

Feel free to share it far and wide.

Non-discrimination and equality are cornerstones of European democracies. Election campaigns are crucial testing grounds for commitment to these values, so it is worrying to see so many of them being increasingly marred by scapegoating, discriminatory language and hate speech across Europe. This causes harm to ordinary people, affecting their dignity and respect at the very least, if they are not also alienated or even attacked. It is clear that discriminatory language and hate speech can also damage the cohesion of society and lead to a downward spiral of intolerance and insecurity.

Politicians have a particular responsibility in this regard because of their capacity to exercise influence over a wide audience. Political rhetoric is a powerful tool for change and strongly protected by provisions for freedom of expression as an essential democratic right. However, if used in a hateful and discriminatory manner, it can cause widespread intolerance and even hate crimes. Politicians should therefore use their right to free speech responsibly, and promote their electoral programme fairly and respectfully.

The media, including social media, also has an important role to play to avoid amplifying discriminatory messages, especially when reporting on language that amounts to hate speech. With due explanation and critical reflection, the media can ensure a healthy and inclusive public debate during election campaigns.

Every individual has the right to equality and freedom from discrimination. Equality bodies are independent state institutions which offer support to any individual who has experienced discrimination, as well as promote equality and counter discrimination and harassment more generally. As the European Network of Equality Bodies mandated to act as the expert voice of equality bodies to advance equality in Europe, Equinet has developed this Recommendation to promote election campaigns which are free from discrimination and hate speech.

Our recommendation is to be considered by political parties, candidates and media outlets (including social media), and focuses on the general principle of equality, prohibition of discrimination, tackling hate speech, addressing sensitive topics and promoting equal representation on electoral lists. It is an ode to the importance of equality as a common European value, demands respecting equal treatment and non-discrimination at all times, and calls upon the aforementioned to respect the founding values of our democracies and our common constitutional traditions.

Download Equinet Election Recommendation: (ENG), (HR), (RS), (TR), (HU), (ES)

The “Good Leadership” Campaign

Together with the Recommendation, Equinet launched a social media campaign on 20 March on what it means to be a good leader under the hashtags #GoodLeadership and #ElectHope. This campaign aims to highlight core values that equality bodies promote in their daily work to make the world more equal such as respect, solidarity and justice.

What can you do?

Participate in the campaign that we will launch on our Twitter and Facebook accounts (@EquinetEurope) by:

  • Printing the ‘’A good leader…’’ image and filling in the empty space with a description that reflects the values you believe in.
  • Taking a photo of yourself with your sign and sharing it on your social media accounts, referencing the campaign hashtags and asking your friends and colleagues to do the same.
  • Bring it to the attention of allies and friends online by tagging their accounts and retweeting the pictures they publish.

FOR A HUMANIST EUROPE – 2019 EU ELECTIONS CAMPAIGN

By the European Humanist Federation

Between 23 and 26 May, European citizens will be called to vote in the European elections.

In many countries, these elections are considered inferior elections and campaigns often focus on national politics or on expressing discontent towards the government. However, the outcomes of European elections are fundamental as they will shape the composition and the work of the European Parliament, thereby shaping EU policies for the next 5 years to come. Furthermore, while the Member States nominate the European Commissioners, the European Parliament has its say via the consent procedure foreseen in the treaties.

Memorandum for the European elections

As humanists, we feel that the question is not the scope of European competences per se, but rather how our values can remain the basic drivers of European integration. This memorandum proposes a vision of a more humane EU that finds solutions to overcome the growing gap between its values and the policies it pursues. A Europe that is truly based on freedom, equality, solidarity and human dignity.

Because the EU is one of our main partners and because we want its action to fully embrace its fundamental values and principles – which, as expressed in article 2 of the treaty establishing the EU, are very much humanist values, we produced a humanist Memorandum for the European elections making a number of proposals in the following 6 key policy domains:

  1. Rule of law and democracy
  2. Civil society
  3. Fundamental rights and freedoms
  4. Equality and social justice
  5. Academic freedom and technology control
  6. Solidarity with the world

Our memorandum is available in English and in French

Manifesto for a humanist Europe

We also drafted a shorter document: our humanist manifesto for a Europe that truly Respects Freedom, Equality, Solidarity and Human Dignity.

This manifesto sums up the 14 key priorities where our memorandum proposes EU action:

  1. Preserving the rule of law and democracy
  2. Civil society as a counter-power and key promoter of European values
  3. Protect a secular vision of Europe
  4. Defend freedom of thought for everyone
  5. Defend freedom of expression
  6. Free and pluralist media as a backbone of citizen emancipation
  7. Freedom of choice, a building block of human dignity
  8. A society that values all people for who they are
  9. No human dignity without social justice and fairness
  10. Secular and public education as a condition for equality
  11. Scientific research and technology assessment
  12. A common immigration policy, based on solidarity and responsibility
  13. A strong Europe promoting peace and human rights on the world stage
  14. Solidarity with future generations: climate change and sustainable development

The manifesto is available in English and other languages.

HELP SPREAD THE MESSAGE!

Are you interested in helping us spread our messages and push humanist values into debates leading to the European elections?

Follow our campaign #HumanistEurope and spread our 14 animations on Facebook and Twitter. Should you want to translate these visuals, get in touch!

BABY STEPS TO SAVE THE PLANET: WHAT I LEARNT AT THE UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT ASSEMBLY

By Patrizia Heidegger, EEB

I joined thousands of international delegates and national ministers in Nairobi calling for solutions to save the planet. Here’s what happened.

Just imagine the crowd at the 4th UN Environment Assembly last week in Nairobi: over 4,000 delegates, 100 environment ministers and selected heads of state, including French President Emmanuel Macron.

The Assembly, also known as UNEA, is the world’s highest decision-making body ever established to solve the most pressing environmental challenges.

Governments had tabled 27 resolutions to address a broad range of burning issues from tackling plastic pollution to managing chemicals, from recognising the role of women in solving environmental challenges to halting deforestation.

The negotiators were confined in small, hot meeting rooms from morning till late in the evening as they dealt with controversies and heavy push backs by some states.

As part of the frenzy, environmental activists and NGOs from around the world were trying to get a hold of delegates in the coffee breaks, in the hallways, in the queue to lunch, or wherever there was an opportunity to press for real change and convince a government to support ambitious solutions.

In the end, the governments adopted 25 resolutions – many of which were hard fought for. To the great disappointment of advocates and activists working to preserve the world’s forests, the resolution on deforestation had to be withdrawn after tensions with countries such as Brazil and Indonesia.

A resolution tabled by the European Union on the circular economy found agreement after the text only seemed to consist of bracketed – unagreed, that is – text for many days. However, the wording was heavily watered down. It soon appeared clear that certain governments at the assembly – amongst them the US – are against the transition to a circular economy, which is really about reducing resource waste in absolute terms.

Unfortunately, some governments also deleted any reference to getting rid of hazardous chemicals in everyday products. The resolution also failed to mention that the planet has ecological limits – and that we need to live and thrive within these limits. Despite momentum around the globe to tackle plastic pollution, the states assembled at UNEA missed the opportunity to agree on a big step forward to curb the production of plastics. Some governments were ready for it, but they were eventually persuaded to take baby steps instead, which will not be enough to save the planet from drowning in plastic.

On a positive note, civil society celebrated the adoption of a resolution that recognises the role of women in finding solutions to environmental challenges. However, Arab states in particular watered down the language in the text and deleted any reference to women defending environmental rights.

To sum it up, after a week, I was glad to see civil society’s growing presence at UNEA, as activists did all they could to make an impact on the negotiations. Among these, I was impressed by the women’s rights’ activists who staged a stunt on the main stairway leading to the conference rooms on International Women’s Day – the same stairs which Macron would walk down just shortly after. I was also happy to see youth activists from Nairobi and other countries organising a march for the climate. All this helped restore a genuine sense of diversity and inclusion, which we desperately need.

We have worked hard to make small steps forward – on global chemicals management, on gender justice, on solving the plastics crisis, on promoting a circular economy. However, these baby steps are much too small to tackle the challenges that humankind is facing. The fight is not over yet, and we all need to make sure that at the next UNEA global leaders feel the political heat and deliver real solutions.

Brave New World: A conference experiment from the future

By Ramona Bruck, Forum Umwelt & Entwicklung (German Forum on Environment and Development)

“The year 2048 is close to becoming a remarkable breakthrough for German sustainability policy. After thorough negotiations, the government managed to published the two-year action plan ‘Save Sustainability’ which might give a new momentum for the implementation of the ’Governance Goals on Goodness and Global Justice’ ”. [1]

Inspired by Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’ as well as Orwell’s ’1984’, the German NGO Forum on Environment and Development was invited to a new, brave kind of conference in November 2018. Through time travel, the aim was to change the perspectives and to critically reflect on the current political and social situation as well as upcoming challenges and turnarounds. Therefore, it was not surprising that – after a stunning light installation that set the mood for the future – no one other than Aldous Huxley himself welcomed the 220 guests at the conference. He pointed out that time traveling is still an evolving technology – which bares several risks. One of this is the unpredictability about which path the present will choose to go. Fortunately, this conference gave the rare chance to look at two scenarios at the same time and these two confronting scenarios to exist parallel. On the one hand, there was an utopian, positive scenario (plan A), where current demands by civil society e.g. sustainability, equality and fair world trade were fully implemented. Herta Däubler-Gmelin, former minister of justice, played the role of herself as a 100-year old activist, looking back at the last 30 years. She explained how after many conflicts and catastrophes at the beginning of the century the political system has been undergoing major changes – even against predominant business interests. Still there was also a dystopian, negative scenario (plan B), where current trends moved forward, unrestrictedly manifesting unstoppable consequences such as climate change, extensive digitalisation and data collection and acute social inequality. Karl-Mephisto Cassandra, (played by Peter Wahl, co-founder of attac) pointed out that even the most ambitious actions against climate change or loss of species were already too late.

Yet the focus of the conference did not – or at least not primarily – lie on visionary ideas and remarkable acting, but convincing arguments on how the world would look like in 2048, given the paths we take today. Diving deeper into the scenarios, the participants could choose between eight different forums (digitalisation, democracy, bio-economy & agriculture, Europe, urbanisation & rural depopulation, social inequality, climate & energy). Based on the underlying idea of the two diverging scenarios. Each forum was composed by one representative of plan A and B, representing individuals from the year 2048: Business representative, old activist or even a living algorithm. The time travelers gave a brief outline what had happened during the last 30 years, which milestones had been important and how they managed to shape the world as it was now, in 2048. The second part covered a discussion between the representatives of both plans. Plan B was in general easier to trace, because current trends are simply continuing and can easily be imagined in the future. However, the challenge was to explain comprehensibly why these trends were carried on despite being recognised as problematic by critical civil-society.

In this respect, plan A was much more tricky, because they not only needed to figure out the momentums during the past 30 years in which civil society was able to change the established the path, but also needed to describe strategies and methods they and on which strategic alliances change they were built.

This two-day conference was also accompanied by different cultural elements as well as ‘future food’. Along with a stage play ‘avanti popolo’ and a poetry slam, the impressive performance by Katharina Schlothauer as Margarethe Thatcher provoked the audience just as the real person had done in the past: “You want to change the world? Let someone explain this to you, who already did.. Me. […] You need the dissatisfied. Tell them you do something good for them – even it is not true. We stood for a better future. At the end, the majority believed me – or at least they believed more in me than in the rest”.

Finally, we returned from the future and invited the concluding panel, NGO representatives from 2018, to draw their conclusions.

Check out our website for the full documentation: https://www.snw2048.de/dokumentation-1/

 Forum Umwelt & Entwicklung / the German Forum on Environment and Development was founded in 1992 after the UN conference on Environment and Development (“Rio“). We coordinate German NGOs in international political processes on sustainable development and environmental issues. Our mission is to raise awareness in the German public on the connection between environment and development and to insist on a change of the current wasteful economy and lifestyle of industrial countries.

[1] Staudt, Elisabeth https://www.snw2048.de/blog-1/2018/9/4/sonderauflage 

#Vote4Values Tracker: Affect the EU Elections and Protect Fundamental Values

by Israel Butler, LibertiesEU

Is the party you’re thinking of voting for in bed with parties from other countries that are violating basic values? If you’re voting centre left, centre right or liberal, then the answer is yes.

If mainstream political groups kicked out their bad apples, could they make a majority coalition committed to protecting our fundamental values? What would happen if all the parties currently in trouble with the EU were to join forces with political groups that are openly against fundamental values? Our #Vote4Values elections tracker will bring you the answers based on the latest polling data.

European countries embraced the basic values of the rule of law, pluralist democracy and fundamental rights after the Second World War. Any country that wants to join the EU has to first prove that it has created rules, like civil liberties, and institutions, like independent courts, that guarantee these values. All EU institutions are legally bound to respect these values, and the European Parliament has underlined its own commitment to uphold them in its internal rules.

But political parties that openly violate basic shared European values have been doing better in recent national elections. In some countries they are now in power, either alone (like in Hungary and Poland) or in coalition (like in Italy, Austria and Romania). Even when these parties have been unable to take power, they have caused mainstream political parties in the political centre to adopt more authoritarian rhetoric and policies, such as in the Netherlands and Sweden.

Between 23 and 26 of May this year, citizens around the EU will be voting in the European Parliament elections. Some experts are predicting a big political shake-up, and not just because of Brexit. The two biggest political groups in the European Parliament (on the centre right and centre left) are likely to see their share of seats fall. And the number of seats held by MEPs that reject basic values is likely to increase.

Don’t know what a ‘political group’ is, or how the European Parliament works? Check out our primer.

Want to find out what political group a party in your country belongs to? Check out this link.

The two openly anti-values political groups in the European Parliament are expected to increase their share of the seats. These are the Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy (or EFDD, with the likes of Alternative fur Deutschland and Italy’s Five Star Movement) and the Europe of Nations and Freedom group (or ENF, which includes the parties of Geert Wilders, Marine Le Pen and Matteo Salvini). These groups aren’t expected to get anything close to a majority. In fact, over 70% of MEPs expected to be elected to the European Parliament are from parties that respect basic values.

But this doesn’t mean you can breathe a sigh of relief. Despite this encouraging pro-values majority, there at least two remaining problems.

First, there are anti-values MEPs in each of the main political groups in the European Parliament. The centre-right European People’s Party (EPP), the centre-left Socialists and Democrats (S&D) and the centrist Liberals (ALDE) each have MEPs from national parties that have run into trouble with the EU for flouting its basic values. Political groups tend to defend their member parties from attack, and nobody is clean. We’ve seen this most clearly with the EPP, which has shielded its Hungarian member Fidesz for many years. But other political groups often do the same. MEPs find it difficult to put partisan politics aside and come together to put pressure on governments that are breaking the rules if they are from their own political group.

Want to find out what political group a party in your country belongs to? Check out this link.

Second, before national elections, mainstream political parties will often rule out working with anti-values parties. But the centre-right EPP has not done this. It’s possible, then, that anti-values MEPs could club together and build a majority coalition with the centre-right EPP, as they have in some countries like Austria. If that happened in the European Parliament, we could see any attempts to take action against governments violating basic values blocked.

We’ve partnered with John Morijn, a researcher affiliated to the University of Groningen and New York University, to bring you our #Vote4Values tracker for the 2019 European Parliament elections. The predictions about how many seats are going to be won by the different political groups is based on publicly available data from the poll of polls – an aggregation of national polls that will be updated regularly.

What can you use the elections tracker for?

We’ve created a series of infographics showing you how pro- and anti-values parties are expected to perform in the European Parliament elections. This should let you see:

  • What proportion of MEPs are anti-values, which political groups they belong to, and how they’re expected to do in the elections.
  • Possible coalitions that could be formed to protect basic values if political groups are willing to kick out their bad apples.
  • Possible anti-values coalitions that could be formed if mainstream political groups decide to collaborate with anti-values political groups and parties.

What do we mean by ‘anti-values’?

Tell Me More

Who have we classed as anti-values?

Tell Me More

With over 70 percent of MEPs expected to be pro-values, you’d have thought it would be easy to guarantee that the European Parliament will champion our rights and freedoms. But because all the main political groups contain bad apples, anti-values MEPs could still end up at the heart of political power. The only way to stop this is if voters start asking their political representatives why they want to collaborate with anti-values parties instead of making new alliances with MEPs who will champion fundamental values.

If you still have questions about how the European Parliament works or what political groups are, head over to our primer and see our latest info video.

If you’re all clued up, you’re ready to dive in to the tracker. #Vote4Values.