*Themes may continue to be important in there: Housing, Relationship with the ayuntamiento, Health, "capital" of the commons, water, squats (e.g. CS gobernador social center). Some criteria for choosing themes could be: - a multitude of European experiences, willingness of a local Madrid partner, transversality- touches other themes, urban commons, policy relevance. But we can also go on an initiative-by-initiative basis to be more precise.
Can imagine: Mixed groups of local Madrid organizations, local citizens, and other commoners from around Europe. They look at one specific initiative (or a subject/theme?) and do a group investigation around problems, tactics, tools, proposals specific to that initiative/theme
Maybe for each workshop/theme, plan a specific time to have groups from Madrid to tell us in detail how they analyze their experiences with the city; problems, limits, solutions, ideas to overcome pbs, etc. On the topic of interactions with the political spheres and institutions there is a need to analyze and think. Maybe this could be a theme/workshop in itself?
3. Document - camp with Zemos? or our own method
Building off production, do a mapping/documentation for each group of laws, projects, groups, anecdotes invoked (perhaps connecting to the CT Wiki, or nourishing the "policy proposals")
(4): Big group Assemblies- Reflection on the ECA Governance? Open call for other topics within the ECA?
Anything we want to "adopt"? Free time to meet in different working groups, or around the policy proposals - (things we didn't have enough time for in BXL)
it seems good to me to plan some time to talk about governance in other ways, to do a check in on how we are working at least. But also having many people physically in the same place is a great opportunity to discuss issues and future developments. Of course we probably need to come up with a method to do that…
Last call we said we want to build the program from the bottom up, matching European commoners (and espeically those from the Urban Commons Working group) to local groups in workshops or visits based around themes. This is great but it requires a lot of coordination work and some sort of criteria/method for selecting the different groups and capacity/willingness to continue following up with them. How do we know who we can work with if it's just an open call? In order to get local groups on board, we have to have a vision of their participation so they know what to bring. Is it just a presentation? WIll we try and get dialogues with them and ECA members goig in advance of the meeting? What?
I'd try to pick one group per theme we can to cover as a partner to organize a session/workshop. Once that is set we can have a call for contribution/participation in the session. This leave the issue of of deciding which groups of course, but that's not impossible to do, isn't it?
You could say "initiative" instead of "action". For example the Communications group has been doing weekly video promotion initiative and we laid this out in a plan and shared it with the whole list and have continuously been updating on it. If another group decides to do something associated with the ECA, they must share it either on loomio or on the list.
maybe: Before starting to implement an agreed-upon initiative or action the group(s) in charge of it should lay out clearly its purposes and objectives, the means required and any other information relevant for other members of the ECA.
When there are objections, discussions should take place to try to resolve the issue. The issue should be formulated to the whole ECAvia the mailing list; if email exchanges are unsuffisant to allow proper discussions a call should be set. The conclusion of the talks should be sent to the list for reaction. If there is no further objection, a decision can be adopted – if not another call can be arranged, or it should be consider that the issue should be dropped.
Gaelle K6 people seems a little too many. And reading the full text is too long (I remember when we read it to ourselves I thought it was too long… (as a reading)).
Here is a proposal of an excerpt of the call (basically I cut the intro). If you read it it taked 2'30". If several people read it is probably 3'. Shall we ask on the list for volunteers ? 4 people
[Person 1] : Commoning relates to the network-based cooperation and localized bottom-up initiatives already sustained by millions of people around Europe and the world. These initiatives create self-managed systems that satisfy important needs, and often work outside of dominant markets and traditional state programmes while pioneering new hybrid structures.
[Person 2] : As commoners:
We build and strengthen communities by using and sharing knowledge, arts, culture, agriculture and technology.
We build co-housing projects, support local agriculture, live in eco-villages, and have community-based and community-owned infrastructures (e.g. for energy, water, wifi, culture and funding).
We take care of and collectively manage natural resources (including water, forests, seeds and animals).
We make and freely share music, images, software, educational materials, scientific knowledge and the like.
We have already succeeded in making some public-sector information accessible to all, including publicly-funded research, health knowledge and technology.
We try to open up existing democratic institutions, through new tools of participatory democracy and transparency.
[Person 3] :
We call for the provision of resources and the necessary freedom to create, manage and sustain our commons. We call upon governments, local and national, as well as European Union institutions to facilitate the defence and growth of the commons, to eliminate barriers and enclosures, to open up doors for citizen participation and to prioritize the common good in all policies. This requires a shift from traditional structures of top-down governance towards a horizontal participatory process for community decision-making in the design and monitoring of all forms of commons.
[Person 4] :
We call on commoners to support a European movement that will promote solidarity, collaboration, open knowledge and experience sharing as the forces to defend and strengthen the commons.
Therefore, we call for and open the invitation to join an ongoing participatory, inclusive process across Europe for the building and maintenance of a Commons Assembly. Together we can continue to build a vibrant web of caring, regenerative collective projects that reclaim the European Commons for people and our natural environment.
Comment by Dimitris: The platform/network should not make any distinction between anyone. The MEPs should not have a special role in such a tool. I disagree with the term network, it's a long discussion but basically in my personal opinion we are not a network because we have many things undefined yet. On the other hand we can take an initiative in creating a platform and invite people to join in to collaboratively work on proposals.
Frédéric SComment by Fred : Thanks for your comment, I agree with you Dimitris Koukoulakis. I am not so comfortable with network. Actualy my concern is that we do not considere the assembly as more that what it is now and we will not be under pressure of the MEPs for that. How to name the process ? it is an question already met in the social forum for example. Perhaps only assembly ?
Gaelle KI am fine with the MEPs proposing a plateform for them (EP) to interact with commoners. This has nothing to do with our identity or how we name ourselves. It is a proposal that they make and that we can discuss during the assembly.