Together in..2057! Blog

The Federal Committee of JEF-Europe,

– Recognises JEF’s stagnating membership numbers,

- Takes note of the great variety in the size and scope of work performed by its national sections,

- Is aware of the different goals pursuit by its sections on national as well as European level,

- Wants to build further on the great successes of the organisation,

- Believes that a more thorough analysis of JEF’s organisational, financial and political capacity is helpful to maintain the work of the Federal Committee, the Executives Bureau, national sections as well as our parent organisations UEF and EMI;

Installs an ad-hoc Working Group “evaluation and revolution” within the Federal Committee,

1. consisting of a fixed number of current and recent JEF activists building on a strong experience through their work on European, national and local level and who are not members of the EB or directly-elected members of the FC,

2. analysing the following issues and working out possible ways ahead:

a. Nature as an organisation: What is the status of JEF-Europe as an organisation? Is it primarily a campaign-, lobby-, educational-, think-tank- or other kind of organisation? To what extent can it embrace different kinds of natures?

b. Europeanness: To what extent is JEF a European organisation? How much can and should it be bottom up? What kind of political and organisational autonomy shall be given to the different layers?

c. Embeddedness: How shall JEF structure its embeddedness in its three main networks, the UEF, EMI and Youth Forum? To what extent do these or JEF need to change in order to be of optimal use for JEF? How are national sections embedded into networks of the (old) Federalists, Movements and youth forums? Shall JEF develop a clear-cut strategy as to how it wants to involve its former activists in other networks during or after their JEF time?

d. Communication: How can the flow of information between the different layers be improved? How can members be addressed more targeted and directly?

e. Publications: What do we achieve with our The New Federalist print and online version? How do they connect to the jef-info? Shall we stay involved in the two? How can synergies be created? Should we develop other means to stimulate wider debate and keep our members informed?

f. Finances: Which scope is there for JEF’s finances in the mid- and long-term? Can JEF’s revenues be diversified further? Under what conditions is JEF willing to engage with commercial activities and/or sponsoring?

g. Membership: How can JEF increase its membership numbers? Should this be a primary organisational goal? How can a JEF transnational section improve the attractiveness of JEF towards members?

h. Legal environment: Is Belgium and the AISBL status the best legal environment for JEF?

i. Managing the office: To what extent can JEF develop synergies its immediate office environment? Shall we keep the office sharing with UEF?

j. Evaluation: Evaluate JEF’s main projects and smaller projects of the past years and prepare recommendations as to what extent, effort and political and institutional environment are worth getting involved in? Which are the political success stories of JEF?

k. Media: Which media and press work has been successful in past years – and which has not? To what extent do investments on this side make sense?

l. Training: Which skills are most needed to be developed further by members and activists? How can sections and the European level integrated their activities in this field better to offer added value?

m. Organisational coordination: How can activities between the different levels be better coordinated?

n. Personnel development: To what extent can or should JEF use its employment opportunities for the personnel and career development of members? How can former members be tied closer to the professional development of JEF activists?

3. inviting all sections to closely follow the task force and possibly set-up mirror structures,

4. supported in any requested means by the Secretariat and the Executive Bureau.

Explanatory remarks