7th European Pirate Party Council meeting Day 1: 28-11-2020
Registration of delegates.
PP-AT Roland Schneider PP-CZ David František Wagner, ., Jan Mareš, Lukáš Doležal PP-EE PP-FR Perik Blivet PP-DE Alexander Spies, Gregory Engels, Jens Stomber, Thomas Gaul PP-GR PP-IS Arndís Gunnarsdóttir (alt. Olga Cilia, Júlíus Blómkvist, Bjarki Hilmarsson) PP-IT Emmanuele Somma, Paolo Didonè PP-LU PP-NL Ji Yong Dijkhuis PP-NO Oktavía Hrund Jónsdóttir fwd to Arndís Gunnarsdóttir PP-PL PP-CAT Dario Castañé, Oliver Herzig PP-ES PP-SE Mattias Rubenson, Siula Grande PP-CH PP-SL Patrik Kristl, Nikolaj Burger PP-SK Michal Pírek, Marcel Litvák Feliks YPE - Tomáš Guth Jarkovský Charalampos Kyritsis MEP Mikuláš Peksa, Markéta Gregorová, David František Wagner PPJP Potsdam: Sebastian Krone PPI Bavaria: Mickey Sinclair PP-BE: Jelle Debusscher Brandenburg Susanne Gonschorek
Guests: Bailey Lamon (PPI Chair, following stream) New member applicants: Marco Confalonieri (Pirati)
Meeting started officially at 11:04, chaired by Mikuláš Peksa, approved by all members.
Rules of procedures:
- contributions: 2 mins
- answers: 1 mins
Casting vote:
- direct message to chair in Mattermost
Membership situation at of today
https://wiki.ppeu.net/doku.php?id=7th_council_meeting_2020:delegates
Voting rights schema (to be used as template) PP-AT (1) PP-CZ (6) PP-FR (1) PP-DE (2) PP-IS (3) PP-IT (1) PP-NL (1) PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS PP-CAT (1) PP-SE (1) PP-SL (1) PP-SK (1) YPE (2) MEP (2)
Total number of members who are allowed to vote: 14 Total number of votes: 24
Saturday 28.11.20 at 13:30 still not present: * PP-EE (no voting rights), * PP-FI (would have voting rights - (1)), * PP-GR (would have voting rights - (1)), * PP-LU (would have voting rights - (2)), * PP-ES (no voting rights), * PP-CH (no voting rights), *
Agenda approval
11:00 – 11:15 Council Meeting chairpersons election and agenda approval 11:15 – 12:00 Invited guests 12:00 - 12:30 Report from the Board. Q&A 12:30 - 13:30 Lunch Break 13:30 - 13:45 New members admission
13:45 - 14:30 Presentation of all motions from ordinary members 14:30 – 15:00 Voting on Motions 15:00 – 15:45 Budget 2021 (including vote) Meeting postponed for the night Open Beer room all night long
Sunday 29.11.20 10:00 – 12:00 Presentations and elections of Chair, Vice chairs, and Treasurer 12:00 - 13:30 Lunch break 13:30 - 15:00 Board member presentation and elections 15:00 - 15:15 Code of Conduct Council has a Q&A 15:15 - 16-00 CoC Council elections 16:00 – 18:15 Closing the meeting and planning the next meeting
Chairing is asking for a public vote for agenda, to remove guest invited guests because we don't have any. Agenda approved.
Chairperson is moving to reporting from the board for 2020. Chairperson is now Katla Thorhildardottir Mikuláš Peksa is now presenting the report, that will be added as PDF to our wiki for the records. Now it's time for questions from members.
- Gregory speaking. Gitlab: what is it for? - A: Gitlab is hosted and used by the MEPs for the parlamentarian work, with invited volunteers. So far there had been mediocre success in involving volunteers and utilizing the system to its full potential.
- Follow up remark: PPDE also create a system called Piratelogin, that is based on Keycloak, and that is able to distinguish between party members and non-members, so maybe there is a way to connect them - Arndís speaking C&C and what is its authority
PP-SE joins with two delegates.
Proposal to change the Agenda and have the “new members admission” right now, before the Lunch break.
There is an objection from PPIT so we are now voting. Motion is approved with all YES expect PPIT and PPFR that votes NO.
So we are now talking about admission of new Observer member. Chairperson is asking to Pirati NGO to present the Association. Marco Confalonieri from Italy is now speaking.
Also Marco's presentation will be uploaded in our wiki.
Chairperson is now asking for members to speak.
Ji Yong is now speaking. He's a bit worried about the role of Pirati towards PPI. Marco is saying the Pirati will support both, PPEU and PPI, to achieve the goal of being a pirate hub for both. PPFR would like to clarify the relationship between Pirati and PPIT Marco is answering that Pirati is not a pirate party (meaning a political party), even if members of Pirati are members of PPIT. It's not a competition: pirati would like to be a hub. Pirati is a fully indipendent organisation towards PPIT.
None is requesting the close voting, so we are now voting of admission of Pirati. Casting vote will be now on MM dedicated channel.
Vote on admission of pirati.io as observer: PPAT Yes (1)(edited) dario 12:31 PP-CAT: yes (1) jiyong 12:32 PPNL: Yes (1) baltic 12:32 PP-FR : Yes (1) trikpa 12:32 PP-SL: yes (1) dfw 12:32 yes (6) t.g.jarkovsky 12:32 YPE: yes (2)(edited) exedre 12:32 PP-IT abstain (1) marketa.gregorova 12:32 MEPs: yes gregory 12:32 PPDE (2) : Abstain. mattiasrubenson 12:32 PPSE (1): Abstain arndis 12:34 PPIS: Yes (3) arndis 12:34 PPNO: Yes (1) michal_pps 12:35 PPSK: Yes
Pirati was admitted as an Observer member into the European Pirate Party
Morning session is now ended.
Lunch break until 13:30.
Reconvened at 13:38, Katla as a chair The chair started wit a recount of the delegates. The chair proposed change in the voting: votes will be asked aloud by the Char and then repeated by Alessandro
Motion 1 - PPEU board - 2020 membership update
Change Article 8 – Observer Members (1) Eligible as Observer Members are a) all parties which (i) are established as a political party or in another form, if their region, country or state does not allow them to become a party (or makes it very difficult for them), in a region, country or state of at least a part of the geographical Europe, (ii) are subordinate to another Ordinary Member Party or one eligible to become such a member party, (iii) carry the term „Pirate“ or any translation of that term somewhere in their party or organisation name, (iv) intend to participate in elections in their region, country or state, if legally possible and feasible, (v) maintain a democratic political base and a democratic internal structure, (vi) are politically active, (vii) accept and intend to comply with the regulations of these Statutes and orders of its bodies and (viii) accept the Pirate Manifesto. b) all parties which (i) are established as a political party or in another form, if their region, country or state does not allow them to become a party (or makes it very difficult for them), in a region, country or state outside of geographical Europe, (ii) are not subordinate to another party or organisation, (iii) carry the term „Pirate“ or any translation of that term somewhere in their party or organisation name, (iv) intend to participate in elections in their region, country or state, if legally possible and feasible, (v) maintain a democratic political base and a democratic internal structure, (vi) are politically active, (vii) accept and intend to comply with the regulations of these Statutes and orders of its bodies and (viii) strive for similar political goals as the Association. c) All organisations which (i) carry the term „Pirate“ or any translation of that term somewhere in their organisation name, (ii) maintain a democratic political base and a democratic internal structure, (iii) are politically active, (iv) accept and intend to comply with the regulations of these Statutes and orders of its bodies and (v) strive for similar political goals as the Association and are closely linked to it. d) The Pirate Group in the European Parliament and the European Pirate Youth Organisation and each Pirate Member of the European Parliament To
Article 8 – Observer Members (1) Eligible as Observer Members are a) All organisations which (i) strive for similar political goals as expressed in the Pirate Manifesto (ii) maintain a democratic political base and a democratic internal structure, (iii) are politically active, (iv) accept and intend to comply with the regulations of these Statutes and orders of its bodies and b) The Pirate Group in the European Parliament and the European Pirate Youth Organisation and each Pirate Member of the European Parliament
Mikulas P. presents proposed change to the rules of eligibility of becoming a Observer Member Arndis: motion was sent in but not on the list
Procedural motion: Gregory - propsed to vote right after each motion is read and discussed no objections, motion approved
The Chair now moves to vote on the first motion:
PP-AT (1) yes PP-CZ (6) yes PP-FR (1) yes PP-DE (2) yes PP-IS (3) yes PP-IT (1) yes PP-NL (1) yes PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS yes PP-CAT (1) yes PP-SE (1) yes PP-SL (1) yes PP-SK (1) yes YPE (2) yes MEP (2) yes Motion 1 passed 24:0:0
Motion 2 - PPCZ - Relief of 2018 fees DFW: to have a clean slate and be able to move on https://wiki.ppeu.net/doku.php?id=7th_council_meeting_2020:2018feesrelieve “In accordance with Art. 13 (7) of the Statutes, Council relieves all Ordinary Members of the membership fees for year 2018, and thus the financial commitments of all members have been fulfilled for that year. PPEU members that have paid membership fees in 2018 can freely decide whether they consider the payment a contribution to PPEU or if the fees paid should be considered a pre-paid membership fee(s). Such decision for this and all pevious such payments must be announced to the board till the beginning of next Council meeting.”
Chair now moves to voting Motion 2
PP-AT (1) (yes) PP-CZ (6) (yes) PP-FR (1) (yes) PP-DE (2) (yes) PP-IS (3) (yes) PP-IT (1) (yes) PP-NL (1) (abst) PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS (yes) PP-CAT (1) (yes) PP-SE (1) (yes) PP-SL (1) (yes) PP-SK (1) (yes) YPE (2) (yes) MEP (2) (yes) Motion 2 passed 23:0:1
Motion 3 - PPDE - Working Group on second chamber
Motion to the Council: “Working Group on second chamber” The council decide to form a working group “2. chamber” - The Working Group shall be tasked with the discussion of details of a future second chamber to be composed of individual members of PPEU. The Working Group shall present a proposal for a change of statutes at the next council meeting, but not later than 2022.
(Added on the proposal of MEPs): The Council kindly invites all the members to provide all the neccessary help with exchange of data that are needed for smooth work of pan-european voting and discussion platforms. Justification: We like to move the discussion further, and also take the former proposal of PPCH into consideration (https://owncloud.ag-technik.de/s/9p8pyZCFdTs99Dx).
Gregory: discussion has been going on for a while about 2nd chamber, explains the motion; Stephen from Switzerland: one of authors of the original proposal from 2012, which was posponed giving voting rights to individual members of the PPEU, now speaks about reasons for creating 2nd chamber and its internal working (standing committees) Gregory: not deciding about the proposal, motion today is to establish to form a working group Mikuláš: thanks for the proposal, notes that we need to have clear technical solution on who is eligible for membership and who is antitled to vote; * proposed adding a sentence to the motion: “The Council kindly invites all the members to provide all the neccessary help with exchange of data that are needed for smooth work of pan-european voting and discussion platforms.” DFW: stressed the importance of having a strong technical solution Arndis: question about the purpose of the proposed Chamber, and how it would help with getting quick feedback Perik: thinks that investing in better technical solutions for current way how ppeu operates Gregory: answer for Iceland - to be more open to grassrotts and activists Mikulas: need for quick feedback - short deadlines on proposals and amendments from EP
The Chair asks if Gregory agrees with amendment by Mikláš Gregory: OK, amendment adopted
The Chair now moves to voting on Motion 3: PP-AT (1) (no) PP-CZ (6) (yes) PP-FR (1) (no) PP-DE (2) (yes) PP-IS (3) (no) PP-IT (1) (no) PP-NL (1) (abst) PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS (no) PP-CAT (1) (abst) PP-SE (1) (abst) PP-SL (1) (yes) PP-SK (1) (yes) YPE (2) (yes) MEP (2) (yes) Motion 3 passed 14:6:4
Motion 4 - PPIS - Pirate Grassroots Katla resignes from Chair Mikulas takes over as Chair Motion to the Council: “Pirate Grassroots” We propose that the Council mandates a new fund for Pirate related projects in Europe. The Pirate Grassroot Fund(Working title). The fund will have a specific amount in it decided and approved on each council meeting. Every member of PPEU can apply for funding for their projects. Applications will be put before the board two times a year. The board must advertise the closing dates for applications to every member of PPEU. Applications must have a rough budget and a detailed project proposal. The Board requests a report once the project is finished. The report must be turned in before the last Council Meeting of each year, in order for the board to report of the funds achievements. The board will supply Reporting Templates for applicants. In cases where applicants do not turn in a report the amount allocated must be returned within three months after the relevant Council Meeting This fund is seen as something for people to work on their activism, expanding peoples ideas on pirate-ism, create workshops, spaces and time for interaction regarding Pirate philosophy. The proposed amount for the first year of the Pirate Grassroot Fund is €3000. Amendment to the budget proposal. To add a budget line of €3000 in order to accommodate the previously approved motion for a new PPEU Grassroot Fund. Counter proposal The council is asking the board to provide up to 500€ per quarter in support of grassroots projects by ppEU members. The members can apply for it directly to the board and present their project to the board at a board meeting, which then votes in favor or rejects the project . If funded, the project will report back and present their findings at the next council meeting, with the option of getting prolonged funding.
Arndis: explains the proposal for creating a new fund for Pirate related projects in Europe The fund would be financed from PPEU budget DFW: Why was it handed in quite late? Any specific proposal? Why the specific budget? Katla: it was a last-minute ide. No specific project in mind so far, mainly to mobilise people. Budget is an estimate, expects the Board would propse changes. Exile: for the Board or Council? Arndis: suggestion to change the proposal so that if someone doesnt hand in report they will have to return the money DFW: possible amendment - giving responsibility to the Board or special working group, stricter financial control (returning funds if report not handed in) Gregory: also no toher financing could have been secured by other means and foundations, criteria approve/disprove projects Mikuláš: if money from one year is not used, is it transferred to next one? Because this is the basic difference between a fund and a budget. Katla answering questions - each Council meeting can change the amount - thought about it more of as a part of the budget - agrees with change about returning the funds if reports not handed in - Boards as overseeing body, Council approving the projects, Board can create a working group (to acheive stronger framewrok) Perik: PPFR agrees with the intention, however has got concerns about the budget Mikuláš: side note on budget if PPEU gets registered as political party Desertrold: Council already has means of funding projects Katla: not familiar wit political party, concerned with funds PPEU has in accounts now, could be great for boosting grassroots Alessandro: happy with the proposal, speaking from a position of Board member and Budget Mikuláš: response to Perik - not clear how long the registration will take
* Counterproposal from PP-AT “The council is asking the board to provide up to 500€ per quarter in support of grassroots projects by ppEU members. The members can apply for it directly to the board and present their project to the board at a board meeting, which then votes in favor or rejects the project . If funded, the project will report back and present their findings at the next council meeting, with the option of getting prolonged funding.”
Procedural motion: Arndis: first vote on PPIS proposal, if not passed then vote on PPAT Counterproposal
5 mins break 15:16 - 15:21
The Chair now move to voting on Motion 4
PP-AT (1) (abst) PP-CZ (6)(yes) PP-FR (1) (yes) PP-DE (2) (no) PP-IS (3) (yes) PP-IT (1) (no) PP-NL (1) (yes) PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS (yes) PP-CAT (1) (abst) PP-SE (1) (yes) PP-SL (1) (no) PP-SK (1) (yes) YPE (2) (abst) MEP (2) (abst) Motion 4 passed 14:4:6
Motion 5 - PPDE - PIRATES support the campaign #PrivacyIsNotACrime
“The Board of the European Pirate Party is encouraged to support and to follow up the campaign #PrivacyIsNotACrime.” Once again we are facing an attack on our basic rights. The member states of the European Union are currently discussing how to build a backdoor into your communication. Encryption is a cornerstone of the digital society. Everything from private entertainment to business secrets is protected with encryption. Of course, security authorities lick their fingers after these accesses. With a backdoor into the most private conversations, it would be possible to achieve almost complete surveillance. This runs counter to a democratic society. Journalists and whistleblowers, just like us, must be sure that they are not being watched by the state. What dictators and other groups do with these back doors once they are created is inconceivable. Many democracy movements worldwide will have to pay the price for the blind activism of the European states. We remember, for example, that China broke open the encrypted chats of activists in Hong Kong. Many services like Signal have so far defied the pressure of dictatorships, but whether they will withstand the possible pressure of the EU remains to be seen. Therefore, this interference with this central democratic right to communication must be prevented. The next step to decide on this issue will be taken on Thursday. Therefore we PIRATES support the campaign #PrivacyIsNotACrime. You can find the schedule at privacyisnotacrime.eu/de: 08.11.2020 The secret draft resolution will be published by ORF 12.11.2020 Deadline for governments to submit comments on the draft 19.11.2020 Discussion & planned decision of the draft in the responsible working group 25.11.2020 Planned decision in the Council of Permanent Representatives TBA Commission / Parliament Use also the possibilities to become active yourself: For posts about #Encryption always uses the #PrivacyIsNotACrime Supports campaign accounts with retweets and mentions: Twitter (@PrivacyIsNotAC1), Telegram (#PrivacyIsNotACrime) Mastodon (@PrivacyIsNotACrime@mastodon.online), You can find material for your own posts here: privacyisnotacrime.eu/de#material If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us: @ArchivariusL; @S_HenkelDD or @pr02.”
Dany - short introduction of the motion Exile: proposal to change the wording, to encourage the Board:
“The Board of the European Pirate Party is encouraged to support and to follow up the campaign #PrivacyIsNotACrime.”
Dany: fine with the proposal Katla: asking to wait a bit with the vote to have time to read through Arndis: asking for more details about the campaign Dany: will add more oficial dates, started locally
The Chair now moves to vote on Motion 5:
PP-AT (1) (yes) PP-CZ (6) (yes) PP-FR (1) (yes) PP-DE (2) (yes) PP-IS (3) (yes) PP-IT (1) (yes) PP-NL (1) (yes) PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS (yes) PP-CAT (1) (yes) PP-SE (1) (yes) PP-SL (1) (yes) PP-SK (1) (yes) YPE (2) (yes) MEP (2) (yes) Motion 5 passed: 24:0:0
The Chair now moves to next point on the agenda.
Budget Alessandro: introducing individual parts of the budget https://ethercalc.net/budget-proposal-2021 much less money spent in 2020 then expected
Questions Perik: budget seems to be ambitious (burning money very fast) and not very detailed (would like to see more detail) Bastian: figures seem to be incorrect in summary? Questions about IT a GDPR amount
Mikuláš: regarding GDPR - understanding was that it was a view of council to have GDPR consultations ad Mattermost - server max. 100 EUR/month, not paying for licence, for time being Mattermost server could be used to host technical solution for data sharing Thomas: missing cost of registering the party Mikuláš: budget line administrative costs Alessandro: answering questions from jitsi chat why there is no technical committee? we need the services we pay for ad spending too much money: Thomas G.: decrease GDPR to 500 EUR Exile: proposal to increase REACT to 1500 EUR Julius: agree with that
The Chair asked if anyone opposes the change REACT from 500 to 1500 - no objections raised
Patrik: asked to discuss Motion 4 Mikuláš: the Motion was already adopted, but can be discussed * proposal: Patrik: strike out line with the fund of 3000 EUR DFW: motion was adopted few hours ago and we can think about making it lower but not striking it out; strike out the GDPR (could be funded via the Fund) * proposal: strike out GDPR completely Thomas: objection against striking out GDPR, rather lower it Katla: is it possible to have procedural motion to lower the amount in Fund to 2000 EUR for the first year? Exile: * proposal: add Motion 4 and REACT into one item of 2500 EUR / strike out Perik: general remark, supplementary motion Katla: lets trust the next board Alessandro: suport motion from PPFR about technical team, against lowering the FUnd (Motion 4) Julius: the budget looks a bit low, do we have comparison? Mikuláš: this is actually the first year we have approved a budget Perik: objecting more to the method of managing the funds, especially with the view of future income Mikuláš: importance of having clear rules, this is very new, only regulations are our statues; working group to clarify rules and processes, invites PPFR to participate in creating the rules Alessandro: welcomes the suggestions to create working group, clear rules Desertrold: remark about unsustainable budget Perik: proposal for audit Julius: outstanding debts? on what grounds can we cut the GDPR? Mikuláš: estimates from Octavia DFW: proposal for audit - prices are close to the budget we are discussing Perik: request to evaluate the budget Mikuláš: supplementary motions, e.g. group independent of the Board that would assess finances, 2nd possibility is to have working group on financial rules, 3rd - postpone the budget for tomorrow * procedrural motion from PPDE: Strawpoll for limititing the Budget 2021 to 7.500 € Thomas: to make the decision easier Desertrold: * PPAT proposal to have 1500 EUR emergency budget given on the percentages of the current proposal and then come up with a more detailed budget at next Council.
Strawpoll in jitsi proposal PPDE: PPDE, PPSL yes, opposed: PP-Cat poroposal PPAT: PPAT, PPDE, PPSL, PPSE, opposed: PPNL original budget: PPCZ, PPNL, YPE, PP-Cat, PPIT, opposed: PPDE
Mikuláš: result: mostly for amending the original budget, opens discussion Bastian: * procedural motion: adopt the budget as provisional until next Council meeting
Mikuláš: procedrual vote: postpone budget discussion for tomorrow after lunch
PPAT counterproposal: The council agrees on a provisional budget given at the current 2021 budget proposal. Amounts can be spent to the proportional months passed. The budget will be amended at the next Council. A workgroup is formed to craft a new budget proposal. (current proposal: https://ethercalc.net/budget-proposal-2021)
15 min break 17:30 - 17:45
List of procedural propsals:
Votation 1: * Thomas G.: decrease GDPR to 500 EUR * David: counterproposal: strike out GDPR completely Which one of the proposals you prefer? PP-AT (1) (2) PP-CZ (6) (2) PP-FR (1) (abst) PP-DE (2) (1) PP-IS (3) (abst) PP-IT (1) (abst) PP-NL (1) (1) PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS (abst) PP-CAT (1) (1) PP-SE (1) (no vote - not present) PP-SL (1) (1) PP-SK (1) (2) YPE (2) (2) MEP (2) (2) Votation will be on Davids motion (Result: 12 David: 5 ThomasG: 6
adoption of option 2
PP-AT (1) (yes) PP-CZ (6) (yes) PP-FR (1) (abst) PP-DE (2) (yes) PP-IS (3) (no) PP-IT (1) (yes) PP-NL (1) (no) PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS (no) PP-CAT (1) (yes) PP-SE (1) (no vote - not present) PP-SL (1) (yes) PP-SK (1) (abst) YPE (2) (yes) MEP (2) yes)
Motion adopted 16:5:2
Votation 2: * Patrik: amend the “Motion 4” fund to 1500 EUR
PP-AT (1) (yes) PP-CZ (6) (yes) PP-FR (1) (abst) PP-DE (2) (yes) PP-IS (3) (yes) PP-IT (1) (yes) PP-NL (1) (yes) PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS (yes) PP-CAT (1) (no) PP-SE (1) (no vote - not present) PP-SL (1) (yes) PP-SK (1) (yes) YPE (2) (abst) MEP (2) (yes)
Motion adopted 20:1:2
Votation 3: *Exile: React budget line will be increased to 1500 € in current board budget proposal Votation 3: * Do you want to vote today, 5 falls * Do you want to vote tomorrow, 4 falls ← that should mean “later” not tomorrow?
PP-AT (1) (1) PP-CZ (6) (1) PP-FR (1)(2) PP-DE (2) (1) PP-IS (3) (2) PP-IT (1) (2) PP-NL (1) (abst) PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS (2) PP-CAT (1) (abst) PP-SE (1) (no vote - not present) PP-SL (1) (1) PP-SK (1) (2) YPE (2) (1) MEP (2) (1)
Result: we vote today 14:7:2, motion 5 falls
Votation 4: Motion: A Bastian: procedural motion: adopt the budget as provisional until next Council meeting B PPAT counterproposal 1: The council agrees on a provisional budget given with the current 2021 budget proposal. Amounts can be spent proportionally to the months passed. The budget will be amended at the next Council. A workgroup is formed to craft a new budget proposal C counterproposal 2: Adopt the proposal from the Board as amended.
Voting on most preferred alternative:
PP-AT (1) (B) PP-CZ (6) (C) PP-FR (1) (abst) PP-DE (2) (A) PP-IS (3) (B) PP-IT (1) (abst) PP-NL (1) (abst) PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS (B) PP-CAT (1) (C) PP-SE (1) (no vote - not present) PP-SL (1) (C) PP-SK (1) (B) YPE (2) (C) MEP (2) (A)
mos preferred version in C, 4:5:10
Vote on version C: Adopt the proposal from the Board as amended.
PP-AT (1) (no) PP-CZ (6) (yes) PP-FR (1) (no) PP-DE (2) (abst) PP-IS (3) (no) PP-IT (1) (no) PP-NL (1) (yes) PP-NO (1) delegates to PP-IS (no) PP-CAT (1) (abst) PP-SE (1) (no vote - not present) PP-SL (1) (yes) PP-SK (1) (yes) YPE (2) (yes) MEP (2) (yes)
Motion on budget adopted 13:3:6
Votation 5: (not necessary) Delay the decision to a deadline by the end of the year, form an online discussion group with pirates willing to give counsel on this topic (delegated by the parties), and let them discuss the decision over the next few weeks. They will be able to debate the issues and have to come to a decision by December 31st, 2020. counterproposal 1: Mikuláš: procedural motion: postpone budget discussion for tomorrow after the Board election.
Florie: reading statement from Oktavia
Meeting prostponed to tomorrow 10:00 h at 18:41 h