The three changes compared to EC amendment are underlined in bold+italic+underlined
1. We want to clarify that this protocol does not affect members of MO that do not engage in FYEG activities.
3. We want to underline the importance of one of the most vital declarations, even in potential complicated situations.
4. This due to: to protect the individual’s privacy (data protection) and underline that we believe in people learning from their mistakes, burdens should not be for the rest of one’s life. If judiciary consequences, due to the zero tolerance policy, the member will be limited in their engagement within FYEG, then a deletion might be postponed until the member can, due to the age restrictions, no longer engage
We, from Jong Groen, appreciate the hard and thorough work as done by all people and parties involved. We, however, would like to propose the following:
We believe that a Safe Space can only be created and facilitated if started from the organisation concerned. We want our members to feel safe, free and protected. We feel that in the current Safe Space Policy there is too much of a focus on potential punishment and setting boundaries. We request therefore to change the discourse so that this exact goal will be reflected within the IRPs. We are convinced that people feel safe when we are supporting each other, when there is a warm and open atmosphere and where people feel equal. This should be the basis. Then you should consider the if; some clear boundaries, which are well-put in the proposal by the EC. This, we truly believe, is the best way to create a safe space.