The exploitation of natural resources is the base of the current economic and productive model. This exploitation is not based on satisfying people’s needs, but on the accumulation of wealth and power for very few at all costs. Therefore, it carries with it the destruction of ecosystems and the natural relations among wildlife and the context where all living beings thrive and grow. We must put an end to this exploitation of Earth. Climate activists and scientists have been warning about the great dangers of this exploitation and its connection to social, gender, and racial injustice across all societies. Moreover, in October 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Council recognised for the first time that having a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment is a human right, adding to the decades-long effort in international law to make the right to a healthy environment a human right – including the conclusion of the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in 2019 that “human rights norms apply to the full spectrum of environmental issues”; and the determination of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, which decides on violations of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, in 2020 that access to a clean and healthy environment falls under the right to life.

During the last months, we could celebrate the success of environmental litigations against the actions of public and private institutions. For example, a French administrative court recognised that the French State could be held responsible for failing to meet its commitments to mitigate climate change; and the Dutch court ruled that the petrochemical giant Shell must cut its emissions and be in line with the Paris Agreement. We welcome these wins and look forward to more advances in this field. At the same time, we regret the fact that sanctions depend solely on the environmental laws at the national level. Crimes against nature know no borders, and therefore sanctions should also be prosecuted at the international level. Moreover, big polluters and corporations, following their neocolonial and imperialist agenda, harm the environment and natural resources of the Global South, taking advantage of the invisibilisation and systemic disregard of indigenous communities and their demands.

In this context, we consider that ecocide, following the definition of Polly Higgins as “1. Acts or omissions committed in times of peace or conflict by any senior person within the course of State, corporate or any other entity’s activity which cause, contribute to, or may be expected to cause or contribute to serious ecological, climate or cultural loss or damage to or destruction of ecosystem(s) of a given territory(ies), such that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants has been or will be severely diminished. 2. To establish seriousness, impact(s) must be widespread, long-term or severe.”, should be included in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (hereinafter simply Rome Statute). The sanctions imposed so far have been insufficient, and in most cases, the big corporations already include in their budgets paying fines for their environmental crimes. In the current context of climate emergency, we cannot accept mass destruction in exchange for money. Our rights are not for sale. The emissions, deforestation, and pollution of air and water will not stop as long as profit is put before people. In order to protect people, we need more legal tools. Criminalising ecocide would make it possible to prosecute those who do the most damage to the environment. Its power lies in the fact that it would make big polluters reconsider their actions, as they would be put in the same box as war criminals, and that is not good for business.

With this resolution, the Federation of Young European Greens:

• Denounces the exploitation or destruction of the environment performed by public and private institutions, and state and private actors, especially those of the Global North in the Global South through practices of (neo)colonialism and (neo)imperialism, and urges the corresponding institutions and actors to initiate processes for historical compensation.

• Urges the European Union to call on its Member States to implement national legal frameworks that align national and multinational companies in their territory to the EU Climate Law.

• Calls on all European states that have ratified the Rome Statute to propose and push for the adoption and ratification of the correspondent amendment to add the crime of ecocide in its list of crimes based on the draft law proposed by Polly Higgins, wherein the juridisction of the ICC for ecocide is explicitly expanded to include corporations.

FYEG Political Platform

We, the Federation of Young European Greens (FYEG), are the movement of the Green youth at the European level. Our individual and organisational backgrounds lie in the social and environmental justice movements, in feminist and queer battles, and in the defence of fundamental rights and democracy. For more than 30 years, our member organisations have joined forces at the European level, uniting their collective voices and aspirations to learn from each other, to debate, to campaign together, and to make the green Europe we wish to see become a reality.

Through our shared struggles and aspirations, we see that not a single one of our political issues is a lone priority. We refuse to choose between the survival and well-being of the planet, our personal liberties and freedoms, and social welfare. To be Green means to fight for all these demands simultaneously.

To achieve our goal of a feminist, diverse, democratic, sustainable, and social Europe, we use different channels, political arenas, and tools. The institutions of formal politics are spaces in which many decisions affecting our lives and our politics are made. We work to be present and heard at all stages and levels, and to make clear the urgency of Green politics.

FYEG advocates for systemic changes that cannot be achieved through a catalogue of single-issue political measures. They require the dismantling of various systems of oppression and the transformation of society as a whole. Therefore, our fight is not limited to institutions. We are also active at the grassroots level, running campaigns together, supporting local struggles, and empowering changemakers through non-formal education projects.

Our work and practices as a movement must be aligned with what we stand for. We must fight against the sexist, racist, ageist, ableist, class-based systems of oppression – also within our own organisations. Only in this way can we build a truly inclusive movement for all.

The challenges lie not only in victories within institutional politics, but also in changing the political playing field. The dreams and actions of a small number of committed individuals and movements can bring causes to the centre of the political debate and, by doing so, effect much-needed change.

As the Federation of Young European Greens, we agree on the principles laid down in this document, which should serve as a basis for our work across Europe.

1. A Diverse and Feminist Europe

FYEG fights for intersectional (see Glossary 91) feminism (see Glossary 63), a feminism that is anti-racist, anti-fascist, and draws from the queer (see Glossary 138) and disability rights movements. A feminism that recognises diversity and the different ways in which privilege (see Glossary 185) and oppression (see Glossary 114) manifest in society. Our feminism is not just about smashing the patriarchy (see Glossary 123), but about smashing all systems of oppression. We are against societies that only feed the dominant power. We push for an alternative model based on justice and equity for those devalued by systems of oppression, one that actively undermines the dominant power.

Systems of oppression seek to divide us, control us, and harm everyone in society. We will not let them. We fight any kind of discrimination or hate crime on the basis of real or assumed nationality, race, ethnicity, religion or beliefs, gender and sexual identity, ideology, disability, class, or age. We recognise the difference and diversity among people and societies in Europe, and see this as a richness.

We advocate for policies created with people who experience discrimination and support affirmative action for underrepresented groups. We demand anti-discrimination laws. Governments must take measures to ensure the safety and health of marginalized groups.

As we work for a Europe which is truly welcoming and inclusive for all, we take a twofold approach. First, we work for social justice (see Glossary 155) and equality now – within the limits of the current norms, within the systems that constrain us – while recognising that this can never be social justice for everyone and that, in this way, only small gains are made. Second, we question the systems, we think them anew, in order to break free from the norms and boundaries that constrain us.

Systems of oppression are a social construct and can therefore be deconstructed, with the help of collective action and organising. We can imagine and give life to new systems that work for all. We question human-made borders, the arbitrariness of passports and permits, and the dichotomy of binary gender (see Glossary 38).

a. Diversity and Intersectionality

Global systems of patriarchy, capitalism, colonialism and racism, and their byproducts, ableism, cis- and hetero-sexism and colourism, among others, intersect to create overlapping and mutually reinforcing layers of oppression and inequality. The solutions we push for must therefore be rooted in an intersectional perspective. When approaching a specific case of oppression, we should not lose sight of the bigger framework in which oppression takes place, as well as other systems of inequality associated with it.

When fighting inequality and tackling societal problems, we keep in mind that a person’s identity has many facets and oppose approaches which define a group as homogenous and based on a single identity.

We understand that all dimensions of a person’s identity contribute to a person’s access to justice and equality. Inequality can take many forms, ranging from the lack of representation of a specific identity in the public sphere to the criminalisation of identities. Our aspiration is a world in which such inequalities are dismantled, and people can express themselves and their identities freely and without fear.

When new policies are proposed at all levels of governance, they should be analysed from an intersectional perspective , taking into account the individual, systemic, institutional and historical dimensions of inequality to ensure that no one is left behind.

b. Anti-racism

Today, European societies remain deeply racist. In such a context, it is not enough to simply not be racist – we must be anti-racist. Racism is not only about hate speech and hate crime: it is the systemic discrimination against and oppression of people on the basis of their supposed membership of a particular racial or ethnic group. It includes antiziganism, antisemitism (see Glossary 4), and
islamophobia (see Glossary 93). It is built through the perpetuation of prejudices, as well as the belief that there are different races and that some races are superior to others. In the case of antisemitism, this ‘belief’ has evolved into a world-explaining conspiracy ideology which sees all evil in Jews and their destruction as the liberation from evil. Antisemitism is a continual presence in society in
its entirety and antisemitic attitudes can be found across all groups of society. We must always fight antisemitism in all its forms and appearances,including in an anti-racist context.

European societies are built on the ongoing oppression and discrimination of racialised people (see Glossary 140), including Black people, people of colour, Roma and Traveller communities, Indigenous peoples, Muslims, and Jews. Today, racialised people are still second-class citizens in Europe. This oppression is visible in the institutions, on the streets, and in culture. Racialised people face police violence and are discriminated against in all aspects of life, from job opportunities to access to healthcare and housing. Hate and discrimination with respect to religions and religious individuals and groups also forms an important part in analysing certain social phenomena, including hate crimes, discriminatory acts and anti-religious sentiments, in an anti-racist context. Though they are not related to race and/or ethnicity, they still intersect with other parts of one's identity and are also being unjustly conflated with the race and/or ethnicity. (See Religion).

Race should be understood as a social construct and as a category that is used to discriminate against people of colour and other racialised groups, and not as a biological reality.

Racism in Europe is, among others, rooted in the colonial and imperialist history of European countries. The ideologies and inequalities that it created are still present today. To properly tackle racism, Europe must face up to its colonial past and recognise the racism present in European history, societies, cultures, and institutions. An appropriate response to this must include monetary reparations for the former colonies of European states, as well as the return of stolen artefacts currently exhibited and kept in European museums. The colonial art restitution debate is a necessity and key contribution to the decolonization of these relationships.

As racism is a structural and systemic problem, public and private institutions must review and change their structures and processes. FYEG supports mechanisms to dismantle racism and achieve justice for those who are marginalised by systemic racism. We support the introduction of mechanisms of affirmative action including access to higher education or public jobs. States must fight discrimination in access to healthcare, jobs, justice, and education. To ensure that the population and in particular the next generation is educated about racism, curricula should be designed that cover different forms and appearances of racism, its history, systemic and structural causes and who has benefitted from this.

Equipped with this knowledge and tools to reflect their situation and circumstances of living, individuals have to recognise their own privileges, educate themselves, and join in solidarity with people and communities affected by racism.

More specifically, FYEG strongly believes that addressing racial oppression holds the key to achieving not only social justice but also climate justice and equity. Racialised activists have been at the forefront of justice struggles. In their struggles they are either made invisible by white people or have been disproportionately targeted by state violence. It is essential for our movements to recognise and actively fight against the mechanisms that have resulted in the exclusion and silencing of racialised activists.

c. Disability rights

FYEG supports the rights and fights of disabled people. Disability can refer to physical or intellectual impairments and can include mental and/or chronic health conditions. Ableism (see Glossary 1) is discrimination or social prejudice against disabled people, such as assuming a disabled person does not have the same capabilities as an able-bodied person to perform certain tasks or roles within society.

Being disabled should not limit a person's choices to be present in public spaces, interact with the world around them, and take part in social, political, and cultural activities. FYEG supports the social model of disability, which sees that social environments exclude and impair people, prevent them from exercising their autonomy, and reduce equality, rather than the person's own impairment.

To remove these barriers, FYEG supports a holistic approach to increasing accessibility which puts disabled people at the centre of policy development. Policies must be created by them and for them. FYEG recognises that disability is unique to each individual and their own experience, and that there can be no one-size-fits-all policy or healthcare approach.

We believe that sign language should be recognised by all states as an official language, and that access to sign language, braille, and other methods of communication should be broadened. FYEG also believes that all barriers should be removed that prevent disabled people from accessing their civil and political rights; these can include physical and social barriers.

When it comes to healthcare treatment for disabled people, medical professionals should work on the assumption that individuals are capable of giving consent unless they are informed otherwise. Medical professionals should not proceed with any form of treatment without first seeking the consent of the person receiving the treatment.

d. Gender

FYEG works towards a world in which people can thrive and know it is safe to be themselves, regardless of their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and sex characteristics.

Gender-based violence (see Glossary 72) is a brutal violation of human rights. It affects people of all social and economic backgrounds across Europe. Women of colour, women with disabilities, LGBTQIA+ (see Glossary 100) women, migrant women, and poor and working-class women are most likely to be at risk and face the biggest obstacles to getting help.

The historical, systemic exclusion of marginalised genders at all levels of political decision-making, from local to European institutions, finally needs to stop. Different mechanisms, including quotas, can help to correct this, and ensure the proportional representation of all gender identities in assemblies at all levels of government in Europe.

Our long-term aspiration is a fluid world. We recognise that labels, while helping us to identify how to fight for rights and justice in a system built against us, cannot represent the spectrum of identities and expressions we embody. Our short-term task is to work for LGBTQIA+ rights, to work for sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), to fight against gender-based violence, and to continue to advocate for gender equality at all levels of society – at home, in the workplace, in politics, etc. We work towards a world in which every person has the right to live freely according to their gender identity and gender expression, and the right to self-determination (see Glossary 148) and bodily autonomy (see Glossary 12).

1. Sexual and reproductive health and rights, combatting discrimination and gender-based violence

Sexual and reproductive health and rights should be part of all educational curricula and should be effectively implemented in all schools. The sexual education curriculum should be non-judgemental, sex positive, consent-focused, and comprehensive enough to cover sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and sex characteristics. More funding and research should be allocated to sexual education and reproductive healthcare.

We demand free, accessible, good quality, and safe sexual and reproductive healthcare and services for all. Healthcare should be based on human rights, bodily autonomy, and informed consent (see Glossary 89) for all, especially the most vulnerable groups, such as trans people (see Glossary 166), people with disabilities, people without papers, and migrants. Additionally, there must be appropriate funding for gender specific medical research since women, trans (see Glossary 166) and gender non-conforming persons usually don't exist in medical research at all or only as pathologised objects. This must change.

Free and accessible sexual and reproductive healthcare should include accessible and free contraception for all, as well as medically-assisted procreation (see Glossary 103). There will also be more money for research into new forms of contraception, such as the male pill. Pink tax discrimination (see Glossary 126) should end. Menstrual products should be cost-free and freely accessible everywhere, including schools, universities, and public toilets. Wherever there is free toilet paper there should be free menstrual products. Gender-neutral toilets will be realized in all publicly accessible buildings and for employees. In large buildings, there will be at least one toilet on each floor that is accessible to everyone. Toilet shortages shouldn't be a problem for anyone.

Each year thousands of people die because of the criminalisation of and lack of access to abortion. Banning abortion only causes greater harm to those who seek it, who then undergo serious health, legal, and financial risks to have an abortion illegally. We condemn all attempts to restrict access to abortion. We advocate for free, accessible, non-judgemental, good quality, safe, legal, and local abortion. The right to abortion must be included in the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights (see Glossary 50).

Certain countries require trans people wishing to access legal gender recognition procedures to undergo forced sterilisation. This violates their dignity and right to bodily autonomy and must be banned. Non-consensual surgeries on intersex people (see Glossary 92) should also be outlawed. States must ban all dehumanising practices and offer reparations to all trans and intersex people who have been forced to renounce their bodily autonomy in this way.

The stigmatisation of HIV (see Glossary 83) must end. HIV treatment is highly effective in reducing the transmission of HIV and people with an undetectable viral load cannot transmit HIV. Legal discrimination against people with HIV must stop. More funds should be allocated to education and raising awareness on HIV and HIV prevention, as well as to research and treatment. HIV treatment, HIV prevention, and testing for HIV should be free and universally accessible.

Women and girls (cis and trans) are often exposed to serious forms of physical violence including domestic violence, sexual assault, and rape. We demand the legal definition of rape to respect individual self-determination. Today, rape is generally defined as sexual intercourse with a person by forcible compulsion; sexual intercourse with a person who is incapable of consent by reason of being physically helpless or mentally incapacitated; or sexual intercourse with an underage person. We demand for it to be defined by lack of consent, not by the threat of violence.

All European countries must implement the Istanbul Convention (see Glossary 94). The Convention sets out measures to address all forms of violence against women, recognising this violence as a human rights violation and a form of discrimination. Countries need to provide clear and concise information for victims in a language they understand, accessible and inclusive shelters, and telephone hotlines.

We acknowledge the gender-based discrimination of women in the labour market, including the underpayment of historically female-dominated occupations. We therefore demand equal pay for equally valuable work and an end to discrimination based on pregnancy and parenthood.

2. LGBTQIA+ rights

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, intersex, and asexual rights are still under attack in our patriarchal, capitalist system. Even today, conservative governments are trying to take away the hard-earned freedoms and rights of LGBTQIA+ people. Homophobia (see Glossary 81) and transphobia (see Glossary 167) can fuel hate speech and hate crime and should be criminalised.

Every person should have the right to live according to their sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression freely and without fear. So-called “conversion therapy” (see Glossary 28) is dehumanising and must be banned and prosecuted immediately. The relationships of same- and opposite-sex couples and their families should enjoy equal recognition. All couples have a right to family life. This includes the right to adoption and foster care, the right for all people with a uterus to have access to medically assisted procreation (see Glossary 103), and the right of equal access to sperm donation, regardless of their sexual orientation, health or relationship status. IVF treatments should be equally reimbursable to all couples. Marriages and civil unions must be open to all couples, and those recognised in one European country must also be and automatically fully recognised in all others.

Trans women are women, trans men are men, being non-binary is valid, and trans rights are human rights. Mandatory mental health assessments violate trans people’s dignity and right to self-determination and should be banned. We demand legal gender recognition procedures for all genders and none, and the right to change names in an auto-declarative and unconditional manner. These procedures should be quick, transparent, accessible, free, based solely on individual self-determination, and without age restrictions. Additionally, we call for the removal of all sex markers in identity documents, including passports.

e. Religion

Pluralistic societies (see Glossary 128) depend on enabling a safe space in which each person is free to believe or not believe, practise their beliefs, observe their beliefs, and organise for their beliefs. We fight against islamophobia (see Glossary 93) and antisemitism (see Glossary 4), and condemn any kind of discrimination and hate speech against people based on their religion. We believe in a pluralistic society built on dialogue. The right to religious freedom and the right to practise religion freely must be protected under national and European law. We oppose the idea that religion is by nature a divisive issue and a source of tensions, and that people should hide their religious beliefs or feel ashamed of them.

We stand for a secular state (see Glossary 153) in which there is a separation between religion and government, and where religious laws are not considered to be above or outside civil law. We believe states should not give preferential treatment to any religion or religious persons and organisations over other citizens and charities as this creates a discriminatory system. Workers should have the right to celebrate the holidays of their own religion without facing discrimination or penalisation. The wearing of religious symbols should not be used as a reason to exclude people from education, work, public services, or public spaces.

f. Cultural and Indigenous Rights

FYEG stands for cultural rights. The colonial, imperialist, discriminatory and assimilationist policies in European countries have left ethnic, cultural and national minorities heavily marginalised and vulnerable. We defend the right of individuals and communities, including national minorities, to practise and preserve their cultures, including their languages, religions, art forms, and ways of life. Ethnic, cultural and national minorities must have strong legal protection, sufficient and stable funding and cultural autonomy in support of their efforts to revitalise, retain and develop their languages, cultures and ways of life. We support the implementation of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages by all European states (see Glossary 54).

FYEG also recognises the importance of respecting and protecting indigenous european populations. For some of them, despite having used the land they live on for thousands of years, their rights are ignored when it comes to decisions that directly affect their economic and social wellbeing, and their cultures risk being eroded and destroyed. FYEG stands for education for the general population to reduce dated views about indigenous populations based on ignorance and prejudice, and a recognition of their economic and social rights to continue their ways of life. This should include local self-determination on issues such as mining, animal herding as well as promotion and protection of indigenous cultures and languages. We support efforts to ensure that these rights are harmonised across artificial political borders, such as through international conventions.

Europe and the European Union must provide support and offer asylum to those whose cultural rights are being violated elsewhere.

2. A Democratic Europe

Democracy is increasingly under attack, both in Europe and elsewhere. Authoritarian leaders ignore democratic principles and violate the rule of law (see Glossary 149) – even within the European Union. Some states proclaim themselves to be so-called “illiberal democracies” (see Glossary 86). At the same time, technological and digital developments are having wide-reaching implications for fundamental rights, posing substantial challenges to our democracies, while also bringing new possibilities for democratic participation and new forms of activism.

FYEG fights for a Europe and a European Union which are truly democratic and embrace and encourage the active participation of their inhabitants. We advocate for the strong protection of the rights of these inhabitants, especially the most vulnerable, young people, and those that engage in activism in order to better our societies.

a. The rule of law

The rule of law is an essential element of democratic societies. In recent years, attacks on the rule of law have multiplied in several European countries, with women and minorities most strongly affected. FYEG stands for reinforcing the independence of the judiciary, accelerating the fight against corruption, and guaranteeing the independence of the media.

In the EU, we call for the full implementation of Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union (see Glossary 6) allowing for the scrutiny and possible suspension of a Member State’s voting rights in the Council of the EU if they fail to respect the fundamental values of the Union including the rule of law, in the short term.
This decision should be taken via qualified majority (see Glossary 137). In the long term, the power to impose sanctions on member states and to suspend voting rights of member states in the Council should become matters for the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) (see Glossary 33). FYEG also supports the implementation of a strong rule of law mechanism (see Glossary 150), according to which the granting of EU funding is made conditional upon Member States’ respect of the rule of law and fundamental rights.

While implementing those tools, we must ensure that citizens are not disadvantaged by their governments’ poor behaviour. It should be made possible to bypass corrupt national governments and for EU funds to be directly assigned to local authorities or final beneficiaries. We also call for increased support for organisations that are fighting for democracy, press freedom, fundamental rights, and the rule of law, for example through the EU Rights and Values programme (see Glossary 52).

The European judicial system should be reinforced. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) (see Glossary 33) should have more power to protect citizens and uphold fundamental rights, including human rights, democracy, freedom of the press and independent judiciary. We support reinforcing the prerogatives and powers of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (see Glossary 61) to investigate and press charges in more fields, beginning with corruption, the misuse of public money, and international crime.

b. Democracy

FYEG supports representative democratic systems in which citizens elect representatives to debate issues and make decisions on their behalf. We support parliamentary systems (see Glossary 121) over presidential systems (see Glossary 130) in which power is concentrated in the hands of a single person and proper debate is not possible. Representatives should be elected using a system of proportional representation (see Glossary 135).

Those current systems in which elected officials are seen as being cut off from citizens and not accountable to the electorate are clearly not functioning well enough and are creating mistrust in democracy itself. Action is needed at several levels to protect and improve our democratic systems.

To complement representative democratic systems, FYEG supports introducing and reinforcing direct democracy mechanisms such as participatory budgeting (see Glossary 122), special assemblies composed of randomly chosen citizens, citizens’ initiatives, the right to petition, citizen-initiated referendums (see Glossary 22), especially on a local level, the right to challenge (see Glossary 146), and representative recalls (see Glossary 144). Democratic institutions should also be made more transparent, with all debates open or publicly available, public registers detailing the financial interests of every elected official, and full transparency on lobbying activities.

But this is not enough: any democracy which does not provide adequate space for debate and reflection is no true democracy, and FYEG therefore supports efforts to create deliberative democracies. Through providing public spaces and opportunities for rational debate and discussion between members of the public and not just talking political heads, through citizenship, deliberation, and participation education in schooling we can ensure that the policies of today that will shape the future - such as on climate change - are well thought out.

FYEG is also supportive of the subsidiarity principle (see Glossary 158). Every decision that affects the lives of citizens should be taken at the level that is closest to them, where they can more easily play an active role and hold their representatives accountable. Local and regional governments should be given more power, and their participation in decision-making processes at the European level should be reinforced. Forms of democracy inspired by the principles of commons (see Glossary 26) and based on the public, democratic management of the commons should be implemented to the greatest possible extent. Our aim needs to be to create liveable, democratic spaces in our towns and cities.

The right to take part in democratic processes should be open to as many people as possible and should be based primarily on a person’s place of residence rather than nationality. All foreign citizens should enjoy the right to vote in their place of residence for all elections. Nobody should be deprived of the right to vote because of their age, nationality, ethnicity, the fact that they are in prison, or any other criteria. Young people in particular are systematically excluded from decision-making processes. FYEG also stands for lowering the voting age to 16 with the prospective to lower the voting age further. Gender quota systems for elections are important tools to redress the underrepresentation of women in politics and should be further adapted to include all underrepresented genders.

Action needs to be taken to enable the civic participation of groups and communities that are excluded from participation in decision-making processes. FYEG recognizes that in our society, women, non-binary people, gender non-conforming people, socio-economically disadvantaged people and young people are subjected to higher burdens to political participation, as well as to violence and tokenism. Discrimination constitutes an attack on democracy. Strengthening training, supporting youth political organisations, using non-formal education methods, using gender balanced lists of speakers and quotas are all examples of interventions that build towards full and meaningful participation of all groups in society, thus to the legitimacy of democratic processes.

c. An activist Europe

Democratic participation must never be limited to the polling booth. The right to protest is a fundamental part of democratic culture and must be protected. We encourage active participation in our democracies, not only through political organisations but also through civil society and activist work. The EU, its Member States, and other European states must actively support and encourage civil society and youth political engagement. FYEG engages itself to promote regenerative forms of activism that protect members’ physical and mental well- being, and urges the social and environmental movements it partners up with to do so as well.

The right to organise and to take part in protests freely, without experiencing threats, intimidation, or violence, should be protected. We also defend the right of journalists and citizens to document demonstrations and police activities during those demonstrations.

In their work for a better society, activists often make use of civil disobedience (see Glossary 23). While the authorities may not welcome its use, their reaction to civil disobedience is often disproportionate to the point of being unacceptable. The rights of activists must be defended under all circumstances.

This also applies to cases in which actions to bring about effective climate action or defend human rights go against the law as it stands.

FYEG stands for reinforcing the protection and the support to whistleblowers, as they reveal information and documents of public interest and for the common good.

d. Towards a federal Europe

Most of the challenges Europe is facing cannot be solved at the local or national level alone. A stronger, more integrated, and federal Europe (see Glossary 62) is needed to address citizens’ demands.

As the only directly elected EU institution, the European Parliament (see Glossary 60) is key to building a stronger Europe. In the short term, its Members should be elected partly on national lists and partly on Union-wide lists, while ensuring the fair representation of all Member States. Instead of being presented with the European Council’s (see Glossary 57) choice of European Commission (see Glossary 55) president, the European Parliament should be able to elect the candidate of its choice. We believe Commissioners should not be appointed by Member States but chosen by Members of the European Parliament while guaranteeing fair representation of Member States. Moreover, the European Parliament should have the right to initiate legislation.

We call on Member States to find a solution to the issue of the seats of different EU institutions, while making sure all decision-making bodies are not concentrated in the same city, country or part of the EU, but are spread across the whole EU. Moreover, the costly moving circus of the European Parliament should be stopped.

Many long-awaited progressive initiatives have been blocked by the Council of the European Union (see Glossary 32). In the short term, decisions at the Council should be taken by qualified majority (see Glossary 137) and not by unanimity (see Glossary 175) on budgetary, social, and fiscal policy. This would both facilitate European action in many fields and reinforce the influence of the European Parliament.

In the long term, FYEG demands the election of a European citizens’ convention. This body would be responsible for drafting an EU constitution that would replace the existing treaties and pave the way for a federal and truly democratic EU. This EU constitution should then be voted on through a Union-wide referendum.

A stronger EU requires a real EU budget. The EU budget should be substantially increased, in particular by giving the EU its own power to levy taxes for its “own resources” (see Glossary 116) such as a European kerosene (see Glossary 96) tax, a carbon tax (see Glossary 18), a carbon border adjustment mechanism (see Glossary 14), a tax on tech giants, and a tax on financial transactions (see Glossary 162) (see Chapter 4 – Fiscal policy). The European Union may levy taxes in certain areas based on the principle of subsidiarity. This will reduce the dependence on Member States' contributions and will allow for more effective taxation in certain areas than a Member State could do on its own. When establishing these Europe-wide taxes, the economic differences between Member States must be taken into account, whereby a Europe-wide tax must not increase inequality between Member States or hit poorer Member States harder. The EU should also be able to issue bonds to contribute to its budget. We call for deepened European defence cooperation and in the long term the development of further interoperability between EU member states armies.

e. Public safety

We believe that every person in our societies should be safe and feel safe. Today’s mainstream public safety policies are not fulfilling that objective: many citizens still feel unsafe and are being attacked based on their gender, appearance, supposed sexual orientation, or gender identity, and on racist and xenophobic (see Glossary 187) grounds. Violence is still a major part of our societies. A public safety policy that aims to end violence by employing even more violence, and that is executed at the expense of public freedoms and fundamental rights, is doomed to fail. FYEG stands for a reinvention of public safety policy based on prevention and rehabilitation rather than violence and repression.

Prevention should be central. We believe that, among others, better education, the teaching of nonviolent communication, gender equality, and tackling racism contribute to reducing the level of violence in society. Public safety is interlinked with social policies. Implementing stronger social policies and fighting against poverty is key to improvement in the long term. We support the integration of stronger, more situation-specific social policies in neighbourhoods with the highest levels of poverty. Prevention recognises that the police cannot be the solution to every issue. Specific personnel such as psychologists and street and other social workers can work better with people in certain psychological states, with homeless people, and with victims of violence. These jobs should be supported and better funded.

The police has become a cornerstone of failing public safety policies. While we believe some form of policing is needed, the police needs to be fundamentally changed. A zero-tolerance policy on racism, sexism, and other hateful conduct in the police is essential. The police should be made accountable for its actions and an independent police oversight body should be put in place to investigate police violence and other complaints. Democratic scrutiny of the police, in which police chiefs are accountable to local assemblies and regularly answer questions during public sessions, is of critical importance. Additionally, policing must be demilitarised. It is unnecessary for the police to have military-like vehicles and heavily armed officers with assault rifles and grenades. There must be structural change – a movement away from state-sponsored violence and repression and towards prevention and cooperation as tools for dealing with conflict in our societies. Defunding the police would lead to this structural change by refocusing public money towards social good.

We also support the improvement of the employment and working conditions of police employees. In some countries, many are overworked and under a lot of pressure, have poor working conditions, and receive low salaries. This contributes to an increased use of violence, higher levels of corruption, and poor quality service. Police employees should receive better training, especially concerning gender-based violence, the tackling of unconscious bias (see Glossary 176), nonviolent communication, and nonviolent conflict resolution techniques.

Certain policies such as drug policies and migration policies create avoidable violence. The criminalisation of the use, cultivation, and selling of drugs, as well as the criminalisation of migration, actively supports the development of underground mafia systems who rely on the use of violence. FYEG stands for the legalisation of drugs (see Glossary 97) and opening borders as a way of reducing violence and reinforcing security (see Chapter 5 – Health).

The judicial system also has a role to play in the prevention of crime by repeat offenders, by ensuring that convicted people receive adequate psychological support, prioritising alternatives to prison, and promoting the rehabilitation and reintegration of convicted people.

f. Digital rights

As citizens’ use of digital products increases, digital rights become more and more important. FYEG believes digital rights are key to fully exercising other fundamental rights, such as the right to access information held by public authorities, to freedom of opinion and expression, and to political activism. Digital activism has become an important part of political activism and must be defended. We therefore stand for an internet in which those rights can be fully exercised and for a regulatory framework that fully protects citizens.

Digitalisation (see Glossary 39) should not be an excuse for states and companies to spy on citizens. Communication via the internet must be protected by encryption. We oppose government-requested loopholes or the weakening of that encryption. The secrecy of correspondence (see Glossary 152) should be extended to include all digital communication, including metadata (see Glossary 104). We defend the principle of self- determination in relation to one’s personal data, as well as the outlawing of mass data retention (see Glossary 102) by private companies. Targeted advertisements and third- party cookies should be made illegal. The right to be forgotten (see Glossary 145) should also be protected.

FYEG believes in the power of free software and open source-based platforms (see Glossary 113), which must be strengthened by the European Union in order to guarantee full transparency in the fight for consumer rights. Alternatives to tech giants should be established that abide by these principles. In order for alternatives to emerge, it is essential to defend the principle of net neutrality (see Glossary 110).

We fight for access to the internet and an accessible internet. This means universal access to the necessary infrastructure and broadband, as well as internet access at no charge. It also means accessibility for disabled people through the mainstreaming of subtitles, alternative text (see Glossary 2), etc. It is also vital to ensure that people from different backgrounds have equal opportunities to use digital domains. For language minorities it is often difficult or impossible to use their own languages digitally as they lack sufficient digital infrastructure, such as localised software, keyboard layouts, grammar checkers and online dictionaries. The development of language technology resources for minority languages must be supported in order to ensure digital language equality.

In times in which almost everyone and everything is digitally connected, we also fight for a stronger right to disconnect (see Glossary 147) for workers.

Digital and technological developments have the power to fundamentally change our societies. The opportunities these technologies bring must be used to strengthen democratic participation. Online pseudonymity must be protected as this is key for people to express their political or personal opinions without fear and without risking negative consequences.

The digital sphere is not a lawless space. Private companies that are active in the digital sphere must be regulated and pay their fair share of taxes. Discrimination and hate speech in the digital sphere must be recognised as problematic, and combatted. This includes developments in the realm of artificial intelligence (see Glossary 7), which has the potential to transform our societies for the better but also risks reinforcing existing discrimination through biased algorithms. More attention should be paid to the negative consequences of automated decision-making. Automated decision-making that can lead to discrimination and ethnic profiling should be regularly tested and adapted to counter this.

The spread of disinformation and fake news has the potential to undermine our democracies and must be dealt with accordingly by effective legislation and training. This includes protection against foreign interference in democratic processes and the fight against terrorism. The pursuit of these goals must never be used as an excuse to pass legislation that restricts the freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, or other fundamental rights. We oppose the use of upload filters (see Glossary 180).

3. A Sustainable Europe

The climate crisis is the largest threat facing humanity. FYEG considers the current economic system of material growth and environmental exploitation as a root cause of climate change. To stop climate change, we need a shift towards a democratic economy able to properly address environmental damage, the use of natural resources and the voices of groups affected (see chapter 4). Without urgent action, it will jeopardise many human achievements and fundamental rights, endanger food and water supply, and put many territories at risk. Climate change is also likely to have important geopolitical consequences.

FYEG considers climate change a real injustice. Those who are the most responsible for climate change are least likely to be affected by it, whereas those who are the least responsible will bear the brunt of its negative effects. FYEG believes it is essential to adopt an intersectional approach highly critical of capitalism when analysing the causes and effects of the climate crisis. We advocate for just solutions to the climate crisis that take into account the racial, gender, class, age, disability, and colonial dimensions of the climate crisis.

Since the adoption of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (see Glossary 173) in 1992, the Paris Agreement (see Glossary 120) in 2015, and the declaration of climate emergency by the European Parliament in 2019, and thanks to the work of many activists and scientists, awareness of the seriousness of the crisis has grown. But the actions that have been taken to tackle climate change, including those of the EU, are still widely insufficient. The world is still on track for an increase in global temperatures way above 2 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels (see Glossary 170).

The climate crisis is not the only global existential crisis humanity is facing. The biodiversity crisis is also a reality, the seriousness of which is still being underestimated. The sixth mass extinction (see Glossary 154), resulting from human activity, is accelerating. Various sources of pollution are still the cause of many diseases and deaths.

FYEG considers these crises as symptoms of an economic system that relies on unlimited economic growth, the exploitation of animals and nature. We need to rethink that relationship and offer concrete solutions to these crises.

a. An urgent and just transition towards climate neutrality

FYEG supports the objective of maintaining global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius. Much stronger action is needed to fight climate change, directly tackling root causes. This implies changing our entire economic system in an extremely short time altering our production and consumption patterns, in a just way, for emissions to drop overall. These types of shifts cannot be done by the market; instead, strong action from the state is needed.

European countries historically holds greater responsibility for climate change than most parts of the world. This means that European Countries holds a bigger responsibility to tackle climate change and its worldwide consequences. European countries and the EU must be the frontrunner in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions. Countries with the most resources should be even more ambitious and reach their climate objectives earlier.

FYEG supports the objective of reaching climate neutrality in Europe by 2035.

We encourage EU member states to implement a general tax on greenhouse gas emissions. The amount of the levy is equal to the damage that the greenhouse gas can cause per kilogram. In addition, this amount can be higher if it appears that the objectives are not being achieved. FYEG is also in favour of further using the European emission trading system by drastically lessen the number of emission rights.

Europe must also provide support in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions to poorer countries, including via financial support and technology transfer. It must also assist them in tackling the effects of climate change, as well as supporting them in making their societies, their economies, and their food and water supplies more resilient to climate change. We must also be careful to ensure that Europe’s path to climate neutrality does not involve externalising emissions to third countries. Instead, it should aim to reduce the emissions caused in third countries as a result of European consumption.

Globally, but also within Europe, the transition towards a climate neutral economy must be socially just. We are concerned about the unequal impact of climate change and of environmental hazards which often disproportionately affect poor people and marginalised groups. We need to make sure our response to the climate crisis does not reinforce existing inequalities. For example, the extraction of rare minerals needed for this transition should not be at the expense of the populations of the countries in which those minerals can be found. While we believe that technological progress has an important role to play in solving the climate and biodiversity crises, we are critical of approaches that tend to overestimate the positive impact of uncertain future technologies to avoid addressing core issues and engage in systemic change. An example is carbon capture and storage (see Glossary 15), often used as a reason for less ambitious emissions targets, in spite of the fact that the technology has not yet been fully developed.

Current mainstream environmental and climate policies do not affect everyone in the same way. FYEG calls for those policies to be both socially just and to fight inequalities. We call for support measures for every worker at risk of losing their job because of the transition towards a carbon neutral economy (see Glossary 16). They should receive help including, but not limited to, having a job guaranteed and having access to retraining. It is also important to reinforce our social welfare mechanisms (see chapter 5) and to take into account the gender and racial aspects of a just transition (see Glossary 95). Failure to tackle the climate crisis would have terrible implications for all, including workers. We should make the transition a just transition.

b. Energy

In order to meet our climate objectives, a deep transformation of our energy system is needed.

Europe must phase out all fossil fuels, starting with coal and fracked gas (see Glossary 68), which must be phased out in Europe by 2027 at the latest. This includes first and foremost the stopping of imports of fossil fuels directly or as soon as possible according to WTO trade law from authoritarian regimes committing the most egregious human rights violations, such as but not limited to breaches of peremptory norms (see Glossary 189) - for example, the Russian Federation. Furthermore, the production and import of fossil fuels must be replaced by renewable and emission-free solutions: wind energy, solar energy, marine energy, and waste heat recovery (see Glossary 183). The production of electricity should be 100% renewable by 2035 at the latest. Taxpayers’ money must therefore not finance fossil fuels. The opening or extension of fossil fuel extraction sites must be prohibited immediately, and existing sites should be closed as soon as possible. New fossil fuel infrastructure should not be built in Europe. This includes gas infrastructure. It is also crucial that the energy gap in certain areas in Europe can be quickly filled in and that an optimal energy mix across the continent is achieved.

FYEG supports energy democracy and stands for the development of a decentralised and interconnected energy system. Energy systems should be localised. We support forms of collective ownership of energy production, such as energy cooperatives. Networks to transport energy are crucial to enable this transition; they should be owned, developed, and operated as commons, for example being publicly owned.

The cleanest and quickest way to achieve the energy transition is to reduce our energy consumption. Efforts should be made to improve energy efficiency, to renovate all buildings, and to transform the industry. Governments must organise the renovation and insulation of all buildings by 2030. This would also play a key role in reducing energy poverty across Europe.

Although nuclear energy (see Glossary 111) emits less carbon emissions, it raises high risks and many serious long-term concerns that by far outweigh the benefits and we strongly take a stand against any attempt to frame nuclear energy as a climate change solution. These include issues regarding the extraction of uranium (see Glossary 181), the disposal of nuclear waste, the safety of nuclear installations, the security measures and level of state control required, the huge consequences of potential accidents, the link with nuclear weapons, the long time it takes to build, the fact that it does not improve the stability of the electricity grid and the significant cost, which could much more efficiently be used to pay for renewable energy sources. Potential solutions such as nuclear fusion (see Glossary 112) will be unable to provide a concrete response in time to solve the climate crisis. We therefore believe that the construction of new nuclear plants should be avoided at all cost, and that nuclear energy should be phased out as soon as possible across Europe. The phase-out of nuclear energy should be carried out in a way that does not endanger climate objectives and if fossil fuels are no longer used for electricity production on the same network. The phase-out of nuclear energy should be carried out in a way that does not endanger climate objectives and if fossil fuels are no longer used for electricity production on the same network. Thus, FYEG strongly supports the development of renewable solutions to replace the output from nuclear power plants. This helps to limit dependence on fossil fuels from Russia and other authoritarian states. A nuclear phaseout must be reliant on renewables instead of fossil fuels. European countries should not export their nuclear technology or build nuclear plants outside of Europe.

We believe natural carbon sinks such as forests, oceans, wetlands, and peatlands have an important role to play in reducing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Policies should be adopted to protect and enhance their potential. On the other hand, technologies such as geo- engineering (see Glossary 76) are often presented as solutions to fight climate change, but their large-scale efficiency remains undemonstrated and their risks remain unclear to the public. While their full potentials are still yet to be seen, these technologies should never be used as an excuse to continue the burning of fossil fuels and delay real climate action.

c. Water, food and agriculture

Water is the backbone of life and agricultural production. It therefore must not be considered as a commodity. Water sources and resources must be protected from potential pollution through agriculture, mining, production, construction and waste disposal. Food is essential to life. It therefore cannot be considered as a commodity. FYEG stands for food and agricultural policies that guarantee that every person has access to local, healthy, diversified and quality food.

Farmers and agricultural workers play an essential role in ensuring this right to food and their own rights should be respected, as enshrined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas (see Glossary 172). Farmers and agricultural workers should be able to earn a decent revenue from their work. We believe in a model consisting of numerous small- and medium- scale farms, guaranteeing thriving countrysides.

Industrialised agriculture is responsible for substantial greenhouse gas emissions, massive biodiversity loss, water scarcity, soil depletion, and a range of public health issues (e.g. antimicrobial resistance (see Glossary 3)). A transition towards a form of agriculture which respects the environment, preserves soil, water, and the climate, and is based on agroecological practices and organic agriculture is urgently needed. Artificial fertilisers and pesticides (see Glossary 124) must be phased out within a reasonable time frame, starting with the most dangerous (e.g. neonicotinoids and glyphosate). A rapid drop in animal farming and in the consumption of animal products is also needed with the goal of phasing out industrial livestock production. Traditional indigenous livelihoods such as hunting, fishing and animal herding must be protected. In general, we consider it desirable that as little meat as possible is consumed, taking into account health concerns and the aforementioned issues. This would improve public health and animal welfare as well as drastically reduce the environmental impact of food production. The precautionary use of antibiotics in animal farming must be banned immediately and the maximum amount of animals held per area must be drastically limited.

Food systems should be rebuilt on the principles of food sovereignty (see Glossary 66), eliminating corporate capture of food, reducing food waste, prioritising short supply chains and locally produced food, ending imports of deforestation-driving products such as soy or palm oil, and making sure that European agriculture is not exported in a way that harms agricultural systems in other countries. To achieve this, we need a food production system that ensures environmental and economic sustainability and food security for all, without endangering the food security (see Glossary 65) of future generations. It is of utmost importance to find ways to guarantee an economically viable system that does not have negative effects on nature and the wider environment. To this end, FYEG looks positively towards promising new methods of food production. Research capacities have to be significantly strengthened and mainstreamed in order to find ways of reducing the environmental impact of the food system, while guaranteeing farmers' rights and ensuring decent living conditions in rural areas. Forms of urban farming such as vertical farming can offer solutions to provide cities with sustainable food, since they reduce the use of some natural resources, such as land area and water. Since sustainable methods of clean meat-production could potentially help the transition to a vegetarian society, while also coming with potential risks, research into safe, efficient and environmentally-friendly clean meat (see Glossary 24)-production needs to be intensified.

This transition towards a more sustainable and fairer agricultural system requires changes in the regulatory framework as well as ambitious public policies. FYEG stands for more transparent labelling, with details of origin, composition, methods of production, use of pesticides, animal welfare, and nutritional values. A thorough reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (see Glossary 25) is needed, taking environmental issues, animal welfare as well as working conditions into account in its subsidy scheme. The promotion of sustainable and plant-based diets should also be encouraged.

GMOs in agriculture have both positive and negative effects. GMOs are meant to provide better yields, increase nutritional capacity, or be more resistant to pests and extreme weather conditions. Yet, they can also increase corporate control through patents, increase farmer dependence on biotech firms, and threaten biodiversity through increased unforeseen mutations and increased herbicide and pesticide use. Associated with mono-cropping practices, GMOs make overall ecosystems less resilient to pests. We believe the use of GMOs, including new GMOs, should be regulated and subjected to individual scientific assessments for and by public institutions, concerning all risks to consumers, farmers, and the environment, prior to authorisation. FYEG believes that heirloom seeds and the development of agroecology represent a better solution to the challenges faced by our food system. Moreover, in a world where the amount of food produced would be sufficient to feed all, increasing yield productivity is not the only leverage point to reduce hunger. Food distribution, the reduction of food waste and shifting towards vegetarian diets are all part of the solution. We firmly believe in food and land sovereignty. Financial interests must never be placed above the environment and biodiversity, nor above people.

d. Transport

Transport is responsible for almost a quarter of greenhouse gases emitted in Europe and is one of the only sectors in which emissions have risen in recent years, despite important technological progress. Transport is also one of the main sources of air pollution, which is responsible for the premature deaths of 400,000 people in the EU each year. Changes in both practices and modes of transport are needed, with a shift towards zero-emission travel a priority.

While keeping up efforts to reduce aircraft emissions, Europe needs to fly less. This can be achieved by introducing a EU-wide kerosene (see Glossary 96) tax, and an end on both the construction of new airports and the extension of existing ones. Train travel should be favoured over air travel. An effective policy could involve the phase-out of commercial flights for trips where it is possible to use an alternative, more environmentally friendly means of transport with a journey time of less than 10 hours. At the same time, train networks should be further developed, including the construction of high-speed trains and the introduction of more night train routes, with the aim of achieving a network of high-speed lines connecting major cities in Europe. We should prioritise the renovation of existing train tracks over the construction of new ones whenever possible in order to minimise the environmental impact. At the same time, existing secondary lines in rural areas should be maintained and the frequency of their service increased. Efforts should be made to achieve a 100% decarbonised network by 2035. Travelling across Europe by train should be made easier, for example by the introduction of a European train ticket system.

For everyday shorter journeys, regions and cities should continue developing public transport networks as well as safe and efficient cycling and pedestrian networks. We aim to eliminate the use of private cars in city centres and residential areas. Comprehensive urban planning (see Glossary 27) plays a crucial role in creating socially accessible and ecologically just cities and residential areas in which people can live, work, and spend free time without having to travel long distances. Insecurity in public transport which disproportionately affect women and gender minorities, should be tackled in order to make public transport really attractive to all. During air pollution peaks, teleworking should be made mandatory. Rural areas should not be left out: regions should guarantee public transport solutions, relying on intermodality between cycling, buses, trains, and private cars. New fossil-fuel vehicles should no longer be available for purchase in Europe by 2025, and their use should be phased out as soon as possible. FYEG also supports efforts to introduce fare-free local public transport throughout Europe, starting with people belonging to vulnerable groups and young people.

Further efforts should be made to ensure that public transport is fully accessible for all, including people with disabilities.

e.Technological Progress

Technological innovation and new technologies can bring about substantial positive change in society. Progress in the medical sector, in digital technologies, in energy production, and in the development of clean vehicles is crucial to fight the ongoing crises Europe is facing.

Technological progress is not always a synonym for social and societal progress. We are firmly attached to the precautionary principle, meaning that innovations should be assessed thoroughly and should be proven harmless for the environment, human health, and society as a whole before being authorised. Uncertainty should not be used as a reason to postpone measures to prevent environmental degradation or preserve public health. New innovations should be open to scientific and public assessment to determine their potential costs and benefits.

While we believe that technological progress has an important role to play in solving the climate and biodiversity crises, we are critical of approaches that tend to overestimate the positive impact of uncertain future technologies to avoid addressing core issues and engage in systemic change. An example is carbon capture and storage (see Glossary 15), often used as a reason for less ambitious emissions targets, in spite of the fact that the technology has not yet been fully developed.

FYEG believes that space science and exploration are important emerging policy areas which deserve more attention. Space science gives us tools in the fight against the climate crisis. It allows us to measure where, when, how and why climate change is taking place, and assists the world with detailed maps and images during disasters. Space travel should only serve scientific research, innovation, and exploration, not financial profit-making or military activities. In addition, FYEG supports cleaning up our immediate space environment - space junk colliding with each other risks causing catastrophic chain reactions.

f. Animal rights

While most European citizens agree that the welfare of animals should be improved, not a lot is being done. We need to consider animals as subjects and sentient beings who should be protected from harm, and we should reflect critically on our place within the animal realm. Animals have rights that should be respected and be taken into account when transitioning towards a sustainable and just agriculture and society. We have to provide an appropriate and painless livelihood especially for animals kept as farm animals.

Animals should not be subject to cruel treatment. FYEG stands for the immediate ban of the cruellest practices, such as the production of foie gras through force-feeding (see Glossary 67), corrida (see Glossary 31), fur farming, dolphinariums (see Glossary 40), and hunting with dogs. We also believe that animals should not be kept in conditions contrary to their natural behaviours. We believe animals should not be allowed to be kept in a circus and that zoos should be subject to a much stronger regulation.

Every year, nearly 70 billion land animals are slaughtered worldwide for food. With the industrialisation of animal farming, the conditions in which farm animals live have become worse and worse. It is essential to both reduce the consumption of animal-based products and improve the welfare of farm animals. Cage farming, one of the commonest forms of industrial animal farming, must be banned with immediate effect. FYEG defends the small-farm model in which animals have access to sufficient space, are able to go outdoors, play and interact with others of their kind. Newly created animal breeds that favour rapid animal growth but often cause the animal to suffer should also be phased out. Stronger regulation of animal transport should be put in place, with a ban on the export of live animals outside the EU.

We support work towards the abolition of the use of animals in research and support research into techniques that will allow scientists to replace, refine and reduce the number of research animals they use. We recognise the importance of animal welfare and the essential contribution that animals have made and currently make to research that improves human and animal health. We support the replacement (through methods that avoid using animals such as computer (in silico) models, in vitro techniques, or human volunteers), refinement (through improvements to scientific procedures and husbandry that minimise pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm and/or improve animal welfare, for example, through improved housing and husbandry and better welfare assessments) and reduction (through good experimental design and statistical analysis) of the use of animals in in vivo experiments. We oppose in vivo experiments where research animals are not housed or treated in a manner in keeping with international best practice.

Wild animals should also benefit from better protection, with the protection of wild natural spaces and the stronger regulation of hunting (see g). The Covid-19 pandemic, which likely originated from interactions between wildlife and humans, is one example of the consequences that zoonotic diseases (see Glossary 188) can have on humankind, and has clearly demonstrated the need to take measures to prevent their development.

FYEG also defends stronger regulation in order to fight overfishing, regenerate fish populations, and restore marine ecosystems. The use of fishing techniques with a low impact on the environment should be encouraged, while higher impact techniques such as bottom-contacting fishing gears, electric pulse fishing (see Glossary 45), and fish aggregating devices (see Glossary 64) (FADs) should be banned. Small-scale fisheries have to be prioritised immediately, and measures must be taken to stop the concentration and industrialisation of the fishing sector in Europe. The rapid development of industrialised fish farming in recent years must be addressed with the introduction of stronger regulations on fishing quota, fish welfare and environmental protection. Activities of fishing companies in fishing grounds of lesser developed states, in particular African, must immediately end. Furthermore the EU and European states must end bilateral contracts which allow European companies to raid African fishing grounds. Instead the EU and European states should support African State to build and develope coast guards which have the ability to effectively protect their fishing grounds from foreign intruders.

g. Protecting our natural environment

Nature should not be regarded as a commodity, as something humanity is separated from, but as something that it belongs to. Like climate change, nature knows no borders. We believe it is time that nature be properly recognised and protected.

FYEG supports giving rights to nature that ensure its protection under national and international law. We want the crime of ecocide to be recognised in domestic and international criminal law. The most destructive fishing, deforestation, soil degradation, and mining practices should be banned. We must fight overfishing. Hunting should be strongly regulated, no longer permitted for commercial and leisure purposes except for indigenous peoples practising their traditional livelihoods, and only authorised as a last resort to preserve balance within an ecosystem.

We support the objective of giving protected status to at least 30% of our planet’s land and seas, with 10% granted a particularly high level of protection. The rainforests, coral reefs, Arctic ice pack, and oceans are global commons, and decisions regarding these global commons should be a global concern for all. We reject approaches to nature conservation that perpetuate colonial domination and violate fundamental rights. No one should be displaced or forced to leave their home because of a nature reserve.

We are on the brink of mass extinction. It is not enough to just protect ecosystems; we must promote the restoration and renaturalisation of devastated areas according to scientific criteria. Furthermore, our own human ecosystems, such as cities, can and must be renaturalised — allowing space for new ecosystems to flourish.

Across the world, environmental defenders are facing threats and violence, with many being murdered for their defence of the environment. This is unacceptable. Defending the natural world is not a crime. Those who threaten environmental defenders must be prosecuted, and the European Union should grant protection and offer asylum to those under threat.

The transition to a zero-carbon society might also have an impact on and conflict with nature conservation. The impact of infrastructures such as wind farms, hydropower plants, and high-speed railways should be minimised as much as possible.

4. A Green and Feminist Economy

The Federation of Young European Greens identifies the root causes of the social and environmental crises as lying within the current economic system. We believe that this capitalist system, based on unrestrained competition, consumerism, the exploitation of workers, and profit maximisation (see Glossary 133) is unsustainable and incompatible with our planet’s limited resources and the goal of an economy that benefits all. This system deliberately imposes social and environmental costs on low-income countries, future generations, and other species. It makes all the reproductive and care work invisible, a work mainly accomplished by women. It creates extreme inequalities and excludes most people from decision-making processes concerning how and what is produced and valued in an economy. This is because it relies on some people owning means of production and living by that, while others have to work to make a living. This creates injustices within societies as well as between them: division between rich and poor, global south and global north all root in capitalism. The crises we are facing are the result of the patriarchal, racist and capitalist system that is disrupting human well-being and destroying our collective resilience, and which represents an existential threat to humanity.

FYEG sees an urgent need for a new vision of progress that is fit for the century ahead of us. In order to bring an end to environmental destruction and human deprivation, it is crucial to change the way our economies are built and defined. We need to shift from economic growth (see Glossary 43) to human and planetary well-being and thus create a new economic system. We need to go beyond indicators such as gross domestic product (GDP) (see Glossary 79) and make issues such as quality of life and environmental well-being centerpiece. We believe the technological shift to a zero-waste industry and economy is not enough. The green and feminist economy we want to build implies a radical change in the democratisation of the economy, the redistribution of wealth, and a just transition.This economy is also feminist, implying that a feminist economy takes equally into account all beings and the environment in its propositions. It makes social protection a priority and values the care work, accomplished mainly by women, for people and the environment.

a. Alternative models to unlimited growth

Economics should not prioritise economic growth, profit, and consumption, but rather human well-being and welfare. The indicators currently used by economists fail to take social and environmental factors into account. We therefore think it is time to develop new indicators which factor in environmental degradation and economic inequality. The genuine progress indicator (GPI) (see Glossary 75), for instance, measures overall quality of life rather than just economic progress, and takes into account the needs of individuals and their environment.

A market model creates privately owned and monopolised resources while alternative economic models, such as “doughnut economics” (see Glossary 41), degrowth (see Glossary 36), and the Economy for the Common Good (see Glossary 44), provide a system which is sustainable, fair, and just.

We need to look at the economy in a new way, dismantling the myth of unlimited growth, putting an end to excessive capital accumulation, and prioritising a redistribution of wealth and production factors. We strive to use the European Green Deal to recover from the current crisis in a sustainable way: to foster a circular economy, economic security and certainty, and gender equality, and to
bring about the destruction of the gendered division of labour. Intergenerational and intragenerational equity are also fundamental social values for a green and feminist economy.

For governments, economic policies must be guided by the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and the UN’s 2030 Agenda (see Glossary 171) for Sustainable Development, not by the pursuit of endless economic growth.

b. Economic structures

The current structure of the economy is a source of injustice, inequality, and environmental destruction. The monopoly some international companies hold prevents the entrance of new actors onto the market. It is more and more difficult for states and citizens to hold companies accountable for their actions. These companies are the gatekeepers for change. FYEG believes that in order to create a more sustainable and fair approach to the economy, our economic system has to change. It must serve human, non-humans, and our ecosystems, not billionaires.

It is time to rethink how we do economics.

Many economic challenges come from large companies who seek profit at all costs. They undermine workers’ rights and environmental standards as well as small local businesses and worker cooperatives. They often avoid paying taxes, compromising the ability of the state to provide public services. We therefore call for the economy to be structured differently. Companies that are considered too big to fail (see Glossary 164) or hold monopolies, oligopolies or create cartels must be split up. Antitrust laws must be effectively enforced to companies with substantial market power. Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) must have more opportunities to run their businesses without facing the threat of multinational corporations. Enterprises that serve goals other than maximising profits, who operate simply in order to provide services or create jobs, are a solution.

We believe workers themselves can take a more active role in shaping the economy. We demand that businesses be governed by the people that work in them. One important step towards this goal would be the occupation of at least 50% of seats on company boards by employees. Another tool is the cooperative business model (see Glossary 29) as it helps to democratise the economy and shift the focus to placing people over profit and building a more inclusive economy. Mechanisms should be put in place to make it easier for workers to transform their companies into cooperatives, especially when the original owner is planning to close the company.

A green and feminist economy rejects the commodification and privatisation of the commons. Basic human needs and social rights should always be guaranteed and must never depend on markets. This applies especially in the cases of housing, health, education, food, and transport. It is particularly important knowing that the impact of this commodification and privatisation is gender biased.

In order to reduce the impact of the economy on the environment, it is also important to deal with the negative impacts of globalisation. While we recognise some of its benefits, it has both social and environmental consequences and favours major companies over small business. We support, where feasible, relocalising (see Glossary 142) the economy, starting with the production of essential goods such
as food and medicine.

The goal of economic policy should not be to boost exports at all costs but rather to improve resilience and reduce imports, dependency on single actors, and environmental impacts. More transparent and shorter supply chains that can be more easily surveyed for exploitative and destructive practices should be encouraged. The introduction of not only carbon but also of social border taxes could be one of the ways to encourage the relocalisation of the economy.

c. A sustainable economy

Transforming our economy into a green and feminist economy also means reducing consumption and pollution. The Earth cannot possibly sustain today’s levels of consumption. Therefore, challenging consumerism should be at the centre of a just transition.

We want to turn the linear economy (see Glossary 101), which is based on a “take-make-waste” model, into a fully circular economy (see Glossary 21). In a circular economy, products and materials are used over and over again instead of being discarded. We believe we can shift from a linear economy to a circular economy based on the following principles: minimising the usage of energy and resources; preserving value in the economy; preventing waste, toxic materials and pollution; keeping goods and materials in use and in closed loops; ensuring human health; and encouraging the prevention of waste.

For consumers to be able to play an active role and change their buying habits, we defend the right to access more detailed, harmonised, and reliable information on the social, environmental, and climate impacts of goods and services over their lifecycle, including durability and repairability (see Glossary 143). We also emphasise the need for change in relation to product-related greenwashing (see Glossary 78) and false environmental claims. We call for regulation encouraging producers the use of non-proprietary standards, designing by the principles of open hardware and a loss of patents and duty to publicise constructions and building plans when spare parts are no more produced. In order to ease repairability of goods producers must ensure the availability of spare parts over the entire lifecycle of the product.

Today, most items and packaging are meant to be used once and discarded. This creates vast quantities of pollution and waste materials. As landfills exceed capacity and micro-plastics pollute the whole planet, there is a substantial need for change. We support a move towards a zero-waste society, phasing out single-use plastics and encouraging the development of bulk buying.

Consumption is influenced by an ever more visible advertising presence. We support regulation in advertising, including a ban on advertising the most polluting products and behaviours (e.g. car and air travel, meat consumption). We support a ban on targeted advertisement that uses people’s personal data to influence their behaviours. We also think the environmental and visual impact of
advertisements should be addressed, for example by limiting the size of advertising billboards in cities, making sure they are not illuminated at night, and banning digital advertising screens.

d. Fiscal policy

Taxation is needed to fund public budgets, maintain quality public services and welfare states, and fund investments needed for a just transition to a zero-carbon economy. We oppose the austerity policies (see Glossary 8) that have been put in place across Europe. Massive investments into social and urban infrastructure, health systems, education and fighting climate change are needed for the young
generation. Young people need decent jobs, health care, free public transport and a liveable planet more than they need a balanced state budget .

We demand fair taxation and a stronger fight against fiscal fraud. Taxation can also be a powerful tool in itself, reducing inequalities, redistributing wealth, and contributing to changing behaviours.

We defend the introduction of a European common taxation policy in order to fight tax avoidance (see Glossary 160) and tax havens (see Glossary 161), both inside and outside the EU. A baseline 20% EU corporate tax (see Glossary 30) should be introduced to reduce the attractiveness of tax avoidance. Part of that corporate tax should automatically feed into the EU budget.

Taxation should be used to reduce inequalities. We support progressive income taxation (see Glossary 134), with higher taxation for the richest taxpayers. We also support the introduction of a wealth tax (see Glossary 184) on millionaires, possibly at the EU level. Finally, we believe a higher taxation on inheritance is key to reducing the transfer of inequalities from one generation to the next.

The Federation of Young European Greens also believes that taxation can help support positive behaviours and discourage harmful behaviours, and that over time we should prioritise phasing out taxes on work in favour of taxes on behaviour and wealth. Behavioural taxes such as a carbon tax, the taxation of meat products, the taxation of single-use plastic items, and the taxation of polluting cars, among others, can be powerful tools to encourage change. Those taxes should be implemented fairly to avoid overburdening citizens already living in precarious situations. Their revenue should be redistributed globally and help support a just transition.

e. Financial markets

More than a decade after the global financial crisis, financial markets and banking systems remain dangerous and flawed. Financial markets continue to cause systemic instability and social inequality. Investments continue to flow to unsustainable, carbon-intensive (see Glossary 19) industries. Banks still ignore the damage their investments are causing to societies and the environment.

We need to change finance. We cannot make the transition to a fairer, greener future economy without a global financial system that can allocate capital to where it is needed, drive sustainable investment, and manage risk equitably. The financial system must serve the needs of society, not the other way around. To achieve this, transparency, fairness, and sustainability are key. The taxation of financial transactions (see Glossary 162) is an important tool to fight short-term and instant transactions. We support its introduction at the EU level.

We need a global banking system – and a system of banking regulation (see Glossary 10) – that responds to today’s needs and prioritises the public good. It needs to encourage productive investments in the local green economies of today and tomorrow, rather than propping up polluting industries or encouraging dangerous speculation. It needs to address inequality, both globally and locally, rather than entrenching it. And it needs to be accountable to society, rather than lawless and deregulated.

f. The digital economy

The digital economy is becoming a central part of the economy. It has the power to change our society – for the better or for the worse. We need to act quickly to ensure that the development of the digital economy is not used to attack our rights and privacy (see chapter 2), or to bypass social regulations as in the case of platform workers (see Glossary 127) (see chapter 5). We need to make digitalisation an opportunity for our society and ensure that regulations are creating a level playing field (see Glossary 99) for all actors, as well as improving training on digital jobs.

The size and influence of some of the big digital companies raise legitimate concerns. We support dismantling tech giants (see Glossary 163) and de-monopolising (see Glossary 37) digital offerings.

Europe’s physical communications infrastructure (see Glossary 125) must be built, owned, operated, and maintained on a non-profit basis as a common resource. This allows faster expansion, with more people gaining access at a lower cost.

While digitalisation can be used to tackle climate change, the biodiversity crisis, and pollution, we must not forget that digitalisation itself is not a climate-neutral activity. From web servers, crypto-currencies, and cables to antennas, phones and computers, digitalisation relies on infrastructure that consumes large quantities of energy and therefore contributes to greenhouse gas
emissions. It also requires the use of many rare earth elements, the extraction of which causes serious harm to the environment.

The premature obsolescence of digital products exacerbates this phenomenon, as well as generating large quantities of electronic waste that is not properly recycled and therefore contributes to water and soil pollution.

A lot more needs to be done to ensure the sustainable implementation of digitalisation. We must remember that digitalisation is a tool to achieve our wider goals and not an end in itself.

g. Preparedness and Civil Defence

FYEG sees the need to prevent runaway climate change. However, we also see the need to prepare for the impacts of climate change, and what might happen if we fail to stop it at 1.5 degrees.

To ensure that the consequences we will undoubtedly have to deal with as the world warms do not hit those who are less well off, while wealthy groups nationally and internationally can continue to live their lives and consume as normal, all actors in society need to be engaged in stronger and more equitable preparedness - institutions and businesses as much as civil society organisations and individuals. Food and water, healthcare, and general preparedness are three areas where we believe significantly more work needs to be done across Europe.

We need to ensure that Europe is agriculturally self-sufficient in order to be sure that when the crisis comes, food does not become something only the wealthy can afford. In the climate of the future, we cannot rely on harvests in other countries to turn out well. Nor is it morally right for a rich country to rely on imports of vital crops when we know that climate change will lead to food shortages, especially in poorer countries. To this end, FYEG believes in an expansion of existing strategic food stockpiles, and an agricultural policy that focuses not only on environmental and climate aspects but also resilience, appropriateness, and security of supply.

The same goes for water - there is insufficient knowledge in many European countries of how much ground reserves they have, and many countries rely heavily on just one or two major sources for the majority of their drinking water. To avoid situations where people lose access to drinking water while nearby industries still use water for their operations, there should be clear prioritisation plan developed in each locality for use of limited water supplies, and where feasible backup systems should be developed in case of contamination or interruption of normal water supplies. As Greens we believe in human security, and there is no need more human than that for water.

Disasters can create supply holdups, and we need to ensure that Europeans can survive while help is on the way. FYEG believes that national governments should develop emergency rationing plans to be prepared for if the worst happens, and require housing associations and households to ensure that they store at least two weeks worth of these durable, basic foodstuffs. This should be combined with a requirement that all newly built structures contain emergency shelters, adapted to local emergency conditions.

In addition, it would be optimistic to assume that COVID will be the last pandemic our generation sees. FYEG believes that all countries should be required to hold emergency pandemic and total defence stockpiles, aimed at providing food, medical and protective equipment, and medicine that a population might need in a long global emergency. Humans security, rather than military security, should be our priority.

5. A Social Europe

For several decades we have witnessed one social crisis leading to the next. Each crisis either revealed or created more cracks in our social systems and shone a spotlight on our deeply dated healthcare systems and unstable European working environment.

Housing has become increasingly difficult to find, with wages stagnating while living and housing costs rise. We live in a society that tolerates the fact that some people are too poor to have a roof over their heads.

Instead of reducing inequalities and providing opportunities for all, education systems across Europe are being transformed by a neoliberal (see Glossary 109) and productivist (see Glossary 132) mindset and are reproducing inequalities from one generation to the next.

Those policies are still primarily dealt with at the national level, reinforcing inequalities between as well as within countries. We need a truly social Europe. This includes fighting inequalities, rethinking the way we work, and taking strong action on housing, health, and education. The system needs to change – now.

a. Fighting poverty

Millions of people across Europe are at risk of poverty and social exclusion, with certain parts of Europe experiencing an increase in poverty rates. At the same time, the rich are getting richer, with some individuals accumulating indecent amounts of wealth. Neoliberalism and myths such as trickle-down theory (see Glossary 169) have not delivered on their promises. Inequalities are on the rise, threatening
the cohesion of our societies.

FYEG supports strong welfare states, which it considers essential in the fight against poverty and to guarantee the enforceability of fundamental rights. Their dismantling in several parts of Europe must end. Action to fight poverty should include but not be limited to ensuring that all individuals receive an income. Existing benefits must be fair, must allow people to live above the poverty line (see Glossary 129), and should rise in line with average wage increases. Social services should help to ensure that everyone has access to a home, healthcare, and training and/or work. Our social policies must leave no one behind.

FYEG stands for the implementation of a minimum income across the EU, set at an amount matching the cost of living in each region. Our social policy’s goal is a guaranteed social security net that leaves no one behind, the right to a meaningful job, abolishing the low-wage sector with strong minimum wages and tariffs, and a significant reduction of working hours while maintaining the wage
level. This should be financed by the higher taxation of the super-rich, among other measures (see chapter 4 – Fiscal policy).

At the same time, Europe must not forget its privileged position in the world and must also work towards eradicating inequalities worldwide (see chapter 6 – Trade and global justice).

b. The future of work

With technological progress, digitalisation, and the need to reduce the environmental impact of our economies, work is changing and is likely to continue to do so. It is important to reflect on the future of work to ensure these changes improve everyone’s welfare and well-being.

FYEG supports a better balance between work and personal life. This will require a whole range of changes, including a reduction in working hours. Studies have shown that a reduction in working hours is accompanied by gains in efficiency. Reducing working hours is also a feminist demand as it enables the redistribution of unpaid care work. As a first step, we therefore propose a maximum 32-hour working week within the European Union while maintaining wage levels. We also support raising the number of paid holidays to a minimum of 40 days per year.

Work needs to be paid fairly. In order for people not to face economic difficulties when working fewer hours, we have to start changing wages immediately and start valuing work differently. Jobs that are traditionally occupied by women tend to be valued less, although they bring significant benefits to society. We should take into account not only the societal value of a job but also the level of mental and physical effort it demands in order to determine wage levels. To use the example of care work, jobs in this sector are systematically underpaid, with the mental and physical demands of the job not
adequately reflected in the wages paid, and involve poor working conditions. FYEG supports raising wages to above average levels for people who work in the care sector.

Wage differences across Europe are used by multinational companies to maximise their profits, exploiting workers in countries where wages are the lowest and firing workers in countries where wages are higher. In order to prevent the lowering of social standards and the deterioration of workers’ rights, we support the introduction of an EU minimum wage scheme (see Glossary 51), with minimum wages based on the cost of living in a particular country or region and a mechanism to progressively harmonise them. Noone who works should live below the poverty line. Workers should be able to travel freely, seek employment, and work in the country of their choice. Strong protective measures are needed to ensure that the foreign posting of workers is not used to bypass national social protection schemes.

Interns and trainees also must receive fair pay in order to cover their living costs and in recognition of the value of the work they do. FYEG wants an immediate ban on unpaid internships.

It is easy to lose a job – and it can be extremely difficult to find another one. Unemployment is not an individual failure, but an inevitability in our broken economic system. The welfare state should be a safety net that leaves no one in poverty. People need to be protected during periods of unemployment. We fight for fair unemployment benefits (see Glossary 177) and the fair treatment of those trying to
re-enter the labour market. Over the course of their lives, individuals change jobs far more frequently than in previous generations. We therefore support the reinforcement of lifelong learning schemes to allow people to study or train for new jobs at any point in their lives.

We support the introduction of parental leave (see Glossary 119) schemes across Europe that guarantee that every new parent, regardless of their gender, has access to a period of paid parental leave of at least three months. Mechanisms should be put in place to ensure that parental leave schemes contribute to gender equality. Mandatory parental leave for new fathers can help to reduce the discrimination
that new mothers face when applying for jobs, as well as promote the equal distribution of domestic tasks in the household. Therefore we support a model where both parents have 4 more months of paid parental leave with additional 4 months left to distribute freely between themselves.

FYEG recalls the right to unionise and considers that trade unions (see Glossary 165) play a crucial role in improving working conditions. The right to unionise as well as the right to strike must be recognised and protected across Europe. Moreover, bodies which represent employees’ interests should be strengthened, and 50% of the seats on the boards of large companies should be reserved for employee representatives.

Digitalisation has led to new forms of work and employment such as the gig economy, in which workers are not employed on regular work contracts which include social protection, but are instead paid for each task completed. While this can bring a flexibility that some workers enjoy, we must ensure that gig workers have equal social protection, including health and work-related accident insurance, protection against discrimination, parental benefits and rights, and pensions. We must also ensure that the platforms and companies who use gig workers are paying salary, tax, and other costs in line with other actors, as well as requiring platforms and other companies to officially employ “false self-employed” individuals in the event that they request this.

We also believe that work which has a positive impact on the environment and on society should be properly rewarded, for example through grants. We propose setting up a care income (see Glossary 20) in the form of a premium paid by states to reward those who care for people, society in general, and the environment on a non-professional basis.

We believe in fair retirement policies, such as a progressive retirement age which allows people to continue working after that age if they freely choose to do so. Many retired people, especially women, receive extremely low pensions. We support decent pension incomes for all which are sufficient for a dignified life.

c. Discrimination in the workplace

FYEG recognises that racism, sexism, classism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, and ageism – which it believes to be inherent to neoliberal capitalism – do not stop at the doors of our workplaces, and stands for anti-discrimination policies in the workplace.

Every European company should have a clear policy in relation to toxic behaviour including unconscious bias, hateful speech, and sexual harassment in the workplace, as well as organising regular trainings on this. We also want to strengthen European law in order to make it easier for people who have experienced sexual harassment to come forward and take legal action against
their harassers.

A European regulation for equality in the workplace should be adopted, making it mandatory for companies to implement an equality plan, ensure gender balance and promote diversity in all levels of company governance , and have a clear plan to ensure the closure of any wage gap. Companies with more than 20 employees must implement a quotum for governing bodies in the middle and top layer of the company, ensuring that a maximum of 60% of people within these governing bodies is cis-gendered and male. Companies who fail to implement basic principles such as equal pay for equal work should be sanctioned.

FYEG stands for the full equality of all genders. We are calling on the European Union to develop a strategy to end gender discrimination. This strategy must include non-binary and trans people.

Racism in workplaces must be fought, and finally ended. In order to achieve this, companies must commit to diversity internships, fellowships, and other programmes. Additionally, antiracism policies, diversity and inclusion reports, and regular training must be made mandatory. We support using testing to expose discrimination and condemn companies that discriminate against people.

We support freedom of movement (see Glossary 69), as well as the freedom to stay (see Glossary 70). The exploitation of migrant workers must be brought to an end. Working and employment conditions, as well as access to benefits, should be determined according to the country in which a person is working, not their nationality or background. Companies, governments, and courts should treat migrant workers the same as other workers. We are concerned about the current practice of several European countries to treat highly skilled migrant workers and other migrant workers differently. We call for the establishment of a universal right to migration for work purposes, as well as a common European policy framework for labour migration.

Young people all over Europe need to work in order to study or to support their families. They are often treated differently to their older colleagues. FYEG would require employers to pay young people (including minors) the same amount as their older colleagues for performing the same work. Union-supported and regulated wage increases based on the number of years working in a certain field or at a particular workplace could still be permitted.

d. Housing

FYEG stands for housing for all. For this to happen, housing must be affordable for all and no longer a profit-making activity. We aim towards a world in which housing is no longer a commodity but rather a human right. States should intervene on the housing market to prevent speculation (see Glossary 157) and ensure that everyone has a home.

We believe that affordable housing should also be decent and of good quality. With extreme weather events becoming more and more frequent, it is more important than ever to build houses which can withstand disasters like flooding and earthquakes. In order to ensure that housing is truly a right for all, we believe that all new buildings must be made accessible for disabled people.

There will be stricter supervision of real estate agents and private landlords. For example, use is made of "anonymous tenants" to combat discrimination in the housing sector. In addition to warnings and fines, rental permits can also be withdrawn if there is structural mismanagement.

Many Europeans are still facing energy poverty (see Glossary 47) and are not able to heat their homes, in particular single-parents, mostly women. Buildings are responsible for approximately 40% of energy consumption and 36% of CO2 emissions in the EU. We believe all housing should be energetically renovated within the next 10 years and environmental standards for buildings must aim to minimalise the use of embodied energy during planning and construction and a maximum of energy efficiency during their lifecycle .

We need higher taxation for property purchases that exceed individual needs. We also need better rental rights for people who cannot afford to buy a house and those who prefer not to own a home. In places where rents have increased in the last decades we support the introduction of rent control measures, which have already been implemented in several places. We also support cities who are
putting restrictions on short-term tourist lets that drive up rental prices. The geographic side of public housing in Europe is currently based on the economic value of houses. This results in segregation between rich and poor and thus also between ethnic groups. We counter this on a policy basis.

We have to increasingly invest in public housing (see Glossary 136) at local, regional, federal, and EU levels in order to combat overburdening by housing costs, which affects around 80 million people in the EU. In many countries, public housing is not evenly distributed between cities and districts, thus increasing inequalities. We support the introduction of public housing quotas by city and by neighbourhood. To prevent pressure on the housing prices on the private market, cities with large student populations need sufficient and quality non-profit student housing. Investments should be increased in non-profit student housing as well.

While some people are overburdened with housing costs, others cannot afford housing at all. The number of homeless people in the EU has risen by 70% since 2010, and more than 700,000 people are now sleeping rough all over Europe. We must therefore launch a Europe-wide plan for everyone to have access to inclusive, climate friendly, and decent homes. We support approaches such as Housing First (see Glossary 82) that provide homeless people with housing without preconditions, seeing this as the first step towards integration. Our general aim is a fair housing market without excessive costs for tenants and buyers and where everyone can afford a place to live. Over the long term, there should be serious consideration given to deprivatising the housing market.

e. Health

As stated in Article 25 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for [their] health and well-being”. A free and accessible universal healthcare system is essential to achieve these standards, based on physical and psychological well-being as well as social care and prevention. Healthcare should be inclusive of everyone without discrimination and be based on the best current scientific knowledge.

FYEG supports publicly funded healthcare. Health is not a commodity, but a human right. Healthcare that is free at point of use means that people are not expected to pay for accessing healthcare services (primary and secondary care). Instead, their health insurance is covered through tax. Healthcare workers are essential, and their working and employment conditions must be improved.

The huge disparities between rural and urban access to healthcare, such as emergency and specialised services, should be addressed, with investment made to support and increase the number of healthcare services and workers in rural areas.

Cooperation between companies and states allows health crises to be tackled more effectively and solutions to health issues more easily available to countries in need. International organisations such as the WHO should therefore be strengthened, while also being made more transparent and inclusive.

The European Union is beginning the process to establish a European Health Union. FYEG supports a mechanism to harmonise healthcare across Europe. To develop this, the EU should commit to properly funding its EU4Health programme (see Glossary 53).

About 25 % of Europe's citizens suffer from mental health problems. As FYEG, we demand that mental health and related conditions be taken more seriously. We have to increase the availability of counselling and psychotherapy as well as funding for other mental health services in order to provide adequate and affordable care for every European citizen who is experiencing mental health problems, independent of their economic or social background.

Marginalised groups (for example women, LGBTQIA+, racialised people) often face issues when trying to access healthcare, such as stigma around their health needs and discrimination, to the point of being refused treatment or not taken seriously. Those with existing medical conditions (such as people with disabilities and/or chronic illnesses), may face difficulties receiving treatment for other conditions. All discrimination should be fought against, with awareness-raising and stigma-reducing campaigns and training for healthcare workers. Additionally, we demand more research to be conducted into mental health in marginalised groups, as well as initiatives that specifically target loneliness and the social isolation of specific groups such as elderly people, chronically ill people, and disabled people.

FYEG fights for sexual and reproductive health and rights (see chapter 1).

FYEG also supports a stronger focus on prevention in public health policy. Fighting air and water pollution, eliminating endocrine disruptors and carcinogenic substances, promoting healthy diets including the reduced consumption of heavily processed food, and promoting sport are all key actions to prevent severe chronic disease. A healthy lifestyle should be affordable for everyone. Therefore, fruit and vegetables should be cheaper and unhealthy products should be increased in price. Sports are important for social contact and should not only be promoted, but also be accessible for all. Therefore, financial support should be given when necessary. Prevention policies on smoking and drinking should also be put in place, for example through information campaigns, taxation, the regulation of sales, and bans on advertising. FYEG encourages countries to create separate shops for alcohol and tobacco. Smoking should be banned in public places where it is clearly a nuisance to people's health. FYEG supports a harm-reduction approach through prevention programmes within drug policy and the treatment of addiction. Alongside addiction awareness-raising, the stigma around addiction should be tackled. Addiction should be recognised as a medical condition, and social protection and medical and social support should be offered to those suffering from addiction.

We support the full legalisation and regulation of drugs across Europe, while increasing prevention measures. Drug legalisation would deprive organised crime structures of a lucrative source of income. Tax revenues from drug sales should be used to fund the healthcare and prevention sectors and social services.

We demand a fair, publicly owned pharmaceutical sector. Large pharmaceutical companies should not hold the monopoly (see Glossary 106) on public safety, especially when this leads to unequal access to life-saving treatments. Additionally, life-saving drugs should not be sold at a profit. All contracts made between pharmaceutical companies and national governments or the European Union should be transparent
and made publicly available.

Individuals’ well-being, dignity, and wishes should be fully respected in the healthcare system. We fight for improving palliative care (see Glossary 117) and for allowing people to choose how and when they die.

f. Education

Education is more than just learning how to spell, counting to 10 or training workers. It should also be the process of learning how to grow as a person and as a member of society. Education must be accessible to all genders, ages, sexualities, religions, and ethnicities, independent of ability,origin, place of residence, access to digital tools, wealth, or legal status.

Education should not depend on the balance of your bank account. It should be free and publicly funded, from kindergarten to university. Education should not focus on performance or economic profitability. Pressure should be taken off children and students, and special attention should be paid to their mental health.

Vocational colleges (see Glossary 182) and universities are of equal importance to institutions of higher education. Young people who want to pursue a more practical education should be given the same resources as those who are more academically inclined. We believe that young people who pursue a practical education should receive payment for the duration of their apprenticeship and be ensured qualified guidance throughout their education.

All types of curricula should be inclusive. Topics such as LGBTQIA+ issues, sex education, mental health, and anti-racism, among others, should feature in every school’s curriculum. We believe that students from ethnic or linguistic minority groups should have access to, for example, their culture and/or language of origin in schools, either as an extra-curricular activity or as part of the main curriculum. It should be safe and possible to break gender norms and class norms in the educational system, and students should be encouraged to follow their dreams and passions instead of fulfilling social expectations.

FYEG also believes that European and international mobility should be accessible to all from an early age. With that in mind, we support increasing the budget of the Erasmus+ programme to guarantee that every young person has the opportunity to take part in an international mobility programme before graduating from secondary school and before graduating from university.

6. Europe in the World

The current international system has not achieved its promise of ensuring peace, guaranteeing fundamental rights, and reducing global inequalities and poverty. Conflicts are taking place all around the globe. Illiberalism (see Glossary 87) and autocracy (see Glossary 9) are on the rise. At the same time, the international organisations and rules that have characterised international cooperation over the last decades are
increasingly under attack. The changing geopolitical context (including the withdrawal of the USA from the world stage and the rise of other powers such as China) will have far-reaching consequences for the international system. On top of this, the effects of the climate crisis will contribute to instability. We stand at the beginning of a period of significant volatility.

The European Union has tried to establish itself as a global actor over recent years. We believe that it is only together that the European Union Member States have enough weight to tackle complex global challenges effectively. The external action of the European Union must be built on and guided by values. We believe that European foreign policy must uphold human rights, democracy, the rule of law and the respect of international law; preserve and build peace; pursue multilateral (see Glossary 107) solutions; and fight for effective action at the global level to fight climate change, the biodiversity crisis, and other global environmental and social challenges.

a. Multilateralism

Challenges such as the climate crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic are global in nature and cannot be overcome by any state alone. In a world that is becoming increasingly connected and complex, international cooperation is the only way forward. At a time when international organisations are being undermined and with certain states pursuing a course of unilateralism (see Glossary 178), the European Union, as well as other actors, needs to actively fight for multilateral solutions and the strengthening of international organisations.

We oppose a move towards a world characterised by great power competition and the rule of the strongest. It is our responsibility to fight for a fair, rule-based international system that protects those who are more vulnerable and gives them the power to actively shape their futures. We stand for the strengthening of international courts and call for the EU to join the European Convention on Human Rights (see Glossary 56) in a timely fashion in order for it to be held to account in cases of human rights abuses.

The European Union will also advocate for reforms within the International Monetary Fund (IMF) (see Glossary 90) and the World Bank (see Glossary 186). Their decision-making processes must be decoupled from the financial contributions of Member States. These institutions must contribute to a stable and sustainable world economy. Multilateral solutions on global issues such as climate change, biodiversity loss, migration, weapons, and security should be pursued.

While being strong supporters of multilateralism, FYEG also believes that it needs to be deeply reformed. The current system is still institutionalising existing power inequalities instead of balancing them. The fact that five of the richest countries in the world, who happen to be among the largest military powers and weapons exporters, hold permanent seats on the UN Security Council (see Glossary 174) and have the right of veto is neither fair nor sustainable in the long term. In the short term, this system should be reformed by giving permanent seats on the Security Council to more countries, including those who have historically been exploited and hindered in their economic development by colonial powers, and by ending the right of veto. In the long term, the UN should evolve towards a global democracy in which representatives from all countries would be democratically elected.

b. Feminist foreign policy

As FYEG, we stand for the development and implementation of a European feminist foreign policy. Feminist foreign policy is a political framework that is centred around the well-being of marginalised people and invokes processes of self-reflection regarding hierarchical global systems.

There is an urgent need for the European Union to reconsider the way it conducts its external actions. Traditionally, foreign policy thinking tends to focus on military force and the security of states. Feminist foreign policy offers us a new, intersectional way to think about foreign policy from the viewpoint of the most vulnerable. It aims to elevate women’s and marginalised groups’ experiences and agency to scrutinise the destructive forces of patriarchy, neocolonialism, heteronormativity (see Glossary 80), capitalism (see Glossary 13), racism (see Glossary 141), imperialism (see Glossary 88), and militarism (see Glossary 105).

For European states, this means addressing its history of colonialism. Many European states built their wealth on the brutal exploitation of other countries. Colonialism and its aftershocks are affecting countries and the hierarchies in the international system to this day. A European feminist foreign policy must be a decolonial foreign policy. A first step into this direction is debt forgiveness (see Glossary 35) and reparations for formerly colonised countries. In the longer term, the way the European Union conducts development assistance needs to be rethought and global economic institutions need to be reformed to effectively address the situation of formerly colonised countries.

FYEG supports the right to self-determination for peoples. The European Union should promote the right to self-determination for peoples, in adherence to international law and states’ territories, and with the prospect of improving the human rights situation and democracy.

In terms of peacebuilding, a European feminist foreign policy means that more women and other marginalised groups must be brought to the negotiation table. Our focus should not be on top-down processes, but rather on community-centred initiatives.

As part of a European feminist foreign policy, the institutions which shape foreign policy, such as the European External Action Service (see Glossary 58) and national foreign services, must reflect the diversity of the societies they work for. Foreign policy continues to be dominated by old white men, and it is the task of institutions to actively take steps to change this.

c. Peace and security

Peace is more than the mere absence of war. Our understanding of peace entails a positive peace that includes a commitment to justice and human rights and the eradication of poverty, discrimination, and social exclusion, as well as tackling the effects of the climate crisis.

Too often security is equated with militarisation. Such a perspective is not only false and limiting, but harmful. We need a paradigm shift in terms of security, putting more emphasis on crisis preparedness, resilience, and emerging security challenges such as hybrid threats and climate change. Further militarisation fails to meet today’s security challenges. Instead of militarisation, we therefore call for an allocation of resources to where they can contribute to human security (see Glossary 84) and truly sustainable peace. This includes ensuring funding for civil society organisations and humanitarian organisations.

Human beings, not state security, must be at the heart of all security efforts. When it comes to conflict response, humanitarian action and dialogue must be prioritised over militarised intervention. Imposing sanctions has precedent over militarized intervention as well, yet sanctions must be targeted and do no harm to the overall population. Within international organisations dealing with
security, the EU must actively fight for solutions built on the principles of human security. Within the European Union, we must put an end to the unanimity requirement to impose international economic sanctions. However, we recognise that in certain situations dialogue is not enough. When genocide or other horrific human rights abuses are occuring, or unprovoked crimes of aggression occur and mediation has proven unsuccessful, we through the EU need to be able to forcefully and militarily respond to protect human life and security. To this end, we support the development of rapidly deployable and interoperable EU military forces that are able to engage in peace enforcement and civilian protection, such as the EUFOR Crisis Response Operations Core, so long as they are truly used for this purpose and not as an instrument of economic or national interests.

Through the production and export of arms, European States are fuelling conflicts across the world. We demand the end of arms exports. In line with the principle of human security, we also call on European States and the EU to increase efforts to make nuclear weapons illegal under international law and join the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (see Glossary 168). We also advocate for the global prohibition of lethal autonomous weapons (LAWs) (see Glossary 98).

We support all Stateless Peoples subjected to oppression by other states. We highlight the importance of supporting their fight for freedom and recognition, and call for international treaties to be respected in context of colonizing or apartheid regimes, only as defined by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Military activities, as well as other forms of subjugation, must be put to an end under the mandate of international organisations such as the United Nations Security Council, or the International Court of Justice. Recognition of new borders for these Peoples needs to be respected by all parties in order to include them as a rightful member of the international community.

The climate crisis will only bring more meteorological and humanitarian disasters, which can be deadly, create problems for the delivery of essential services and risk destroying critical infrastructure. In times of peace we support the training and use of military forces for disaster response and preparedness, both within Europe and outside of it, in strict accordance with
international law and solely under mandate.

d. Migration

We believe in the unrestricted right to travel and migrate for education, economic, security, freedom, peace, climate, and other reasons. Freedom of movement should be considered a human right. Your freedom and opportunities should not depend on where you or your parents were born or your ability to acquire a certain nationality.

At the same time, we are also conscious of the root causes of forced migration, especially from countries in which people are affected by famine, war, climate change, exploitation, and various kinds of persecution (ethnic, cultural, religious, political, ...). You should not be forced to look for better and safer conditions in other countries because your situation is deteriorating to the point where your life and that of your loved ones are put in grave danger. Furthermore, sustainable development cooperation is not only giving aid to those who need them. Europe should be proactive in rooting out the causes of forced migration, especially when originating from European actor's actions, and ensuring human security (cf Feminist Foreign Policy)

Europe must become a safe haven for people seeking refuge. Illegal pushbacks (see Glossary 85) of migrants and refugees must stop, and the humane treatment of migrants and refugees upon and after their arrival ensured, in particular access to sufficient food, clean and safe drinking water, and healthcare. The housing of migrants and refugees in mass camps with poor living conditions must end, and dignified housing must be provided immediately. Member states and local governments should strive to provide secure small-scale housing which will serve as a springboard for migrants and their families to be able to rent in the private housing market in the medium and long-term. In housing refugees, member states and local governments should also put the particular sensitivities into consideration including, but not limited to, unaccompanied minors, LGBTQ+ migrants, and migrants with disabilities.

Human rights activists who organise voluntary rescue operations have been charged with heinous crimes. Humans have always been migrating and will always migrate. Europe should support migration, facilitate secure travel for all migrants, especially refugees and asylum seekers, and make sure that all people are saved when in distress, as regulated in international admiralty law.
Criminalising and hassling private organisations and commercial ships which do so is a breach of international law and must be prosecuted. The European States' and the EU's externalisation of border management, through agreements such as the ones with the Turkish government and the Libyan authorities and militias, has further amplified the violations of human rights at the borders of the EU. This must end immediately.

We defend the right to asylum. Europe must create legal and safe channels for migration. We demand humanitarian and resettlement visas, allowing refugees to come to Europe safely. Administrative procedures to obtain these visas should be free of charge for applicants at the point of service.

We need a common European asylum policy based on the principles of solidarity with migrants, asylum-seekers, and refugees. The Dublin system (see Glossary 42) as we now know it should be replaced. Refugees and asylum seekers already in the EU should be able to effectively register for asylum, have access to asylum procedures, and be able to request asylum not in the member state of arrival but in the one of their choice. A common system of EU procedures, requirements, and checks must be implemented, with clear time frames, in order to relieve pressure on the individual. We need a common European asylum policy based on the principles of solidarity. Additionally, all member states, particularly those who are of better financial standing, must welcome more refugees, in order to relieve pressure on border countries. In welcoming refugees, member states and local governments should also put particular sensitivities into consideration including, but not limited to, unaccompanied minors, LGBTQ+ migrants, and migrants with disabilities.

Europe does not have a migrant or refugee crisis, Europe has a militarisation of migration and border policies crisis. FYEG is unequivocally against “Fortress Europe”. The militarisation of border management, including through Frontex (see Glossary 71), has turned Europe into a fortress, causing the death of thousands of migrants every year. We demand the abolition of Frontex and the reallocation of its
budget and resources towards policy and appropriate institutions based on the human security framework. Their main objective is to create political, economic, social, cultural, and environmental conditions in which peoples' vital rights and freedoms are secure.

Current border policies institutionalise racism and social stratification (see Glossary 156). Instead, we should make sure that our migration policies serve to create a welcoming, inclusive, diverse, and peaceful Europe. This means equal access to education, job opportunities for all, the recognition of education and skills learnt in someone’s country of origin, and the provision of language training. Moreover, it should be easier to gain study, work, and residence permits in Europe and to be granted family reunification. The granting of permanent residence permits should be the norm, not the exception.

Across Europe, millions of people live undocumented. The rights of these paperless people (see Glossary 118) should be protected. There are millions of young people who were born in the European Union but are not EU citizens because of their parents’ migration status. Anyone who is born in the EU is European and should receive an EU passport upon birth.

e. The geopolitical challenges of digitalisation

Digitalisation has brought new geopolitical challenges. Digital companies and platforms are in an excellent position to use the flaws of the current international system to their benefit, for example to avoid taxation or locate the country that will offer them the best conditions and the lowest level of accountability. At a time when certain companies have become more powerful than states, only international cooperation and European legislation can provide solutions and protect citizens’ personal data and privacy. We support dismantling the biggest tech companies to allow other actors to compete on a level playing field and to avoid the over-concentration of power. We also support the development of alternatives to tech giants that must show greater respect for people’s data and privacy.

Digitalisation has also created new online battlefields. The cyberattacks reported by some media outlets, hospitals, and public services show the need to reinforce cybersecurity (see Glossary 34). The attempts of some countries to influence democratic processes such as referenda and elections, for example through disinformation campaigns, also demonstrate the need to take preventative measures. We support a ban on targeted advertising (see Glossary 159) and the strong regulation of political advertising on social media.

Finally, digitalisation also has geopolitical consequences in relation to the consumption of rare earth elements (REEs). REEs are essential for the manufacture of many electronic devices but are only found in sufficient quantities in certain countries, which makes them a source of geopolitical tension. We support the development of recycling facilities in Europe as well as limits on the export of waste containing REEs.

f. Trade and global justice

Sharp global inequalities shape today’s international system. Formerly colonised countries are suffering from the legacy of colonialism to this day. Global inequalities are also apparent in the climate crisis and the biodiversity crisis, as those who are the most responsible are not the same as those who are most severely affected. Global inequalities are perpetuated by free trade and by international trade rules that leave countries powerless to face multinational corporations.

FYEG stands for global justice. Global justice entails a rethinking of how we conduct both development and trade. The EU should reserve 1% of its GDP for development cooperation and should advocate for raising the OECD (see Glossary 115) standard to 1%. This amount must be fully spent on improving the situation of people in poverty-stricken countries providing local aid groups, communities or relevant authorities with funds and support to develop initiatives which fit their own priorities, in respect of good governance. It should neither end up with European companies that receive this as a covert subsidy, nor be spent to prevent migration to Europe. The EU and its Member States must fundamentally re-design their approach to trade agreements and finance development in order to fully comply with highest fair trade and environmental standards. Its development banks believe in outdated economic models that result in accumulated debt and large corporations stunting the growth of local businesses.

Trade must be fair. This means that trade can never be conducted at the expense of human rights, democracy, social and environmental standards, or the fight against the climate crisis. We oppose any trade and any trade agreements that do not fulfil these criteria. Like development policies, fair trade must acknowledge the responsibility of former colonial European states towards countries which have historically been exploited and hindered in their economic development by them. Fair trade must respect the interests of formerly colonised countries and must not counter the objectives of development policies.

The change we are calling for is not limited to trade agreements. We also call for regulatory due diligence and transparency in supply chains to prevent environmental harm and to ensure social rights. European companies must be held responsible in European States and the EU for breaches committed in third countries. A human rights due diligence (HRDD) legislation, legally referring to all human rights, should apply to all business relations of all companies who are making use of the EU’s single market (with specific considerations for SMEs) to ensure that the entire supply chain is being looked at. We believe that HRDD legislation must at least cover, but not be limited to, severe human rights violations, and their enforcement must be uniform across the European Union.

FYEG stands for a different type of globalisation, one that is based not on increasing profits and trade at all costs, but rather on exchanging ideas, celebrating cultural diversity, and working together towards a better future.

g. A Green European Neighbourhood Policy

The European Union will not become stronger by closing itself off from others. Through the European Neighbourhood Policy (see Glossary 59) the EU has since its inception tried and failed to guarantee democracy, human rights, fair economies and rule of law for states bordering the Mediterranean and to the East of the Union.

Though the expansion of the EU is not an end in itself, EU membership should be open to all European countries that are not yet or no longer members of the EU. We support the accession of countries who express the wish to join the EU if they meet human rights, democratic, and rule of law criteria.

The European Union should develop and maintain strong cooperation with neighbouring countries who are not members of the EU, including by guaranteeing visa-free travel and participation in key programmes such as Erasmus+ (see Glossary 48). For non-European states, the entire policy needs an overhaul with enhanced conditionality, greater focus and rewards for progress on fundamental rights, and cooperation on environmental and climate issues. As greens, we support measures that secure peace and prosperity, and provide the basis for environmental and climate action. The European Neighbourhood Policy has the potential to do so, but does not contribute to the achievements of these objectives right now.

Glossary

1. Ableism: Discrimination or prejudice against disabled individuals or people who are perceived to be disabled.

2. Alternative text: A written description of an image to help screen-reading tools explain the image to visually impaired readers.

3. Antimicrobial resistance: A process through which microbes evolve and develop mechanisms that protect them from the effects of antimicrobials such as antibiotics and antifungals. This phenomenon is being accelerated by the massive use of antimicrobials in intensive animal farming.

4. Antisemitism: A certain perception of Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews or discrimination against them.

5. Antiziganism: Hostility, prejudice, discrimination, or racism specifically directed at Romani people.

6. Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union: Procedure to suspend certain rights from Member States of the European Union in the event of a breach of EU fundamental values.

7. Artificial intelligence (AI): The ability of a machine to complete tasks which ordinarily require human intelligence.

8. Austerity policies: A set of government-imposed economic policies to reduce budget deficits. Measures can include tax increases and spending cuts.

9. Autocracy: A system of government in which supreme power over a state is concentrated in the hands of one person.

10. Banking regulation: Government rules or regulations on how banks and financial institutions should conduct business.

11. Bioenergy: Energy produced using biomass or biofuels, including energy from wood or other plants, plant-derived biofuels, and organic waste.

12. Bodily autonomy: The right to govern what happens to one's own body.

13. Capitalism: An economic system in which the means of production are in private ownership and operated for profit. It is characterised by the accumulation of capital, investments determined by private decision, and the fact that prices and the production and distribution of goods are primarily determined by competition in a free market.

14. Carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM): A proposed tax to be imposed on certain goods imported from outside the EU, based on their carbon footprint. The CBAM would reduce emissions and encourage the use of domestically produced goods.

15. Carbon capture and storage (CCS): A process which attempts to prevent the release of large quantities of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere from fossil fuel use in power generation and other industries. Waste CO2 is captured, transported to a storage site, and pumped into underground geologic formations, where it is securely stored away and thus prevented from reaching the atmosphere.

16. Carbon neutral economy: An economy that operates without releasing more CO2 than can be absorbed by carbon sinks.

17. Carbon sink: Anything that absorbs more CO2 that it emits. Examples include areas of vegetation (e.g. forests) and phytoplankton-rich seas, which naturally absorb the CO2 present in the atmosphere.

18. Carbon tax: A tax paid by businesses that emit CO2 in the course of their operations.

19. Carbon-intensive industries: Industries that emit high quantities of CO2 and are responsible for the vast majority of CO2 emissions.

20. Care income: Remuneration received by non-professional carers such as family members for their care work.

21. Circular economy: In contrast to the linear economy, a circular economy is designed to eliminate waste, promote the continuous use of resources and materials, and use finite resources in a sustainable way.

22. Citizen-initiated referendum: A referendum that can be initiated by a group of citizens as opposed to referendums that are initiated by government and elected bodies.

23. Civil disobedience: Active and professed refusal to obey certain laws, governmental demands, or commands. Used as a nonviolent and usually collective means of political action.

24. Clean meat —also known as in vitro or cultured meat— is meat that is grown in cell culture, rather than in an animal’s body.

25. Common Agricultural Policy: The agricultural policy of the European Union, introduced in 1962. It now consists of a system of agricultural subsidies as well as other programmes.

26. Commons: Cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of a society, including natural materials such as air, water, and a habitable earth. These resources are held in common as opposed to being under private ownership.

27. Comprehensive urban planning: A process that determines community goals and development aspirations as a first step. Areas such as transportation, utilities, land use, recreation, and housing are all considered.

28. Conversion therapy: The use of any of various methods in an attempt to change a person’s sexual orientation to heterosexual, or to change a person’s gender identity to correspond to the sex they were assigned at birth. Conversion therapy is not based on scientific evidence and is ineffective and harmful.

29. Cooperative business model: A membership-based business model in which a group of people with a specific need are willing to work together to found and operate a jointly owned company that will meet that need.

30. Corporate tax: A tax that companies are required to pay on the profits they make.

31. Corrida: Bullfight.

32. Council of the European Union: Decision-making body of the EU made up of ministers of EU Member States. Together with the European Parliament, it amends and approves the legislative proposals of the European Commission.

33. Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU): The judicial branch of the EU. It ensures that the legislation agreed upon is interpreted and implemented identically across all Member States, and that such implementation is in compliance with that legislation. The CJEU also deals with legal disputes between Member States and the EU institutions and, in certain cases, between businesses, organisations or individuals and the EU institutions.

34. Cybersecurity: The application of technologies, processes, and controls to protect systems, networks, programmes, devices, and data from cyberattacks.

35. Debt forgiveness: The total cancelation of debt owed by individuals, corporations, or states.

36. Degrowth: A concept that critiques a global capitalist system pursuing growth at all costs, causing human exploitation and environmental destruction. It advocates for societies to prioritise social and ecological well-being instead of corporate profits, overproduction, and excess consumption.

37. De-monopolise: Break up existing monopolies.

38. Dichotomy of binary gender: The classification of gender into two distinct, opposite forms of masculine and feminine, whether by social system or cultural belief.

39. Digitalisation: The use of digital technologies to improve business processes. Digitalisation may change business models and provide new revenue and value-producing opportunities. Also the process of moving to a digital business model.

40. Dolphinarium: A pool or aquarium for dolphins and other aquatic mammals, allowing them to be on public display.

41. Doughnut economics: An economic model which places emphasis on balance between socio-ecological systems and highlights the importance of serving one without excessively damaging the other, remaining within a safe and just space for humanity.

42. Dublin system: An EU mechanism that determines which Member State is responsible for the examination of an asylum application submitted by someone seeking international protection within the EU under the Geneva Convention.

43. Economic growth: An increase in the production of goods and services, compared from one time period to another.

44. Economy for Common Good: A social movement advocating for an alternative economic model. It calls for working towards the common good and cooperation as values above profit-orientation and competition.

45. Electric pulse fishing: A fishing technique sometimes used which uses electric shocks to catch fish.

46. Embodied energy: Embodied energy is the sum of all the energy required to produce any goods or services, considered as if that energy was incorporated or 'embodied' in the product itself.

47. Energy poverty: The lack of access to modern energy services.

48. Erasmus: Erasmus+ (formerly known as Erasmus) is a programme to support mobility and cooperation opportunities in higher education, vocational education and training, school education, adult education, youth work and sport. Best known for its university exchange programme.

49. Erasmus+: See Erasmus.

50. EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Legally binding charter that sets out the rights and liberties of everyone in the European Union.

51. EU minimum wage scheme: Proposed EU directive on the introduction of a minimum wage for workers in the European Union to ensure a decent living.

52. EU Rights and Values programme: The programme aims to protect the rights and values enshrined in the EU treaties by supporting civil society organisations and encouraging civic and democratic participation.

53. EU4Health programme: The EU’s response to the COVID-19 crisis. The largest ever EU programme within the health sector, EU4Health aims to increase preparedness for cross-border health threats, as well as strengthen health systems across the EU.

54. European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ECRML): European convention for the protection and promotion of languages used by traditional minorities.

55. European Commission: The executive branch of the European Union. Responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the EU treaties, and managing the day-to-day business of the EU.

56. European Convention on Human Rights: An international convention to protect human rights and political freedoms in Europe, adopted in the framework of the Council of Europe and that is enforced by the European Court of Human Rights.

57. European Council: EU institution which defines the general political direction and priorities of the European Union. It comprises the heads of state or government of Member States, the Commission president, and the president of the European Council.

58. European External Action Service (EEAS): The diplomatic service of the EU.

59. European Neighbourhood Policy is the structure that governs the EU’s relations with states in its immediate neighbourhood.

60. European Parliament: Directly elected EU body that has legislative power, budgetary power, and control over other EU institutions such as the European Commission.

61. European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO): Independent office responsible for investigating, prosecuting, and bringing to judgment crimes against the EU budget.

62. Federal Europe: The transformation of the EU from a confederation (union of sovereign states) to a federation with a central government.

63. Feminism: A range of social movements, political movements, and ideologies that aim to establish gender equality in society.

64. Fish aggregating devices: An object used to attract fish such as marlin, tuna and dolphins. Widely used in the industrial fishing of tuna, it is accused of increasing the fishing of juveniles, bycatches of sensitive species as well as creating marine litter.

65. Food security: The ability for all people, at all times, to have physical, social, and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food that meets their food preferences and dietary needs for an active and healthy life.

66. Food sovereignty: A concept developed by farmers based on the right of people to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and the right of communities to control the way food is produced, traded, and consumed. It could create a food system that is designed to help people and the environment rather than to generate profits for multinational corporations.

67. Force-feeding: A feeding technique used in the production of foie gras. A nutritional substance is given to the goose by means of a small plastic feeding tube passed through the nose or mouth into the stomach. As a result, their livers become massively enlarged.

68. Fracked gas: Gas obtained through the use of fracking. Fracking is the process of drilling down into the earth before a high-pressure water mixture is directed at the rock to release the gas inside.

69. Freedom of movement: The right to travel, work, and live in a country, as well as the unconditional right to leave and re-enter.

70. Freedom to stay: The right to remain in the country of one’s choosing.

71. Frontex: The European Border and Coast Guard Agency. An EU agency, Frontex is responsible for border control of the European Schengen Area, in coordination with the national border and coast guards of Schengen Area Member States.

72. Gender-based violence: Harmful acts directed at an individual based on their gender. It is rooted in gender inequality, the abuse of power, and harmful norms.

73. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs): Animals, plants, or microbes whose DNA has been altered using genetic engineering techniques.

74. Genital mutilation: A procedure that typically includes the total or partial excision of external genitalia. Female genital mutilation (FGM) involves the partial or total removal of external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons. It is recognised internationally as a violation of the human rights of girls and women.

75. Genuine progress indicator (GPI): A national-level indicator that provides information on sustainable economic welfare, rather than just economic activity. GPI has been suggested to replace or supplement GDP.

76. Geoengineering (also known as climate engineering): The deliberate manipulation of the Earth's climate to counteract the effects of global warming from greenhouse gas emissions.

77. Globalisation: The growing integration and interdependence of the world's economies, cultures, and populations, brought about by cross-border trade in goods and services, technology, and flows of investment, people, and information.

78. Greenwashing: A superficial or insincere display of concern for the environment, usually in order to gain business advantage.

79. Gross domestic product (GDP): The market value of all the final goods and services produced within the geographic boundaries of a country within a specified time period, normally a year.

80. Heteronormativity: A discourse which is based on the assumption that heterosexuality is the norm and privileges this over any other form of sexual orientation.

81. Homophobia: A range of negative attitudes and feelings towards homosexuality or people who identify or are perceived as being lesbian, gay, or bisexual, as well as systemic discrimination against them.

82. Housing First: An approach to tackling homelessness in which permanent housing is seen as a person’s first and primary need and is provided without any preconditions.

83. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV): A virus that attacks the immune system. If not treated, HIV can lead to AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome).

84. Human security: A security concept that redirects focus from the security of states to insecurities in people’s daily lives, such as the threat of hunger, disease, crime, environmental degradation, and issues related to the labour market.

85. Illegal pushbacks: Illegal cross-border expulsions without due process.

86. Illiberal democracy: A governing system in which, although elections take place, citizens are cut off from knowledge about the activities of those who exercise real power because of the lack of civil liberties.

87. Illiberalism: See “illiberal democracy":

88. Imperialism: The policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation, especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas.

89. Informed consent: Agreement or permission to take a particular course of action granted in full knowledge of the possible effects or results.

90. International Monetary Fund (IMF): A multilateral institution that lends money to governments with the aim of stabilising currencies and maintaining order in international financial markets.

91. Intersectionality: A way of understanding how people’s overlapping identities impact the way they experience oppression and discrimination.

92. Intersex people: Intersex is an umbrella term for differences in sex traits or reproductive anatomy. Intersex people are born with these differences or develop them in childhood. There are many possible variations in genitalia, hormones, internal anatomy, and chromosome patterns.

93. Islamophobia: A range of negative attitudes and feelings towards people who practise Islam or are perceived as Muslims, as well as systemic discrimination against them.

94. Istanbul Convention: The Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. A legally binding treaty aiming to put an end to violence against women and domestic violence.

95. Just transition: A framework developed to encompass a range of social interventions needed to secure workers' rights and livelihoods when economies are shifting to sustainable production, primarily combating climate change and protecting biodiversity.

96. Kerosene: A clear flammable liquid primarily obtained from petroleum, commonly used as a fuel for jet engines.

97. Legalisation of drugs: Drug production and commercialisation is legal under specific conditions that are controlled by the government.

98. Lethal Autonomous Weapons (LAWs): A type of autonomous military system that can independently search for and engage targets based on programmed constraints and descriptions.

99. Level playing field: A state in which conditions in a competition or situation are fair for everyone.

100. LGBTQIA+: An initialism that stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, intersex, and asexual, as well as other gender, sexual, or romantic minorities.

101. Linear economy: An economic model based on the assumption of a constant supply of raw materials, resulting in a “take-make-dispose” mentality.

102. Mass data retention: The collection and storage of data on individuals and their online behaviour by governments and businesses.

103. Medically assisted procreation (MAP): A generic term for any of a range of techniques that manipulate an egg and/or sperm to bring about fertilisation.

104. Metadata: Data that provides information about other data.

105. Militarism: The belief that a country should maintain a strong military capability and be prepared to use it aggressively to defend or promote national interests.

106. Monopoly: A company, person or state that has (near) complete control over the supply of or trade in a commodity or service, meaning that it is impossible for others to become involved in it.

107. Multilateralism: In international relations, multilateralism refers to an alliance of multiple countries pursuing a common goal.

108. Neocolonialism: The use of economic, political, cultural, or other pressures to control or influence other countries, especially formerly colonised ones.

109. Neoliberalism: A political and economical ideology, associated with economic liberalism and free-market capitalism. It supports privatization, deregulation, free trade, austerity and reductions in government spending.

110. Net neutrality: The principle that internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all data equally. According to this principle, ISPs may not intentionally prioritise certain types of online traffic and block or meter others.

111. Nuclear energyEnergy that is produced from nuclear reactions.

112. Nuclear fusion: A process in which two or more atoms are combined to form one or more atomic nuclei and subatomic particles, producing energy. Research is being funded into the use of this energy in electricity production, for example through the ITER programme.

113. Open source-based platforms: Software that is publicly licensed and designed with available source code, granting users the right to use, copy, study, change, and improve its structure or design.

114. Oppression: Unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power.

115. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD): An international organisation with the mandate to stimulate economic progress and world trade.

116. Own resources: The EU’s main sources of revenue comprising duties and levies, value added tax, and national contributions.

117. Palliative care: Medical and related care provided to a seriously ill patient to manage symptoms, relieve pain and discomfort, improve quality of life, and meet the emotional, social, and spiritual needs of the patient.

118. Paperless person: A person who does not have any proof of their legal identity or status.

119. Parental leave: Time off from employment granted to parents to care for a child following its birth or adoption. Employers are required to hold employees’ jobs for the duration of the leave period. Parental leave is sometimes unpaid. FYEG supports fully paid parental leave.

120. Paris Agreement: A legally binding international treaty on climate change mitigation, adaptation, and finance, signed in 2016. Its primary goal is to limit the global average temperature rise to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, in addition to pursuing efforts to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees.

121. Parliamentary system: A democratic system of governance in which the executive has the direct or indirect support of a democratically elected parliament, and is held accountable to that parliament.

122. Participatory budgeting: A process of democratic deliberation and decision- making in which citizens decide how to allocate part of a municipal or public budget.

123. Patriarchy: A social system in which men hold primary power.

124. Pesticide: A chemical substance or biological agent used to deter, incapacitate, or kill certain insects, mammals, wild plants, and other unwanted organisms.

125. Physical communications infrastructure: The network of interconnected resources (cables, switches, towers, antennae, etc.) upon which broadcasting, telecommunication, and internet services are operated.

126. Pink tax: The tendency for products marketed specifically toward women to be more expensive than those marketed for men.

127. Platform workers: Workers that are put in contact with customers through online and are paid for each completed task rather than employed through regular work contracts with social protections.

128. Pluralistic society: A society in which members of diverse ethnic, racial, religious, and social groups are able to maintain and develop their unique cultural identities, with the acceptance of the dominant culture, provided these are consistent with the laws and values of wider society.

129. Poverty line: The minimum level of personal or family income deemed adequate in a particular country, below which one is classified as poor according to governmental standards.

130. Presidential system: A system of government in which the president is constitutionally independent of the legislature and holds most executive power.

131. Privilege: Special status or advantages conferred on certain groups at the expense of other groups.

132. Productivism: The theory that increasing productivity is the primary goal of socio-economic activity.

133. Profit maximisation: The process by which a firm determines the price, input, and output level that returns the greatest profit.

134. Progressive taxation: A tax system based on the taxpayer’s ability to pay. Low-income earners pay a lower rate of tax than those with higher incomes.

135. Proportional representation: An electoral system in which the number of seats held by a political group or party within a legislative body is proportional to the number of votes received.

136. Public housing: Low-rent housing owned, sponsored, or administered by the state.

137. Qualified majority: One of the voting systems used by the Council of the European Union to take decisions (the others being simple majority and unanimous vote). The usual qualified majority is reached when 55% of Member States representing at least 65% of the total EU population vote in favour. In special cases, the figure rises to 72% of Member States representing at least 65% of the EU population.

138. Queer: An umbrella term for gender, sexual and romantic minorities who are not heterosexual, heteronormative, or gender-binary.

139. Quota (diversity and inclusion): A policy requiring a certain number or share of minority group members or women on boards, shortlists, etc., in order to make institutions and businesses more representative.

140. Racialised people: Individuals who have been ascribed a racial identity for the purpose of continued domination, discrimination, and social exclusion.

141. Racism: The systemic discrimination and oppression of people on the basis of their supposed membership of particular racial or ethnic groups, built through the perpetuation of prejudices and the belief that there are different races, some of which are superior to others.

142. Relocalising the economy: Establishing a network of small businesses in the local area to fulfil basic needs rather than relying on national or global corporate monopolies.

143. Repairability: The extent to which an object is able to be repaired.

144. Representative recall: A process through which voters can remove elected officials before their official terms have ended.

145. Right to be forgotten: The right of an individual to have private information on them deleted so that third persons can no longer trace them.

146. Right to challenge: An option offered in some countries allowing citizens to call for a referendum challenging a decision taken by the parliament or the government.

147. Right to disconnect: The right to digitally disconnect from work without facing negative repercussions.

148. Right to self-determination: The right for people, based on respect for the principle of equal rights and fair equality of opportunity, to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no interference.

149. Rule of law: The principle that all persons, institutions, and entities are subject to the law, including lawmakers, law enforcement officials, and judges.

150. Rule of law mechanism: Preventive tool to promote the rule of law and provide options in the event of breaches by Member States, for example the suspension of EU funding.

151. Schengen Area: An area in which all member countries have agreed to abolish controls at internal borders and create a single external border.

152. Secrecy of correspondence: A fundamental legal principle guaranteeing that sealed correspondence will not be opened and the content will not be revealed to anyone but the addressee.

153. Secular state: A state that is neutral in matters of religion.

154. Sixth mass extinction: An ongoing mass extinction event of wildlife on Earth as a result of human activity, in particular over the last century.

155. Social justice: The objective of social justice is to create a fair and equal society in which each individual matters, their rights are recognised and protected and in which wealth is fairly distributed.

156. Social stratification: The hierarchical structures of class and status in any society.

157. Speculation (financial): Investment, in particular on the housing market, involving high financial risk but also the possibility of significant gain.

158. Subsidiarity principle: A principle according to which social and political issues should be dealt with at the most immediate (or local) level that is consistent with their resolution.

159. Targeted advertising: Internet advertising that delivers customised adverts to consumers based on their behaviour on the internet.

160. Tax avoidance: The arrangement of one's financial affairs to minimise tax liability within the law.

161. Tax haven: A country or place which offers foreign individuals and companies very low tax rates. People choose to live there or register companies there to avoid paying higher tax in their own countries.

162. Taxation of financial transactions: A tax that is applied to all financial transactions, just as tax is paid on all other transactions, services, and goods.

163. Tech giants: The largest and most dominant companies in the information technology industry.

164. Too big to fail: Companies and business, particularly banks, that are so interconnected and so large that their failure would have a serious impact on the economic system, and that therefore require rescuing by governments in the event of potential failure.

165. Trade union: An organisation formed primarily by workers in order to represent their rights and interests to their employers.

166. Trans people: People who have a gender identity or gender expression that differs from the sex that they were assigned at birth. People whose gender identity matches the sex that they were assigned at birth are referred to as cisgender or cis people.

167. Transphobia: A range of negative attitudes and feelings towards transgender people, as well as the systemic discrimination against them.

168. Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons: An international agreement to comprehensively prohibit nuclear weapons with the ultimate goal being their total elimination.

169. Trickle-down theory: A theory according to which financial benefits given to large businesses and the wealthy will in turn trickle down to smaller businesses and consumers.

170. Two degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels: One of the objectives of the Paris Agreement is to keep a global temperature rise well below this level. Global temperature rises are usually calculated compared to “pre-industrial levels”, meaning before the unusual rise in global temperature observed since the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

171. UN 2030 Agenda: A resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly which focuses on achieving 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which aim to end poverty and hunger, combat inequalities, and create a peaceful, just, sustainable, and inclusive society.

172. UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas: Declaration adopted in 2018 by the UN General Assembly which recognises the rights of farmers and people living in rural areas. These include the right to nature, seeds, land, water, biodiversity, health, education, and housing, as well as labour rights and cultural rights.

173. UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC): An international treaty signed in 1992 which sets a framework to address climate change at a global level. Regular international negotiations have been organised under the aegis of the treaty which led to the adoption, among others, of the Tokyo Protocol and the Paris Agreement.

174. UN Security Council: One of the six principal organs of the UN system, the UN Security Council is responsible for maintaining peace and security. Its resolutions are legally binding.

175. Unanimity: The agreement of all.

176. Unconscious bias: An attitude or stereotype that an individual unconsciously associates with another person or group of people.

177. Unemployment benefit: A payment made at regular intervals to an unemployed person.

178. Unilateralism: An approach in which a country decides on a policy or course of action on its own, without regard to the interests of other states, outside agreement or support, or reciprocity.

179. Universal basic income (UBI): A periodic payment provided to all on an individual basis, without means testing or work requirements.

180. Upload filters: Automated decision-making tools that scan files uploaded to a particular platform in order to determine if these violate the platform’s guidelines and rules.

181. Uranium: A chemical element widely used in nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons

182. Vocational colleges: Post-secondary educational establishments that offer teaching and practical experience in skilled trades.

183. Waste heat recovery: The use of the surplus heat produced by processes whose main aim is not heat production.

184. Wealth tax: A tax based on the value of the assets owned by a taxpayer.

185. White privilege: The societal privilege that benefits white people over non-white people in some societies.

186. World Bank: A multilateral financial institution that lends money to governments and government agencies for development projects.

187. Xenophobia: A range of negative attitudes and feelings towards foreigners or people who are perceived as foreign, as well as systemic discrimination against them.

188. Zoonotic diseases: Any infection or disease that is transmitted to humans from animals.

189. Peremptory norms: Also jus cogens norms. These norms are rules accepted by (almost) all states, which are of fundamental importance for the international community, and which have universal application and are always valid and may not be derogated from. Examples include the prohibition of genocide, piracy, slavery, racial discrimination, the crime of aggression and the unlawful use of force.

Russia launched a full-scale military invasion of Ukraine on 24th February 2022, after years of hybrid aggression starting from 2014. The invasion has been widely condemned internationally, and the actions inflicted by the Russian Federation have been nothing short of war crimes.

An urgent and coordinated international response

We call for full commitment to ending the war. The ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on 16th March 2022 has made it clear that the Russian Federation is in breach of international law. The ICJ must now have the process accelerated to have the Russian Federation tried for genocide. We also call for Putin to be tried for war crimes at the International Criminal Court. We demand the immediate withdrawal of all Russian troops from the territories of Ukraine, as well as from Georgia and Moldova.

We condemn the political leaders who are delaying the supply of arms to the Armed Forces of Ukraine by spreading misinformation about their help or denying Ukraine’s requests even for defensive weaponry, specifically by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. We call for the sanctioning of openly pro-Putin politicians in Europe, in particular Viktor Orban and the Hungarian government, as well as Aleksandar Vučić and the Serbian Government who do not agree to impose sanctions on the Russian Federation by breaking the common European front and repeating Russian disinformation in the state media.

We also call for equal sanctions for Belarus. Lukashenka and all his allies involved in cooperating with Putin, participating in war crimes in Ukraine, and torturing civilians in Belarus must be held accountable. Lukashenka`s support for Putin's actions must be classified as aiding, abetting and otherwise facilitating deliberate or indiscriminate attacks against the civilian population of Ukraine.

After the urgent end to the conflict, the reconstruction of Ukrainian infrastructure must be financed from Russian reparations. If this is not achieved, the European Union, the States participating in the EEA and Schengen should finance, and the costs should be distributed in proportion to the expenditure on Russian gas, oil and uranium, which financed the Kremlin's activities. The European Union must also accelerate the process to grant EU candidate status to Ukraine with accession to closely follow.

Long-term peace and security

As Young Greens we stand for a broad and inclusive approach to establishing peace, through the protection of human rights, rule of law, and international justice. When these principles are compromised and lives are at risk, the international community must come together to end the conflict. To this end, we call on the EU for the rapid deployment of interoperable EU military forces with the aim of peace enforcement and civilian protection, and to restore the legal borders of Ukraine with Crimea and Donbas, granted in the Budapest Memorandum in 1994.

FYEG supports the oil, gas, coal and uranium embargo on Russia to stop financing Putin’s war. The embargo must come hand in hand with a just transition to renewables for a democratisation of Europe’s energy with social protections to prevent the cost being burdened by citizens. At the same time, Europe must not transfer any materials for weapon production to Russia. We condemn Western companies that continue operating in Russia thereby supporting the stability of the Putin's regime by paying taxes to the repressive machine, and helping to circumvent sanctions imposed by democracies to reduce military aggression against Ukraine.

As Ukraine is a major exporter of grains and the world’s largest supplier of sunflower oil, the war has led to supply shortages. This has resulted in increased prices in Europe and risks amplifying famine in Africa and the Middle East. It is urgent for the international community to intervene to end the conflict, to prevent an elongated period of food insecurity brought on by the war. A way to do so is to indefinitely suspend all trade duties and tariffs charged to Ukraine to help them get through the conflict and reconstruction.

No one left behind

The EU must also provide and support the distribution of humanitarian aid to Ukraine. Currently, Russian troops are reported to be blocking the transit of civilians and aid. Safe passage must be granted to civilians and for the transportation of medicines and other forms of aid. We also call for the supply of veterinarian aid and food for animals to be fairly distributed. Action must be taken to preserve the cultural heritage from destruction through military action

The war has brought increased sexual violence against women both in Ukraine and those displaced. And yet, many are denied necessary sexual and reproductive healthcare services such as abortion either in Ukrainian hospitals or in Poland. Every European country should provide the necessary healthcare to all Ukrainians arriving in their country, including sexual and reproductive health services and psychological support.

Human trafficking has also increased, particularly of women and children. The EU should work with humanitarian organisations to provide a safe passage to those crossing borders and to prevent children from being separated from their families.

More than 11 million people in Ukraine have fled the country and over 7 million have become Internally Displaced Persons (IDP). Meanwhile, horrifying stories have emerged that some Ukrainians are being illegally deported to Russia, who must immediately be retrieved and taken to a place of safety. While we support the EU’s decision to welcome refugees from Ukraine, European leaders must not forget refugees fleeing war and oppression from elsewhere. We demand a humane EU asylum and migration policy with safe passage to the EU for all refugees and migrants.

From the aspect of bigger inclusion in society, we would like to suggest to European local communities and institutions opening free and official language courses for refugees from Ukraine who will be able to learn the language of the country where they are in. Language is something that people need every day and with free language courses, everyday life will become easier for refugees in European countries.

Conclusion

The Federation of Young European Greens wholeheartedly expresses its solidarity with the people of Ukraine. We strongly condemn the violence and horrors inflicted by the Russian Federation. The whole of Europe must stand together with Ukraine to provide support to civilians and ensure that justice is brought.

Global events once again confirm the need for a strong and cooperative security policy.

Unfortunately, soft, democratic policies have not worked, as a result of which we have in recent years seen armed aggressions, acts of terrorism, and the outbreak of full-scale war in Europe.

This once again underlines the need for a clear response and solidarity on the issue of collective security and peace, for strengthening the Eastern flank of NATO at this moment, and also starting developing a strong common European defense capacity.

For years the Baltic States and Poland have raised their concerns about a potential Russian invasion, which were mostly ignored and dismissed as paranoia. After the terroristic and fascist Russian regime, led by Vladimir Putin, annexed Crimea and the de facto occupation of the Donbas and Luhansk regions in 2014, the Baltic States and Poland increased their military spending to at least 2% of the GDP. This was not followed by the rest of the NATO member states. This left Baltic States and Poland feeling isolated and alone in managing their defense. Unfortunately NATO was the only viable defense mechanism available to these countries. We need to show true European solidarity and support Eastern European countries in their need for safety.

Moreover, FYEG understands Finland and Sweden’s wishes to join NATO, as that will make the Baltic Sea region safer and condemn any obstruction and manipulation by others in realizing the right of these countries to join the alliance.

While Western countries continued flirting with Vladimir Putin just to continue importing Russian fossil fuels, those countries which had previously been exposed to the horrors of Russian imperialism, started preparing for the worst, while continuing to support Ukraine from Russia's war against them.

Moreover, Germany kept building the Nord Stream 2 fossil gas pipeline from Russia to Germany, while Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltic States were opposed to it due to increased Russian influence. The partial Russian occupation of Ukraine had almost completely disappeared from the public eye until Russia started yet another invasion in early 2022.

Furthermore, many member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and member states of the European Union (EU) continued to export their weapons to Russia after the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014. Germany and France exported weapons worth more than 270 million euros. France's exports to Russia even increased significantly in 2015, a year after Russia annexed the Crimea peninsula. Czechia, Bulgaria, Italy, Slovakia, Finland, Spain, and Croatia also continued to export weapons, spare parts, and vehicles to the Russian military.

The Ukrainian resistance held up against the relentless terroristic onslaught of Russian occupiers. Despite Ukraine’s heroic resistance, without the influx of new weaponry, Ukraine cannot hold. It is thus necessary that Ukraine will be supplied with weapons to continue its counter-offensives against the Russian war criminals.

The Baltic States and Poland have been the biggest supporters of Ukraine during this invasion.Estonia has provided Ukraine military support of about 0.8% of their GDP, Latvia 0.7%, Poland 0.2%, and Lithuania – 0.1%, while Germany has given only 0.01% of their GDP in military aid. These discrepancies in the support for Ukraine standing up against the Russian invasion are worrying and are an expression of lacking European solidarity.

In order to strengthen European solidarity and with the aim to build European defense capacities, in particular to protect Eastern European countries against aggressions of the Russian Federation, FYEG calls to urgently build a strong and resilient European Defense Mechanism. It would be articulated by strengthening the cooperation between military forces of European countries and by providing defense support to the countries exposed to the most immediate threats.

Given the atrocities committed by forces under NATO command in the past, the reliance on NATO of some European countries for their defense is not sustainable, yet we acknowledge the current dependence on NATO as a defense mechanism for the countries most threatened by Russian aggression.

FYEG therefore demands that the European defense mechanism is set up as quickly as possible as an alternative defense solution to the NATO. Whereas the EU could play an essential role, it is vital that this mechanism is not limited to EU member states, but is open to every European country except for the Russian Federation.

The lack of a collective regulatory mechanism has allowed individual NATO members to exploit the alliance for their own interests, which in turn has resulted in criminal actions in the Middle East and other counties. Now this has led to weak support for Ukraine, provoking a difficult political and security situation for countries in Eastern Europe, the Baltics, and the Nordic countries, which are close to Ukraine and the Russian Federation.

We acknowledge there is a need in NATO for fair regulatory mechanisms that prevents the USA or any other single country from taking one-sided decisions as well as ensuring democratic ways of resolving internal problems and conflicts. At the same time we demand the creation of a strong institution in the future European defense mechanism that focuses exclusively on conflict prevention and resolution as well as ensuring peace and global security.

We believe that a strong structure and regulatory mechanisms will also enable us to control the level of militarization of countries and avoid subsequent wars and armed conflicts. One of the core values of the Greens is non-violence, so we believe that with the great threat of aggression from a Russian (or any other) imperialist government, we must first defend peace in all countries.

Since the creation of the European Union, energy has been a crucial aspect of the European integration process, to the point that two of the three founding Treaties revolve around the energy sector. In Articles 114 and 194 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union it is stated that Union policy on energy shall aim, in a spirit of solidarity between Member States, to ensure security of energy supply in the Union and promote the interconnection of energy networks. The European Union (EU) also believes that the promotion and protection of human rights around the world is a legitimate concern of the international community. The EU is bound by its Treaty to promote human rights, democratization and development.

Currently, the European energy market is regulated according to the TEN-E regulation, which allows the Union to meet its core energy objectives by laying down rules for identifying and the developing Projects of Common Interest (PCIs). These will ensure the interoperability of trans-European energy networks, the functioning of the internal energy market, the security of supply and the integration of renewable forms of energy.

Despite this, however, the current energy markets in Europe are still very regionalized. In part, this is due to a lack of energy infrastructure connecting Member States. Improving the interconnectivity of the energy market has several benefits: improved security supply, increased efficiency and increased competitiveness. This aligns well with the energy strategy that EU has stated previously, which is based on the pillars of securing an expanding supply of energy from both domestic and foreign sources, developing a more competitive internal energy market, and encouraging and supporting environmental protection and development of clean and renewable energy sources. Additionally, the new energy market of the EU is expected to encourage diversification and flexibility to react to market conditions across the countries. It also provides a more powerful bargaining position for European energy companies when sourcing energy in global markets, since there is a larger range of options available with regard to supply routes and there is better access to customers.

However, there are still many contradictions within EU energy policies and fossil fuels phase out is being blocked by the Energy Charter Treaty. This allows energy corporations to put forward compensation claims to states if the former deem their investments and expected profits have been damaged by policy changes. This has led to climate friendly policies becoming a financial risk for all states as big fossil fuel companies are currently suing European states for fossil fuel phase outs and demand several billion euros.

It is acknowledged that the EU has committed to comply to standards of democracy and to support human rights in foreign relations, in accordance with the founding principles of the Union itself, that is the principles of liberty, democracy and respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law. Given its current dependence on multiple energy suppliers, however, the EU’s ability to promote its interests and values risks to be limited when energy imports are supplied by countries with different values, even countries that violate human rights. Human rights are considered of vital importance to the EU, but when it comes to energy imports suddenly not.

While the Treaty on the European Union states that foreign policy should 'consolidate and support democracy, the rule of law, [and] human rights', the European Union has been criticised for putting its needs for energy imports before the aforementioned values: in accord with a study by the NGO Freedom House, Norway is the only country out of the EU’s main oil and gas suppliers to meet international standards of democracy, unlike the remainder (Nigeria, assessed as “partly free”, and Russia, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Qatar which are defined as authoritarian states). Moreover, some if not most of these countries have been known to violate human rights, in the energy sector, but outside of that as well. By importing energy from these countries, these regimes profit from European money, which does nothing to stop the abuse of human rights by these regimes. However, it is possible to change the EU energy market. For example, the European Parliament has instated several sanctions against Russia and is debating issuing even heavier sanctions, but is yet to accept an energy boycott at the moment of writing. Clearly, it is possible for countries in and outside the EU to take action against authoritarian governments when it comes to upholding our values, including the respect for (fundamental) human rights.

Not only would the European Union benefit from an increased energy independence in reference to human rights and democracy, it would also strengthen energy security and contribute profitably to the project of decarbonisation of the energy sector. It is time to clearly condemn dependence on energy imported from countries with authoritarian regimes and that contribute to the violations of fundamental human rights.

The current situation does not only imply the EU is financing authoritarian regimes as well as the Russian war against Ukraine, but it is also allowing Energy Companies to attain huge profits at the expense of consumers. Energy prices are rising exponentially, while fossil fuel companies are making record profits. Governments spend millions of tax money on subsidizing them. At the same time, the increasing inflation makes basic needs a luxury, while wages are drastically losing value. At this moment, many people cannot pay for their basic needs, don’t know how to pay their energy bills and homelessness is on the rise.

The economic system is deeply rotten, providing more and more money for the richest companies that massively destroy our planet and human lives, while the majority of peoples‘ living situations become more precarious than ever and energy poverty spiking dramatically among countries. Although there is not one common definition of energy poverty between Member States, it is generally described as a situation in which households are unable to access essential energy services. This can only be tackled by a drastic revolution of our energy system. Only by phasing out fossil fuels by 2030 and massively increasing subsidies, jobs and resources in renewable energies, the earth overheating can be limited, while at the same time ensuring a democratization of the energy system and the European independence from authoritarian regimes that are a serious threat to human lives and human rights. Moreover, stronger and better-connected energy infrastructure can go a long way in reducing energy poverty.



This can only be tackled by a drastic revolution of our energy system. We need comprehensive European-wide reform of our energy policy - one that intersectionally addresses both the energy transition and energy poverty - via sweeping phase-outs of fossil fuel by 2030, the stopping of subsidies, and comprehensive environmental taxes, complemented by pioneering action to revolutionise and connect the European energy grid, redirect subsidies and funding to renewable energies, limit and stabilise prices, and ensure all households have access to affordable energy. Unprecedented times call for unprecedented action, only in so doing can the earth overheating be limited, while at the same time ensuring a democratisation of the energy system - one that is coordinated, green, interconnected and based on solidarity; that is independent from authoritarian regimes that are a serious threat to human lives and human rights; and that ensures the right to energy is a right for all.

The Federation of Young European Greens, with regards to the goals expressed in the EU Green Deal, calls on the EU and the governments of Member States to:

1. Develop a legislative and policy framework to create a more interconnected European energy market to assist and support the energy transition towards renewable sources, with the aim of further improving storage and transfer capacity and reducing costs and therefore prices in order to achieve energy independence, by:
   1. Granting the European Parliament, Commission and Council the legislative authority to regulate the energy market and energy infrastructure supranationally through EU legislation;
   2. Initiating the grounds for legislation to regulate the international European energy market and improve supranational connection between energy markets of Member States, for example by establishing an independent body to compile and assess the current bilateral energy trade agreements between Member States and third countries, and to assess the deficits and strengths in the energy infrastructure of each Member State;
   3. Pulling out of the Energy Charter Treaty as soon as possible and stopping its further expansion
   4. Enshrining the right to energy within the European Charter of Human Rights and in European energy law.

2. Based on this framework, to implement and develop an interconnected and improved energy infrastructure in Europe, as achieving this is an essential step to ensure a functional and efficient European energy market, as well as a necessity for more sustainable energy supply, by:
   1. Investing in and facilitating the building of more energy infrastructure in and between Member States with significant infrastructure deficits to enable improved storage and sharing of energy, such as but not limited to flexible power grids, better demand-response technology, electric vehicle charging, and energy storage;
   2. Investing in improving energy infrastructure where it already exists;
   3. Implementing the connection of energy infrastructure across Member States in order to facilitate the creation of a European energy network;
   4. Investing in and stimulating research on sustainable technologies such as, but not limited to, energy reduction, energy storage and energy production;
   5. Offering targeted assistance and investment support to ensure energy infrastructure has similar quality across Member States.

3. Based on this framework, to implement and develop a Europe-wide energy strategy for a transition to a green and just energy system policy that addresses energy poverty by:
   1. Developing just transition plans which rapidly phase out fossil fuel usage while minimising the socio-economic disruptions to workers and communities;
   2. Ensuring that all people, especially those with lower income, have access to energy by implementing effective measures that keep energy prices affordable as well as energy supply sufficient, such as a moratorium on energy bills until energy supply and inflation rates are stabilised, a cap on energy prices, and comprehensive storage and connection infrastructure as proposed above;
   3. Redirecting all fossil fuel subsidies into renewable energy projects on state as well as consumer-level, while ensuring that this is complemented by measures that guarantee access to energy, especially of low income households, such as those proposed in 3.2;
   4. Implementing Europe-wide taxes. Firstly, increased taxes specifically on fossil fuel companies as well as a windfall tax and caps on their profits. Secondly, more broadly, a carbon tax on corporations throughout Europe for their emissions within and outside Europe. The resulting funds should be directed to measures addressing energy poverty, energy infrastructure and the energy transition.

With regards to the violation of human rights by the governments of states such as, but not limited to, the Russian Federation, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, FYEG calls on the EU and the governments of European countries to:

1. Condemn in the strongest terms the violation of human rights by authoritarian governments of energy-exporting states;

2. Based on these violations of human rights to aim for independence from importing energy from these states via the ending of current energy trade agreements as soon as possible;

3. Henceforth ensure that any future energy trade agreement is contingent to a set of minimal standards including but not limited to respect of human rights and rule of law wherein:
   1. States which breach the most egregious violations of human rights will no longer be considered as viable options to import energy from, whereas
   2. States which fall short of meeting the minimal standards yet abiding by a commitment to improve their respect for, among others, human rights and rule of law will be considered, and
   3. The assessment of the fulfilment of said criteria will be conducted by an independent body.

Introduction

As the only species on this earth with the ability to think long-term - even if we are not always so good at using this ability - we have a responsibility to ensure that life goes on, as well as the responsibility to preserve and protect nature and the climate. We can only achieve this, in the really long term, by working together with other countries to spread life to other planets. No matter what Sweden, no matter what Europe does, this will happen. But we can decide if it's the logo of a company on the side of the spacecraft that lands on Mars with humans, or if it's a flag that represents humans and not money.

Space exploration has clear scientific and cultural benefits but we also acknowledge that it is enormously resource-intensive which makes it very attractive to private individuals and companies. All space exploration should only be done when necessary, especially if private companies are involved, and has to serve the public interest. Space is not a playground for billionaires.

Climate

On the other hand, in the short term, space science is a great help in the fight against climate change. It is only through large Earth observation programs such as the Copernicus satellites that we can measure exactly where, when, how and why climate change is taking place, and it is the same satellites that are used to assist with detailed maps and images during natural disasters, which we know have already become more and more usual. Much of the early research on solar panels that has led to the efficiency they have today was done by NASA for use in space. The same applies to hydroponic and vertical agriculture. Space gives us time, breathing space and tools in the fight against the climate crisis. Therefore, we propose:

that more money is spent on climate-related space research.

Reusable rockets

The space industry is much like the electric vehicle industry. Both are mineral and rare earth metals heavy industries. Both are also industries of the future. But if the industries want to be part of the ‘green future’ they will have to stay within the planetary boundaries. To do so they need to become a part of the circular economy. Reusing and recycling EV batteries are now becoming mainstream, the space industry still has a lot of catching up within this area. But last year a breakthrough was made, when the first astronauts were launched on a reused rocket.

“NASA contend that reusable spacecraft are crucial for making the space industry more affordable. The concept is not new; for years, the space agency reused its small fleet of space shuttles, but reusable rockets weren’t a reality until 2021.”

So to make the space industry greener, cheaper and more circular we propose:

that the European Space Agency (ESA) works together with NASA and other international partners to establish a requirement for rockets to be reusable and completely recyclable as soon as possible.

Asteroid mining

Not all asteroids are created equal. By extracting the minerals found in extraterrestrial celestial bodies, we can completely eliminate the need to have environmentally destructive and human rights-violating mines here on earth. It is not something that will happen today, tomorrow or next year, but the technology is evolving and with more money, production could start around 2040. To be able to go through a fair transition, we will need batteries, and superconductors in turn need lithium, gold, platinum and endless other rare earth metals. That is why we propose:

that while we firstly prioritise the sustainable extraction and recycling of resources on Earth, and the reduction of resource use (e.g. the right to repair, the fight against negligent or avoidable obsolescence, sustainable product design), the European Space Agency (ESA) conducts research on asteroid mining, while always taking into consideration its environmental and economic impact, and only pushing for it once it becomes a viable and sustainable alternative in the future.

that the European Space Agency (ESA) develops a strategy for environmentally friendly and carbon neutral (within the atmosphere) space transport.

New international space station

The ISS is old and according to the original plans would have been scrapped as early as 2008. It is important for us to have a part in the work of the new international space station that is to be built next, we have the power to influence the spacecraft that will spend future decades with groundbreaking orbital research around the earth. That is why we propose:

that the European Space Agency (ESA) continues its work with international partners for a successor to the International Space Station (ISS).

Environmentally friendly space transport

Further to our calls on 'Reusable rockets', zooming through space isn't at all sustainable. As research into space continues, it is inevitable that the flow of 'traffic' from Earth to our stations in space and of our spacecraft within space will increase significantly. The amount of fuel necessary to transport resources and our astronauts from our stations on Earth to our stations in space and possibly vice versa is insurmountable, notwithstanding the amount of minerals and resources necessary to build the rockets and other spacecraft already iterated above.

Even if we manage to develop reusable spacecraft, we must acknowledge the astronomical amount of energy they will consume and the environmental impact of that. Therefore we propose:

Space pollution

Space debris are the objects that we humans have left in orbit around the Earth. These are everything from dust to pens and broken satellites that are as big as buses. In the worst case, it could be that in the future we will not be able to postpone things into space because there is too much rubbish in the way - the so-called Kessler syndrome. Already today you need to plan launches for clusters of space debris. In order to reduce the amount of defunct and functional satellites and, therefore, reduce the current and future space pollution, we must make all scientific data collected from these satellites open-source. That is why we propose:

Corporations should be accountable for the space pollution they are making, as well be accountable for the destruction of space discovery potential, especially with global systems like Starlink. Therefore, we demand that every global scale project is implemented in collaboration with scientists not to reduce the scientific potential in space discovery.

that the European Space Agency (ESA) strengthens the work of cleaning up space debris for a better space environment

International Cooperation

Due to long territorial disputes between different factions and France, ESA is not part of European cooperation, even when it gets most of its money from it. This stupid and resource-wasting battle must end. We therefore propose:

that the European Space Agency (ESA) is integrated into the European Union.

To summarize, we propose:

• that more money is spent on climate-related space research;

• that the European Space Agency (ESA) works together with NASA and other international partners to establish a requirement for rockets to be reusable and completely recyclable by 2035;

• that the European Space Agency (ESA) develops a strategy for environmentally friendly and carbon neutral (within the atmosphere) space transport;

• that the European Space Agency (ESA) continues its work with international partners for a successor to the International Space Station (ISS);

• that the European Space Agency (ESA) strengthens the work of cleaning up space debris for a better space environment;

• that the European Space Agency (ESA) is integrated into the European Union;

• that while we firstly prioritise the sustainable extraction and recycling of resources on Earth, and the reduction of resource use (e.g. the right to repair, the fight against negligent or avoidable obsolescence, sustainable product design), the European Space Agency (ESA) conducts research on asteroid mining, while always taking into consideration its environmental and economic impact, and only pushing for it once it becomes a viable and sustainable alternative in the future.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is the counterpart of the European Union (EU) in the Southeast Asian region, consisting of 10 member states: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. ASEAN has since its formation continued to pursue the increased integration of Southeast Asian nations, establishing amongst other things the ASEAN Vision 2020 in 1997 and ASEAN Charter in 2008 to pursue the realisation of a single ASEAN community and free-trade area; as well as establishing the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) in 2009, and adopting the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration in 2012. ASEAN is expected to be the world’s fourth largest economy by 2030.

ASEAN-EU ties date back to 1972, where the then European Economic Community was the first international entity to establish informal ties with ASEAN, followed by formal ties as a Dialogue Partnership in 1977 which was institutionalised by the ASEAN-EEC Cooperation Agreement of 1980. Since then, ASEAN-EU ties have continued to blossom, with the EU in 2012 being the first regional organisation to accede to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia and in 2015 establishing a diplomatic mission to ASEAN. As a result of the 23^rd ASEAN-EU Ministerial meeting in 2020, the EU and ASEAN have since improved their Dialogue Partnership into a Strategic Partnership.

The influence of the EU on ASEAN is undeniable, with the EU being the third largest trading partner of ASEAN (and ASEAN as well being the third largest extra-EU trading partner), the third largest provider of Foreign Direct Investment in ASEAN, the largest collaborator in development cooperation and lobbying of the EU amongst other states leading to ASEAN for the first time in its history declining to invite a political leader of a member state to its October 2021 summit.

With 2022 marking the 45^th anniversary of the partnership of the two unions, it is now more relevant than ever to further blossom the relations between the two unions in order to strive for a truly inclusive and sustainable Strategic Partnership with each other and for an inclusive and sustainable global community.

The Federation of Young European Greens calls on the European Union:

1. To further expand its economic cooperation with ASEAN, including:
   1. the establishment of a region-to-region (EU-ASEAN) free trade agreement,
      1. The further facilitation and stimulation of foreign direct investment that prioritises sustainable development in ASEAN contingent on, among others, respect for human rights, labour rights, rule of law, sustainability, and climate and environment, by, for example, pushing for transparency, predictability and security for investors alongside stringent corporate social responsibility rules and responsible business practices,
      2. The advancement of clear EU-ASEAN trade-related regulatory frameworks, as well as the promotion of EU rights, standards and policy frameworks such as the Eurocodes;

2. To increase efforts in improving regional security and stability, including:
   1. The sharing of information, intelligence and technology to combat transnational and cybercrime,
   2. The initiation of security summits and other diplomatic means to foster discussion in which the EU could act as an independent conduit for dialogue amongst the claimant states in the South China Sea dispute,
   3. The continued strong denouncement of authoritarianism, the breach of rule of law and human rights in the region, particularly in Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos and through Indonesia on Western New Guinea, and the continued urging for the immediate and unconditional release of political prisoners;

3. To broaden the scope of collaboration and socio-cultural cooperation with ASEAN, including:
   1. The active involvement of the EU in the various ASEAN summits of which it is a member of,
   2. The organisation of cultural and social exchanges, and the fostering of the collaboration of artists and media producers and organisation of joint-exhibitions and cultural projects,
   3. The organisation of academic and research exchanges, the increased provision of scholarships and trainings, and further cooperation in terms of research, technology and investment therein,
   4. The further involvement of civil society and youth in the processes and discussions of EU-ASEAN, such as the more frequent organisation, if not yearly, of the EU-ASEAN Young Leaders Forum.

Note: the resolution was drafted with support of the Taipei Representative Office in the Netherlands.

The current state of political affairs has made it immeasurably clear the importance of international solidarity in the enforcement of international law and the right to sovereignty and self-determination of peoples. Now more than ever must we uphold the protection of human rights and the principles of democracy and international rule of law, condemning the oppression, subjugation and bullying that global superpowers exert unto their own peoples and on smaller states.

The People’s Republic of China’s (hereinafter PRC) authoritarianism continues to remain unabated as reports of abuses, if not atrocities, committed by the state grow.

The crimes against humanity and genocide of Uyghurs.

Over a million Uyghurs remain arbitrarily detained in internment camps, wherein they are subjugated to forced labour, systematic sexual abuse and rape, and torture; a further number of at least 600.000 Uyghurs have been forcefully relocated under the PRC’s forced labour system. The Uyghurs are also subject to extreme restrictions on freedom of religion and expression and the erasure of their religious, ethnic and cultural identity, as the state has systematically destroyed Muslim buildings including mosques and cemeteries, banned religious practices and forced renunciations of faith, forced the separation of Uyghur children for re-education, and brainwashing. It is now beyond reasonable doubt that the PRC has implemented policies including mass forced sterilisations, forced contraception, and forced abortions. Reports have also surfaced of forced medical experimentation and mass deaths in camps.

It is thus clear that this is no longer simply a situation of cultural genocide, but of crimes against humanity, including torture, and of genocide committed against Uyghurs according to the definitions provided for respectively in Article 7(1) of the 1998 Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court, the 1984 United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and Article II of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Similarly there has been a clear breach of the right to (internal) self-determination of the Uyghurs.

The right to self-determination, prohibition of crimes against humanity, torture and genocide are ius cogens (peremptory) norms under customary international law, and thus binding regardless of the PRC’s reservations; as well as erga omnes obligations (owed to the international community as a whole) that fall under universal jurisdiction. Although the ICC does not exercise jurisdiction over PRC territory, the Court has held that “the Court may exercise jurisdiction over crimes when part of the criminal conduct takes place on the territory of a State Party”.

The formal recognition of the situation in PRC as a genocide is therefore of significant legal importance as the first step to holding the PRC accountable.

PRC neo-imperialism.

Despite the lofty promises of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the project has evolved into a framework in which the PRC implements various foreign policy tools in order to manoeuvre and expand its sphere of geopolitical influence across the globe. This includes various forms of economic and neo-imperialism entailing the exploitation of the economic and/or political vulnerability of countries in order to attain this expansion, such as its exercise of debt trap diplomacy on less economically developed countries. Furthermore, the expansion of cross-continental infrastructural development and natural resource extraction through the BRI without sufficient provisions for the protection of the environment and human rights has not only been devastating to the environment and livelihoods, of especially rural populations, but entrenches a system of asymmetrical reliance on natural resources and exploitative economic control across the Global South when economic diversification, modernisation and independence should be supported instead.

The PRC has further continued to increase military tensions and aggression toward its neighbouring states, from its military interventions at the China-India border to the ever increasing military pressure in the South China Sea. The PRC has furthermore continued to exert pressure on any opposition abroad, from its threats against Lithuania for establishing the Taiwanese Representative Office, to sanctions of officials of states that criticise it.

The isolation of the Republic of China.

Despite the Republic of China (ROC, hereinafter Taiwan) fulfilling the criteria of a state according to Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention of 1933, the people of Taiwan are prevented from exercising their right to self-determination and self-sovereignty by the PRC. Taiwan is also significantly limited in meaningfully participating as a sovereign state within the international political order, as it is prevented from membership or attendance of most international organisations.

As a result of the PRC’s One-China principle, all states are forced to choose between the PRC or Taiwan, as formal diplomatic relations with the PRC is contingent on the severing of any formal relationship with Taiwan and therefore the non-recognition of the Taiwanese government.

Furthermore, China has significantly intensified their aggression against Taiwan and military pressure across the border over the past decade, going as far as sending warplanes into Taiwan’s air defence zone. The PRC has also threatened military action against any independence attempts of Taiwan, and throughout the COVID-19 pandemic has continued to block Taiwan’s membership of WHO. Based on the ICJ Wall Advisory Opinion 2004 and Reference Re Secession of Quebec, it could be argued that the increased aggression and militarisation and international isolation indicate a significant breach of the meaningful exercise of the right to self-determination of the people of Taiwan.

A full reset.

Europe needs to re-evaluate its ties with China. We need a full reset of EU-China relations – deviating from a focus of maximalising economic gain to maximalising the respect for human rights, democracy, international law and the international rule of law.

The Federation of Young European Greens reiterates R06 Standing up the Chinese Authoritarianism of the 2020 General Assembly, and with regards to the crimes against humanity and genocide of the Uyghurs, calls on the European Union and the governments of European countries:

1. To formally recognise and declare the situation subjected to the Uyghurs as a genocide;

2. Based on this breach of international law,
   1. For member states to start universal jurisdiction investigations of the crimes against humanity and genocide committed by the PRC against the Uyghurs in order to pursue prosecution of the PRC within national regimes, and/or
   2. For the European Union to file a lawsuit against the PRC in the International Court of Justice and to pursue charges against the Chinese Communist Party in the International Criminal Court;

3. To implement Europe-wide trade sanctions on products originating from the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region or associated with the forced labour of Uyghurs;

4. To implement Europe-wide diplomatic sanctions on PRC officials of the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, and eventually of Xi Jinping.

With regards to the neo-imperialism of the PRC, calls on the European Union and the governments of Euopean countries:

1. To denounce in the strongest possible terms the aggression of the PRC in the South China Sea and the debt trap diplomacy in the African and Asian regions;

2. To provide a feasible alternative to the BRI contingent on, amongst other aspects, respect for human rights, including:
   1. The adoption of the Build Back Better World (B3W) initiative, with EU-wide funding of the initiative,
   2. The ending of the externalisation of the EU border regime and thus the funding of authoritarian regimes in Africa via the EU Trust Fund for Africa and to replace this with intensified funding of pre-existing Official Development Assistance (ODA) mechanisms contingent on minimum standards and principles relating to, amongst others, human rights and environment and climate, such as that of the Blue Dot Network,
   3. Further expansion and intensification of the Global Gateway strategy, such as via further expansion of the European Fund for Social Development Plus (EFSD+).

With regards to the isolation of the Republic of China, calls on the European Union and the governments of European countrise:

1. To denounce in the strongest possible terms the increasing aggression and military build-up of the PRC against Taiwan;

2. To formally recognise the sovereignty of Taiwan and push for the full membership of it in the institutions of the institutional order, primarily the four core international agencies Taiwan is currently pursuing, WHO, Interpol, ICAO and the UNFCCC, and eventually the UN;

3. To further enhance engagement and broaden partnerships with Taiwan, including a reset of the European countries’ One China Policy and the broadening of the scope of interaction with Taiwan beyond purely economic engagement such as the further collaboration of European and Taiwanese ministers;

4. To increase European foreign investment into Taiwan, for example by further intensifying the terms of the EU Bilateral Investment Agreement+ with Taiwan, with a particular focus on Taiwan’s expansion of offshore wind energy;

5. Based on this, to eventually establish formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan:
   1. By recognising the official diplomatic missions of Taiwan with the EU and with the various European countries no longer as representative offices serving as de facto embassies, but as de jure embassies and diplomatic missions,
   2. And by doing the same for the representative offices of the EU and of the various European countries in Taiwan.

At the end of 2021, in agreement with the European Parliament and the Council, the European Commission declared 2022 as the European Year of Youth.

We are worried. We are the generation that has been living from crisis to a crisis. When we were born, the world was already in crisis. When we were born, the world was already 0.5 degrees warmer. When we were born, we were already beyond 350 ppm; which is the “safe” level of carbon dioxide.

This generation has witnessed several economic crises, record levels of unemployment, a housing crisis, a global pandemic and wars in Europe. All while grappling with the effects of the climate crisis.

We are not the “Next Generation Europe”, we are THIS Generation Europe and we are in a crisis.

We lost two years of our education, work, mental health and life to the poor political decisions made in this pandemic!

The EU has declared 2022 the Year of Youth, saying it is in recognition of the sacrifices the younger generation had to make during the pandemic. However, the proposals they have made so far fall short to respond to the real sacrifices we made during the pandemic.

Our schools closed down. Not all of us had the means to participate in remote learning, especially those of us from marginalised backgrounds. Some of us have dropped out of education and will not return. For those that stayed, it was very hard to find the incentive and energy to focus on our studies, with no end in sight to the pandemic. Yet we were expected to deliver the same results.

Those of us staying in a different place than our homes had to either return home or stay in towns where our universities were and pay ever increasing rents and dormitory fees. For example, in September 2020 the University of Manchester encouraged the students to go to the campus and promised them face-to-face classes that were finally canceled two days before the course started. The students were trapped and forced to pay for accommodation that was in bad condition.

We, students, rely on part-time jobs to pay our tuition fees and sustain ourselves while studying. During COVID-19 restrictions bars and restaurants were closed and many students were unable to find part-time jobs. In France, students had to queue for food handouts.

Since the onset of the pandemic, the youth unemployment rate in the EU has risen from 15.8% to 19.5% (Eurostat). Those who didn’t lose their jobs saw a reduction in their income. According to the research done by the European Youth Forum, one in every four young people reported a decrease in their income (Beyond Lockdown - the pandemic scar on young people).

Young people were hardest hit in the 2008 global financial crisis. That crisis has not only led to very high youth unemployment rates in Europe but also a stance among political decision-makers that “any job is better than none”. That left us with unpaid internships, gig-workers, zero hour contracts. The current generation of young people were already worse off than their predecessors and now we are facing the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression.

Additionally, we are in a mental health crisis. Young people all over Europe are sounding the alarms for the drastic rise in mental health and wellbeing issues. The crises we have witnessed ever since we were born and the current economic system driving them have greatly impacted this generation. The rising levels of young people living with burn-out, anxieties and depression show that we have yet to receive the much needed essential aid that was promised to us. With the greater waiting times and overloaded health care, we need more than just raising awareness.

We were promised a good life. And we have been denied. Especially the racialised youth, gender and sexual minorities, disabled youth, migrant youth have been denied.

One year of youth is not going to solve our problems.

We do not need festivals. We need real change!

As FYEG we are concerned that this Year of Youth will result in a lot of stylish campaigns, but very little substance. We are worried that decisions about young people will be made without consulting us at every step of the way. We are worried that the leaders will invite young people to meetings only to listen to us, but not to take the much needed action afterwards. We want to see outcomes from the European Year of Youth exist beyond 2022.

Without concrete actions, the European Year of Youth will only remain as youth washing and we have seen enough of that. What young people really need is hope. Hope that there is a way out of these crises and that the people in power do not only care about their position, but about our future.

This Manifesto therefore demands:

• The European Year of Youth should not be limited to young people from EU member states but should also involve young people from the UK, the Western Balkans and EU Partnership countries.

• The civil space for youth organisations in Europe has been shrinking. We are very worried that the words of the European Commission are not followed by concrete actions. A strong youth sector is key to ensure that young people from all backgrounds can have access to a safe space to engage and grow as active citizens.

• The increase in the overall Erasmus+ budget should be reflected in the operating grants that youth civil society organisations receive. Even though the Erasmus+ budget has been doubled, the operating grants have remained the same. In a European Year of Youth, we need strong European youth organisations. The operating grant support should be tripled and distributed to more organizations. Especially youth organisations that target marginalised young people should be given a priority.

• The European Commission should provide small funding opportunities to formal and informal youth organisations to organise “pilot” activities, much similar to the Council of Europe’s European Youth Foundation (EYF) Pilot Activities. The application and reporting should be simple so that new organisations without professional secretariat can easily apply and report.

• Russia has left the Council of Europe. That means they will not pay their membership fee, which will decrease the overall funding. Last time Russia didn’t pay its membership fee, the CoE immediately cut funds from the youth sector. We can not let this happen again. The EYF has been providing support to young people all across the continent for 50 years and they must be protected at all costs.

• The European Commission should start a more formalised research regarding the marginalised young people taking part in the activities organised or funded by the Commission grants, with an aim to understand and prioritise their needs and to remove barriers to their participation in European youth events.

• We are calling on the European Commission and the Member States to put forward a common binding legal framework for an effective and enforceable ban on unpaid internships, traineeships and apprenticeships and providing a minimum standard of rights concerning working conditions.

• We do not think the European Commission’s new program ALMA (Aim, Learn, Master Achieve) will be a relief to the systematic youth unemployment and precarity. We are worried that this initiative would be limited to privileged few who would already have a good chance in getting short-term work experience in a different member state. Instead, the efforts should be directed towards immediately introducing an EU minimum wage scheme, with minimum wages based on the cost of living in a particular country or region and a mechanism to progressively harmonise them.

• The Commission President Von Der Leyen said “This Next Generation EU recovery pack is a lot of money that the next generation will have to pay back”. We reject the premise that young people should be indebted because of the poor political choices that were made before them.

  • The Next Generation EU should be funded through EU level wealth tax, kerosene tax, and tax on tech giants.

  • Youth organisations should be consulted in the delivery of national plans for the deployment of Next Generation EU Funding.

• We propose a one-time COVID relief to all European young people (age 14 - 30) to help them overcome the challenges they currently face, due to the sacrifices they had to make in the past years.

• The European Commission should initiate a crisis Mental Health plan targeted at policy change in the Member States. This plan should include, but not be limited to:

  • increasing accessibility and the funding of (mental) healthcare facilities, making sure that everyone gets the help they need

  • investing in training of mental health professionals, equipping them with tools to help people from marginalized communities

  • making (mental) healthcare free

  • investing in already existing, bottom-up community-building initiatives

  • increasing the financial support provided to civil society organisations (CSOs) who work on mental health

  • mainstreaming mental health into all social, economy and climate policies

IT IS OUR FUCKING FUTURE.

One of the principles of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of humankind, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity. We understand that human dignity should neither be exclusive to nor withheld from any ethnicity, gender, language, religion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Unfortunately, sports have been instrumentalised by certain countries and regimes to hide their record of grave human rights violations and at times glorify a personality cult to serve as a distraction. This is called sportwashing. A very notorious case is the 1936 Summer and Winter Olympics hosted by and held in Nazi Germany. Going into recent times, more and more cases of sportwashing are being committed: the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia, the 2022 Winter Olympics in China, and the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar to name some. The preparations for the latter are being plagued by cases of migrant workers working under dangerous conditions with little to no pay, extremely low standards of living, and deaths caused by preventable workplace accidents.

We young greens believe that no country which engages in severe human rights abuses such as forced labour, genocide, and war crimes may be allowed to host major international sport tournaments such as but not limited to Olympic Games and world championships. Furthermore, similarly severe human rights abuses such as forced labour, forced displacement, and persecution of national and cultural minorities in the process of preparing for these games are unacceptable and should lead to the host country being changed or the games suspended, as well as other sanctions (e.g. fines or bans from future competitions).

Therefore we, the Federation of Young European Greens, call for:

• a reform of the International Olympic Committee’s Code of Ethics where severe human rights abuses in the process of preparing for the games should lead to the host country being changed or the games suspended, as well as other sanctions where necessary (e.g. fines or bans from future competitions);

• a reform of the Rule of Conduct for Host Countries and the hosting process where human rights abuses in the process of preparing for the games must at all times be avoided, where countries with history of human rights violations must closely consult and be supervised by the International Olympic Committee, and in case of violation an appropriate sanction can be put on the host country;

• to apply these provisions analogously to international sports federations with their respective international sporting events and competitions;

• Sports clubs to be prevented from being acquired by states for the purpose of sportswashing;

• the revival of the Olympic Truce as an absolute requirement during the Olympic Games. It means no country will engage in an armed conflict seven days before the start of each Olympic Games and until the eighth day after the conclusion of the Paralympics. Its violation by any aggressor or attacking state should also be sanctioned forcefully.

In the context of climate emergency, when science and activists worldwide are urging for the decarbonisation of the global economy, the transport sector plays a major role. Specifically, air transport requires a massive reformulation effort. Despite the warnings —and obviousness— regarding the high impact of aviation on the environment, the operators of several major European airports are putting forward expansion proposals. Scaling up these facilities is in line with a strategy of growth in the aviation sector that is in clear contradiction with the need for decarbonisation. These are consequences of our economic system and policies that are based on the exploitation of people and the environment. In this system, corporations are making profit at the expense of our rights to live in a healthy environment.

In Spain, the national airport operator AENA has put forward plans to expand virtually all major Spanish airports. In the case of Barcelona - El Prat Airport, the expansion project envisions a new terminal and the extension of one the airport’s three runways, with the goal of reaching 70 million passengers per year by 2030. The airport is located right by the Llobregat Delta, a space of critical ecological importance within the dense, heavily urbanized Barcelona conurbation. There are several swamps and two main lagoons around the airport area, one of which would be removed to allocate the runway extension. Overall, the Barcelona Airport expansion project would generate the following negative impacts:

• Massive biodiversity loss, as 43 protected bird species, fish and reptiles would be deprived of their natural ecosystem

• Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions coming from airport operations would surge by 33%, which go in the opposite direction of international agreements to reduce drastically overall emissions by 2030

• Direct health impact due to air and noise pollution generated by airport activity, such as cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, as well as an impact on the mental health of airport workers, passengers, and nearby residents; also, an indirect, global health impact from increased GHG emissions contributing to climate change worldwide should be considered.

• 10 million additional tourists would visit Barcelona annually, further increasing pressure on public services, and speeding up gentrification, directly impacting on the inhabitants’ housing rights

• A model based on an unstoppable growth which benefits big companies fostering ecocide capitalism, undermining the very universal right to live in a habitable planet

• 1.7 billion euro would be lost to an unupdated and unsustainable transport system; instead this budget should be allocated to improve and expand the local rail network, with a focus on night trains and international connections—as of 2019, 54.5% of airport passengers could be provided with competitive rail alternatives

With this resolution, the Federation of Young European Greens:

• Call on the appropriate authorities and institutions to protect the environment and health by halting all expansion plans of all European airport operators, which constitute a threat for a green and just transition.

• Urge all European countries and institutions, specially those that are members of the European Union, to develop a competitive intra-european train network, creating new cross-border services through high-speed and night trains, with the goal of reducing airplane use.

• Urges the European Commission to revise the 2014 Aviation Guidelines, adopting new rules halting state aid to airlines, airports, and airport expansion and nonessential infrastructure investment projects of already developed airports, with the continued exemptions of 'very small airports' meeting the criteria to constitute a Service of General Economic Interest (SGEI) insofar a competitive train or sea alternative is not feasible

• Urges national European governments and European institutions to put forward a ban on air routes where a competitive rail alternative exists, as was already approved by France on national air routes where an alternative rail service with travel times under 2.5 hours is offered. Competitiveness shall also include an assessment based on costs alongside duration

• Call on the European Commission to create an air carbon tax that may be dynamically adjusted depending on the distance and the existence of competitive rail alternatives over the same route; the obtained revenue should be used to further develop competitive rail alternatives, with the intention to discourage frequent flying.

• Call on civil society and local governments on showing their discontent with such projects and claim for a green and just transition

During the last years, the political landscape in many institutions at different levels has changed, bringing the option of developing and putting forward real progressive, transformative and green policies. The possibilities, limits and potentialities of progressive and green organisations in government, including compromising or keeping the relations with social movements, has been triggering a great debate within the Green Family. We consider that being able to bring real ambition and being brave in policy-making is something to celebrate, and we should make the best of the trust that electors put on our proposals. Political parties and organisations thrive with the development of political and ideological debates in the context of policy-making and the creation of proposals, and we also welcome these experiences in the context of legislative chambers at all levels and other cross-party spaces. Sadly, we have witnessed how trying to start certain debates or implement specific policies which challenge the status-quo has prompted the reaction of elite groups that hold lots of economic and social power. These groups do not have anything to do with democratic representation of the people: big corporations that make profit of people’s rights, seeing that their privileges are at risk, are (mis)using legal tools with the aims of political thuggery and damaging the image of the institutions and trying to put an end to the policies and legal frames that protect the rights of the citizens.

These practices, called lawfare, are persistently being used by big corporations that make profit of basic rights, such as housing, access to water and breathing clear air, in Barcelona as a response to the proposals of the progressive and green local government of the city. Once the institutions started tackling the privileges of big private corporations and putting forward a set of proposals in line with the general interest and the right to the city, those lobbies started legal procedures against the government of the city as political weapons. This follows a clear agenda of trying to stop the public servants from fulfilling their commitments. During the last seven years, the members of the local government of Barcelona received 11 lawsuits, and 10 of them have already been dismissed.

All these lawsuits are always being put forward by legal entities that are closely related to real estate corporations, vulture funds, the multinational company in charge of the management of the water of the city, but also the automotive sector and the tourism lobby. During the last two mandates, Barcelona has been a leader in developing policies that contribute to achieving the right to the city: housing policies and putting an end to the privatisation of the water to manage it as a common good. Also, green policies have been implemented to reduce the air and noise pollution due to cars, foster the use of public transport and active mobility (walking and biking) and increase the healthy and green areas in the city. In this sense, mass media, in general not independent from these economic powers, is also joining this campaign of delegitimation. Traditional media and online pamphlets are spreading fake news and feeding the anti-political narrative, puting at the same level politicians facing charges for corruption with this legal abuse.

With this resolution, the Federation of Young European Greens:

• Welcome the brave proposals put forward by Barcelona en Comú at the Barcelona City Council government for the past 7 years and welcome such proposals in other local governments.

• Endorse the green and progressive organisation in the upcomong 2023 municipal elections and similar organisations in other elections in the future.

• Show its solidarity with Mayor Ada Colau and the Barcelona en Comú councilors as well as government officials across the Member States in the local government, who are being victims of this prosecution solely for prioritising the rights of Barcelonians

• Urge the corresponding institutions to put an end to the privilege of big corporations that are making profit of our rights, including housing, water supply, and healthy cities, and stop them from employing lawfare schemes against political parties and organisations which are developing progressive policies to move forward into equal access to the right to the city

• Calls for initiatives on both national and European levels to enact legislation limiting the maximum amount of money that can be spent on lobbying by individuals or (corporate) organisations, eventually with a ban on corporate lobbying, and the facilitation of lobbying by and consultation of civil society organisations and academia.

According to the latest data from the UNHCR, more than 4,000,000 Ukrainians left their country since the beginning of the Russian invasion, seeking asylum in nearby European countries. With the European Union and European countries openly denouncing the war, a wave of solidarity has risen in Europe, with thousands of European citizens having mobilised to welcome and help the Ukrainian refugees, including through donations and the provision of accommodation.

Although this wave of solidarity is admirable and has helped hundreds of thousands, it is developed jointly with a problematic discourse: indeed, we have heard that these refugees would be of “quality”, and that our proximity with the Ukrainian people justified the welcoming efforts, as they are “like us”. This problematic discourse assesses that non-European refugees would be of “bad quality” since they are not “like us”: this is uninhibited racism, and it is unacceptable.

All of us thus must fight this discourse, and underline its racist character: this can no more be the main discourse in the European media, as the FYEG has previously done, with the #NoDiscriminationOnMigration.

Furthermore, we must acknowledge the various marginalised groups made invisible and swept under the rug in our discourse on asylum. In the Ukrainian context alone, people of colour, immigrants, ethnic minorities and LGBTQIA+ refugees faced disproportionately high obstacles in fleeing. In the broader asylum context, systemic, systematic and social discrimination and obstacles are faced on the grounds of religion, beliefs, cultural and ethnic origin, gender and sexual orientation and identity, disability and class. The asylum system within Europe needs exhaustive and comprehensive reform in order to guarantee the right to asylum for all peoples.

Therefore, following this communication campaign, the Federation of Young European Greens calls on the European Union and the governments of all European States to:

• Welcome and guarantee the right to asylum to all refugees, with special consideration to the extra obstacles faced by marginalised minorities whether from Ukraine or any other place in the world, and to accommodate for these obstacles.

• Stop all pushbacks at the border as well as the deportation of those who have crossed the border, acknowledging the necessity of humanitarian duty instead of the construction of "Fortress Europe".

• Replace Frontex and the concept of “Fortress Europe” with a humanitarian alternative focused on saving and welcoming refugees.

• Immediately stop the criminalisation of people and non-governmental and civil society organisations devoted to welcoming and helping refugees and facilitating the movement of these peoples across international waters, and to finally support these organisations.

• Rather than the persecution of refugee traffickers, combat refugee trafficking by providing real and legal alternatives to traffickers for refugees to flee to the EU, especially for refugees fleeing conflicts, or refugees for whom the journey is too costly and dangerous.

• End as soon as possible EU refugee cooperation treaties with Turkey and Libya as well as the externalisation of the EU border regime via such treaties and the funding of autocratic regimes in Africa to stop migration corridors, which keep out refugees on the basis of their background and which put the most vulnerable refugees in even more dangerous situations.

• Facilitate and ensure the provision of basic rights and needs to those seeking asylum such as humane accommodation pending approval of their asylum process and Europe-wide coordinated processes to ensure asylum seekers are not left in limbo for years in camps.

• Continue this facilitation and guarantee of basic rights and needs upon having their application processed and the refugee relocated including but not limited to language, housing, humane temporary accommodation in facilities, right to work, healthcare and mental healthcare.

• Within the EU, implement an EU-wide framework truly based on the principles of solidarity and responsibility sharing for the shared funding, processing and relocation of asylum seekers and refugees, wherein the Dublin regulation is abolished, Member States with the most resources live up to their commitments to relocate refugees with an enforcement mechanism to ensure this, as well as mechanisms that provide funding for the processing of asylum seekers and coordinate the relocation of refugees in a manner that is finally fairly and justly divided between Member States based on their capacity.

Together, we must stand up against racism. Always. Everywhere.

While the rich are disproportionately responsible for the climate emergency and environmental degradation, it is mainly the poor who are suffering their consequences. The links between the climate, environmental and social crises must be recognized. They are not three separate crises, but manifestations of one single problem: capitalist exploitation.

Between 1990 and 2015, the richest decile of the world's population was responsible for more than half of greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions from the "richest 1%" of our planet have increased since the Paris Agreement was signed and are likely to increase even more by 2030¹. These striking disparities are the result of completely different lifestyles, as evidenced, for example, by disparities in airplane use. One percent of the world's population is responsible for half of the emissions caused by aviation, while 90% of world’s population have never flown².

These environmental inequalities take many forms and are present at all scales. On the one hand, the habits of the most affluent are more harmful to the environment and contribute more to climate change than those of the least affluent. On the other hand, exposure to environmental pollution and climate change is unequal. Poorer people live in neighborhoods with higher pollution of nitrogen dioxide³, a gas produced during the burning of fossil fuels that worsens symptoms of asthma and reduces lung function growth⁴. Worryingly, the World Health Organization notes for Europe that: “although air pollution levels have decreased over recent years, inequalities in exposure persist”⁵. In the French Île-de-France region, for example, waste treatment facilities, such as incinerators, are often located in low-income neighborhoods⁶. Similarly, the poorest have fewer opportunities to adapt to climate change; they tend to have less access to green spaces that could help to cool off during heat waves, and it is more difficult to move away from high risk areas, such as regions threatened by rising sea levels and flooding. Nothing justifies that those who contribute most to climate change and the destruction of our environment can escape the consequences, for example by living in air-conditioned houses in areas where the impacts of climate change are less.

The Federation of Young European Greens works for a better recognition of environmental inequalities. These should be taken into account systematically by public authorities. Public authorities in Europe must fight any form of environmental inequality at all scales. Their efforts must go beyond encouraging individual consumer action. We need a paradigm shift.

Moreover, we must be extremely vigilant with regard to products that promise to have a lesser environmental and climatic impact. In response to the awareness of the climate and environmental emergency, more and more products have been put on the market that promise to be good for the planet and humanity. Organic food, fair trade products, electric vehicles, and carbon offsetting programmes often have a lower environmental and climate impact and are produced under better working conditions, but they are by far too expensive for the majority of the population. Thus, they are only accessible to the most affluent who can afford the luxury of ethical and environmental consumption choices. Worse, the promotion of these products conveys the idea that one must belong at least to the middle class to save the world. Even if it is imperative to reduce the impact of consumption on the planet and to improve the conditions of production, this cannot be achieved by adding a few more fair trade products to the shelves of our supermarkets. It must be a systemic change that includes helping the poor and raising social and environmental standards dramatically. The wealthy don’t save the world. They destroy it. Capitalism relies on the exploitation of workers and nature and creates these massive inequalities. To fight inequality at its root cause, we need to fundamentally change our economic system. Taxing wealth can only be a first step in creating an equal society.

FYEG is fighting against all forms of inequality, for climate justice and environmental justice. Since these struggles are intimately linked, we cannot fight the climate emergency without fighting social inequalities and vice versa. We must fight against environmental inequalities, notably by making the wealthiest pay:

• Taxes on income and capital must be more progressive, including by an introduction of a wealth tax for the whole of Europe.

• We call on the European Union, or its Member States by lack of such EU power, to levy a higher carbon tax rate for luxury products and on European states outside the EU to introduce such analogous measure. The rental, purchase and maintenance of yachts, for example, should be heavily taxed according to their environmental impact. The EU should push for such a Union-wide tax to be implemented as soon as possible.

• European countries should close their airspaces to private jets. The Single European Sky initiative should support this prohibition.European countries should also close their ports to luxury private yachts.

• Environmental and climate policies must be subjected to rigorous scrutiny by an academically diverse, independent authority to identify their potentially regressive impacts. We must avoid at all costs that the poorest and disproportionately people of colour already exploited by the capitalist economy, are disproportionately impacted by these policies.

• Revenues generated by the above-mentioned measures must be used to combat the effects of environmental inequalities and to support the poorest. Environmental and climate policies should not be a burden for poor people and people of colour; they must be designed so as to benefit them.

• Environmental inequalities are also occurring in other parts of the world. While environmental standards in Europe are slowly rising, we must make sure that polluting activities are not simply moved to other parts of the world, which would increase environmental inequalities. Carbon offsets are not a solution and should be phased out. Firstly, they come with the inherent risk that they are used by the wealthy as letters of indulgence; having the financial means to be able to buy carbon offsets, those wealthy can thus continue their carbon-intensive lifestyles. Secondly, carbon offset projects have very frequently negative impacts on the local and regional level. For carbon offsets in the Global South for example, forests frequently become inaccessible to the local population, so that tree growth is not hindered. Whilst such projects can have a positive value on the environment, they must be a sufficient balancing of the individual and collective rights of peoples, especially marginalised peoples. Only when the reliability of the carbon offset project is verified by an independent external organ and evaluated on the basis of minimum human rights standards, can its operators sell their commodified carbon certificates. Such balancing is necessary in order to ensure these practices do not induce the poorest to have to pay for the carbon emissions of the wealthy

• The EU needs to re-design its trade and foreign economic policies, to ensure that when receiving crucial resources such as metals to enable the green economic transition, both EU firms and countries, and those countries that provide the EU with the natural resources needed are appropriately compensated. This would entail expanding and ensuring protections and compensation of workers in countries where the resources are extracted, through setting greater worker rights requirements on natural resource products that enter the EU single market. The EU should support investment to construct natural resource processing infrastructure to ensure that they gain larger shares of the value-added in the global product value chain. Finally, in the process of creating or expanding natural resource extraction projects, the communities affected by these projects should be involved in the decision-making processes in an equitable manner.

• The EU needs to reduce and potentially phase-out in the short- to medium-term the use of carbon offsets to compensate for carbon emissions by both the private and public sector. The use of carbon offsets can ameliorate the effects of cap-and-trade, such as when polluters double count an emission reduction. In the case of carbon offset programs deemed necessary such as the UN’s CORSIA scheme the EU needs to ensure that the necessity and use of carbon offsets is reduced. Furthermore, that the carbon offsets are part of EU certified projects, that the EU makes sure that they have little to not externalities, that land prices do not rise disproportionally, that the offsets are able to actually offset the carbon in the short- to medium-term, and that any groups and communities affected from the carbon offset projects are not excluded from the decision-making processes.

• Environmental inequalities are also occurring in other parts of the world. While environmental standards in Europe are slowly rising, we must make sure that polluting activities are not simply moved to other parts of the world, which would increase environmental inequalities. The EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism would be a first step in the right direction, but needs to be complemented by policies for other types of activity.

The Climate emergency, environmental degradation and economic inequalities are intimately linked. Let's fight against all three at the same time, let's tax the rich!

• The Climate emergency, environmental degradation and economic inequalities are intimately linked. Let's fight against all three at the same time, let's tax the rich!

1. https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10546/621305/bn-carbon-inequality-2030-051121-en.pdf

2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378020307779 (Gössling, Humpe (2020): « The global scale, distribution and growth of aviation: Implications for climate change »)

3. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/unequal-exposure-and-unequal-impacts (page 19)

4. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ambient-(outdoor)-air-quality-and-health

5. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/325176/9789289054157-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (page 57)

6. Ludosky & Toussaint (2020): “Ensemble nous demandons justice. Pour en finir avec les violences environnementales”

Mining resources comes with negative impacts on the environment that should be reduced to a minimum. At the same time, a just transition to a carbon-neutral society is only possible when key parts of our infrastructure are renewed. However, this transition requires mining resources in itself; cadmium is for example needed for the construction of solar panels. Some methods of mining are more harmful to the environment than other methods. Underwater mining is especially harmful to the environment and should therefore be prohibited.

According to “Seas to risk” report: “Areas approved for deep-sea mining (DSM) exploration now cover over 1.3 million square kilometres in the Pacific, Indian and Atlantic Oceans. Of the 30 exploration contracts the International Seabed Authority (ISA) has established so far, European contractors hold a total of nine. Countries sponsoring or holding contracts include Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, France, Germany and the UK”.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has launched a moratorium on deep-sea mining. It has called on its member states to implement a moratorium on deep-sea mining and the issuance of contracts for exploitation and exploration. Environmental and biodiversity NGOs have welcomed this measure.

But many European countries continue the race to exploit the mineral resources of the seabed even though this has devastating consequences on the 250,000 known living species and on the millions we do not yet know of and the fact that mining releases huge amounts of carbon, which reduces the capacity of the oceans to slow down climate change.

We can mention the Solwara 1 project planned to mine mineral-rich hydrothermal vents in the Bismarck Sea, part of the Pacific Ocean, not far from Bougainville Island. This is the first deep-sea mining project at the international level that was approved but then brought to a halt because of environmental destruction. Other tentative projects are the ones planned near the Canary Islands. The so-called “grandmothers of the Canary Islands” are composed of more than 100 seamounts that cover the bottom of the sea, located about 269 miles south of the island of El Hierro. They are extinct submarine volcanoes with important mineral deposits of manganese crusts, polymetallic nodules, and phosphorites. The European Union has formally declared that the grandmothers of the Canary Islands are a strategic reserve of raw materials necessary for the energy transition.

On the other hand, European countries and the EU have made the security of the supply of raw materials one of their priorities. It encourages the exploration of new frontiers and innovative mining methodsunder the pretext that the ecological transition requires the use of rare minerals such as cobalt used for the batteries of electrical devices.

We refuse to use the ecological transition to go and exploit and destroy the seabed!

The "Sustainable Blue Economy" strategy adopted by the European Commission foresees that the EU defends the conditional exploitation of seabed mineral resources in the international area after sufficient research has been carried out on the impact on the marine environment, biodiversity, and human activities.

The Federation of Young European Greens (FYEG) is unambiguous: our biodiversity has to be protected – whether on land or underground.

We must make our continent a global leader in sustainable development. When building a sustainable Europe, we cannot forget to protect our seabed.

WHAT WE STAND FOR:

• Ban on deep-sea mining in European waters as well as on the continent.

• Ban on processing minerals from the seabed in Europe and ban on importing products containing minerals from the seabed into Europe (similar to the ban on conflict minerals).

• Ban private deep-sea mining research projects and those for economic purposes, and only fund public deep-sea science research projects, such as those by academia and international institutions, that look into sustainable methods and contribute to our understanding of deep-sea ecosystems, in order to form a scientific consensus that deep sea mining can be done sustainably.

• Increase waste recycling rates to 80% to recover raw materials and facilitate recycling across Member States, by giving Member States with the capacity to mass-recycle the possibility to buy disposed material from other Member States. Special attention is given to the recycling of e-waste, thus precious minerals and metals used for the production of technology in order to phase-out mining. To increase and improve waste recycling, European legislation should require producers to design products so that they can be easily recycled, for example by not mixing plastic with paper packaging.

• Producers have to sell products designed to last as long as possible. Producing products that stop working after an artificially short amount of time is not only a burden for the consumers, but also the environment since it increases demand for new products, and therefore resources. To alleviate the pressure on our environment, and to reduce the need for underwater mining, artificial lifetime limitations, including negligent or avoidable obsolescence, must be banned across Europe. To stimulate the production and purchase of sustainable products, the lifespan of consumer technologies has to be included on its packaging.

• Enabling a local and decentralized repair industry on national and European level, by providing financial and educational incentives to create local repair shops that can perform repairs on the widest range of goods possible at the lowest prices possible.

• Ban the design of products that can exclusively be repaired by the manufacturers of the product.

• The right to repair must be enshrined in European law. All consumer technologies should be able to be repaired by consumers themselves when needed. This includes creating legislation that sets minimum design requirements to ensure easy disassembly and replacement of key components. Similarly, producing products that are difficult or impossible to be repaired is a burden for consumers and the environment as it leads to unnecessary excess demand.

We call for respect for the biodiversity of the seabed and respect for the right of marine biodiversity to develop freely without human intervention.

Through this motion, we want to affirm our refusal to participate in this race for scarce resources which is destructive to our marine biodiversity and which brings nothing.

Indigenous knowledge is critical in solving the climate crisis. That’s why it’s a bit ironic that the livelihoods of indigenous peoples have been under pressure for centuries, and still are under pressure today.

There is only one indigenous people officially recognized in the European Union - The Sami people - that traditionally resides in the Sapmi area in the north of Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia. Even though this is the only indigenous people residing in Europe, there are many indigenous peoples being affected by our continent; the actions of the EU and European countries in the global market have a huge impact on the lives of indigenous peoples across the globe.

Therefore, a;

Europe that is in line with indeginous rights across the globe should ensure that

• All trade agreements by the EU and by European countries must respect the rights of the the indigenous communities directly or indirectly affected in the counterpart and possibly in neighbouring states. This must entail respect for ILO Convention 169 alongside core human rights conventions. Furthermore, these indigenous communities must be consulted and represented in the discussions and evaluation of the agreement either by a representative or, where possible, a collective or council representing them

• All foreign investments in industries by European countries and the EU must respect the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (ILO Convention 169)

• Indigenous peoples are an important group for funding in international development policies and should be promoted

• Non-Self-Governing Territories' right to Independence referendums worldwide should be supported

Europe is to ensure the rights of its indigenous populations by

• Ensuring that the EU and its member states ratify the ILO Convention 169

• Prohibiting contruction in indigenous lands if it would damage or restrict access to lands culturally or religiously important to indigenous communities, or negatively affect their environment, health, livelihood or other rights in any way. The evaluation of any project should be done in consultation with possibly affected indigenous communities either by a representative or, where possible, a collective or council representing them

• Supporting the dissemination of indigenous knowledge, culture and history in Europe and areas that are colonized by Europe

• Funding projects by the state or civil society organisations that increase the knowledge of- and usage of indigenous languages. This includes the teaching of indigenous languages as part of school curriculum.

• Allowing The Sami People to freely migrate within the Sapmi area, regardless of the official country borders

• Supporting the Nordic Sami-council and encouraging all countries with indigenous land to create an indigenous council

• Increasing funding for research on indigenous language, culture and history

• Depositing EU grants earmarked to strengthen national and ethnic minorities directly to minority organizations instead of through the Member States

The cultivation of the Earth along with forestry activities has been vital for our survival as humankind. Unfortunately, the continuous push for the industrialization and globalisation of the world’s agriculture and food supply systems threatens the future of humanity and the natural world, which are deeply interconnected. The Covid-19 pandemic and the trade implications of the war in Ukraine have made more visible the vulnerabilities of food systems across the globe that are not able to ensure a sufficient and healthy diet for everyone. In Europe, the hegemonic agro-industry model developed in the last decades has entailed a reduction in crop diversification, a depletion of soil and biodiversity, and the pollution of aquifers and water reserves due to the use of synthetic fertilisers and pesticides, along with antibiotics in animal farming. The exploitative labour conditions in agriculture of migrant workers, mainly in southern Europe, are also part of this model, a region which is the most vulnerable of the continent to desertification and the sustainability of any form of agriculture in the following decades.

Jointly addressing the challenges of sustainable food for the European and world population, the preservation of biodiversity and natural resources and the response to climate change requires a profound transition of our agricultural and food system. A shift towards an agroecological paradigm based on the phasing-out of pesticides and synthetic fertilisers, and the redeployment of extensive grasslands and landscape infrastructure would allow these issues to be addressed in a coherent manner. In this sense, there is a wide scientific consensus in the capacity of agroecology to nourish all Europe and to nourish all people better, expressed in the reports of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the former UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier de Schutter. A step from the status quo is needed to put the health of people and ecosystems first than the interest of the big landowners and seed producers in agro-industry, a shift that has to be ensured from political institutions. Hence, it is not just about rigorous ecological and social standards, but about transforming the way food is produced, distributed and consumed, giving room for local knowledge and food sovereignty, and the functioning of food systems as a source of shared prosperity.

To generalise organic agriculture is not enough, we can see it in the greenwashing made by agri-business by meeting the minimum requirements for their production to be labelled as “organic” but not making significant changes in the way food is produced and distributed. In addition, we need a structural change in a situation where consumption patterns are still far from meeting a diet that is within planetary boundaries, marked by an overconsumption of meat and ultra-processed food that damages the health of the people and the planet. We have to overcome the false dichotomy between prioritising nourishing the whole world and ensuring long-term sustainability of the soil: both are possible under agroecology, improving public health and making possible the mitigation and adaptation to the climate crisis. Under agroecological principles, farmers and peasants are agents of change, carrying out ecosystem services along with the production of healthy, organic and accessible food through short supply chains that ensure food security and are the materialisation of food sovereignty. The projects rooted on the social and solidarity economy such as cooperatives, food hubs and local associations should be the engine of these transformations.

For all these reasons, the Federation of Young European Greens makes a call to all political entities across Europe to create a legal and policy framework that fosters the up-scaling of agroecology, urgently transitioning to agroecological production and consumption and minimise food waste, while increasing the ambition and reshaping the goals of the Farm to Fork strategy. The redesign of the CAP also has to stop the discriminatory practice of countries not receiving the same amount of subsidies, mainly punishing farmers in the newest EU member states.

• Facilitate the rapid abandonment of the use of hazardous pesticides and fertilisers and the funding of research behind and use of the use of biocontrol and natural barriers and predators, biopesticides, polyculture, the phase-out of bioenergy crops and vegetable protein imports, the increase of the share of legume crops in rotation, the redeployment of natural grasslands and extension of agroecological infrastructures (hedges, trees, ponds, stony habitats). A cut in funds from intensive farming to redirect them to agroecological initiatives is also key.

• Decrease support to reductionist agricultural research and increase investments in public research on agroecology and organic farming, creating Agroecological Living Labs and learning hubs. Transitioning to agroecological systems needs a life-long learning, transdisciplinary and multistakeholder approach, in formal and non-formal education and research. Agricultural sciences curricula should be transformed into agroecological curricula. Additionally, educating on the benefits of agroecology in rural areas to empower youth initiatives should be a priority of educational policies, increasing the visibility of certification programs in agroecology, exchanges of good practices and networks of support and knowledge.

• Rethink the relation between urban and rural societies and territories, taking into account the interdependence between cities and ecosystems. We need to create an alliance based on short supply chains with surrounding territories, as indicated by the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact. To link transformative production and consumption initiatives is essential for the up-scaling of agroecology.

• Aim for the objective of 100% organic, local and fair trade products by 2027 in public restoration with vegetarian and vegan options everyday. Entities of the social and solidarity economy should be prioritised and supported by public administrations through this policy and other measures designed at all political levels. The relocalization of production through agroecological initiatives and the progressive increase in the ecological and social requirements of public purchase are central to reach this goal. The public sector has to take this leadership role for the transformations to come as soon as possible in the rest of economic and societal spheres.

• Agroecological laws at all legislative levels should be enacted to ensure a just transition from conventional agriculture to agroecology (up-scaling agroecology). Some Latin American countries have been pioneers in this kind of legislation, such as the case of Uruguay in 2018.

• At the EU level, we demand the taxation on imported commodities whose methods of production do not comply with the EU environmental and human rights standards. Determination of compliance with said standards is done by an independent body. Such an evaluation should be reassessed at least every 4 years. Where this especially harms smallholder producers, profits from such a taxation will be invested in initiatives that incentivise production meeting such standards. This is particularly important in the sector of protein crops, where the ban on imported soya in the EU could phase out synthetic fertilisers responsible for high greenhouse gas emissions and close the nitrogen cycle at the finest territorial level. A redesign of the Common Agriculture Policy is needed in order to halt the disproportionally advantageous treatment of large agricultural companies and to put small and medium organic and agroecological practices at the centre of public support, to ensure just prices for local producers, reduce the distance food travels between production and consumption and minimise food waste, while increasing the ambition and reshaping the goals of the Farm to Fork strategy.

• Develop European, state-level as well as local and regional programs to facilitate access to land for all and especially for youth through Land Banks, for instance, in the form of council land redistribution. This would generate new job opportunities and rural development and promote safe and decent working conditions and wages. A gender perspective has to be integrated in all the measures taken, as well as mechanisms to ensure equity for ethnic minorities
  
  
  .

• Develop local and regional programmes designating public land most accessible by communities, such as those in the heart of communities, for sustainable community projects and facilitating and stimulating the cultivation of such projects. These projects, such as community gardens, are to be decided by communities themselves through local forums, councils, or other local participation initiatives.

To European civil society:

• FYEG supports the Agroecology Europe Barcelona Letter and any other organisation or movement working in the lines of an agroecological transformation.

• We make a call to join forces in the advocacy and action towards a truly sustainable food system that places the health of people and the planet over profit, a transformation in the food system that cannot wait if we want genuinely resilient territories for the decades to come.

Introduction

As the only species on this earth with the ability to think long-term - even if we are not always so good at using this ability - we have a responsibility to ensure that life goes on, as well as the responsibility to preserve and protect nature and the climate. We can only achieve this, in the really long term, by working together with other countries to spread life to other planets. No matter what Sweden, no matter what Europe does, this will happen. But we can decide if it's the logo of a company on the side of the spacecraft that lands on Mars with humans, or if it's a flag that represents humans and not money.

Climate

On the other hand, in the short term, space science is a great help in the fight against climate change. It is only through large Earth observation programs such as the Copernicus satellites that we can measure exactly where, when, how and why climate change is taking place, and it is the same satellites that are used to assist with detailed maps and images during natural disasters, which we know have already become more and more usual. Much of the early research on solar panels that has led to the efficiency they have today was done by NASA for use in space. The same applies to hydroponic and vertical agriculture. Space gives us time, breathing space and tools in the fight against the climate crisis. Therefore, we propose:

that more money is spent on climate-related space research.

Reusable rockets

The space industry is much like the electric vehicle industry. Both are mineral and rare earth metals heavy industries. Both are also industries of the future. But if the industries want to be part of the ‘green future’ they will have to stay within the planetary boundaries. To do so they need to become a part of the circular economy. Reusing and recycling EV batteries are now becoming mainstream, the space industry still has a lot of catching up within this area. But last year SpaceX made a breakthrough when they launched the first astronauts on a reused rocket.

“Both NASA and SpaceX contend that reusable spacecraft are crucial for making the space industry more affordable. The concept is not new; for years, the space agency reused its small fleet of space shuttles, but reusable rockets weren’t a reality until 2021.”

So to make the space industry greener, cheaper and more circular we propose:

that the European Space Agency (ESA) works together with NASA and other international partners to establish a requirement for rockets to be reusable and completely recyclable by 2035.

Asteroid mining

But not all asteroids are created equal. By extracting the minerals found in extraterrestrial celestial bodies, we can completely eliminate the need to have environmentally destructive and human rights-violating mines here on earth. It is not something that will happen today, tomorrow or next year, but the technology is evolving and with more money, production could start ~ 2040. To be able to go through a fair transition, we will need batteries, and superconductors in turn need lithium, gold, platinum and endless other rare earth metals. That is why we propose:

that the European Space Agency (ESA) develops a strategy for environmentally friendly and carbon neutral (within the atmosphere) space transport.

New international space station

The ISS is old and according to the original plans would have been scrapped as early as 2008. It is important for us to have a part in the work of the new international space station that is to be built next, we have the power to influence the spacecraft that will spend future decades with groundbreaking orbital research around the earth. That is why we propose:

that the European Space Agency (ESA) continues its work with international partners for a successor to the International Space Station (ISS).

Space pollution

Space debris are the objects that we humans have left in orbit around the Earth. These are everything from dust to pens and broken satellites that are as big as buses. Which usually moves at about 27,000 km/h. In the worst case, it could be that in the future we will not be able to postpone things into space because there is too much rubbish in the way - the so-called Keppler syndrome. Already today you need to plan launches for clusters of space debris. That is why we propose:

Corporations should be accountable for the space pollution they are making, as well be accountable for the destruction of space discovery potential, especially with global systems like Starlink. Therefore, we demand that every global scale project is implemented in collaboration with scientists not to reduce the scientific potential in space discovery.

that the European Space Agency (ESA) strengthens the work of cleaning up space debris for a better space environment

International Cooperation

Due to long territorial disputes between different factions and France, ESA is not part of European cooperation, even when it gets most of its money from it. This stupid and resource-wasting battle must end. We therefore propose:

that the European Space Agency (ESA) is integrated into the European Union.

To summarize, we propose:

• that more money is spent on climate-related space research;

• that the European Space Agency (ESA) works together with NASA and other international partners to establish a requirement for rockets to be reusable and completely recyclable by 2035;

• that the European Space Agency (ESA) develops a strategy for environmentally friendly and carbon neutral (within the atmosphere) space transport;

• that the European Space Agency (ESA) continues its work with international partners for a successor to the International Space Station (ISS);

• that the European Space Agency (ESA) strengthens the work of cleaning up space debris for a better space environment;

• that the European Space Agency (ESA) is integrated into the European Union;