This wiki is closed and NOT maintained! The up-to-date PPI wiki can be found at https://wiki.pp-international.net

<

PPI Conference 2013/GA meeting/Minutes

From pp International
Revision as of 21:48, 5 May 2013 by Valio (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

Note: All times are in Kazan (Russia) local time.


Contents

Saturday, April 20, 2013 morning block

09:35 - Opening

Sven Clement (PP-LU) and Denis Simonet (PP-CH) get accepted as meeting chairs of the GA

Sven asks who is willing to do the minutes. Pat Mächler (PP-CH) is willing to do the minutes.

Sven Clement appoints Pat Mächler as the minute keeper.

09:45 - Speech by Pavel Rassudov (Chairman PP-RU, host party)

  • Pavel Rassudov welcomes everyone to the conference. He talks about the issues of the Russians with the Ministry of Justice, the common culture of Europe and Russia, the global movement in general. The speech is in Russian and translated.

09:50 - Speech by Gregory Engels (current co-chairman PPI)

  • Gregory Engels provides a short review of the movement in the last year: 43 elections, 28 seats in regional parliaments, 1 senator (PP-CZ), first elected mayor (PP-CH), indication that pirates are accepted as political player. The political world now considers the pirate movement as a political force, i.e. as it helped to stop ACTA. PPI was also at certain WIPO events. Gregory reasons about the decision for Russia as host (global movement thus farthest available place from the previous one, recent 2nd denial of PP-RU for registration by the Ministry of Justice, NGOs now got a lot of restrictions concerning international work within Russia). Gregory reasons about the rainbow flag of the Queeraten he brought along and the law restrictions within Russia which are against human rights. Gregory reasons about some of the replacement contracts of ACTA: IPRED (reversal of proof of guilt if you will get disconnected for alleged infringements), TTP, CETA. He also mentions reform on the prohibition of drugs and patent seed frameworks as examples where an international organization is needed.

10:00 - Vote on the Rules of Procedure (RoP)

  • The meeting chair Sven asks whether everyone is okay with the proposed RoP.
  • Jens Stomber (PP-DE) brings forward the question concerning adding new motions during the GA. The meeting chairs Sven explains the reasoning behind that.
  • The meeting chair Sven reminds about the procedure concerning handing in votes for remote delegates, which were instructed previously.
  • There is a slight delay as the GA is waiting for the votes of the remote delegates, as well as setting up a direct connection for the presentation machine to the meeting chairs table.


Quorum is reached for remote participant.

Vote on Rules of Procedure
Country AU CAT CH DE FR LU PT RU
Vote No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Result 7 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS => The Rules of Procedures are accepted

10:34 - Presentation of applicants as ordinary member

Latvia: There is no person to present.

Slovaquia: There is no person to present. There are 15 active member, they registered last year.

Ukrainian Pirate Community: There is no person to present.

Bosnia-Herzegowina: Sent in a video which is due to be presented.

  • PP-CZ: raises the issue that they are denied access to the pad.

The video of Bosnia-Herzegowina is shown.

Estonia: Sent in a video which is shown.

Belarus: There were two different applications, one for ordinary member, one for observer member. The organizations now decided to merge their efforts into just one application as an ordinary member. Mikhail Volchek provides a presentation at the place as speaker of the Belarusian pirates using a slideshow; it's about their organization and their expectiations on PPI.

Tunisia: Maxime Rouquet (PP-FR) presents the current situation in Tunisia, where another group denies to work with the applicant. However the applicant says he offered to work together and would be actually willing to share PPI membership.

Israel: There is no person to present.

Hungary: There is no person to present. Sven mentions that they provided statutes in Hungarian.

Iceland: There is no person to present. Sven recites the founding date, the member count and some other data as written in the wiki.

Turkey: Yasin Aydin (PP-TR) who represents the Turkish board presents the group. He mentions some key data about the party, such as supporters. He tells about the Internet censorship by the Turkish government, that the PP-TR provides information to people on how to defend ones anonymity and that plan to setup service for unfiltered net access.

Poland: Sent in a presentation which is shown. The party is currently intensifying activities again and gaining more momentum.

Japan: Tom Kito (PP-JP) tells about the difficult situation in Japan, where there is a lot controlled by the mainstream media. There is one dominating party and e.g. the green party did still not register, although they are rather old. Some people get arrested without any clear reason. The situation got especially worse after 9/11. They try to establish the party, but it's difficult as everyone who participated lost their job due to the activities. They have about 100 members. The core of the PP-JP is thus demanding basic democracy.

Korea (South): Sven provides the data about the party as written in the wiki. They are also struggling a bit with the name. They provided some slogans which states their position.

11:28 - Presentation of applicants as observer member

Berlin: A person was expected. Postponed.

Young Pirates (Ung Pirat, SE): A person was expected. Postponed.

Best Party Iceland: Sven provides the keydata as written in the wiki: Humanity, culture, nature and peace are the cores. They are the ruling party in Reykjavik

Tyrol: Sent in a video which is shown.

  • It becomes clear that Berlin won't be presented directly by a person.

Sweden: Anna Troberg turns in via a video connection. She speaks about the expectations and the intent of PP-SE to follow the work of PPI.

Young Pirates (Ung Pirat, SE): It becomes clear that Ung Pirat won't be presented directly by a person. Sven presents the keydata about Ung Pirat.

Berlin: Sven presents the keydata about the party as written in the wiki.

La Rioja: Sven presents the keydata about the party as written in the wiki.

11:42 - Afternoon program

  • Gregory presents the afternoon program: There will be a meal break after the program until 13:00 (Kazan local time). There will be presentations in an unconference/open space/barcamp style by remote and IRL delegates. The present are asked to propose their barcamp suggestions.
  • Lora Iakovleva (PP-RU) will present 3 to 4 topics, e.g. about broadening the platform.
  • Alexis Roussel (PP-CH) will present the strategy of the Pirate Party Switzerland.
  • Jens Stomber (PP-DE) would like to record video clips, as well as the crypto party movement.
  • Sven Clement (PP-LU) will talk about the statute changes.
  • Gregory Engels will talk about changes in democracy worldwide.
  • Rick Falkvinge will provide a talk.

The proposals are pinned on a whiteboard and are open for additions for remote and IRL delegates.

The morning block is closed at 11:53

  • Some additional info concerning the lunch is provided by the host

Saturday, April 20, 2013 afternoon block

13:00 - Statute change proposal discussions (room B)

  • Sven Clement explains the concept: This is a discussion on the handed in statute proposals. There will be no formal decisions, but the intent is that as most members can participate as possible. The votes on the proposals will be carried out tomorrow, Sunday.

The planned start of 13:00 gets stalled until 14:05 as there were problems with the video stream.

Note by the editor: according to the statutes statute changes (SAPs) require a two thirds majority, motions a simple majority. In this informal voting block the chair ignored votes that were casted as abstention to evaluate the outcome (see #SAP-11, #SAP-24, #SAP-8, #SAP-23).

Multiple members per territory

This paragraph concerns the statute proposals #SAP-1a, #SAP-1b, #SAP-2a, #SAP-2b, #SAP-19, #SAP-25, #SAP-29 and #SAP-32

  • Sven Clement puts forward the discussion what is the opinion of the people present
  • PP-CH is generally against multiple members per country, but could agree to certain exceptions if there are severe political problems in that region.
  • PP-BR says the problem with Catalonia/Spain might arise anywhere and that they are formally opposed.
  • PP-LU is formally opposed to have multiple ordinary members per country, as they think the best way is cooperation and the easiest way to achieve this is to "enforce" federations or confederations in that way.
  • PP-FR does neither want to have multiple ordinary members per souvereign state. France proposes to fix the problem until to the next year in order to let those who are affected
  • PP-AU prefers most #SAP-19 including amendment b (the Czech proposal, which includes the "souvereign state" rule by France, but goes further).
  • Denis suggest to vote independently on the proposals to see whether a statute amendment could be accepted and then to see whether there are conflicts.

There is an argument with remote and IRL delegates that the remote participation is not as it should be for a party who is promoting technology. It eventually the present try to resolve it by using phone calls with loudspeaker.

  • PP-CAT says that they are pushing for a confederation, as long as the PP-ES does not represent the whole of the pirates in Spain, because they are not federated. No party in Spain can talk in the name of the others, not even Partido Pirata. Catalonia is willing to solve the situation in a proper way and they are willing to work together with all parties including Spain PP.
  • PP-BA asks if they can already vote.
    • Sven explains that there is no formal vote today and Bosnia-Herzegowina can vote tomorrow by proxy.
  • Maxime PP-FR: The point what Catalonia brings forward is probably that the regulation of federations should also apply to confederations.

Sven proposes now to try an informal vote on all proposals (#SAP-1a, #SAP-1b, #SAP-2a, #SAP-2b, #SAP-19, #SAP-25, #SAP-29, #SAP-32).

The remote delegates have 14:44 till 14:47 to cast votes by mail, then the IRL delegates will raise the cards (this delay rule is in order to avoid tactical voting)

Informal vote on #SAP-1a
Country AU BR CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote No No Yes No No No No Yes
Result 6 YES, 2 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-1a is informally rejected


Informal vote on #SAP-1b
Country AU BR CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote No No Yes No No No No Yes
Result 6 YES, 2 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-1b is informally rejected


  • Fabricio (PP-DE) notifies that Portugal sent a procedural motion.
  • There is an argument by Sven that there is no possibility to do this. The motion has to be send in by e-mail to the chair.


Informal vote on #SAP-2a
Country AU CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote No Yes Yes Abs Yes No No
Result 3 YES, 3 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-2a is informally rejected


Informal vote on #SAP-2b
Country AU CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote Yes Yes No No No No No
Result 2 YES, 5 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-2b is informally rejected


Informal vote on #SAP-19
Country AU CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote Yes Yes Yes Abs No No Yes
Result 4 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-19 is informally rejected


Informal vote on #SAP-25
Country AU CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote Yes Abs No Abs No No Abs
Result 1 YES, 3 NO, 3 ABS => #SAP-25 is informally rejected


Informal vote on #SAP-29
Country AU CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote No Abs No Yes Yes No Abs
Result 2 YES, 3 NO, 2 ABS => #SAP-29 is informally rejected


Informal vote on #SAP-32
Country AU CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote Abs No Yes Yes Yes No Abs
Result 3 YES, 2 NO, 2 ABS => #SAP-32 is informally rejected


Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-19a
Country AU CAT CH FR LU RU
Vote Abs Yes Yes Abs Yes No
Result 3 YES, 1 NO, 2 ABS => #SAP-19a is informally accepted


Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-19b
Country AU CAT CH FR LU RU
Vote Yes Yes Yes Abs Yes Yes
Result 5 YES, 0 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-19b is informally accepted
  • Maxime: Everyone seems to be in favour of replacing the word in the statutes with "sovereign state". There is a stance from certain members that "confederation" should be added, if "federation" is there. It would be possible to draw a consolidated version based on this. I would be willing to draft this one up.
  • Sven asks if this would be acceptable.
  • There is no opposition.

Regarding Court of Arbitration

This paragraph concerns the statute proposals #SAP-11, #SAP-17, #SAP-26 and #SAP-31

  • Sven: There are certain motion that would change the underlying law to Swiss law for the CoA (which is e.g. used in international sports and available in many languages) [SAP-17, SAP-31], one concerning changing the court into a council [SAP-26], one concerning adding investigators [SAP-11].
  • Stefan: PP-CH objects SAP-11 as we don't want to have investigators that interfere with issues of the parties and second because it's not part of the power of a court.
  • Marc: How do you wanna make sure that the underlying facts are true then?
  • Stefan: We think the parties in the case should bring forward the arguments to the court. Normally you bring all the evidence with your arguments to the court.
  • Maxime: The proposal amendment is exactly in order to alleviate the problem where parties file issues, but do not provide sufficient data to judge on the data. Thus it's really better to have investigators in order to help filing the case, as at the moment it doesn't really work well.
  • Sven: I remember the case in Prague, where we discussed whether there was corruption among the board concerning the place. In that case the complainant that there exist written documents that say that this GA should not take place in Europe. In that case we just had two sides, where the question was which side to trust.

A procedural joint motion was handed in by remote delegates. The meeting chaired asked for 10 minutes to evaluate it.

10 minutes break till 16:00

The meeting chair answered to the joint by mail and summarizes the reply. The response in full reads

Dear motioneers,

Thank you for your proposals.

The Chair decided as follows:
Joint procedural Motions:
>1) Repeating of the original vote to assess quorum
This is not a valid procedural motion, thus rejected by RoP.

>2) Vote to revoke a decision to declare that the GA has started.
This decision has been taken this morning. The RoP (7.3.3. m) say that
such a motion can only be raised immediately after the decision is
announced, thus also rejected by RoP.

>3) Motion to reassess the quorum.
As we currently are in an informal part of the conference the assembly
is de facto in recess. We are going to reassess the quorum anyway
tomorrow morning when we resume the conference. Nonetheless, this
changes nothing on the de jure situation that we are in an informal
part, because the only result could be that we are in recess.

>4) Postpone indefinitely motions (MOP-1, MOP-2)
This will be tabled immediately.

>5) Table the discussion on agenda as the next point on the agenda
This will be tabled for tomorrow morning 10 o'clock Kazan time (UTC+4)
as then the assembly will resume.

Kind regards,
Sven Clement
Denis Simonet
  • Marc proposes to change the word for people assisting the court (now: "investigators") into something else such as "expert".
  • A discussion inbetween Marc and Maxime arises.
  • Sven invites the remote delegate to come up with proposals as well.
  • Sven asks whether #SAP-31 would be also acceptable for PP-CH instead of #SAP-17.
  • Stefan: The main difference is that the court is either formed by a person of each member, whereas in #SAP-31 they get elected by the GA. The reason is that the members are more capable to tell who could be a good judge from among their pirates.
  • Sven: There is proposal #SAP-31a by PP-CZ. Would that change anything concerning for PP-CH?
  • Stefan: We would accept #SAP-31 with #SAP-31a as a replacement for our #SAP-17 and withdraw it in that case.

The chair opens a vote at 16:11 till 16:16 on #SAP-31a

Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-31a
Country AU BA BR CAT CH FR LU RU
Vote Yes Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes
Result 6 YES, 2 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-31a is informally accepted
  • Stefan: We thus would withdraw #SAP-17 as #SAP-31 gets likely accepted

The chair opens a vote on #SAP-11, #SAP-26, #SAP-31, at 16:18 till 16:23

Informal vote on #SAP-11
Country AU BA BR CAT CH FR LU RU
Vote Yes Yes Yes No Abs Yes Yes Abs
Result 5 YES, 1 NO, 3 ABS => #SAP-11 is informally accepted


Informal vote on #SAP-26
Country AU BA BR CAT CH FR LU RU
Vote Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Abs
Result 4 YES, 3 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-26 is informally accepted


Informal vote on #SAP-31
Country AU BA BR CAT CH FR LU RU
Vote Yes No Yes Abs Yes No Yes Yes
Result 5 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-31 is informally accepted
  • Maxime proposes a vote inbetween SAP-26 and SAP-31

The majority agrees that there should be a straw poll inbetween SAP-26 and SAP-31 as to which one is preferred

Informal vote on #SAP-26 vs #SAP-31
editor: detailed voting data not available, as it was to fast to note down
Result 5 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-31 is preferred

Technical small changes

This paragraph concerns the statute proposals #SAP-12, #SAP-13, #SAP-14, #SAP-18 and #SAP-22.

The chair summarizes the proposals:

  • #SAP-12 is about changing "juristic person" into "legal person"
  • #SAP-13 is about changing "three quarters" into "threequarters"
  • #SAP-14 is about changing "bear to" into "abide by"
  • #SAP-18 is combining SAP-12, SAP-13, SAP-14 plus clarifying that the ordinary members are the ones that could decide on the statute amendments
  • #SAP-22 is about adding regulations to clarify when statute amendments shall come into effect
  • #SAP-18a is combining SAP-18 and SAP-22 plus about explicitely clarifying that SAP-18 upon approval shall come into effect immediately

The chair proposes to vote on #SAP-18 and #SAP-18a, as when approved clearly the present can skip the discussion on #SAP-12, #SAP-13, #SAP-14 and #SAP-22.

Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-18a
Country AU BA BR CAT CH FR LU KZ RO RU
Vote Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Abs
Result 7 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-18a is informally accepted


Informal vote on #SAP-18
Country AU BA BR CAT CH FR LU KZ RO
Vote Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Result 8 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-18 is informally accepted

The chair notes that thus the votes on #SAP-12, #SAP-13, #SAP-14, #SAP-22 are not necessary as their intent appears to have a clear majority found.

Voting majorities and other mechanisms

This paragraph concerns the proposals #SAP-20, #SAP-20a, #SAP-30 and #SAP-30a.

The chair summarizes the proposals:

  • #SAP-20 would changes how the majority is calculated and removes the right for proxies / remote participation
  • #SAP-20a would ammend that it only comes only after the GA (i.e. that remote participation is still possible for this GA)
  • #SAP-30 has been withdrawn
  • #SAP-30a would clarify that statute proposals must be announced for extraordinary meetings. As #SAP-30 was withdrawn the chair handles #SAP-30a as a statute proposal on it's own (instead of a procedural motion)
Informal vote on #SAP-20
Country BR CAT CH FR LU RO
Vote Yes Yes No No Yes No
Result 3 YES, 3 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-20 is informally rejected


Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-20a
Country BR CAT CH FR LU RO
Vote Yes Yes Yes Abs Yes No
Result 4 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-20a would be informally accepted
  • It is suggested to add #SAP-20a directly to #SAP-20. However it becomes clear that the present would still informally reject such a motion.


Informal vote on #SAP-30a
Country BR CAT CH FR LU RO
Vote Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Result 4 YES, 2 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-30a is informally rejected

Board

This paragraph concerns the proposals #SAP-21 and #SAP-27.

  • Sven (chair): #SAP-27 is about changing to a board of representatives
  • Maxime: We like the idea of #SAP-27, but we're afraid that we loose activity as it will be hard to find members in each ordinary member.
  • Sven says that PP-LU shares this view; additionally that these people would be also responsible for a lot of other stuff and that there will be a lot of overhead if there are more than 7 people.
  • Sven (chair):#SAP-21 changes the composition of the board and simplify it, eleminating alternative members and changing wordings.
Informal vote on #SAP-21
Country AU BR CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote No No Yes Yes No No No No
Result 2 YES, 6 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-21 is informally rejected

Informal vote Proposal SAP-27 3 YES (AU, BR, RU) 5 NO (CAT, CH, FR, RO, LU) 0 ABSTENTION

Informal vote on #SAP-27
Country AU BR CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote Yes Yes No No No No No Yes
Result 3 YES, 5 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-27 is informally rejected

Adoption of e-Democracy, conflicting motions, public votes

This paragraph concerns the proposals #SAP-24, #SAP-24a, #SAP-24b and #SAP-28.

  • Sven (chair):#SAP-24 creates a permanent online e-democracy system instead of a postal referendum. Issued and initiatives can be raised to the board. Anyone outside still has to submit to the GA.
  • PP-LU seems to be strongly against it, as computers don't work out
  • PP-BR mentions that this is the future

The chair summarizes further:

    1. SAP-24a removes the point of competing motions
    2. SAP-24b add that there can be a permanent GA
  • Sven (chair):#SAP-28 is about making votes public
  • PP-LU and PP-FR express their support as there is a responsibility to pirates as delegates
Informal vote on #SAP-24
Country AU BR CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote Yes Yes Yes Abs No No No Yes
Result 4 YES, 3 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-24 is informally rejected


Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-24a
Country AU BR CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote No Yes Abs Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Result 5 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-24a would be informally accepted


Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-24b
Country AU BR CH FR LU RO RU
Vote No Yes Yes Abs Yes No Yes
Result 4 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-24b would be informally accepted
  1. SAP-24 is recounted due to request
Recount informal vote on #SAP-24
Country AU BR CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote Yes Yes Yes Abs No Abs No Yes
Result 4 YES, 2 NO, 2 ABS => #SAP-24 is informally accepted


Informal vote on #SAP-28
Country AU BR CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Abs
Result 6 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-28 is informally accepted

Human Rights, balance privacy vs transparency, annual goals

This paragraph concerns the proposals #SAP-8, #SAP-9 and #SAP-23.

On request by the current minute keeper (Pat Mächler), Marc Tholl is appointed as the intermediate minute keeper by the meeting chair Sven Clement

  • The chair shortly summarizes the proposals and the votes are casted.
Informal vote on #SAP-8
Country AU BR CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Abs
Result 5 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-8 is informally accepted


Informal vote on #SAP-9
Country AU BR CH FR LU RO RU
Vote Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Abs
Result 4 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-9 is informally accepted


Informal vote on #SAP-23
Country AU BR CAT CH FR LU RO RU
Vote Yes Abs Yes Yes Yes Yes No No
Result 5 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-23 is informally accepted

Sunday, April 21, 2013 morning block

10:00 - Opening

Due to technical problems and a missing number of remote delegates the start was postponed to 11:00.

The meeting is chaired again by Sven Clement and Denis Simonet, the minutes are kept again by Pat Mächler.

Meeting opened by Sven Clement at 11:00

10 ordinary members are present, thus the necessary quorum is reached.

The chair states that

  • present with IRL delegates are CH, DE, FR, LU, RU.
  • present with remote delegates are AU, CAT, ES, PT, UK.
  • CA is not attending but wants to provide a message to the GA which is read by the chair: CA is criticizing the way PPI works as an organization and on the organizational level of conferences.
  • The chair asks whether anyone wants to discuss the agenda of today, before going on with the proceedings. The remotes are granted 3 minutes.
  • A German delegate states that there is a procedural motion, which is due to be discussed.
  • On question it is noted that the agenda is published in the wiki.
  • The chair notes that there was another procedural motion that is interpreted by the meeting chair as moving MOP-1 and MOP-2 at the end of the agenda. There is no opposition, thus the motion passed.

PP-KZ is joining the meeting as remote delegate. 11 ordinary members are present.

  • AU handed in a procedural motion, that the statute amendments shall be discussed before the admittance of new members. There is no opposition, thus the motion passed.
  • DE handed in a procedural motion (mentioned above) that remote participants are given the opportunity to give remote delegates a voice by putting Mumble on loudspeaker. The meeting chair notes that this has now been setup for today, thus no vote is needed. Remote delegates shall signal their proxy that they want to have a voice statement.

PP-BE is joining the meeting as remote delegate. 12 ordinary members are present.

Statute amendments

  • The chair notes that there was a lengthy block where members have been invited to where the statute amendments where discussed in detail. Furthermore a spreadsheet was published in order to provide preliminary votes on statute amendments.
  • Poland asks whether they are accredited.
  • The chair notes that they are not a member yet and can be accredited afterwards.

PP-CZ is joining the meeting as remote delegate. 13 ordinary members are present.

  • Muriel from PP-CAT provided a message, which might due to be read when discussing #SAP-23.

The chair summarizes the results from yesterday and recites the preliminary votes in the GoogleForms spreadsheet (which are congruent to the results from the informal votes in the block yesterday) https://docs.google.com/a/pp-international.net/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AuBWp4Spq3n0dHNtY2xOUFpHVFNqMTg3TDV5eHJwSFE#gid=0

  • #SAP-1a rejected
  • #SAP-1b rejected
  • #SAP-2a rejected
  • #SAP-2b accepted
  • #SAP-8 accepted
  • #SAP-9 rejected
  • #SAP-11 accepted
  • #SAP-12 accepted
  • #SAP-13 accepted
  • #SAP-14 accepted
  • #SAP-17 rejected alltogether
  • #SAP-18 and SAP-18a accepted
  • #SAP-19 accepted
  • #SAP-19a rejected
  • #SAP-19b accepted
  • #SAP-19-motion rejected
  • #SAP-20 rejected
  • #SAP-20-a accepted
  • #SAP-21 rejected
  • #SAP-22 accepted
  • #SAP-23 accepted
  • #SAP-24 accepted, as well as #SAP-24a and #SAP-24b
  • #SAP-25 rejected
  • #SAP-26 rejected
  • #SAP-27 rejected
  • #SAP-28 accepted
  • #SAP-29 rejected
  • #SAP-30 rejected
  • #SAP-31 rejected
  • #SAP-32 rejected
  • The present are asked if they want to build the agenda based on this.
  • The chair notes that PP-CAT wants to have their statement read. The statement reads
We would like to propose a motion to change SAP-2a before it is voted. 
As you can see in the reasoning the main goal of this motion was to change "Federation" by "Federation or Confederation" the rest was how we thought the whole paragraph should end up coherently with the other proposals we sent, but it was not the main point of this SAP.
Blame it on not having much experience writing amendments back then.
I tried to express this yesterday during the meeting when Maxime was talking about it but I'm not sure it was conveyed to the people in the room.
Is it still possible to change the proposal so that the only effective change is that one ("Federation or Confederation" instead of just "Federation")?

Vote on basing the agenda on the preliminary votes (DUE TO BE COMPLETED BY DATA OF SVEN! SORRY TOO FAST...) 5 YES () 2 NO (RU, DE) 3 ABS (FR) => The motion gets passed.

#SAP-33 (regulations on number of ordinary members per country)

Maxime: There was the discussion that it should be one ordinary member per sovereign state and that there shall be a split in a confederation (or federation) if necessary if there are multiple groups. We thus put forward a new proposal which includes all elements that were in favour at the discussion block yesterday. It is a better balance amendment, please surpport to have a more clear statutes.

The new proposal SAP-33 reads:

I. Change IV. Ordinary Members(2) into:

2) There can be only one Ordinary Member per country multiple Ordinary Members per sovereign state. In this case, the voting power of this sovereign state is split between these Members''.

II. Change VI. Multiple applicants from one country into: VI. Multiple applicants from one country sovereign state Only one Organization from any one country can be recognized for Ordinary Membership in Pirate Parties International. A National Pirate Organization may consist of more than one Pirate Party participating in

    • (1) If there are multiple applicants for Ordinary Membership status, they are encouraged to join together into'' a Federation or Confederation'' based on the common Pirate purpose. It is the responsibility of each Federation or Confederation'' to ensure that all its constituent Associations meet the requirements of these statutes.
    • (2) If a Federation or Confederation cannot be agreed on, the voting power of this state is split between these Members. The spliting method is, in order of preference :
      • a) consensus between all Ordinary Members of this sovereign state ;
      • b) compromise between all Ordinary Members of this sovereign state, with the help of a Registered Moderator from the Court of Arbitration ;
      • c) decision by the Court of Arbitraton within the limits contained in proposals given by Ordinary Members from the sovereign state.
    • (3) As long as none of the prefered methods comes into action, the voting power of the sovereign state is split equally between its Ordinary Members.

III. Change IX. General Assembly(3) into: (3) The General Assembly decides with the majority of the votes, one vote per Member sovereign state that has at least one Ordinary Member''.

IV. Change IX. General Assembly(5) into: (5) The physical or remote presence of one third of the Ordinary Members gathering one third of the total voting power'' shall constitute a quorum.

V. Change XI. Voting(1) into: (1) Each sovereign state with at least one'' Ordinary Member shall have one vote and resolutions shall be taken by a simple majority of the sum of the votes of the Ordinary'' Members present or represented and voting. In the event of a tie, the motion is defeated.

VI. Change XIa. Revocation(1) into: (1) At any time, a fifth of the Ordinary MembersOrdinary Members wielding at least a fifth of the voting power'' can initiate the revocation of a PPI officer by asking calling upon'' the Court of Arbitration. The Court of Arbitration can reject the revocation request if it is not'' supported by less than a fifth enough'' of the Ordinary Members, if an election for the seat took place less than a month ago or will take place within a month, or another revocation process of the same PPI officer is already in progress.

VII. Change XX. Amendments(1) into: (1) This These'' Statutes can only be amended by a vote of at least two thirds of the voting power of the''attending Ordinary'' Members of the General Assembly, on a regular or extraordinary meeting called for this purpose''.

VII: Change XXI. Liquidation(1) into: (1) The organization can only be dissolved by a vote of at least two thirds of the total voting power of the Ordinary'' Members of the General Assembly, on an extraordinary meeting called for this purpose only.

Temporary disposition

This amendement will enter into effect immediately for new Ordinary Members, but for the Ordinary Members that belonged to the same sovereign state before this General Assembly opening, they will each one keep their voting power until the closing of the conference.

Sven asks whether there are futher statements for SAP-33; there are none. The vote on SAP-33 is opened.

Special statement from PPI Borad concerning the non-accreditation of PP-NL: Sven mentions that there was a huge amount of confusion with the accreditation of Samir Allioui and Rodger XXX of PP-NL, as the vice-president and president sent a message just before the GA claimed are not in a position to represent PP-NL at the GA. Shortly after a second mail was recieved by secretary general of PP-NL, which claimed that the vice-president and the president had no say in international matter within PP-NL and thus Samir and Rodger are valid delegates of PPNL. Due to the conflicting signals and the short time span lead to the decision from meeting chair that the accreditition of PPNL is not accepted.

Vote on SAP-33 8 Yes (CH, LU, PT, FR, KZ, CAT, AU, DE) 1 No (RU) 1 Abstention (UK) => SAP-33 gets passed.

PP-BR is joining the meeting IRL. There are now 14 ordinary member present.

PP-CR is joining the meeting as remote delegate. There are now 15 ordinary member present.

Sven notes that there was a request for invalidation by mail of the GA by PP-NL (due to non-accrediation).

MOP-4 (proposal on setting the membership fee)

The Swiss delegation exchanges their original MOP-4 by a new one. The new motion is published in a pastebin as a short workaround. ( http://pastebin.com/7G5XbwZ6 )

The motion reads: The Pirate Party Switzerland moves to modify its or the membership fee as follows: 1. Each ordinary member shall pay to the PPI Headquarters the following membership fee: a) 30 EUR base fee; b) plus 15 EUR if the member is registered in whatever form required in that country; c) plus 15 EUR if the member has run in any election; d) plus 250 EUR per supranational or national member of parliament within their membership; e) plus 50 EUR per regional member of parliament within their membership; f ) plus 10 EUR per local member of parliament within their membership. 2. If any political and financial benefits originating from a member of parliament are predominantly consumed by another political parties said member of parliament is not counted in the calculation of the membership fee. 3. If any political and financial benefits originating from a member of parliament are equally split with other political parties said member of parliament is counted only with the respective fraction in the calculation of the membership fee. 4. Each observer member shall pay to the PPI Headquarters half the amount due if it were an ordinary member unless said observer member is part of an ordinary member or a paying observer member. 5. The membership fee is due at the June 30, 2013. 6. The money originating from the membership fee must be spent in accordance with the budget accepted by the General Assembly. 7. The PPI board shall present full accounting data on the collection and expenditure of the money originating from the membership to the next ordinary General Assembly. 8. The lay auditors elected by the General Assembly shall verify the correctness of the accounting data and present their report to the next ordinary General Assembly.

  • UK asks whether there is a budget for PPI.
  • Gregory tells about the financial situation concerning the old bank account in Brussels; access is not possible until the new statutes of PPI-HQ are published. Within the PPI board there was a first proposal that was approved which said that it will be mostly spent to organize PPI GAs and events. The fee proposal of PPCH does not change this financial budget approved by the PPI board. The board intends to publish a budget to the GA.
  • CAT intends to motion to change so that observer members do not have to pay.
  • Sven replies that CAT would not have to pay if the form a federation and that they shall submit the motion by mail
  • alios (DE) shall join on Mumble in order to provide a statement by the loudspeaker. The power fuse seems to be killed by the process. The sound system is not working and the projector is also out for some time. The meeting is temporarily halted.
  • The meeting chair opens the lunch till 13:00 local Kazan time ("13:00 sharp" due to time constraints)

Sunday, April 21, 2013 afternoon block

13:05 - Sunday Afternoon

Meeting reopened at 13:05 Kazan local time.

Topic "member fee" continued

  • DE says that they would support both motions
  • CAT says that they will vote against until observer members don't have to pay.
  • TN states that they can't pay in Euros.
  • Sven notes that from his POV it's sufficent to pay the fee in any currency at the exchange rate into Euros at the day of decision making (i.e. in this case today, April 21st 2013)

The vote for the fee is opened. CAT opposes as their motion (observer members shall not pay the fee) was not taken into account. Sven closes and voids the current vote.

The vote on the motion of CAT to exempt observer members is cast (YES means "observer members do not pay")

Vote on exempting observer members from the proposed fee as provided by mail (CAT) wich proposal is this ? please MOP Number??? 4 Yes (PT, AU, DE, CAT) 4 No (CH, LU, BR, KZ) 3 Abstention (FR, RU, UK) => Tie. According to the statutes the motion is defeated

Vote on annual fees according to new proposal in pastebin (CH) wich proposal is this ? please MOP Number???

5 Yes (RU, LU, CH, BR, DE) 3 No (UK, FR, CAT) 0 Abstention => Proposal for annual fee passed

Acceptance of new members

  • Gregory: The board is obliged to provide a recommendation to the GA according to the statutes. This was discussed in the last PPI board meeting. Based on the information that was provided the board states
    • there were 14 organizations that filed an application for ordinary members before the deadline
    • for all of the applications except Japan and Korea the board recommends acceptance
    • for Japan and Korea the board was unable to decide on the issue as up to the date where the recommendation was done not enough information was provided then by the applicants. This does not mean that the board recommend to reject the applicants.
    • there were 7 organizations that filed an application for observer members before the deadline
    • for all of the applications as of observer members the board recommends acceptance
    • the application for Belarus was changed by agreement in Belarus in favour of letting Pirate’s Center of Belarus become a member (they PP-BY is part of that); thus there is only one application as ordinary member by the Pirate’s Center of Belarus
  • Maxime (FR) asks whether organization that applied as ordinary and are turned down, can instead be granted to become observer members
  • Sven: Yes, the current members can file a motion to have them accepted as observer members, in case that they get defeated as ordinary members
  • Question from PPCH: concerning Belarus, which is the valid package of documents for the application of Belarus now?
  • Mikhail: the second set is the correct one.

There is a procedural motion by Portugal to recount the vote on membership fees. The meeting chair opens the vote on member fees again.

MOP-4 revisited (proposal on setting the membership fee)

New vote on annual fees as provided by pastebin (CH) where is PPBE vote ?? 5 Yes (RU, LU, CH, KZ, DE) 6 No (AU, BR,PT, UK, FR, CAT) 0 Abstention => The motion is defeated

Chair is astonished by situation. He insists to note that should not be the case that recounts are used for changing the vote results as only purpose.

Acceptance of new members continued

PP-CH propose that newly approved members are only becoming a member today if they are present, otherwise tomorrow. The vote is cast.

9 Yes (FR, LU, CH, KZ, AU, DE, CAT, RU, PT) where is PPBE vote ?? 1 No (BR) 1 Abstention (UK) => The motion is accepted

  • Fabrizio (PP-DE) (via mumble): Belgium is not able to give their vote as their proxies do not respond.
  • Sven: It's up to the parties to arrange a common protocoll for exchange. If that doesn't work the chair can act on that. As to our knowledge the proxy of Belgium does respond.
  • Proxy: I think the problem is the lagging with Skype, so sometimes the answer arrives after the vote is closed; that happened with the membership fee.
  • Sven: Then we will grant a timeframe of 4 minutes.

PP-RU motions to have the vote on all applicants en bloc. The vote on the motion is cast.

vote on block membership of all applicants (RU) 7 Yes (PT, KZ, BR, LU, DE, RU, UK) 4 No (CAT, AU, FR, CH) 0 Abstention => The motion is not accepted as the 2/3 majority is not met for accepting new members. The chair will cast new votes for each member separately.

Denis takes the lead of the meeting chair and Sven takes the meeting chair assistance position

Single votes on ordinary members

PP Latvia DE LU BR CH AU RU UK FR 0

Slovaquia CH LU DE RU UK BR KZ AUS FR CAT

Ukraine CH LU BR AUS RU UK DE FR

BiH

CH LU BR AUS KZ CAT DE RU UK 0 abs FR

Estonia

CH LU BR CAT DE BR FR

Belarus CH LU BR DE AU FR CAT


Tunisia AU BE LU FR CH CAT KZ DE RU UK 0 0

Israel CHLUBRDE RU UK CAT AU FR

Hungary CH LU AU DE RU UK BR CAT 0 ABS

ICELAND CH FR LU BR KZ AUS CAT DE UK RU

TUrkey CH LU BR AU CAT DE RU UK KZ 0 ABS

Poland ch LU PT BR KZ CAT DE UK RU FR

Japan KZ FR AU

Corea CH LU BR PT DE RU UK KZ FR

Inbetween there were discussions concerning whether Belgium had the possibility to vote again. The proxy recieved the spreadsheet with the votes on the statute amendments, but which are not a topic anymore.

Votes on observer members

Denis: Does anyone object to vote on them en bloc? France does object; thus the votes are cast separately

BERLIN CH LU BR AUS CAT DE RU UK KZ 0 0

Young pirates of sweden (Ung Pirat) CH LU BR AU PT FR DE RU UK KZ 0 0

Best party of iceliand CH LU BR PT AUS KZ DE RU UK FR 0

PPSweden

CH LU BR AUS CAT GER FR PT RU UK KZ

Tyrol LU CH FR BR PT GER CAT RU UK KZ AUS

Rioja

CH LU BR PT GER CAT RU UK AU


14:20 break till 14:30 announced so the meeting chair can reorder things


14:35 - Report of board members

  • Lola Voronina's report is read aloud by Denis. Lola expresses her frustration with certain developments with pirates, which lead her to stop continuing her work in December. Nevertheless she is grateful for the constructive pirates and aspects.
  • Gregory reads his report. It is split into a political and an internal part. Gregory presents several lobbying efforts at WIPO, UNESO and other international organizations; PPI is now also listed as official lobbying organization at the EU. Support was granted to the EFF-campaign against including DRM in HTML standards. Iceland and Israel had elections. The intent to setup an online GA met several hurdles and once setup did not recieve the necessary quorum. He closes with an outlook about the future tasks for the pirate movement. The report will be sent out to pp-leaders.
  • Jelena said she would write up a report.
  • Denis provides a report on his work. Firstly he concentrated on building up a press team, which was run on a minimum level as it became obvious that there was not a huge amount of participation. Secondly he invested time into becoming a WIPO member, which was not accepted yet; however Denis got the opportunity to be a visitor with KEI.
  • Denis asks whether the reports by Ed and Nuno shall be read. No one speaks up.
  • Travis did not provide a report (???)


Board elections

Sven takes over the lead of the meeting again

http://wiki.pp-international.net/PPI_Conference_2013/Board_candidatures

Co-Chairpersons (2 positions)

Sven lists the co-chairperson candidates

  • Bc. Vojtěch Pikal (sponsored by CZ)
  • Gregory Engels (sponsored by DE)
  • Thijs Markus 'Ikke' (sponsored by PT)

Presentation of candidates

  • Sven reads aloud the text Pikals wrote in the wiki, as he is not available atm and appears not to be represented by someone.
  • Gregory presents himself.
  • Sven reads aloud the text Thijs wrote in the wiki, as he is not available atm and appears not to be represented by someone.

Sven explains the voting procedure. The vote is cast and counted.

Coffee break till 15:45


Results (all candidates were electable by the number of votes recieved)

  • Bc. Vojtěch Pikal (sponsored by CZ): 12 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS => ELECTED
  • Gregory Engels (sponsored by DE): 9 YES, 4 NO, 1 ABS => ELECTED
  • Thijs Markus 'Ikke' (sponsored by PT): 7 YES, 5 NO, 2ABS

Voting details

  • JP: yes on all
  • PT: yes on all
  • TR: yes on all
  • FR: no on Pikal and Thijs, yes on Gregory
  • IL: yes on all
  • KZ: yes on Pikal and Gregory, no on Thijs
  • CH: yes on Pikal and Gregory, no on Thijs
  • UK: abstention on all
  • PL: yes on Pikal and Thijs, no on Gregory
  • RU: yes on Pikal and Gregory, no on Thijs
  • LU: yes on Pikal and Gregory, no on Thijs
  • DE: yes on Pikal, no on Gregory, abstention on Thijs
  • BR: yes on Pikal and Thijs, no on Gregory
  • BE: yes on Pikal and Thijs, no on Gregory
  • AU: was handed in too late, thus not considered (was: yes on Pikal, no on Gregory and Thijs)
  • BY: was handed in too late, thus not considered (was: yes on all)
  • CAT: was handed in too late, thus not considered (was: yes on Pikal, no on Gregory and Thijs

Other board members (5 positions)

Denis will not do the chair meeting assistance anymore as Denis will be a candidate; Alexis Roussel replaces him

Presentation of candidates

  • Gabdrakhmanov Azat (IRL presentation)
  • Denis 'SciFi' Simonet (IRL presentation)
  • Artem Libkind aka Llanowar (does not run anymore)
  • Thomas Gaul (text read by Sven)
  • Marc Tholl (IRL presentation)
  • Nuno Cardoso aka nonnu (text read by Sven)

Voting details (the candidate Artem was listed on the sheet, but did not run anymore; he was ignored in this statistic; i.e. "all" may mean sth different)

  • BR: yes on Denis and Nuno, no on rest
  • BE: yes on Nuno, no on rest
  • TR: yes on Azat, Thomas & Nuno, abstention on rest
  • PT: yes on Denis, Thomas & Nuno, no on rest
  • SR: yes on all
  • CH: yes on Denis, Thomas & Marc, no on rest
  • DE: yes on all
  • FR: yes on Denis, Thomas, Marc & Nuno, abstention on Azat
  • KZ: yes on all
  • IL: yes on all
  • RU: yes on all
  • LU: yes on all
  • UK: abstention on all
  • PL: yes on Azat, Marc & Nuno;
  • BY: yes on Azaz, Denis and Nuno, no on rest
  • AU: yes on Azat, Thomas & Marc, no on rest
  • CAT: yes on Azat, Denis, Thomas and Nuno, no on Marc
  • JP: yes on all

Alternate board members (4 positions)

Candidates:

  • Fabricio Do Canto (PP-DE)
  • Keith Goldstein (PP-IL)
  • Radoslaw Pietron (PP-PL)
  • Paul Bossu (PP BE)
  • Yasin Ayrin (PP-TR)
  • Jelena Jovanovic (PP-RS)

A vote is cast and counted

Results

  • Fabricio Do Canto (PP-DE): 12y, 4n
  • Keith Goldstein (PP-IL): 10y, 4n
  • Radoslaw Pietron (PP-PL): 13y, 2n
  • Paul Bossu (PP BE): 14y, 2n
  • Yasin Ayrin (PP-TR): 12y, 2n
  • Jelena Jovanovic (PP-RS): 15y, 2n
  • Market Gregorova (PP-CZ): 11y, 1n

3 candidates elected: Jelena (1st), Paul (2nd), Radoslaw (3rd) There is a tie between Fabricio da Canto (DE) and Yasin Airin (TR) for the fourth position


Voting details

  • RS: yes on Fabricio, Radoslaw, Paul & Jelena; no on rest
  • BR: yes on Fabricio, Keith, Paul, Yasin & Jelena; no on rest
  • TR: abstenstion on Radoslaw and Market; yes on rest
  • IL: yes on Keith and Jelena; abstention on rest
  • KZ: yes on all
  • PT: yes on Fabricio, Paul, Jelena & Market; no on rest
  • LU: yes on Keith, Radoslaw, Yasin & Jelena; abstention on Market; no on rest
  • UK: abstention on all
  • DE: yes on all
  • PL: yes on all
  • RU: yes on all
  • FR: yes on all
  • CH: no on Fabricio & Paul; yes on rest
  • JP: yes on all
  • BY: yes on Paul, Yasin, Jelena & Market; no on rest
  • AU: no on Keith and Jelena; yes on rest
  • CAT: yes on Radoslaw, Paul, Jelena & Market; no on Fabricio; abstention on rest
  • BE: yes on Fabricio, Radoslaw & Paul; abstention on rest


A second vote inbetween Fabricio and Aysin is cast

Aysin reaches the quorum and is elected with Fabricio fails the quorum with

CoA elections (3 to 7 positions)

Candidates:

  • Benjamin Siggel
  • Andrew Norton
  • Arturo Martínez
  • Keith Goldstein
  • Maxime Rouquet
  • Thomas Bruderer
  • Henrique Peer
  • Fabricio Do Canto

The vote is prepared

Motion: Pirate Movement is not sea piracy

A motion is filed by PP-RU: A resolution shall be supported that explains that Pirate Movement Ideology has nothing to do with sea piracy, which is the reason why the Ministry of Justice in Russia turned down the registration of PP-RU twice. The text is read IRL and will be sent to the delegates.

"We, the members of the Pirate Parties of the world, the members of Pirate Parties International, declare that democracy and the right for uniting are the most important values. Unfortunately, the members of pirate party of Russia do not have opportunity to officially create ts own party. Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation has already rejected in registration twice due to the fact that our state officials consider the word "pirat" in the meaning of sea bandits, robbing the marines. That is why Russian pirates do not have an opportunity to take part in the elections, that means that we do not posess the legal right to influence on shaping the russian legislature.

e call the ministry of justice of the Russian Federation upon the common sense and demand for admitting the reality. Pirate party of Russia does exist and is not binded with sea piracy. Piracy is an contemporary international political ideology of the extension of civil freedoms."

CoA elections (3 to 7 positions) continued

The vote is cast and counted

Results:

  • Benjamin Siggel
  • Andrew Norton
  • Arturo Martínez
  • Keith Goldstein
  • Maxime Rouquet
  • Thomas Bruderer
  • Henrique Peer
  • Fabricio Do Canto


Lay auditor elections (3 positions)

  • A vote is cast and counted.
Candidates Results
Patrick Mächler Elected
Sven Clement Elected
Arturo Martínez Not elected
Keith Goldstein Elected


The General Assembly of Pirate Parties International

Condemn all dictatorships and regimes which deny human rights.

Recognize that the need to strengthen participation in political processes and democracy in the world has become urgent. The attempt to pass important, far-reaching global treaties that have the potential to influence the lives of everyone on the planet has been attempted to get passed without any public consultation (so called Anti-Counterfeit Trade Agreement ACTA) make it evident that an early involvement of general public and parliaments in the international agenda setting process is urgently needed.

Notes that some supra-national organizations such as the European Union, the Pan-African Parliament, the Mercosur Community, the Arab League, the Council of Europe and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe include parliamentary assemblies as treaty organs in order to involve elected representatives in their work.

Takes note of the fact that no parliamentary body exists within the framework of the United Nations, the World Bank group, the International Monetary Fund or the World Trade Organization. We believe that the lack of parliamentary representation in these organizations strongly contributes to the international democratic deficit.

State support for the creation of a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA) as a parliamentary body within the UN system that is complementary to the UN General Assembly, calling for creating a body that is directly elected by earth's citizen.

Calls upon world governments to include the involvement of citizen in the practice of making large scoped far fetched decisions by utilizing general referendums

Appeal to legislators to introduce rules that would ease the process of the foundation of new political parties, to include the parties that do not have political representation in parliaments into the state funding regulations and to reduce or eliminate the barring clauses that is obstructing especially newly created parties."


-> motion passed. (with view abstentions)

Motion PP-ES "all ordinary membership application should be suspended at least for a period of 2(TWO) years until PPI has found a structure that would fit such a growing movement. Applicants countries should only be allowed as observers during that period"

All against, PP-UK abstain. -> motion defeated.

Closing words from the Meeting Chairman

Closing of the conference: 18:30 (local time)