Location: Fuglsangcentret in Fredericia, Denmark.
Present:
Ove Bejsnap, chairperson, Denmark, EDBU
Tiina Nummi-Södergren, Sweden, EBU
Serguei Sirotkine, Russia, EBU deafblind commision
Absence: Geir Jensen, Norway, EDBU
Rapporteur: Ilse Bellamy
Ove Bejsnap welcomed to the 3rd meeting in the Committee and informed that Geir Jensen had sent his apologies for absence.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren informed that she unfortunately had to discontinue the meeting tomorrow morning and leave early Sunday morning because of family reasons. She therefore suggested that today focused on items where she beneficially could give her point of view.
Ove Bejsnap agreed with Tiina Nummi-Södergren and would make sure the committee discussed the most important issues today. Serguei Sirotkine and he would discuss the practical tasks in relation with the conference in October, Sunday morning.
Everyone had received the agenda including practical information.
Ilse Bellamy shortly went through the programme for the meeting.
Hereafter the item was closed.
The agenda, which had been sent out, was approved.
Serguei Sirotkine wanted to have item 7 regarding public relations specified, though. Ove Bejsnap informed that he would like to discuss a strategy for how we can have the information regarding the conference distributed to people in Europe in the best possible way. We have to practice a more progressive information strategy.
Serguei Sirotkine thanked and was satisfied with the answer.
Serguei Sirotkine informed that he had thoroughly read the minutes and said that all important information said at the meeting were written in the minutes, and that it was very accurate and detailed. He recommended that the minutes be taken cognizance of and thereby approved.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren endorsed the comments of Serguei Sirotkine
Ove Bejsnap concluded that the minutes were approved.
Ove Bejsnap gave the floor to Serguei Sirotkine.
Serguei Sirotkine thanked and informed that the Deafblind Commission have their next meeting in July in Poland. The Commission have not met since July last year. In the meantime contact has been kept by e-mail. Serguei Sirotkine informed that he had sent a draft of the programme to the Committee a few days earlier. Everyone had recieved this by e-mail.
Serguei Sirotkine added that the programme was not completed as there is still a few uncertainties regarding some lecturers. The programme will be fine-tuned at the meeting today, and later completed by e-mail and on the next meeting in the Deafblind Commision in Warsaw, Poland.
Ove Bejsnap thought that the programme should be completed as soon as possible after the 1st of May and be sent out in September.
Ilse Bellamy recommended that the programme be finished as well as possible in April and sent out the end of April with a 2nd reminder for the conference. It is of great significance that persons interested can read a programme and from this become motivated to participate.
Ove Bejsnap took cognizance of Ilse Bellamy’s comment and recommended the Committee to follow her recommendation.
Ilse Bellamy added that the programme sent out for the EBU conference looked good and that it was almost finished. She recommended that the programme be accepted and used for sending out in one months time. Until then Serguei Sirotkine could try to get a final answer from the one lecturer who is lacking a confirmation of their participation and then inform the Committee about this.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren informed that EBU has discussed the conference at their board meeting. There was an agreement that the member countries should inform about the arrangement.
The EBU board agreed to print the invitation in their news letter. Tiina Nummi-Södergren recommended to follow Ilse Bellamy’s recommendation to send the programme out as soon as possible, also to the EBU board. The former invitation has been sent out to EBU member oragnizations, but the information work has to be more progressive, and the national blind organizations has to be requested to support the participation of deafblind persons at the conference. Tiina Nummi-Södergren thought that Serguei Sirotkine had come a long way with the preperations and commended him for his efforts.
Ove Bejsnap commended Serguei Sirotkine for his draft for the programme.
Serguei Sirotkine agreed to the issue that we should send out a 2nd reminder in April and enclose the programme. Therefore it was necessary to plan this 2nd reminder here at the meeting today. He realised that he as the chairperson of the Deafblind Commision had to work effectively in the near future to get everything in place.
The Committee agreed to take cognizance of the draft for the EBU deafblind conference, that has been sent out, and use it for sending out a 2nd reminder of the jint arrangement, which will be sent out in April. The secretariat in Denmark will work out the 2nd reminder including the programme and send this to the committee for approval before it officially will be send out.
Serguei Sirotkine wished to enlarge on the draft. He asked if the committee found the structure of the conference satisfying. Ove Bejsnap and Tiina Nummi-Södergren expressed that the structure was good. Serguei Sirotkine thanked for this comment.
Serguei Sirotkine drew attention to the timeschedule in the two periods of workshops. In the first period, the workshops will last one hour and 15 min. and in the second period it will only last 45 min. Ove Bejsnap thought this had no significance as the subjects during the second period of workshops were easier accessible and therefore it is not necessary to spend more than 45 min. on these. It is also a question of whether the person chairing the meeting should prioritate their time well.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren thought that the comment from Ove Bejsnap sounded reasonable. She had not noticed the difference at the two periods in the workshop earlier, but it is important that the participants have time to speak about the subjects.
Serguei Sirotkine thanked Ove Bejsnap and Tiina Nummi-Södergren for their comments and would take note of these.
He would again consider the division of subjects at the two workshop periods so as the easy subjects be spread at workshops of 45 min. duration. The presentation at the short workshops would therefore at the most last 10-15 min. At the longer workshops the presentation can at the most last 25 min.
At plenary sessions the speaker can at the most talk for 20 min. and hereafter there will be 20 min. for discussions. This Serguei Sirotkine will point out to the speakers through a seperate letter.
Maybe it is possible to extend the time for the small workshops on the second day.
Serguei Sirotkine asked if we should keep the plan the 19th of October and have one hour plenary session to use for a discussion of the workshop proceedings and for working out a draft for resolutions, or if we should take time from the plenary discussion and use this time to extend the short workshops?
Ove Bejsnap thought that it did not matter much if there was used more or less time on each subject. The most important is to fulfill all that has been planned. Therefore it is important to inform the speakers about their timeschedule, which should be followed accurately. Normally the first day is the most important because the participants often have many questions, but these can also be answered during the social gatherings, and on the second day everything will be more quiet.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren informed that when EBU is holding conferences it is different who is speaking during plenary sessions and during workshops.
Serguei Sirotkine would consider to change the subject the 19th of October at 4.50 pm - 5.50 pm, so it would treat “presentation of draft to resolutions”. Thus omit to discuss the contents of the workshops and plenary sessions.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren remarked that it would be good to have both subject included, but prioritate working out the resolution highest, and it there is time, give the participants the opportunity to express about the workshops and plenary sessions.
Serguei Sirotkine would consider Tiina Nummi-Södergren’s suggestion with the remark that the draft for resolutions is prioritated highest.
Serguei Sirotkine and Ove Bejsnap would continue the discussion regarding this subject, if necessary, tomorrow.
Serguei Sirotkine asked if it was a good idea that the Committee pointed out persons for the resolutions committee? This way we could prepare the persons for the work, and at the conference these persons could be officially elected for this work. This procedure can make the work more efficient, and the draft for the resolutions should be composed before the conference. Comments from the conference can be worked in the drafts.
Ove Bejsnap found it sensible to point out persons for the resolutions committee before the conference. He recommended Serguei Sirotkine, Stig Ohlson, and Lex Grandia, and possibly one more person.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren agreed to Serguei Sirotkine and Ove Bejsnap’s comments. She recommended that there be an native English-speaking person in the resolutions committee to ensure the wording is correct in English.
The second question from Serguei Sirotkine was whether we should arrange an exhibition of technical aids during the conference.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren asked if there was space enough for an exhibition? Would the exhibition means that some preferred to see that rather than participate in plenary sessions and workshops. EBU always raise these questions before they decide to arrange an exhibition. Often it is important to open the exhibition at certain times.
Ove Bejsnap informed that Fuglsangscentret has enough space for an exhibition. He agreed with Tiina Nummi-Södergren that there should be pre-set opening hours for the exhibition to avoid it having influence on the participation of the rest of the programme.
Serguei Sirotkine thanked for the comments and would take cognizance of these. He stressed that it would be interesting for the Eastern European participants to see what technical aid are available in Western Europe. We should be careful though, because the Eastern European countries will not have funds to buy these aids. Therefore there is also a political aspect, and maybe we should consider not to plan an exhibition.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren informed that if exhibitors are invited they should cover their costs themselves, as it is advertisement for them to exhibit products. There is also the angle that EDBU can take out a sponsorship with these companies. This EBU has done, and Tiina Nummi-Södergren will send information to the Committee about this system of sponsorship that EBU has. Sponsorship can also be entered after the conference and therefore is not neccesarily connected to an agreement about an exhibition.
Serguei Sirotkine thanked Tiina Nummi-Södergren for her good comment. He pointed out that we arrange a joint arrangement and therefore everyone can benefit from sponsorship.
Ove Bejsnap suggested that FDDB take on the responsibility of arranging an exhibition and enter into sponsorships, if any.
Serguei Sirotkine thought that the company from Italy which has developed the Braille Com machine also should be invited.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren would like to be informed which exhibitor would be chosen and she would like to be contact person between companies in Sweden, and also the before-mentioned company in Italy.
She needed to know the times for the exhibition and what expenses there were in connection with the exhibition, as well as who is the contact person for all exhibitors.
The Committee decided that FDDB co-ordinates an exhibition, and that the Committee members should send information to FDDB with information regarding relevant companies, which can exhibit technical aids. Ilse Bellamy was pointed out as co-ordinator for this task.
Serguei Sirotkine suggested that the Committee could hold a meeting with EBU deafblind commission in July, where they have already arranged a meeting. The purpose would be to get the last practical affairs in place.
Ove Bejsnap wanted to have the purpose specified more as he thought that this communication possibly could be done by e-mail. Furthermore, Denmark has not estimated such a meeting. Therefore the Danish board has to approve this expense first. July is a vacational month in Denmark and it could be difficult to get interpreters and guides. Serguei Sirotkine explained that the purpose should be to finish the planning of the joint arrangement. We could, together, discuss the programme. He understood the possible difficulties at holding such a meeting, among these the financial. Ove Bejsnap thanked for the specification and understood Serguei Sirotkine’s suggestion, and interpreted his wish as a wish for having safety and security that the conference will go off well.
Serguei Sirotkine thought a meeting could clarify a detailed organization of the conference,as well as clarifying the financial distribution of responsibilities. He said that Ove Bejsnap maybe was right, that we maybe could arrange everything by communicating by e-mail.
Ilse Bellamy suggested that the Danish works out an overview of the organization of the conference including the financial division of responsibilities, what help can be expected from this center, and from others in Denmark.
Serguei Sirotkine thanked for Ilse’s suggestion and would like to receive such an overview.
Ove Bejsnap would not exclude a meeting with the deafblind commission in July.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren thanked Serguei Sirotkine for his invitation for the Committee to meet with the deafblind commission in July, and thought we could decide to receive the invitation depending on how much we would cover on the meeting today, and thereafter make a quick decision whether we should meet in July. Furthermore it was also important to know Geir Jensen’s options for participating on the meeting in July. She suggested that we decide on the matter on e-mail within the next few days after this meeting.
The Committee agreed to first see the result of the meeting today and hereafter by e-mail, within the next few days, decide whether the Committee should meet with the EBU deafblind commission in July.
With these comments the item was closed.
Ove Bejsnap informed that the interim board had not been assembled since the last Committee meeting. There is still not clarity regarding the draft for the constitution. These discussion is done by e-mail now, and has to be finished mid-April.
In December 2002 FDDB sent out an invitation to those organizations and other deafblind people we are aware of in Europe.
So far there has been no enrolments to the arrangement, but Dimitar Parapanov from Bulgaria has shown interest, but lacks money to participate.
Ove Bejsnap will as soon as possible contact deafblind people in Europe personally to encourage them to participate.
Furthermore, Ove Bejsnap could inform that Stig Ohlson has created a homepage about the joint arrangement on www.edbu.org, as promised.
Ove Bejsnap had worked out a draft for the programme for the EDBU congress. This has not been sent out, and was instead looked through at the meeting.
A preliminary meeting is planned the 21st of October where the participants can ask questions to, for example, constitutions and the future work of EDBU.
It is important to give the participants the opportunity to give their opinion about the founding of EDBU. The 22nd of Ocober the official founding of EDBU will take place.
The 21st and 22nd of October speakers from outside will be invited. These will be:
Yannis Vardakastanis, President of EDF
John Wall, President of EBU
Knud Søndergaard, President of EUD
Stig Ohlson, President of WFDB
Tiina Nummi-Södergren asked how the board of EDBU will communicate?
Ove Bejsnap informed that the number of board members and areas of responsibility, will be decided upon from the constitution that will be chosen. Furthermore, a suggestion for an action plan for EDBU, has to be worked out. At the present time it cannot be determined how the board will communicate. It completely depends on the constallation.
Ove Bejsnap thought that it will take several years before EDBU can be well rooted and the work can be organized effectively and satisfactorily. We know from experience that many deafblind people cannot just travel to a board meeting because this is a great expense also regarding interpreters.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren recommended that the candidates are nominated by national organizations to have a financial warranty for the work. There are expenses for communication equiptment, secretary and interpreter aid as well as travel expenses. EBU also has the system that each country can chose to support candidates from other countries, if we find that they are best suited for the job. That gives an incredible strength in the European work.
Ove Bejsnap completely agreed with Tiina Nummi-Södergren. It is important with qualified candidates who can also get the neccesary financial support either from their own country’s organizations or from organizations in other countries.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren asked if it was likely that blind organizations will support deafblind candidates from countries which does not have their own deafblind organization.
Ove Bejsnap informed that there are several countries where the blind organization supports the deafblind work and therefore it is possible that these blind organizations also are willing to support deafblind persons if they will be candidates for the EDBU board. Therefore we must in well time ask suitable candidates if they will run and if they have the financial support from an organization.
Serguei Sirotkine asked if deafblind persons who are already in the board of WFDB can also be in the board of EDBU?
He also asked if deafblind who work in EBU can also be in the board of EDBU?
How do one solve the problem if suitable candidates are not supported by their national organizations?
Is it therefore possible to find suitable candidates for the board of EDBU?
There is a great difference in the Western and Eastern Europe and this complicates the possibilities of finding candidates. In Eastern Europe economy is the most acute problem.
Serguei Sirotkine expressed great worries about this problem.
Ove Bejsnap answered that he saw no prohibition what-so-ever to run for the EDBU board regardless if the person already is elected into WFDB’s board or in committees under EBU.
Regarding the financial factor, it is not new that there is a difference in East and West. Unfortunately it is a fact, but Ove Bejsnap hoped that it is possible to find suited candidates, and that these will receive the financial support they need.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren mentioned that deafblind people working in EBU committees can run for the EDBU board. EBU had the last few years estimated that it was a good idea to keep the deafblind commission, as it is still a fact that deafblind people in Europe still are attached to the blind organization. It has still not been determined how EBU will see upon a continuance of the deafblind commision in the future. EBU will definetely discuss this with the future EDBU board. The preservation of this committee should also be continuously assessed to ensure that such organs only continue if the respective organizations can benefit from it. The problem with the Eastern countries’ lack of finances compared to Western countries’ is something we are familiar with in EBU. The situation will change when EU is extended. Then more countries will share in the financial programme in EU.
Serguei Sirotkine informed that despite the official founding of EDBU the present deafblind commission under EBU expressed that there is still a need for support from EBU for activities for deafblind people. These activities should still be the responsibility of EBU several in the future. The deafblind commission has already let the EBU board know this. In the future it is possible that EDBU will be the organization which takes responsibility of these activities.
The above mentioned was just an orientation for the Committee members.
Ove Bejsnap thought that the financial problem could not be solved here today, but that we naturally should be attentive to this fact.
With the above mentioned remarks, the discussion was ended.
The Committee took cognizance of Ove Bejsnap’s briefing regarding the planning of the EDBU congress.
Ove Bejsnap informed that the Association of the Swedish Deafblind has donated SKR. 50.000, in December 2002, for the EDBU congress.
Ove Bejsnap informed that as soon as it will be the 1st of May, which is the deadline for enrolments, we can determine how many enrolments there are, and hereafter work out a final budget for the expenses.
Serguei Sirotkine will contact lecturers and ask whether they can cover their own cost for participation.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren informed that the EBU board had discussed the budget for the joint arrangement. Here it appeared that there is a deficit of DKK 100.000. It was agreed to inform the membership countries, and request them to support with funds for the arrangement. John Wall had expressed that it could be considered to divide the expenses.
Furthermore it was possible to offer grants for deafblind participants. In particular to participants from Eastern Europe.
Reportedly the Dutch delegate is working on obtaining funds for participants from the Netherlands. The next EBU board meeting is in the beginning of May.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren thought that in the second reminder for the conference it could be informed that if one had great interest in the conference, but did not have the financial funds present, one could inform this at enrolment.
The item was hereby closed.
Ove Bejsnap asked if it was a good idea to have media-coverage of the joint arrangement.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren thought that media-coverage with for example television is a good idea, especially because this year is the European Year of Disabilities and several newspapers and television stations write about this subject.
Serguei Sirotkine also thought that it was a good idea to have the mass media write about the arrangement and thereby spread information about deafblindness to the public. Whether Fredericia is a place where mass media can be attracted to is doubtful. Therefore a great pressure should be put on the mass media to attract them. Serguei Sirotkine recommended that Ove took the responsibility to attract the mass media.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren thought that journalists in smaller cities easier comes out to arrangements than in the capital. This has been the experience in Stockholm.
Ove Bejsnap concluded that it is not easy to catch the interest of the media, but that we should try to do our best.
Ove Bejsnap thought that a commercial value could be ensured for those organizations, foundations, etc., which support the arrangement. For example a list of the persons who has supported with funds could be put on the homepage.
Tiina Nummi-Södergren suggested that articles were given out at the conference, that could be publicised in the respective countries.
With these remarks and suggestions for the further work, the item was closed.
There were no further comments to this item.
Ove Bejsnap referred to an earlier suggestion from Serguei Sirotkine that the Committee could be gathered in July with the deafblind commission.
The Committee agreed to discuss this by e-mail in the next few days. Furthermore it was agreed to stay in close contact by e-mail.
Serguei Sirotkine informed that the deafblind commission is planning to hold a meeting the days before the conference.
Ove Bejsnap ascertained that the Committee had dealt with all items on the agenda the 22nd of March which meant that he and Serguei Sirotkine could use the 23rd of March for discussing more practical matters.
Ove Bejsnap thanked everyone for their engagement and for an effective meeting.
Enclosed:
Draft for the programme for the 5th EBU deafblind conference
Draft for the programme for the EDBU founding congress
Minutes of the meeting between Ove Bejsnap and Serguei Sirotkine the 23rd of March 2003
(2010-11-08)