The conference was opened by the Vice-President of European Alliance for Freedom, and Member of European Parliament, Philip Claeys, where he gave his view on the European political reality and the inability of the European establishment in dealing with the on-going, both political as well as financial crisis.
The most challenging part of the conference was the panel debate with young politicians coming from different political parties:
Gustav Kasselstrand - (Chairman of the Sweden Democratic Youth)
JulienRochedy - (National Director of Front Nationale Youth)
DietmarHolzfeind - (FPÖ EP Assistant)
Tom Van Grieken - (Chairman of VlaamsBelang Youth)
This panel debate opened a new path for cooperation of youth organizations with the similar political idea, and showed that critical debate is not a call for a closed Europe but for a Europe of cooperation. It was the perfect occasion to highlight the need for an alti-Europe not anti-Europe, since all the speakers agreed that this EU is not functioning properly and it is time to look for possible alternative solutions.
Holzfeind believes that is the right moment to stop the endless demand for money from Brussels, and to prove that the Member States are indeed, the one who could use the funds efficiently on the national level. All participants also agreed that EFTA could be the pointer to the right direction and one of the possible solutions. Van Grieken highlighted that all eurocritical parties today in Europe encounter problems in action taking, and that this debate is often far away from the public. Rochedy addressed the issue of the Eurozone and took the Swedish example of a Euro free country which is less if at all affected by the financial crisis, than the countries of the Eurozone. ‘’ If Euro would disappear, it would be the end of this policy of nonsense and the states could make conjunctions on their own’’ - concluded Rochedy.
When asked about the possibility of forming a southern/ eastern block of European countries, Kasselstrand replied that he doesn’t find it a practical nor a functional solution, ‘’tight cooperation is possible only between similar countries, and even then it is hard to develop a common policy to suit everyone’s need’’ he concluded. Coming from Sweden, which refused to give up on their national currency, and doesn’t suffer from the euro instability, Kasselstrand is more worried about the multiculturalism that is a product of the EU, and that is little by little eating up the left overs of the Swedish culture.
Holzfeind also expressed his fears about the disappearance of the national identity throughout the EU that is especially visible in small states. As a conclusion to the debate Van Grieken offered a simple historical lesson: ‘’ Competition in innovation and technologies made Europe as a continent stronger against Europe and China, in days of sovereign states’’. The only competition that can be found in Europe today is about the redistribution of the funds in the EU budget.
The conference was closed by Sam van Rooy’s presentation on ‘More EU = more multicultural and less Flemish’.