|
|
Doc. 8282
16 December 1998
Second-chance schools — or how to combat unemployment and exclusion by means of education and training
Report
Committee on Culture and Education
Rapporteur: Mr René Kollwelter, Luxembourg, Socialist Group
Summary
The Assembly expresses concern at the hundreds of thousands of adolescents and young adults who, having left the education system without qualifications, have no access to employment and risk being excluded from society.
It draws attention to proposals by the European Commission and calls on member states to set up second-chance schools, based on an active tripartite partnership between young people, schools and firms. The aim of these schools is to help young people take up the challenge of successful integration by giving them the prospect of obtaining jobs at the end of the training period.
I. Draft resolution
1. The Assembly is concerned about low achievement at school, which draws too many young Europeans into a spiral of failure. Leaving school without completing their education, they are virtually excluded from the labour market.
2. Hundreds of thousands of adolescents and young adults in Greater Europe fall outside the scope of training systems, and have no access to employment. The gap between qualified and unqualified is expanding and the unemployment rate tends to be twice as high for the latter.
3. This situation is unacceptable to any policy maker because, as well as being unfair to the young people concerned, it is also a threat to social cohesion. It jeopardises the future of our model of democratic society and results in a tremendous waste of our most valuable asset: human resources.
4. Economic and social progress depends increasingly on development of the intellectual capital that is the basis for innovation and creative activity. Tomorrow’s society will be based on information and knowledge, placing greater emphasis on human intelligence than on natural resources.
5. Our society has a major responsibility to offer all its members equal opportunities to participate in its development. This principle is the basis for the values that unite the member countries of the Council of Europe, which has presided over the emergence of human rights and promotes solidarity and social cohesion in Europe.
6. Investment in education and training will be the key to growth and progress. Equal access to knowledge and education must therefore be available to all, regardless of differences of gender, ethnic origin and income.
7. The European Commission has proposed to improve the integration prospects of young people excluded from the labour market by implementing pilot projects on second-chance schools (White paper on education and training "Teaching and learning: towards the learning society", 1995) .
8. The Assembly considers that such projects should be extended to all European countries by setting up schools that pursue the following goals:
i. to mobilise all local forces and provide young people with high-quality educational resources in addition to the measures taken by the member states;
ii. to reintegrate unqualified young people by offering them a second chance through the setting-up of new education centres and schools and colleges as locally based as possible;
iii. to offer quality supervision by employing well-qualified teachers and trainers;
iv. to improve the motivation, ability to learn, basic knowledge and social skills of the young people concerned in order to make them more employable.
9. This new type of school should be legally independent of traditional education systems so as to ensure a maximum level of autonomy and flexibility. The following methods should be applied:
i. a genuine, active tripartite partnership should be established between young people, schools and firms in order to help young people take up the challenge of successful personal, social and vocational integration by giving them the prospect of obtaining jobs at the end of the training period, which should not last more than two years;
ii. training should be provided at an appropriate pace and use methods based on the new educational and multimedia technologies, in close co-operation with partner firms;
iii. there should be intensive pooling of teaching methods between second-chance schools;
iv. sports and cultural activities should be organised as part of the training programme.
10. The Assembly accordingly invites the governments and parliaments of Council of Europe member states and calls on states enjoying special guest status to:
i. take note of the social and educational objectives of the “second-chance schools” scheme;
ii. implement one or more pilot projects, bearing in mind the above considerations;
iii. evaluate these pilot projects and, if appropriate, consider implementing them on a larger scale;
iv. incorporate such a scheme into their general machinery for combating unemployment and exclusion.
II. Explanatory memorandum by Mr Kollwelter
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Towards the learning society
3. Basic principles
4. Partners of second-chance schools
— Role and importance of firms and associations
— Role and motivation of teachers
5. How do such schools operate?
6. Projects in America and Israel
7. European pilot projects
8. Conclusion
1. Introduction
Hundreds of thousands of adolescents and young adults in Europe fall outside the scope of training systems, without access to employment.
This situation is unacceptable, for as well as being unfair, it is also a threat to social cohesion. It jeopardises the future of the European democratic model of society and results in tremendous waste of our most valuable asset: human resources.
Notwithstanding accolades that contain a hint of self-satisfaction, our school system has a significant failure rate. As we enter a learning society based on the acquisition of knowledge, it is important to prepare everyone and to offer a second chance to those who missed the first.
By setting up second-chance schools, the European Commission hopes to improve the integration prospects of young people excluded from the labour market who, for various reasons, leave school without completing their education. All local forces should be mobilised on their behalf, making high-quality educational resources available in addition to the measures taken by the member states.
That is the thrust of the action taken by the European Commission, which have initiated a number of pilot projects that are already in operation or are due to commence shortly in most member countries of the European Union.
The first step is to identify the social and educational objectives of this new type of school, to find out about and evaluate current trials and to ascertain where and how such schools might, if appropriate, fit into existing structures.
As an organisation comprising all the countries of Europe, the Council of Europe should promote such schemes, especially since education and training programmes are one of its key tools. It should allocate specific resources to the setting-up of second-chance schools, particularly in central and eastern Europe.
2. Towards the learning society
Society at the beginning of the next millennium will undoubtedly be a learning society that will invest in intelligence and facilitate learning and teaching. It is clear that citizens’ role in the society of the future will increasingly be shaped by the knowledge and the skills they have acquired.
At the same time as improving individual access to information and knowledge, the changes currently taking place have also altered the skills required, giving many of our fellow citizens a feeling of uncertainty.
Education and training are two key answers to these new parameters. Priority must be given to improving general knowledge and developing job skills.
Qualifications are still the best defence against unemployment, but certain failings can no longer be denied. For example, vocational streams are undervalued and young people tend to be overqualified for their first jobs. The image of qualifications as an almost absolute indicator of ability for selection purposes is no longer valid.
The European Commission White Paper “Teaching and Learning: Towards the Learning Society” does not set out to challenge the traditional system, but argues that it should be combined with a more flexible, open approach.
Among other things, it advocates finding new ways of validating acquired skills, regardless of whether they lead to the award of a diploma. This approach does away with ideas that have been accepted for decades. It provides scope for immediate evaluation of people’s qualifications throughout their lives.
Measures aimed at facilitating access to knowledge include training courses and action by local associations to help low achievers find jobs. However, the cost of setting up integration firms, workshops and other skill-based means of reintegration is very high.
Alongside these measures, the European Commission intends to promote two schemes to combat exclusion: voluntary service for young people and “second-chance schools”.
With regard to the latter, which are the subject of this report, the basic idea is fairly simple: to provide young people who have left the education system without any qualifications and who have sufficient motivation to go back to school with a means of acquiring certain skills. The goal is to integrate them into society through the employment market. Experience in some European countries has shown that it is important to ensure that these remedial measures or “second chances” do not result in “ghetto schools”.
Second-chance schools may be aimed at entire problem neighbourhoods, particularly in big cities. This is a way of guarding against any form of segregation which might arise from a selection between those who are capable — or incapable — of completing traditional schooling.
In response to a crisis situation in the 1930s, albeit in a different context, local authorities had the idea of working with associations to offer a second chance through schooling. Second-chance schemes are now being developed in problem neighbourhoods in several European countries, with the implementation of measures — concerning both human resources and facilities — based on those pioneering models.
Other governments have introduced positive discrimination measures for second-chance schemes in difficult neighbourhoods by setting up special local arrangements and allocating considerable additional budgetary resources.
The European Commission is determined to support such second-chance projects, inter alia through the Socrates and Leonardo programmes. Its support may take the form of co-funding for pilot projects, establishment of networks of current projects or assistance with the dissemination of teaching methods.
3. Basic principles
The average duration of schooling is generally on the increase throughout the world; this overall rise in the level of education is certainly positive, but also has its downside. The gap between qualified and unqualified is widening and the unemployment rate is twice as high for the latter. The consequences of failure at school are becoming more and more serious as low achievers are doomed to unemployment, welfare dependency, financial insecurity, exclusion and crime. Five million young people are affected in the European Union, and an average of 10% of pupils in each year group are sacrificed in this way.
Unremitting efforts must be made to combat low achievement at school, although considerable progress has been made in recent years. Some hold that the traditional school system should be reformed before second-chance schools are set up, so as to avoid sanctioning its flaws once and for all. The rapporteur has received letters putting forward this argument.
It is not a question of flaws, however, but the natural repercussion of the reality that all school systems are aimed at a majority and are not suitable for a minority of young people: failure is inherent in the best educational system, be it in Europe or elsewhere.
This is because schools cannot do everything, for they are not sanctuaries isolated from the surrounding environment and sheltered from the impact of inequalities and social differences.
It must be stressed that there is no question of competing with existing education systems in any way or of putting first-chance schools on trial.
The “Second-Chance Schools” scheme is a separate system that targets different young people and has its own methods and aims, as it is entirely geared to employment.
The scheme should therefore be seen as a special experiment whose success depends very much on the support it receives from first-chance schools and universities: to each its own role, specific emphasis and tasks.
4. Partners of second-chance schools
Implementation of the basic principles referred to in the previous section must of course take place in the field. The same applies to the choice of methods and decisions about the specific form of the project, which is then run according to local needs. The aim is to develop an activity that is completely immersed in the social environment and integrated into it.
— The first category of partners consists of local authorities. It is important that requests originate from the field in order to avoid transplanting projects which may not take root. Regional and local authorities, trade organisations and trade unions must therefore be involved from the outset and their specific complaints addressed. This ensures that projects are run in co-operation with the national education system and all the organisations, associations and agencies that offer training for young people and help them to find jobs.
— The second category of partners is firms. In order to prevent young people seeing second-chance schools as one more administrative measure to be added to a long list of other measures, it should be made clear that priority must be given to relations with the surrounding area, especially the labour market. Many of the young people targeted by second-chance schools have attended courses of various kinds and see little point in more training. They must be offered more individualised courses including skill-building training designed by or with employers. The latter must undertake not only to provide a certain amount of assistance but also to offer young people jobs once they have completed their training.
Involvement of the business world in general, and firms in particular, is crucial for the success of the “Second-Chance Schools” scheme.
— The third category of partners is obviously young people themselves. Relations with young people, or rather young adults, should be based on contracts, with the rights and duties they entail, such as respect for all other participants and partners. The essential requirement is that young people must be highly motivated, prepared to make an effort and determined to succeed. The fact that they sign contracts with their partners means that they are treated as equals and as citizens. It also places them in a new situation from the outset: for the first time in their lives they have something to lose.
The role and importance of firms and associations
A number of additional comments should be made about the role of firms and associations, which form the basis for the project.
With regard to firms, why might they want to become active partners in the project and how can it benefit them? It is time to take the concept of civic firms a stage further, emphasising their responsibilities in a modern society. They can no longer disregard the social environment; whether they like it or not, they are involved in combating exclusion.
Although an initial effort is required, this involvement can include positive aspects for the firm. Planning in conjunction with the school may generate new ideas, approaches and projects. Firms are also able to locate specific skills corresponding to the jobs available.
The basic principle behind the role of firms in second-chance schools is that of alternating classroom and workplace training. Ad hoc trials have tended to show that a certain amount of time is needed in order to obtain positive results. The second basic principle is that a tutor or training director should be present in the firm. That person must have a very specific role and should, if possible, be a permanent employee of the firm.
As well as firms, local and regional associations and associations that are already active in the field and have a sound knowledge of the area (including NGOs) also play a key role. They often run reception and guidance centres. They can also help to recruit young people, many of whom may have contacted them already.
Associations can assist with supervision, follow-up, encouragement and crisis management throughout young people’s training, in close co-operation with the heads of second-chance schools. Consideration should be given to including representatives of associations on the boards of governors and management teams of second-chance schools, on the same basis as representatives of the business community and employment bodies. Lastly, a contract system might be envisaged to recognise certain associations’ activities in connection with the project.
Such an outward-looking approach on the part of schools and the relocation of some of their activities outside the school grounds will undoubtedly represent considerable assets for the Second-Chance Schools scheme.
Role and motivation of teachers
In this type of project, teachers usually have to face major difficulties:
— relational problems with the young people (or rather, young adults); consequently more is asked of them than of traditional teachers, particularly in terms of motivation and availability;
— the young people targeted are very mixed, so small group and individual work is important;
This implies that traditional teaching methods must be replaced by more innovative, project-based teaching in small groups. In addition, computers and the new information technologies allow the individual to learn at his/her own speed and change the teacher/student relationship.
With regard to teaching methods, the eternal question of teacher training then arises. In the present case, it is important to take into account the major difficulties listed above, the fact that teachers must go beyond the traditional teaching of specific subjects and that young people require genuine support. Associations can contribute in this respect by promoting intercultural approaches and active teaching methods. Universities can also take part in such training by undertaking in-depth applied research on teaching methods.
Rather than expecting too much from a single teacher, it is important to set up multidisciplinary teams made up of teachers, community workers, social workers, doctors, psychologists, business leaders and other partners who can help young people to acquire the full range of social skills.
5. How do such schools operate?
The operation and internal organisation of such schools cannot be imposed from the outside, but should be defined according to a number of parameters in the light of each school’s specific circumstances. It is important to bear in mind:
—th e kind of young people targeted by the project;—
— the objective, which is to give young people a sense of responsibility, motivate them and make them more employable;
— the various types of activity necessary to adapt teaching methods to the needs of the young people targeted and the actual conditions encountered.
In this context, reference should be made to positive experiences such as those in the United States; they demonstrate the need for small second-chance schools which can create an intimate atmosphere, as opposed to traditional, over-sized schools. Smaller schools are more conducive to developing self-esteem and respect for others.
The various schemes under way adapt to conditions in the field in very different ways, but also reveal certain areas of convergence. One aspect is the timetables operated by second-chance schools. They must be flexible, in order to give young people time for a range of activities. Compliance must be compulsory, however, as part of the discipline essential to any form of education. Another aspect is participation by young people in setting the school rules and in the actual running of the school; this is a way of both instilling a sense of responsibility and establishing forms of co-management with the young people.
A final aspect is management of the inevitable conflicts. Teaching teams must serve as genuine role models, favouring “social pressure” as a means of conflict management without resorting to the traditional hierarchical argument that the superior is always right. This is a typical example in which civic education must prevail over any other hierarchical form of education. Such social pressure relies on young people’s accountability, capacity for independent analysis, management and decision making and responsibility towards others.
6. Projects in America and Israel
The American project
The “accelerated schools” scheme is one of the answers Americans have found to the crisis in their education system, which has a failure rate of some 30% in primary and secondary schools. On average, these “at-risk” pupils are two years behind in relation to normal schooling; half of them leave the traditional education system without any qualifications. They come from modest backgrounds or belong to non-English-speaking ethnic minorities.
The basic principle behind the project is the belief that all pupils in a given year group can be brought up to the same level of achievement by the end of their schooling. In order to attain this objective, low achievers are made to work at a faster pace than other pupils; the aim is to provide them with schools of excellence.
Another basic idea is that the same teaching methods are used for all categories of pupils. Rather than viewing low achievers as slow pupils who are incapable of learning within the normal time-limits, ambitious objectives are set which must be achieved within mandatory periods.
All pupils are expected to form a responsible community which has a great deal of decision-making power and takes responsibility for a large number of choices. Having assimilated a vision of what the project should be like, this educational community undertakes to set up an intensive school that learns to resolve most problems as they arise.
The community also draws on each person’s talents, which tend to be under-utilised, and the process of transforming the school results in changed attitudes and a different culture.
This process takes about five months, necessitating numerous consultation meetings at all levels. Schools involved in this type of scheme must not be left on their own, but brought together in networks. This has been the case in the United States, where they have had the support of Stanford University.
Such schemes have mushroomed in the United States, generating many very encouraging publications and studies which have resulted in further expansion.
The Israeli project
Alyat Hanoar is an educational organisation specialising in the education of young adults and teenagers with major social, cultural and family problems which impair their ability to become responsible adults.
Having received various assignments since its inception at the beginning of the 1930s, in the 1980s Alyat Hanoar was given the task of ensuring the rehabilitation, education and integration of all the young people among the tens of thousands of Ethiopian Jews transferred to Israel in particularly traumatic and difficult circumstances.
The main focus of this major project for individual psychological, cultural and social reintegration is a youth village, or more precisely a community of such youth villages. The community is made up not only of teenage boys and girls, but also of teachers, various supervisory staff and technical and administrative staff.
Most members of this educational community live on campus with their families. Social life is managed by a number of institutions run by the pupils themselves, at different levels. Supervisory and teaching staff meet regularly with the village director, who helps them to serve as role models for the young people, enabling them to identify with the project and providing support and interaction.
The project has three main objectives:
— to promote individual independence and self-fulfilment through positive interaction among the young people, and between young people and supervisory staff;
— to go further than traditional schools by taking a broader approach and developing cultural and sporting talent through classes, workshops, visits and other extra-curricular activities;
— to foster individual responsibility towards the community and society by giving each young person specific roles, activities and tasks.
It should be emphasised that the whole project operates with virtually none of the usual penalties and punishments, and discipline and order are ensured by social pressure from the whole community.
According to the information at the rapporteur’s disposal, the project has achieved impressive results. This model has produced a significant number of managers and, above all, the drop-out rate is much lower than usual, whereas many of the young people concerned had previously dropped out repeatedly. The project has been able to overcome both the great cultural differences of the participants and considerable prejudice. This is shown by the remarkable results obtained in integrating these young immigrants from Ethiopia, in less than ten years.
Sixty or so such villages are currently in operation, bringing together some
17 000 young people or about 11% of a year group. The annual cost of maintaining pupils in the villages is fairly low: including schooling, it amounts to about 40 000 French francs per pupil.
7. European pilot projects
As of late 1998, there are fourteen pilot projects in various European Union countries. Some projects are still being devised and set up whereas others have already been functioning for some months. The cities or towns involved are Athens (Greece), Catania (Italy), Seixal (Portugal), Bilbao and Barcelona (Spain), Marseilles (France), Brussels (Belgium), Heerlen (Netherlands), Cologne and Helle (Germany), Leeds (UK), Ribe (Denmark), Norköpping (Sweden) and Hämenlinna (Finland).
I visited some of these schools and, in October 1998, had a consultation meeting with the various project directors and consultants.
It should be said that the European Commission has provided consultants for the pilot projects to help the various partners set up the projects and make financial arrangements. They also help with structural-fund formalities. A number of projects now receive support from the structural funds, either the ERDF — if the town concerned is eligible — or the European Social Fund (ESF).
The consultants are also helping to set up a system of self-assessment making it possible to keep track of progress towards the initial objectives.
An electronic network linking second-chance schools has been set up and is financed through the European Union ISPO programme. The aim is to establish an effective means of pooling experience for the benefit both of the main organisers in the schools and the pupils. The network should enable new teaching tools to be centralised and provide pupils with contact with similarly placed young people throughout Europe. This in itself could be a first step towards their reintegration.
I have decided to describe four of the pilot projects which have progressed the most. The information and comments are taken from official booklets or derive from on-the-spot conversations or meetings and the replies to a questionnaire which I sent to the project leaders.
Bilbao project
150 young people between the ages of 16 and 20 are currently in training. There is no intention to increase the number.
Project operator: Bilbao municipality.
Academic qualifications: none.
Status of the young people at the school: student for 18 months, trainee for the last six months.
Legal status of the school: answerable to the municipal development agency (private company/public limited company).
Annual budget: ecu 1.2 million/year (infrastructure and operating costs).
Share of contributions to the budget: 40% to 45% public funding, 5% to 10% private finance, 50% EU grants.
Length of the course: 2 years.
Status of the teachers: private employees.
Involvement of firms: described as good (in connection with training periods with firms).
The school operates under a number of schemes promoting the economic revitalisation and reorganisation of the city, which has a youth unemployment rate of 57%. The course is based on close co-operation with businesses and any student completing it is guaranteed a job. It lasts two years and is divided into three stages.
The first comprises 50% general education (mathematics, languages, life skills, social and cultural activities) and 30% practical vocational training under instructors. During the second stage the proportions are reversed. For the rest of the time the young person is supervised by school staff. The third stage is crucial. A quarter of the student's time is devoted to theoretical vocational training, a quarter to the practical side and for six months he or she works in industry and is supervised by a tutor. In principle, the firm should end up employing the trainee.
Cologne project
432 young people of 22 years of age are currently in training.
Project operators: the Land (Nordrhein-Westfalen), the municipality, businesses, the employment office.
Qualifications required: none.
Status of the young people at the school: student.
Legal status of the school: second-chance institution.
Share of contributions to the budget: 68% public funding, 5% private funding, 20% from the City of Cologne, 7% from employment offices.
Length of the course: 1 to 2 years.
Status of the teachers: civil servants.
The main feature of the course is its practical approach: young people are able to spend either three days a week in industry and two at school or one week in two in industry. The school has been incorporated into existing provision for young people without qualifications or in danger of exclusion. There are two main objectives: either the young people are steered directly towards a job, which explains why there is such close collaboration with firms, or they acquire enough skills for entry to traditional vocational training schemes.
Leeds project
75 young people between the ages of 16 and 24 are in training at present. There should be 100 by the year 2000.
Project operators: state, municipality, businesses.
Qualifications of the young people: lower than their actual learning capabilities.
Status of the young people: student/trainee.
Legal status of the school: part of the UK Government’s New Deal package.
Current budget of the school: £315 000.
Share of budget contributions: 55% public funding, 45% European funding.
of the course: 1 year or more.
Status of the teachers: state employees or mixed status.
Involvement of firms: good.
The school is housed in a former high school but is in direct collaboration with the Family Learning Centre which is run by the municipality in co-operation with local training schemes. The basic principle is that a young person’s training must take account of his or her social or family background. It is the institution which reaches out to the young person rather than the reverse and the main aim is to cater for the young person plus his or her environment.
The course is based on an individual approach and divided up into four modules: learning basic social skills, group work, information technology workshops and self-assessment. Firms are involved in the project so that they have a say in deciding what basic skills should be taught at the school and to increase their interest in employing the young person at the end of the in-firm training.
Marseilles project
84 young people between the ages of 18 and 22 are currently in training. There should soon be 500 in total.
Project operators: the state, the city of Marseilles, businesses, the European Union.
Young peoples’ qualifications on entry: none.
Status of the young person at school: paid professional trainee
Legal status of the school: non-profit-making association.
Budget: infrastructure FF 100 million; operating costs: FF 12 million in 1998 and
FF 18 million in 1999.
Share of contributions to the budget: 54% public funding, 10% private funding, 36% from European funds.
Length of the course: 2 years.
Status of the teachers: private employees.
Involvement of firms: satisfactory.
The project is an ambitious one. A new school is currently being built in the northern part of the city. Two annexes, one of which has already been opened, will complete the whole. The new building will be located next to a new industrial estate and close co-operation is expected to be established between the two. Certain steps have already been taken:
— an information drive has been launched to draw the attention of local and regional decision makers to the project;
— instructor training has begun;
— local employment offices have been brought into the project;
— support has been sought from business circles and professional organisations as the main aim of the school is to guarantee work to all young people admitted to the course;
— a project on health and hygiene precautions has been set up;
— existing skills are refreshed through sports and cultural activities, learning new computing techniques and learning a trade through existing bodies and future employers;
— young people's involvement with their neighbourhood community is being promoted;
— arrangements have been made for board and lodging to be provided within the school.
A brief analysis of these four pilot projects clearly reveals the diversity and flexibility needed to fit second-chance schools into the existing system and adapt them as much as possible to local circumstances and needs.
8. Conclusion
There is no doubt, and all the statistics confirm this, that there is a direct correlation between employment and training. Education and training should therefore be used as one of the means of combating unemployment and exclusion.
Second-chance schools need to differ from traditional educational institutions in the various ways described above.
So as not to distort one of the main aims of the scheme, it is important to train young people for work in general and not for a particular job.
The scheme should be carefully targeted and the three partners — the young person, the school and the firm — must be highly motivated and work closely together to ensure success.
The new facility must remain somewhat separate from the existing education and training system and characterised by its flexible approach and its close co-operation with other training organisations.
It is therefore important that Council of Europe member states be made aware of the social and educational aims of the scheme.
At a later stage, taking the pilot projects as models, each country will be able to adapt the project to its own needs and circumstances and set up its own pilot project.
Subsequently, an appraisal of the pilot projects will have to be conducted and it could be decided, if felt appropriate, to set up a broader network.
In the end, we hope that European countries will add this kind of school into their overall policy and weaponry for combating unemployment and exclusion.
Reporting committee: Committee on Culture and Education
Budgetary implications for the Assembly: None.
Reference to the committee: Doc. 8070 and Reference No. 2276 of 24 April 1998
Draft recommendation: unanimously adopted by the committee on 4 December 1998
Members of the committee: Lord Russell-Johnston, (Chairman), MM. Probst, Zingeris, de Puig (Vice-Chairmen), Arnason, Arzilli, Bartumeu Cassany, Bauer, Baumel, Mrs Björnemalm, Mrs Camilleri, MM. Chornovil, Corrao, Cubreacov, de Decker (Alternate : Staes), Diaz de Mera (Alternate : Varela), Dumitrescu, Mrs Fehr, Mrs Fleeetwood, Mrs Fyfe, Mrs Garajova, MM. Glotov, Gül, Hadjidemetriou, Hegyi, Mrs Isohookana-Asunmaa, MM. Ivanov, Jakic, Jarab (Alternate : Mrs Stepova), Mrs Katseli, MM. Kiely, Kofod-Svendsen, Kollwelter, Kriedner, Lachat, Mrs Laternser, MM. Lazarescu (Alternate : Chiliman), Legendre, Lemoine, Libicki, Liiv, Mrs Maximus, MM. Nemcova, O’Hara, Pereira Marques, Polydoras, Mrs Poptodorova, MM. Radic, Ragno (Alternate : Martelli), Risari, Rockenbauer, Roseta, Mrs Rugate, Mrs Saele, Mrs Schicker, Mrs Stefani, MM. Sudarenkov, Symonenko (Alternate : Khunov), Tanik, Mrs Terborg, MM. Urbanczyk, Valk, Vangelov, Verbeek.
NB: The names of those who took part in the vote are in italics
Secretaries to the committee: Mr Ary, Mrs Theophilova-Permaul, Ms Kostenko