Points answered by the organisers 

The synthesis of the evaluations just presented to you highlights the answers sometimes given by the same participant.
We feel that this is a good occasion to recall points answered by the organisers and which accompany the questionnaire

***
Generally, for us, the European continental assembly was a success, given the conditions and the challenges that had to be overcome. These involved gathering a large number of people that had never met each other, most of whom had never heard of the Alliance movement and its method of working, and whom were prevented from any opportunity to present and explain themselves. What is more, they were asked to formulate concrete proposals on subjects not necessarily ideal for this type of action. So, getting results after only five days is an achievement!
Naturally, they were not always satisfactory.
Obviously, Innocent was right to call us timid.
And of course we could have done better … as always! 
But even so!

To start with we will focus on what did not work as well as we would have liked:
- Most of the participants were identified too late: the partners responsible for identifying them often failed to keep to the timetable; what is more there were many late cancellations  (perhaps meetings with all expenses paid lead to a some persons losing their sense of commitment!).
- Not all the preparatory work that had to be done collectively over six months on the electronic forum had been completed and we had to make up for this lost time of reflection during the assembly itself. 
- The lack of prior media exposure and the absence of the Romanian press at the meeting were not foreseen either.

I. Logistical organisation

On the one hand, the Romanian travel agency was very efficient, though thanks to big efforts from us since their hierarchical management slowed down smooth relations during the months of preparation.
On the other hand, the requirements of certain participants were very difficult to satisfy. 

•	During the meeting:
From our point of view, the smoothness of dialogue between the participants, the effort of listening and using the language of the other, optimising communication, openness without forming geographic and linguistic clans, etc. were impressive. The group's cohesion was visible from the outset, despite the fact that very few people knew each other beforehand.

II. Organisation of the content

This is the point that frustrated us most, since our initial aim had been to give the participants of the assembly six months using the electronic forum to get to know each other, exchange their experiences and above all formulate (jointly with the coordinators) the subjects to be debated and the possible proposals to be finalised during the assembly itself.
Very few of the participants at the meeting had benefited from this joint work (due to late identification for some and also lack of participation and contributions from those who had been able to take part in the process).
Consequently, it was more difficult than imagined to coordinate the work sessions. The method chosen had to be modified in the final weeks before the assembly, resulting in a loss of precious preparation time.
It should be recalled that the topics chosen at the first preparatory meeting when the project was being set up (March 2000) were not dealt with by the Alliance workshops and some topic contributors failed to carry out their role or even abandoned it on the way.
Furthermore, the fact that the continental assemblies were held simultaneously demanded work from a great number of allies, thus the Peles coordinators had to take on this difficult task without enough preparation and without specialised knowledge of the topics.

•	During the meeting:

I can only mention the GOV workshop, which I joined from the moment organisation allowed and I was struck by the strong desire of all to formulate and produce interesting reflection together. 
As often happens, it appears that the restitutions have not always rendered justice to the wealth of the debate and the proposals made. We will try to retrieve the essence of these facets by reworking all the material produced: notes, writings on the paperboard, diagrams, documents, etc.

I am personally responsible for having left out the context of the one and half hour session devoted to the persons from the Middle East and the Maghreb region. Subject to long preparation, this session had been intended as an interactive forum for questions and answers between continental Europeans and the neighbouring countries of the Mediterranean involved in European Construction. The overlong presentation of the region's problems was slightly off the mark and I understand the surprise of some. Other regions suffer from difficult and painful situations that are just as pertinent.

All the Alliance continental assemblies (the Americas, Asia, Africa, the Arab world and Europe) were scheduled to start on 21 June. Given that our meeting ended on this date, we were unable to really benefit from the intercontinental communication set up. I hope that you have been able to consult all the messages on the website. 

III. The future

We have great expectations for the future of our joint activities and hope that everyone has been able to glean positive elements from the approach and wishes to fuel the movement with their own projects and actions.

Thank you
Manola