Sometimes the vote does not take place next day but is postponed to the next session. Waiting for the final result can thus be unbelievable two or three weeks. If you want to publish an article after taking vote, you might end up with quotes of MEPs from the previous month. Not mentioning that the discussed issue could have easily changed in a substantial way in the meantime.

Follow the committee while taking coffee

On the other hand, sometimes Parliament shows how to do things in order to make it easier for the media. For example by organising debates before big summits such as G20 meetings. By discussing the issue in advance, Parliament gives a clear idea on its expectations. A sort of rather action than reaction approach. This can be even strengthened when a resolution is adopted (which was unfortunately not the case ahead of the G20 summit in Pittsburgh).

I also like the enlarged live streaming of parliamentary committees. In the past, if a committee was discussing a big piece of legislation or a very attractive topic, the meeting room got stuck very quickly by MEPs, assistants, lobbies or journalists. This is not a problem in case you do not need a chair and table and can take notes while standing.

However, you could have some troubles if you speak only three or four languages. MEPs like to express their ideas in their mother tongues so a meeting can be very multilingual. Live coverage through internet in most used languages makes life easier. You can stay in front of your computer, sit on your favourite chair, sip your favourite coffee, take notes or even record the meeting on dictaphone.

The new EP President Jerzy Buzek has already announced plans to modify some ways the Parliament works. Let´s wait and see.

Fight for human rights is tough

Not all of them could come (some are already dead) but 16 personalities confirmed that they would show up. As the time of debate approached, I was getting nervous. We had plenty of things to do – write stories, make interviews, organize people.

All in all, I was pretty down and tired when the debate started. To tell the truth – I did not expect a lot from it. Just had a feeling that there would be too many speakers,  the moderator would be extremely diplomatic and the laureates would skip from one topic to the other. However, one of them was different.

 The speech of a Bangladeshi fighter for women’s rights Taslima Nasreen left me speechless. She was talking slowly, with a lot of sorrow. No pathos, no slogans, no bullshit. Just the reality.

Islamic fundamentalists forced her to leave Bangladesh. After 10 years in Europe, she moved to India. However, radicals kicked her out again. “Since I was thrown out of India recently, I have been living in hotels, at friends’ houses. I have no home. I am homeless everywhere,” she said.

Man she really got me. You could hear from her voice how much she has suffered. She misses her language, culture, country. But after all she also said: “Sakharov Prize gives me encouragement to go on fighting in this difficult situation.”

No pathos, no slogans, no bullshit. Just the reality.

Sometimes, when you are too close to the painting you do not get the whole picture. It is like looking at Monet and seeing blurry blots. Just need to step back for a while. I had the same feeling that evening. I left all the organizational stuff and looked for a while at the result.

She also showed me what is the price of fighting for good thing. And I realized I do not have guts to do something similar. All I have guts for is write a story somewhere … on a blog. But is it enough?