From assemblies to action

1. CONCRETE ACTION: FROM IDEAS TO PRACTICE

Across the sessions, there was a strong shared sense that action needs structure, continuity and visibility. Participants discussed different formats and scales of action, ranging from local interventions to coordinated European moments.

Recurring ideas included:

• Action cycles rather than one-off events (e.g. recurring action days or thematic action weeks)
• Combining storytelling, visual tools and physical presence (stickers, flyers, interventions in buildings, exhibitions)
• Actions that are easy to join, adaptable to different local contexts, and not dependent on large resources
• Using moments of disruption strategically, while also valuing slow, relational work
• Understanding action as a learning process: attempt is success
• shared tools (templates, narratives, visual materials) that local groups can adapt and reuse

2. POLITICAL DIRECTION: COMMON GROUND WITHOUT OVERSIMPLIFYING

In the Political Direction labs, participants revisited the core themes discussed in the first Assembly and explored whether a shared political statement or demand makes sense at this stage.

Key points of convergence included:

• Housing as a right, not a commodity
• Safety, affordability, health and long-term habitability
• Moving beyond growth and extractive logics
• Regenerative and adaptive approaches over demolition and speculation
• Transparency around ownership, power and decision-making

At the same time, participants expressed caution:

• A common statement should not flatten differences or local struggles
• It should avoid being overly technical or diluted
• Positive, accessible language was seen as crucial to reach beyond activist and professional bubbles
• a collective European statement, while keeping the process open, iterative and representative.

3. MOVEMENT BUILDING: HOW WE STAY CONNECTED

A large part of the discussions focused on how to sustain collaboration beyond the Assembly. Participants emphasised that networks do not survive on shared values alone, but need care, coordination and practical infrastructures.

Frequently mentioned needs were:

• Regular in-person meetings (1–2 times per year)
• A shared platform or map for skill-sharing and mutual support
  (Who is doing what? Who can offer what? In which context?)
• Knowledge-sharing formats (fundraising skills, advocacy strategies, legal tools)
• Common calendars, directories and contact points
• Dedicated coordination capacity
• Sub-granting or joint fundraising approaches
• Creating reasons to meet: concrete projects, deadlines, shared actions

Importantly, participants stressed that having fun, building trust and emotional motivation are not secondary, but central to long-term movement building.

WHAT EMERGED OVERALL

Rather than one single outcome, the Assembly clarified a shared understanding:

• Diversity of struggles is a strength – coordination should support, not homogenise
• Action, political positioning and movement-building are deeply connected
• The European level can add value by connecting, amplifying, and resourcing existing work

The Assembly was widely described as a starting point for deeper collaboration, with strong interest in continuing the process through working groups, shared tools and future European Assemblies.

‍