CENTRAL EUROPEAN STEERING COMMITTEE FOR CANADIAN STUDIES
Eighth
meeting of the CESCCS
Hradec
Kralove, Czech Republic
28-29
March 2003
Report
Participants
Don Sparling (the Czech Republic) [DS]
Marian Gazdik (Slovakia) [MG]
Ljiljana Matic (Yugoslavia) [LM]
Judit Molnar (Hungary) [JM]
Katalin Kurtosi (Central European Journal of Canadians Studies) [KK]
Petr Vurm – Assistant, CE
CS Secretariat, Brno, Czech Republic [PV]
1.Opening
The meeting opened at
15:30
2. Adoption of the
agenda
The agenda was adopted as
presented.
3. Approval of the
report on the Debrecen meeting
The report was adopted as
presented.
4. Financial reports
4.1. Report to 27
March 2003
DS presented the
financial report, covering the period from the Debrecen meeting to 27 March
2003 (see Appendix 1). Most of the items were standard; his comments touched
only on those that were of a different nature than usual. This year for example
there had been a special budget item for increasing the presence of French on
the CE CS Website. He and PV had discussed the possibilities, in the end
deciding that it was impossible to make the website totally bilingual. However,
this was feasible for the front page, and for the individual pages of teachers whose teaching
is in French. See 5.21.
The item
“other Sec. expenditures“ covered
among other things contributions to accommodation costs for graduate students
and others coming to Brno to work on PhDs and Mas as well as the cost of
photocopying material in the Brno CS library for Canadianists in the region.
Though these kinds of expenditures had not been explicity approved earlier, DS felt that they
were legitimate as part of the effort to make maximum use of the very large CS
library in Brno.
DS stated
that the supplementary grant of 250 CAD would be explained later (see 11 below).
4.2 Preliminary report on fiscal year 2002/2003
DS pointed out that the fiscal year was almost ended,
so that a preliminary report could be presented that (with estimates for the Hradec
Kralove meeting) would contain figures very close to those in the final report
that he would be submitting to DFAIT. He added that in the report on the Hradec
Kralove meeting, which he would be writing up after the end of the fiscal year,
he would include the final rather than the preliminary figures (see Appendix
2).
Several of the figures
were considerably lower
than had been anticipated. In particular, because this second Steering
Committee was taking place in Hradec Kralove rather than in Grainau (and two of
the participants had been unable to attend), the sum spent on Steering
Committee meetings was far under budget.
Another expenditure that
had not been made,
though money had been allotted for the purpose, was a meeting of the CEJCS board. In a brief discussion on whether the
board would be meeting in future, KK expressed the view that this might prove
necessary, so that this item should be included in the 2003/2004 budget.
5.1 Visits to Brno
DS reported that visits
from students (Czechs, a Romanian) doing MAs or PhDs on Canadian topics had
continued. He felt that more should be
done to encourage this kind of stay, since the CS library in Brno is
considerable, and it is far from being fully utilized. In the past period he
had used some CE Secreatariat funding to help support the stay of the students
in Brno, though this had not been explicity approved of before. He suggested
that the SC budget should include an item to help contribute to the cost of students‘
stays in Brno – e.g. to cover their accommodation costs in inexpensive
university facilities. This was welcomed by the rest of the SC.
5.2 The CE CS webpage
5.21 Bilingualization. DS reminded people that money had been provided
in the budget to introduce more French onto the CE CS website. PV had prepared
a new parallel introductory page in French and doubled some other entries; in
addition. entries for teachers working in French were being changed to that
language. In future there would be an attempt to provide important information
in both languages.
5.22 Keeping entries
up to date. PV explained that,
because it was becoming increasingly difficult to keep the information in
personal entries up to date, he had devised a new, automated system. Through the listserve, everyone had
been informed of how it works. In future, everyone will be able to update his
or her entry automatically, in the language of choice, at any time. The new system is easy to operate (“user-friendly”) and should enable
people to make any changes in their entries in a matter of minutes.
5.3 New initiatives
DS asked SC members for
suggestions as to what new initiatives the Secretairat might undertake.
5.31 Listserve KK
suggested that, since they have an up-to-date listserve in Hungary, kept by
Andras Toth, it might be better for Petr Vurm to send all information for
distrubution to him (in the way information for Poland is sent to Agnieszka
Rzepa). This seemed like a useful idea. PV would contact AT, and also get from
him the names to add to our webpage.
5.32 JKF Centre DS reported that he had wanted to
list the successful applicants for the JFK Centre grant on the CE CS website,
as a means of encouraging people to apply. But he had been told by the
librarian at the JKF Centre that this was not possible, as this was classified
information. KK mentioned that their had been problems with the payment of
grants to some CE scholars; when she was there grants were not paid till almost
the end of people’s stays, and this caused some real problems. DS promised he
would get in touch with Walter Larink to enquire about both these issues.
5.33 Catalogues of
Canadian books. DS had been
contacted by Mme Colette Dupuis, who is in charge of the new
books exhibit at Grainau every year. Pointing out that many book orders from CE
(e.g. those in the book-grant programme) contained books that were not in print, she suggested that since he met a lot of CE
Canadianists at various events, he might be able to hand out up-to-date
catalogues to them. DS had replied that he didn’t in fact see so many CE
Canadianists in the course of a year, but that it would be very useful to have a set of
current Canadian book catalogues at the CE CS Secretariat in Brno: people could
get in touch and ask us whether or not particular books were available, what
books were available in certain areas, etc. She had agreed, and would be
sending a full set of the most recent catalogues to the Secretariat. CE
Canadianists will be informed of this via the listserve. If this proves useful,
the Secretariat would be regularly supplied with the latest catalogues.
5.34 Finally, one general suggestion was made – that the Secretariat should send out an
e-mail message to people with a brief
summary of the services it provides, just as a reminder, and also ask for new
ideas.
6. Publications
6.1 Proceedings of the Bucharest
conference
MB was planning to bring the final versions of the articles to
Hradec Králové.
Instead, she sent them electronically
to DS. He and PV will look them over, and do the final preparations for the
printers. This might involve some final polishing-up of the language. The
articles had been checked, but DS said that in his experience this was not
always 100 per cent effective, and a publication with articles in weak English
or French was not a good advertisement for CE CS. The same cover will be used
as for the Brno proceedings; they will form a series. Probably the title of the
publication will be that of the theme of the conference. DS could not say when
exactly the publication would come out; given his heavy commitments in the near
future, sometime in the summer seemed the most likely date.
6.2 Central
European Journal of Canadian Studies
The response to the call
for articles had been gratifying: 17 articles (four in French), three book
reviews, one article on an event in the region. Comparison with earlier issues
showed that interest in the publication was clarly rising.
A discussion was held on the number of readers for each
article. KK felt the practice of having four readers for each article,
spread out over the whole region, should continue; this ensured a broad
acceptance of all articles, and avoided arousing local sensitivies. It was agreed that the same as used in the
past would be employed again this time. Complete sets of the contributions
would be sent to members of the editorial board in different countries (Nancy
Burke in Poland, Margareta Gyurcik in Romania, Petr Kylousek in the Czech
Republic) for distribution to readers; KK would see to the readers in Hungary.
DS said he would work with Petr Kylousek, and perhaps send some articles to
readers in other countries (Slovenia, Serbia). Each article would be given a
ranking from one to five (five being the highest), accompanied by a definite
statement as to whether it should be published as is, recommended for
publication with changes, etc. It was also suggested that new readers should be
involved, where possible: we should avoid the situation were only a a few
people were reading material issue after issue. KK said that the numbers
involved were already large, but agreed that we should always keep in mind the
danger of becoming too exclusive.
DS asked when readers’ reports would be due back. KK
suggested the end of May.
DS brought up the
question of whether the journal board should meet sometime (perhaps in Brno or
Bratislava, or even in Budapest). KK felt it would be useful, but there might
well be problems of finding a time suitable to all. Suggestions were made for
the second half of June or bginning of July. KK would look into this.
DS asked KK to send an
e-mail to the board members telling them the articles would be arriving within
ten days. This way they could have the readers ready by the time the material
arrived. As far as publication date was concerned, DS said he felt it would
likely be sometime in the fall.
Finally, it was agreed to
raise the print run to 300 copies.
6.3 Proceedings of the European graduate
seminars
DS reminded those present
that the Secretariat in Brno also published the proceedings of the graduate
seminars organized annually by the ENCS, and handed out copies of number two.
He had spoken to Elke Nowak, who is putting together the proceedings from the
Berlin seminar (September 2002). Between the Brno and Berlin seminars there had
been one in Avignon, but there was no communication from the French and he did
not know if papers from that event were going to be published. In future, there
would be a publication for each grad seminar.
6.4 Distribution of publications
Because of mailing costs,
DS had sought for some other way of distributing publications. He had spoken to Magdalena Rosova at the
Canadian Embassy in Prague, and it had been agreed that they might be
distributed by diplomatic post. DS had not yet had time to arrange this. When
this is ready, he will send out an
e-mail on the listserve saying that copies will be arriving at the various
embassies, and that people should turn to their local embassies if they wish a
copy. Embassies will also have instructions that CS Centres should have copies,
to put in libraries.
KK asked whether it was
possible to send copies of the journal to Paris (the Canadian Cultural Centre
there). DS replied that copies would be
sent to all of the Western European countries. In the case of the graduate
seminar proceedings, most copies would be sent to Western Europe, since the
seminar is their initiative.
7. Canadian Studies developments in Central
Europe
The country reports were
presented (see Appendixes 3-10). This was the first time that a unified format
had been used. DS asked how people felt about it. KK felt that it was very practical. DS agreed, adding that it
also made it much easier to compare what was going on in different countries.
Having all this information in this form would also be useful when the new CE
association applied for membership in the ICCS.
A brief discussion on the
formal aspects of the reports followed. DS pointed out that there was no
specific category for a conference as such; this should perhaps be included
under no. 2 in the form.
DS also touched on points
of detail. He felt that titles of theses (and their authors’ names) should only be included when they had been defended; otherwise
numbers were enough.
JM felt it was a good
idea to put the names of teachers down for courses. KK this would also be
useful when applying for a grant, since the country reports are public
documents and could be referred to.
8.1 Report on the Debrecen conference
The Steering Committee
expressed its pleasure at the hospitality it had received at the conference in
Debrecen in October 2002, commented on how well it had been organized and how
excellent so many of the sessions had been, and asked JM to pass on its thanks
to the organizers of the Conference. She replied that we would do so, and added
that it was planned to make it a biennial event.
8.2 GKS: Grainau 2003
Since the CE Steering Committee had decided
not to meet at the GKS conference in Grainau (as it had in the past), all ten CE places there were freed up for other CE
Canadianists. In the end, eight CS Canadianists were chosen to go to Grainau
(in fact all who had met the SC criteria for attendance, i.e. work related to
the subject of the conference, which was Acadia, or work in Francophone
Canadian studies).
DS had also been present
at Grainau; part of his stay had been paid by the ENCS, since in his capacity
as Co-Convenor of the group he attended a meeting of ENCS reps organizing the
big 2005 conference that was held in conjunction with the GKS conference. Some
CE Network Secretariat money had also been used.
8.3 GKS: Grainau 2004
When at Grainau, DS had
agreed with the new GKS President, Dirk Hoerder, that next year places would be
made avaiable for six CE Canadianists at Grainau (they will be paid for out of
the CE Network budget). Other CE Canadianists can of course apply on their own,
though priority will be given to GKS members.
8.4 3rd International CE Canadianists’ conference, Krakow 2004
DS reported that about a
month earlier Anna Reczynska had sent him a draft version of the call for
papers. He had made some changes, and distributed the current, provisional
version. DS proposed that the
announcement should be issued simultaneously by PACS and the CE Network, with “3rd International Conference” and “3rd
Congress” in reverse order. DS felt it was hard to discuss the
call for papers on the spot, but asked people to send him comments and
suggestions by the end of the coming week.
There were some things to
discuss. Anna mentioned panels – do we want panels? What exactly do we mean by panels? KK replied that these were perhaps 5 people talking together,
each for 5 to 10 minutes, and then answering each other and responding to
questions from the floor (as in the final session at Grainau).
In the original proposal
the deadline for applications was August 31. DS suggested September 30, with
first fall in late April and then reminders being sent out at the beginning
of September. It was agreed the original
abstract of 200-300 words was slightly too much; the 250 word maximum was
better.
It was felt both
accommodation and meals should be covered (as in Bucharest). DS said he
believed that was the original proposal, on which the budget was prepared. He
would investigate this.
8.5 Graduate student seminar in Szeged (2004)
KK felt the seminar in
Szeged in the fall of 2004 should be publicized as soon as possible; this would
encourage students in the area to work now in order to present a paper there.
DS pointed out we can’t do it now, before the 2003 seminar in Italy (or Spain,
depending on the final arrangement) - this would only create confusion. As soon
as the seminar is over, though, this would be possible.
9. Lecture tours
DS reported that Dirk Hoerder
had said the GKS still had money for lectures. However, he (DS} felt these were
difficult to organize centrally (i.e. from the Brno Secretariat). Once we are
association, we could have an item in the budget for speakers coming to the
region; it would be easier to organize this on our own than at second hand
through the GKS. In theory it might even be possible to put at item for this
activity in the next CE Network budget; however, DS feslt that there would be
enough work ahead with the preparation of the new association. Those present
concurred. It was agreed to simply send out an e-mail message to people to the
effect that if they plan to invite speakers they should let others know, so
that maximum advantage can be taken of the opportunity.
10. Class-set grants
DS reported that when he was at DFAIT in January he spoke about the class-set
grants.
It was agreed that they
would not be offered in the coming year; instead, the programme would be
evaluated and if the result was positive it could be renewed the following
year. DS had offered to prepare the evaluation questionnaire. He had done so,
and the draft questionnaire had been sent to SC members; he asked for comments.
All agreed it was OK.
The question arose as to
who should send the questionnaire out. It was felt that, since the whole
process had been initiated and administered by the SC, the SC should be
responsible for this too. DS would be writing to Nancy Hector (who would also
be commenting on the questionnaire) and he would pass on to her this view of
the SC.
KK brought up the
question of the Oxford anthologies of Canadian literature in English. DS
reported that Nancy Hector and Marie-Laure de Chantal had said they were going
to recommend to embassies that they see to the purchase of anthologies for CS
centres. DS was not sure what money would be used for this. KK pointed out that if DFAIT bought,
say, 50 copies, they could get a
reduction. DS suggested we figure out how many copies would be needed if each
centre were to receive three copies; we could then ask DFAIT to approach the
publisher and see what price they could get. Since the class-set programme is
suspended this year, this anthology programme could have a chance. DS also
mentioned that there was an anothology of
Quebec literature (he thought in two volumes).
11. Summer schools
DS reported that the
question of holding a CS summer school had arisen, in two different situations.
First, back in 2002 he had received an e-mail letter from the University of
Zagreb asking if he/ the CE CS Network could organize a two-week summer school
concentrated on Canadian Studies. The university would pay for accommodation
and meals. He answered that he thought he could find teachers in the region,
but that he was not sure about money for travel. He had contacted the embassy
in Zagreb and asked them to see if Ottawa could fund this. The second situation
in which the question of a summer school had arisen was at the conference in
Debrecen, where he had talked to Peter Szaffko, who had suggested a summer
school in Debrecen in late summer 2003, complete with ECTS credits, that would
focus on Canadian theatre..
When in Ottawa in January
DS had spoken to Jean Labrie and Marie-Laure de Chantal about the Debrecen
idea. In principle they felt it was an interesting idea, but they are moving
away from one-off things and are thinking in terms of longer projects. DS
suggested that there could be an annual summer school – probably at the MA
level, though welcoming PhD students – each year on a different topic and in a
different place.
.
As far as the Croatian
summer school was concerned, M-LdC had not heard anything from the embassy in
Sagreb. However, about three weeks before the Hradec meeting, the Dean of the
Faculty of Arts rang up DS and asked about the summer school. This was the
first time DS had had any response from Zagreb since the first communication.
The dean told DS the school would be held in a university facility beside the
sea on the island of Rab, and for the first time a date was mentioned: the
first two weeks of June 2003. DS pointed out this was not the best time. Also
that, given the time and the amount of teaching that was wanted, he felt four
teachers (two each week) would be needed, and that he had no idea whether
transport costs might be covered by DFAIT.
He had done two things;
asked the SC members whether they were free to teach in early June, and asked
Marie-Laure de Chantal whether DFAIT might be able to cover transportation
costs. None of the SC teachers replied in the positive. MLdC replied that DFAIT
might consider it, but only in a wider context
– perhaps as a pilot project to see if it is feasible to run a summer
course, or something like that.
Discussion focused first
on the possibility of the summer school in Croatia. DS said the people in
Zagreb wanted to know by the end of March whether we could do it. KK pointed
out that we would need some time to prepare and coordinate a proper programme,
if it was to be a success. No one felt this could be done in the time
available. KK also suggested that June was never going to be very suitable;
perhaps a date in early September might be more suitable. DS pointed out,
however, that this year at least the Croatians were speaking about a course in
June. In the end it was agreed that DS would write to the Dean of the Faculty
of Arts of the University of Zagreb explaining with regret the various reasons
why we were not able to provide a team of teachers for the course, and
suggesting that in future it might be possible to arrange something, if the
circumstances were clear and the time right and plenty of advance warning was
given.
As far as the option of
having a summer school in Debrecen was concerned, DS returned to what the
people in DFAIT had told him in January. The main point was that this would
have to be part of a larger, ongoing project, not simply a one-of-a-kind event.
DS felt this would be feasible, with a different topic and venue each year
- e.g. theatre (Debrecen),
multiculturalism (Brno), literature (?), language questions (?), etc. However, here again he felt it was not
realistic to think in terms of beginning this year. Also, the cost of such a
summer school would be more than that needed for the Zagreb event (since Zagreb
had offered to cover accommodation and meals). He suggested we leave this
subject for now, and return to it in future, perhaps coming up with a proposal
for a specific series of summer schools from, say 2004 to 2007.
At 18:45 DS brought the
Thursday afternoon session to a close.
The morning session on 29
March opened at 8:45.
12. CE Association of Canadian Studies
DS explained the
procedure for registering the new association. He had consulted a lawyer in Brno, who had not added
anything to the constitution, but had reformulated it to meet Czech legal
requirements and then sent it off to the Ministery of the Interior. After six
week we had got the answer that due to the foreign membership some parts of the
constitution were somewhat problematical – it would be better to register it as
an international organization with headquarters here rather than as an
organization with international membership (there is some legal nuance between
the two). The lawyer had made the necessary changes and sent the new version
off to Prague. She felt there should not any problems – this was the view of
the person at the Ministry as well – so we should assume we will be registered
without any problems.
DS
suggested we should move ahead according to the following scenario, which he
had discussed with Gaetan Vallieres in Ottawa in January. As soon as the
association is registered this gives it legal existence, which means we can
proceed with writing to CE Canadianists and asking them to join it as members.
The membership fee would be for 2003/2004. In the fall (Sept.-Oct.) we would
know how many members there are. At the end of October we sould send off to the
ICCS in Ottawa an application for membership (the application would contain
information on the constitution, membership, activities of the CE Network over
the past few years and information from each of the coordinators concerning
activities in their respective countries. At the ICCS Executive Committee in
November our application would be considered. What we would hope would be that they
would approve this application, and recommend it for consideration at the
Annual General Meeting in Montreal in May. Probably this would have to be a
provisional recommendation depending on the election of the Executive Committee
of the new CE association; this should happen at the conference in Krakow at
the beginning of May. Immediately after
the Krakow conference we would send the names of the new executive committee to
the ICCS. Hopefully this would be the last formality clearing the way for a decision
at the meeting in Montreal.
A
discussion on the membership fee followed. DS asked how much it should be. KK declared that it had already been
decided: 7 CAD, for both students and teachers.
[[Note:
Subsequent to the Hradec Kralove meeting, in checking reports on earlier SC
meetings, DS was unable to find a record of the SC having made this decision.}}
The next
question was how to collect the membership fee. Because bank and other charges
in this part of the world are so outrageous, it would be pointless to have
individuals paying their membership fee to the Secretariat through bank
transfers or international money orders (this is doubly true in view of the
relatively small size of the fee). Even within some countries (e.g. Hungary –
KK) banks charge a lot for an account. KK suggested we should ask whether
individual embassies in the different countries might not collect the fees, and
then forward the appropriate sum electronically to the Prague embassy. DS was
sceptical about this, but said he would inquire. It was also suggested that the
fee could be collected at the conference in Krakow. DS pointed out this would
not be possible, for two reasons. First, when we send in our application for
membership to Ottawa in October we will have to include information on the
number of members. Second, at the conference in Krakow we will have to elect an
executive committee for the association, and to do this we need nominees from
each of the countries beforehand, chosen in such a way that every member of a national
“chapter” can participate.
It was also
suggested that there might be some bank with branches in the different
countries that would allow the fees to be paid to them and transferred
inexpensively to the Secreriat in Brno. PV would check this out. DS said there
was of course one other way, that the SC members could collect the fee in their
individual countries and bring the money with them when they met, but that this
was quite clumsy.
One final
question concerning the new association arose: what if a person on the
executive committee had to step down before the end of his/her three-year term?
DS
said there
was a provision for this in the draft constitution: the members in the national
chapter of the appropriate country would choose a replacement. KK felt it would
be practical to have two people – a second person in each case, also so that
if, for example, a member of the Executive Committee could not come to a
meeting, the substitute would. DS felt that this was up to the individual
countries: no constitution can make provision for every eventuality – there has
to be space for flexibility.
13. Use of conference grants 2002/2003
DS recapitulated briefly the problems with the allocation in the 2002/2003 buidget for CE Canadianists to attend conferences.. Unfortunately there had been a communication slip-up between DS, the ICCS and DFAIT, with the result that the money the Steering Committee thought it would be redistributing had already been distributed. Some of this had then been spent before it was realized what had happened. In the end, instead of thirteen CE Canadianists going to conferences on the basis of the decision taken at the Debrecen meeting, eight went to Grainau, and two to other conferences; in two more cases, the money was spent to cover the travel costs of students going to the graduate student seminar in Berlin. Because of the problems concerned with the distribution of the conference grants, and the approaching deadline of the fiscal year, it turned out in the end that funding for one conference grant could not be allotted. This sum of $250 CAD was then sent to the CE Network in the form of a supplementary grant, and should be used in 2003/2004 to support attendance at a conference.
When DS was
in Ottawa in January and spoke to Jean Labrie and Marie-Laure de Chantal
concerning the CE SC budget, he was told that we could think in terms of more
or less a similar total sum in 2003/2004, and that the makeup of the budget was
flexible and essentially up to us, in accordance of course with some of the
ideas discussed with them. For example, if we wished we could again have
funding for grants to attend
conferences. This is good news, since it means we can advertise earlier for
these grants, thus enabling people to attend conferences in May/June and over
the summer and early fall.
Some items
in the new grant request will be less than in the past – e.g. the cost of
Steering Committee meetings (no meeting at Grainau; see 4.2). This means that
other items can be adjusted, or new activities or items added (e.g. the fee for
the lawyer preparing the constitution for the new association). He asked for
comments on what the 2003/2004 draft budget should look like.
Various
things were mentioned. These included the second instalment of the grant for
the Krakow conference; the third number of the CE journal; funding to help CE
students come to Brno and do research there (500 CAD was decided on). The
question of funding for a summer school came up, but as it had been decided
that it would not be possible to organize anything in the summer of 2004 (see
11), any funding for a such a project would only begin in the 2004/2005 fiscal
year. KK suggested we leave it at that:
we are quite busy now, with conferences, the journal, the travel grants, etc. -
other associations do considerably less.
Concerning
the grants to attend conferences, DS reminded people of the agreement with Dirk
Hoerder: six places at Grainau in 2004. However, the 250 CAD for conference
participation did not cover this year’s participants (the conference fee was
177 Euros). So the question to be considered was how many conference grants
should be put in the budget request for the next year, and how much per grant.
KK suggested that, given the cost of most conferences (travel, meals,
accommodation, etc.), 300 CAD per person would be better this would still
represent only a contribution to the total cost. It was decided to offer a
maximum of 15 such grants (this year there were 13, at 250 CAD; also, 250 CAD
is carried over from the current budget), plus the one left over from last
year.
Discussion
was held on how to advertise these conference grants. It was agreed we should
announce them in April right away, for conferences being held between now and
the end of the fiscal year (March 2004). KK suggested a deadline of May 10 for
applications, so as to enable people to get to conferences in late May and
June. Since there are six places for Grainau, in this round we would offer
grants for ten people, going to conferences and presenting papers. In this
round we would have “quotas” for countries. A second round could be held in the
fall, to include Grainau (no paper needed, but involvement in topic of Grainau
conference) and grants not taken up in the first round. This round should be
done in cooperation with the embassies (except Poland). The allotment would be
as follows (number of places): Poalnd – 2; Hungary – 2; Romania – 2; Czech
Republic and Slovakia – 1; Serbia – 1; Bulgaria, Slovenia, Montenegro, Croatia
– 2 altogether. For the last group, DS
would have to coordinate the selection.
15. Next meeting of the Steering Committee
The next
meeting of the Steering Committee should be sometime in October, or early
November at the latest. Ottawa likes idea of the SC meeting in conjunction with
something else – this produces synergy. DS asked if anybody knew about any
event happening in the CE region in October. No one was aware of anything. DS
suggested we send out a query on the listserve as to whether there is any centre
that is interested, any kind of event that we could hold our meeting in
conjunction with. We could also offer ourselves as a little miniseminar;
perhaps the local university could provide some contribution for accommodation
and/or meals.
16. AOB
There
didn’t seem to be any other business. DS reminded those present of two tasks:
1) to provide an electronic version of the country report, perhaps slightly
amended in line with the format agreed on at the meeting; 2) to send him, by
end of the coming week, any comments on the wording of the call for papers for
the Krakow conference.
The
session, and with it the Hradec Kralove Steering Committee meeting, closed at
10.05.