1 Democracy, Dialogue
and Debate
| (27041)
14775/05
COM(05) 494
| Commission Communication: The Commission's contribution to the period of reflection and beyond: Plan-D for Democracy, Dialogue and Debate
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 13 October 2005
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 25 November 2005
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 8 December 2005
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | To be decided
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | For debate in European Standing Committee
|
Background
1.1 At the end of the European Council on 18 June 2005, Heads
of State and Government adopted a declaration on "the ratification
of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe", calling
for a "period of reflection" following the negative
votes in France and the Netherlands and "a broad debate to
take place in each of our countries, involving citizens, civil
society, social partners, national parliaments and political parties"
in which the European Institutions should "make their contribution,
with the Commission playing a special role in this regard".
The purpose of this communication, the Commission says, is to
respond to this request.
The Commission Communication
1.2 The Commission recalls its strong support for ratification
and its assistance to all Member States with their information
campaigns. The Commission continues to regard the Constitution
as "an important step forward in making the European Union
more democratic, transparent, effective and stronger to the outside
world" and to regret "the fact that in the current circumstances,
it is unlikely that the Constitution will be ratified in the foreseeable
future". It opposes "piecemeal implementation of parts
of the text" and says that "any vision of the future
of Europe needs to build on a clear view on citizen's needs and
expectations. This is the purpose of Plan-D".
OBJECTIVES
1.3 Plan-D is not a rescue operation for the Constitution but
a facilitator of a wider debate between the European Union's democratic
institutions and citizens. It should be seen as complementing
existing or proposed initiatives and programmes such as those
in the field of education, youth, culture and promoting active
European citizenship. It dovetails with an earlier Action Plan
on communicating Europe which "seeks to improve the way that
the Commission presents its activities to the outside world"[1]
and the subsequent White Paper on communication strategy and democracy.[2]
Together, they constitute "a long-term plan to reinvigorate
European democracy and help the emergence of a European public
sphere, where citizens are given the information and the tools
to actively participate in the decision making process and gain
ownership of the European project".
1.4 Restoring public confidence in the European Union is seen
as a major challenge. The Commission says that whether in terms
of trust, image or assessment of EU membership, all the indicators
have fallen, mirroring a similar decline in the public approval
of and trust in the national political process. While 54% of EU
citizens still support EU, only 47% view the EU positively. Trust
in the EU had dropped to 44% by Spring 2005. "People need
to feel that Europe provides an added value and they have the
ability to affect the way decisions are taken", whereas currently
only 53% of EU citizens believe that their voice counts.[3]
However, 49% would like the EU to have a greater role in five
years time while only 14% wish to see it less involved in key
policy areas. "This calls for the emergence of a Europe which
listens more in order to meet its citizens' expectations".
1.5 Moreover, since the European institutions are "too often
the scapegoat for unpopular decisions and … often seen as
remote and bureaucratic", one of the main objectives of the
period of reflection should be "to stimulate a more accurate
communication of the activities of the European Union".
1.6 The debates should involve civil society, social partners,
national parliaments, political parties, young people and minority
groups. The mass media, especially television and the internet,
must be engaged in stimulating the debate.
1.7 Plan-D is not to be limited to the period of reflection, but
should run throughout the lifetime of this Commission, and beyond.
ASSISTING NATIONAL DEBATES
1.8 The Commission believes that its role is to assist rather
than replace Member States in the organisation of national debates
and work with national Governments to help organise and fund events
promoting the debate, which should cover the whole political spectrum
of views. The European Parliament could also work with national
institutions, both directly and through the involvement of individual
members of the European Parliament.
1.9 The Commission says that although there is no standard model
for the organisation of debates, models such as the National Forum
in Ireland or the Platform for Europe in Spain "may offer
inspiration".
1.10 Since National Parliaments are "the bridge to ensuring
effective scrutiny of decisions taken by National Governments
on European issues" the Commission is keen to develop its
co-operation "since a greater voice for Parliaments is a
greater voice for Europe's citizens". The Commission envisages:
high level participation in COSAC[4]
and the EU Speakers' Conference, establishing National Parliaments'
requirements for types of information and ways of co-operation,
facilitating the electronic exchange of EU-related information
between National Parliaments and a forum in Brussels, to discuss
National Parliaments' contributions during the period of reflection,
exchange views on national experiences and best practices, and
examine possible co-operation and joint actions with, and/or support
from, the EU Institutions during this period.
CONTENT
1.11 Notwithstanding "individual national specificities",
national debates should focus citizens' attention on the future
of Europe, examining their expectations and discussing the added
value and the concrete benefits of Community action — "how
Europe is addressing issues such as jobs, the economy, transport,
the fight against terrorism, the environment, oil prices, natural
disasters or poverty reduction in Africa and elsewhere. The results
of these debates should help the European Institutions, and in
particular the Commission to better define its priorities".
1.12 The Commission suggests the following themes:
- Europe's economic and social development: the capacity
of Europe to generate growth and create more jobs; the common
values on which the economic and social models in Europe are based;
the reforms needed in order to face global competition and create
sustainable development;
- Feeling towards Europe and the Union's tasks: what
people think should be done at local level and what they see as
the future role for the Union, including developing an area of
justice, freedom and security or dealing with climate change and
natural disasters; and
- Europe's borders and its role in the world: the prospect
of new enlargements and the Union's capacity to take in new members;
its relations with its neighbours and the other large blocs in
the world; the overall safety of the continent; expectations of
Europe in a globalised world regarding trade, climate change,
mobility (e.g. trans-European networks), international security
and development.
FEEDBACK
1.13 This "listening exercise" needs to be structured
to ensure that the feedback can have a direct impact on the EU
policy agenda and lead to clear results that are taken on board
at the end of the period of reflection. Each Member State should
present a synthesis to the Commission and Council Presidency of
the initial results, which should be made public. An initial feedback
process should take place in April 2006 so that a first set of
conclusions can be drawn. The Commission will organise a Conference
on "Europe Day" (i.e., 9 May 2006) to draw together
the main conclusions, and an overall synthesis of the national
debates, thus allowing the Austrian Presidency to orientate the
preparation of the stocktaking exercise at the June 2006 European
Council as set out in the declaration by Heads of State and Government.
Methods
1.14 The Commission puts forward a number of detailed suggestions
for:
- Stimulating a wider public debate — including
the Commission President and/or the vice-President for institutional
relations and national Commissioners visiting as many Member States
as possible, to include National Parliaments, business and trade
unions and civil society. The Commission will work with the latter
establish a European Round Table for Democracy, and with Member
States to organise regionally based events with "European
Goodwill Ambassadors", on the UN model;
- Promoting citizens' participation in the democratic process
— to include increased transparency at all levels of in
the European institutions, improving consultation processes and
support for European Citizens' Panels and research into how to
increase voter participation in European elections and national
referenda; and
- Tools to generate a dialogue on European policies —
a specific Eurobarometer survey on the Future of Europe, using
the Internet "to actively debate and advocate its policies
in cyberspace" and targeted focus groups.
FINANCING
1.15 An associated Legislative Financial Statement contains:
- a total indicative cost of Plan-D for 2006 of €6 million,
plus €810,000 for administrative expenditure not in the reference
amount; and
- a detailed breakdown of objectives and sub-objectives, with
associated Achievements, Expected Results/Impacts and Indicators.
The Government's view
1.16 In a skeletally thin Explanatory Memorandum of 8 December
2005, the Minister of State for Europe in the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office (Mr Douglas Alexander) says that the Government welcomes
the principles behind Plan-D and looks forward to the proposed
Commissioner visits. He insists that implementation must be in
co-operation with Member States and must respect national circumstances,
and believes that further discussion is needed on the detail,
framework and feedback process of Plan-D.
1.17 He also mentions that MEPs were questioning increased spending
on the debate and might therefore seek to block any future funding
of Plan-D.
Conclusion
1.18 Beyond these few words (which include a redundant insistence
on something that the Commission itself emphasises on several
occasions) the Minister does not discuss any of the many proposals
in this important Communication — even the one then in the
hands of the UK Presidency, on translating into practice the long-standing
Council commitment to opening Council meetings to the public when
the Council acts as co-legislator.[5]
Nor does he make any mention of what action the Government itself
had in mind on ensuring effective UK participation in the process
of reflection and the broad debate envisaged in the June 2005
European Council Conclusions.
1.19 Moreover, we are not aware of any of the visits or events
suggested by the Commission taking place here. Nor do we have
any idea what sort of synthesis the Government has in mind to
present to the Commission.
1.20 We therefore recommend the Communication for early debate
in the European Standing Committee, before any synthesis is presented,
so that the House may know the Government's position on Plan-D,
and what synthesis it plans to present about the period of reflection
and national debate here, and have the opportunity to express
its own views.
1 SEC(2005) 985 of 20 July 2005. Back
2
Which we consider in paragraph 4 of this Report. Back
3
http://europa.eu.int/comm/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb63/eb63_en.htm. Back
4
Conference of Community and European Affairs Committees of Parliaments
of the European Union: see http://www.cosac.org/en/. Back
5
COM(05) 494, page 9. Back
|
