30 Plan D — Democracy Dialogue
and Debate
| (27497)
9393/06
COM(06) 212
| Commission Communication: The period of reflection and Plan D
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 10 May 2006
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 16 May 2006
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 26 May 2006
|
| Previous Committee Report | None; but see HC 34-xxii (2005-06), para 1 (15 March 2006)
|
| To be discussed in Council | To be decided
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared; relevant to the debate on "A Citizen's Agenda — Delivering results for Europe"
|
Background
30.1 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".
30.2 On 15 March we considered Commission Communication
14775/05 "The Commission's contribution to the period of
reflection and beyond: Plan-D for Democracy, Dialogue and Debate"
which we recommended for debate in the European Standing Committee,
along with Commission Communication 5992/05 "White Paper
on European Communication Policy".[104]
That debate took place on 23 May.[105]
The Commission Communication
30.3 In the introduction, the Commission says that
Plan D "gave new impetus to the debate on the future of Europe
by encouraging new ways to draw citizens into the debate".
Although triggered by the French and Dutch referenda, Plan D:
"is not a rescue operation for the Constitution,
nor is it limited in time to the reflection period: it is a starting
point for a long term democratic reform process. The political
thrust is to create a citizens' ownership of EU policies, to make
them understandable and relevant, and to make EU Institutions
accountable and reliable to those they serve."
It goes on to say that "this process will take
time if tangible and lasting results are to be achieved, and it
will require a genuine commitment primarily by the Member States,
but also by the EU Institutions". Success "will ultimately
be measured by the EU's capacity and willingness to listen, to
process the feedback, and to subsequently deliver policy results".
30.4 The Communication provides "a synthesis
of the debates, with particular reference to the lessons that
can be learnt from Plan D" and includes details from a special
Eurobarometer survey on
the Future of Europe. It looks at four issues raised in national
debates so far:
— The
economic and social development of Europe;
— The European Union and its role;
— The borders of Europe and its role in
the world; and
— The way the Union works: "Concrete
actions, less words".
30.5 It accompanies Commission Communication 9390/06
"A Citizens' Agenda — Delivering Results for Europe"
as the Commission's contribution on the Future of Europe, which
we have recommended elsewhere in this Report for debate on the
Floor of the House.[106]
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF EUROPE
30.6 The Commission says that the Eurobarometer survey
suggested that, while Europeans were generally happy to live in
their respective countries, they had a generally pessimistic vision
of the future, dominated by concerns about economic and social
prospects, with unemployment, especially amongst young people,
being a core concern. The impact of globalisation was a key issue,
with fears of a negative impact on social protection and increasing
wealth disparities: those considering it a good opportunity for
national companies (37%) were outnumbered by those considering
it as a threat to employment and enterprises (47%). A lack of
dynamism in the European economy was strongly criticised in several
countries. Concerns about social protection focused on pension
reforms, social security or health systems. "In general,
citizens tend to consider that the European Union could use the
European social model to help protect against negative side-effects
from globalisation, but see few concrete actions taking place."
Freedom of movement for workers was a sensitive issue in almost
all national debates: fears of job losses and downward pressure
on wages in some old Member States; the remaining restrictions
on free movement of labour perceived as a denial of the Union's
basic freedoms by citizens in the new Member States, with concerns
that the application of the Schengen system might set up new barriers
for Member States' neighbours.
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND ITS ROLE
30.7 While EU membership
is perceived as positive
in both national debates and polling evidence, the latter also
showed decreasing support in a majority of Member States over
the past few months, particularly in Austria, Finland and the
United Kingdom, and citizens in several new Member States questioning
the role of their country in the Union. The reduction of EU funding
was of particular concern in Spain, where there is a perception
of "losing out" with the most recent enlargement; while
citizens in countries like Sweden and the United Kingdom are critical
about what they see as an unfair burden.
30.8 Peace amongst the Member States and the single
market are recognized as the two most positive achievements of
European construction. Opinion polls also point to a favourable
assessment of the Union's efforts to foster co-operation in research
and innovation and promoting equal treatment of men and women.
Issues linked to safety, such as environmental safety, food safety,
transport safety and passenger rights, energy supply, were positively
outlined in several debates.
30.9 But "citizens are more critical towards
what they perceive as over-regulation, excessively detailed legislation
and bureaucracy. The image of a remote EU needlessly interfering
remains strong." In many countries, other critical comments
focussed both on the democratic deficit and the lack of transparency
of European institutions: "there were many calls for a greater
involvement by citizens in the decision making process".
30.10 The perception is felt most strongly in several
small countries that the Commission does not apply the same treatment
to all Member States, with a sense that rules on excessive deficits
or competition decisions and Community law are not applied fairly.
30.11 Opinion polls demonstrated a very weak knowledge
and understanding of the functioning of the Union, its institutions
and their role.
THE BORDERS OF EUROPE AND ITS ROLE IN THE WORLD
30.12 Enlargement
was "one of the
most widely discussed subjects in the debates". On average,
55% of Europeans consider the enlargement of the EU to be positive,
but 63% fear that a new enlargement would increase difficulties
in national job markets. In the EU-15, doubters sometimes considered
that past enlargements had gone too far and too quickly, and questioned
further enlargement in general, and the accession of Turkey in
particular. Historical and geographical perspectives tended to
influence citizens' opinions, with some countries being more favourable
to Croatia and Western Balkans than to Turkey, and Finns and Latvians
expressing the need for more co-operation between the European
Union and Russia. There was a more positive attitude towards further
enlargement in Slovenia and the United Kingdom.
30.13 In several (unnamed) countries, citizens (again,
no numbers) are said to have referred to "the need for a
strong Europe, with common initiatives in foreign policy
and a further development of defence and
security policy, whilst efforts in promoting peace and democracy
in the world are quite broadly recognized". By contrast,
improvement of EU capabilities for crisis management, as well
as the intensification of transatlantic relations, were said to
have been only occasionally raised.
THE WAY THE UNION WORKS: "CONCRETE ACTIONS,
LESS WORDS".
30.14 The Commission says there was "a strong
sense that EU action was essential, with strong
expectations" and that
"the idea of Europe
as a political project for peace and solidarity and as a place
where freedom and justice are shared is accepted by the vast majority
of citizens". They see the European Union as "well placed
to defend the European model in the world, to fight terrorism
and to tackle other security challenges". They perceive "the
positive aspects of Community integration" with regard to
the environment, food safety and energy. Where the EU has a good
record, European public opinion considers that it should continue
its work and have its power reinforced, particularly in promoting
democracy and peace in the world and co-operation in research
and innovation.
30.15 But there is also a perception that the way
the Union works can get in the way of policy delivery: "citizens
are more critical on the way in which the European Union acts
than on the policies followed, and wish to be more involved in
Community decision-making. There was a wish for EU action to be
translated into tangible results in areas where there was a recognition
of real value added."
30.16 Institutional questions were seen as abstract
and complex; there was more interest in concrete policies affecting
daily life. Overall, "European public opinion also gave support
(25%) to the view that a Constitution would be of benefit for
the future of Europe, after comparable living standards and the
introduction of the Euro in all Member States".
30.17 In its Conclusions, the Commission says that
its commitment to democracy, dialogue and debate will not end
with the conclusion of the period of reflection. It will continue
to depend on close co-operation with the EU Institutions and the
Member States, "as well as improved efforts and involvement
from some of them". Praising "very constructive and
forward looking initiatives" taken by some Member States
— "public debates and fora, an active outreach to national
parliaments, to regions and to the local level" — it
says that the EU would clearly benefit from more such initiatives
being taken by more Member States, which need to be seen more
of a permanent function in developing European affairs, and for
allowing continuous feedback from EU citizens, with particular
importance attached to involving young people. The fact that EU
citizens have a fairly low knowledge and interest in how the EU
Institutions operate but high expectations on delivery and policy
content puts important demands on the EU Institutions to better
involve citizens in the policy process at all levels. For its
part, the Commission will consider how to respond to this feed-back
and to initiatives coming from citizens, in the process of policy
formulation.
30.18 A stock-take of the Plan D actions which have
been implemented so far by the Commission is provided in the Communication's
annex and includes:
— Group
and individual visits by the Commission President and Commissioners
to Member States, and contacts with or visits by Commissioners
to National Parliaments;
— Promoting more effective consultation
through the White Paper on a European communication policy;
— A €2 million Call for Proposals
for European trans-national citizens' projects involving at least
4-5 Member States;
— The "Debate Europe" Online
discussion forum (5,354 contributions posted by 4 May 2006); and
— Events under the "Spring Day Europe"
initiative (debates about Europe among young people; 7,354 schools
participated on 4 May 2006).
The Government's view
30.19 Referring to citizens' greater interest in
concrete policies affecting their daily life rather than institutional
issues, the Minister for Europe (Mr Geoffrey Hoon) says in his
25 May 2006 Explanatory Memorandum that "these issues are
precisely the sort of issues that the Hampton Court summit focused
on, and where the Government believes the focus of debate on the
future of Europe should be".
30.20 He goes on to say that the Government notes
the Commission's view on the need to ensure "structures —
at European, national, regional and local level — for allowing
continuous feedback from citizens" and will wish to look
carefully at any further proposals put forward by the Commission.
"Given the read-across to other work on openness, transparency
and consultation, the various Directorate Generals in the Commission
need to co-ordinate their consideration of these areas."
30.21 With regard to the Commission's wish to see
Member States initiate more activities "such as public debates
and fora, active outreach to national parliaments, to regions
and to the local level", he says that the Government:
"remains committed to co-operating with
the Commission's representation in the UK for example on the roll-out
of Europe Direct centres and the Commission's plans for UK-specific
Eurobarometer research. Lead responsibility for Commission activity
is the Commission's. However the Government maintains that the
main responsibility for the process and content of national debates
lies with Member States and the Commission must respect national
circumstances."
30.22 Overall, the Government will "take note
of this communication as a useful update on the Commission's activities
in advance of the June Council discussions on the period of reflection".
Conclusion
30.23 The Minister's remarks suggest that there
is some tension between what the Commission sees as its responsibilities
and role and how the Government sees them in taking forward a
process that will be crucial to the long-term development of the
Union.
30.24 From our perspective, this Explanatory Memorandum
is consistent with that of his predecessor on the original Plan
D Communication and with the position articulated during the debate
thereon. All in all, it is hard to avoid the impression that the
United Kingdom has been significantly less involved, at all levels,
in the process so far than have other Member States' parliamentarians
and citizens: for example, during the Plan D debate, the Minister
seemed to be uninformed when asked about the Interparliamentary
forum on 8-9 May organised by the Commission and the Austrian
Presidency, and acknowledged that the UK was not one of those
countries so far included in what the Commission calls its "specially-designed
Plan D visits". This seems to be at one with a mindset that
is somewhat at odds with the process of transparency and inclusion
that the Commission says EU citizens are seeking, and which was
clearly articulated in the debate, when the Minister — pressed
repeatedly to say what UK views were — said that the UK
was engaged in discussing various unspecified ideas with its partners
about the way forward and that he would inform the House once
a consensus was reached.
30.25 We consider this further elsewhere in this
Report with regard to the Commission Communication on "A
Citizens' Agenda — Delivering results for Europe",
which we are recommending for debate on the Floor of the House.
30.26 We now clear the document, which we consider
relevant to that debate.
104 See headnote. Back
105
Stg Com Deb, European Standing Committee, 23 May 2006,
cols 3-36. Back
106
See paragraph 1 of this Report. Back
| 
