Brussels, 20/11/2013 (Agence Europe) - On Wednesday 20 November, the anti-Strasbourg lobby won a symbolic vote claiming that - by virtue of a Treaty change - the European Parliament has the right to decide on the place and time of the Parliament's sitting. The vote was immediately criticised by French MEPs, including leader of the EPP Group Joseph Daul, who criticised “the exploitation, by those who argue against the seat being in Strasbourg, of a report which was supposed to examine the place of all the seats of the European instititions”.
The report, compiled by Gerald Hafner (Greens/EFA, Germany) and Conservative MEP Ashley Fox (ECR, UK), proposes launching a procedure to revise the Treaty so that the Parliament itself - and not the member states by unanimity - might decide on where its seat should be and its internal organisation. The Parliament would be “more efficient, more rational on a cost level and more environmentally-friendly if there was a single location for its seat”, said the 483 MEPS who voted in favour, as opposed to the 141 who voted against and the 34 who abstained.
The anti-Strasbourg MEPs also believe that maintaining the monthly travelling between Brussels and Strasbourg has become a negative symbol for the majority of European citizens - particularly in a period when the financial crisis has resulted in large and painful cuts in member states' spending.
The resolution focuses on the financial costs of the 12 plenary sessions (one per month). The cost of the geographical dispersion of the European Parliament (between Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg) is thought, according to estimates, to be between €156-204 million - including the additional costs of the seat in Strasbourg which are estimated at €103 million. The total cost of the three working places represents around 10% of the Parliament's total annual budget, the resolution states. In addition, the carbon dioxide emissions linked to travelling between the three working places are between 11,000 and 19,000 tonnes, according to estimates.
The non-binding vote has certainly made the Greens/EFA and ALDE Groups pleased as they both support making Brussels the single seat of the Parliament. In the view of the Greens/EFA, the Parliament took an important step on Thursday and gained in authority, the rapporteur stated. “It's not only about ending this costly arrangement (…), the Parliament has had enough of being walked between Brussels and Strasbourg, against its own will, by the governments”.
In Catherine Trautmann's view (S&D, France), former mayor of Strasbourg, this report “serves” the institution. “Like almost all the assemblies in the world, the European Parliament cannot decide where it wants to work - because it would just need another majority to change its seat regularly. If this prerogative belongs to the Council, which must decide unanimously, it's because the seat of the institutions derives from the primary law of the European Union and the decision process is the same for all seats”. In Trautmann's opinion, this is waste of time, energy and money, which is pointless and appalling (our translation throughout). (SP/transl.fl)