The Commission’s portal lists as ‘successful initiatives’ all those that gained the required number of signatures under the stated conditions: their number currently stands at just four. These are the three referred to in the first part of this Beacon (see EUROPE 11255/1), all of which were handled by the ‘Barroso II’ Commission; for ‘Stop vivisection’ and ‘One of us’, it decided not to propose any legislation. In its response to the ECI on drinking water, on the other hand, it agreed to launch a revision of the directive on the subject.
The fourth and final successful ECI is called ‘Ban glyphosate and protect people and the environment from toxic pesticides’; registered on 25 January 2017, it had passed the million signatures mark by July. On 12 December of the same year, the Commission published a communication in which it stated that it was unable to ban glyphosate-based herbicides, but pledged to legislate to step up measures to protect the citizens (see EUROPE 11924/14).
The proposed regulation on the transparency and sustainability of the EU risk assessment model in the food chain, which was adopted by the College on 11 April 2018, was the subject of a provisional agreement between the Parliament and the Council on 11 February 2019; this agreement was subsequently adopted by the EP plenary session of 17 April (see EUROPE 12238/17). Yet the glyphosate saga rumbles on.
The poor success rate of ECIs has been the subject of bitter disappointment to European civil society (estimated to represent more than 8 million engaged citizens) since 2015: an open letter to the Commission in April was followed, in October, by an own-initiative report of the European Parliament, both calling for the system to be reformed. The following year, more than 40,000 citizens signed a petition for the Commission to act. On 13 September 2017, the Commission finally adopted a proposal to revise the 2011 regulation (see EUROPE 11863/7). The Court of Justice seems to have played some part in encouraging it to do so.
An inter-institutional agreement was reached on the new text on 12 December 2018 (see EUROPE 12159/20), approved by the Parliament on 12 March 2019 (see EUROPE 12213/21) and then adopted by the Council on 9 April. Basically, the number of signatures required remains the same, but they must come from at least a quarter of member states and use a centralised electronic collection procedure; countries may opt to lower the participation age to 16. Signatories will have to provide fewer personal details and will be counted in the member state of their nationality, irrespective of where they declare their support for the initiative. The modus operandi must be accessible to people suffering from a disability. Promoters of ECIs will be assisted by the Commission and national points of contact. The partial registration of ECIs will also become possible. The system will be the subject of broad communication and will be evaluated on a regular basis. The new regulation will enter into force on 1 January 2020, with the current procedures remaining in place for ECIs registered before that date.
The Juncker Commission is also going to some effort, within the existing framework, to be more open to registering initiatives. This is borne out by recent examples. On 8 April, it registered an ECI aiming to create ‘an objective and impartial evaluation mechanism to verify the application of the European Union’s values by all the member states’ (see EUROPE 12228/21). On 30 April, it decided to do likewise for four new ECIs: (1) ‘The fast, fair and effective solution to climate change’; (2) ‘Ending the aviation fuel tax exemption in Europe’; (3) ‘Cohesion policy for the equality of the regions and sustainability of the regional cultures’ (following a Court judgment; see above); (4) ‘Pro-Nutriscore’ (imposing this simplified labelling system on food products to improve the health of consumers). However, it decided not to register the ECI calling on the EU to stop trade with Israeli settlements, arguing that it lacks the powers to propose a decision of this kind (see EUROPE 12245/11).
There are currently 18 registered ECIs making their way through the process, of which three are closed to new signatures, and which are awaiting a response from the Commission. The current College has chalked up four refusals to register ECIs, compared to 20 for the Barroso II Commission, a drop of 80%. The 2011 regulation did not, therefore, kill off the ECI, but the policy has become more open, with more practical support for the organisers, who have to get up to speed with their grasp of the legal framework of the field in question and prepare bullet-proof dossiers. The subject matter of ECIs shows that civil society is acutely aware of the major issues of the moment. If the pool of citizens (particularly young ones) prepared to support an initiative becomes larger and information is distributed more effectively, the number of ‘successful ‘ECIs may finally start to rise as well.
The next Parliament will need to pay more attention to ECIs and even though it is entirely natural and instinctive for it to remain jealous of its powers of initiative, the future Commission will need to adopt a proactive attitude, which will ultimately only help its popularity and legitimacy. But for this to happen, the citizens must first vote for MEPs who are sensitive to this issue…
Renaud Denuit