On Tuesday, 1 September, German Minister of State for Europe Michael Roth promised that Germany’s Presidency of the Council of the EU would “get into high gear” so that the work of the Conference on the Future of Europe would be able to begin before the end of 2020.
“We hope to get the machine up and running as soon as possible”, the minister emphasised when presenting the priorities of the German Presidency to the European Parliament’s Committee on Constitutional Affairs.
With the Union facing “a unique crisis”, this would be “the perfect time” to launch a dialogue with European citizens to “determine what we can do better at the EU level”, he added. According to him, an event to kick off the conference will be held under the German Presidency of the Council of the EU. However, he did not answer questions from his fellow MEPs Gabriele Bischoff (S&D) and Damian Boeselager (Greens/EFA) regarding the schedule.
The interinstitutional trio—the European Parliament, the EU Council, and the [European] Commission—will first have to finalise a joint declaration that sets out the principles and objectives of the conference, the work of which is to last 2 years. Since the beginning of the year, discussions have been slowed down by the urgency of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the EU Council did not finalise its common position until the end of June (see EUROPE 12513/25).
Regarding the joint declaration, the minister is of the opinion that the interinstitutional mandate should be “reasonable” and “as inclusive as possible”, notably by incorporating the position of national representatives.
“Let’s not try to solve everything in the joint declaration”, said Domènec Ruiz Devesa (S&D, Spain).
The European Parliament and the EU Council have differing opinions on the ambition of this consultation exercise, in particular on the possibility of amending the European treaties in fine and on the governance of the conference. The European Parliament wants Guy Verhofstadt (Renew Europe, Belgium) to manage the day-to-day work of the conference, whereas the Member States reached agreement to appoint an independent European person of standing.
With regard to the amendment of treaties, the German deputy minister reiterated that the positions of the Member States differ. The same applies to the leading candidates (‘Spitzenkandidaten’) in the European elections, an issue that the conference is called upon to address. In addition, Mr Roth pointed out that there are also divisions in the European Parliament on the very idea of the conference.
Pascal Durand (Renew Europe, France) and Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL, Germany) stressed the importance of involving citizens. Echoing them, Mr Roth said that Germany wanted “a decentralisation” of discussions despite a difficult health context.
Geert Bourgeois (ECR, Belgium), for his part, judged the Conference on the Future of Europe to be “a pointless exercise”, one that will generate a lot of opposition.
For a binding EU Transparency Register
Furthermore, Mr Roth hoped for “a binding agreement” with the European Parliament on EU Transparency Register reform, on which interinstitutional negotiations resumed at the end of June (see EUROPE 12508/26).
He looked favourably on the ‘no registration, no representation’ principle, according to which a European or national senior official is not permitted to meet a lobby representative if the latter is not registered in the European register.
At present, this rule applies to European Commissioners, rapporteurs, and European Parliament shadow rapporteurs on a legislative text and, on a voluntary basis, to the ambassador as well as his/her deputy from a Member State holding the Presidency of the Council of the EU.
According to Daniel Freund (Greens/EFA, Germany), even if this rule becomes generalised in the EU Council, there will still be “many holes in the Swiss cheese”. Mr Roth retorted that, in the European Parliament, some MEPs still balk at publishing all of their meetings with lobbyists in the name of the independence of their elective office.
Finally, on giving the European Parliament a right of inquiry, Mr Roth reiterated that the EU Council still did not have a mandate to negotiate with MEPs on this “sensitive issue”, which affects the powers of Member States and EU institutions. “We can’t move forward unless everyone shows some flexibility”, he warned. (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)