Like many European federalist personalities, Pascal Durand (Renew Europe, France) is not happy with the delay in the preparations for the Conference on the Future of Europe.
Admittedly, the health situation linked to the Covid-19 pandemic complicates the situation, but other considerations, linked to the governance of this citizens’ consultation, are delaying the start of the work - which is due to last until 2022 - and giving the impression that Europe is still entangled in its institutional shortcomings.
The “turbo” announced by German EU Affairs Minister Michael Roth to speed up discussions between the EU Council, European Parliament and Commission on an interinstitutional agreement detailing the objectives and modalities of the conference does not seem to be fully underway. However, results are expected within two years, under the French Presidency of the EU Council, because of the European elections in 2024 (see EUROPE 12550/20).
“The announced turbo comes after a year of fallow! I'm not reassured by Mr Roth. [...] I am no longer hearing about the intended composition of the conference, i.e. to go beyond the logic of the interinstitutional conventions” by giving a voice to citizens, the EESC, the Committee of the Regions, NGOs and civil society, declared Mr Durand on Tuesday 6 October to EUROPE. He expressed “doubts about the EU Council’s willingness to implement what was decided more than a year ago”, he added.
Without denying the difficulties, Mr Durand is of the opinion that the relaunch of work in the European Parliament during Covid-19 proves that it is possible to debate while respecting social distancing, in particular by videoconference. Drawing on the experience of polling institutes, he also sees no problems in the selection of representative panels of European citizens. And the French idea of organising conference proceedings at the Parliament’s Strasbourg headquarters will help to “get out of the Brussels bubble”.
The main sticking point in the interinstitutional discussions concerns the presidency of the future conference. In January, the Parliament had devised a governance structure allowing the Renew Europe group to take on a coordinating role, a task to be carried out by the Belgian Guy Verhoftstadt (see EUROPE 12405/1).
Faced with the reluctance of several Member States to appoint a convinced federalist, the Council of the EU recommends choosing an independent European figure chosen by the institutional trio (see EUROPE 12513/25).
“Normally it would be a representative of Parliament and even an elected representative of the Renew Europe group. The choice of Guy Verhofstadt’s had been generally supported”, confirmed Mr Durand. “Without knowing why, things have been blocked. (...) It has been said: we need an interinstitutional agreement on the name of the person. It cannot be an MEP, because the EU Council will not agree. Now unanimity is needed at the EU Council”, he added, criticising “an abnormal slip up of a procedure”.
The MEP warned Member States against the temptation to switch to force. “The Parliament will not accept that the EU Council decides who will preside. It would be, once again, meddling in an intergovernmental logic”, he considered.
Several names are circulating as possible candidates put forward by the EU Council: former Danish Prime Minister, Social Democrat Helle Thorning-Schmidt, former EPP MEP, Finland’s Alexander Stubb and even Danuta Hübner (EPP, Poland).
Mr Durand does not have faith in a Christian Democrat presidency at all. “It would be incoherent: it was not the EPP that wanted the conference. There would be a majority to oppose it”, he said. Same thing goes for a possible two-headed presidency. (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)