Brussels, 12/01/2006 (Agence Europe) - In Strasbourg next Wednesday, the European Parliament will debate the Duff/Voggenhubber draft proposal on the period of reflection following the interruption of the European Constitution ratification process, and the structure, topics and framework for an assessment of the debate on the European Union (see EUROPE 9090). Those Parliamentary committees which have expressed their opinions for the constitutional affairs committee all stress the need to open genuine dialogue between the institutions and Member States, but above all with citizens, and to do nothing that would compromise the advances contained in the European Constitution.
The chairpersons of some committees have given fuller opinions, like, for example, Elmar Brok (EPP-ED, Germany) chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, who begins by deeming any attempt to renegotiate the Constitutional Treaty unrealisable. Mr Brok suggests that, during the period of reflection, Parliament immediately launches and coordinates an initiative called “European Citizens First” to respond to the concerns and aspirations of Europeans. The initiative should comprise a general debate with Heads of Government or their representatives and European Commissioners, to be held at the European Parliament at the start of each year on the direction European policies should follow; a “Day of debate on Europe” to be held simultaneously in all national parliaments; setting up national and European Citizens Forums; the immediate adoption of measures to make decision making more democratic and open: promoting the idea of European referendums, granting the right of petition, allowing the public to attend Council debates and votes (see EUROPE 9095 for the decision to allow the public to attend codecision debates and votes), allowing national parliaments to have recourse to the warning procedure, provided for in the Constitution under the subsidiarity principle (see EUROPE 9098 on Jean-Claude Junker's similar views). In the meantime, Mr Brok wants best use made of the existing treaties: in particular he calls on the European Commission to be much more integrated and dynamic in its approach to external action and to make full use of its right of initiative with regard to the CFSP, and stresses the support role that the “Parliamentary diplomatic service” could play (the EP could, for example, use its network of over 30 permanent Parliamentary delegations and ad hoc delegations). However, he feels that the creation of the post of European Foreign Minister and a Foreign Affairs service will necessarily depend on how the ratification process is going and must be subject to Parliamentary control.
Maria Berger (PES, Austria), Legal Affairs Committee rapporteur, begins by saying that, from the legal point of view, it would be impossible to separately apply only part I of the Constitution, without substantial amendments to existing treaties. She suggests drawing up, as a basis for an interactive debate, a series of questions and answers going through the problems posed by the Constitution and responses to them; setting up in every Member State a group of people to stimulate discussion in these debates and charged with producing a report on citizens' attitudes with MEPs and national MPs acting as rapporteurs; then bringing those rapporteurs together in a European conference to draw out common strands from the debates; carrying out a study on the financial impact of not having a Constitution, similar to the study on the cost of non-Europe, completed ahead of the single European market (editor's note: Cecchini report).
Austrian Social Democrat Hannes Swoboda, Industry, Research and Energy Committee rapporteur, suggests that forthcoming Presidencies of the Council nominate well-known personalities with experience of Europe to encourage in-depth debate on the objectives of the European Constitution and the adoption of measures to familiarise national parliaments' scientific staff with the use of European instruments. Mr Swoboda feels that the present period of reflection should be used mainly for discussion with the public principally on the contribution of EU industrial strategies and policies to the creation of new jobs, on the boost that a well-structured Community research and innovation policy could give European industry, and on the role of the energy policy, destined to become a shared competence between the Union and Member States.
In his concise opinion document, the President of the Transport and Tourism Committee, Paolo Costa (ALDE, Italy) also stressed the need for better communication (particularly to counter false arguments made by mediocre national leaders who try to offload their own responsibility for failure onto Brussels, he said). Costa says the decision-making process has to be streamlined and made more transparent. He said his Committee worked mostly under the codecision procedure and wanted the codecision elements of the draft constitution to be preserved in any future changes.
The European Parliament does not have codecision powers for the Common Agricultural Policy, and in his report for the EP's Agriculture and Rural Development Committee, Germany Liberal MEP Wilhelm Schuth called for EP codecision powers in future treaties. He said the CAP was a cornerstone of the European project so the EP should have full and complete codecision in all farm policy matters, consumer protection and foodstuff safety. The rapporteur said that the objectives of the CAP, as set out in Part III of the constitution, should be 'radically defined'. The FDP MEP also wants the EU's future communications strategy to ensure citizens are given full information about the CAP, particularly the most recent reforms to turn it into a modern policy in line with the EU's new objectives.
Vladimir Zelezny (Independence and Democracy, Czech Republic), rapporteur of the Regional Development Committee, concentrates in his report on subsidiarity and proportionality and the need to regularly consult regional assemblies to improve the quality of cohesion legislation. He said the cohesion, or 'solidarity', policy should be made more visible in the field. He also called for young people to be involved in the debate.
The need to get young people involved was also highlighted by German Green Helga Trupel, rapporteur of the Culture and Education Committee, who said the debate about the constitutional treaty was also a debate about European diversity and identity, and the cultural and education programmes implemented by the EU made a vital contribution to boosting European awareness. Trupel called for a greater budget for culture and education in the upcoming Financial Perspectives and recommended a timetable for the constitution so allow the vote on a European draft constitution on the same day in all EU Member States coinciding with the 2009 European elections.
Helga Trupel is also drafting the opinion of the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee. In that report, she is at pains to demonstrate that the European constitution would do better than existing treaties to meet citizens' concrete expectations in priority areas like justice, freedom and liberty. She said the European plan for freedom, security and justice had to be at the centre of debate on the future of debate. She said the constitution would absorb the democratic deficit in this area. The new European Agency of Fundamental Rights should be established in codecision with the Parliament, she said, and be fully independent.
Edit Bauer (EPP-ED, Slovakia), rapporteur of the opinion of the Women's Rights and Gender Equality Committee, called for all reflection on the future of Europe to respect unity in diversity and gender equality. She said combatting all forms of discrimination had to be promoted. The debate should cover issues at the heart of referendum campaigns, like the future of the European economic and social model, she said, suggesting the organisation of parliamentary forums of MPs and MEPs where women would be given equal representation. She rejected the idea of small groups of a few Member States being set up either because of the constitutional crisis or to solve it.