Strasbourg, 16/05/2006 (Agence Europe) - On 16 May, MEPs heard Margot Wallström, Institutional Relations Commissioner, present two documents adopted by the Commission last week in the context of the period for reflection on the future of Europe (EUROPE 9189). MEPs are divided over the Commission's proposals. Some support its resolve to bring Europe closer to its citizens stressing the concrete results of European integration. Others reproach it for its lack of ambition towards the Constitution.
“The Commission is listening to its citizens to meet their expectations”, Margot Wallström said. Drawing the first lessons from national debates on the future of Europe, she spoke of the concerns of citizens regarding unemployment, the quality of life, the rate and the scope of past and future enlargements and security. The Commission therefore established an agenda for European citizens covering “prosperity, solidarity and security”, she said. She mainly spoke of the consultation underway on review of the single market (see related article), a “debate on enlargement” that the Commission hopes to go into in greater depth through its strategy announced for October, and the adoption, next week, of a strategic document on the coherence of EU action at international level. Concerning the institutional process, Ms Wallström was very pleased with the attachment shown by Member States for the Constitution after the latter's ratification by Estonia and Finland's announced intention to ratify the Constitution during the second half of 2006. There are “various solutions” for reactivating the process but there “is not yet consensus”, she commented, saying one must listen not only to those who say “yes” but also to those who say “no”. Finally, she recalled the Commission's proposal to draw up a “joint declaration for the three European institutions” for the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome in 2007. In her view, such an initiative would be a “good base for expressing the will to resolve the interinstitutional problem during the European Council”.
“My Group supports Plan D”, Inigo Mendez de Vigo (EPP-ED, Spain) said, who believes it is better to speak of period of analysis - which implies proposals - rather than period of reflection. He welcomed the idea of a “joint declaration” as a “good idea”, and felt the fact that the ratification process is pushing forward is “good news”. This runs “counter to those who say the Constitution is dead”, he said. In his view, European citizens must be convinced of the cost of saying “no” to the Constitution by giving concrete examples, as the Commission had done for the internal market. “We need the Constitution”, Martin Schulz, President of the PES Group, said, stressing “it is not possible to meet citizens' expectations on the basis of the Treaty of Nice”.
He criticised the wait-and-see policy of José Manuel Barroso, when “the President of the Commission should fight tooth and nail for the Constitution”. He said that if we didn't defend the Constitution together, “our opponents will think we have given in”. “Europe of results lacks ambition,” said Marielle de Sarnez (ALDE, France), regretting the “timid advances” put forward by the Commission to change the decision-making procedure on legal and police cooperation and on legal migration. “Was a year needed for that?” she asked. She would have welcomed greater ambition on the communitisation of policies such as “research, energy, economic governance, at least in the euro zone”. She also criticised the “lack of proposals (from the Commission) on the institutional level” at a time when “the ratification process is continuing symbolically”. “We will have to re-write the Constitution,” she added, calling for a “shorter, simpler, more readable” text “re-focused on the major objectives” of Europe. Johannes Voggenhuber (Green, Austria) also reproached the Commission for its lack of courage and initiative: its President “has never become involved in the inter-institutional conflict” and he “makes himself the lawyer for intergovernmental Europe,” he said, “when it is that very Europe that is the cause of the crisis”. It was not always with more competition that a “Europe of solidarity” was created, warned Gabriele Zimmer (GUE/NGL, Germany), speaking about the expectations of citizens expressed at the recent European Social Forum in Athens. “Organise lunches with real people,” or go and see “football or cricket matches,” suggested Nigel Farage (UK Independence Party). Wojciech Roszkowski ironically compared the reflection period with Japanese “No theatre”, “where you watch for three hours and nothing happens”.