Brussels, 07/05/2009 (Agence Europe) - After several weeks of hesitation motivated by the fear of adversely interfering with the forthcoming referendum in Ireland (EUROPE 9861, 9870 and 9889), the European Parliament finally debated and voted on the five reports linked to the Lisbon Treaty in plenary session on Thursday 7 May.
Institutional balance. Adopted by 363 votes to 93 and 19 abstentions, the report by Jean-Luc Dehaene (EPP-ED, Belgium) remained unchanged compared to the text approved in constitutional affairs committee (EUROPE 9858 and 9837). In order to fully benefit from the institutional changes introduced by the Lisbon Treaty, in-depth and permanent cooperation between institutions will be essential, the EP states. MEPs welcome the fact that the essential elements of the “Community method” (Commission's right of initiative, joint decision-making by EP and Council) have been retained and enhanced by the new treaty. Strengthening of the role of the EP also implies that, in future, the Commission and Council will provide it wilth all the documents necessary for carrying out its work, the EP stresses. The role of the European Council should be refocused on its fundamental task, which is to give the political impetus required and to define the guidelines and general objectives of EU activity, MEPs assert. The designation of a permanent European Council president is welcome, but the EP underlines the fact that the person appointed cannot be considered as the “president of the European Union”, but only as the person who will ensure preparation of and continuity in the work of the European Council, and represent the EU outside the EU within the framework of the CFSP “at his level and without prejudice to the work of the CFSP high representative”, MEPs say. They also welcome the essential role conferred on the General Affairs Council by the Lisbon Treaty so that it ensures consistency and continuity in work by the various formations of the Council and European Council. The EP draws attention to the “major difficulties” that could arise in coordinating the various Council formations due to the new system of presidencies. In order to avoid such problems, MEPs suggest that “new troikas” be set in place for 18 months (groups of three presidencies). These troikas would share the presidencies of the different Council configurations (except for the External Affairs Council and the Eurogroup) and of Coreper, thus allowing the work of the Council as a whole to enjoy coherence, relevance and continuity, the EP states. As far as the appointment of the president of the next European Commission is concerned, foreseen for June/July on the basis of the Nice Treaty, the EP asks to be consulted and involved in the procedure as if the Lisbon Treaty were already in force. A political agreement should be concluded to this end between the EP and Council, MEPs request (on 5 May, when addressing MEPs, Alexandr Vondra gave his assurance that the Parliament would be consulted immediately after elections “in the spirit of the Lisbon Treaty”, EUROPE 9895). The procedure for appointing other members of the future Commission should only be launched once the results of the second Irish referendum on the treaty are known, the EP states. If there is a yes-vote to the referendum (and as long as the Czech, Polish and German ratifications have been completed by then), approval by the whole of the Commission (including its president) by Parliament should only take place after the Lisbon Treaty takes effect.
Relations between the EP and national parliaments. The report by Elmar Brok (EPP-ED, Germany) was approved by 379 votes to 65 and 16 abstentions. MEPs wish especially for a new form of “pre-legislative and post-legislative dialogue” with national parliaments, once the Lisbon Treaty has taken effect. To this end, they suggest multiplying and developing meetings between specialised EP and national parliamentary committees with a view to setting up a “permanent network” of committees allowing early dialogue on legislative projects underway at EU level. The EP also calls for strengthened parliamentary control of all aspects of Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP).
The EP's role and responsibility in implementation of Lisbon Treaty. With approval of the report by Jo Leinen (PES, Germany) by 441 votes to 77 and 18 abstentions, MEPs welcome the fact that, with just a few exceptions, the new treaty will place the EP on an equal footing with the Council as EU legislator, including in key areas such as the budget, agriculture, justice and home affairs. The EP also suggests that the three main institutions (Council, Commission and Parliament) should, together, define a joint work programme in the form of an interinstitutional agreement reflecting the key EU objectives after 2009.
Citizens' initiative. Adopting the report by German PES member Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, by 380 votes to 41 and 29 abstentions, the Parliament calls on the Commission to present a proposal for a regulation on the citizens' initiative, immediately after entry into effect of the Lisbon Treaty. It requests that the regulation be clear, simple and user-friendly, incorporating practical elements related to the definition of a citizens' initiative in order that it should not be confused with the right of petition. In the wording of the regulation, the Commission is invited to take into account a series of Parliament recommendations concerning admissibility criteria for an initiative and the procedure arising from that initiative.
Any citizen with right of vote in his/her member state should be able to take part in a citizen's initiative supported by one million signatures. Parliament believes these signatures should be gathered in at least one quarter of the member states. In each of the member states concerned, at least 1/500th of the population should have supported the initiative for that initiative in order to be admissible. The initiative, which enters the scope of Union competence and meets the previous criteria, would make it an obligation for the Commission to examine the matters raised, hear the organisers of the initiative and take a decision within three months. If the Commission does not come to a decision, the organisers should be able to appeal to the Court of Justice or to the European Ombudsman, the Parliament says.
Financial aspects of the Lisbon Treaty. With the adoption (442 votes to 86 and 15 abstentions) of the report by French Socialist Catherine Guy-Quint, Parliament welcomes progress made by the Lisbon Treaty regarding democratic control and transparency for Union finances. It regrets, when it comes to the Union's own resources, that member states have not seized the opportunity to set in place truly Union own resources, which are more equitable, more transparent, more easily perceptible by the citizens and subject to a more democratic decision-making procedure. It above all regrets that no progress has been made to involve the Parliament in the definition of the limits and the type of own resources available to the Union.
Parliament deplores the fact that the Lisbon Treaty has retained the requirement that the Council should act unanimously when adopting the MFF (multiannual financial framework), rendering the decision-making procedure very difficult and encouraging negotiations on the basis of the “lowest common denominator”. It therefore urges the European Council to make use, as soon as possible, of the provision which enables it, by means of an unanimous decision, to impose a switch to qualified-majority voting for the adoption of the MFF. It supports the switch to a five-year MFF, but is aware that a full coincidence between the MFF and the term of the European Parliament and the term of office of the Commission might be difficult, as it considers a negotiating period of at least one year may be necessary to allow each new Parliament and each new Commission to take fundamental financial policy decisions during their terms of office. It underlines that the legally binding nature of MFF calls more than ever for the introduction of greater flexibility in order to allow the Union to react to unforeseen challenges in a sufficiently flexible and effective way, both within and outside the Union.
Parliament welcomes the abolition of the distinction between compulsory expenditure (CE) and non-compulsory expenditure (NCE), as a result of which Parliament now has the right to take decisions concerning all Union expenditure on an equal footing with the Council. It underlines the importance that the conciliation committee will have in future, not only for resolving political differences but also those between the two branches of budgetary authority. This committee will be responsible for finding, within 21 days, an agreement on a compromise text, which will take effect if not rejected by the budgetary authority. Parliament considers the members of this committee must be drawn from the very highest political level. It invites the Council to swiftly reach an agreement with Parliament on the conciliation committee's method of operation.
Within the framework of the CFSP and common security and defence policy, Parliament underlines that the Lisbon Treaty provides for the establishment of new procedures to ensure rapid access to the Union budget and to create a start-up fund of member state contributions. It stresses, however, that all external actions of the Union should as a rule be financed from Community appropriations, and only exceptionally - in the event of an emergency - on the basis of contributions outside the Union budget. Finally, the European Parliament wishes to invite national parliaments to take part, each year, in a joint public debate on national and Community budgetary policy guidelines, prior to consideration of the respective draft budgets, in order to establish from the outset a common framework for coordination of member states' national policies, while also taking into account the Community contribution.
As the debate opened during the Wednesday evening session in Strasbourg, German Social Democrat Jo Leinen and Belgian Christian Democrats Jean-Luc Dehaene and Elmar Brok underlined the importance of this vote which comes the day after that by the Czech Senate, and the enlarged powers that the European Parliament will enjoy. French Socialist Catherine Guy-Quint stressed that the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty will bring about changes in budgetary procedures, for which they must be prepared. She also stressed the need to foresee new resources for the future high representative and the External Action Service or for new policies. Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufman, the German member of the GUE, thanked her colleagues of the EPP-ED, PES and Greens who helped her to draw up her report aimed at defining the criteria and procedures allowing implementation of the citizens' initiative to “enhance direct democracy in a united Europe”.
“Ms Kaufmann, you can be proud because, thanks to you, there are new links between the citizens and the European Union”, said Margot Wallström, who praised the work of the five rapporteurs in succession. The vice-president of the European Commission welcomed the 26 parliaments' support for the treaty, which “will allow Europe to be more democratic”. These reports will allow “our working methods to be reformed” and implementation of the treaty to be speeded up, she stressed, saying that the “treaty is good for Europe”. Ms Wallström also congratulated the Parliament for having worked to establish interparliamentary conferences opening the road to a “real network of parliaments”.
Michael Gahler (CDU) spoke out in favour of including common military spending in the budget. Dutch Socialist Thijs Berman said pressure should not be put on Ireland, but that there should be investment in social rights and clean energy. German Social Democrat Evelyne Gebhardt stressed that, with the Treaty of Lisbon, consumer protection becomes a transversal activity. British Liberal Democrat Andrew Duff underlined that climate and financial crises demonstrate the need to strengthen the EU's effectiveness. In his view, the Lisbon Treaty is the “logical answer” to such crises. While supporting rapid entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, Austrian Green member Johannes Voggenhubber said he has not “given up the dream that his children or grandchildren will one day say 'Long Live the Republic of Europe'”. On the other hand, Tobias Pflüger (PDS, Germany), Nils Lundgren (Junilistan, Sweden) and Roger Helmer (Conservative, UK) said it was necessary to respect the no-vote of the Dutch, French and Irish peoples. Mr Helmer, who welcomed the fact that the Conservatives will be leaving the EPP Group, said “all that resembles a coup d'état”. French UMP member Alain Lamassoure returned to the citizens' initiative to call on the political parties to make good use of it and the civil society to seize it. “In this Union where we all move about freely, the last remaining barriers are those of our debates”, he regretted. Romanian Socialist Adrian Severin took the view that these reports are an “explanatory statement” allowing better understanding and improvement of procedures. He trusted that they would contribute to bringing about a “European demos”. Greek Socialist Costas Botopoulos said the new treaty will allow a move towards a more democratic and more political budget. He nonetheless wondered whether the Parliament would really be able to play its role in a shortened procedure consisting of just one reading. He also regretted the fact that the opportunity has been lost to foresee new own resources.
German Green member Milan Horacek and Czech Socialist Libor Roucek strongly criticised the Czech president who does not wish to comply with the decision of the two houses of parliament in his country. “He is behaving like a dictator, like an absolute monarch”, Roucek deplored. Jana Bobosikova (NA, Czech Republic) asked for an apology from Daniel Cohn-Bendit who had accused Vaclav Klaus of having sought to buy votes from senators.
Irish Socialist Proinsias de Rossa considered the debate welcome to deal with the transition towards the Lisbon Treaty. He promised to work for the “yes” vote during the forthcoming Irish referendum and congratulated the Czechs who “have voted for the future”. Also delighted by this discussion, Avril Doyle (Fine Gael) said she expected the result of the second referendum to be positive. Her compatriot, Mairead McGuinness (Fine Gael), said “the Irish know the situation - they made a mistake”. “I am asking them to vote for the future of our children”, she added.
Catherine Guy-Quint was the last to speak, with an outburst against British Conservatives and other speakers who had, among other things, challenged the parliamentary ratification method: “You must not confuse democracy and demagogy!. “This Treaty will bring transparency (…) - transparency that is essential to combat the cancer of national egoism that is eating away at political Europe!” (H.B./O.J./transl.jl)