“Vive L’Europe” – These were the closing words of Giscard d’Estaing’s opening speech. And he was not the only person that was positive concerning the convention. Both the presidium and the convention members were fully aware that this was a very special day. Valéry Giscard d’Estaing and many others mentioned the historical example for this new European institution: The Philadelphia convention.

Underlining the great impact of the European Parliament on the creation of the convention, new elected EP-President Pat Cox made his contribution in stressing the importance of the convention. In his eyes, the convention marks a revolutionary step forward by changing the integration method.

Mr. Prodi had a clear idea of the aim of the convention: “It is your tasks to find the answers!”. Unclear was nevertheless which questions he referred to. Ms Maij-Weggen, MEP from the Netherlands stressed that the Convention should only concentrate on the important questions and not on all 60 questions raised in the Laeken declaration.

It is not surprising that 105 convention members from 28 countries have different ideas about the question, whether an issue is important or not. Nevertheless it was clear that there is a certain agreement on several interesting topics. All of the speakers at day one, be they members of the convention or of the presidium, mentioned transparency, democracy, enlargement, and the involvement of the civil society.

In order to make the European Union transparent, Olivier Duhamel, a French MEP, found an easy solution: “We have to make the European Union understandable for citizens: simplify, simplify, simplify.”

A Finnish Convention member made clear, that however it might be called, the convention is dealing with a constitution of a federal state. Concepts of a confederation or a “federation of nation states” seem old-fashioned to him. He asked for a brand new model, making representative democracy also possible on a supranational level.

Even if it was just the first session there were already concrete proposals for the future structure of the European Union. Mr. Amato stressed, that there is a need to define the seperation of powers in Brussels: “We need Montesquieu in Brussels”, he referred to the founder of the modern concept of separation of powers. The European Parliament and the Council should think about new laws and the European Commission should execute these decisions. Many other politicians demanded a strengthening of the European Parliament as basis for any reform.

Europe’s task is not only to clean up her own house, but also to take up responsibility in the world. Mr. Prodi made this clear in his speech. “Firstly, as Europeans, we must take our share of the responsibility for peace and development in the world. The future of the world is at stake, the lives of millions of human beings forced to live in indescribable poverty and the fate of the innocent, who are forced to pay the highest price for senseless wars. And none of our states, acting alone, can do this.”

Mr. Giscard d’Estaing explained the procedures of the convention. Firstly, in a so-called listening period opinions will be collected, concepts and ideas wil find their way into the assembly. Then the working period will start, where concrete things will be elaborate. Finally, the recommendations will be presented to the governments as well as to public. He also pointed out that the convention cannot compared with any other conference or assembly. Its success depends largely on the efforts and the will of its members.

Mr. Dehaene, being responsible within the presidium for contacts with the civil-society, stressed several times that the public should have the possibility to give an input into the debate inside convention. He emphasised, that the final outcome has to be supported by the citizens of Europe. Since the convention will not be able to listen to every organisation and to every citizen, he mentioned the necessity for streamlining: groups with similar interests should get together and express their ideas together. Most of the open network for the civil society will be based on the internet [http://european-convention.eu.int/], there is already a forum [http://europa.eu.int/futurum/forum-convention/] established. On the European level there will be hearings to different topics. National convention members and national governments will be responsible to organise further activities on the national and local level.

The important role, that the youth will play for the future of Europe was mentioned several times by Mr. Giscard d’Estaing and Mr. Dehaene. Both mentioned a special Youth-Convention. This sounds like an excellent idea, but a succeeding press-conference showed, that there is no clear idea yet how it should be organised and by whom.

It was interesting to see, that many of the 35 convention members coming from applicant countries, took the floor. They appreciated the possibility to be involved in the discussion and contributed to the debate from the beginning.

During the first meeting it became obvious as well, that the normal convention members are not willing to agree to all of the presidium’s proposals, as it was feared before. The “rules of procedure” could not be voted on, since many convention members complained ahead of the meeting about not having had enough time to read it through. Elmar Brok asked the presidium to take a seat in the middle of the convention, and not to sit in front and above of the other members. Not only the representation of women in the presidium is poor. Like a member of the convention complained, there is not a single representative of the applicant countries in the presidium.

Finally there is to say, that the civil society accepted the invitation to take part in the discussion even before it was officially mentioned. The evening before the opening of the convention, JEF and UEF organised a panel discussion, named “The ‘Constitutional Convention’: What are the prospects for the federation of Europe?”. The panel was made up by Jean-Luc Dehaene, Inigo Mendez De Vigo, Michel Barnier and Janos Martonyi. The room in the European Parliament was full with enthusiastic Europeans, being keen to join the debate. Many similar events will be organised in the next weeks and months, feel free to visit our calendar.

Jan Kreutz
Vice-President JEF-Europe
jan.kreutz@jef-europe.net