Dear Europeans,

Two weeks ago we experienced one of the most important and remarkable Convention plenaries. After the heated debates outside the Convention, last plenary finally discussed the issues of the future institutional structure of the European Union. Some 80 speakers took the opportunity to voice their opinion.

A large majority of the Convention members referred in their contributions to the German-French proposal on institutions, which was published a few days before the Convention plenary (we published it in the last bulletin). Although the representatives of the French and the German governments are important players in the Convention, we have bear in mind that there are 103 other full Convention members. This was stressed by Andrew Duff MEP who published, together with a large number of other Convention members, a paper on institutions. In the paper he summarised several topics that the majority of the Convention members seem to agree on, although Giscard d'Estaing has so far refused to accept these majority opinions.

"Mr President, first of all I would like to recommend the new contribution, 487/03, from myself and 30-plus colleagues, which summarises 25 key elements of institutional reform. These cover fairly familiar ground and they are all aimed to strengthen the Institutions and to separate the executive powers more clearly from the legislative powers. [...] It would be sensible today for us to be very precise about what we can agree upon, so that we can move on sharply to debate the areas of disagreement.
Speaking of disagreement, I turn now to 489/03, which has been signed by two members of the Convention, one French and one German. There is common ground between some of their proposals and some of ours, but not, unfortunately, concerning the issue of executive power. The Franco-German proposal seeks to combine two contrasting approaches: one for a presidential-style Europe and the other for a parliamentary-style Europe. Frankly, I do not think the proposal is a proper compromise between them. Instead it is a cut-and-paste exercise, juxtaposition without synthesis, and the problem is that it accentuates the difference between the federal and the non-federal parts of our system. There would be a super-president of the European Council, beyond parliamentary control, plus three sorts of presidency of the Council of Ministers. This would make legitimacy, consistency, more of a problem than they are at present. The functions of the super-president to supervise the decisions of the European Council seem only to bear a passing relationship with the broadly strategic functions of the body itself; worse, they would also duplicate and compete with the functions of the President of the Commission.
I fear that we are seeking here to formalise rivalry between the Commission and the Council, whereas in fact it is greater synergy that is required."

[Speech of Adrew Duff in the Convention Plenary 20th January 2003.]

"Meine Damen und Herren, ich freue mich ja, dass der deutsch-französische Motor wieder läuft, wünsche mir aber, dass man bei Gelegenheit den Rückwärtsgang rausnimmt, damit wir nicht im 19. Jahrhundert enden. Ich glaube, die Sehnsucht der Europäerinnen und Europäer nach einem Napoleon IV. und auch nach dem Modell, nach dem die deutschen Kurfürsten ihren Kaiser gewählt haben, ist begrenzt!"

Rough Translation: "Ladies and Gentleman, I am glad that the German-French Motor is running again, but I would wish that sometimes the revearse gear would be taken out, so we do not end up in the 19th Century. I believe, the longing of the Europeans for a Napoleon IV and also for the system, the German elector princes used to elect their Emperor, is limited."

[Parts of the Speech of Johannes Voggenhuber in the Convention Plenary 21st January 2003.]

Reply to questions from Jan Kreutz, Vice-President of JEF Europe (jan.kreutz@jef-europe.net)

1. What is your general impression of the work of the Convention so far?

The Convention is tackling a hugely challenging task confidently and competently. We're looking at the fundamental issues at the heart of how Europe will work. It’s clear that an efficient EU with 25 Member States will need strengthened institutions. I think the Convention is doing a very good job of preparing the ground for each Member State to decide on Europe's future at the next Intergovernmental Conference.

We are taking the Convention very seriously. As the Prime Minister Tony Blair said, “now is a moment in time when isolation from decision-making is not just pointless but immensely damaging. There are debates here that have to be won.”

2. What are your five most important points to be included in the European Constitution?

In my view the five most important points that a Constitution should include are:

· What the EU is – a union of sovereign states who have decided to pool some of that sovereignty, in order to secure peace and prosperity and liberty in Europe and the wider world.
· The EU’s mission, in simple language.
· The role and responsibilities of the union’s institutions.
· The clear distinction between supranational and national competencies.
· The core policies the EU needs to fulfil its mission.

3. What role does the Convention play in the political agenda of the British Government?

Summary of the session on 20th and 21st January 2003 on institutions:

OPENING OF THE SESSION

President Giscard D'Estaing opened the plenary session of the Convention by recalling that the Praesidium was working on a first group of articles of the draft Constitutional treaty and hoped to be able shortly to present them as a proposal to the Convention. In addition, an analysis and categorisation of the existing treaty articles, according to whether, and to what extent, they required amending was underway. This should allow the Praesidium to prepare a mandate for the group of legal experts from the three institutions who would begin work on those articles which required only technical modifications, with a view to submitting drafts to the Convention.

To read the full report: http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/03/cv00/cv00508en03.pdf

De Villepin: Monsieur le Président, chers Collègues, mon ami Joschka Fischer a parfaitement présenté la proposition du Chancelier Schröder et du Président Chirac.

Notre contribution exprime un engagement résolu en faveur de l'Europe. Elle vise, par un renforcement du triangle institutionnel, à concilier la double inspiration de l'Europe, celles des Etats et celle des peuples, pour une Europe plus forte. Dans un monde où l'enjeu est aujourd'hui la guerre ou la paix, l'Europe doit tenir sa place, car le monde a besoin d'Europe. Nous voulons plus d'Europe et donc une Union plus efficace à la fois pour décider et agir, une Union plus démocratique et légitime pour susciter l'adhésion des citoyens, une Union plus transparente pour être comprise et aimée. Deux préoccupations centrales nous ont animés : d'abord respecter l'équilibre institutionnel en renforçant chacune des trois grandes institutions, qui sont au coeur de l'idée de Fédération d'Etats-nations et ensuite, nous avons voulu dépasser les clivages (entre communautaires et intergouvernementaux, entre petits et grands Etats, entre Conseil, Commission et Parlement ...). Ce sont autant de freins à la capacité d'agir de l'Union. Notre système institutionnel doit respecter l'égalité entre tous les Etats membres, définir les responsabilités entre les institutions, renforcer leur coopération.

Fischer: Herr Präsident, gestatten Sie mir, dass ich aus unserer Sicht die deutsch-französische Initiative dem Konvent erläutere. Im Konvent gibt es zwei unterschiedliche Herangehensweisen an die künftige institutionelle Architektur. Einige konzentrieren ihre Überlegungen auf die Rolle des Rates und seiner Vorsitzfrage, andere auf die künftige Rolle des Europäischen Parlaments und der Kommission.

Deutschland und Frankreich haben den Versuch unternommen, diese scheinbar gegensätzlichen Sichtweisen in einem Modell zusammenzuführen, und zwar mit dem Ziel einer demokratischen und handlungsfähigen Union. Wir hoffen, dass unsere gemeinsamen Anregungen dem Konvent einen wichtigen Impuls für seine Beratungen geben können.

Prise de position des Premiers Ministres et des Ministres des Affaires étrangères du Benelux suite à la Contribution franco-allemande à la Convention européenne sur l'architecture institutionnelle de l'Union

Le Benelux prend note avec intérêt de la contribution de la France et de l’Allemagne aux travaux de la Convention sur l’Avenir de l’Europe au moment où celle-ci entame le débat sur l’avenir institutionnel de l’Union élargie.

Les partenaires du Benelux partagent avec l’Allemagne et la France le souci de maintenir une architecture institutionnelle de l’Union efficace et démocratique afin de permettre à l’Union élargie d’atteindre ses objectifs.

Comme ils l’ont signalé dans le mémorandum publié le 4 décembre, l’Union européenne doit disposer d’institutions communes fortes, privilégier et étendre la méthode communautaire et renforcer les éléments institutionnels aptes à promouvoir l’intérêt commun. Il importe de rendre les institutions existantes plus efficaces, et non pas de rendre l’architecture institutionnelle plus complexe. Le Benelux n’est pas favorable à la création de nouvelles institutions telle la création d’un Congrès.

Contribution by Mr Elmar Brok, Mr Karel De Gucht, Mr Lamberto Dini, Mr Elio Di Rupo, Mr Andrew Duff, Mr Olivier Duhamel, Mr Caspar Einem, Mr Ben Fayot, Mr Paul Helminger, Mrs Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Mr Peeter Kreitzberg, Mr Alain Lamassoure, Mrs Johanna Maij-Weggen, Mr Luis Marinho, Dr Jurgen Meyer, Mr Louis Michel, Mr Jozef Oleksy, Mrs Anne Van Lancker, Mr Johannes Voggenhuber, and Mr Josef Zieleniec, Members of the Convention; and by Mrs Pervenche Beres, Mrs Maria Berger, Mr Carlos Carnero Gonzalez, Mr John Cushnahan, Mr Neil MacCormick, Lord Maclennan, Mrs Eleana Paciotti, Mr Nicolas Schmit, Mr Adrian Severin, Mr Istvan Szent-Ivanyi, and Mr Wim Van Eekelen, Alternate Members of the Convention.

KEY ELEMENTS OF INSTITUTIONAL REFORM

Heartened by the work of the Convention so far, the signatories to this contribution have reached broad and firm agreement on the following proposals for institutional reform.
The list is not exhaustive and is in summary form, yet it comprises an indispensable reform package if the enlarged Union is to be more simple, efficient, effective, transparent and, above all, democratic.

CONTRIBUTION DÉPOSÉE PAR OLIVIER DUHAMEL SUR LA DÉSIGNATION DU PRÉSIDENT DE LA COMMISSION

La Convention doit s’accorder sur une série de questions institutionnelles. La construction des consensus en la matière est plus difficile qu’elle ne le fut sur des questions déjà tranchées comme l’incorporation de la Charte, la personnalité juridique unique de l’Union ou la simplification des instruments et des procédures.

Cette grande difficulté vient d’abord de ce que chaque Conventionnel ou presque a en tête un schéma institutionnel précis, et qu’il en existe une multitude. Elle est accrue par les effets, réels ou supposés, que la solution retenue pour une institution aura sur les autres. Nombre de Conventionnels sont contre une présidence durable du Conseil européen parce qu’ils craignent un affaiblissement de la Commission, d’autres contre l’élection du président de la Commission par le Parlement parce qu’ils redoutent un affaiblissement du Conseil européen, etc...

Nous n’avancerons pas si chacun reste figé sur son modèle de prédilection et tous les choix qui s’en déduisent. Pas davantage si l’on ne cesse de raisonner en opposant les institutions les unes aux autres.

La présente contribution veut participer à une réflexion ouverte sur la désignation du président de la Commission. Elle implique d’être clair sur ce que nous voulons et aussi précis que possible sur les moyens d’y parvenir.

To read the document see: http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/03/cv00/cv00506en03.pdf

The drafting of the Constitution should take account of the citizens’ point of view on the functioning of the Union’s Institutions. This contribution is based on my seven years experience as European Ombudsman in handling citizens’ complaints.

Openness European citizens still believe that the Institutions function too secretively. The last ten years have brought significant progress towards openness in many Union Institutions and bodies, but there is still much to do.

Democracy is a fundamental value and openness is an essential part of democracy. The Constitution’s statement of fundamental values should reflect this by retaining the phrase, added by the Amsterdam Treaty, that decisions in the Union are taken “as openly as possible.” (Art. 1 TEU).

The Union’s legislative bodies should comply with normal democratic principles by meeting in public. This point is made in the preliminary draft Constitutional Treaty (Art. 36), in Mr BROK’s draft Constitution (Art. 104), as well as in the “Penelope” draft (Art. 87.2), which was recently submitted as a contribution to the Convention (CONV 481/03).

To read the full document see: http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/03/cv00/cv00505en03.pdf.

Contribution from Lena Hjelm-Wallén, Dick Roche and Teija Tiilikainen to the discussion on a Constitutional Treaty: Openness and good administration in the EU institutions

It is generally accepted that a precondition for democracy in the Union is that all citizens should be able to influence the formulation and implementation of the Union’s policies. To realise this it is necessary to work towards more open, efficient and accountable EU institutions. It is not too bold to claim that the future health of the Union depends on citizens’ trust and confidence in the workings of the institutions. The new Treaty must demonstrate that the Member States of the Union take these issues seriously and should clearly state what principles should apply in the administration of the institutions.

To read the full document see: http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/03/cv00/cv00490en03.pdf.

Introduction

1. The social content of European integration, the social face of Europe, is a matter of crucial concern for the citizens of the Union. It is also a matter that has become prominent in the deliberations of the Convention. European citizens are at one with their representatives in their concern over employment, conditions of work, social security, people's welfare before they become professionally active, while they are active and after they retire with an adequate pension available to all.

2. Social considerations constitute an essential part of European integration. The EU cannot be a credible force for good in the wider world if it is indifferent to questions of social justice in European society or to how its citizens are treated at work and in retirement. As set out in Article 2 TEC: "The Community has the mission, by means of creating a common market, an economic and monetary union… to promote… a high level of employment and social protection". Social regulation is seen as a means necessary for the advancement of the common market itself. "The Treaty of 1957 already included a chapter on Social Policy (Part III, Title III, Chapter I) as well as a chapter on the free movement of workers (Part II, Title III, Chapter I). On this basis already in 1958 the Council adopted regulations on the free movement of workers (No. 15) and on the coordination of social security of workers (No. 3 and 4). In 1967 a Directive in the field of occupational safety and health (Directive 67/548/EEC was adopted. Finally, with the European enterprise proceeding from the early phase of a common market to the mature form of a community of values, "economic and social progress" are proclaimed in Article 2 TEU as major aims of the European Union.

To read the full preliminary draft report see: http://European-Convention.eu.int/docs/wd11/6873.pdf.

The final report of the working group has not been published yet, but within the next days you will be able to find the final report of the working group on: http://European-Convention.eu.int/doc_wg.asp?lang=EN.

Let's Leave God Out of This

Josep Borrell Fontelles

It is usually said that Europe is a meeting point of values within a geographical space. However, after the rise of the neo-liberal policies without a social balance, with the imminent enlargement towards the East and the Turkish question on the horizon, it is necessary to specify both the values and the geography of the European project.

In this debate about Europe’s being and raison d’être, two different but related events have recently had a bearing: the request by the Pope to include a reference to God and to the heritage of the Christian faith in the new European Constitution; and the declarations by the President of the Convention, V. Giscard d’Estaing, affirming that the adhesion of Turkey would mean the end of the European Union. The combination of these two positions, with a tendency to consider Europe as a “Christian Club” and consequently excluding a great country with a Muslim background like Turkey, is as inevitable as dangerous.

"Religious reference in the Constitutional Treaty"

The Secretary-General of the Convention has received the contribution from
Mr Joachim Wuermeling, alternate member of the Convention. This contribution has been co-signed by 21 members and alternate members of the Convention.

Elmar Brok; Dr. József Szájer; Adrian Severin; Hildegard Puwak; Constantin Ene; Dr. Hannes Farnleitner; René van der Linden; Frantiýek Kroupa; George Vella; John Bruton; Mihael Brejc; Ivan Korcok; Jan Figel; Antonio Tajani; Erwin Teufel; Evripidis Stylianidis; Janusz Trzcinski; Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis; John Inguanez; Edmund Wittbrodt; Marta Fogler.

The Constitutional Treaty should create a Union of freedom, values and responsibility. The ethical roots of Europe are also found in its religious heritage. This should be recognized in the future Constitution.

Der Konvent muss die Ratsreform differenziert angehen – Präsidenten und Vorsitzende allein sind keine Lösung

Eine verbesserte Effektivität des EU-Ratssystems erfordert drei Reformschritte:
- die Ausweitung der Entscheidungen mit qualifizierter Mehrheit,
- die Trennung von exekutiven und legislativen Funktionen, und
- die Klärung der Frage des Vorsitzes.

Letztere bestimmt derzeit die politische Diskussion; allein ihre Lösung wird einer auf 25 Staaten und mehr anwachsenden EU allerdings kaum zu mehr Effektivität verhelfen.

Eine konsensfähige Reform des Ratssystems, welche die Handlungsfähigkeit der EU erhöht und dabei die Ausbalancierung der nationalstaatlichen Interessen innerhalb der EU berücksichtigt, wird Elemente einer Wahl-, Team- und Rotationspräsidentschaft beinhalten müssen.

"The debates in the Convention on Monday and Tuesday about the institutions of the EU were good for Europe", said Jo Leinen (PES), vice-president of the Constitutional Affairs Committee in the European Parliament. A majority of speakers (47 out of 77) rejected an elected president of the European Council. It would thus be a violation of the Convention if after this debate the idea of an elected president of the European Council were to reappear in the proposals of the president or the presidium of the Convention, emphasised Leinen. "More democracy" in the EU must be the message from the work of the Convention to Europe's citizens. President Giscard d' Estaing should now produce concrete text drafts which truely reflect the great majority in the Convention on the institutional issues.

Brussels, January 22 2003

The President of the Committee of the Regions, Albert Bore, and the CoR delegation to the European Convention held an exchange of views with Convention President Valery Giscard d'Estaing on 20 January during a reception in advance of the Convention's forthcoming plenary session on regional and local authorities, scheduled for 7 February.

Albert Bore welcomed the Convention's discussion on the positioning of Europe's regional and local authorities and the Committee of the Regions as their representative body in Europe within the future Constitutional treaty.

"I hope that the Convention's meeting of 7 February will be an opportunity for representatives from all spheres of European governance to focus their attention on the role and potential of local and regional authorities in the European democratic process.

The European Convention is not just a forum to re-think the high politics of Europe but also has an obligation to address the relationship between the principle of proximity set out in the Laeken declaration and the local dimension where citizens interact with the European policy making process on a daily basis.

This debate concerns all political representatives, not only those from the towns and cities. It introduces a more dynamic approach to subsidiarity as an active relationship between local, regional, national and European spheres of governance. This was set out in the European Parliament's recent Napolitano report on the role of regional and local authorities in European integration.

Presenting the case for a stronger role for the Committee of the Regions and Europe's local and regional authorities does not call into question the authority of member states or complicate the EU decision-making process.
The contribution we offer responds to the Convention's objectives for a more efficient, joined up relationship that reflects the interdependencies between all European democratic bodies.

Recognising the policy shaping potential of local and regional authorities as the primary implementers of European legislation leads to improved co-ordination, transparency and proximity between Europe and the citizen.

My colleagues in the Committee of the Regions will take these ideas forward with the members of the European Convention on 7 February and we welcome President Giscard d'Estaing's recognition of the importance of this debate."

EWLA welcomes the Preliminary Draft Constitutional Treaty of the Convention’s Praesidium (Draft), the Commission’s Communication of 12.12.2002 and the Commission’s Feasibility Study (F.S.). Drawing on its previous contributions, EWLA presents its first comments on this Draft, which are available under:
Download file

released on Tuesday, 21 January 2003

The Young European Federalists (JEF-Europe) welcome the fact that a clear majority of the Convention members have spoken in favour of a federal model of the European Union at this week’s plenary session.

“There is clearly a broad consensus in the Convention that the president of the European Commission has to be elected through the European Parliament.” stated Alison Weston, President of JEF-Europe. “Additionally, members are also not in favour of the intergovernmental proposal of the German and French government to elect a permanent President of the Council. The federal model for Europe is clearly gaining ground.”

THE UNITY OF EUROPE

The Constitution establishes the unity of Europe.

It shall establish European unity in a valid, albeit non-final, form. It bestows a high degree of democratic legitimacy on its laws and its actions. It shall empower and entrust the Union to overcome the historic divisions in Europe by admitting all the European states willing and able to accede to it. It shall render the Union capable to act both internally and in the world at large, and it shall prepare the way for an ecologically and socially sustainable development.

This Constitution shall not create a European federal state. The future development of the Constitution will determine the final goal of European unification. The Union shall therefore not have the right to amend its Constitution on the basis of its own sovereignty, to assume competences, to collect taxes, to incur debts, and to lead wars.