The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
For me, like for Migeru, the first improvement should be to give more power to the European Parliament. That's the reason why, along with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, made me support the Constitutional Treaty.
Another way to improve democracy in the EU should be to work on the relationship between the European level and the national/local level. At the moment, they are very much disconnected form each other, and it is true both for the institutions/administrations and the civil society organisations.
Paradoxically, it is probably because the European Union is not bureaucratic enough (Solveig!)... As Migeru mentioned it, given the size of the EU (now ~500 millions of citizens), the European Commission has a surprising low number of agents (you could almost drown them in a big bathtub... well, maybe a swimming pool!). What is less known is that it's also true for the civil society organisations like the trade unions, the employers organisations and the NGOs as well as the national representations: their Brussels-based teams are very small. For example, in the European permanent secretariat of the European Trade-Unions Confederation, there is at the most one or two team members coming from a given country, and some countries have no permanent member in the team. Ditto for Business Europe and UEAPME (the employer's organisations), let alone the NGOs.
These teams are usually very knowledgeable about the functioning of the European institutions and they have developed a high level of competence in working together. however, their small size has an important consequence: each person in these small teams has a very heavy workload (meeting MEP, preparing dossiers, participating in negotiations, attending commissions and work groups, informing/training new member states representatives...) and thus they have no time left to play the essential role of go-between with their colleagues at national and local levels in order to share their knowledge and disseminate information. The result is the existence of a micro-society which is very efficient (yes!), but disconnected from the national and local level. And I think it is true also for the European political parties and for the MEP who are really involved in the parliament (unlike most of the French ones!).
And here is the vicious circle: given the high level of skills and knowledge of these people, and the necessary cost/time to acquire them, and given the depth of their commitment, the turn-over is very low, so there is little dissemination of knowledge/information through "shuttle" effect. And this problem would remain even if we had a bicameral system.
Even if I think they should be reinforced, I don't think the solution is to develop huge Brussels-based teams. In my opinion, the solution requires to work at several levels:
As to what to do, I'd suggest - get ET noticed! In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
I am not opposed to a real bicameral parliament for Europe. However, this kind of institution means the transformation of the EU into a federal system. As far as I know, there is, so far, little support among European citizens for such a solution. Until there is a majority of Europeans willing to go for it, we have to deal with a the hybrid system we've got.
I do not know if there is such resitance to a straightforward bicameral parliament. I have the impression that the parliament is the most trusted part of the EU structure, so increasing parlamentarian power (in two chambers) should be popular. I have more the impression that governments constituting the Council is unwilling to give up their powers. Is there any polls around that could give indications? Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
Oh, that was not what you were asking. So what are you asking, how it should be structured to be popular (among the populations of Europe) or how it should be structured to satisfy my visions of Europe (una grande et democratica)? Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
For EU constitution I would choose (in order of descending preferability):
So either it's a representative of the then current government of the country, or it's a new class of representatives that would be elected specifically for that purpose.
I suspect that the latter would create all sorts of power sharing conundrums, so the first one is more practical - and is what is happening already in effect via the Council.
Alternatively, you may consider that the real second chamber is the COREPER, which I'll let you google... In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
While we are at it, I think we should also discuss the role of the European Economic and Social Committee and of the Committee of the Regions... "Dieu se rit des hommes qui se plaignent des conséquences alors qu'ils en chérissent les causes" Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet
I don't know whether the second chamber should discuss laws for those realms of policy were there will be veto power for individual countries. Since veto is not certain, and since this would not be a senate like the US or any other federation, I suggest that on those matters there should not be head counting; just two outcomes: approved or not approved.
The issue is its composition. Lets see its requirements:
Lack of commitment is the reason that came to mind. Making them hold sessions during one week, in the same place - Brussels -, instead of week end marathons here and there, is an adequate display of the everyday business of negotiations between sovereign, yet hardly independent, countries.
I just cannot see how government heads would let go any of its powers to someone else of its own nationality. Can you? One week for europe and three for strictly your own country seems a good compromise. you don't realise the full magnitude of this change. ... Actually, I think the EU is already much more than what we are taken to realise.
(what follows may be off topic. I just assume that you have federalism in mind) I've nothing against federalism, except that is a higher concentration of power. I distrust large countries. They are prone to destructive policies, home and abroad. May be a european federation is better. Let's make different errors, better errors, said Samuel Beckett. At the national level, I've nothing to lose. However, I've the EU to lose. I remember Jacques Delors - "the european community is a slow animal, better that it goes in the right direction". In fact, federalism is the only subject which makes me feel pleasant about mortality: cannot imagine the ability to decide for futures generations on this subject.
I do think it is a good idea that important, specialised parts of the portfolio are segregated and that the respective ministers attend.
Of course, each National government could have a "minister for European Affairs" (this could well be "European and Foreign Affairs" in charge of attending all EU councils. But, at the end of the day, sometimes the head of state or government has to be the one at the meeting to agree to the big decisions.
So, like I said, the current configuration is probably the correct one. The issue is, can the Council be expected to operate under roll-call votes all the time, rather than secret votes? The European Parliament already publishes voting records for every vote that it conducts. We have met the enemy, and it is us — Pogo
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 23 7 comments
by Oui - Feb 22 8 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 20 3 comments
by gmoke - Feb 14 2 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 19 13 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 15 23 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 14 13 comments
by Oui - Feb 17 38 comments
by Oui - Feb 25
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 237 comments
by Oui - Feb 228 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 203 comments
by Oui - Feb 2018 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 1913 comments
by Oui - Feb 195 comments
by Oui - Feb 18
by Oui - Feb 1738 comments
by Oui - Feb 168 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 1523 comments
by gmoke - Feb 142 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 1413 comments
by Oui - Feb 144 comments
by Oui - Feb 1238 comments
by Oui - Feb 774 comments
by Oui - Feb 665 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 518 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 412 comments
by Oui - Feb 136 comments