World View Paul GillespieIn a crisp and pointed assessment of the problems facing the European Union the Laeken Declaration of December 2001 said it "needs to become more democratic, more transparent and more efficient". They mandated the Convention on the Future of Europe to prepare a draft constitutional treaty to address those tasks.
Gathered again 19 months later here in Porto Carras, near Thessaloniki, they spent yesterday morning evaluating the Convention's work. It helps to recall the "three basic challenges" facing the EU the Laeken document went on to identify: "How to bring citizens, and primarily the young, closer to the European design and the European institutions; how to organise politics and the European political area in an enlarged Union; and how to develop the Union into a stabilising factor and a model in the new multipolar world."
The draft constitutional treaty produced by the Convention is certainly more transparent than the tatterdemalion ones it is intended to replace. Part I describes basic values, objectives, institutions and competences in an accessible and readable fashion. It is cross-referenced to part II, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which it is now proposed will be incorporated in the treaty; to part III, dealing in detail with the policies and functioning of the Union; and with part IV, the brief general and final provisions.
The document as a whole is, therefore, much longer than the 18th-century US Constitution. As John Hume argued in these pages this is because we live in much more complex societies and political systems. But it is also because the document is a draft treaty. Since the EU is neither a state nor a nation but an original transnational entity many more of its policies and functional rules have to be spelled out in a detailed treaty than is the case in national constitutions. Parts I and II are much shorter, about the length of the Irish Constitution. They simplify and explain the EU's raison d'etre clearly for any interested citizen - a real achievement.
Transparency without power reduces politics to spectacle. Democracy and efficiency, the other Laeken benchmark tests, must also be applied to the draft constitution. Since democracy is a highly-contested concept even in national settings, how much more is that the case in this transnational one. The draft text distinguishes between the principle of representative democracy, on which the EU "shall be founded" and the principle of participatory democracy which gives "citizens and representatives organisations the opportunity to make known and publicly exchange their views on all areas of Union action."
According to Article I-45 "citizens are directly represented at Union level in the European Parliament. Member-states are represented in the European Council and the Council by their governments, themselves accountable to national parliaments, elected by their citizens." Every citizen has the right to participate on an equal basis in the EU's democratic life, while political parties at European level "contribute to forming political awareness and to expressing the will of Union citizens."
The draft adds little new to European citizenship rights compared to previous treaties. "Every national of a member-state shall be a citizen of the Union," according to Article I-8. "Citizenship of the Union shall be additional to national citizenship; it shall not replace it." Thus the existing link between ethno-national identities and political citizenship is reinforced, disappointing those who hoped to see a more inclusive definition giving rights to third-country immigrants.
The five citizenship rights already established are restated: to move in the EU; to vote and stand for local and European elections where they reside; to receive diplomatic and consular assistance from any member-state in third countries; and to petition the European Parliament and Ombudsman directly. A late addition allows one million signatories to petition the EU Commission to take an initiative.
Proposals for direct election of the Commission president alongside the five-yearly European Parliament elections, as put forward by John Bruton, a member of the Convention's executive praesidium, attracted little or no support. Federalists say it would interfere with the established direct citizen access through the Parliament, while inter-governmentalists see it as hopelessly premature or dangerously misconceived.
An Irish Government proposal that an electoral college of national parliaments and the European Parliament would choose the president also failed to gather support (although national parliaments' role is otherwise strengthened in policing EU competences). Instead the text says European political leaders will take the European elections into account in nominating a candidate as Commission president for approval by the European Parliament.
Thus the European Parliament is central to the democratic test of the draft constitution. The Convention increases its powers. Its legislative co-decision is extended to 46 new areas covered by qualified majority voting, assuming all are agreed. If such increased power confers democratic salience with voters this is a net gain. Whether it does so will depend crucially on how well its political party groups adapt to their representative role. They shape the Parliament's behaviour - but not voter choice, which continues to be dominated by domestic politics.
Unless the quality of that electoral connection improves a Europeanised politics is unlikely. It could be helped by this week's agreement on funding of European party group campaigns, increasing national identification with them. If they each nominate a candidate for Commission president a competitive aspect would be introduced, increasing the connection.
Efficiency, the third Laeken benchmark, will test the new institutions proposed to govern an enlarged EU to the limits. The Convention solves many problems and on balance strengthens the main institutions; but it leaves relations between them unsatisfactory in the longer term, making it likely this treaty will require renewal fairly soon. Political identity is grown within and without. New EU foreign policy structures and policies are required to deal with an uncertain world and a changing transatlantic setting. If this is not handled within the EU system, largely by extending majority voting and increasing political controls it will develop by using provisions for enhanced co-operation between the most committed states.
pgillespie@irish-times.ie