FEPS Policy Brief July 2021

A PROGRESSIVE APPROACH TO THE CONFERENCE ON THE FUTURE OF EUROPE

Summary About the author:

The Conference on the Future of Europe is the widest process of engagement with citizens, besides elections, that the European Union has ever undertaken, but as such it has enormous potentials as well as risks. Richard Corbett The main risk will be to result in a big disappointment, if proposals supported by citizens will be not followed up by the European institutions. British politician and former Member of the However, it can also offer a great opportunity to progressives to introduce (1996-2009 and 2014- 20) for the S&D Group largely-needed changes in the European construction, enhancing the European Union’s capacity to act and deliver in a number of cross-border sectors (from healthcare to climate change, from economic justice to migration), and strengthening its democratic accountability and transparency. This Policy Brief offers some proposals, among the many that could and will be discussed, that could be embraced by European progressives and that may help to make the European Union and its institutions increasingly understandable to European citizens.

A progressive approach to the Conference on the Future of

Europe

Richard Corbett

British politician and former Member of the European Parliament (1996-2009 and 2014-20) for the S&D Group

Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...... 2 2. From policy goals to capacity to deliver ...... 2 3. Capacity needs accountability ...... 5 3.1 The veto (again) ...... 6 3.2 Full European and national parliamentary scrutiny of legislation...... 6 3.3 Citizens’ initiatives ...... 6 3.4 Elections and appointments ...... 7 3.5 Transnational lists in a pan-EU constituency ...... 8 3.6 Other ways of improving European elections ...... 8 3.7 Simplifying ...... 9 4. How to get these points across ...... 9 5. Conclusion ...... 9 ABOUT THE AUTHORS ...... 10 FEPS WORK ON RELATED TOPICS ...... 11

1 A progressive approach to the Conference on the Future of Europe Richard Corbett

1. Introduction The latter is perhaps the greatest risk. The final report of the conference will be finalised by The Conference on the Future of Europe has ‘consensus’ of an Executive Board in which enormous potential – but also risks. three representatives each of the European It is the widest process of engagement with Commission, the Council and the European citizens that the European Union has ever Parliament must all agree. Above all, its organised outside of elections, involving recommendations need subsequent follow up: deliberative discussions and any of them that require unanimous approval consultation exercises in all member states, an of member states (such as any modification to interactive Multilingual Digital Platform on the field of competence of the EU, any change which any citizen or group of citizens may place in its budgetary resources, any reallocation of their contribution and comment on those of the main spending priorities defined in the EU’s others and national and pan-European Citizens’ multiannual financial framework, or any Panels with randomly selected participants. change in the EU’s powers or decision-taking These will all feed ideas and proposals into a procedures) face this high hurdle. Some Conference Plenary, where representatives governments currently say that they do not from the citizens panels, social partners and support making changes to the EU treaties. civil society representatives will meet with We should also be aware that the Conference elected representatives from the will be the target of campaigns of various kinds: national parliaments, European Parliament, some promoting a specific policy, others a national governments, and regions, to try to particular institutional change – but also some secure broad political backing for the most that want to discredit the whole exercise supported ideas coming up from citizens. because they oppose the EU and do not want It therefore has the potential to engage a vast anything that might lead to its success. It may number of citizens in informed debate about well be targeted by extremist groups or foreign the EU and its future, and to distil broadly powers. accepted demands about EU priorities and the This paper looks at how to make a success of way it works. It will be the first joint public the process from a progressive perspective and reflection on the future of the EU since the Convention on the Future of Europe 20 years at how those who are constructively critical of ago. It would be surprising if it doesn’t produce aspects of the EU can turn it into an some follow-up – every previous major opportunity to press for change. exercise of reflection and reform (from the joint Parliamentary Assizes in 1990 to the 1996 2. From policy goals to capacity to deliver Reflection Group to the 2010-11 Convention) Initial debates under the umbrella of the has eventually led to some significant changes Conference are likely to focus on policies and to the EU, even if they fell short of some political priorities for EU action: what do expectations. citizens think we should be doing together at There are also risks: that there are technical EU level (and what we should not), what should problems with the platform or with the be the EU's priorities, where should its policies citizens’ panels (neither of which have been be strengthened: climate change and the attempted before on such a scale); or that environment? health? economic fairness? there is a cacophony of ideas with little protecting rights and the rule of law? security? consensus; or alternatively that a widely migration? education? foreign policy? defence? agreed set of conclusions are subsequently not Indeed, the Digital Platform and the Citizens’ (or not sufficiently) followed up by the EU Panels are mostly organised around such institutions or member states, causing subjects. widespread disappointment.

2 A progressive approach to the Conference on the Future of Europe Richard Corbett

There will be plenty for progressives to say on depend on changes to the competences, these subjects. The economic, environmental, resources, powers, and procedures of the EU: and social interdependence of our group of • To enable the EU to address cross- neighbouring countries, which already share a border aspects of health, not least highly integrated single market, a customs during pandemics, we need to expand union, a security community and much else, its executive capacity. The EU has and which proclaim common values on human traditionally been focused on rights, democracy and the rule of law, means legislation and setting rules. The Covid- that common action is essential for achieving 19 crisis revealed a lack of capacity in results in many fields. The case for enhanced marshalling resources, organising EU action in several areas is likely to find procurement, distributing protective support. Climate change and most equipment, ventilators and vaccines. environmental questions cannot be solved at This is a field where much can be done, national level. Healthcare was previously without changing the treaties, by thought of as a national responsibility, but the strengthening the executive capacity Covid-19 pandemic dramatically illustrated (budget, staff, authority to act) of the that there are cross-border issues where EU Commission and the European level action is potentially helpful or even Medicines Agency. necessary. An integrated single market needs common rules to protect consumers, workers • To do more on climate change, we and the environment, and to ensure social need commitment to an ambitious justice. It also means that specific issues such programme. This needs political will, as tax fairness require common action to which is largely there and is growing. ensure that multinational companies and rich But action is currently handicapped by oligarchs cannot avoid tax by playing one the requirement for unanimity within country off against another. the EU Council to adopt common Stronger and more solidaire economic environmental measures when they management tools are especially needed concern land use, water resources, among those member states sharing a energy supplies and fiscal incentives. common currency. The protection of rights and fundamental values is a growing priority, • To strengthen the capacity of especially when these are seen as being under governments to take action on the threat. Large-scale migration to Europe has economy to secure jobs and growth, a revealed a plethora of problems that can only number of joint actions are required, be made worse if member states act not least implementing the recently unilaterally and try to pass on difficulties onto agreed Next Generation EU their neighbours. And external political, enhancement of the EU budget and the economic, security and environmental creation of a significant borrowing challenges in an increasingly volatile world, facility for the EU. But at a time when including political instability and military governments are going to need greater threats at our doorstep, also plead in favour of resources to finance public services stronger common external action by the EU. and investment, we need to tackle the But any honest assessment of the EU’s enormous problem of tax evasion and performance, or of its potential, in these fields tax avoidance by multinational must rapidly lead to a discussion about its companies and by rich oligarchs, and capacity to act. also tackle tax havens. EU action in this area could lessen the ability of The key step that will be needed as this debate multinational companies to avoid tax progresses, is to show how policy outcomes by transferring profits to the

3 A progressive approach to the Conference on the Future of Europe Richard Corbett

jurisdiction with the lowest tax rates (or the feeblest enforcement). It could • To better guarantee the rule of law also limit the damage caused by ‘tax and respect for human rights and for competition’ which encourages minorities in every member state, you countries to offer tax breaks to cannot rely on a rule that requires multinationals in return for an unanimity (of every other national investment. The free movement of government) to take the decisive capital within the EU makes it difficult measures when a member state is in for countries to take individual action serious and persistent breach of its on these matters. Collective EU level obligations. We now know that two action, whether that is setting states in the same situation will back common rules and standards, each other and prevent any action, minimum rates of corporate taxation, rendering the EU incapable of or making companies pay tax where suspending a member state that they make their profits (country by becomes a dictatorship, or an ‘illiberal country reporting), are currently democracy’ crushing the rights of frustrated by the need for unanimity in ethnic, linguistic and sexual minorities the Council on tax matters. or suppressing press freedoms or judicial independence. That is simply • To ensure fairness and economic not acceptable in a Europe that is justice in the EU’s highly integrated supposed to be based on shared single market, we need to strengthen values, enshrined in a treaty that all social corrections to the market. Most have ratified. At the very least, such corrections are at national level stronger legislative measures requiring (notably the provision of welfare, conditionality for receiving EU funding social services, education, healthcare, should be introduced and used. Still fiscal redistribution) and some at EU better would be to amend Article 7 TEU level (rules for consumer protection, treaty to replace the unanimity the environment, and workers’ rights). requirement. But to be effective, and not undercut by unfair competition, some EU-wide • To better address the issue of standards for the national measures migration into Europe – a cross-border are needed. That requires the capacity issue by any definition – a combination to set EU minimum standards for of measures is needed, giving a national minimum wages (at, perhaps, stronger capacity to take common 50% of the national average salary), for action at EU level, both in terms of child benefits for employees, for safe helping those in need and in terms of working conditions, for training fighting the gangs of traffickers who standards, for and the ruthlessly exploit both refugees and other issues headlined in the European those tempted for economic reasons Pillar of Social Rights, agreed in to come to Europe. Some of those principle at the 2017 Gothenburg measures are budgetary or legislative, summit, and reaffirmed at the Social but a wider legal base in the treaties Summit in Porto on 7-8 May 2021, but would help. which now requires vigorous implementation. The Conference • If the EU is to have any credibility in should be a vehicle for endorsing the world affairs, it cannot afford to have idea that the EU should be an engine of a situation where even issuing a joint social . statement is vulnerable to the veto of

4 A progressive approach to the Conference on the Future of Europe Richard Corbett

a single member of the Council. In a consuming frequent feature of EU world where the United States, Russia, ‘crisis summits’. China and India will have far greater clout than any individual European Such changes to enhance the capacity of the EU country, the EU’s limited ability to take to deliver are even more necessary as we head common positions and undertake joint actions will leave Europe irrelevant on towards a Union of over 30 member states. It is the sidelines. Much of the important to keep the long term in mind, rather infrastructure is there: the External than go for short term fixes. Action Service under a Vice President 3. Capacity needs accountability of the Commission (High Representative), one of the widest A greater capacity for EU-level action and diplomatic networks across the world, decision taking requires looking again at the the ability to adopt sanctions and to question of its democratic accountability. deploy a degree of military capacity. The EU has come a long way over the last three But if all that is subject to lowest decades in this respect. To adopt almost any EU common denominator decision taking, legislation (as well as the budget and vulnerable to the most reticent international agreements), you now need the member state (or even to a member approval of both the elected European state under the influence of an Parliament and the Council whose members external power), it will be of little use. are accountable to national parliaments (a kind The need for unanimity in the Council of bicameral legislature at EU level). must go. Commission proposals for legislation are first

sent directly to national parliaments, enabling • If the EU is to be able to finance the them to shape the position taken by their policies requested of it that need minister in the Council. The Commission can spending, it will have difficulty to do so take office only with a vote of confidence from within its current budgetary the European Parliament (which first conducts constraints. Both the ceiling on its ‘own public hearings with all nominees), which also resources’, and the ceilings on specific has the right to dismiss it. The President of the categories of expenditure laid down in Commission is elected by the European the Multiannual Financial Framework, Parliament following the European require unanimity to raise or change parliamentary elections, and most European them. So does the creation of new parties have developed the practice of ‘own resources’, some of which have announcing, ahead of the elections, who their the potential to lessen the perception candidate is for this post (who have become that the EU is financed by contributions known as the Spitzenkandidaten, of which from national budgets. The argument more below). needs to be made that spending jointly at EU level can save money at national But there are nonetheless gaps and level (through economies of scale or by shortcomings. Some national parliaments pay avoiding duplications). It is in the little attention to draft European legislation. interests of member states to raise the There are still some fields where the European ceilings and create new resources for Parliament has only a consultative role on the Union. And even a limited increase legislation. It takes a two-thirds majority in the in flexibility (qualified majority voting EP to dismiss the Commission mid-term. When within certain limits) would avoid the powers to implement legislation are conferred deadlocks over relatively small upon the Commission, the procedures used are amounts that are currently a time- complex and opaque and lack democratic safeguards. And while parties put up their

5 A progressive approach to the Conference on the Future of Europe Richard Corbett

candidates for President of the Commission clauses or treaty change should be used to ahead of the elections, it is easy for a minority rectify the situation. within the to prevent the Parliamentary powers are also unsatisfactory nomination of any such candidate even if s/he when it comes to implementing powers has, or could, secure a parliamentary majority. conferred on the Commission. Whereas The whole system can also appear distant and delegated acts are subject to examination and complex. Distance is unavoidable: EU possible rejection by Parliament or Council, institutions are inevitably further away than implementing acts (try to explain the difference local and national institutions. That is why we to a non-specialist!) are not. Instead, have the principle of subsidiarity: only act at committees of national officials advise the European level where necessary or where Commission and can sometimes block it without any role at all for the Parliament other there is a major advantage in doing so. A than to be informed, and to object if it goes degree of complexity perhaps also beyond the remit of the Commission. All this is unavoidable, in a diverse Union of nearly 30 laid down in EU Regulation 182/2011 which can member states. But it could be simplified in be changed through the ordinary legislative ways that would make it more readily procedure. Why not provide for the democratic understandable for citizens. And citizens need safeguard of allowing Parliament, by a majority to know that there is accountability, that their of its members, to trigger at least a views are heard, and that the choices they retrospective review of such decisions? make in elections matter. Another way to enhance parliamentary powers without treaty change, concerns how national parliaments make use of the three-month 3.1 The veto (again) period they have to examine legislative We saw above how the biggest single factor proposals before the Council takes a position preventing the EU from taking effective action on them. Ostensibly, this is to conduct a is the veto given to each single member of the ‘subsidiarity check’ – to verify that the proposal Council in areas that require unanimity. That is does not violate the principle of subsidiarity: if not just a question of capacity to act, it is also a a third of national chambers raise an objection, question of democracy, when the will of an the proposal must be re-examined by the overwhelming majority is thwarted by a tiny Commission and withdrawn, modified, or minority. Any true reform of the EU must justified. In practice, subsidiarity is hardly ever address this central issue, at the very least by a problem (in over a decade, only three yellow using the ‘passerelle clauses’ (Article 48(7) and cards have been triggered) and the period is various specific clauses allowing a decision by used instead by some national parliaments to the European Council to transfer a matter from examine the substance of a proposal and to the field of unanimity to the field of qualified advise their minister as to the position he/she majority voting), or else by amending the should take in the Council. This process was treaties. The fallback solution of enhanced pioneered by the Danish and other Nordic cooperation whereby a (large) group of states parliaments but is not universal. Some national may decide to proceed among themselves is parliaments pay little attention to EU not satisfactory but is better than deadlock. legislation (until they sometimes find reason to complain after its adoption). The Conference 3.2 Full European and national parliamentary could invite them all to do so. scrutiny of legislation 3.3 Citizens’ initiatives The anomalies in the treaties where the Council may adopt legislation without the Among the political rights conferred directly on approval of the European Parliament is a clear EU citizens by the EU treaties is the European democratic deficit. Here too, the passerelle Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) whereby a million

6 A progressive approach to the Conference on the Future of Europe Richard Corbett

citizens from a quarter of the member states Since 2009, the Treaty says that the European can submit a proposal for a legislative act to the Parliament elects the president of the to consider. In practice, Commission, on a proposal of the European this has been a big disappointment. The Council which has to take into account the organisational hurdles involved mean that only results of the European elections in making its half a dozen initiatives have ever reached the nomination. Since then, ahead of each threshold, and the fact that anything that election, European political parties have gathers over a million signatures is an idea announced their candidates for president of likely to already be in the public domain and the Commission (called Spitzenkandidaten by already considered, means that it is not an the media) with the presumption that the effective way to put new ideas on the table. candidate of the largest party – or the one able And if a citizen has a good idea that is genuinely to assemble a coalition that secures a majority new, why should s/he have to find a million in the European Parliament – should normally other signatures to be able to put it to the become president. Commission? Why not scrap it and replace it This is, after all, something that the public is with a simple undertaking from the European familiar with in national elections in most Commission to consider any petition that member states. Ahead of national appears (without needing to double check parliamentary elections, parties normally make thousands of individual signatures) to have clear who they would put forward to be head significant support? It would not be too of government if they win the election or be onerous for the Commission to do that – best placed to lead a coalition. That is certainly far less onerous than the complex frequently (but not always) the party leader. hurdles (which have often triggered legal The head of state, when choosing a potential challenges) involved in the current procedure! prime minister after the election, has to look at No doubt, these laxer requirements mean that who can secure a parliamentary majority. many proposals would be dismissed as not feasible or desirable – but the authors can That is frequently, but not always, one of these always campaign in other ways (such as with party candidates. Take, for example, Italy. MEPs) for support. Every party has a candidate for prime minister ahead of national parliamentary elections, 3.4 Elections and appointments which sometimes results in one of them being Democracy is not just about legislative proposed to parliament by the head of state procedures. It is also about how people are and securing a majority (eg Berlusconi in 2008), elected or appointed to positions of but can equally lead to a compromise name responsibility. It is likely that the Conference being found (eg in 2018, when Giuseppe Conte process will reveal some public dissatisfaction was chosen as prime minister, plucked from in that respect. academia without even having been a candidate in the elections at all, because none Of course, the European Parliament is elected of the party candidates could build a majority, directly by citizens (of which more below) and and a compromise had to be found). the Council and European Council are elected indirectly (in that their membership is a It could be argued that that is what happened consequence of the results of national at EU level. After the 2014 elections, the elections). But the composition of the European Council (acting as a sort of collective European Commission was until recently not head of state) proposed the candidate from the connected at all to the outcome of the largest party, the European People’s Party European elections and is now only partly so, (EPP), to become the president of the despite the first item of business on a newly Commission and Jean Claude Juncker (after elected Parliament’s agenda being the vote on some negotiations on his programme), secured the president of the Commission. the necessary parliamentary majority. But in

7 A progressive approach to the Conference on the Future of Europe Richard Corbett

2019, none of the Spitzenkandidaten looked wide constituency in which the European-level likely to secure a majority and Ursula von der political parties would put up candidates in a Leyen was picked from nowhere to be the proportional ‘list’ election – has been compromise candidate. In 2024, parties will suggested. Voters would have two votes: one again put forward candidates for president of in their national or regional constituency (as the Commission. If they do not, then some in now) and a second one for the European level the public and media will accuse them of contest. It is argued that this would highlight wanting to keep it secret until after the the European dimension of European elections election, to be settled behind closed doors. and reinforce the European public sphere. It might at the same time give a higher profile to But will the European Council subsequently the party candidates for President of the propose one of them? This is not something Commission (the Spitzenkandidat), whom you can easily legislate for. National parties could place at the top of their European constitutions do not explicitly require the head level list of candidates. of state to propose as prime minister the candidate of the largest party or the one However, using the Conference as a vehicle for capable of assembling a majority coalition – a pushing this idea may be difficult. flexibility that can be important. But there is, in It is an idea pushed mostly by (some) politicians most countries an expectation that the starting and academics, which sits uneasily in a point is with such candidates, especially as they conference that is supposed to be driven by will have featured prominently in the election ordinary citizens. They are unlikely to do so, as campaign. it is not a widely known feature of electoral At the very least, the Conference can underline systems. Most federal systems do not have that this should be the normal expectation at federal level constituencies or party lists: in European level too. It could be made clear that Germany, India, Switzerland, Canada, and so citizens expect the European Council to first on, all members are elected to parliament in put forward the Spitzenkandidat who seems their constituency or region, not directly at most likely to obtain a parliamentary majority. federal level. Also, the idea has little consensus in political circles. Even the European Two procedural changes could further facilitate Parliament position is not exactly one of this, but they both require treaty change: overwhelming support for the idea. Nor is it - The need for a qualified majority in popular among member states: the smaller the European Council to formally ones worry that parties will mostly choose propose the candidate to European candidates from the more populous member Parliament: could this not be a simple states for obvious electoral reasons (there are majority? At present, whatever the ways around that – and Parliament’s election results, a blocking minority rapporteur on the electoral law, Domènec Ruiz within the European Council can Devesa, has proposed a clever way to do that – prevent the process from working. but they risk being seen as contrived and - The need for and absolute majority of complicated). Those who want to make this a all members of the European key issue for the Conference may find it to be Parliament to then elect the candidate an uphill struggle. (meaning that any absences or 3.6 Other ways of improving European abstentions count against) – could this elections not be a simple majority of those voting? There are other ways in which European elections can be improved and made more 3.5 Transnational lists in a pan-EU constituency accessible for people. The idea of transnational lists – electing a number (perhaps 30 to 50) MEPs in a single EU-

8 A progressive approach to the Conference on the Future of Europe Richard Corbett

Some of these are of a more general nature and the Union externally, confusing interlocuters apply to national elections too: all studies show (as recently illustrated in the ‘sofagate’ affair) there is a social inequality in electoral and annoying partners (as at G7 summits, participation, with lower turnout of poorer where the EU alone has two representatives at voters. Across the Atlantic, we have witnessed the table in addition to the three from its blatant attempts at ‘voter suppression’ – member states, making five EU representatives making it more difficult for certain categories and four others). of voters to exercise their rights – and there are The Treaty left open the possibility of fears that similar practices could be used in appointing the same person to both positions. Europe. A citizens-led conference should surely And why not? The role of the president of the call for stronger protection of democracy at all European Council at its meetings is to levels. persuade, cajole and find compromises that Some specific things can also be done take the EU forward – exactly what the regarding European electoral law. The president of the Commission is doing at such European character of the election would be meetings. The exact division of tasks between enhanced if the names and logos of the them when representing the EU externally is European political parties appeared on the hard to delimit. Above all, having a single face ballot, as was agreed in principle but not yet would be easier for public understanding. ratified in member states. 4. How to get these points across 3.7 Simplifying The above reflections contain some ideas that Perceptions in some parts of public opinion progressive Europeans might want to propose that the EU is a distant bloated bureaucracy are in the context of the Conference. There will no exaggerated, if not entirely an example of fake doubt be others. And, of course, it is a citizens- news. But why not cut bureaucracy where it is led debate and we must look at all the not absolutely necessary? Why does the Court suggestions that emerge. of Auditors have 27 full members at political level, each with their own private office But if the above ideas are felt to be worthwhile (cabinet)? What it might need is more actual contributions, then the first step is to get them professional auditors on its staff, but not top- noticed, discussed, and supported in local heavy political management. Similarly, why 27 events and above all on the digital platform, Commissioners, when in reality there are about where there is unavoidably a bit of a numbers a dozen genuine portfolios? game: the more people supporting any In both those cases, national balance can be particular idea, the more likely it is to make achieved in other ways than every country progress in the Conference process. having one member each: balance can be 5. Conclusion achieved overall across institutions (not within each one) and/or over time (rotation). The Conference on the Future of Europe has More importantly, while Brussels insiders the potential to shape the priorities of the (mostly) understand the nuances of the European Union over the next decade. But to different roles of the president of the do so, it must make the link between desirable Commission and the president of the European policy objectives and ensuring that the Union Council, the wider public does not. Why two has the capacity to deliver on them. And any presidents? One chairs the institution that has such capacity requires in turn that decisions the right of initiative to propose new policies, taken at European level are democratic, and the other chairs the institution that sets through accountable institutions and the defines “the general political directions and understandable procedures in which citizens priorities” of the Union. They both represent can have confidence. To be a success, the Conference must make those links.

9 A progressive approach to the Conference on the Future of Europe Richard Corbett

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Richard Corbett was a Member of the European Parliament (1996-2009 and 2014-20). During that period, he was for ten years the Coordinator for the S&D Group on constitutional questions. He was the European Parliament’s co-rapporteur on the Constitutional Treaty and on the Lisbon Treaty. He was the UK Labour Party’s leader in the European Parliament. He was also senior advisor on constitutional questions to the President of the European Council, (2010-14). Prior to becoming an MEP, he worked with on Parliament’s proposal for a Treaty on European Union. He later drafted proposals incorporated in the Maastricht and Amsterdam treaties, not least the first draft of what is now the EU’s Ordinary Legislative Procedure (co-decision procedure). He has several times been the rapporteur on rewriting the Parliament’s Rules of Procedure. He has written extensively on European affairs, including a number of academic textbooks and was a visiting professor at the in Bruges.

10 A progressive approach to the Conference on the Future of Europe Richard Corbett

FEPS WORK ON RELATED TOPICS

All resources are available at www.feps-europe.eu

11