To break the deadlock Europe needs more democracy. No national referendums to eurosceptics dear, almost always severely constrained by political issues unrelated to those European and exposed to a variety of populist wave. Neither of the asphyxiated and deceptive disputes between national parties that are resolved for the most part, still today, the elections for the European Parliament (EP) in the individual Member States. But of genuine representative democracy on a continental scale that draws its lifeblood from robust transnational parties and a full and effective use of the powers of the EP.
This is the core political appeal launched by IAI along with four other European study centers - the Center for Studies on Federalism, The Federal Trust, the Institut für Europäische Politik and Notre Europe - and signed by eminent personalities of European politics - Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, Jerzy Buzek, Jean-Luc Dehaene, Jacques Delors, Paavo Tapio Lipponen, Mário Soares, Peter Sutherland and Guy Verhofstadt - in view of the EP elections next June. The appeal, written by Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa, comes from a study of the five institutions on “Democracy in the EU and the Role of the European Parliament” recently published in the series Quaderni IAI.
A European public space
That in recent years has increased the gap between citizens and institutions is no more about its denial. And this is also the starting point for the study of the five institutions: the progressive enlargement of the Union’s powers did not reflect a parallel strengthening of structural control and democratic participation. But how to bridge this gap, which is one of the main reasons of the stalemate in the reform process of the EU?
S’immagina there are those who are able to resolve the problem by reducing the sphere of action, returned to the States some of its powers. It should be noted however that this view is widely discussed in the European Convention six years ago, the proposals to renationalise gathered some political consensus extremely limited. And polls show that is not what they want European citizens. Indeed claim that in certain areas such as immigration, energy and foreign policy, the EU will strengthen its capacity for action. And if there is a lesson to be drawn by the serious economic crisis this year is that when it comes to vital common interests and there is a danger that lost some achievements not only economic but also social and civilians who were permanently acquired for It is vital that you have an efficient system of collective action. If, beyond the current crisis, we look to the great global challenges, from climate change to energy problems until the new security threats, the need for stronger and more coherent common European policies emerge with equal clarity.
The answer to the so-called democratic deficit can not reside in folding nationalistic, in return for increasingly impotent national sovereignty. Is, however - this is one of the central thesis of the study - in a widening scope and structure of pan-European public space, a prerequisite for building a genuine representative democracy on a continental scale.
Not that the European institutions have not tried, especially in recent years to stimulate a public debate at European level through new approaches to communication: a commendable effort, which also provided some results. But that risks appear somewhat ‘donchisciottesco opposite to the size of the challenge. Yes, because to pull the other side are formidable forces, from the various actors involved, to make the European Union, not just the present that would occasion the scapegoat of their problems and failures.
We need therefore the most powerful and effective, they are really able to open spaces for growing public debate on European issues.
The missing link of European democracy
According to the study of the five institutions, these tools can not be that European political parties, which today are marginal players in the entire political scene of the continent. It is they, the transnational political parties, the main missing link in European democracy.
Only through the action of strong political Europe, is the thesis of the study, you can bring the citizens to the institutions. It is precisely this fact, one - perhaps the major - role of political parties or doing a bridge, mediating between citizens and institutions.
This is primarily to strengthen the legal basis of European political parties. Some steps in this direction have been made in recent years, but are clearly insufficient. Serve, it is stressed in the study, give the parties a transnational European legal personality, which would enable, among other things, to act directly in election campaigns for the renewal of the EP.
It is a little like that not only governments, but the same leaders of national parties, because it calls into question the vested interests. No wonder: If you develop a supranational system of political legitimacy, even the leadership at the national level would be subject to new forms of verification. However, in Italy as elsewhere, some politicians and groups were more aware of others of the importance of expanding the space for political action at European level. The lot is open and events such as the appeal of the five institutions may find an echo in fact not negligible in many political circles.
To weigh the votes of citizens
But meanwhile, as do the European elections to an appointment where people feel the importance to the concrete definition and implementation of policies?
The study put forward various proposals, but one in particular, if implemented, could have widespread effects: the political parties or coalitions transnational appoint their candidates for the presidency of the European Commission, submitting them for evaluation of the citizens during the elections for the renewal of the EP. It is a proposal not only perfectly feasible in the existing treaties, but in line with what they determine. Parliament has power of veto on the appointment of the Chairman of the Commission (and the College of Commissioners as a whole). With the Treaty of Lisbon, then the role of Parliament in the appointment procedure of the Commission President would be further strengthened and the Heads of State and Government should “take into account the European elections” when selecting candidates to be submitted to Parliament.
The study of the five institutions in fact proposes to leverage on this potential link between the European elections and the choice of President, one of them as the key to give greater political weight to the votes of citizens. That could have a direct impact on the nomination of one of the key EU institutions. While today one of the reasons that, in the eyes of citizens, make the European elections of second order compared to domestic ones, is the fact that the voter has no clear political effects will arise. In national elections, the competition among the candidates at the head of government is usually no less important than that between the parties. It is also the case in Italy for fifteen years. Moreover, the same practice can be cited in support of this proposal: in the last European elections the EPP he made clear that if the result was the strongest group in the EP would have claimed responsibility for one of its leaders as chairman of the Commission, as also happened with the appointment of Barroso.
Playing cards
It goes without saying that if you consolidate the practice by which political parties or coalitions Europe every five years to appoint their candidate for President of the Commission, this constitutes in itself a powerful stimulus to their development and facilitate cohesion. At the institutional level will strengthen the bond of trust between the EP and the Commission and, in general, the community dimension than intergovernmental.
But games are not already made? It appears that behind the scenes the government, or at least some of them have already agreed on the renewal of the mandate for Barroso. But meanwhile, to assume the support of Parliament to any intergovernmental agreement, given the precedents, it is a good bet. And perhaps never as the European elections this year seem more open to different outcomes. In times of crisis the movement can also be very large. The agreement on Barroso also is far from ironclad, it is true that a few days ago, French President Sarkozy has openly taken the distance. Not at this point would be more logical and honest play cards?
Create a virtuous
But what happens if no party or coalition obtains a clear European majority? Not for this competition among the candidates would be useless. Look at the German case: in the last elections, neither major party has prevailed on the other, but Parliament has chosen as chancellor candidate that voters could express themselves.
But the Commission could not so “politicized”? In fact, as we have seen, is the same as the Treaty of Lisbon that pushes in that direction. But in practice the Commission, taking on a more political profile, would not lose some of its power, one that derives from its nature “technical”? Even if we can make such a clear distinction between technical function and policy of the Commission, the reality is that the Commission’s role is undergoing a long gradual erosion. A stronger link with the EP, if anything, could help reverse this process.
In short, here is the strong point of the study of the five institutions: the prefiguring a virtuous loop that, starting from a transformation in meaning of the elections to the European Parliament, gives more power to EU institutions and, what is most importantly, their ability to implement policies in the interests of citizens.
