Speakers:
- Alin Mituta MEP (Renew), European Parliament;
- Niklas Nienass MEP (Greens), European Parliament;
- Gaëtane Ricard-Nihoul, Deputy Head of Unit, European Commission;
- Annemie de Clerck, Citizen Ambassador for the Conference on the Future of Europe;
- Elias Dray, Vice-President of the European Youth Forum;
- Aimée Duprat-Macabies, Policy and Advocacy Officer, European Movement International
Moderator:
- Federico Terreni, Policy and Advocacy Manager, European Movement International
The event was based on the recently adopted report on Parliamentarism, European Citizenship and Democracy with the elephant in the room: participation.
Alin Mituta presented the issues, stressing that the current institutional setup of the European Union and the unanimity voting in the Council are not fit for democracy. He also emphasized that the Council and the European Parliament are co-legislators, so the EP shouldn’t be treated as the secretary of the Council; the Council should stick to its role, refraining from giving instructions to the EP. Among the proposed solutions of the report are a shift from unanimity to qualified majority, and the EP getting full authority over budgetary powers. According to Mituta, the EU is not fit for enlargement either, so we need to reform it first. Democracy needs an upgrade. The citizens want to be more involved, and European Citizens’ Panels represent only a partial solution to that. A proposed new mechanism for participatory democracy is the European Agora which intends to give influence to citizens over the guidelines of European policymaking. The Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions should have more important roles too. As Mituta remarked, we have to take into account the state of the real EU, not the EU Bubble.
Niklas Nienass outlined the current situation, namely how our society has changed as a whole, with the speed that we live at, the Internet and the globalized world, where people (especially the younger generations) move around the Member States. In this new reality, there are much needed updates. Nienass focused primarily on the citizenship issue, more specifically the voting rights. Voting in another Member State in the regional and national elections for citizens who lived there for several years was deemed necessary in the report to mobilise people. Besides, Nienass highlighted the need for the EP to be more connected to national parliaments. We have to take into account the priorities of citizens and provide the opportunity for a discussion to have a certain reliability. Referring to the European Citizens’ Panels, Nienass added that if two thirds of randomly selected people agree on something, it must be something to put up with.
Gaëtane Ricard-Nihoul talked about the role of the Commission which also wants innovation. The Conference on the Future of Europe has led to a movement, and people in the Commission are feeling that change as well. They are working on proposals, rethinking the very ecosystem of democracy and citizen engagement, coordinating more services. The flagship is the new generation and the European Citizens Panels – but the problem is that the subjects are usually too broad. A suggested resolution is the one-stop-shop: a platform for citizens, an interactive space to impact policy making. Ricard-Nihoul said that we can expect its launch before the end of the year. One thing is for sure, that the follow-up of the Conference on the Future of Europe has certainly manifested in new impulses.
Annemie de Clerck declared how useful the experience in the Conference on the Future of Europe was – sort of a reality check for politicians too if they were doing their work good enough. De Clerck underlined that surprisingly or not, we – the citizens – do have a lot of things in common with the EU politicians, because they have the same concerns. So, what does that supposed to mean? That we have to do this together. Because it is also the citizens’ duty to make sure that democracy works. And if we get the chance, we have to make a difference.
Aimée Duprat-Macabies noted that there is a worsening of authoritarian tendencies, and democratic backsliding, not only in Hungary or Poland, but even in some Member States like France. The civic space is shrinking, but we shouldn’t forget that civil society is a prerequisite for democracy: they are watchdogs, they monitor and report on situations. Governments need accountability and transparency, and the civil society must have a stronger relation with the institutions (especially the EP) to improve the democratic functioning of the EU.
Elias Dray talked about the important role of the youth which is becoming particularly relevant with the European elections approaching. Five member states lowered the voting age which could be one way to engage young people more. Elias stressed that we need to give the youth something to vote for, to promote the habit of voting. The disengagement is partly because of young people losing hope in politics, since some policies are just not fit for reality. We need democratic fairness and the right tools to handle fake news. The European Youth Forum would also like to see young people on top of the election lists. Elias mentioned the EU Youth Test too which was created with the intention to fix the gap between young people and the EU institutions, and for all the future generations to feel that policies have a relevance to them. It is meant to be a tool to ensure that the youth is considered when the EU is deciding on all kinds of new legislations and policies.
In the Q&A section, some more diverse topics have arised. Ricard-Nihoul stated that the Commission would support a bottom-up approach, but at the same time, it has to be impactful.
She mentioned the possibility of a Youth Panel.
On the subject of the European Citizens’ Initiatives, Mituta agreed that in a way, it would make more sense to direct them to the EP, but for the moment they are directed to the Commission.
Nienass expressed that we should support young people going on Erasmus programmes, because having experiences and friends abroad is what could get them more engaged, not knowing the EU institutions better. Mituta still marked the importance of more education on the EU and its functioning.
In a thought experiment, he and Nienass imagined Ukraine joining the EU. Mituta stressed that it would blow up the existing system (especially agriculture). Nienass added that if we look at the EP, where the maximum number of members is set at 751, we can conclude that right now the Treaties do not even make it possible for Ukraine to join.
Circling back to the topic of civil society, Dray insisted that it is a cornerstone of democracy, and that the EU institutions could use its input, its expertise. That is why civil society – and young people – should have a regulated way to give their ideas to the EU institutions. In an interesting turn of events, Nienass questioned the legitimacy of the civil society – since they are not elected, nor randomly selected.
Even if this report didn’t deal with civil society, we can still conclude, that EU officials not only recognized the important role of citizens and young people, but effectively took steps towards a more participatory Europe.
You can read the draft report here:
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/AFCO-PR-746872_EN.pdf
You can read the adopted text here:
https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/summary.do?id=1757786&t=d&l=en
You can visit the event page here: