Margot Wallström
Vice President of the European Commission responsible for Institutional affairs and communication strategy

"Bridging the Gap; how to bring Europe and its citizens closer together?"

Stakeholders' Forum co-organised by the European economic and Social Committee and the European Commission
Brussels, 8 November 2005

First of all let me start by saying that I really appreciate this very timely initiative and that I look forward to the debate that will follow my intervention. I am here today to listen and participate in the debate, so I hope my speech will be on the inspiring side... but, then you never know with politicians... what we think is extremely interesting might actually be very boring... So, I will spill the beans, already, and say that I think that democracy is a very interesting subject.

1. Introduction - the right for everyone to be heard

Coming here today and seeing your work reminds me of something I read in Nelson Mandela's autobiography, Long Walk to Freedom, where he describes, as a young boy, how impressed he was by the democratic nature of the local meetings that were held in the King's house in Mqhekezweni:

"Everyone who wanted to speak did so. It was democracy in its purest form. There may have been a hierarchy of importance among the speakers, but everyone was heard, chief and subject, warrior and medicine man, shopkeeper and farmer, landowner and laborer.

The foundation of self-government was that all men were free to voice their opinions and equal in their value as citizens."

Why refer to Mandela, you may think - he was struggling for freedom and democracy against an apartheid system, what's that got to do with Europe? Well, I do so for several reasons.

Firstly, when I think about contemporary democracy, great fighters for democracy like Nelson Mandela and Rosa Parks automatically come to mind. Because, they are people who have challenged and redefined the traditional concept of democracy. They added the dimension that democracy is a value and a right, that is there for everyone, without any exclusion.

And secondly, when he writes that in the King's house "all were free to voice their opinions and equal in their value as citizens" he points towards some issues that are valid for us here today, for our discussion on how we can bring Europe and its citizens closer together. Namely, the importance of providing a space for debate where power is within reach. That citizens' should have equal access and equal value in the dialogue. And that Mandela's "long walk to freedom" distinctly begins at home.

Finally, what Mandela also can teach us is that we must not take our understanding of democracy for granted. Our assumptions of democracy must constantly be challenged, in order to ensure that democracy evolves with societal and technological development.

Following those lines, I dare say that in Europe, we have been taking democracy for granted, we have assumed that it is working and done very little challenging. However, it has become increasingly clear that it's "pumpkin time..." In other words, high time for us to challenge and redefine what democracy in today's Europe must mean.

2. Bridging the gap between Europe and its citizens'

To bridge the gap between Europe and its citizens' we can listen to Mandela. What he says about the form that democracy must take is highly valid. We must start this work at home, in our schools, in our towns and regions... and civil society will be the key to our success.

And this is of course where this meeting comes into the picture. The reason why I am here today is to listen to you and get input on the White Paper. The White Paper has a simple message; it is about the need to democratize communication and the debate on the European Project. The difficult part is; well, the rest... how we do it, and how we do it together.

For the purpose of the discussion I will outline some of the key issues and starting points for the White Paper.

To begin with, I think it is important to say that a meaningful role of public political communication must be defined against the background of all the radical changes that are taking place, both at technological and societal level.

We communicate as never before. Internet is fast becoming the leading privileged tool of communication and access to information. A global occurrence is the dot.com generation, a new generation that only relates to the internet for information and communication. It is clear that technological development is rapidly changing the make up of our societies and how the public sphere functions.

This development gives us great opportunities but also challenges. We must consider how citizens' right to information, freedom of expression and the capability to participate in public sphere can evolve with technological and societal development.

In essence, I am talking about the need to ensure citizens equal access to information and the public sphere as a question of democracy.

Another aspect that I believe is crucial for bridging the gap concerns the question of ownership. A political integration project, such as the EU, can only work if people are part of writing the "script" - if it is possible to relate to and identify with the project as a commonly agreed venture. This is where Europe as a political project must improve its performance, by giving citizens ownership of the EU.

For me this means that the future of the European project, what it means to be a European citizen and the common values that can create a European identity, only can be defined by the citizens of Europe - debating and discussing these issues.

And this is where the need for a working European Public sphere comes into the picture.

3. A democratic infrastructure for the empowerment of citizens'

When we discuss how to develop a European Public sphere it is crucial to recognize that in a fully democratic multicultural Europe, a project for a European public sphere cannot be "imposed or forged" as a top-down mission. Rather, it must be the result of citizens' genuine interest and free choice to participate in a debate on European issues.

Basically, what I am saying is that bridging the gap is an issue of getting citizens interested, empowering citizens and creating spaces for public debate. And, we must also ensure that public debate finds its way into the European decision and policy-making process, that citizens have a right to be heard.

To build, what I call a European democratic infrastructure could be a way to do this. This is an idea that I would like to test with you here today.

For the empowerment of citizens, a European democratic infrastructure should embrace and work with three objectives;

Firstly; we should realize citizens' rights to communicate

By this I mean that, if the public sphere should be accessible to all citizens, it is not enough to guarantee freedom of expression and the right to information. It is also necessary to ensure that citizens have the means to communicate and have equal access to the public sphere.

This is particularly important as regards language minorities, disabled citizens or other groups that systematically might be excluded from participation in the public sphere. Key words here are diversity, inclusiveness and participation.

Secondly; we should provide the space for citizens to connect with each other and establish links with institutions of democracy

EU citizens must not only have the means to communicate, but also have a right for their voices to be heard. In practice, bridging the gap between Europe and its citizens' means that we must create meeting spaces (virtual and physical) for civic debate on the European project, and establish links between citizens and governance structures - all the way from the local, national, regional to the European level. In addition, I believe that it will be necessary to upgrade the relationship with civil society organisations into a partnership.

And thirdly, we should ensure commonly agreed norms on institutional communication

An equally important dimension of citizens' empowerment concerns the way institutional communication works - from a citizens' perspective. It will not be enough to provide the means and spaces for citizens to communicate in the public sphere. Debates will be futile if citizens do not also have access to vital information concerning all EU Institutions. This will require a general shift in how the Institutions relate to citizens. Institutional communication must redefine its role and move towards greater transparency and accessibility, and learn how to communicate better with citizens.

***

Closure

This is where I would like to finish my contribution and listen to your reflections and ideas on how to realize these objectives in practice. Your work today is a valid contribution to the White Paper and I thank you all for sharing this experience with me. Today's meeting can in itself work as an illustrative example for how the future of Europe as a political project should be debated - as an inclusive, diverse and participatory process.