[autom.vertaling] De gezamenlijke parlementaire vergadering over de Toekomst van Europa zet uitbreiding in de schijnwerper (en)

On the eve of "Europe Day", nearly 250 members of the European Parliament and EU national Parliaments gathered in Brussels to discuss the future of Europe now that the introduction of a new treaty has been put on hold. In his opening speech, EP president Josep Borrell called for a "period of proposals" to follow the "period of reflection", which was introduced after the draft constitutional treaty was rejected by referendums in France and the Netherlands.

Mr Borrell reminded the meeting that the Nice Treaty was " insufficient for the future " and that there were " pressing questions to be answered", even though " the answers are not always easy to find". The Convention, which drew up the first draft of the Constitution, has perhaps " underestimated the unease of our fellow citizens", he said, adding, " we are gathered here to debate how we can re-launch the dynamism of the European project and restore confidence among the people who have elected us". At the moment, the EU was focussing too much on sectoral policies, he said, " as if the lack of a comprehensive European project is making us resigned to a Europe of projects ".

Mr Borrell didn't want to pretend that the two-day meeting in the European Parliament was going to solve everything, " but the simple fact that we, European and national parliamentarians, work on this together, for me is symbolic and a sign of hope ".

Austrian Parliament President Andreas Khol, who co-chaired the meeting with Mr Borrell, pointed out that the four big themes to be debated - the EU in the world and the borders of the EU; globalisation and the European economic and social model; freedom, security and justice; and the future resources of the EU - were all linked. " Who is going to fund the further development of the EU in terms of foreign policy and of the much-discussed European social model? Money doesn't flow from the cash dispenser ". Khol added that the European Court of Justice, perceived by many as the driving force behind EU integration, " should act according to the legislation and not act too quickly ". His colleague from the Austrian Bundesrat, Sissy Roth-Halvax, listed as main problems " How to involve the national parliaments? They have a role to play in monitoring the activities of the EU.  And how to bring the activities of EU institutions, some of which are best carried out at a regional level, closer to the citizen? ", she asked.

Four working groups

After the opening of the meeting, participants split up into four working groups. The working group on the EU in the world and the borders of the EU was chaired by Elmar Brok (EPP-ED, DE) and Jari Vilén, Chairman of the Grand Committee of the Finnish Eduskunta.

Future enlargements require a new treaty

Enlargement was at the centre of the debate, as the present EU Treaty makes any further enlargements after the accession of Bulgaria and Romania impossible. Some parliamentarians therefore voiced grave doubts over future enlargement. " On the basis of current treaties, further enlargements will be hard to tackle ", warned Carlos Carnero Gonzalez (PSE, ES), while Klaus Hänsch (PSE, DE) said " after the accession of Bulgaria and Romania a lengthy period of deepening will be needed ". Lord Hannay of Chiswick (House of Lords) worried that further enlargements would be impossible after the accession of Croatia, something that the founding fathers of Europe surely wouldn't have wanted. Deputy speaker of the Slovenian Parliament Vasja Klavora pointed out that past enlargements had brought many benefits to both old and new Member States and that finding a solution was imperative.

Hubert Haenel (French Senate) reminded the meeting that France has changed its Constitution so that after the accession of Croatia, any future enlargement will be submitted to a referendum. Greek MP Christos Papoutsis was all in favour of future enlargements, on condition that these would not weaken the European project or the institutions of the EU.

A pause

Bronislaw Geremek (ALDE, PL) said that the EU and its citizens had tired of enlargement and that a pause is advisable. After that, the EU could go on to take in Croatia and the Balkan states. French MP Pierre Lequiller agreed and said that as far as enlargement was concerned, a time-out was necessary in which to further deepen the EU. For him creating a convergence between the old and the new members in order to start up new projects is central to the EU's absorption capacity.

Karin Thorborg of Sweden was happy with the present reflection period, which made it possible to review the EU's undemocratic decision-making processes and its policies, which are detrimental to poor countries and shape all countries in the same liberal market mould.

Make the treaty clearer

Andrew Duff (ALDE, UK) said that the old Part III of the draft treaty should be renegotiated in order to make the accession processes far more clear and to describe the thresholds that candidate countries must cross, while making clear that these thresholds are expressed in terms of liberal democracy and not of history, geography or culture. Hungarian MP Attila Gruber also felt that citizens might be more willing to accept a new treaty if it were more easily comprehensible. His Portuguese colleague Armando Franca saw things more straightforwardly: problems in foreign policy and European competitiveness could be solved if the constitutional treaty were implemented.

Future borders

Charles Tannock (EPP-ED, UK) was worried about the proliferation of mini-Member States if the EU continued to expand and countries such as Montenegro and Kosovo also gained independence, as this would seriously upset the balance between big and small Member States. Oskars Kast?ns from Latvia praised enlargement as the biggest success of EU foreign policy and said that politicians needed to sell it much better as such. The borders of the EU, he continued, are fairly well laid down in the Treaty, but one must remember that they are more about values and in the minds of Europeans than on a map. Austrian MP Werner Fasslabend said that the EU would increase in size by one third if Turkey and Ukraine joined and that this would drastically change the nature of the EU. He therefore favoured an intermediate status for such countries.

EU role in the world

On EU foreign policy there was a large measure of consensus. Introducing the debate, German MP Michael Roth, who will report on the results of the working group, said, " I don't want a renationalisation. Europe is the response to globalisation. No Member State can go it alone. Citizens expect more from the EU in terms of foreign policy ". This view was echoed by Mr Carnero: " CFSP is a factor of world stability. Therefore we want a Minister of Foreign Affairs and some sort of Energy Minister as well ". Mr Brok added that " Member States cannot achieve much on their own: think of bodies like the WTO. In the future, the transatlantic community will continue to be a driving force in external affairs." 

Mr Kast?ns said that the draft constitutional treaty had contained all the answers: a common defence policy, security guarantees, a president, a foreign minister, common foreign representation and a legal personality. However, Belgian MP Stef Goris worried about the lack of parliamentary scrutiny in the EU foreign policy, in particular in the case of foreign missions such as to the Congo.

Mr Gruber added that civilian cooperation between EU states, such as in the fight against recent floods, appealed far more to citizens than military cooperation.

08/05/2006

Joint Parliamentary meeting on the Future of Europe

Working group on "the European Union in the world and the borders of the Union"