Making Sense of the EU: The Achievements of the Convention
Abstract:Building democracy at the supernational level is an unprecedented task, but so once was building democracy at the level of the modern state. By today’s standards we would not likely classify France, Britain, or the United States in the nineteenth century as “democratic,” but in the time they were in the forefront of democratic development. The same can be said for the European Union today, and the progress of the EU in the last half-century has been remarkable. Recent advancements by the Brussels Convention—reflected in the resulting draft treaty for a European Constitution—represent significant steps forward for entrenching the rule of law, the separation of powers, and the people’s input and participation in Europe’s supernational institutions.
Managing the EU Crises: Another Way of Integration by Stealth?
Europe has been hit hard by the financial and economic crisis, and there is no fast solution in view. The problem facing the EU is a problem of governance both technically and politically. Most actors, with the possible exception of the ECB, are in disarray because they are caught between the necessity to act and the political reluctance to acknowledge fully the consequences of a multi-level governance system, notably democratic legitimacy and accountability. The discrepancy between political rhetoric and actual practices during the crisis appears as a new form of government by stealth. There is not yet an obvious way out of this morass. The first one seems the easiest as it would be nothing more than ‘muddling through’ as usual, whereas the second option, a two-speed Europe, though more politically attractive, is technically very difficult to implement institutionally. The third possible solution is paradoxically the one that surreptitiously persists at present: a ‘federalism of executives’ that is both unmanageable in the long run and unacceptable from a democratic point of view.
Analysis: The Agenda 2007 Proposals: Evolution or Revolution?
On 10 February 2004 the Commission published its proposal for the financial perspective 2007-2013. A week later it adopted the third report on economic and social cohesion. These two documents form the basis of the so-called ‘Agenda 2007 reforms’. They will be the greatest challenge for the enlarged EU after the intergovernmental conference, since they will determine the financial basis for EU policy-making until the middle of the next decade. The Agenda 2007 proposals certainly hint at courageous reforms, because they place a previously unheard-of emphasis on performance and quality. Under the proposals, structural operations should generate value for money, and the funds should focus on projects which generate added value at a European level. Overall the Commission’s proposals point in the right direction, because they balance, on the one hand, solidarity for the new Member States and weak regions in the old Member States with, on the other hand, investments in future tasks. Moreover, they constitute a paradigm shift. For the first time, the Common Agricultural Policy will not be the dominant expenditure category. Now it is up to the Member States to examine the proposals politically and find a compromise between sometimes very divergent interests. It is to be hoped that, during the debate over expenditure limits and division of funds, national interests do not outweigh European interests.