How to restart the European process – a three-point plan 22 October 2005 Richard Laming Director, Federal Union

Background to debate No votes in two referendums on constitutional treaty Further ratifications shelved European Council has called for a period of reflection until June 2006

Reasons for No votes Dissatisfaction with EU at present Dissatisfaction with politics at present Confusion over contents of treaty Confusion over consequence of No vote Failure to win argument for Europe

A three-point plan Immediate improvements to the EU Rethinking procedures for revising treaties What should the new treaty say?

Immediate improvements Open meetings of the Council of Ministers when acting as a legislature Stronger connection between European elections and choice of Commission president Involve member state parliaments in debate over legislative proposals

Revision of the treaties Necessary to revise the treaties - they are not adequate as they are now Rethink the procedures to be followed

Procedure New convention – not a committee of experts Majority voting within the convention rather than working by consensus Inter-parliamentary conferences Engagement with civil society Proceedings publicly available

Form of the final proposal Sets of amendments to the consolidated treaty, not “delete all and replace” Separate debate over present EU from debate about future EU Clearer relationship between “problems” and “solutions” Separate debates on different elements of proposed new treaty

Amendments in four parts (a)Foreign and security policy (b)Justice and home affairs (c)Economic governance of the eurozone (d)Democracy and the legislative process

Which parts apply to whom (a) and (b) apply to those member states that sign and ratify them (c) would apply only to the members of the eurozone (d) must apply to all member states without exception

Identify what matters Distinguish between constitutional innovations and technical changes Technical changes do not need referendums

Ratification procedure Assuming a mix of parliamentary and referendum ratifications Parliamentary ratifications first Referendums on the same day after parliamentary procedures completed Separate votes might be held on the different parts of the proposal

What happens after a No vote? A no vote to be followed by a second referendum A second failure means other member states may proceed without No state NOT non-implementation of proposals

What should the new treaty say? Not our final word on the subject Making the EU institutions more democratic, effective and accountable

Foreign and defence policy Merge posts of High Representative and Commission Vice-President (“double-hatting”) More decision-making by double majority voting in the Council Constructive abstention permitted for outvoted member states Moves towards defence integration

Justice and home affairs ECJ to be supreme court of the Union Charter of Fundamental Rights should have legal force Commission to have executive competences over justice and home affairs

Economic governance of the eurozone Stability and Growth Pact reformed to encourage economic growth and political accountability EU allowed to issue debt instruments within set limits rather than balance its budget

Democracy and the legislative process Each sectoral Council to have individual chair, not member states by rotation Council to deal with legislation in public Council to vote by double majority Co-decision of Parliament and Council on all legislation

Budget – both income and expenditure – to require assent of both Parliament and Council Commission president elected by Parliament immediately after elections

What happens next? Debate about three-point plan Lobbying decision-makers Campaigning for idea of Europe