On the Results of the Conference on the Future of Europe *

Paolo Ponzano 
Professor of European Governance at the European College of Parma; Secretary General of the European Movement Italy; Deputy Representative of the European Commission in the 2002/2003 Convention

The 49 proposals and 328 measures that conclude the Conference on the Future of Europe are the result of the first supranational consultation of European citizens, which is unprecedented in the history of participatory democracy. It is difficult to define the national origin of the proposals, since they are the result of both citizens' panels and recommendations elaborated by the working groups and discussions held in the same groups and in the plenary sessions of the Conference. Based on the footnotes in the final report, it could be argued that the largest number of proposals comes from the citizens of a few countries (especially Holland, France, Italy, Belgium, Germany, closely followed by Lithuania and Denmark). Since, as mentioned above, the proposals were discussed and reworked in the working groups and in the plenary session, one could not draw the general conclusion that only the citizens of these countries actively contributed to the results of the Conference. However, the statement remains valid that, with the exception of the discussions held in the working groups and in the plenary session, which obviously had a transnational character, most of the events organized to provide inputs to the work of the Conference were held nationally and mainly in the aforementioned countries. This situation has contributed to limiting the transnational character of the Conference and its conclusions.

Another limit already indicated by the Conference lies in the difficulty of the digital multimedia platform in allowing a real debate between citizens and civil society organizations on a transnational level. In terms of quantity, the registrations on the platform of citizens and civil society organizations were still at an insufficient level (about 50,000) to be fully representative of public opinion in the entire European Union. However, this result was not eased by the unexpected closure (at short notice) of the registrations on the multimedia platform on February 21, 2022. A comparison made with the citizens' consultations organized in the past by the European Commission shows that the number of responses to the White Paper of the Commission chaired by Juncker (containing the five scenarios defined by the Commission for the future of Europe) had reached the remarkable level of 200,000. A fortiori, it should be remembered that one million signatures from the citizens of at least seven Member States of the European Union are needed for the European Citizens' Initiatives (ECI) to draft a European law proposal to be taken into consideration by the European Commission. We are therefore still far from the representativeness required within the Union by the provisions in force or practiced in other consultations already carried out.

Despite the aforementioned limitations, the Conference on the Future of Europe represented the first example of participatory democracy at the European level which allowed a small group of the European population, especially young people, to express themselves on the policies and institutions of the Union. A desirable improvement in the functioning of the multilingual digital platform and an increase in transnational debates, as well as the support of the media and the press, should favor the progressive formation of the "European public sphere" advocated by Jurgen Habermas as an indispensable precondition for the creation of a real European "demos". A European supranational democracy needs a European public space, where citizens can discuss and debate, exchange ideas and form an opinion. It is therefore necessary to overcome the linguistic barriers - which have so far represented an obstacle in this field - so that the citizens of the various European countries can discuss the problems that can only be solved at a European level, and be in a position to propose shared solutions.

As can be seen from the citizens' proposals, the vast majority of these can be implemented on the basis of the Treaties in force, while only a minority (about ten at the most) would require an amendment to the Treaty of Lisbon. This situation has led to a difference of opinion between the European institutions on the follow-up to be given to the Conference, which was already foreseeable from the outset. The Council of Ministers - reflecting the divisions existing between the Member States in this field - wanted to reaffirm its traditional position according to which it is the responsibility of the European institutions - and in particular of the European Commission - to give an operational follow-up to the results of the Conference, elaborating the law proposals necessary to adopt European regulations or directives in the matters indicated by the European citizens. Since the Council can only act on a proposal from the European Commission, it is therefore necessary to wait for the latter to present the necessary legislative proposals before intervening on a legislative level.

The European Parliament – which from the outset declared itself in favor of an amendment to the Treaty of Lisbon now in force since 2009 – emphasized the fact that in about ten cases citizens had formulated requests which demand, in order to be adopted, an amendment to the Treaties. Therefore, the European Parliament took the opportunity to present, immediately after the conclusion of the Conference, a resolution asking the European Council to convene a Convention, as foreseen by Art. 48 of the Lisbon Treaty, to start the procedure for revising the Treaty itself. In this way, the EP intended to immediately capitalize on that part of the requests of European citizens which coincide with the proposals often put forward by Parliament itself (in particular the attribution to the EP of a right of legislative initiative, and the abolition of the unanimity rule in favor of majority decisions), which it considers essential for making the European Union more democratic and more effective.

Unfortunately, in order to assemble a majority within Parliament to adopt the draft resolution swiftly, the drafters of the resolution added an internal request to the Constitutional Affairs Committee (AFCO) to continue work on possible amendments of the same treaty and to draw up a report for the month of January 2023. This mandate within the Parliament itself has provided an indirect alibi to the Council of Ministers - within which the member states are divided on the idea of reforming the treaty of Lisbon soon- for not giving an immediate follow-up to the Parliament's request and postponing any decision until Spring 2023. This decision makes it problematic to launch a Convention for the modification of the Treaties before the European elections of May/June 2024, since the Member States will want to exploit for electoral purposes the decisions that will be made in the Council before the electoral deadline, on the basis of the proposals requiring no change to the Treaties in force, which the European Commission will present in the meantime.

* A longer version of this article is being published in the "Review of European public law" of the University of Naples.