News

After the fiscal compact, European democracy

Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:54:00 +0100

Guido Montani is the Vice-President of the UEF and member of the Spinelli Group.

European division, not a plot of wicked financiers, was the real cause of the crisis. When the crisis burst, the Franco-German directoire decided to work as an emergency government. It produced some positive results, but also some breakdowns. The positive side of its policy is that the governments of Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Italy are now actively fostering austerity programs and, for the future, they will abide by severe fiscal rules. Germany is especially pleased with this outcome. The other side of the coin is European recession, more unemployment, more poverty, and the nationalisation of the credit and sovereign debt market. Europe is more divided and poorer today than in 2010, when the sovereign debt crisis broke out.

The German government is aware that, in the long run, the emergency government could nurse grudges in the other member states and should therefore be replaced by a real European democratic government. Recently Mrs Merkel declared: “My vision is political union, because Europe has to follow its own path. We need to get closer step by step, in all policy areas … In the course of a long process, we will transfer more powers to the Commission, which will then work as a European government for European competencies. This implies a strong Parliament. The Council, which brings together heads of governments, will form the second chamber. Finally, we have the European Court of Justice as the Supreme Court. This could be the future shape of the European political union in a while and, as I said, after many steps.” Though the word “federalism” is not mentioned, the institutional reform here outlined is certainly based on the federal model. The European federalists welcome this new stance, though they are aware that in politics there is always a wide gap between declarations and facts.

If supported by a strong will, the proposals of the German government will open the way for a radical reform of the EU. However we try to show here that the good will of some governments is not enough to succeed if the European Parliament is not fully involved in the reform process.

The transformation of the Commission into a European government is only in part a problem of competencies or powers transferred by national states to the European institutions. In a democratic regime, the executive has to be accountable to the citizens. Today, the European Commission is already democratically accountable to the European Parliament, as the resignation of Santer’s Commission in 1999 and the vote of confidence of the EP for the new Commission show. But the citizens are not aware or are insensitive to this soft democratic accountability

There is a wide gap between the people’s participation in national politics and their participation in European politics. The reason is well explained by Alexander Hamilton: “There is an inherent and intrinsic weakness in all federal constitutions,” said Hamilton after the Philadelphia Convention. “The operation of the national government, falling less immediately under the observation of the mass of the citizens, the benefits derived from it will be perceived, and attended to by speculative men” (The Federalist, 17). Only the second part of this statement can be ascribed to the EU; the Commission cannot be considered the “national government” of the EU.

The history of European integration is different from that of the USA. The founding fathers of the United States were aware of building a nation. The EU is not a nation and nationalism cannot become the ideology of European integration. Indeed, nationalistic parties, such as FN in France, are against the European project. The European Union is a new kind of federation; it is a federation of national peoples or, better, a supranational federation. Jacques Delors, in order to explain this novelty, proposed the term “Federation of nation states.”

However the problem is not terminology, but the behaviour of European citizens. The sovereign debt crisis showed that the degree of financial solidarity among European peoples is lower than the degree of solidarity existing in the “nation” USA, where the federal government, with a federal budget, a federal debt and a federal bank, has the power to guarantee sturdy financial cohesion among the 50 member states of the Union.

Here we do not support the view that the EU should copy the USA model. The European fiscal union in progress is different. At the end of the process a new model of fiscal federalism will be set up. But certainly the EU cannot do without a democratic government. Democratic accountability is based on a bond of confidence among citizens and their government. This link today does not exist.

The citizen votes for the European Parliament, but the European election is nothing but a second-order national contest, because the powers of the European Parliament are unclear even for the future MEPs: an EU government plan is not even debated. We can understand why the turnout at the European election is low and always declining. The reform proposed by Mrs Merkel should therefore aim to give power to the citizens to choose with their vote, not only a member of the Parliament but also the President of the Commission (more or less what happens in Germany and in the UK).

The EU needs a new electoral system for the European Parliament; moreover the reform should also concern the powers of the Commission, because the European economy does not need only austerity but also growth. Finally the President of the Commission should have the power to represent the EU in the international arena. This result can be achieved with “One single President” for the Commission and the Council.

In this way it will be possible to overcome some of the “intrinsic weaknesses” of the EU government. But these reforms cannot be carried out without the aid of the “speculative men” or far-sighted men and women. Today these far-sighted people are the members of the European Parliament. They are elected in order to safeguard the interests of the citizens and, when necessary, to strive for a stronger and more united Europe. Unfortunately this is not the case. During the sovereign debt crisis the European Parliament barely improved some of the Council’s decisions. No comprehensive proposal for a better fiscal union – with a federal budget and a federal government – was worked out by the Parliament. Why such timidity?

The Parliament has the power, based on Art. 48 of the Lisbon Treaty, to propose a new Convention. But up to now the Parliament has done nothing. It is difficult to understand why the European parties, at least the most pro-Europe ones, are so afraid and passive. A first explanation, as has already been mentioned, is that the European electoral system is an ineffective mechanism to choose good representatives for the citizens.

A second explanation is the fear to open the so-called Pandora box of institutional reforms. The wound of the failed European constitution is still open. This fear is groundless. The Lisbon Treaty is already a treaty-constitution: today we do not need a completely new institutional architecture. We just need some reforms in order to build a more effective and democratic European government. In many countries, the “mass of the citizens,” as Hamilton says, understands that the solution of the crisis is more Europe, a better European government, but the citizens do not know how to change the European institutions. Thus the European Parliament must find the courage to talk to the people, to explain that a way out is possible and that at the end of these dark years there is some light.

It is impossible to build a European democratic government without the full and active participation of European parties and European citizens. In every political community the parties are the indispensable link between institutions and the people. The main task of the “far-sighted men” (and women) is to use their power now, joining their wisdom to that of the national governments. The European Union stands on two legs: the will of the national governments and the will of the citizens. With one leg only Europe is lame.

This article was published on "Euractiv" (February 13th, 2012).

EUD Secretary-General Christian Moos: “The Time of small Steps is over”

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 12:24:00 +0100

„The Maastricht treaty aims at an ever more integrated union of the European people. The crisis now jeopardizes this union. Its economic and social implications operate like a wedge in Europe.” Moreover, the current supremacy of the European Council and the predominance of the so-called intergovernmental method of the European states threaten the cohesion of the European states. “The crisis has created dependencies. The heads of state or government do not any longer meet as equals.” Especially Germany was pushed in a role which harms the very basis of the European unification.

The European people now have to respond to these challenges, Moos says. “It is now time to bring Europe closer to its people. The Union requires a government which is fully responsible to the European parliament. The parliament needs the right of initiative. The EUD commits itself to the idea of a European federalism, a federal European structure.”

„We need a new convention that prepares a European constitution. In this process the European people have to be involved in such a manner that makes the constitution their own”, said the EUD-secretary general. He is aware of the reluctant attitude of many people, especially regarding the failed constitutional treaty in 2005. “But the European idea will die if it runs short of visions.”

View the complete press release (in German).

Les organisations européennes adressent une pétition au Parlement européen l'invitant à s'engager sur la voie de l'Union fédérale

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:22:00 +0100

La pétition par les présidents de l'Union des fédéralistes européens (UEF), des Jeunes fédéralistes européens (JEF-Europe) et du Mouvement européen international (EMI) demande au Parlement européen d'utiliser le pouvoir que lui confère le Traité de Lisbonne d'initier une révision des traités avec pour objectif de créer une véritable Union fiscale basée sur un système financier refondé.

Voir le texte de la pétition ici (en anglais et allemand).

L'eurodéputé Andrew Duff, Président de l'UEF a déclaré: "Le traité intergouvernemental est un détour obligé afin de contourner le véto britannique mais il ne prévoit en rien l'instauration de la solidarité fiscale nécessaire à la survie de l'euro sur le long terme. Il ne résout non plus en rien les problèmes qui entourent la légitimité politique de l'Union."

"Nous appelons le Parlement à agir et utiliser les compétences qu'il possède pour engager la prochaine étape de la construction européenne"

Pauline Gessant, Présidente de la JEF-Europe a déclaré: "La réponse va dans la bonne direction mais elle n'est pas suffisante pour faire face aux défis actuels de manière décisive. De plus, nous regrettons sincèrement le retour à la méthode dépassée des négociations "derrière des portes closes" et la suprématie intergouvernementale du Conseil européen. Le processus d'unification européenne doit se faire avec les citoyens et leurs représentants, il doit être discuté de manière transparente et démocratique."

Le parlementaire européen Jo Leinen, Président du ME-I, a ajouté: "Les étapes futures du processus d'intégration doivent être effectuées avec la participation des enceintes en charge de la représentation des citoyens -le Parlement européen et les parlements nationaux- et non par le truchement de négociations intergouvernementales. La méthode pour modifier et améliorer les traités européens se doit d'être une nouvelle Convention, non une succession de sommets européens".

Les membres des trois organisations vont dès à présent ajouter leurs signatures à la pétition.

European organisations petition the parliament for next step to federal union

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:16:00 +0100

The petition by the Presidents of the Union of European Federalists (UEF), the Young European Federalists (JEF-Europe) and the European Movement International (EMI) asks the European Parliament to use its new Lisbon treaty powers to initiate a further revision of the European Union treaties with the objective of creating a full fiscal union with a reformed financial system.

See the full text of the Petition here (also in French, German, Italian and Spanish).

Andrew Duff MEP, President of UEF, said: "The intergovernmental treaty is a necessary expedient to bypass the British veto, but it does not install the fiscal solidarity needed to save the euro in the long run. Nor does it help resolve problems surrounding the Union's political legitimacy.

"We call on the Parliament to act to use its full powers to initiate the next steps in European construction".

Pauline Gessant, JEF-Europe President said: "The response goes in the right direction but is insufficient to address the present challenges decisively. Furthermore we strongly regret the old-style “behind-closed-doors” negotiations and the intergovernmental supremacy of the European Council. The European unification process must involve citizens and their representatives and be discussed in a transparent and democratic way”.

Jo Leinen MEP, President of the EMI, added: "The next steps of European Integration must be done with the participation of the Citizens Chambers – the European Parliament and the National Parliaments – and not through intergovernmental negotiations. The method for changing and improving the European Treaties must be a new Convention and not a series of EU Summits."

Members of all three organisations will now add their signatures to the petition.

Andrew Duff attended the constitutive meeting of UEF Lithuania

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:35:00 +0100

Speaking at the meeting Mr Duff said the blue European flag could be seen on the streets of Lithuania already in 1990. According to Mr Duff, the Lithuanian Independence movement was progressive and forward-looking from the very beginning.

“Europe is nearing its federal moment - the time to decide on whether it wishes to become more united or not. The growth of the federal movement in Lithuania is therefore greatly to be welcomed”- he said.

The president of UEF also criticized the way the current euro crisis is being dealt with at the European level. “The new compact on fiscal discipline tackles only one side of the problem, namely the lack of fiscal discipline. But the current crisis cannot be solved without greater fiscal solidarity, which is not foreseen in the treaty”.

During the meeting Mr Petras Auštrevičius, a liberal MP, was elected as the new president of the organization. Mr Auštrevičius stressed that the European Union today faces very significant challenges. “We see very clearly today that the EU as a political-economic entity is still in the making. I have no doubt that closer integration in the EU is a wise decision and at the same time – one of the main goals which should be sought by Lithuania”, - he said.

The initiator of the movement in Lithuania, Mr Rokas Grajauskas, expressed his satisfaction that in a very short time it was possible to find so many pro-European people. On the other hand, the new organization has already been heavily criticized by the nationalist groups in the country. Mr Grajauskas nevertheless said he hopes the Lithuanian society will be resilient to superficial anti-European populism, which attempts to “frighten people that Europe will take away their identity, culture and customs”. “It is not a coincidence that in the opening part of our constitutive resolution we say that the European Union, on the contrary, is the guarantor of the cultural identity of European nations. The principle “united in diversity” is not only an empty slogan but a defining principle of European integration”, - he said.

The constitutive resolution, adopted during the meeting, outlines in detail the principles and values of UEF Lithuania, as well as its tenets in the institutional, economic and military areas. The resolution also addresses the current euro crisis and expresses the need for deeper economic-fiscal integration by creating collective euro bonds and increasing the autonomous EU budget. At the same time the resolution calls for the need to strenghten the common military capabilities of the EU, which would be employed to defend EU’s territory.

UEF Lithuania has already seen the support of politicians from different political factions. It will be the first such organization in the Baltic states.

Audio interview with Christian Wenning: "European federalists on ridge road"

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:41:00 +0100

To listen the full interview in French click here.

‘The European Union at Risk’ Policy Briefing by Andrew Duff

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:10:00 +0100

The title chosen for the event spoke for itself but Andrew Duff stated it bluntly: ‘The EU is an experiment, and like all experiments it can fail’. For the President of the UEF, the European integration has always been an on-going process that all EU states had accepted – he instantly corrected ‘except for the UK to some extent‘. Andrew Duff went on to explain his vision of the UK/EU relationship reminding his audience that, although traditionally reluctant to fully embrace the méthode communautaire, the UK had always insisted on being at the table and participating in EU talks. The veto of David Cameron against an attempt to salvage the euro through necessary treaty changes at the last European Council was a predetermined attempt to break the traditional UK EU policy, according to the Lib Dem MEP. Duff described the veto as ‘sabotage’ that has proven counterproductive as the 26 other states circumvented it by starting to draft an intergovernmental agreement on fiscal discipline, leaving the UK isolated.

Duff then commented on the new agreement which latest draft had been released the day before. The spokesman of the ALDE group for constitutional affairs announced that, after several tries, the high contracting parties had finally found a name for this international agreement ‘Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union’. According to Duff, the new treaty has both negative and positive aspects. Starting with the bad features, he doubted the capacity of the new treaty to convince the markets. Markets are no fools, and would wonder if the decision to work outside the EU constitutional framework meant that the governments might not be serious about fiscal discipline and economic governance. According to Duff, the new treaty takes on board existing tools such as the package of legislation on economic governance – the ‘Six-Pack’- passed in September by the European Parliament. He also underlined that mention is made of the Euro Plus Pact (signed by only 23 states), whose content and value are still to be defined.

For Duff the real novelty is the introduction, on the initiative of the Germans, of the duty to entrench a golden rule and debt brake clause in national constitutions (or an act of near comparable value). On the debt brake, he highlighted that the description of the public deficit enshrined in the fourth draft treaty diverges from the description made by the Stability and Growth Pact and thus two standards will apply, creating confusion. He concluded on the debt brake stressing that the ECJ would be empowered to oversee the implementation thereof as well as having to deal with cases brought by states under Article 273 TFEU. He specified that such a procedure differs from the traditional infringement proceeding of the Article 258, led by the European Commission — under the new treaty the Commission will be at disposal of the states as a ‘consultant’ or ‘secretariat’. He finally wondered what would be the dynamic leading Member States to suddenly start to sue each other if they always had the opportunity to do so but never did in the past.

Overall, the co-chair of the Spinelli Group is sceptical about the new treaty. He stressed that ‘coordination’ is not truly federalist; ‘economic governance’ is not a proper ‘economic government’ and that taken the situation of the Eurozone, Euro summits, which the new agreement institutionalises, will have to meet almost everyday! He also questioned the relation between this new body and the EU institutions. Apart from the questions raised by the ECJ and the Commission, the British MEP wondered what would be the role of the directly elected European Parliament, whose President will be ‘invited to be heard’ at Euro summits – an odd and unprecedented situation. According to Duff, the Parliament should not get too involved in this new deal as it ought to have clean hands when the text will be taken to Court – for it will, sooner or later.

Finally Andrew Duff underlined two encouraging points. He welcomed the fact that the new text will enter into force after the ratification of the 12th Eurozone state and not wait for the 26 to have completed the process; that will set a political precedent for the inevitable forthcoming EU treaty revisions. Such revisions would take place in five years at the latest since, according to the draft treaty, its provisions will have to be integrated into EU law through a constitutional Convention. By that time, he said, the UK coalition government will have changed and things will be considered accordingly.

Andrew Duff wound up by stating that the new treaty had good, bad and curious features. He regretted that the states did not prove as enthusiastic a year ago when the Six Pack was being negotiated and insisted on the fact that what the new treaty will not give birth to a genuine fiscal union of a federal type based on solidarity among European tax payers. ‘This new treaty must work, but not too well otherwise we risk to set a dangerous precedent’, he concluded.

Federalists to petition Parliament on Fiscal Union

Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:15:00 +0100

The UEF took note of the circumstances which led up to the drafting of a new treaty outside the framework of the European Union, but welcomed the fact that the British bluff had been called and their veto by-passed.

Several problematical issues in the 4th draft of the treaty were noted, including the problem of discordance with the official EU structure and treaty-based criteria.

In the view of UEF, the new treaty does not address the critical problem of sovereign debt and is therefore only one further step towards what must be done to salvage the euro and to begin economic recovery.

Andrew Duff MEP, President of the UEF, said:

"For all its complications, the new treaty does contain some features which federalists can welcome warmly. These are that it goes further than the Six Pack in terms of budgetary discipline; it commits to the greater use of enhanced cooperation among the eurozone; it will enter into force before all signatory states have ratified it; and it is to be incorporated into the EU treaty within five years.

"What Europe now needs, however, is a draft treaty on fiscal union run by a federal economic government. For this reason the UEF has decided to petition the European Parliament to use its new constitutional powers to initiate this next decisive step."

Movement for federal Europe to be established in Lithuania

Wed, 11 Jan 2012 17:49:00 +0100

Founders of the movement, called Union of European Federalists (UEF) Lithuania, say it will be a non-governmental citizens’ organization. They all want to see Europe politically and economically united with a common Constitution, supranational governing structures, as well as foundations of effective transnational democracy.

The new organization was announced in a press conference by its founders and initiators: Mr Petras Auštrevičius, a liberal member of the Seimas and deputy chairman of the Committee on European Affairs, Mr Rokas Grajauskas, founder of UEF Lithuania, Mr Egidijus Vareikis, a conservative member of the Seimas, professor Gediminas Vitkus, head of the political science department in the Lithuanian Military Academy and Ms Vaida Česnulevičiūtė, a member of the presidium of Young European Federalists (JEF Europe).

Mr Auštrevičius, who is also Lithuania’s former chief negotiator for accession to the European Union (EU), stressed that as the EU meets new challenges today, it is vital to adequately defend Lithuania’s interests in the Union. “We expect to remain in the core of Europe, at the same time we want to see EU countries move forward together and not separately. Of course, this will require considerable common political will, unity and solidarity”, - said Mr Auštrevičius during the press conference.

Speaking about the aims of UEF Lithuania Mr Grajauskas, one of its founders, stressed that federal Europe is first of all beneficial to Lithuanian citizens, whereas long-term security and well-being of Lithuania as a country directly depends on the vitality of the EU.

“Federal Europe is beneficial to Lithuania in every aspect From the economic point of view, larger EU budget will mean more funding to Lithuania, since for some time ahead Lithuania will be a net beneficiary of the EU funds. The security aspect is of no lesser importance. For it is hard to expect that the United States would remain committed to the security of Lithuania and the wider region indefinitely. Therefore we think that the security vacuum in the longer term should be filled by effective European military capabilities”, - said Mr Grajauskas.

Meanwhile Mr Vareikis, a conservative MP, stated that federalism is a cure, not the cause of our problems, and said that the current crisis has become so acute due to the shortage of federalism. According to him, the main problem facing the euro at the moment is not the euro itself but rather the disrespect for the rules governing the common currency. Mr Vareikis also sees no contradiction between loyalty to one’s own country and European federalism. “Patriotism should be encouraged, the real problem is cocky nationalism”, - he said.

Founders of the new organization also spoke of the need to promote more effectively the idea of united Europe and what it can bring to Lithuanian citizens, as well as pledged to provide an alternative view to the often unfounded anti-European populism.

Branches of the Union of European Federalists, a Europe-wide organization, currently exist in 18 European countries and unite more than 50 thousand members. UEF Lithuania is the first such organization in the Baltic states.

For more information contact: eurofederalistai@gmail.com

Encouraging active European citizenship in the post-Lisbon EU

Wed, 11 Jan 2012 17:26:00 +0100

The event was opened by the UEF Vice President Philipp Agathonos. The participants received a greeting address from Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borissov as well. The working part started with a lecture of the Polish Ambassador Leshek Henzel who made an assessment of the Polish EU Presidency.

2 UEF Vice Presidents thrilled the audience as speakers. Philipp Agathonos made a critical analyses of the EU CFSP after Lisbon and MEP Andrey Kovatchev spoke about the increased role of the EP and its electoral reform.

The other topics discussed were how to defend the common European interest in the national public spheres, the German perspectives for the future of the EU, the role of the media in the European communication and how to use the ECI in order to make citizens’ Europe a political reality.

Panel discussions, working groups, debates, lectures and plenary sessions were part of the methods used to debate these issues.

The rest of the speakers included Reinhart Krapp Deputy Head of Mission, German Embassy, Seppo Aho, International Secretary, EM Finland, Ralitsa Kovatcheva, journalist, Vladimir Shopov, politologist and Velko Ivanov, Secretary General of UEF Bulgaria.

The seminar was also a good occasion for JEF and UEF EB members Sarantis Michalopoulos and Nikos Lampropoulos to meet activists from national sections and discuss the opportunities to foster regional cooperation.

The rich social program besides giving the participants a chance to explore the night life in Sofia included a horse ride in Vitosha mountain and excursion to the Rila Monastery.

"No" to a phoney Fiscal Union, "yes" to a Federal Government

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 16:32:00 +0100

Guido Montani, Vice-President of the Union of European Federalists and member of the Spinelli Group in Brussels.

"For much of Europe 2012 will be a year of recession, increasing social discontent and serious political troubles. The 2008 financial crisis spread from the United States to Europe and the world. Today the European recession slows down the world economy and endangers the monetary union. It is the breeding ground for euroscepticism and nationalism, not only in peripheral countries, such as Hungary, but in the actual core of Europe: in France, the Netherlands, Germany and Italy. The sovereign debt crisis was not caused by the financial market, but by the inadequate Franco-German governance.

As a rule, when a government is not able to face the problems of a political community, the citizens can change the administration. Opinion polls reveal that the citizens are greatly dissatisfied with the way the European Union works, but nobody tells them how to change the European “governance.” Here is the gist of the European democratic deficit: in the Lisbon Treaty the word “government” does not even exist. And since the EU does not have a legitimate government, the Franco-German directoire, a non-democratic government, rules.

During the sovereign debt crisis, the strategy of the Franco-German directoire was to defend the euro at the least cost – the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) – compatible with the interests of France and Germany. Of course the interest of Germany was to save the euro, because the German economy is fully integrated into the single market, but also to lower the risk of instability deriving from member states with excessive deficits and debts. This explains the obsession on austerity policies. The smooth working of the monetary union requires the compliance of member states with the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP), but an excess of austerity can kill the European economy.

In Greece, the GDP fell by 5% and the risk of default is still looming. In 2012, Italy, Spain and France will be in recession. There is something wrong in the European economic policy. If we consider the result of the 9 December Council, it is easy to see the shortcomings. The so-called fiscal union is a deception, a new name to impose more effective rules for the members of the SGP.

But can a fiscal union do without an EU budget? Why does the European fiscal union consist only of national budget constraints? The EU budget is the tool to finance European public goods – such as investments in research, energy grids, green investments, cohesion funds, etc. – in short, it is the tool for solidarity and growth. It is worth the effort to remember that EMU means Economic and Monetary Union: a fiscal union should provide tools for a more coherent and effective economic union. But for the German government Europe does not need more solidarity and more growth.

The 9 December proposals also display the French idea of Europe very clearly: a new “Europe des patries,” a Europe led by France and its allies. According to President Nicolas Sarkozy’s declaration after the Council: “The fact that the responsibility of the governance now belongs to the heads of state and government marks an indisputable democratic progress.”

This is the second deception of the Council. In a Council of 17 members it is clear that the main decisions will be taken by the Franco-German directoire. Can we consider this kind of governance democratic? Can the European Parliament (not even mentioned in the Council’s proposal) dismiss the directoire?

For Sarkozy, the European democracy is nothing but a summation of national democratic governments. This explains why in the UMP (Sarkozy’s party) and in other European quarters the idea of a new Parliament, made up of national parliamentary members - as the European Parliament was before its direct election - is being discussed.

The Franco-German directoire had the power to push Europe towards a serious recession, but it does not have the power to plan a recovery. If half of the EU countries are in recession, only a European plan for growth, supported by the main political parties and social partners, can succeed. Europe needs a recovery plan and a democratic government. They are two aspects of the same problem.

The real basis of a European recovery plan is a long-term political perspective on crucial goals, such as renewable energies, investments in human capital, communication networks, regional policies, and the single market. Only a European democratic government can launch an ambitious project, find the support of the European citizens, the national governments and maintain a continuous dialogue with the European Parliament.

The core of a true European fiscal union – not a reinforced SGP – already exists. The linchpin of a recovery plan is a EU autonomous budget. Today, the EU budget is not autonomous and is not big enough. The authoritative report “Europe for Growth” – signed by three MEPs: Jutta Haug, Alain Lamassoure, Guy Verhofstadt – shows the main line for an effective reform: the EU budget should be financed by its own resources (a mixture of a financial transaction tax, a carbon tax, a corporate tax).

Moreover some national expenses (such as advanced research, development aid, defence) can be managed more efficiently at the European level. The economies of scale can produce a substantial European dividend. During times of recession, a sound policy is also to lower national budget expenses. Concerning the recovery, the European Commission has already proposed the growth plan “20-20-20”, that is 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, 20% share of renewable energy in the total energy consumption and 20% improvement in energy efficiency by 2020.

A part of this plan is devoted to investments in transport connexions, electricity grids and broadband networks for more than €1.5 trillion by 2020 (a share of €50 billion has already been implemented). Some of these investments will be financed by project bonds.

We cannot discuss the details of these proposals here. Maybe they are not enough and should be improved.

However, we emphasise that a recovery plan is a political project, because a recession can easily become a 10-year long depression, as in the 1930s. The inevitable social disorders and growing eurosceptism will cause the collapse of the European project. A directoire yields inefficiency, division and recession.

Only a democratic government can lead Europe towards safer waters. The necessary reform to attain this goal is not too complex: the European Commission is already responsible before the European Parliament, but today it is considered a bureaucratic body, a secretariat of the Council.

In order to change the negative image of the European Commission it is necessary to link the choice of its president to European elections, to the will of the people, and to increase its political authority by joining the presidency of Commission and Council. The goal is “One President for the EU.” Later on it will probably become necessary to revise the method to appoint the commissioners.

But the starting point can be a quick reform of the Lisbon Treaty, before the European election of 2014. Moreover, in order to link the appointment of the president of the EU to the European election closely, the reform of the EU Parliament electoral system – a European constituency, as proposed by MEP Andrew Duff – should be taken into consideration. A more radical reform is the direct election of the president of the EU, but this reform requires more time and a broad public debate, since it will set up a presidential system.

Let’s conclude with an appeal to the European Parliament. The legitimate representatives of the European citizens must raise their voice. They cannot confine their role to ratifying the decisions of the national governments or to give advice. They have the power (Article 48 of the Lisbon Treaty) to ask for a new convention. They must use it.

They should involve citizens, organisations of civil society, national parliaments and trade unions in a debate on the future of the Union. Today the citizens’ trust in EU institutions has waned by the bad governance of the directoire. The only way to regain their confidence is to involve them in the construction of a true fiscal union and a federal government."

This article was published on “EurActiv” (January 9th, 2012).

MFE meeting with trade unions to promote a European federation for a European growth plan

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 15:22:00 +0100

Among other initiatives, on 13 December 2011 Franco Spoltore, Secretary General of MFE, participated in a panel discussion with representatives of the Italian, German, French and Spanish trade unions in Milano, organised by the Italian trade unions. The meeting highlighted the need for trade unions to develop a Europe-wide vision on growth and employment and the role of Europe to promote it. The MFE explained the proposals of the federalist movement and stressed how the project of a European federation and a European plan for growth and employment are more and more becoming two sides of the same project in the current European political and economic phase.

In this respect, options to launch a European Citizens Initiative have also been discussed. On the matter of a Citizens Initiative, on 25 November 2011 Lucio Levi, President of MFE, met with representatives of the Italian trade union UIL to discuss how to cooperate to the launch of an ECI on a European plan for sustainable growth. MFE has also written to a number of representatives of political and social forces inviting them to join a network to promote such ECI. Download the letter.

Convention on the role of Italy to promote a European federation

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 15:10:00 +0100

In the past Italy traditionally defended the prospect of a united and federal Europe at every important moment of the European integration process. The new government headed by Mario Monti can again play such a role in the course of the ongoing negotiation of the new treaty on an enhanced economic and monetary union decided at the European Council meeting last 8-9 December. The Convention intends to increase the awareness on a European federation as the only solution to address the dramatic economic and financial crisis facing Europe and discuss initiatives Italy can take in the next few months.

Article by Franco Spoltore, Secretary General of MFE, on Le Monde online

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 14:32:00 +0100

Fédération européenne, maintenant ! L'objectif fédéral doit constituer le point d'arrivée du processus d'intégration européenne

L'autoexclusion par la Grande-Bretagne de l'accord par lequel l'Allemagne et la France ont voulu marquer le commencement du renforcement de l'Union monétaire, indique qu'une rupture d'un poids politique énorme s'est réalisée et qu'une phase nouvelle du processus européen peut s'ouvrir.
Maintenant qu'un cadre nouveau s'est créé autour du projet de l'Union monétaire, fiscale et budgétaire, il reste cependant beaucoup de travail politique à faire pour construire effectivement la nouvelle Union. Le problème ne concerne pas tant les limites qui subsistent encore avec les instruments élaborés pour affronter l'urgence des dettes souveraines. Pour les Européens elle est avant tout significative de la nécessité de construire, à court ou moyen terme au maximum (c'est à dire, dans une échéance temporelle de deux ans au plus), en allant au-delà du nouveau Pacte de stabilité, une véritable union fiscale et une union politique à part entière.

L'accord sanctionné prévoit de nouvelles règles et indique les instruments pour les imposer aux États. Cet état de choses renforcera les systèmes de surveillance réciproque entre les différents pays, mais, en l'absence d'un saut vers l'unité politique, il ne résoudra ni le problème de la solidarité, ni celui du développement, pas plus que celui de la légitimité démocratique du nouveau système européen.

La première question, celle de la solidarité est évidente : si l'on n'en arrive pas à un cadre étatique commun, on est contraint de continuer à exercer la solidarité sur la base de la coopération volontaire entre des pays avec des niveaux de développement différents, des ressources budgétaires et des capacités de production différentes tout en étant interdépendants et intégrés.

Concernant le développement, l'absence d'exécution, jusqu'à aujourd'hui, des plans adoptés à plusieurs reprises, démontre que, sans ressources et capacités de gouvernement au niveau européen, les projets soit restent en grande partie lettre morte, soit ils sont infléchis par les exigences nationales des différents pays, aussi parce que les investissements de chaque pays dans un marché unique se font, en grande partie, au bénéfice des partenaires.

Le dernier point, celui de la légitimité démocratique est lui aussi évident : la nécessité politique demeure de justifier aux yeux de l'opinion publique le fait d'enlever aux parlements nationaux respectifs les prérogatives sur le contrôle des budgets et la définition des politiques économiques.

La question cruciale de la légitimité démocratique, ainsi que celle de la relance sur de nouvelles bases du développement, constituent le point décisif à dénouer pour faire accomplir au processus européen le saut qualitatif nécessaire pour dépasser toutes ses contradictions et ses fragilités actuelles.

Dans quelle direction faut-il aller ? Un exécutif européen doté de pouvoirs limités, mais effectifs ainsi que du contrôle de ressources européennes autonomes, légitimé par le vote des citoyens et responsable face à un parlement européen démocratique dans la plénitude de ses pouvoirs législatifs ne pourra naître que de la transformation du Conseil en Chambre haute des États et d'une réforme du Parlement européen en une Chambre basse élue sur la base d'une loi électorale uniforme et représentative des citoyens de la nouvelle Union – dans laquelle la règle démocratique « one man one vote » soit en vigueur et que la violation actuelle du droit dénoncée par la Cour constitutionnelle allemande soit assainie. En d'autres termes, il pourra seulement être le fruit du processus constituant démocratique à travers lequel les États qui ont, ou qui auront, accepté l'abandon de la souveraineté monétaire et qui seront disposés à la transférer dans le domaine fiscal, construiront une nouvelle souveraineté européenne avec l'implication et le soutien d'une très large partie de l'opinion publique. Cela implique le dépassement de la méthode communautaire.

Dans cette perspective, en admettant que l'objectif fédéral doive constituer le point d'arrivée du processus afin que l'unité puisse être vraiment irréversible et solide, comment le gouvernement provisoire de la nouvelle Europe que les gouvernements ont baptisé à Bruxelles pourra-t-il se développer et se renforcer ?

La question est assurément complexe. Mais le temps presse : si nous voulons sauver l'euro et le projet européen et retourner les difficultés actuelles en les transformant en une chance pour un nouvel avenir de progrès, tous ceux qui croient en ces objectifs doivent s'engager à faire prendre corps à la nouvelle réalité. C'est pour cela qu’en Italie le Movimento federalista europeo a invité les partis politiques et la société civile à participer à une Convention pour la Fédération Européenne (le 14 janvier prochain à Rome, Teatro Capranica h. 10-13, www.facebook.com/movimentofederalistaeuropeo).

You can retrieve the original article here.

27th Bardonecchia Seminar on Federalism and European Citizenship

Wed, 21 Dec 2011 13:52:00 +0100

The seminar, this year, addressed the following issue: “The challenge of public goods in the framework of the global crisis. The role of institutions and European citizens.” The presenters stressed that in the era of global interdependence is necessary to produce and provide public goods in the world and that the presence of a conscious and active citizenship is a key factor in achieving this goal.

Scholarships were awarded to the best participants, enabling them to participate to the Ventotene National Seminar, organized by the "Altiero Spinelli" Institute for Federal Studies.

The seminar was attended by 45 young students - 30 students from the high schools of the region and 15 representatives of the Young European Federalists (JEF Italy).