Dacian Cioloș is chair of the Renew Europe group in the European Parliament.
The European Union is no stranger to shape-shifting. Throughout its history, the EU has evolved from a “community of coal and steel” to an “economic community” to the more unified political structure of the European Union we know today.
But too often, this change has been unstructured and chaotic. Faced with serious existential challenges, from the rise of the far-right populism, to a climate emergency and threats to European stability, the EU urgently needs to find new ways to adapt and renew trust in its value.
The proposal to establish a so-called Conference on the Future of Europe is a key step in this direction.
The idea, put forward by French President Emmanuel Macron earlier this year and supported by Renew Europe in the European Parliament, is to improve the EU’s democratic decision-making process by better connecting our priorities as a bloc to the expectations of our citizens.
Now that the proposal has been backed by voices in the European Council and made concrete in the form of a Franco-German non-paper, we should turn our attention to how to make a success of the initiative.
It is high time we take a critical look at the state of our European democracy and the way we make decisions at an EU level. We urgently need to increase the direct involvement of our citizens, make the EU’s workings more transparent and increase our capacity to act and speak with one voice.
To achieve this goal, the Conference on the Future of Europe needs to address several important questions, first among which is: How can European citizens be more directly involved in appointing the politicians who run the EU’s institutions and design its policies?
The opaque way in which the EU’s top jobs were distributed following the European Parliament election in May — which saw exceptionally high turnout, with more than 50 percent of European voters casting ballots — showed that this is clearly necessary.
We need to provide clarity, once and for all, about whether or not to follow the Spitzenkandidat process — whereby only a party’s lead candidate can become European Commission president — and whether there should be European-wide lists of candidates in the next European Parliament election.
We should also ask ourselves: Are there ways to improve the decision-making process in the European Parliament and the European Council in order to make them more transparent, democratic and understandable to the public? And when it comes to EU funding, can we make the process whereby money is allocated more logical and more robust, with both legislative bodies on an equal footing, so that we can avoid endless zero-sum conflicts?
The Conference on the Future Europe can help address these questions if we establish its mandate and its organization as soon as possible. To make a success of it, the European Parliament should lead the process. It should involve all European countries, every European institution, NGOs and citizens’ organizations — and, perhaps most importantly, citizens themselves.
There is no time to waste. There’s a discussion to be had about potential changes to the European treaties, but we shouldn’t let this become a prerequisite for improving the way that the union functions now. There is much that can and must be done within existing frameworks, and we shouldn’t delay.
This is an important opportunity for self-reflection that we should all embrace. The European election in May showed us that people want to have a say in deciding the direction of the EU. We have to maintain this positive momentum and deliver real reforms that make good on the trust voters have placed in us.
European citizens expect a better Europe, but also a different Europe. Together, we can build a stronger, more participatory EU that is ready to act. We have the chance to move Europe forward. We must take it.