1. Constituting transnational Democracy as the main challenge for European Integration An introduction to a debate at the Europe Institute of the University of Auckland (NZ) by Andreas Gross (Switzerland) Director of the Scientific Institute for Direct Democracy in St- Ursanne and Swiss MP & Leader of the Social democrats in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) Auckland, 17 th of June 2008 www.andigross.chwww.andigross.ch info@andigross.ch

2. An overview of my presentation: I. I. After the second Irish No: A very timely debate II. II. The forgotten history of the 1940s: Why the European Integration Process (EIP) is treaty based III. III. The missed opportunity of the early 1990’s and the prize they had to pay: A common currency but no common democracy IV. IV. 2001- 2008: The rushed and thus failed attempt to make a “constitutional treaty”: The one positive innovation could not compensate the basic problem V. V. Possible ways to overcome the “institutional crises” (The Crises of European Democracy/ies) of the EU

3. I. After the second Irish No at the 12 th of June 08 Le Monde: The Irish and the Dutch people belong to most convinced Europeans: There No-votes 2008 and 2005 are not “anti-European” votes. “Why should we approve, what we can not understand ?”(TA,ZH) “It highlights how out of touch the Continent’s political elites are” (The Australian, June 16) “The Irish voters lost their confidence in their political class; indifference and distance produce rejection” (FAZ, June 14 ) “Many people feel, the Union is remote, undemocratic and ever more inclined to strip its smaller members of the right to make their own laws and (...) futures.” (IHT, June 14-15) “’The people have spoken, the bastards’. So said one Californian candidate when voters did not respond in the way he desired. Many EU leaders must privately be thinking the same after the Irish No.” (FT, June 14/15)

4. Democratization of the EU means: We have to contribute to overcome the input part of the EU legitimacy deficit No citizen participation (Powerless) Elite domination (Social Distance(D)) Centralistic and bureaucratic (strc D) No common public sphere (comm D) No common identity (Cultural D) No feeling of togetherness / common belonging (emotional D)

5. But let’s not forget: The quality of Direct Democracy (DD) depends of it’s design - a well designed DD contributes to: Communication and Deliberation Sharing of power Public and individual learning Citizens acting and more transparency Integration of diversity by civic participation Legitimacy by convincing More identification, less distances More openness for other policies and actors

6. II. The forgotten history of the 1940s: Why the European Integration Process (EIP) is treaty based ? To overcome for ever all wars the pioneers of the European Integration in the early 1940s (Leon Blum, Alberto Spinelli, Paul Henri Spaak, Denis de Rougement, Carlo Schmid - and Jean Monet /Robert Schumann) wanted to: - transcend the nation-state - establish a federal European constitution - transcend borders and integrate the people That’s why they asked for an elected European Constitution Making body. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe should 1949 do this.

7. The Cold War did not allow the Europeans to do it this way ! 1. The winners of the Second WW were the US and the USSR: The Europeans had not the sovereignty to make a constitution. 2. The Second WW did not discredit the Nation-State in the measure the pioneers anticipated it - the Cold War saved it quicker than many thought. To save the Core of the Integration-Project Monet & Schumann started 1951 with the common coal & steel- Union under a strong executive authority and made it: - With a treaty, without a constitution - Put the Economy first, with the hope politics will follow - Put Governments in the center, not the people

8. III.The missed opportunity of the early 1990’s The Cold War was over, the separation of Europe overcome, all new states (over 15...) and some old ones (5-7) wanted to join the old EC of the 12: But in Maastricht (1991/92) the majority of the EC-Leaders were more interested to make and share profits and therefore e.g. in the common currency then in the making of a transnational democracy based on a European federal constitution. They missed the opportunity to “integrate people, not only states” (Jacques Delors, Sept. 1992) The Consequences: 1992: In two Referenda Denmark said No (52%) and France nearly missed the No (50,5 %) : Chock !! “The institutional crises of the EU began, which goes on now for 15 years ” (Le Monde)

9. IV. 2001- 2008: The rushed and thus failed attempt to make a “constitutional treaty”: Dec 2000Poor Nice Treaty discredits summit-rule June 2001Irish Referenda No to Nice Treaty June 2001Violent clashes at the Gothenburg summit Dec 2001Most auto-critic summit declar. in Laeken (Be) leads to the 2nd EU- Convention Feb 2002- Convention delivers draft for a “Treaty to June 03establish a European Constitution.” May 2004Accession of 10 new EU Members Okt. 2004EU Heads sign in Rome “Constit.Treaty” June 2005NL and F say No in referenda to CT 2007“A simplified treaty” is ratified by 18 states 16.6.08Ireland votes No to ST again !

10. The big innovation of the Convention: The first ever transnational democratic citizen right Art.I-47:”A significant number of citizens, no less than one million, coming from a significant number of Member States, may take the initiative of inviting the Commission (...) to submit an appropriate proposal on matters where citizens consider that a legal act of the Union is required for the purpose of implementing this Constitution. A European law shall determine the provisions for the specific procedures.....” Project of the citizens movement eurotopia (*1991) - taken up by a German Conv. Member - approved by the Chairman - EP is ready to share it’s initiative power with the people - 20 initiative groups tried to use it already

11. Lessons to be learned: To be decided from the start: Treaty or Constitution ? In order to be integrative and democratic Constitution making needs time! (ZH: 2000-2005) A Constitution-making Convention needs to be elected and representative The Convention needs to be open for several broad consultation processes (Citizen’s ownership) A Constitution needs to be legitimated by a peoples vote in a Referendum (Double majority?) A Constitution would devolve powers to the States and Regions without disintegration (“Unity & Diversity”), establish a clear power division & sharing and would establish clear brakes against soft centralization!

12. V. Possible ways to overcome the “institutional crises” of the EU - and of Democracy(ies) The EU needs more Democracy as well as Democracy needs Trans-Nationality ! (Global) Markets need legitimate rules and institutions in order to make them respect non-market actors and “goods”(Climate, Poor, Justice & equity....) Transitional new treaty with a window to open a real constitution making process ? A core-group (Euro-states?) deepens integration: Multi-speed integration options ? Democratization of the procedures make majority-rule acceptable, which can not be avoided in a bigger EU