Economy
#FutureofEurope: To be or not to be
Today (1 March), Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission, presented five different options for the future of the European Union. The Commission is asking citizens, member states and the European Parliament to choose between being swept along by the impact of globalisation, security concerns and the rise of populism or steering the ship and navigating the choppy waters ahead, writes Catherine Feore.
It is a to be or not to be question. But it is a to be or not to be question asked in a very European Commission kind of a way.
Option 1) Business as usual – is already ruled out because there can’t be a stronger social dimension and deepening of Economic and Monetary Union without more Europe. Option 2) Nothing but the single market – the ‘twas every thus option’ and a slight variant on the business as usual option – but doomed for the same reason. Option 3) A ‘coalition of the willing’ option – which is pretty much what exists at the moment. Option 4) doing less more efficiently – which is fine where it applies – but which is ruled out for the same reason as options one and two are non-starters and finally, option 5) the ‘doing much more together’ option and this is the real choice, it is the 'to be or not to be' question.
The argument, as it has ever been, is that we are stronger together. The Commission point out that not one Member State of the current EU will account for even 1% of the world’s population by 2060, this alone is a compelling argument for staying together.
The five scenarios outlined are: ‘Carrying on’; ‘nothing but the single market’; ‘those who want to do more’; ‘doing less more efficiently’; and,’ doing much more together’. However, there is a slight dissonance between the scenarios and the challenges. The white paper refers to a paper on deepening Economic and Monetary Union – no progress can be made on this without more profound cooperation. Likewise, there is a future paper on developing the social dimension of Europe.
ALDE leader Guy Verhofstadt immediately ruled out the first three options and said: "What we absolutely should avoid is going further down the path of ‘Europe à la carte’, with opt-outs and exemptions for everyone. Europe today is a union of ‘too little, too late’ because we are a loose confederation of nation states paralysed by the unanimity rule. If we want Europe to work again, we need more unity. This is what our founding fathers had in mind: Jean Monnet, Paul-Henri Spaak and yes, Winston Churchill who led the pro-European fight in Britain.”
Europe lacks the capacities to solve the crisis. It's #Time2Reform. The #FutureofEurope is at stake. #EPLenary pic.twitter.com/NRUMTUsGDf
— Guy Verhofstadt (@GuyVerhofstadt) March 1, 2017
Verhofstadt is known for his federal views and while there is support for further cooperation, it isn’t put in such strident terms by other political groups. In particular, the resistance to further cooperation – and indeed current cooperation – from the ruling governments in Poland and Hungary would suggest that it will be difficult to avoid a route that won't require a ‘coalition of the willing’.
The European People’s Party welcomed the initiative while acknowledging that the choice was clear. The largest group in the parliament represent a broader coalition and recognise that sometimes it will not be possible for all states to move forward at the same speed: “Our union has always been much more than just about trade or a common currency. Our union has always been about its people, about protecting and making their everyday lives better. Sometimes we’ve stumbled, but many more times we’ve succeeded. Sometimes we have seen our visions accomplished; at other times we have compromised in order to remain united in our diversity. We need the European Union to answer to current and future challenges.
At this turning point for the world, we can only survive together. We need a better & strong Europe & we need strong member states. #CSUAM17 pic.twitter.com/rg2gZkBC5Y
— Manfred Weber (@ManfredWeber) March 1, 2017
S&D Group president Gianni Pittella said he was disappointed with the Commission’s approach and considered it a political mistake to present five scenarios instead of signalling a strong and comprehensive choice. Pittella called on the Commission to assume their responsibility as guardians of the treaties to push for the common good of Europe. He said: "The Socialists and Democrats only see one option: to work together as Europeans and do much more together, because together we are stronger.
"We cannot accept the sacrifice of a common European future as a result of the short-sightedness of the Council or because of a fear of possible outcomes of national elections.”
"Europe must be united if we are to weather the storm we are facing" says @giannipittella in #FutureofEurope debate in #EPlenary pic.twitter.com/OqdGLrjVmg
— S&D Group (@TheProgressives) March 1, 2017
The White Paper is the beginning of a process and will be presented at the Rome Summit to celebrate the 60th years since the signing of the Treaty of Rome. To encourage debate the Commission, together with the European Parliament and interested member states will host a series of ‘Future of Europe Debates’ across Europe’s cities and regions.
Share this article:
-
France4 days ago
France passes new anti-cult law against Senate’s opposition
-
Conferences4 days ago
National Conservatives vow to go ahead with Brussels event
-
Conferences1 day ago
NatCon’s on-off conference halted by Brussels police
-
NATO5 days ago
‘No violence or intimidation’ can block Ukraine’s NATO path