European Council 17 June 2010: Van Rompuy’s chance to reform governance

The latest blog entry European Council 17 June 2010: Impetus needed on governance asked the president of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, to improve the standards of information and governance in the interest of citizens, transparency, good governance and democratic participation.


Is this just hopeless idealism in the best of all possible worlds?

Few people seem to mind, anyway.

Actually, few people seem to give a damn about what the heads of state or government are up to at the European Council.

(Not that they have been encouraged, I would say.)



The facts


Let us take a look at the facts, two days ahead of the 17 June 2010 European Council meeting. What advance information is available? You can then judge for yourself.




An annotated draft agenda, dated 7 May 2010, has been published (Council document 9533/10). A few headline issues are briefly mentioned.




There are no background notes since the 25 to 26 March 2010 Spring meeting.



No documents have (as it seems) been submitted to the June European Council, except the annotated draft agenda mentioned above.




Yesterday, the General Affairs Council (GAC) met in Luxembourg to prepare the European Council (document 11021/10). This is all the GAC had to say about the upcoming summit:

PREPARATION OF THE JUNE EUROPEAN COUNCIL

The Council examined draft conclusions for the European Council meeting to be held on 17 June, prepared by the President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, in cooperation with the Spanish presidency and the Commission.

Issues to be addressed by the European Council, as set out in an annotated draft agenda issued in May (doc. 9282/10), include:

– Jobs and growth: adoption of the Europe 2020 strategy;

– G-20: preparation of the Toronto summit;

– Development policy: UN millennium development goals;

– Climate change.

President Van Rompuy is also expected to present an interim report on the work of the task force on economic governance that he chairs, at the request of the European Council, and which has held its first two meetings.

The draft conclusions will be reviewed in the light of the Council's discussion.

Comments

We notice that an annotated draft agenda with a different document number than above (and it is dated 4 May), but otherwise we are none the wiser.

The draft conclusions were and remain undisclosed.

No proposals have been published with reasons and underlying documents.

Without issues out in the open and clearly identified, how is informed advance public debate supposed to take place?



Van Rompuy’s chance to reform

According to Article 3 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Council, the president Herman Van Rompuy has the power to lead on the annotated draft agenda and the provisional agenda, as well as the issues (preparation and continuity).

This means that, with good will, Van Rompuy could establish more open, transparent and inviting practices by improving on past behaviour.

Even if the heads of state or government stopped short of rising to the standards of clear proposals and reasons as in other public bodies, agendas and background notes could be developed to name each issue individually, explain the context for each, as well as refer and link to the relevant proposals and reports in much greater detail than before.

Citizens, transparency, good governance and democratic participation would win.

Where are the drawbacks, if any?




Ralf Grahn

European Council 17 June 2010: Impetus needed on governance

The previous blog entry, European Council 17 June 2010: Good governance?, wondered how good governance is within the grasp of municipal boards and councils, but seems to be unattainable for the European Union, and whether (European) Council’s execrable standards are a necessity, or if it would be possible to do more to enable informed debate and democratic participation.



How the European Council functions

The simple and transparent formula for public information is to publish each proposal with reasons and underlying documents. With issues out in the open and clearly identified, advance public debate, informed or uninformed, is made possible.

The European Council is an official institution, which makes a limited number of concrete decisions. Generally, it exercises power by providing “impetus” for the development of the European Union and defining general political directions and priorities of the EU. Most concrete decisions are taken by the Council (solely or as a co-legislator).

The European Council’s task of supreme guidance is traditionally exercised through conclusions, more or less clearly expressed utterances on major themes.

The often bland and bureaucratic statements from the European Council tend to obscure the fact that they are based on concrete proposals and detailed debates. In practice, the issues are decided in the European Council, at the latest, as the result of an opaque process.

Even if the concrete decision is taken later by the Council, the remaining formal decision is often just that – a formality.

This means that major parts of the process – input, gestation and real decision, output, formal decision – remains opaque.



Are improvements possible?

The current practices have not been designed with the interests of citizens, transparency, good governance or democratic participation in mind. When we study how these things work, it would probably be more correct to assume the opposite.


Is all for the best in the best of all possible worlds?

In my view, clear and detailed proposals leading to identifiable “decisions” are possible, if the European Council wants to raise its standards of governance and information, including the opportunities for informed advance debate. It is a question of political (good) will.

Only the European Council can reform itself, so “impetus”, directions and priorities are needed from the top, president Herman Van Rompuy.




Ralf Grahn

European Council 17 June 2010: Good governance?

The European Council is, under the Lisbon Treaty, an official institution in a union with 500 million people. Actually, it is the most important institution, because of the “impetus” it gives or refuses to give the European Union.

In two days 27 heads of state or government and the president of the Commission meet under the chairmanship of the full time president of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy. The high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, Catherine Ashton, participates.

Preparations for the Summer European Council 17 June 2010 have been ongoing since the latest ordinary meeting, almost three months ago.

After the coordinating General Affairs Council yesterday, the president of the European Council drafts the provisional agenda.



Limelight or openness?



Yesterday, 14 June 2010 the General Affairs Council (GAC) prepared the European Council meeting.

The draft conclusions prepared before the GAC are not public. The changes agreed by the GAC are not public. The conclusions will only be made public after the fact, once they have been approved by the European Council. Perhaps it is part of human nature that the national leaders are inclined to steal the limelight.

However, the Lisbon Treaty “marks a new stage in the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen”. Every citizen has the right to participate in the democratic life of the union.

These ambitions collide, to the detriment of citizens.

The simple and transparent formula for public information is to publish each proposal with reasons and underlying documents. With issues out in the open, advance public debate, informed or uninformed, is made possible.

Thousands of local, regional and national public bodies all over Europe are able to communicate reasoned proposals every week for all to see.

On the contrary, the traditions of the European Council and the current practices of the Council do little to support the emergence of informed debate about the upcoming issues.

If good governance is not beyond municipal boards and councils, why is it unattainable for the European Union?


Are the (European) Council’s standards a necessity, or would it be possible to do more to enable informed debate and democratic participation?




Ralf Grahn