EurActiv Logo
EU news & policy debates
- across languages -
Click here for EU news »
EurActiv.com Network

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

European journalists: EU needs political reform

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 30 October 2012, updated 02 September 2013

The economic crisis is a chance to relaunch European political integration and bridge the perceived European democratic deficit, the Association of European Journalists said at its 50th international congress last weekend in Italy.

Meeting in Offida, off the Adriatic coast, journalists put the focus on the future of the European dream, often defined like a “building site,” said Italian Council of the European Movement President Pier Virgilio Dastoli.

“We do not know yet what are the works to be undertaken and which construction company we must rely on,” but we should as soon as possible and no later than 2013, he said.

Dastoli recalled Italian President Giorgio Napolitano's speech in Mestre earlier this year on the need of political parties able to think in an European dimension, no longer “fighting for the defence of national interests”.

At the same time, he invited Europeans not to wait for governments initiatives. The “works” have to start next year, so that the 2014 European elections will represent a referendum on the United States of Europe. 

To keep alive the European dream, a political initiative which reinforces the economic reforms is needed, said the vice president of the Italian Senate European Policy Committee, Giacomo Santini.

Marco De Andreis, member of the European Council on Foreign Relations think tank, imagines a reform leading to a “light federation”.

Summarising a proposal developed with Italian Senate Vice President Emma Bonino, De Andreis said that government functions such as defence, diplomacy, border control and management of trans-European infrastructure should be transferred to the European Union.

In this way, Europe would gain advantages from economies of scale as well answer the need for more democratic legitimacy.

With a view to the 2014 election, EurActiv.com founder Christophe Leclercq said citizens require from the European institutions, especially the European Parliament, to boost online communication, mainly through social media. It is important to abandon the technicalities, in order to handle the crisis and forge real solutions.

EurActiv Italy

COMMENTS

  • I sincerely hope that, as far as the UK is concerned, hell will freeze over before we ever hand over key areas such as defence and border controls to the EU. Given their record and performance on CAP and Fisheries (to name but two items out of a long list of failures), we may all as well go home, run a hot bath, climb in and slit our wrists.

    By :
    Don Latuske
    - Posted on :
    30/10/2012
  • And they have right !
    Otherwise we will remain our "weak" national economie!

    Single Monetary Single economic and Political Union is the perequesities for a good system !! That is a rule!
    It's so logic and we will have to go on a federal way.

    I don't see any problem to reinforce Europe and fight the jobless if could have a good economie for all of us !

    By :
    an european
    - Posted on :
    30/10/2012
  • How on earth Marco De Andreis interprets the transfer of another four major pillars to Brussels as delivering democratic legitimacy baffles me.

    Centralisation is fundamentally anti-democratic. The further you move power away from the citizen, the less democratic your politics.

    By :
    Hoover
    - Posted on :
    30/10/2012
  • @Hoover
    NO, It's not antidemocratic ! It doesn't mean full governement! (Dual federalism => Wikipedia)
    As we know We cannot stay anymore at this point!

    U.S. has a very powerfull Cent.Gov. wich states loses most of it!but the most important is that their system handle their economie stable and jobless rate down !
    Ours are rising and our economie is still on failsafe!

    We need so or so modern uncomplicated system !
    Multi national political systems is outdated and for today's purposes no more acceptable!There are too many political discrepancies!!
    We cannot go blind backwards or stay "weaken" downing our economie and jobless rate !
    So the option is a minimum federalism that we cannot breake and must go towards!

    So the question is how many federalism:
    min. Confederation or max. United Countries or states!

    It's logical for every kid to understand that !

    What does it change finally for us when it will be named states, countries or territories as we know that Europe entire was a Country in the roman empire and not to forget that in this golden ära we helped each other!

    What does it change finally for us when it comes to most important economie stability and jobraising!
    Everybody knows that!

    I'm not proud to be european if it comes with too high nationalism in front of our economie and jobless!

    But i am a proud to be if we have alltogether a powerful United Europe with a good economie and a very low unemployement!

    So solidarity is demanded!

    By :
    an european
    - Posted on :
    31/10/2012
  • Again, the inevitability of deeper integration (in whatever form you want to call it!) and again, nobody has explained why other than some vague safety in numbers/size. Again, the EU, to date following its many transformations, has not demonstrated any competence to manage what it has been given (I will acknowledge that it is national politicians, without too much reference to their electorates, who have given power away rather than it being taken).I have said here and elsewhere before that I do not care if the UK's influence wanes globally. I expect that we, the people, will hardly notice the difference - it is just a game for politiciand and eurocrats wishing to -play on a larger stage. Will somebody please give me an example of an EU competence (whether via the EP, Commission or Council of Ministers)or action that has benefitted people throughout Europe. In doing so, please give evidence, preferably independently developed and cite sources. Many thanks

    By :
    Don Latuske
    - Posted on :
    31/10/2012
  • @Don Latuske,

    What Don says is basic stuff, absolutely correct and logical. You will find the majority of the UK electorate at one with him on this.

    George Mc

    By :
    George Mc
    - Posted on :
    31/10/2012
  • We don't need a "federation light": we already have one.
    The German Constitutional Court already says that the EU is no longer a "confederation", but a "federation of states"(!)
    What we need is a true, democratic and efficient Federation, like the US.
    To be unambiguous, more federalism means in the EU's case more centralism (in a central state, more federalism means less centralism). And more democracy, ie decisions taken by a directly elected president and/or by a representative parliament, but not by a secret council of states.
    The kind of federalism pursued by Euro-leaders, especially Schäuble, is extreme fiscal centralism. In no federal state does the central state have as many intrusive and suspensive powers as the ones that the leaders are thinkg of giving the Commission. Even a central state does not control its constituents as tightly. This centralism will be weak because it will intrinsically be dictatorial in its purpose ("dictating" the absolute budget norm to be respected) and in its means (the "super commissioner", vaguely controled by a sub-parliament and waving the huge stick of suspending the payment of eurobonds) therefore undemocratic, therefore illegitimate, therefore weak.

    By :
    Charles
    - Posted on :
    02/11/2012
  • Federalism means having a powerful central state (powerful because of its democratic legitimacy, its budget and its final say in important issues), powerful local states and clear competences assigned to federal and local levels. The EU is lacking a clearcut separation of federal and local competences: few are exclusively the sole responsibility of the EU, and even fewer escape its intrusion. As a result, decisions at the federal level are taken too slowly, and just as slowly the EU gnaws away at states sovereignty. This is due to the principle of subsidiarity: The EU intervenes in whatever field it wants, and the states make sure they can delay this for as long as they can, as a result decisions need at least 2/3 majorities. This is both inefficient and illegitimate today, even if it had its justification in the past.

    By :
    Charles
    - Posted on :
    02/11/2012
  • @Charles- Posted on : 02/11/2012

    Dear Charles !

    So finally what we need is as Tony Blair said!

    One from us democratially elected EU-President !
    I wish !

    Is that right ?
    Thank You!

    By :
    an european
    - Posted on :
    05/11/2012
  • @ An European

    Yes, but do not trust Blair at all. That democratically elected president would only be a "democratic figleaf" on an organization still essentially based on intergovernmental arrangements with the states still wielding important veto powers. Blair is very much aware of British interests, and these interests are to stay in the EU and to keep as many vetos as possible. British interests are against a truly democratic governance system (i.e. one man, one vote) because they dilute British influence, especially in the area of financial service regulation which is 15% of British GDP (London is the EU's financial center and is much too big for Britain alone).

    By :
    Charles Villette
    - Posted on :
    05/11/2012

Advertising

Videos

EU Treaty and Institutions News

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

EU Treaty and Institutions Promoted

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Advertising

Advertising