Convention: Involving civil society in the debate

Convention: Involving civil society in the debate

Stanley Crossick takes stock of the participation of civil society in the Convention plenary in June and calls for this episode not to remain isolated, but to develop into a regular exchange and, thus, widen participation in the debate.

Reactions are mixed as to the significance – and indeed relevance – of the plenary session held on 24 and 25 June, which was devoted to contributions from civil society. Some sceptics wonder whether the Convention Presidium is genuinely involving the civil society or merely paying lip service to it. Others criticise the manner in which the session was prepared, and organised – at short notice and very formally.

Our assessment tends towards the more optimistic. The EPC contribution was not presented until 18h30 on Monday but nevertheless there were still some 250 participants present, including the President, Vice President and Secretary. Some allowance must be made for the fact that this is the first time that the Union has prepared for an IGC in this way. It is true, however, that there was no real interaction between civil society representatives and Convention members, and no “excitement”.

We believe that there was a genuine attempt to involve the civil society, as was underlined by comments from the President, two Vice-Presidents and members of the Convention. There was also recognition that they can play an important role. The Nice Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) called for a deeper and wider debate about the future development of the EU, involving “representatives of civil society”. It was felt that civil society organisations should be consulted at as early a stage as possible. The Convention needs ongoing information from academics and think-tanks: the generation of ideas is important. The contact groups are to meet again.

Stimulating national public debates is clearly vital if EU citizens are to “buy in” to the process. Concern was expressed that the organisations presenting to the plenary – mainly European NGOs – do not necessarily represent national attitudes. This was exacerbated by the short notice of the meeting which made it much more difficult for non-Brussels based organisations to attend. In fact, only half those who registered, actually attended.

The Convention is still at the listening stage. The question arises, however, as to how civil society can influence the Convention when it moves from listening mode to drafting and deciding modes. Will the input of the different organisations be considered by the all-important working groups? Full involvement of civil society is highly desirable, both for its own sake and as a building block to a public debate in the different Member States (and candidate countries). So far, there has only been a debate by the political elite in public.

Stanley Crossick is Director and Founding Chairman of the European Policy Centre

For more analyses see The European Policy Centre’s

website.