Animal welfare is an issue where ordinary citizens’ mass support can make a difference The EU has a troubled history when it comes to consulting the people. Remember the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, re-run after Irish voters said “No” first time round?
The treaty was bolted together from the wreckage of the European Constitution, which voters in France and the Netherlands scuppered in 2005.
The phrase “democratic deficit”, a favourite of Brussels-watchers, still haunts the EU.
Turnout in last year’s elections to the European Parliament was the lowest ever – just 43%, described by the European Commission as “a real failure for democracy”.
In this age of social networking on the internet, and Obama-style election “crowd-sourcing”, EU institutions are trying to address the image problem, recognising that many voters question their legitimacy.
So, among many other things, the Lisbon Treaty says the EU must create a new tool for direct democracy – under strict EU rules, of course. Next year we will hear a lot more about the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI).
The rules are to be hammered out in the next few weeks – after all, it is nearly a year since the treaty went into force in all 27 member states.
With sufficient support – at least a million signatures across the EU – ordinary citizens should be able to initiate a law or laws in Brussels. The internet has made that kind of mass mobilisation possible.
The absence of rules has not stopped campaigners vying to be among the first to get a hearing for their cause at the Commission.
In early October the environmental group Greenpeace said it had more than a million signatures supporting its call for a halt to the sowing of genetically modified (GM) crops in Europe.
It was a response to the Commission’s authorisation of a GM-type of potato, called Amflora. A variety of maize is the only other GM crop allowed in the EU, amid heated debate – and much uncertainty – about the crops’ effects on living organisms.
If the aim of the ECI is to get ordinary citizens more engaged in European issues the evidence so far suggests that well-connected pressure groups and politicians will still have the loudest voices. They are the ones with the lobbying experience that generates publicity and funding.
An internet campaign to prevent the EU from levying direct taxes is led by a Belgian MEP, Derk-Jan Eppink, of the European Conservatives and Reformists group.
“The citizens are paying more than enough taxes already. They don’t want additional tax bills from Brussels,” he says.
A Danish Social Democrat MEP, Dan Jorgensen, is gathering signatures to stop the practice of transporting live animals for several days. He wants the EU to set an eight-hour limit on such journeys.
Dan Jorgensen MEP and Diana Wallis MEP talk about the European Citizens’ Initiative
The Lisbon Treaty says an ECI has to have support in a “significant number” of member states, to make it a genuinely European initiative. The Commission defines that as a minimum of nine countries – one-third of the EU states. The parliament’s chief negotiators say six countries is enough.
The Commission, which drafts EU laws, will have the power to vet the initiatives. But MEPs argue that a public hearing is the appropriate filter to decide initially whether an ECI has a chance of becoming law.
Disgruntled EU citizens can already petition MEPs to act on an issue. The parliament’s petitions committee assesses the merits of the case and can then press for EU action.
Many petitions are local in nature – for example, complaints from UK citizens resident in Spain who object to certain building projects in their area.
But the ECI is a different beast – it is intended both to widen public debate on issues concerning Europeans in general and, where necessary, to trigger new legislation.
“It’s good to get citizens to engage more… but it takes governments to reform the big things”
Stephen Booth Open Europe think-tank
Yet will the EU manage to strike the right balance – engaging citizens in important policy areas without strangling them with red tape?
EU Administration Commissioner Maros Sefcovic says the method for gathering signatures must be “simple and user-friendly”.
Verification of signatures is crucial to prevent fraudulent initiatives. But some citizens – perhaps many – will not want to submit personal data, however worthy the cause. The controls will have to avoid compromising personal privacy.
The ECI may appear too feeble for those who want fundamental change in Brussels – it will not give ordinary citizens the power to change treaties.
Those who want to stop the parliament’s regular, very expensive trips to Strasbourg will be disappointed.
The liberal, anti-discrimination values enshrined in EU treaties may also block a planned ECI from far-right groups led by the Austrian Freedom Party (FPOe), who want to stop Turkey joining the EU.
Stephen Booth, an analyst at the Open Europe think-tank, says the new citizens’ tool “won’t tackle any of the really big issues such as agriculture, budget spending”.
“It’s good to get citizens to engage more… but it takes governments to reform the big things,” he told the BBC.
According to Mr Booth, the pan-European spirit of the ECI also conflicts with “subsidiarity” – the EU principle that decisions should be taken as closely as possible to the citizen, in many cases at local level.
Speaking on the BBC programme The Record Europe, Liberal Democrat MEP Diana Wallis warned against over-hyping the ECI.
“It’s not a Swiss-style system of initiatives and referendums. It’s dipping the toe in the water of participatory democracy… an opportunity for European citizens to push the legislative button.”
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.