14 January 2014

Paul N Goldschmidt: The unpopularity of the European Union

Opinion polls seem to indicate that the forthcoming European elections risk being derailed and transformed into a referendum for or against the Union. Goldschmidt finds this extremely dangerous and says Europe's current unpopularity must be vigorously countered.

All opinion polls seem to indicate that the forthcoming European elections risk being derailed and transformed into a referendum for or against the Union. This is extremely dangerous: indeed as the question will not be asked explicitly, as required in a referendum, it will be particularly convenient for those advocating the “No” to avoid detailing the practical modalities of any alternative. Even if superficially, as is likely, the “Yes” vote wins, the debate will, nevertheless, bring to light a deep split within this group, between those who favour a “federal” or an “intergovernmental” Union at either/or EU and EMU level.

Assuming that the “No” vote is represented by 1/3 of the new EP Members and that the “Yes” is evenly split between federalists and intergovernmentalists, a reasonable hypothesis, it would follow that the EU would be totally incapable of putting forward a credible proposal for the Union’s future, liable to win the support of a majority of the electorate. Such a deadlock would only foster speculation concerning the survival of the Union itself because that it is illusory to bet on a – still weak - improvement in global economic activity to solve Europe’s structural problems.

To avoid being trapped in such a predicament, it is essential to mobilise the electorate by proposing various “political” alternatives for conducting economic, social, environmental, etc. affairs at European level. The designation by the European political parties of their candidate for the Commission presidency constitutes a first - but far from sufficient - step in this direction. What is fundamental is to ensure that the “political” orientation resulting from the polls will hold sway for five years, leaving areas devolved to national parliaments to be governed by the majorities elected nationally. Only then can one avoid Europe being held hostage by its individual Members and protect the general interests of its citizens.

Within such a context, it would become possible for the “Aye” camp to constitute a common front against the “Naysayers” by showing their lack of credibility and denouncing their position as an imposture, carrying with it significant negative consequences for every Member State.

For those who shrug their shoulders and believe that the EU cannot be reformed because it is riddled with the same tars that pervade the political class of number of its Member States, I wish to draw their attention to another institution. It boasts more than twice as many adherents as the EU and has also been subjected to growing disaffection. Considered still recently as moribund, because of allegations concerning its lack of democratic legitimacy, its elitism, its endemic corruption, its incapacity to address the preoccupations of its members, it has appeared recently nearly miraculously convalescent. I am, of course, referring to the Catholic church and the election of Pope Francis, whose initial impact has given new hope to millions of believers (and to others as well), even if there can be no doubt that it will take some time to implement the necessary changes and that both some conservatives as well as ultra progressives will be disappointed.

It is a similar shock that Europe needs to initiate its own transformation. Voters should have the opportunity to express their choice on the future political direction of the Union, and the “Synod” (Council) gathered in “Conclave” (European Council) should elect the “Pope” (President) of the executive taking account of the result of the polls. The Pope should be entitled to form his own team (Commission), confirmed by the Parliament. He should exercise fully his exclusive right of initiative to implement, with the approval of the Parliament, the orientations resulting from the elections and the reforms needed to carry its corresponding “European project”. In particular, this team should prepare a full Council (Intergovernmental Conference) to discuss a new Treaty introducing the necessary institutional reforms as well as the devolution of responsibilities to the appropriate different levels of power. It should specify the role of the Synod and would leave a large degree of autonomy to the regional “Episcopal conferences” (Member States) in full compliance with the principles of subsidiarity. A referendum, needing a Europe-wide 60 per cent rate of approval, would provide the necessary democratic legitimacy to the whole process.

Europe’s current unpopularity must be vigorously countered. Far from being a problem, the European Union is an unavoidable ingredient of any solution. Only six months remain to provide the demonstration.

---

Paul N Goldschmidt, Director, European Commission (ret); Member of the Advisory Board of the Thomas More Institute

Tel: +32 (02) 6475310 / +33 (04) 94732015 / Mob: +32 (0497) 549259

E-mail: paul.goldschmidt@skynet.be / Web: www.paulngoldschmidt.eu

© Paul Goldschmidt