After the Conference on the Future of Europe, is the EU going to redraft its treaties?

Concluded in 9 May in Strasbourg, the CoFoE indentified key reforms that European citizens want Europe to adopt. But do the recommendation require treaty change?

After one year of seating, between online, physical, and hybrid meetings, the 800 randomly-selected citizens of the Conference for the Future of Europe (CoFoE) gave out their final recommendations on 9 May 2022. Presidents from the European Commission and the European Parliament, as well as Emmanuel Macron on behalf of the European Council, received a booklet of the measures from the participants of the Conference.

Since then, the idea that treaty change, the redrafting of the European treaties, gained momentum. Some argue that to fully adopt the recommendations of the CoFoE, a change in the governing rules of the Union is necessary.

As the idea of the revision of the treaty is being discussed, let’s have an overview of the reasons why it might be a good occasion, right after the CoFoE.

Why change the treaties?

Many careful observers of the Union are frustrated by a few shortcomings of the current governing rules. Let’s try to list them here.

First, there is a lack of democratic representation, visible in the few powers granted to the European Parliament. The Parliament cannot initiate law - this is the sole prerogative of the Commission. It cannot sanction the budget of the Union. Promoters of treaty change would like to give more power to the Parliament.

Second, there are the limited powers of the European Union itself. Compared to what European countries can do, the Union is a political dwarf. It does not have its own budget, cannot raises taxes for itself, and depends on donations of Member States. Treaty change could grant fiscal powers to the Union.

Third is the veto right. For much of the important decisions, the States, gathered within the European Council (co-legislator with the Commission and the Parliament) must agree unanimously on a decision. More often than not, some states block a reform that would impact them, effectively dropping the proposal as a whole. Promoters of treaty change ask for the transition to qualified majority votes (only a minority involving enough countries and population could stop a text from being adopted) in all matters.

Fourth, there is a small representation of civil society, European regions, and the many economic and social stakeholders that make Europe. A revision of the treaties could increase the powers of the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions, which have today a purely consultative role.

For these reasons - and many others - treaty change is needed. A revision of the treaty would be an opportunity to change the most pressing issues of the Union.

Call for a Convention

The rewriting of the treaties supposes to come up with new rules. Who could draft them? To leave it to Member States would undermine the objective to leave more power to the central institutions and end the veto right. To leave it to the European Parliament would allow for progressive and ambitious reform, but probably too unstable and misfit for the Union of State that the EU currently is.

The consensus would be to convene a Convention, in the model of the CoFoE. 800 citizens, representing all social classes, education levels, sexes, country of origin - quite simply, Europe in its diversity - participated in one of the greatest democratic exercises in recent years.

The model created at the CoFoE could be reused and improved on to draft the new texts that could become the basis for a Union fit for today’s challenges.

In any case, I will continue to report on the developments around the idea of treaty change. Follow the beubble.