Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe’
Date: 2004-10-28
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, European Constitution, citizens' Europe, deepening of the European Union, public awareness campaign

20.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 120/123

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Treaty establishing a Constitu-
tion for Europe’

(2005/C 120/23)

On 29 September 2004, the European Parliament decided to consult the European Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the ‘Treaty estab-
lishing a Constitution for Europe’.

In view of the urgent nature of the work, the EESC decided, at its 411th plenary session held on 15 and 16
September 2004, to appoint Mr Malosse as rapporteur-general. At its 412th plenary session on 27 and 28
October 2004 (meeting of 28 October 2004), the EESC adopted the following opinion by 166 votes to 4,
with 6 abstentions:

1. Introduction

1.1
The EESC expressed its support for the draft Constitu-
tional Treaty in its opinion of 24 September 2003 (1). In this
opinion, the EESC pointed out that once agreement had, hope-
fully, been reached between the Member States, the key task
would be to secure the support of the people and civil society
bodies in the EU Member States.

1.2 We have now reached this stage as the debate on the
ratification of the Treaty has been set in train in each of the EU
Member States, irrespective of the method of ratification which
has been selected (ratification by Parliament or through a refer-
endum).

At

this crucial

1.3
time for the future of the European
venture, everyone must be encouraged to look beyond their
own interests, be they personal, sectorial, professional, local or
national interests. The draft Treaty has to be scrutinised from
the standpoint of its overall political importance in the context
of the process launched over 50 years ago by the founding
fathers of the European Communities.

means of hearings and consultations and through the participa-
tion of observers selected by the social partners and the EESC,
marked a real step forward, also vis-à-vis the constitutional
practices pursued in the majority of the Member States. In its
abovementioned opinion of 24 September 2003 (2), the EESC
also put forward proposals for strengthening the process of
involving civil society in the future.

2.1.2
Although there was a number of setbacks, the IGC did
not substantially change the text proposed by the Convention.
The Constitutional Treaty is based on a consensus between all
the political groupings and is the fruit of a genuine democratic
debate.

2.1.3
Even though the Convention was not given consti-
tuent power, in view of the dual nature of the EU, as a union
of states and peoples, the establishment of the Convention
represented a genuine break with earlier practices, which
completely disregarded the representation of parliaments and
civil society.

Against this background, the EESC welcomes the action
1.4
taken by the European Parliament's Committee on Constitu-
tional Affairs in asking the EESC for an opinion on the Consti-
tutional Treaty. The EESC intends to avail itself to the full of
this opportunity to set out:

Abandonment of

the Constitutional Treaty would
2.1.4
constitute a defeat
for the method of drafting which was
adopted. It is therefore essential to plead the cause of using this
method on a permanent basis (as stipulated in the Constitu-
tional Treaty itself).

— clear messages addressed to civil society organisations in
the EU on the content and scope of the Constitutional
Treaty and

— recommendations on the communication strategy to be
adopted with a view to rallying civil society behind the
Constitutional Treaty.

2.1.5
For this reason, the EESC, which participated in the
work of the Convention, endorses the legitimacy of the Treaty
and calls upon all the members of the Convention and obser-
vers who signed the draft Treaty to follow its example.

2. Clear messages

2.2 The establishment of a Constitution, a ‘revolutionary’ step in the

history of the European venture

2.1 Use of the instrument of the ‘Convention’: a step forward in the

process of democratising the European venture

2.1.1
The Constitutional Treaty was drafted by a Conven-
tion, most of whose members were national MPs or MEPs. This
method of drawing up the Constitutional Treaty does, in itself,
represent a step forward which deserves to be drawn to public
attention. The efforts to involve civil society organisations, by

2.2.1
The Constitution provides a new framework of opera-
tion for the Union. The Constitution comprises three main
parts, the first two of which represent complete innovations.
Part I defines the principles and values underlying the Union;
Part II sets out the fundamental rights of the citizens of the
Union; and Part III defines and updates the Community policies
set out in the earlier treaties.

(1) Cf. Official Journal C 10 of 14.1.2004, p. 43.

(2) Cf. footnote 1.

C 120/124

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.5.2005

2.2.2
The Constitution provides a means of replacing the
existing treaties by a single, comprehensive document, thereby
making the way in which the EU operates more readily under-
standable and more accessible to all.

2.2.3
The Constitution does not replace national constitu-
tions but coexists alongside these constitutions. It will apply to
all of the territory of the European Union.

2.3.5.1
By maintaining an open and regular dialogue with
representative civil society associations, EU Institutions should
act in a more coherent and transparent way. By consulting the
parties concerned, it should be possible, for example, to avoid
nitpicking rules and rules which cannot be applied in practice.
Under the Constitutional Treaty the Commission would also be
obliged to carry out a more effective assessment of
the
economic and social
including the
impact at regional and local level.

impact of its proposals,

Although the substance of the Constitution is not,
2.2.4
‘revolutionary’, the fact that the new Treaty
strictly speaking,
takes the form of a constitution is bound to mark a new
chapter in the collective awareness of the people of the Euro-
pean Union by focusing on a joint ambition and a common
destiny. The EESC is duty bound to promote public awareness
of this step forward in the building of Europe.

2.3.5.2
One of the major innovations of the Constitutional
Treaty is the establishment of a right of popular initiative.
Provided that each request is supported by at least one million
citizens coming from a significant number of Member States,
EU citizens may in future invite the European Commission to
submit proposals for legislation which meet their aspirations.

2.3 A more democratic Union which recognises that the interests of
the people are paramount in the building of Europe (Part I of the
Treaty)

The objective of the Constitutional Treaty is abun-
2.3.1
dantly clear: to establish a political union on behalf of the citi-
zens and States of Europe.

2.3.6
The Constitutional Treaty confirms the role played by
the social partners as a key component of democratic life in
the Union, whilst
the social
dialogue.

respecting the autonomy of

The introduction of

2.3.7
the
proposed Constitution for Europe should make it possible to
reduce the democratic deficit in an expanding Union.

this new part

I) of

(Part

The Union's ambitions focus on the principal aspira-
2.3.2
tions of the citizens of the Union. The Constitutional Treaty
explicitly mentions ‘full employment, a highly competitive
social market economy and a high level of protection and
improvement of the quality of the environment’, when listing
the aims of the Union. The Union also seeks to promote
‘economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity among
Member States’ and to provide ‘an area of freedom, security
and justice’ for its citizens.

2.4 A Union which affords better protection of

the fundamental

rights of European citizens (Part II of the Treaty)

2.4.1
The Charter of Fundamental Rights was drawn up by
a Convention whose democratic legitimacy was widely recog-
nised. Contributions from civil society organisations played an
important role in the drafting of the Charter.

2.3.3
cratic legitimacy of the decision-making process:

There has been a distinct improvement in the demo-

2.3.3.1
The powers of the European Parliament, as the joint
legislative body, have been increased. This development could
help to strengthen public perception of the importance of the
European Parliament.

2.3.3.2
The new role assigned to the national parliaments
safeguards against any over-regulation at EU level. The
Commission is obliged to inform national parliaments of any
new initiatives and the ‘early warning mechanism’ enables them
to monitor compliance with the principle of subsidiarity.

In future, citizens can be informed of the positions
2.3.4
adopted by their respective governments at the Council, since
the latter body will be bound to act in a transparent way in its
capacity as a legislative body.

2.3.5
For the first time, participatory democracy has been
recognised as a principle underlying the operation of the Union
and providing a vital counterpart to representative democracy.

2.4.2
The Charter of Fundamental Rights is seen as marking
a step forward as it incorporates, without breaking them down
into separate categories, all types of individual and collective
rights (civil and political rights and social and economic rights).
It also adopts an innovatory approach by recognising more
‘contemporary’ civil rights (linked to sustainable development,
consumer protection, gender equality, bioethics, the protection
of personal data, etc.).

2.4.3
The fundamental rights of Union citizens form an
integral part of the Constitutional Treaty, rather than taking the
form of a preamble.

2.4.4
The incorporation of the European Charter of Funda-
mental Rights into the Treaty, as demanded by a large number
of European civil society organisations, is of significant impor-
tance as these rights will henceforth be legally binding.

2.4.5
This progressive measure will, in practice, mean that
citizens will benefit from better legal protection. They will, in
future, be able to invoke the provisions of the Charter in any
national courts when challenging decisions taken by the Euro-
pean Institutions and by Member States in implementing Com-
munity law.

20.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 120/125

2.4.6
The EESC, which was involved in the drawing-up of the
European Charter of Fundamental Rights, takes the view that its
incorporation into the Treaty represents a significant step forward in
the protection of the rights of natural and legal persons.

2.5 A Union which is capable of meeting the aspirations of its citi-
zens by virtue of the Community method and Community policies
(Part III of the Treaty)

in particular,

The existing Treaties and,

the Com-
2.5.1
munity method, have demonstrated their effectiveness to a
considerable degree. Part III of the Constitutional Treaty there-
fore sets out the main provisions of the existing treaties with
regard to the EU's common policies, whilst extending qualified
majority voting to approximately 20 areas hitherto subject to
unanimous voting. Furthermore, it gives official recognition to
the co-decision procedure as ‘ordinary legislative procedure’,
thereby strengthening the powers of the European Parliament.
Most of
the decisions taken by the Union relating to the
common policies can therefore be adopted more effectively and
more democratically.

2.5.2
Part III of the draft Constitution sets out the general
principles underlying the fields in which the EU Member States
have decided either to pool their resources or to cooperate. The
content of the policies in these areas is not, however, cast in
stone; it depends on the decisions taken by EU governments
and by majority votes in the European Parliament and therefore
reflects the will of these bodies.

2.5.3
One example of this is social policy, with the insertion
of a general provision ('social clause') stipulating that the Union
must take into account, when defining and implementing its
'the requirements linked to the promotion of a high
policies,
level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protec-
tion, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of
education, training and protection of human health'. Further
examples include combating all forms of discrimination and
exclusion and the recognition of the role of services of general
interest in the promotion of the social and territorial cohesion
of the Union or, as already enshrined in the Treaty, catering for
the
requirements of
consumer protection.

environmental dimension and the

The difficulty encountered in securing popular invol-
2.5.4
vement in the draft Constitutional Treaty may be attributed to
the very fact that, whilst the public is used to being consulted
on specific actions or proposed policies, it is not used to being
consulted on operating frameworks. In order to mobilise public
opinion, we have to launch a debate on what course of action
the public and the Member States wish to pursue, now that the
principles, values, objectives and operating rules have been
clearly set out in the draft Constitution.

2.5.5
For this reason, the EESC would, at this stage, like to
establish a link between the Constitutional Treaty and the
Lisbon Strategy, which will shortly be the subject of a mid-term
review. The subject of the Lisbon Strategy should be introduced
into the debate since it maps out a vision of the future for all
citizens of the EU marked by: competitiveness, full employ-
ment; shared knowledge; investment in human resources; and
growth, whilst preserving the living environment and the
quality of life through sustainable development. This strategy
has now broken down as the implementing instruments are
not up to the task and there is a chronic lack of public involve-
ment and involvement of civil society. At this stage, there is
therefore a vital need for a fresh impulse and new Community
initiatives in order to make the Union's economic and social
project credible.

2.5.6
In the opinion which it submitted to the European
Council (3), the EESC called for the mid-term review to place
responsibility for implementing the Lisbon Strategy in the
hands of public and civil society players. The forthcoming mid-
term review must be seen as providing an opportunity, which
cannot be missed, to pass on to the public and civil society a
clear political message spelling out the content of the EU's
project.

2.5.7
EU citizens need to be made aware of the fact that the
democratic progress achieved by the draft Constitution offers them the
wherewithal to decide themselves on the content of the policies and
actions to be pursued in practice by the Union in order to meet their
aspirations. Rejection of the Constitutional Treaty would therefore be
tantamount to freezing the Treaties in their present form.

2.6 Rallying European civil society behind the achievements of the
Constitutional Treaty in order to overcome its shortcomings

2.6.1
This does not mean that we should keep quiet about
the shortcomings of the Constitutional Treaty in its current
form. A large number of the demands of civil society could not
be taken into account by the Convention and still fewer by the
IGC. In its opinion of 24 September 2003 (4), the EESC noted a
wholes series of weaknesses in the Constitutional Treaty,
including the following:

2.6.1.1
The lack of adequate operational provisions for
implementing the principle of participatory democracy. As a
result, the role of the EESC was not strengthened to the extent
necessary to ensure effective civil dialogue.

The absence of provisions acknowledging the role
2.6.1.2
played by organised civil society in implementing the subsi-
diarity principle (including functional
in the
protocol on the application of this principle.

subsidiarity)

(3) Opinion submitted by

and Social
Committee to the European Council on the mid-term review of the
Lisbon Strategy (1438/2004).

the European Economic

(4) Cf. footnote 1.

C 120/126

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.5.2005

The weakness of EU governance

2.6.1.3
regards
economic and employment policy and the absence of rules
providing for consultation of the European Parliament and the
EESC in these areas, which concern civil society players most
of all.

as

2.6.1.4
The lack of any requirement for mandatory consulta-
tion of the EESC on application of the non-discrimination prin-
ciple, the common asylum and immigration policy or culture,
despite the Committee's expertise in these fields.

Does this mean then that

2.6.2
the Treaty should be
rejected? The EESC believes that this would only make things
worse and send a negative signal regarding the European
venture, both within the Union and outside, where hostile or
competing forces would certainly take delight
in such a
setback. On the contrary, the Committee feels that it is possible
to build on the proposed institutional framework and improve
it through operational measures:

2.6.2.1
The provisions on participatory democracy should
be made the subject of a series of communications defining the
consultation procedures and the role of the EESC.

2.6.2.2
Civil society should be consulted on the content of
the European law defining the procedures for implementing the
right of citizens' initiative. The EESC could be asked to deliver
an exploratory opinion on this subject. It could also lend its
support to civil society initiatives.

2.6.4
By opting for a committed, critical and constructive
approach, organised civil society will help to ensure that citi-
zens are well
informed and will keep up the pressure on
governments. The worst thing would be if politicians were to
be confirmed in the - unfortunately widely held - view that citi-
zens are not interested in the European venture. This view is
totally false because people actually expect much from Europe,
in particular that it will bring improvements in their everyday
life by providing a vision of their future.

2.6.5
The EESC believes that the adoption of the Constitutional
Treaty is not an end in itself. Rather, it opens the way towards a
strengthening of participatory democracy. To reject the Treaty would
be to give up the progress achieved through the Convention method.

3. Effective communication

the quality of

The EESC believes that
the communication
strategy will be a determining factor for the adoption of the
Constitutional Treaty by the people of Europe. A pragmatic
and professional approach is therefore needed to ensure that
the strategy is effective. The EESC recommends that
the
communication strategy be built around action in the following
four areas:

3.1 Provision of resources: information tools and funding

2.6.2.3
The principle of participatory democracy should be
applied to the EU's key strategies for promoting growth,
employment and sustainable development.

The complexity of the Constitutional Treaty calls for
3.1.1
the development of
information tools that could be used,
upstream of the communication process, to launch campaigns
or organise debates.

2.6.3 Moreover, and still within the framework of
the
Constitutional Treaty as it has been adopted, it is also impor-
tant to inform the public about how flexibility could be intro-
duced and progress could be achieved without the need to
revise the Treaty:

3.1.2
It would be up to the Member States, with the support
of the information offices of the European Parliament and the
Commission representations in the Member States, to devise
information tools and make them accessible.

2.6.3.1 Member States wishing to advance further down the
road of European integration will find it easier to establish
enhanced cooperation between themselves.

These tools could take the form of interpretive guides
3.1.3
to the Constitutional Treaty, geared to the concerns of different
population groups in each Member State. The more customised
these tools are, the easier it would be for them to be used effec-
tively by the media, civil society organisations, political groups
and local and regional authorities in disseminating information
and rallying public support.

If all the Member States express the political will to
2.6.3.2
it will be possible to deepen integration in sensitive
do so,
areas where unanimity is still required, such as taxation or
social policy, for example. A ‘bridging clause’ allows qualified
majority voting to be extended to these areas.

3.1.4
The provision of adequate financial resources is neces-
sary for the implementation of a communication strategy that
meets citizens' expectations.

20.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 120/127

3.2 Launching of public communication campaigns using the media

and grassroots communication channels

expectations, answer their questions and guarantee the demo-
cratic character of the debates.

Once the requisite resources have been placed at their
3.2.1
disposal, the media,
local and regional authorities, political
groups and civil society organisations will have the means to
act as a conduit for information. They will be able to convey
clear messages on the implications of the Constitutional Treaty
that are attuned to the concerns of their local audience.

3.3.3
National and European institutions must provide logis-
tical support for these initiatives. National economic and social
councils and similar institutions could coordinate the debates at
national level by establishing a calendar of events and liaising
with the EESC, which could provide them with documentation
and put them in touch with speakers.

Initially,

to find out,

it would be useful

3.2.2
in each
Member State, how the Constitutional Treaty is perceived by
different population groups in order to reflect on the content
of the messages to be conveyed. Drawing on the conclusions
reached,
the messages would be to overcome
people's fears and respond to their expectations.

the aim of

3.3.4
In order to ensure a degree of consistency between the
initiatives, the EESC requests the European Parliament and the
European Commission to ensure that initiatives by representa-
tives of organised civil society enjoy the same support as those
by elected and other representatives of European, national,
regional and local bodies under the 1000 debates on Europe
initiative. Civil society cannot be kept on the sidelines.

3.2.3
In addition, the message-bearers and communication
media will have to be chosen carefully. The involvement of a
wide variety of players is essential to guarantee the pluralist
nature of the campaign. Moreover, their closeness to citizens
will be a key factor enhancing the credibility and acceptance of
the messages conveyed, hence the importance of action taken
at local and regional level.

The EESC requests the European Parliament to allocate
3.3.5
a significant proportion of the EU communication budget to
the debates on the Constitutional Treaty to complement the
resources of national and local public authorities and the
resources at the disposal of civil society organisations.

3.2.4
The EESC recommends to the European Parliament
that working parties be set up with institutional communica-
tion professionals in each Member State with a view to making
practical proposals to governments regarding the measures and
resources necessary to embark upon an effective communica-
tion campaign in the Member States. The EESC is prepared to
make available its expertise in this field and to offer the
support of its contacts in the Member States, national ESCs and
similar institutions.

3.4 Giving the debates and ratification a European dimension

3.4.1
It is essential to make sure that the adoption of the
Constitutional Treaty by the people of Europe is not deter-
mined solely by domestic policy issues.

3.3 Organising debates that are open to all members of the public
with a view to fostering the exchange of ideas and convincing
people

3.4.2
Therefore the EESC recommends that the debates and
the ratification of the Constitutional Treaty be given a truly
transnational dimension:

3.3.1
The communication campaigns should lead to the
opening of genuine dialogue with the public. It is essential that
people be offered the opportunity to ask questions and hear
different arguments so that they can make and express their
own judgements.

3.3.2
Such dialogue will only be possible in the context of
decentralised debates. The closer the interface with citizens, the
better the information provided will be able to respond to their

On the one hand, the European Institutions should
3.4.2.1
help to coordinate the communication activities of political
groups, local and regional authorities and civil society organisa-
tions by encouraging the exchange of good practice in this
field and the pooling of efforts. For example, the EESC could
promote the exchange of good practice (and know-how) at
European level between civil society organisations involved in
communication activities.
It could also establish feedback
arrangements for evaluating, at European level, proposals, criti-
cisms and recommendations put forward by members of the
public during debates organised by civil society. Finally, the
EESC stands ready to support cross-border or multi-national
initiatives.

C 120/128

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.5.2005

3.4.2.2
Furthermore, the EESC endorses the proposal by the
European Parliament's Committee on Constitutional Affairs to
hold the ratifications on or around a symbolic date (such as
8 or 9 May), insofar as is possible.

3.4.3
Therefore the EESC calls for active involvement by the
European Institutions in the drawing up and implementation of
the communication strategy on the Constitutional Treaty. It is

Brussels, 28 October 2004.

important to work alongside the Member States and to send
out a strong and positive signal to citizens about Europe.

For its part,

3.4.4
messages
achievements of the Constitutional Treaty,
alia, citizenship and participation.

the EESC undertakes to convey clear
the democratic
in terms of, inter

to European civil

society about

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘The environment as an economic
opportunity’

(2005/C 120/24)

In a letter from Mr Atzo Nicolaï, Minister for European Affairs, the future Netherlands presidency of the
Council requested the European Economic and Social Committee on 22 April 2004, in accordance with
Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to draw up an opinion on: ‘The environ-
ment as an economic opportunity’.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 21 September 2004. The rapporteur was
Mr Buffetaut.

At its 412th plenary session (meeting of 28 October 2004), the European Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion by 130 votes to two with two abstentions.

1. Introduction

1.3
Not until two years later did the European Council take
the decisions which led to the formulation of a strategy for
sustainable development, thus adding to the Lisbon Strategy.

1.1
In a letter of April 2004, the future Netherlands presi-
dency asked the EESC to draw up an exploratory opinion on
the environment as an economic opportunity. The Netherlands
presidency would like to focus on win-win opportunities where
progress
technology and environmental
protection could help to achieve the economic and social
objectives of the Lisbon Strategy.

in environmental

However,

1.4
is environmental protection really a main-
stream issue for the Lisbon Strategy? The stagnation which has
afflicted some European economies has resulted in economic
growth and job creation becoming the top priority, with envir-
onmental protection taking second place on the Roman prin-
ciple of ‘primum vivere, deinde philosophare’. But, given that
importance to our
the environment is of such fundamental
lives, could it not be argued that it is of concern to everyone,
and not only to experts?

1.2 When setting the European Union the very ambitious
objective of becoming ‘the most competitive and dynamic
knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable
economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social
cohesion’, the European Council made little mention of envir-
onmental aspects. Only the term sustainable could be inter-
preted as a reference to the concept of sustainable develop-
ment.

1.5
In this context, major European economic sectors have
been concerned that the determination of the European Union,
and the Commission in particular, to set exemplary interna-
tional environmental standards incurs the risk of them going it
alone.