Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on The Commission's contribution to the period of reflection and beyond: Plan-D for Democracy, Dialogue and Debate and the White paper on a European communication policy
Date: 2006-06-15
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: European citizenship, citizens' Europe, communications policy, democratic deficit, information policy, political participation

22.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 229/67

the European Parliament,

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the
Council,
the European Economic and Social Committee and the
Committee of the Regions on The Commission's contribution to the period of reflection and
beyond: Plan-D for Democracy, Dialogue and Debate and the White paper on a European commu-
nication policy

(2006/C 229/10)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Euro-
pean Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Commission's contribution to the
period of reflection and beyond: Plan-D for Democracy, Dialogue and Debate COM(2005)494 final and the White
paper on a European communication policy COM(2006) 35 final;

Having regard to the decision of the European Commission of 13 October 2005 to consult it on the
subject, under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision of its Bureau of 15 November 2005 to instruct its Commission for Consti-
tutional Affairs, European Governance and the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice to draw up an
opinion on this subject;

Having regard to the Treaty of Nice (2001/C 80/01);

Having regard to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe signed by the Heads of State and Govern-
ment on 29 October 2004 (IGC 87/04 rev. 1, IGC 87/04 Add. 1 rev. 1, IGC 87/04 Add. 2 rev. 1);

Having regard to the Declaration by the Heads of State or Government of the Member States of the European
Union on the ratification of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (European Council, 16 and 17 June
2005);

Having regard to the Cooperation Agreement between the Committee of the Regions and the European
Commission (CdR 197/2005 Item 11) signed on 17 November 2005;

Having regard to the European Parliament resolution on the period of reflection: the structure, subjects and context
for an assessment of the debate on the European Union, A6-0414/2005;

Having regard to the Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the
Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the
Committee of the Regions — The Commission's contribution to the period of reflection and beyond: Plan-D for
Democracy, Dialogue and Debate (CESE 1390/2005 fin) (1);

Having regard to its Opinion of 13 October 2005 on The period of reflection: the structure, subjects and context
for an assessment of the debate on the European Union (CdR 250/2005 fin) (2);

Having regard to its Opinion of 17 December 2002 on the Communication from the Commission to the Council,
the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on An information
and communication strategy for the European Union (CdR 124/2002 fin) (3);

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 52/2006 rev. 1) adopted on 7 April 2006 by the Commission for
Constitutional Affairs, European Governance and the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (rapporteur:
Ms Mercedes Bresso, President of the Piedmont Region (IT/PES);

Whereas:

1)

the European Union's difficulties over communication with its citizens are symptomatic of a demo-
cratic deficit within the EU. Major decisions that influence the lives of Europeans are made on the
basis of complex intergovernmental and interinstitutional negotiations during which citizens are
passive or only occasional observers;

(1) OJ C 65 of 17.3.2006, pp. 92-93.
(2) OJ C 81 of 4.4.2006, pp. 32-36.
(3) OJ C 73 of 26.3.2003, pp.46–52.

C 229/68

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.9.2006

2)

3)

4)

5)

until, on the one hand, the democratic deficit is rectified through institutional reform, as is, more-
over, set out in the draft Constitutional Treaty, and, on the other hand, the role and work of the
existing democratic bodies of the European Union are accepted, the European institutions will have
a primary obligation to help compensate for the consequences of the democratic deficit by other
means in order to enable citizens to express their opinion on the future of the European project;

there is an urgent need not only to set up effective means of communication but, more importantly,
to identify the objectives of this initiative and make them public. It is also necessary to promote
forums for public participation and to include the European project in school curricula. The process
aims to compensate for the consequences of the democratic deficit by giving citizens the opportu-
nity to express their opinion on the political future of the European project, especially the institu-
tional and political nature of Europe: whether we intend to extend or curb common policies, or
increase, maintain or limit economic and political integration;

the EU's communication policy should be aimed at the development of a broader European aware-
ness. This awareness can only come about if public support is created for European cooperation.
The starting point for this should be the subjects and issues which affect people's daily lives and
where there is clear added value to be obtained from European cooperation. Everyone must realise
that this is a long-term process;

regional and local authorities have a fundamental role to play in the debate on the future of Europe
by motivating citizens in relation to issues that affect them closely and by organising structured
debates with citizens, elected regional and local authority representatives and MEPs. It is to be hoped
that the Committee of the Regions, as the institution that represents local and regional authorities,
and the European Parliament, as the embodiment of supra-national citizenship, will be part and
parcel of this process, in a genuine expression of multilevel communication;

unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 65th plenary session, held on 14-15 June 2006
(meeting of 15 June).

Opinions and recommendations of the committee of the
regions

1. The Committee of the Regions' views on the period of reflection

and Plan D

The Committee of the Regions

1.1
recognises that the period of reflection is an opportu-
nity to give new impetus to the European Union and that the
into
current crisis in European governance should not call
question the validity of the European integration project. All
communication policies will prove fruitless unless they are
based on recasting European integration in democratic terms;

1.2
points out that the European Union will not result in a
shared destiny unless it succeeds in instilling and disseminating
among its own citizens a feeling of shared identity that cele-
brates diversity, passing on its founding values to future genera-
tions, communicating and promoting them through its external
relations, explaining to its citizens the key tools for communi-
cating and interacting with the institutions and creating a basic
awareness of the key aspects of European economic, political,
historical and social integration, and above all, actively invol-
ving them in European integration and decision-making;

reasserts its commitment to pursuing the constitutional
1.3
process; opposes the idea of relinquishing the Constitutional
Treaty in favour of the Treaty of Nice or adopting selective
implementation (cherry picking); advocates adopting a Consti-
tutional Treaty that consolidates the creation of a political,
prosperous, powerful and citizen-based Europe; calls for the
ratification of a Constitutional Treaty by 2009, bearing in mind
the difficulties encountered in a number of Member States and
the position of those that have already ratified the Treaty. The
period of reflection should therefore be extended, ensuring that
no opportunities
furthering European integration and
improving Europe's public image are ignored, through partial
or global agreements;

for

The Committee draws attention in this context

to
1.4
nationalist and protectionist
tendencies which are evident
within the EU; this trend is a danger for the further develop-
ment of the European Union;

1.5
emphasises that the period of reflection presents an
opportunity for refocusing the debate on the advantages of
multilevel governance as the answer to the European integra-
tion ideal summarised in the Constitutional Treaty's motto
‘Unity in Diversity’;

22.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 229/69

1.6
believes that the EU way of doing things should fully
incorporate the principle of subsidiarity and proximity to
ensure effectiveness and legitimacy, in the knowledge that at
this stage subsidiarity is a vital means of narrowing the gap
with its citizens;

the European Commission in the Member States should recog-
nise them; and that they should also play a role in EU initia-
tives under Plan D as well as actions carried out by the Euro-
pean Parliament. Sufficient financial support must be made
available by the European Union. Otherwise there is a danger
that the plan will be no more than an expression of good inten-
tions;

recognises that a European public space can only be
1.7
created if Europe reinvigorates political integration wherein citi-
zens can proactively choose clear policy positions for Europe's
future;

1.8
reiterates that no efforts should be spared to foster the
development of a European civic spirit that promotes the citi-
informed participation in consolidating European
zens'
integration;

full,

reiterates that all elected representatives bear responsi-
1.9
bility for meeting these pressing needs; urges local, regional,
national and European elected representatives to work together
to establish democratic links with their citizens; and in this
context, advocates closer interinstitutional cooperation with
the European Parliament and the other institutions, with a view
to substantially strengthening regional consultation within the
European Union;

1.10
is convinced of the need for permanent dialogue with
citizens, political organisations, unions and associations based
on a pact of trust, and in this context, considers that the period
of reflection should be used to listen to citizens. This requires
the EU institutions to pursue a policy of openness and accessi-
bility that makes it easier for citizens to take part in discussion
and debate. For this reason, sustained and structured coopera-
tion is
responsible for
listening;

required between the institutions

1.11
considers it necessary for all EU institutions and
bodies to systematically highlight the important role which the
strong regional and local dimension in Member States has
played in the process of European integration. This territorial
dimension is a unique feature of our integration process, which
has the potential to lend greater democratic legitimacy to all
EU decisions. In this respect, CoR opinions should be taken
into account much more if we wish to strengthen the demo-
cratic legitimacy of the European Union;

1.12
points out that, in line with the White paper on Euro-
pean Governance and the draft Constitutional Treaty, the CoR
should have instruments enabling it to monitor the Commis-
sion's implementation of the measures approved in its opinion,
at least for those topics on which it must be consulted;

1.14
considers it necessary to move beyond the period of
reflection: European institutions and elected representatives
must engage seriously in a structured debate with citizens and
their associations by adopting the method advocated by the
Convention on the Constitutional Treaty. The debate should
begin by defining the real problems experienced by European
citizens, such as welfare, employment, environmental protec-
tion and energy and, as proposed by the European Parliament,
should address a limited number of priority issues relating to
the future of Europe, namely:

(i) What is the object of European integration?

(ii) What should Europe's international role be?

(iii) In the light of globalisation, what is the future of the Euro-

pean economic and social model?

(iv) How are the borders of the European Union to be defined?

(v) How are freedom, security and justice to be promoted?

(vi) How is the European Union to be funded?

1.15
believes that more needs to be done to win the trust
of citizens than merely to conduct a dialogue and to draw up a
citizens' wish list. EU citizens need to know that, in the final
analysis, it is they themselves, via their elected representatives,
who decide on the future of the Union. The questions raised in
the preceding point therefore need to be answered by means of
— where possible common — political views expressed by all
local, regional and national authorities;

believes that, in addition to carrying out information
1.16
and communication campaigns,
local, regional, national and
European elected representatives must ensure that their institu-
tions, bodies or organisations assume, as part of their day-to-
day work, responsibility for providing information on the Euro-
pean dimension of their area of activity. The Committee of the
Regions therefore points out that a publication on best prac-
tice is currently being drawn up as follow-up to this opinion,
giving examples of specific activities carried out at local and
level relating to the implementation of Plan D for
regional
Democracy, Dialogue and Debate;

1.13
considers that decentralised communication strategies
should capitalise on the democratic potential of CoR members
and their European mandate. This implies that the national
plans under Plan D, some of which are already at the imple-
mentation phase, should involve them; that Representations of

stresses the need to include the fourth dimension, i.e.
1.17
Decentralisation,
in Plan D, alongside Democracy, Dialogue,
and Debate, by using external means of communication such
as the local and regional authorities, since their responsibilities

C 229/70

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.9.2006

in this field give them a fundamental role to play through
forums, initiatives and debates. The debate should be launched
from these local and regional forums in the presence of elected
representatives (from local, regional, national and Community
levels), and representatives of civil society and civic associa-
tions. These forums would successfully communicate the
outcome of the debate to national parliaments and to Stras-
bourg.

guiding and coordinating local and regional authorities and the
local and regional press, thereby actively contributing to this
reflection period within the framework of
interinstitutional
cooperation; underlines, in this context, the need to secure an
increase in available budgetary resources and to allocate the
necessary budget to contribute to a renewed information and
communication policy;

2. The Committee of the Regions' views on the European communica-

tion policy

The Committee of the Regions

2.1 would welcome coordination with local and regional
bodies, since multilevel governance as expressed by the EU and
the regions would facilitate multilevel communication, with
actions aimed at fostering mutual understanding as part of a
shared subsidiarity approach; expects that local and regional
authorities will be actively involved in EU communication
policy. In view of the diversity existing within the EU and with
an eye to the implementation of the subsidiarity principle, the
government bodies which are closest to the people are the
appropriate players for enabling the Union to communicate the
European project to the people;

2.2 welcomes, in this respect, the publication of the White
paper on a European communication policy based on strength-
ened dialogue, proximity to citizens and a decentralised
approach, but nevertheless deplores the fact that the document
has no political vision and therefore serves only as a tool;
draws specific attention to the absence of any strategic vision
of the EU's nature and its role in protecting and promoting its
citizens' interests and needs in the years to come;

2.3
is pleased to note that the White Paper acknowledges
the role played by local and regional authorities, and, in par-
ticular, the role of the media in establishing dialogue with citi-
zens and actively engaging local and regional communities in
European issues; recommends that the extensive network of
media correspondents in Brussels be linked more effectively
through appropriate measures
with local editorial offices,
(workshops, inviting journalists to Brussels); recalls that, in this
sphere, local and regional authorities need appropriate opera-
tional resources to be effective;

2.4
emphasises that due in part to its own contribution
and that of the local and regional authorities, the European
Union has an appropriate democratic framework for re-estab-
lishing dialogue with its citizens in order to develop a European
civic spirit and reshape Community action to promote proxi-
mity; recalls that the local and regional press constitutes a
crucial means of communication with citizens;

2.5
deplores the marginal role set out for it in the white
paper but remains willing to assume its responsibility for

2.6 welcomes in this context the opening of negotiations
with the relevant services of the European Commission with a
view to drafting an addendum to the cooperation agreement
between the CoR and the European Commission, renewed in
November 2005, on the information and communication
policy;

2.7 wishes to make its own contribution to the European
Charter or Code of Conduct on Communication and asks the
Commission to provide details on the concept, objectives and
added value of such a document;

believes that it is imperative to link communication
2.8
policy and active citizenship through actions supporting high-
profile events, studies and information tools, platforms for
dialogue and reflection, addressing the broadest possible public
across borders, and tackling issues of immediate concern to the
people, such as employment, the development of urban areas
and the countryside, immigration and security, energy and the
environment, matters in respect of which action at European
level brings an absolute added value. These issues also have
considerable influence on the policies pursued by local and
regional authorities. This is the kind of action which makes
Europe a reality to its citizens;

2.9
acknowledges that one of the white paper's objectives
is to gain a better understanding of public opinion through
Eurobarometer surveys and suggests that
the opinion polls
should be better tailored to the local and regional levels and
that better connections be established between the Eurobarom-
eter, the CoR and its members; local and regional players in
public bodies are themselves the most immediate interfaces
with public opinion;

2.10
encourages the inclusion in school curricula of Euro-
pean civic education courses, with proper timetable and staff
provision in schools and universities, to explain the significance
of the European project, its founding values, origins, primary
goals, and future challenges;

2.11
advocates a European information policy that would
enable the EU to obtain independent media tools and, more
specifically, would welcome the development of tools within
for communicating with Europe,
regional press agencies
communication training programmes for public officials, and
Europe by Satellite's (EbS) transformation from an audiovisual
tool into a genuine European press agency;

22.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 229/71

substantial

proposes more

2.12
simple, decentralised,
funding arrangements to support the activities of smaller non-
governmental organisations in providing the public directly
with information about the EU, e.g. through events to promote
dialogue, courses, brochures tailored to regional needs and
visits to Brussels;

2.13
this information should first be
compiled and then communicated through regional and local

recommends that

Brussels, 15 June 2006.

institutions; would like the other institutions to establish more
systematic coordination with it in order to create communica-
tion and information plans together, as planned;

2.14 would like information and communication on the
EU finally to be seen as a logical framework for local, regional
and national organisations, bodies and institutions as well as
the media to ensure that they can provide correct and complete
information.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Michel DELEBARRE