COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL AND THE COUNCIL A Europe that delivers: Institutional options for making the European Union's work more efficient The European Commission's contribution to the Informal Leaders' meeting of 23 February 2018
Date: 2018-02-14
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: European Commission, European Council, European Parliament, European election, European party, candidate, operation of the Institutions, parliamentary election, president of an institution, regional and local authorities

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 13.2.2018 COM(2018) 95 final  COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL AND THE COUNCIL   A Europe that delivers: Institutional options for making the European Union's work more efficient         The European Commission's contribution to the Informal Leaders' meeting  of 23 February 2018  
 
 
"We need to improve the communication with each other – among Member States, with EU 
institutions, but most importantly with our citizens.  

We should inject more clarity into our decisions. Use clear and honest language. Focus on 
citizens’ expectations, with strong courage to challenge simplistic solutions of extreme or 
populist political forces." 

Bratislava Declaration, 16 September 2016 

"Europe's future lies in our own hands and […] the European Union is the best instrument to 
achieve our objectives. 

We want the Union to be big on big issues and small on small ones. 

We will promote a democratic, effective and transparent decision-making process and better 
delivery." 

Rome Declaration, 25 March 2017 

"To succeed in Europe, we have to put an end to this artificial opposition between the Union 
and its Member States.  

Our Union can only be built with our Member States and never against them." 

Jean-Claude Juncker, Strasbourg, 17 January 2018 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A Europe that delivers: Institutional options for making the 
European Union's work more efficient 

The European Commission's contribution to the Informal Leaders' meeting  

of 23 February 2018  

At a critical time, on 16 September 2016, Europe's Leaders came together around a positive 
European agenda in the form of the Bratislava Declaration and Roadmap. This was both an 
acknowledgment  that  the  EU  is  best  placed  to  address  the  challenges  we  face  and  a 
commitment to better serve the needs of Europeans by delivering tangible results on a set of 
key priorities. Leaders recognised that only a collective resolve to deliver jointly on the things 
that matter will help close the gap between promises on paper and people's expectations.  

More than a year later, the Bratislava method is working. The EU has made real progress in 
areas  such  as  border  management,  defence,  investment,  digital  economy,  education  and 
culture  as  well  as  the  social  dimension  of  our  internal  market.  This  new  method  has  been 
reinforced with  the Leaders' Agenda of October 2017 setting  out clearly what  the European 
Union  intends  to  deliver  over  the  next  16  months,  until  the  elections  to  the  European 
Parliament. 

Creating  a  Europe  that  delivers  for  all  Europeans  and  meets  their  expectations  is  the  right 
focus for our collective work. Questions of an institutional nature have therefore rightly taken 
a back seat.  

The European Commission continues to believe that now is not the time to engage in abstract 
discussions of institutional reform. But there are a number of practical steps that can be taken 
on the basis of the existing Treaties to make our Union more efficient in delivering on its key 
priorities. It is, after all, through our common institutions and our mutually agreed decision-
making processes that we are able to deliver what we promised and what citizens expect of us. 

The European Commission therefore welcomes President Tusk's decision to schedule a debate 
among  Leaders  on  institutional  matters  on  23  February  2018.  To  feed  this  discussion,  the 
present  Communication  sets  out  various  options,  within  the  current  Treaty  framework,  for 
making the European Union's work more efficient. This Communication is accompanied by a 
Recommendation  on  enhancing  the  European  nature  and  efficient  conduct  of  the  2019 
elections  to  the  European  Parliament,  updating  and  complementing  some  elements  of  its 
Recommendation of 20131.  

1  Commission  Recommendation  of  12  March  2013  on  enhancing  the  democratic  and  efficient  conduct  of  the 
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
elections 
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013H0142&from=EN 

(2013/142/EU) 

Parliament 

European 

the 

to 

– 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
1.  Lead  candidates:  the  foundation  for  a  political  European  Commission  more  in  tune 
with the realities of Europe 

The  European  Union  is  both  a  Union  of  States  and  a  Union  of  citizens.  Citizens  are 
represented  directly  through  the  European  Parliament  and  indirectly  through  their  own 
governments, working together in the Council and in the European Council2. The President of 
the  European  Commission  draws  on  both  sources  of  legitimacy:  he  or  she  is  proposed  by 
Leaders in the European Council and then elected by the European Parliament. 

In  2014  the  new  "Spitzenkandidaten"  system  saw  European  political  parties  identify  "lead 
candidates" in advance of the elections to the European Parliament. This system put faces on 
the  competition  between  different  political  programmes  and  raised  the  profile  of  pan-
European  electoral  campaigns.  While  not  reversing  the  downward  path  of  voter  turnout 
witnessed in previous elections to the European Parliament3, the lead candidate system helped 
in stemming its fall4 as it injected a greater element of information and choice5.  

The  lead  candidate  system  is  not  a  direct  presidential  election.  It  is  not  automatic  that  the 
candidate of the party which obtains the largest share of the vote is elected as President of the 
European Commission; it is the one who is able to find majority support first in the European 
Council in line with the Treaties6, then in the European Parliament. It is recalled that under 
the Treaties, the European Parliament and the European Council are jointly responsible for the 
smooth  running  of  the  process  leading  to  the  election  of  the  President  of  the  European 
Commission.  Member  States  agreed  that  prior  to  the  decision  of  the  European  Council, 
representatives  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  European  Council  will  conduct  the 
necessary consultations7.  

In 2014, it was  the  lead  candidate whose  party obtained the  largest  share of votes who was 
best  placed  to  find  majority  support  in  both  the  European  Council  and  the  European 
Parliament.  

The lead candidate process, after its result was confirmed by the European Council on 27 June 
2014 and by the European Parliament on 15 July 2014, was an important factor that enabled 

2 Article 10(2), Treaty on European Union. 

3  Voter  turnout  in  elections  to  the  European  Parliament:  1979:  61.99%  1984:  58.98%  1989:  58.41%  1994: 
56.67% 1999: 49.51% 2004: 45.47% 2009: 42.97% 2014: 42.61%. 

4  Fall  in  turnout  compared  with  previous  elections  to  the  European  Parliament:  2004:  4.04  percentage  points; 
2009: 2.5 percentage points; 2014: 0.36 percentage points. 

5 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and 
Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  –  Report  on  the  2014  European  Parliament  elections  – 
COM(2015) 206 of 8 May 2015. 

6 Article 17 (7) of the Treaty on European Union: "Taking into account the elections to the European Parliament 
and after having held the appropriate consultations, the European Council, acting by a qualified majority, shall 
propose to the European Parliament a candidate for President of the Commission. This candidate shall be elected 
by the European Parliament by a majority of its component members. If he does not obtain the required majority, 
the European Council, acting by a qualified majority, shall within one month propose a new candidate who shall 
be elected by the European Parliament following the same procedure." 

7  Declaration  11  on  Article  17(6)  and  (7)  of  the  Treaty  on  European  Union  annexed  to  the  Final  Act  of  the 
Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon. 

3 

 
 
                                                            
 
 
 
 
 
the Juncker Commission to be more political and more focused in its policy choices. This was 
also thanks to the Strategic Agenda of key priorities, set out by the European Council in June 
20148, that fed into the 10 points of the Political Guidelines which were the basis for President 
Juncker's election by the European Parliament and which naturally reflected the programme 
on  which  he  had  campaigned  across  the  Union.  This  helped  to  show  that  the  European 
institutions  and  Member  States  can  work  together  and  deliver  on  issues  which  matter  to 
citizens and truly require European action. All this was intended to help reduce the perceived 
division between "Brussels" and the Member States. 

Having  campaigned  across  Europe  and  interacted  directly  with  citizens  and  elected 
representatives at local, regional and national level helped confer more accountability on the 
successful  lead  candidate  in  2014.  This  process  gave  the  President  of  the  European 
Commission  a  mandate  to  be  more  selective  in  choosing  priorities  for  European-level 
intervention,  based  on  a  shared  agenda  with  joint  ownership  across  institutions.  This  has 
helped  the  European  Commission  to  identify  where  Union  action  is  needed  and  where  it  is 
not. "Big on big things and small on small things" is therefore the approach advocated by the 
Juncker Commission and endorsed in the Rome Declaration9.  

Overall, the lead candidate system had a positive impact on the relationship between the EU 
institutions and thus the efficiency of the work of all of them.  

Going one step further would be to have the President of the European Commission directly 
elected  by  citizens,  as  some  have  argued10.  However,  this  would  require  a  change  in  the 
Treaties. 

On  the  basis  of  the  current  Treaties,  the  experiment  of  2014  should  continue11  and  be 
improved. The  European Commission  believes  there are practical steps that  can  be taken to 
improve the process while respecting the balance between the EU institutions and among the 
Member States. 

It  will  be  important  to  continue  open  discussions  on  the  best  process  to  reflect  the  unique 
democratic  nature  of  the  European  Union  and  the  double  legitimacy  of  the  European 
Commission,  representing  all  European  citizens  and  all  EU  Member  States.  The  process 
should  be  developed  further  to  bring  a  real  European  debate  on  the  Europe  its  citizens  and 
Member States want, building on the positive contribution of the 2014 process. 

8  Strategic  Agenda  for  the  Union  in  Times  of  Change  –  European  Council  26  and  27  June  2014  – 
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/143477.pdf 

9 Declaration of the Leaders of the 27 Member States and of the European Council, the European Parliament and 
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/03/25/rome-
the 
declaration/ 

Commission: 

European 

10  For  example  Wolfgang  Schäuble's  speech  when  awarded 
http://www.karlspreis.de/fr/laureats/wolfgang-schaeuble-2012/discours-extrait-par-wolfgang-schaeuble 

the  Charlemagne  Prize 

in  2012:  

11 "If you want to strengthen European democracy, then you cannot reverse the small democratic progress seen 
with the creation of lead candidates  – 'Spitzenkandidaten'. I would like the experience to be repeated"  – Jean-
Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission in the 2017 State of the Union address, Strasbourg, 13 
September 2017. 

4 

 
 
                                                            
 
 
 
 
Choosing the lead candidates earlier than last time, ideally by the end of 2018, and an 
earlier start to the campaign would give voters more opportunity to identify the candidates 
and the political programmes they stand for12. It would allow candidates, including those who 
hold executive office as Head of State or Government,  as a Minister or as a Member of the 
European Commission, more time to visit Member States to take the pulse of Europe and of 
citizens' concerns. In 2014, European political parties selected their candidates relatively late 
in the process, leaving only a few weeks for them to campaign and create a profile across the 
continent.  

The way lead candidates are selected by European political parties can also be of relevance. If 
European  political  parties,  which  bring  together  like-minded  national  and  regional  political 
parties  and  their  leaders,  were  to  hold,  for  instance  "primary"  elections  to  select  their 
candidates,  the  process  of  familiarisation  and  profile-building  could  start  earlier.  By 
presenting a contest between personalities with different ideas, this could help generate more 
interest for the campaign and the subsequent elections to the European Parliament. 

The  links  between  national  parties  and  European  parties  should  be  more  visible  and 
encourage more openness in the European political landscape. In a targeted reform proposal 
on  European  political  parties  and  foundations13,  presented  with  the  2017  State  of  the  Union 
Address,  the European Commission  proposed that an obligatory level of transparency  about 
these  links  should  be  required  for  European  political  parties  seeking  funding  from  the  EU 
budget  (namely  that  their  logo  and  programme  should  be  published  on  the  websites  of  the 
national  and  regional  member-parties).  Member  States  and  the  political  parties  themselves 
could go further on a voluntary basis, for example adding the logos of the European political 
parties to campaign and ballot material. National and regional political parties should position 
themselves  clearly  and  distinctively  on  the  main  issues  at  stake  in  the  European  debate. 
National and regional political parties, including those not affiliated to European ones, should 
also make clear their intentions for participating in (existing or potential new) political groups 
in the European Parliament and their intended choice of European Commission President.  

The  media  plays  an  important  part  in  any  election  campaign.  In  2014,  in  several  Member 
States,  the  debates  between  the  candidates  for  the  post  of  President  of  the  European 
Commission  were  shown  on  major  television  channels  (such  as  ARD,  ZDF,  ORF,  RTBF, 
France24,  LCI  and  Euronews),  whereas  in  other  Member  States  they  were  covered  only 
superficially, if at all. It was a good start but not enough. For 2019, and to encourage wide, 
balanced and impartial reporting it would be desirable for at least one debate between the lead 
candidates to be broadcast on the main public service channels in each Member State. In any 
case,  broadcast  debates  on  the  content  and  challenges  of  the  elections  to  the  European 
Parliament can help to raise awareness and increase citizens' involvement. 

12 "I would like to see European political parties start campaigning for the next European elections much earlier 
than in the past. Too often Europe-wide elections have been reduced to nothing more than the sum of national 
campaigns.  European  democracy  deserves  better."  –  Jean-Claude  Juncker,  President  of  the  European 
Commission in the 2017 State of the Union Address, Strasbourg, 13 September 2017. 

13 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation No. 1141/2014 
of the European Parliament and the Council of 22 October 2014 on the statute and funding of European political 
parties and European political foundations – COM(2017) 481 of 13 September 2017. 

5 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
 
2. Legal framework for the 2019 elections to the European Parliament 

Leaders in the European Council have to decide, on the basis of a proposal from the European 
Parliament  and  with  its  consent  on  the  final  text,  on  the  composition  of  the  European 
Parliament for the 2019-2024 term. A decision reviewing the distribution of seats between 
Member  States  is  necessary  before  the  European  election  and  the  withdrawal  of  the  United 
Kingdom from the Union in March 2019 needs to be taken into account; the UK currently has 
73 seats.  

There are several options: 

  make Parliament smaller than the maximum 751 allowed by the Treaties;  

 

 

 

re-allocate seats to other Member States;  

reserve unused seats for future enlargement of the Union  

reserve unused seats for the possible creation of a transnational constituency.  

The European Parliament proposed on 7 February 2018 a mixture of the first three options: to 
shrink the overall number to 705 Members, to reallocate 27 seats and to keep the remaining 
unused  seats  as  a  reserve  for  enlargement.  Whilst  not  calling  for  the  creation  of  a 
transnational  constituency,  the  European  Parliament's  resolution  recalls  that  such  a  step 
would have to be set out in the EU rules governing elections to the European Parliament, for 
which  there  is  a  European  Parliament  proposal  from  2015.  Changing  these  rules  requires 
unanimous approval by the Council with the European Parliament's consent on the final text, 
and  then  ratification  by  each  Member  State  in  accordance  with  their  constitutional 
requirements.  

A  number  of  Member  States14  have  recently  expressed  support  for  a  transnational 
constituency whereas others15 have expressed their disagreement with its establishment.  

A  transnational  constituency  could  strengthen  the  European  dimension  of  the  election  by 
giving  candidates  the  possibility  to  reach  more  citizens  across  Europe.  It  could  be  coherent 

14 For example: Emmanuel Macron, President of the French Republic, 26 September 2017 –  
http://www.elysee.fr/declarations/article/initiative-pour-l-europe-discours-d-emmanuel-macron-pour-une-
europe-souveraine-unie-democratique/;  
Leo Varadkar, Taoiseach of Ireland – 17 January 2018 – 
 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+CRE+20180117+ITEM-
008+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN;  
Summit of the Southern European Union Countries (Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal and Spain) –  
Rome, 10 January 2018 – "Declaration: Bringing the EU forward in 2018" –  
http://www.governo.it/sites/governo.it/files/documenti/documenti/Notizie-
allegati/governo/DeclarationIVEUSouthSummit.pdf 

15  Summit  of  the  V4  –  Visegrad  Countries  (Czech  Republic,  Hungary,  Poland  and  Slovakia)  –  Budapest,  26 
January 2018 – Statement on the Future of Europe – http://abouthungary.hu/speeches-and-remarks/v4-statement-
on-the-future-of-europe/ 

6 

 
 
                                                            
 
 
with  the  lead  candidate  process,  as  it  would  arguably  create  a  European  space  for  public 
debate and a more visible role for European political parties16.  

If  a  transnational  constituency  were  to  be  created  it  would  be  important  to  ensure  that 
parliamentarians    would  be  able  to  represent  and  communicate  closely  with  the  voters  who 
elected them, both for reasons of accountability and to be able to raise their concerns.  

The  electoral  system  is  already  being  reviewed.  In  2015,  the  European  Parliament  tabled  a 
formal proposal for the reform  of the  electoral  law of  the European Union17.  A decision 
needs to be taken by May 2018 if it is to have effect in good time for the next elections to the 
European  Parliament.  The  European  Parliament's  proposal,  in  addition  to  a  transnational 
constituency, advocated a reform of the EU electoral law to foster the European character of 
these  elections.  It  included  a  uniform  deadline  for  the  establishment  of  electoral  lists  and 
electoral rolls across the EU; allowing EU citizens residing outside the Union to participate; 
encouraging  Member  States  to  allow  postal,  electronic  and  internet  voting;  gender-balanced 
lists  of  candidates;  enhancing  the  visibility  of  European  political  parties  by  placing  their 
names and logos on the ballot papers; and transparent and democratic procedures for selecting 
candidates. 

A  key  proposal  was  for  a  threshold  of  between  3  and  5  per  cent  of  votes  cast  for  single 
constituency Member States and constituencies of more than 26 seats with a list system. Such 
thresholds  help  reduce  political  fragmentation  in  the  resulting  Parliament,  which  makes 
decision-making  more  efficient.  Due  consideration  needs  to  be  given  to  ensuring 
representation  of  diverse  opinions  and  respect  for  different  Member  States'  traditions  in 
deciding on this proposal. 

3. Composition of the European Commission 

Today, the College of Commissioners consists of 28 members, one from each Member State.  

Article  17(5)  of  the  Treaty  on  European  Union  stipulated  that  as  of  1  November  2014,  the 
European  Commission  was  to  be  made  up  of  a  number  of  members  corresponding  to  two-
thirds  of  the  number  of  EU  countries  (for  a  Union  of  27  Member  States  there  would  be  18 
Commissioners), unless a decision was made to the contrary.  

In 2009, before the second Irish referendum to ratify the Lisbon Treaty, the European Council 
agreed to adopt a decision ensuring that the number of Members of the European Commission 
would correspond to the number of Member States.  

The European Council must now review its Decision of 22 May 201318. Leaders will have to 
decide  whether  to  maintain  a  European  Commission  with  one  Member  from  each 

16 "I also have sympathy for the idea of having transnational lists in European elections – though I am aware this 
is an idea more than a few of you disagree with." – Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission 
in the 2017 State of the Union Address, Strasbourg, 13 September 2017. 

17  European  Parliament  resolution  of  11  November  2015  on  the  reform  of  the  electoral  law  of  the  European 
Union (2015/2035(INL)). 

18 The Decision of 22 May 2013 requires that "the European Council shall review this decision (…) in advance 
of  the  appointment  of  the  first  Commission  following  the  date  of  accession  of  the  30th  Member  State  or  the 
appointment  of  the  Commission  succeeding  that  due  to  take  up  its  duties  on  1  November  2014,  whichever  is 
earlier." 

7 

 
 
                                                            
 
 
 
Member State, or to make it smaller. In the case  of a smaller  European  Commission, the 
Treaty  stipulates  that  its  Members  will  be  chosen  on  the  basis  of  a  system  of  strictly  equal 
rotation between the Member States, reflecting the demographic and geographical range of all 
the Member States. 

A smaller executive would in theory be more efficient in its operation, easier to manage and 
would  allow  a  more  balanced  distribution  of  portfolios  among  its  Members,  as  recently 
argued  by  some  Leaders19.  In  such  a  case,  the  European  Commission  would  need  to  pay 
particular attention to ensuring full transparency in relations with all Member States20. 

A small executive would, however, mean some Member States would not have one of their 
nationals  represented  at  the  political  level  of  the  institution.  Keeping  one  Member  of  the 
European  Commission  per  Member  State  has  the  advantage  of  maintaining  a  direct 
communication  channel  to  citizens  and  national  authorities  in  all  Member  States.  For 
example,  the  Members  of  the  Juncker  Commission  have  proved  to  be  an  essential  relay  to 
their countries of origin, communicating in the national language, including by making more 
than 657 visits to inform, debate and discuss with national parliamentarians.  

If one Commissioner per  Member State is to be maintained,  organisational adjustments will 
again be required to ensure accountability, unity and efficiency. The Juncker Commission has 
structured its work around several Vice-Presidents responsible for cross-cutting project teams 
in  different  policy 
the  High 
Representative/Vice-President.  Each  Vice-President  was  entrusted  with  an  enhanced 
leadership role and the responsibility to steer and coordinate a team of Commissioners. This 
two-layered structure has shown its worth and could be further enhanced in the future.  

the  First  Vice-President  and 

including 

fields, 

 4. A Double-Hatted President 

One option to make the structure of the Union more efficient could be for a single person to 
hold  the  two  offices  of  President  of  the  European  Council  and  President  of  the  European 
Commission21.  

This change could help overcome a persistent and harmful misconception: too often there is a 
perceived division between the European Commission and the Member States. Decisions are 
too  often  represented  at  national  level  as  "diktats"  imposed  upon  Member  States  by  a 
disconnected  "Brussels",  where  in  fact  it  was  the  Member  States  and  the  directly  elected 
Members of the European Parliament who together decided what to do.  

19 Emmanuel Macron, President of the French Republic, 26 September 2017 – "Une Commission de 15 membres 
devra  être  notre  horizon  et  pour  avancer,  soyons  simples:  que  les  grands  pays  fondateurs  renoncent  à  leurs 
commissaires pour commencer! Nous donnerons l’exemple." http://www.elysee.fr/declarations/article/initiative-
pour-l-europe-discours-d-emmanuel-macron-pour-une-europe-souveraine-unie-democratique/;  Sebastian  Kurz, 
Chancellor of Austria, in the programme of the ÖVP  for the 2017 Austrian elections – https://www.sebastian-
kurz.at/programm/artikel/kurswechsel-in-europa  

20  Declaration  10  on  Article  17  of  the  Treaty  on  European  Union  annexed  to  the  Final  Act  of  the 
Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon. 

21 "Europe would function better if we were to merge the Presidents of the European Council and the European 
Commission. (…) Having a single President would simply better reflect the true nature of our European Union 
as  both  a  Union  of  States  and  a  Union  of  citizens."  –  Jean-Claude  Juncker,  President  of  the  European 
Commission in the 2017 State of the Union Address, Strasbourg, 13 September 2017. 

8 

 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                          
 
 
 
 
The European Commission is an institution created by the Member States to work towards the 
common  European  interest,  as  is  the  European  Council.  Having  one  person  preside  the  two 
institutions  would  embody  the  dual  nature  of  the  Union's  legitimacy  and  accountability  and 
strengthen both.  

This  would  also  make  the  external  representation  of  the  Union  more  streamlined  and  more 
straightforward  for  third  countries  to  follow.  Other  world  leaders  would  have  a  single 
counterpart, including in their relations with the EU notably in summits and in international 
bodies such as the G7 or G20.  

A dual appointment of this nature does not imply merging the two institutions. The President 
of the European Commission is already a Member of the European Council in his own right, 
and  this  has  always  been  seen  as  entirely  compatible  with  his  independence.  Neither  of  the 
two Presidents vote in the European Council; they both advise, bring input from the work of 
their respective services, help to build bridges and map out common ground among Member 
States. A dual appointment could further enhance the existing close and effective coordination 
between the two independent institutions.   

A  double-hatted  President  is  possible  under  the  current  Treaties,  which  implicitly  allow  the 
President  of  the  European  Council  to  be  appointed  to  another  European  role22.  The term  of 
office  of  the  President  of  the  European  Council  is  shorter  than  that  of  the  President  of  the 
European Commission but since it is exactly half as long and allows for a re-appointment, a 
pragmatic solution could be envisaged.  

In this respect, inspiration could be drawn from the existing role of High Representative for 
the Common  Foreign and Security Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission. 
This position, which is the result of an evolution of the former role of the Secretary General of 
the  Council  of  the  European  Union/High  Representative  for  the  Common  Foreign  and 
Security  Policy  created  by  the  Treaty  of  Amsterdam  and  that  of  the  then  Commissioner  for 
External  Relations,  was  codified  by  the  Treaty  of  Lisbon.  It  provides  an  example  of  how 
responsibility in two EU institutions can be successfully exercised by the same person without 
compromising the independence of the institutions' respective roles or giving more power to 
one over the other.  

5. Dialogue with citizens on the road to Sibiu 

In the crucial period ahead of the elections to the European Parliament, where the Union must 
show  it  can  deliver  on  citizens'  expectations,  there  is  a  welcome  and  growing  focus  among 
Member States on the importance of more citizen engagement in the discussion on the future 
of Europe23. Too often, the EU debate has been undermined by myths, misrepresentations and 
side  issues.  Politicians,  at  EU,  national,  regional  and  local  level,  share  a  responsibility  to 
foster  honest  debate  about  Europe  and  its  future.  Citizens  would  be  readier  to  vote  in  the 
elections to the European Parliament if they were more aware of the impact of EU policies in 
their day-to-day life. 

22 Article 15 (6) of the Treaty on European Union states that the President of the European Council shall not hold 
a national office. 

23  "We  should  involve  national  Parliaments  and  civil  society  at  national,  regional  and  local  level  more  in  the 
work on the future of Europe." – Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission in the 2017 State 
of the Union Address, Strasbourg, 13 September 2017. 

9 

 
 
                                                            
 
 
Throughout 2018 and 2019, Leaders will be meeting regularly to discuss the way forward up 
to the next key staging post in the reform and development of the Union: the Sibiu Summit of 
9  May  2019.  The  more  that  discussion  is  solidly  anchored  in  information,  debate  and 
involvement  of  citizens  and  civil  society  in  the  Member  States,  the  more  productive  the 
outcome will be.  

President Macron's proposal of Citizens' Consultations24 on the future of Europe has attracted 
explicit support from several Leaders of other Member States25, and sympathy from most EU 
institutions  and  Member  States,  and  national  dialogues  in  other  formats  have  taken  or  are 
taking  place  in  Ireland,  Bulgaria  and  Sweden  among  others.  Other  Leaders  of  Member 
States26  have  also  announced  their  readiness  to  engage  in  broad  public  discussions  on  the 
future of Europe in accordance with their respective national practices. The right structure for 
this process will vary between Member States according to their own traditions and internal 
democratic arrangements: they can be run individually, jointly between participating Member 
States or within a framework supported by the European institutions.  

The  European  Commission  has  experience  of  organising  its  own  Citizens'  Dialogues,  with 
Members  of  the  European  Commission,  Members  of  the  European  Parliament,  national 
governments, local and regional authorities and civil society representatives all taking part in 
some  478  interactive  public  debates  in  more  than  160  locations  since  January  2015  in  and 
beyond  Europe's  capital  cities.  The  European  Commission  is  stepping  up  this  process  by 
organising  or  helping  to  organise,  between  now  and  May  2019,  around  500  more  Citizens' 
Dialogues  in  cooperation  with  the  Member  States,  with  local  and  regional  authorities,  and 
with the European Parliament and other European institutions. 

The  European  Commission  will  share  the  benefits  of  this  experience  with  Member  States 
planning their own events and is ready to offer its support where it can, for example to link 
the  process  to  the  online  consultation  it  is  launching  on  the  future  of  Europe  which  could 
remain open until 9 May 2019.  

Starting  from  the  Leaders'  meeting  of  23  February  2018,  and  taking  into  account  their 
respective  political  structures  and  practices,  Member  States  as  well  as  local  and  regional 
authorities  should  be  encouraged  to  hold  outreach  events  to  engage  with  citizens  in  public 
debates  and  consultations  on  European  Union  issues,  including  in  particular  the  future  of 
Europe in the context of the process leading to the Leaders' meeting of 9 May 2019, shortly 
before the elections to the European Parliament. 

24  Emmanuel  Macron,  President  of  the  French  Republic,  Speech  at  the  Congress  of  Versailles,  3  July  2017  – 
http://www.elysee.fr/declarations/article/discours-du-president-de-la-republique-devant-le-parlement-reuni-en-
congres/ 

25 Summit of the Southern European Union Countries (Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal and Spain) 
– Rome, 10 January 2018 – "Declaration: Bringing the EU forward in 2018" –  
http://www.governo.it/sites/governo.it/files/documenti/documenti/Notizie-
allegati/governo/DeclarationIVEUSouthSummit.pdf 

26  Summit  of  the  V4  –  Visegrád  Countries  (Czech  Republic,  Hungary,  Poland  and  Slovakia)  –  Budapest  ,  26 
January 2018 – Statement on the Future of Europe – http://abouthungary.hu/speeches-and-remarks/v4-statement-
on-the-future-of-europe/  

10 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
 
Conclusions 

At their meeting of 23 February 2018 on institutional issues, Leaders are invited to: 

1)  take  note  of  the  fact  that  the  election  of  a  successful  lead  candidate  as  Commission 
President,  on  the  basis  of  a  proposal  from  the  European  Council  and  a  jointly  developed 
Strategic  Agenda,  can  enhance  the  efficiency  of  the  European  Commission,  allowing  it  to 
work on a focused political programme with  joint ownership across institutions; it can also 
help  raise  the  profile  of  the  European  electoral  campaign,  making  clearer  to  citizens  the 
competing visions for the future of Europe and policy programmes; 

2) call on the European political parties to choose their lead candidates by the end of 2018, 
and encourage an early start of that process;  

3)  encourage  transparency  regarding  the  existing  and  intended  affiliation  of  national  and 
regional  parties  with  European  parties,  lead  candidates  and  groups  in  the  European 
Parliament; 

4)  complete  work  on  the  composition  of  the  European  Parliament,  the  reform  of  the 
Regulation  on  European  political  parties  and  foundations  and  the  reform  of  the  European 
electoral law by spring 2018 to allow them to have full effect for the electoral year 2019; 

5)  consider  the  creation  of  a  transnational  constituency  for  the  elections  to  the  European 
Parliament; 

6)  plan  for  the  review  of  its  Decision  of  22  May  2013  on  whether  to  maintain  a  European 
Commission with one Member from each Member State, or to make it smaller; 

7) consider the efficiency gains of the creation, over time, of a double-hatted President of the 
European Council and of the European Commission;  

8) encourage Member States to foster public debate and engagement on the future of Europe 
in the coming months and in the run-up to the Sibiu Summit on 9 May 2019 and the elections 
to  the  European  Parliament,  by  developing  Citizens'  Dialogues  and  similar  debates  and 
consultations  in  all  Member  States  according  to  their  national  traditions,  with  high-level 
participation. 

11