Proposals of the European Parliament for the amendment of the Treaties (debate)
Speaker: Sven SIMON (Germany, Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) / Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands)
Date: 2023-11-21

  Sven Simon,  rapporteur. – Mr President, colleagues, do we change the Treaties with this report? No. This week we have to answer two questions. First, do we want a convention to discuss Treaty change? Second, is this draft a sufficient basis to open up a discussion? My answer to those questions is ‘Yes’.
16 years ago, the Lisbon Treaty was signed. But the world has changed since then. We are facing new challenges. The financial crisis, Brexit, migration, Russia’s war on Ukraine are forcing us to act.
I have with this report three priorities. I want the European Union to become more focused, more capable to act, and more democratically accountable. It is not about old ideas of federalism versus the Europe of nations. It is about improving the European Union where it really matters to the Europeans.
We must create a defence union, bringing the defence industries together in order to be able to defend ourselves, which is not the case today. Colleagues, if you think about the fact that we in Europe have 178 main weapon systems and the United States has 30, it comes with no surprise that we waste taxpayers’ money – pay more, get less.
We must strengthen our energy cooperation to achieve energy independence and decarbonisation. We must ensure that the internal energy market does not just exist on paper, but also functions in reality.
I want to fulfil the voters – my voters’ – demands and protect our borders against illegal migration and trans-national crime. But for this, we have to change and amend the Treaties. The European Union does nearly have no competency and we are blocked by vetoes and unnecessary bureaucracy.
It is true that we need to improve the protection of the rule of law, but the legal procedure needs to be in front of a court. This would stop the blame game in this House, which doesn’t bring us any further, but divides us all the more.
It was a structural mistake of the Lisbon Treaty that the European elections have no influence on the Commission, on the composition of the Commission. We need a European Commission that can be elected and voted out of office.
Colleagues, this report is a very substantial one. It may be those are right who say it is simply too much, too difficult to understand, not the right time, and too difficult to explain, especially when you have to fight against right-wing populists at home who instrumentalised the whole thing. I’m also aware that we have totally different debates in different Member States.
But those colleagues who are concerned, let me say: this is a very first step on a long road to go; a road that requires the consent of all Member States; that will include lengthy discussions. As in any compromise in this House, it is not a perfect report for anyone. Every political group had to make concessions, but at the end of the day, there are again two questions on the table.
First, do we want a convention? Second, do we think that this draft is a sufficient basis to open up a discussion? Not more, not less. For me, the answer to those questions is a very convinced yes.
Colleagues, we have no time to waste. Depending on the outcome of the next US election, Europe is only a little more than a year away from losing its nuclear umbrella. We need to wake up. We as Europeans need to grow up as a Union and grow up fast. The way to get there is through a reform of competences and institutions. Let us take the first step by voting for this report.