29 / 150
POPULISM AND NATIONALISM VERSUS EUROPEANISM
29
among 27 or 28 countries supposes eternal dis-
cussions that often end in decisions watered
down to the point of inanity. Given that coun-
tries in the position to do so routinely leverage
their power and the size of their contributions
to the community budget to get their way, it is
furthermore neither objective nor neutral. In the
final instance, it is always conditioned by na-
tional election cycles and referendums, which in
some cases can paralyse community decision-
making for more than a year.
The only way to improve the efficacy and
internal balance of the Union is to vest more
power in communitary institutions. However,
this does not mean granting them additional
competences that can be held by member
states; the Commission is currently in the pro-
cess of correcting what may have been an over-
zealous approach to regulation. The principle
of subsidiarity must be upheld at all levels of
governance. Nevertheless, the EP, the only
communitary body whose members are directly
elected by EU citizens, and the CE, the compo-
sition of which is contingent upon the EP and is
accountable to that institution, must have the
effective power to implement the Treaties and
set specific policies while the European Council
serves as a collective head of state that ap-
proves the general direction of policy-making
and presides over issues concerning sovereignty
such as the entrance of new members and ar-
eas of a purely intergovernmental nature such
as foreign affairs and defence. For this to come
about, the functions of these institutions must
be streamlined and enhanced. The European
Parliament must be given full legislative author-
ity (which it currently shares with the Council),
greater control over the Commission that in-
cludes the right to pass a constructive vote of
no confidence in that body’s leadership and a
mechanism by which eurozone countries can
pursue a common economic policy. Once rati-
fied by the EP, an EC president should be free
to choose the members of his or commission
(which must be balanced in terms of regional
representation and gender), the duty of which
should be to implement well-defined policies
subject to the assessment and approval of vot-
ers in subsequent European elections, who will
thus determine the direction of, and assume
responsibility for, decisions made at this level.
Given that he who pays inevitably calls the
shots, it goes without saying that community
budgets would be best funded through some
form of European taxes rather than by means
of contributions from member states. Such a
system would make the EC accountable to
European citizens rather than national govern-
ments, as is currently the case.
However difficult it may appear, this is the
path that must be taken. The satisfactory reso-
lution of a number of crises now affecting peo-
ple across Europe will require more than the
mere coordination of national policies. In the
sphere of finance, for example, a harmonised
deposit guarantee scheme is needed to achieve
common banking union. Problems in the area of
migration can only be solved by means of the
homologation of national laws and regulations
and the establishment of firm quotas. At a time
when the EU may need to face a growing num-
ber of problems along its external perimeters
alone, European security and defence (whether
conventional or focused on terrorism or cyber-
crime) requires an organised communal effort.
We must also construct a social Europe, begin-
ning with a community guarantee of social
rights such as a standard minimum wage and
unemployment benefits that builds upon na-
tional governments’ social commitments and
strengthens public perception that EU citizen-
ship provides direct benefits.