THE STATE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION REPORT. Europe in a period of transition

IMPROVING THE DEMOCRATIC FOUNDATIONS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION: BRINGING THE EUROPEAN UNION CLOSER TO ITS CITIZENS 17 Parliament, which allocates seats to Member states on the basis of their population, is organised into political groups, and members of parliament have an individual representative vote, enabling the expression of the wish- es of the majority. The European Council and Council of the EU, when voting by qualified majority – 55 per cent of Member states representing 65 per cent of the popu- lation – also provide a means of expressing the wishes of the majority of the citizens of the Member states. The problem arises when these bodies follow inter-govern- mental dynamics and seek to reach consensus, as here the weight and influence of the larger, more powerful states always prevails over the rest (Fabbrini, 2013), ig- noring the wishes of the majority. Part of the democracy of the EU is exercised through national leaders represented at the European Council and Council of the EU, and accountability to national parliaments for decisions taken at the European level. It is therefore important to remember that when we choose a head of government, they have two jobs to perform: to lead the country but also to form part of one of the EU’s governing institutions. The fact that there is no space for discussion of European political options in national elections, as happens in Spain, or that accountability for European and EU Council decisions is not common prac- tice in the Spanish parliament is indicative of a significant democratic deficit (Guinea, 2021b: 95-96). And this is not due to the European political system, regulated in the treaties, but rather to individual national practices. The Conference on the Future of the EU as a democratising exercise The celebration of a citizens’ Conference on the Future of Europe was one of the key proposals of the European Council’s candidate for the Presidency of the Commis- sion, Ursula von der Leyen (Von der Leyen, 2019: 21). She drew up her programme after consulting and nego- tiating with the majority political groups in the European Parliament, whose support was essential: The European People’s Party, the Socialists and Democrats, Renew Euro- pe and the Greens (Guinea, 2020a: 180). The pillar with respect to democracy and, in particular, the decision to call a Citizens’ Conference on the Future of the EU was a demand of Renew Europe, which echoed the proposal put forward by President Macron of France in one of his memorable calls on the need to relaunch the integration project (Macron, 2019). In light of the experience of Brexit and the polit- ical pressure of Europhobic nationalists and illiberal movements, Macron defended the need to deepen and improve integration around the parameters of freedom, protecting citizens and delivering progress to win cit- izens’ support. He also believed that citizens want to participate in this change, and therefore proposed calling a Conference on the Future of Europe, bringing together representatives of institutions with representatives of the Member states and panels of European citizens to trace out a roadmap to translate the changes necessary for the success of the political project into proposals for action. Von der Leyen echoed every detail both of the in- itiative and the spirit of Macron’s proposal. According to the Commission, the conference should reflect the aspiration that Europeans “perform a prominent role in establishing our priorities” (Von der Leyen, 2019: 21). She therefore proposed that the conference bring togeth- er citizens and European institutions “on an equal foot- ing”, and expressed a willingness to follow through on the conference’s proposals, whether through legislative initiatives or even through proposals to revise the treaties (Von der Leyen, 2019: 21). The conference is an initia- tive to involve political groups other than the European Council, the only institution assigned this function under the Treaties (art. 15.1 TEU), in setting the EU’s political direction. It is a democratising exercise in the dual sense proposed by Dahl: first, to enable citizens to learn about and understand the EU; and secondly, to give citizens a greater role in defining policies, something that is much needed at the current stage of integration. Despite the almost perfect management of Brexit by the Commission, we should not forget the lessons