I thank the Chairman and welcome the MEPs present. It is great to see them here. I hope this will be a more regular occurrence, as dialogue between national parliamentarians and MEPs is helpful.

I welcome the opportunity to speak about the EU citizens’ initiative because it was highlighted during the Lisbon treaty referendum campaign as a very positive development. The Lisbon treaty contains many provisions that make the concept of European citizenship more meaningful. It is important, therefore, that we are seen to act on them quickly. The citizens’ initiative will take time to introduce, but it will engage people and make them realise that while there is a democratic deficit, of which I have been critical for a long time, it is possible for citizens to influence the decisions and legislation emerging from the European Union and that we are putting in a place a mechanism for doing so. Even though it is important that we do this quickly, it is also important that we think it through properly because it is quite ambitious. We are talking about a transnational democracy, 27 member states – a number which will possibly grow – with different electoral systems and political cultures and so on.

I attended the meeting last night in European Union House addressed by Proinsias De Rossa, MEP, Professor Brigid Laffan and so on. It was very interesting. Professor Laffan spoke about unintended consequences. That is always a difficulty with anything new and innovative that is being launched. I have no doubt that in regard to the citizens’ initiative, there will be unintended consequences. For that reason it probably would be a good idea, within the time constraints, to set up a task force consisting of parliamentarians but also civil servants and representatives of civil society, particularly those involved in social networking. The points being made about the collection of signatures and so on and on-line communication in relation to the initiative are important. We must consider the most practical way of organising signatures in support of a particular initiative. We should have representatives and persons who understand how the social networking media work brainstorming and stress-testing the concept to assess what might and might not work and identify potential pitfalls in what is being proposed. I recommend that such a task force be set up rather quickly.

The Commission’s Green Paper poses many practical questions in regard to the citizens’ initiative concerning the collection of signatures, the number of member states involved and so on. I accepted the idea that signatures should come from at least one quarter of the member states, but in the debate last night the point was made persuasively that if that was to be the case, given the number of member states, one could end up with what Professor Laffan called a geographical sub-system, under which a small number of member states from the north or south of the European Union could come together to bring forward an initiative that represented particularly the interests of that part of the Union. By increasing the required number of member states to one third, one could get around this issue because it is unlikely that an initiative would be brought forward that represented only the interests of a particular section of member states or citizens within them. Therefore, it would be worth looking at the idea of raising the threshold to one third of member states.

It is also important, even though there will be well over 1 million signatures in support of most citizens’ initiatives, that there be a sponsoring organisation because there will be much liaison between the Commission and those sponsoring an initiative in trying to define terms and clarify various issues. If that is the case, the issues to which Proinsias De Rossa referred such as making a declaration of interests and so on could be easily established and, perhaps, form the agenda of the organisation spearheading the campaign. I recommend that this be part of the way the process will works.

In the debate last night there was talk about admissibility which people at this meeting have referred to as registration. It is important that early in the process there be an opportunity for those who want to get involved in a citizens’ initiative to put a wording together and submit it to a body which would determine whether it was acceptable. There is a danger, once this process is launched, that people will believe they can submit citizens’ initiatives on any issue. Obviously, there will be clear limits. It has been pointed out that initiatives must be in keeping with the objectives set out in the treaty. The early determination of this is important to ensure people will not go to the trouble of organising campaigns and collecting signatures only to be told at the end of that process that their petition is inadmissible.

National authorities will have an important role to play. The verification of signatures is probably the most important work they will do. If there is no agreement in advance on the part of national governments that they are prepared to take on this role and that there will be funding to meet the practical resource implications, the initiative will not work as intended. As I mentioned, there is a need to look at the electronic collection of signatures. It will be a missed opportunity if we do not factor this in in the way the process will work.

Reference has been made to 16 years old and whether those below voting age across member states can participate. I certainly would be in favour of this, as we have a problem in engaging young people. We are not talking about giving them the right to vote, but we are extending to them an opportunity to influence the legislation which emerges from the institutions of the European Union. It would be a good way of engaging young people who are very active through the social media and so on with the European Union and politics in general. This issue should be looked at.

The question of the involvement of the Diaspora is pertinent. What is to be done about Irish people living in another member state or Polish people living in Ireland and so on who want to be part of a citizens’ initiative? We have to look carefully at this issue. In general, I welcome the citizens’ initiative. The more we can raise the level of public awareness of the process in the coming months in advance of the submission date the better because we want people to start availing of the initiative process as soon as it is agreed. December 2010 is the proposed date of adoption of the regulation.

Filed under:
Joint Committee on European Affairs by Deirdre