english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home arrow newsitems arrow EUParliament Head Sassoli to EF on EU Future: Yes Citizens WebFora. No United Forum+Full Dialogue ?

EUParliament Head Sassoli to EF on EU Future: Yes Citizens WebFora. No United Forum+Full Dialogue ?

Written by ACM
Wednesday, 15 January 2020

 eu_parliament_president_sassoli_2020_speech_to_press__agg_eurofora_400


*Strasbourg/EU Parliament/Angelo Marcopolo/- Speaking with "Eurofora" since Tuesday, at the Eve of MEPs' Vote for a landmark Resolution on Europe's Future Conference (2020-2021), EU Parliament's President, David Sassoli, clearly Highlighted, adding a Bright Smile, his acceptance of EU Citizens' Web Fora on Europe's Future, in view of the Forthcoming Conference of 2020-2022, according to Our Wider Project about Digital Public Debates with Politicians Before important Decisions are taken, (Comp., among others, also, f.ex.: ..., etc).

eu_parliaments_president_sassoli__agg_eurofora_400 

+This Point was Confirmed also by the Experienced EU Parliament's Press/Communications' Director and Spokesman, Jaume Duch, referring later "Eurofora" also to a relevant Draft Text tabled by 5 Mainstream Political Groups, (EPP, Soc., ReNew, Greens, Left), which Adds quite a lot in this Direction, (See Infra).

eu_parliament_comm._director_duch__agg_2020_press_meet._eurofora_400 

However, these Welcome Moves do Not Yet go as far as to create a United and Permanent EU Citizens' Forum for that purpose, (not even during this 2020-2022 Conference), Neither a fully-fledged Dialogue between EU Citizens and Politicians Before Decisions, as "Eurofora"s project has advised, (even if some Steps were made in this regard, particularly thanks to the Last-Minute Adoption, in Wednesday's Votes, of a relevant Amendment : See Infra)...

ep_vote_on_europe_future_conference_eurofora_screennshot_400 

--------------------------------------------

- Indeed, the Adopted EU Parliament's Resolution stresses from the outset that, as a matter of Principle, "this Conference process Should be an Occasion to closely involve EU Citizens in a Bottom-Up exercise, in which they are Listened to, and their Voices contribute to the Debates on the Future of Europe".


Also Because "there is a Need for EU Institutions to ReConnect with the Citizens", by "Facilitating (such) a Debate", "as the EU has ... become ...Remote from the Citizens", criticized a Draft Resolution tabled by the Conservatives/Reformists.


=> For that Purpose, inter alia, it's, in Addition, "a Listening Phase" which "should be initiated" "Prior to the launch of the Conference process", in order  to enable Citizens, from Across the EU, to express their Ideas, make Suggestions and propose their own Vision of what Europe means for them", the Adopted Resolution asks.


+ In this regard, "the Conference is an Opportunity ...to engaging Directly with Citizens in a meaningful Dialogue", where "Consultations should be organised using the most efficient, Innovative and appropriate Platforms, including OnLine tools (f.ex. Web Fora, etc), and should reach All parts of the EU, in order to guarantee that Any citizen can have a Say".

------------------------------------------------

But How exactly it should be Organized in this Conference for Europe's Future and relevant Deliberations, ...that's anOther Story !


F.ex., the Rightist MEPs of "ID" Group claimed, in their Draft Resolution, that "the most Effective, Fair and Indisputable way of involving the Citizens ... is Direct Democracy" !,  ("in particular, the use of Referendums")...


Nevertheless, Despite Ancient Greek Civilisation's charm and that of Switzerland's Nowadays, French President Macron's landmark Speech at Acropolis' Historic "Pnyx" Rock since 9/2017, "Pirate" Parties' recent breakthrough, and/or Contemporary Internet's Facilitation capacities, (etc), Nobody seriously suggested to Skip from InDirect to Direct Democracy in Europe now...


The Focus obviously is on EU Citizens' participation to the Decision-Making Process, mainly via Public Debates before final Decisions, along "Eurofora" Project's lines.


>>> But it still remains Restricted in Narrow margins, Not Yet Reaching its fully-fledged Dimension, at least as things stand until now :


- Thus, while EU Parliament's Resolution urges to create "a Plenary" Body for MEPs, Representatives of EU Council, EU Commission, National Parliaments, etc., due to work at EU-Level during All the process of the Conference for Europe's Future, Dealing with All its main aspects, taken Together, EU-Wide, (etc),


on the Contrary, Nothing Similar has been still foreseen for EU Citizens ! They are Divided, from the outset, into Various Thematic "Citizens' Agoras" with about 200-300 Different Members each, (a Wording Meaning "Speech" or ..."Market", in Ancient Greek ...), concerning only some Specific Issues, and being held at Various Locations.

---------------------

Since EU Citizens are Not considered, ipso facto, as Members of a Decision-making Body, (contrary to Direct Democracy etc.: Comp. Supra), Neither are they Elected to such a Collective Body, the remainining Question is how they are Otherwise "Selected", in order to eventually participate in any such Bodies :


- A very Large Majority in EU Parliament leaned towards "Pollster"-like Methods of ascertaining the "Representativity" of Selected EU Citizens, considering f.ex. their Age, Gender, Education, Job, Origin, etc., compared to the Average of the concerned Population, in relation to which they should be well "Balanced".


That "Selection" should be made by some (UnDefined) "Independent Institutions", and ..."Randomly", as it was Stressed by a Last-Minute Amendment, (Tabled by the "ReNew" and "Green" Groups), Adopted by EU Parliament on Wednesday.

---------------------------------------------


=> But the Most Important point obviously is what happens to the Outcome, i.e. the Conclusions of EU Citizens' verdict or views, inside a Public Decision-Making process.  


- It's naturally Good, from a Pluralist Democracy point of view, that "a Minority Opinion can be Voiced", (whenever the EU Citizens' Agoras canNot find an "Agreement by Concensus"), as the adopted Resolution says.


- However, Public Debate, Exchange of Arguments, and Vote by Majority being traditionaly the Cradle of Democratic Decision-Making, it's Difficult to Understand why that Resolution pushes aside Majority Decisions among EU Citizens, Obliging them to Focus, instead, Only on "Seeking to Find Agreement by Concensus" !


+ Moreover, it's Regrettable that a very Important Amendment, on the Key Issue of Democratic "Pluralism", Supported by 341 MEPs and almost 5 Political Groups, (in an Exceptional Unity of All the Right : mainstream "ChristianDemocrats/EPP", "Conservatives/Reformists", "ID" Rightists, as well as the "Left", and most "Independents", a few Socialists, etc), was finaly Droped, Only because of a Tiny Difference of just One (1) Vote : 341 to 342, (with 15 Abstentions)...


According to that Draft Amendment, "in all public Consultations related to the (Future of Europe) Conference process" ("Meetings", "Opinion Polling", "Social Media engagement initiatives", etc), Pluralism must be ensured" : I.e. "all Programmes, Speakers lists, Panels, Literature and Documents, etc. must be Balanced, and ensure that a great Variety of Differing Viewpoints is presented, reflecting the Diversity of Opinions in Europe, in order to Stimulate a profound Debate", as it stressed.


------------------------------


>>> Now, concerning the Heart of the Matter : I.e. the Fate reserved to EU Citizens' Viewpoints inside the Future of Europe Conference, the adopted EU Parliament's Resolution simply speaks about a so-called "FeedBack Loup", where "the Conclusions" of "Thematic Agoras" (Comp. supra) of "Citizens and Youth", will be "Presented" to "the Conference Plenary" (Comp. Supra), by some "Representatives" of those "Agoras", "in order to ...Discuss" them with participating MEPs, EU Commissioners, Ministers, etc.


Nothing, or Few things were, Initially, said about What kind of "Discussion" this UnPrecedented collective Meeting, (obviously Crucial for the Future of Europe Conference's Success), might or should be...


EU Parliament's Draft Resolution had Only asked for "a Minimum of 2 Meetings of Each (Citizens or Youth) Thematic Agora, in order to Provide INPUT for the Conference Plenary, and Receive Global FEEDBACK (sic !) on the Deliberations" : This last point should be dealt with "in anOther Meeting, in DIALOGUE Format", it said, (using a potentialy Interesting, but still Vague expression).


+ At this point, a useful Last-Minute Amendment, (tabled by MEPs Paulo Rangel, vice-President of the ChristianDemocrat/EPP Group, and Gabriele Bischof, Chair of the Workers' Group in CESE), Added that EU Citizens' (agoras') "conclusions" should "be TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT during the Deliberation in the Conference

Plenary", (Comp. Supra).


=> How Far can this go ? Could this Result into a Real "Dialogue" between EU Citizens and EU Institutions Before Decisions affecting People's Lives and/or Society at large, as "Eurofora"s Project (2006-2020) pleads for, (since it was Initially presented during an EU Parliament's Press Conference, together with the EU Commissioner and EU Parliament's vice-President in charge of Medias, as Early as already back on 2006 in Strasbourg) ?


In Fact, that "EuroFora"'s Project is Inspired by Both an Original, Pioneer Analysis of main points in Public Administrative Law, concerning developments on the Public Decision-Making Process, at Countries such as France, Germany, Italy, Greece, etc., (at First Published in a Legal Research of more than 1.000 pages, chosen by the University of Strasbourg for a Prize destinated to PhD. Thesis, after a written Proposal by Professor Paul Amselek, of Paris II University, already since the Beginning of the 1980ies), and a Collective Project by European Journalists, Universitarians, EU Media Officers, etc, (that we Coordinated): "EIW", which was officially Accepted by EU Commission in Brussels in order to be examined in the framework of the Program "ESPRIT", for the Utilisation of Modern Communication Technologies in Innovative Activities in nowadays Society (1997). After the Creation of "EuroFora", back on 2007 (Comp. Supra), it was Highlighted also on the sidelines of a landmark 3 Days Conference organized at the University of Strasbourg by Dean Florence Benoit-Rohmer on 2010, Discussed also in the City of Strasbourg's Collective Meetings on Citizens' Participation between 2017-2019, proposed to COE's "World Forum of Democracy" forthcoming "Labos", (under the name "4 G" Project, for "Digital Dialogue in Democratic Decision-Making"), since 2019, and is part and parcel of a "Doctorat d'Etat" Research prepared under the Direction of President Jean Waline for publication after 2020.


- In Practice, the Main points are Public Administration's Obligation to Timely Warn Citizens about its Forthcoming Decisions which affect their Lives and/or Society at large, Collect their eventual Observations on that, and Reply to them, with a Correct, Legal, and Sufficient Motivation, well Before they Decide, withOut showing any Abuse, (under Supervision by a Judge), while keeping its own, more or less, Discretionary Power to Decide on the Substance of the issues at stake.

-------------------------------------

Even if French President Emmanuel Macron recently declared, in his Press Conference on the conclusions of the latest, December 2019 EU Summit in Brussels, (Comp. "Eurofora"s NewsReports from the spot, f.ex., at: ..., etc), that IF any EU Treaty Change might, eventually, be Needed, particularly for Citizens' role in Europe's Future, then, he would be "Ready" to Advance in this direction, nevertheless, the current "Lisbon Treaty", (which just celebrated its 10th Anniversary), has already Provided for the necessary Legal Tools, including f.ex. Article 11 for "Regular" "Dialogue", between EU "Citizens"/Civil Society and EU "Institutions"on the "Acts" they take, (etc).


As for MEPs - Citizens relations, in fact, in the current context of EU Lisbon Treaty, they are far Away from being in Competition between them, f.ex. about Direct or Representative Democracy, etc : On the Contrary, there is often an interesting Potential for Cooperation and Solidarity among them !


- F.ex., if "Eurofora" Project is systematically applied, with MEPs-Citizens Debates Before Decisions, (i.e. at the Eve of each Plenary Session), then, one among its Consequences, would naturaly be the Augmentation of Medias' Interest for EU Parliament's subsequent activities, during its Plenary Session which follows, whose Press impact would grow...


+ Moreover, the alleged "Lack of Legislative Initiative" for MEPs nowadays, (one among the Issues expected to be discussed during the Future of Europe's Conference), seems, in Fact, to be either a Myth, at least partially, or a Self-Inflicted Wound, which could be easily Dissipated, in real Practice, if MEPs Started to Systematically use (and, therefore, Simplify) Lisbon Treaty's EU "Citizens Initiative", in order to Oblige the EU Commission to table the Draft Bills that they want ! Indeed, even the Smallest Political Group inside EU Parliament, (f.ex. that of the "Left", or "Greens", "ECR", etc), can Easily find at least 1 Million of its Fans in order to Sign a Topical Bill of interest to their own Party, among more than 512 Millions of Europeans (i.e. less than 1 out of 510)... And things could become much more Easier if they were Methodically Organized, and Often Used.


So that EU Citizens and MEPs can Become Allies for More and Better Democracy in the foreseable Future.

 


(.../...)


("Draft-News")


------------------------------------------

 


 

European Entrepreneurial Region

Statistics

Visitors: 38013982

Archive

Login Form





Remember me

Lost your Password?
No account yet? Create account

Syndicate

RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3
OPML

Other Menu


  imag0573_400

    An "Eugenic" loophole Amendment, which might expose to Dangers reminiscent of "3rd Reich's" notorious Genetic Abuses, hidden at the last minute inside an otherwise Good, larger Health policy Package scheduled to be voted on Thursday, was strongly denounced by a coalition of MEPs from various Political Groups and Countries, in a Press Conference held this afternoon at EU Parliament in Strasbourg.

    Mainly calling to "Select Human Embryos", via "Genetic Counselling" and "pre-implantation" Techniques including "Genetic Tests", in order to "Eradicate Hereditary rare Diseases", it might open ways to Dangerous Practices in Future, they denounced in substance.

    But they also made it clear that a much larger Report inside which this Controversial Amendment "No 15" was added in dubious circumstances, officialy destinated to struggle against "Rare Diseases", and drafted by Professor Antonios Trakatellis, was otherwise "an Excellent Report", aiming at a "completely Uncontroversial target" of Health policy on which "all MEPs and Experts are united, believing that Europe should act" to protect People's Health (See "EuroFora"'s earlier News).

    The controversy came at a particularly delicate moment for the EU in relation to Citizens, at the eve of June 2009 EU Elections, and shortly before Ireland re-votes for "Lisbon Treaty"..    

- Denouncing risks of "an Eugenic demand, very similar to what we had during the 3rd Reich in Germany, but now coming from some Scientisists themselves", German ChristianDemocrat/EPP MEP Dr. Peter Liese stressed that critical MEPs were against "Eugenic" engineering with "Selection of Human Embryos", and anything which might ultimately lead up to to a "Selection of Human Race". It doesn't help to "eradicate" Human Lives, he added.


    Several Experts and NGOs expressed "Deep Concern", as f;ex. DR M.C. Cornel of the "European Society of Human Genetics", which stressed, on this occasion, that "the importance of Non-Directiveness in Reproductive issues is a Central characteristic of Human Genetics, after the Atrocities committed in the name of Genetics in the first half or the 20th Century".

     - "This is completely Unacceptable", stressed Italian Liberal MEP Vittorio Prodi, on the Controversial Amendment, also because pushes to "eliminate early Human Life", as he noted.

     - "This opens a Dangerous Road, rather a Motorway", denounced Danish MEP Mrs Margrette Auken, from the "Greens", observing that various similar attempts were made in the Past "not only in Germany, but also in several other Countries, "even at the 1970ies", "f.ex. on forced Sterilisation of Roma" People, and other criticisable situations f.ex. in the UK, in Sweden, etc. as she said.

    + Other NGOs, as f.ex. "LebenHilfe" from Berlin, added that, among various other Risks, could also be that, by exploiting the pre-implantation Genetic Diagnostics and the Selection of "healthy" Embryos, some may "propagate" several "Eugenic" aims, starting f.ex. by pushing to eradicate Human Livies which might "Cost too much" to preserve, ultimately exposing to dangers reminiscent of the "3rd Reich"'s atrocious abuses.

    In consequence, ChristianDemocrats/EPP and "Green" MEPs "decided by Majority to vote against" this Controversial Amendment, anounced to Journalists the 5 MEPs who participated in the Press Conference, representing a wide spectrum, from Liberals to "Greens" and ChristianDemocrats, and from Hungary, Italy, Germany and Danemark up to Ireland (Gay Mitchell), etc.
----------------------------------
    Hungarian ChristianDemocrat MEP Laszlo Surjan said "that it was "Suddenly, at the End of the Procedure" in Committee, that "appeared this (Controversial) Amendment, which has nothing to do" with the main purpose of the Report, on which all agreed.

    He denounced an "Unhonest" move, and called to "avoid this kind of unacceptable situations". Nobody should "Select People", Surjan stressed.

    - "We (MEPs) had No Chance to Discuss" this last-minute Amendment earlier added at a Committee's level, said German MEP Peter Liese

    Speaking to "EuroFora", Dr. Liese, the Spokesman of the ChristianDemocrat/EPP Group in EU Parliament, said that MEPs didn't oppose other references of the Report f.ex. on "Genetic Tests", because they were "no proposals" to impose them, while, on the contrary, there was "a Problem" if anyone attempted to "impose" f.ex. this or that Genetic Technique and "Genetic Counselling", etc. to the People on human reproduction.
-------------
The precise Text :
-----------------
    Controversial parts of Amendment No 15 ask mainly "to lead finally to the Eradication" of "Hereditary" "rare diseases", "through Genetic Counselling .., and ..pre-Implantation Selection of healthy Embryos".

    But  EU Rapporteur Professor Trakatellis, said to "EuroFora" that fears should be alleviated by Guarantees that all this should be done only "where appropriate", when it's "not contrary to existing National Law", and "always on a Voluntary basis", according to other Parts of the Amendment.

    He stressed that the main aim was to allow "a free and informed choice of persons involved", without imposing them anything :  - "It's not an obligatory, but advisary" text, he said.

    To make that point clear, he was ready, in agreement with many MEPs, to eventually drop at least that part of the controversial Amendment which initially called for "efforts to ..lead finally to the Eradication of those rare diseases" "which are Hereditary".

    But, until late Wednesday evening, reportedly together with many other MEPs, he stood by all the rest of the controversial Amendment, (fex. on the "Genetic Counselling" and the "pre-implantation Selection of healthy Embryos"), so that critical MEPs, going from ChristianDemocrats as Dr. Liese, to "Greens" or "Ind/Dem", observed to "EuroFora" that "this was not enough" to close the dangerous loophole.

    Particularly since, as Professor Trakatellis noted himself, "this is already allowed to the U.K.", and "other National Legislations would probably follow, sooner or later" in a similar direction. As for a general call to "Eradicate Hereditary rare Diseases", this "should happen, at any case, in practice, de facto", to protect public Health.

    On the contrary, "our goal should be to help patients suffering from rare diseases, not to eradicate the patients. In case of genetic disease risk, the decision should not be guided by scenarios" made by politicians. "Perents who may decide to accept a child, even if handicapped or with genetic disease, must be respected and supported with solidarity", critical MEPs stated.

    - "Any Pressure" to "a patient or couple (who "should be able to make an informed choice consistent with their own values"),"from health Professionals, Public Health Policies or Governemental Institutions, or Society at large, should be avoided", stresses the "European Society for Human Genetics".

----------------------------------

Each MEP's vote will be registered !

-----------------------------------   

The Socialist Group requested a "Split vote" on the Amendment 15, first without, and afterwards with the words "lead finally to the Eradication" etc.


    But the first "split vote" leaves intact all the other parts of the Controversial Amendment, (i.e. "Genetic Counselling", "Selection of healthy Embryos", etc).

    That's why, 3 Groups of MEPs : ChristianDemocrats/EPP, "Greens/EFA", and "Ind/Dem", have asked for "Roll Call Votes", on everything regarding the Controversial Amendment No 15, and on the final outcome of the resulting Report as amended, which will register all the individual positions to be taken by each MEP.   

Something which will obviously make each MEP think twice before voting for one or another choice, to be sure that he/she will make the right choice in front of EU Citizens, particularly at these pre-Election times...


    Crucial Votes were scheduled between 12 Noon and 1 p.m. local Strasbourg time, in the middle of a long series of various other Reports, and after a long Public Debate on the larger Health policy package, from 9 to 11.50 am.

    The specific Report inside which was hidden the controversial Amendment is due to be debated between 11 and 12 am.

    So that more last-minute Surprises may not be excluded a priori...

    Particularly at the present Historic moment, when even the Institutional Future of the EU depends on the result of a second Referendum on "Lisbon Treaty", later this year, in ...Ireland, a mainly Catholic country, where People are particularly sensitive in such kind of socio-cultural and values issues...
 

      ***     
 
     (Draft due to be updated).
 
***

Polls

2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?

Results

SMF Recent Topics SA

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.