The Conference on the Future of Europe, concluded on May 9th, 2022, was reduced due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It aimed to address 49 propositions and translate them into 320 measures across 9 areas, including climate change, health, economy, justice, employment, EU's role in the world, values, education, culture, sports, and democracy. The event faced criticism for being overly ambitious.
Three criteria were suggested to evaluate the Conference's outcome: the level of citizen participation, the continuation of consultations, and practical consequences. Technically, the Conference was successful, with a multilingual online platform demonstrating its capacity and effectiveness. However, the level of participation was not considered high enough, mainly engaging those already interested in the EU.
The Conference's recommendations can be categorized into three groups: ongoing actions, those based on existing treaties, and others requiring treaty changes. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, some proposals have been expedited, while others have become more necessary. The European Parliament proposed a European Convention for treaty reform, but many member states are hesitant, leaving room for less ambitious actions.
The Conference has sparked discussions about incorporating citizen panels into democratic life. While this is not a new idea, it suggests a commitment to generalize this practice. The real test will be how tangible results impact the EU, whether through policy implementation, new policy introduction, or improving democratic institution functions.
Some measures, especially those urgent and necessary post-COVID-19, particularly for addressing the Ukrainian crisis, have potential for progress. For example, the European Parliament proposed ambitious changes to EU competencies in health, energy, defense, sanctions, education, economic and social policies, protection of Union values, and granting powers to the parliament.
The Council of Europe's conclusions were less detailed, emphasizing each institution's responsibilities and the importance of informing citizens. The European Commission had a positive response, promising to detail follow-up actions in their State of the Union speech, though only announced a mental health initiative and supported a European Convention without linking it to the Conference.
Several EU member states opposed treaty changes, mainly Scandinavian and central European countries, while others, including Spain and Italy, were more accommodating. Activating such reforms requires a simple majority of states, which currently seems unlikely. The Czech Republic holds the rotating presidency, and Sweden will take over next, both also in opposition.
While the possibility of a third European Convention is remote, some Conference proposals can advance, especially if they don't require treaty changes, can be achieved through transitional clauses, or can be resolved with an intergovernmental conference. Other measures requiring a European Convention will need suitable conditions, possibly arising from the need for significant changes in the EU's functioning when the bloc expands. This could create opportunities for negotiation that are currently out of reach, as many countries opposing reforms are among those most favorable to expansion. The Ukrainian crisis has revived the debate on expansion, potentially giving impetus to implementing some of the Conference's most ambitious proposals.
