Interview des militants du PSE: Margot Wallström, décembre 2006

Margot Wallström est vice-présidente de la Commission européenne et commissaire aux relations institutionnelles et à la stratégie de la communication. Elle a également été commissaire à l'environnement dans la Commission Prodi (1999-2004). En Suède, elle a été ministre à la défense des intérêts de consommateurs, des femmes et de la jeunesse, ministre de la culture et ministres affaires sociales.

Sandra: A European level of party politics still doesn’t exist. A grassroots member of a national party has no possibility to influence decision making in the European parties. The best communication strategy doesn't interest people when they have no say. Europe claims to be democratic. But the EU would be the only democratic structure in the whole world without a functioning party body which creates public opinion by their discussions. Aren’t a functioning political awareness and grassroots a precondition for democracy? How can we enhance party structures on European level?

"Not even half of the electorate likes the way democracy works in Europe."

Margot Wallström: Sandra, seven out of ten Europeans say they know little or nothing about the European Union. More than half think that their voice does not count. Less than half the electorate bothered to vote in the 2004 European Parliamentary elections. And not even half like the way democracy works in Europe.
One of the main challenges movements like ours face is to involve people in the discussions and debates around Europe's future. What kind of Europe do we want? How will we live together and what about the jobs, the environment, the future of our children?
The problem is that political and societal discussions and debates are mainly taking place on a national level in the national public sphere. But in the EU today, more and more decisions affecting our daily lives are being taken at European level. Our political parties, our media, our educational systems all still have a mainly national perspective. We need a corresponding European arena – a European public sphere – where learning and debate can take place across borders. If EU citizens expect their common problems to be tackled at EU level, they should be keenly interested in how their fellow-Europeans in other countries feel about these problems. But do people in Greece know how the issues that concern them are perceived by people in Estonia? No not really. To make this kind of conversation possible we need to develop a European public sphere including a European political culture meaning European political parties, European media and European meeting places. People need forums where they can discuss the issues together across national borders and language barriers. In my job as Vice president of the European Commission responsible for Communication I have put forward proposals in a White Paper that identifies this problem and suggests ways of tackling it.
It recommends “empowering citizens”. That means giving people – you and me – the opportunity to learn the facts, discuss the issues and really make our voices heard. It recommends that EU institutions and all levels of government in each EU country should work with the media to inform people properly and present the full range of views on European issues. It recommends exploiting new channels of communication like the Internet – and creating new forums for debate, such as online chat rooms and interactive TV programmes. And it says that EU citizens – you and I – should be presented with a real choice between different policies. At present, the only choice we are offered is between different candidates in European Parliament elections, and we don’t really know what our choice will mean in terms of policies or new legislation.
Of course, this will take time. And it certainly can’t be done by the European Commission alone: it has to be a joint effort by all the “key players” all EU institutions, all EU governments and political parties, civil society and the media in all EU countries.

"At present, the only choice we are offered is between different candidates in European Parliament elections, and we don’t really know what our choice will mean in terms of policies or new legislation."

Alan: The European Commission president recently said that the need to secure a European Constitution is an "increasingly pressing" issue. Of course, to resolve that issue, the support of a majority of French voters will be needed, in a second referendum.
On the same day, it was reported that the Commission will propose a full liberalisation of postal services in Europe by 2009. The result will probably be that prices of individual letters will shoot up, many post offices in rural areas will close and many post workers may lose their jobs. This measure will be especially unpopular in France, where most employees in the postal service are civil servants. It will make the European Commission - and the European Constitution - even more unpopular in France.
An unfortunate coincidence, n'est-ce pas?

"I think we have to recognize that the problems that the Constitution was designed to address, have not gone away. For me it is clear that the Union would be better equipped to face the challenge of globalisation, if the Constitutional Treaty were in place."

Margot Wallström: Dear Alan. I understand your worries. And you are probably right when you assume that it will make the EU more unpopular if people are not properly informed about the intentions of this proposal. But just so you know the Commission proposal retains the very strong principle of the so called universal service obligation. This means that mail will continue to be collected and delivered anywhere within your country 5 days per week at an affordable rate. These essentials, which together are known as the 'universal service', will not change. The aim of the Commission's proposal is to make it better for the consumers- not worse. And as far as rural areas go, letters will still be delivered there, by postal workers.
Now to the wider issue on the future of the constitutional treaty: I think we have to recognize that the problems that the Constitution was designed to address, have not gone away. For me it is clear that the Union would be better equipped to face the challenge of globalisation, if the Constitutional Treaty were in place. We would also function in a more democratic and efficient way, both on the internal and external level. Do we really believe that we can play an important role in international affairs without a Minister for Foreign Affairs? Or that we can cope with the challenges of migrations having to take any single decision in this area by unanimity?
There will be no easy and quick fixes to an institutional settlement. By we need to find a solution involving into a broad debate on why we need a new constitutional treaty. I think it will be difficult but very worthy trying again.

 Sven: Dear comrade, the journalists in my country – Germany – do not know much about the European Union. I read for example often in newspapers, that the European Parliament is a club for debate and no real decision making body. I believe that not the journalists in Brussels are the problem, but the editorial staff in the home countries. What are you doing to change this situation? Wouldn’t it be a good idea to set up a communication team which strategically writes letters to the editors? How about setting up a seminar unit which invites journalists from their home countries to Brussels to coach and to train them on European matters?

"Indeed - the editorial line is sometimes not what we ideally want. But hey - it is politics and the journalists write what they hear all around the place - from us in the Commission and from their government: the result is what you read."

Margot Wallström: You have very good ideas Sven. And it might please you to know that some are already implemented by the Commission. We have people who do "rebuttal" to wrong stories, but often it is not the facts but the interpretation that is the problem - and that is hard to rebut!
On journalist seminars: The European Journalism Centre in Maastricht organises per year for us some 40 seminars. Last year we had over 500 journalists participating from all over Europe on topics like constitution and enlargement amongst others. Additionally, we invite journalists from the Member States to come to Brussels and visit the institutions. I have no figure at hand how many these were last year, but it is certainly again around 500. And the Commissioners visits editorial offices when they are in a Member State. But indeed - the editorial line is sometimes not what we ideally want. But hey - it is politics and the journalists write what they hear all around the place - from us in the Commission and from their government: the result is what you read. But I am glad democracy has a free press and I know you do too!

Sophie: Bonjour, en tant que commissaire européenne chargé de la communication, c'est intéressant de vérifier que vous même essaiez de communiquer directement avec les citoyens à travers votre blog. Croyez-vous que les outils de communication via internet - notamment les blogs - représentent un atout important dans la communication politique?

"Je suis convaincue que l'internet peut être cette sphère publique européenne dont on parle tant."

Margot Wallström: Oui Sophie, en fait, je suis convaincue que l'internet peut être cette sphère publique européenne dont on parle tant. Il constitue une plateforme vous permettant de discuter avec un interlocuteur se trouvant à 5000 km de vous, sans devoir quitter votre domicile ou votre bureau. Les forums de discussion et autres blogs fonctionnent comme des salles de réunion ou de conférence. Mon blog est un moyen inestimable de réception de réactions, d'opinions du public. L'éventail des commentaires et opinions que je reçois via le blog s'avère extrêmement utile. Il me permet d'établir des échanges directs de façon régulière avec des personnes issues de pays et d'horizons divers.

Maria: Chère Margot, j'ai eu l'opportunité de suivre le débat au tour du Plan D (D pour Démocratie, Dialogue et Débat) de la Commission européenne. Ce plan a été adopté il y a un an, son but étant d'écouter les citoyens européens et les rapprocher des institutions européennes desquelles ils se sentaient éloignés. Un an après, quel est le bilan que vous faites du Plan D? Les citoyens ont-ils répondu à l'appel? Est-ce que le Plan est vraiment parvenu à rapprocher les gens des instances de décision de l'UE?

"En ce qui concerne le rapprochement du citoyen aux institutions européennes nous avons encore un long chemin devant nous."

Margot Wallström: Maria, en termes généraux nous pouvons dire que les citoyens ont répondu à l'appel et nous nous réjouissons de cette réponse, qui confirme que nous allions dans la bonne voie. Bien évidemment leur réponse a été très variée et différente dans les 25 pays de l'Union, aussi bien en termes de contenu du débat qu'en termes d'intensité, ce qui reflète parfaitement la diversité de la population européenne.
Outre la participation significative des européens à des nombreux débats thématiques, des tables rondes pour la démocratie et des fora (organisés non seulement par nos Représentations dans les pays membres, mais aussi par des collectivités locales, par les réseaux d'information, par les autorités nationales ou par les parlements nationaux et locaux) nous avons reçu beaucoup de contributions en Internet par le biais du Forum on line "Debate Europe" lancé par la Commission au mois de mars dernier et modéré dans 20 langues.
En ce qui concerne le rapprochement du citoyen aux institutions européennes nous avons encore un long chemin devant nous, mais nous avons déjà réalisé quelques avancées importantes. Par exemple, le Président de la Commission, moi-même et les autres membres de la Commission avons intensifié les visites aux pays membres pour permettre des rencontres entre les Commissaires et, notamment, les représentants des gouvernements et parlements nationaux, des collectivités locales, des médias et des organisations de la société civile, afin de mettre en place des échanges avec un échantillon social véritablement complet. Nous avons aussi lancé un appel à proposition afin d’apporter un soutien financier à des projets visant à organiser des manifestations citoyennes. Cet appel à propositions vise à encourager les initiatives d'organismes européens tendant à promouvoir la participation du public à des débats sur des sujets relatifs à l'Union européenne.

Mark: Dear Margot, I have seen in PES activists news that you are also a PES activist and that you have been at the launch at 9th of May. I believe that PES activists is a really good idea. Is there anything that you or the Commission can do to support and promote such projects?

Margot Wallström: Yes Mark. And I think it is very important. The Commission is actually doing a lot in the area of Involving citizens in European integration. Apart from my own areas of responsibility I would like to point to my colleague Commissioner Figel and his particular responsibility for education and culture. Just to mention two examples:
- the youth portal with a lot of interesting programmes and possibilities for cross-border contacts between young people between 15 and 25 years. The programme is open to youth in 31 European countries. The YOUTH programme offers possibilities to young people in the form of both group exchanges and individual voluntary work, as well as support activities.
- the new programme "Citizens for Europe" 2007 – 2013 will encourage cooperation between citizens and their organisations from different countries in order to meet, act together and develop their own ideas in a European environment which goes beyond a national vision, respecting their diversity. Intercultural exchanges will contribute to improving the mutual knowledge of the culture and history of the European peoples. It will bring our common heritage to the fore and strengthen the basis for our common future. Mutual understanding, solidarity and the feeling of belonging to Europe are indeed the building blocks for the involvement of citizens and are reflected by the four different programme actions.