European Conference on European Democracy - EUDEM
Salzburg, Austria, 3-4 May 2012
“Democracy Improvements from the Perspective of the Europe of the 47”
Statement by Andreas Kiefer, Secretary General of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe
Mr Chairman,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The future of the European democratic model and of citizen participation in democratic governance of our continent, which is the theme of this conference, is indeed a key issue of public debate today. This debate is taking place against the background of multiple crises ravaging European societies which are, one can say, undermining the very foundation on which our democratic systems are based.
On the one hand, the economic and financial crisis, and the crisis of the euro-zone in particular, has become a crucial test for the European democratic model. Austerity measures have had a devastating impact on social services, first and foremost at local and regional level; luckily, this technocratic approach of demanding budget cuts without economic stimulus packages is being increasingly questioned. At the same time, European unity itself has been tested, as we witness a lack of solidarity in the face of the crisis. Solidarity has been challenged both between member states – be it within the EU or the Council of Europe – and between different tiers of government (European, national, regional and local), resulting in incoherent economic policies in response to the crisis.
On the other hand, we are living through what a 2010 report of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly described as a “crisis of democracy”, and what one young activist from Greece, participating in a debate of the Council of Europe Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, called a “crisis of values”. This second crisis is characterised by a growing gap between the institutions and the citizens, a lack of public trust in democratic mechanisms and people’s disillusionment with democratic processes as a whole, due to the lack of effective rights of citizen participation and other institutional deficits of democracy (the weakness of parliaments vis-à-vis the executive, government work geared to short-term electoral success and lacking long-term vision, etc.).
Indeed, if most European citizens today do not trust their politicians – and the 2009 Eurobarometer shows that only half of them do, and this for local authorities who gained the highest score, while the figure for national and European politicians is much lower;
if most European citizens see corruption at all levels of governance as a major challenge to democracy – and this in a system of governance based on the rule of law and equal treatment;
and if many Europeans feel disempowered and excluded from decision-making on matters affecting them;
then we do have a systemic crisis which must be addressed urgently if we are to advance into the future with a stronger, not weaker, democracy.
Apart from the crises, the European reality today is characterised by two major aspects: growing ethnic and cultural diversity of European communities, and a surge in people’s activism outside the established institutions of governance – through civil society, voluntary activities and social networks, for example. An emergence of so-called Pirate Parties standing for direct democracy and citizen participation, and their growing success in more and more countries, is a tangible expression of people’s demand for new forms of democratic participation and governance.
From Occupy Wall Street to Indignados, from Génération Précaire to Pirate Parties, people are seeking to assert themselves as direct stakeholders in making decisions that are affecting them. From this picture, it is clear that the commitment of citizens to democratic values has not diminished – however, they simply do not see the current system of governance as representing and upholding these values any longer, at least partially. This is why we can speak today of the crisis of legitimacy of the existing system.
This is taking place in a Europe whose local communities are becoming increasingly multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-religious. A 2011 report of the Group of Eminent Persons, commissioned by the Council of Europe and entitled “Living together: Combining freedom and diversity in 21st century Europe”, described the main challenges to European democracy today as being linked exactly to the issue of diversity, which all levels of government have to face.
The true challenge is to find ways of using this diversity for the benefit of the entire community, beginning from the grassroots. Responses to this challenge lie in reaching social consensus on the legal framework by which everyone has to abide; in ensuring equal treatment and equal protection of citizens’ rights – by, among other things, promoting local integration and access to social rights and public services for all, such as housing, education, health care and employment; as well as in fostering intercultural dialogue and harmonious relations between different cultural and religious groups.
A key role in meeting this challenge belongs to local and regional authorities, as pubic action at the grassroots level has the most direct and tangible impact on our citizens.
Thus, using diversity for the benefit of all, building productive intercultural relations between population groups, ensuring integration of minority groups and bringing about better social cohesion are among today’s main challenges for public authorities at all levels of governance, responses to which represent an integral part of participatory democracy we are seeking to build.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The current situation in Europe shows that the traditional system of representative democracy is being increasingly challenged by elements of direct democracy, calling for a new democratic model based on direct and continuous participation of citizens in governance, not limited only to elections.
New information and communication technologies offer vast opportunities in this field, in the framework of so-called e-democracy – for example, in carrying out direct consultations with citizens and receiving their feedback on public action, in collecting signatures for citizens’ initiatives, in introducing e-voting and e-governance in a broader sense, and in setting a general framework for e-participation and provision of e-services.
The European Citizens’ Initiative is certainly an important step in this direction, which, we are convinced, will give a boost to e-democracy and the use of e-tools. However, to be effective, citizen participation must engage all levels of governance, and especially the “implementation level” at the grassroots – which is local and regional, where the results of such participation are the most effective.
At the same time, participation must have concrete impact and bring about results sought by citizens. The current experimentation with direct consultations often results in frustration when citizens’ input does not lead to concrete action. In other words, non-binding referenda and consultations that serve as mere opinion polls are not sustainable as they may only fuel further disillusionment and be seen by citizens as wasted efforts on their part.
So, what can the Council of Europe, whose outreach spans 47 European countries, do, or what is it doing, to build a new democratic model?
The Council of Europe began discussing the evolution of European democracy back in 2005, when it established the annual Forum for the Future of Democracy. Over the years, the Forum looked into a wide range of aspects of democratic governance, from the interdependence between democracy and human rights and the framework for e-democracy to democratic electoral systems, the role and functioning of political parties, and strategic approaches to good governance. Building on the Forum’s deliberations, the Council of Europe is launching this year a broad Strasbourg Democracy Forum, which will also meet annually.
As a result of these deliberations, we could identify today several requirements for a successful participatory model, combining representative and direct democracy through greater citizen participation and involving the use of new technologies. We could also speak of several axes of action to achieve this objective.
First, the response to a systemic crisis must also be systemic, and this response lies in a greater devolution of power towards the level closest to the citizen – the grassroots level. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities has been the driving force behind decentralisation in Europe for more than five decades. This process, based on the legal framework of the European Charter of Local Self-Government adopted in 1985, has resulted in greater autonomy of our local and regional communities, with ever-growing range and depth of competences of grassroots elected authorities, leading eventually to the creation of ‘proximity governance’ to replace the ‘remote governance’ of today.
The greater the distance between citizens and institutions of power, the more complicated and problematic the procedures of involving citizens in decision-making, ensuring their access to guaranteed rights, and receiving their feedback on government action. The greater this distance, the more bureaucratic hurdles citizens have to overcome, the weaker the public oversight and the more opportunities for abuse of power and corruption, as it is easier to make some “steps of the way” less transparent if there are too many of them. For the same reason, it is also more difficult to receive direct citizens’ feedback on public action, making them “skip the steps” and air their grievances in public demonstrations or, in extreme cases, by resorting to riots.
These developments bring to the fore the question of relationship between people and power, between citizens and authorities. There is a growing realisation of the need to replace the concept of top-down transfer of competences and responsibilities with their bottom-up delegation, thus returning the power to its legitimate owner, the people, and their local communities, in a new model of governance.
This new model of governance is a second major component of participatory democracy. A new concept reflecting this vision is that of a system of multi-level governance. The new model will replace the existing system of vertical hierarchical subordination of the different tiers of government by their horizontal equal partnership, the transfer and delegation of competences by the sharing of responsibilities, and the levels of government by domains of governance – local, regional, national, European, and sublevels in between – based on the delimitation of clearly identified competences. This delimitation, in turn, must be based on the criteria of effectiveness and efficiency of action when assigning responsibility to a particular domain of governance.
Another model, overlapping with multi-level governance, is that of multi-stakeholder governance. This concept is being used by the United Nations in its discussions on global governance and involves – in addition to international, supranational, national, regional and local levels – other stakeholders in the democratic process, such as civil society, the voluntary sector, and private business. In time, this model, first tested with the Internet governance, could be mainstreamed into political life, much as the concept of sustainability, which began in the field of the environment and ecology but has been broadened to sustainable development encompassing all aspects of society.
Whatever the end result, it is clear that a new governance model is an imperative as a basis for a new democratic system. There are already elements of multi-governance that have been growing within the existing system over decades: for example, the transfer of competences to local and regional governments in an increasing number of fields as a result of the growing application of the principle of subsidiarity. On the one hand, this transfer of responsibilities to lower levels unburdens higher levels and helps to optimise the use of resources. On the other hand, lower levels, more empowered both politically and financially, are in a better position to act as genuinely equal partners, especially as the ever-growing complexity of tasks at hand brings to the fore the need for governance partnerships in addressing and solving the problems. In other words, European institutions and national governments can no longer “go it alone”.
Another element of multi-level governance is the so-called Agenda in common, approved last November by European ministers responsible for local and regional governments. This agenda identifies areas of common concern to both national and grassroots authorities, where their joint action can have maximum impact. Today, these priority areas include finding responses to the economic crisis, broadening citizen participation and fighting corruption.
It is our conviction that the European Charter of Local Self-Government must be the basis from which we can proceed in building the new system. The Charter was indeed the first treaty to lay down the clear delimitation of competences for each level of governance and the principle of subsidiarity – a system that has been put in place in the national settings of member states, and the functioning of which the Congress has been closely monitoring.
Applying the principles of the Charter to the European level would be a logical extension of this process, while, at the same time, broadening the application of the Charter itself. One step in this direction was the adoption of the Additional Protocol to the Charter in 2009, dealing specifically with the right of citizens to participate in the affairs of a local authority. Another would be the lifting of reservations to the Charter made by the countries that ratified it, to allow for a truly unified European space of common standards for local democracy.
We are convinced indeed that the way to overcome the current crisis is through greater participation of our citizens in democratic processes and decision-making at the grassroots. Increased public participation and direct involvement in local governance will give our citizens a sense of empowerment, and will help to restore confidence and bridge the gap of the democratic deficit.
The local level is an excellent ground for innovation in this respect, and the Congress has already made proposals to local authorities for using e-tools (including the delivery of e-services) and organising citizen consultations on urban projects. Another innovative idea is participatory budgeting, whereby the initiatives of citizens and civil society – many of which may have their own external funding – are included into local budgets according to municipal priorities. This kills two birds in one stone: strengthens local budgets through outside supplements, and responds to the wishes of the people as to in what areas action should be taken. Participatory budgeting is gaining ground today in particular in Germany, Scandinavian countries and the United Kingdom.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
As I have already mentioned, the use of e-democracy could be counterproductive if people feel that their contribution had no impact, or find the whole consultation exercise to be too abstract. However, whereas there is certainly a risk to this effect at national and European levels, the grassroots level – regional and local communities – hold a big future for e-participation and the provision of e-services. The physical proximity improves transparency of the process and immediacy of the result, and serves for better accountability of public authorities. For example, some local communities in the United Kingdom are using electronic systems whereby citizens can report problems and breakdowns in their community, things that are not working in the moment, so that repair action could be taken. This experiment is proving to be quite successful in raising the effectiveness and efficiency of public action.
This brings me to the third component of participatory democracy, which can be described as active democratic citizenship. Indeed, we need informed, educated and conscientious citizens with an active civic position, citizens that are aware of their rights and civic duties, in order to ensure the quality of participation and therefore the quality of participatory democracy.
In 2010, the Council of Europe adopted a Charter on Education for Democratic Citizenship (EDC) and Human Rights Education (HRE), establishing for the first time a framework for concerted efforts to equip citizens with the knowledge, skills and understanding of democratic processes, and to help develop their attitudes in a democratic society, in order to empower them to exercise and defend their rights, to value diversity and to play an active part in democratic life.
In October 2011, the Congress adopted a resolution calling on local authorities to develop policies and frameworks for education for democratic citizenships, and suggested tools they can use in the process. At the same time, our resolutions and recommendation on the human rights implementation at the grassroots level stressed the need for raising human rights awareness in local and regional communities, through appropriate education and training, both for elected representatives and their staff as well as for citizens at large.
We are convinced these steps are an integral part of building a better framework for citizen participation which, especially at local level, could take different forms: town hall meetings, public debates on issues of concern, citizen consultations and initiatives, local referenda, but also the form of various participative structures such as consultative councils of migrants and foreign residents, youth assemblies, even children’s councils, etc.
Over the years, a range of tools have been developed within the Council of Europe to steer public action towards this participatory framework. For instance, the 1992 Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level provided foreign residents with the right to vote in local elections – a right which is granted today, with or without the right to stand in elections, by more than 20 European countries, and which is a major step for local integration and participation of migrants and foreign residents.
Another example is the European Charter on youth participation at local and regional level, which is marking its 20th anniversary this year and which suggests lines of action to engage young people in democratic processes at the grassroots. In this regard, the Council of Europe system in the field of youth, whereby recommendations to national governments are elaborated with the participation of representatives of youth organisations, is unique and could serve as an example for any future participatory framework.
One of the successful initiatives of the Congress testing various participation schemes at the grassroots level is the annual Local Democracy Week, which has become a truly pan-European event since its first launch in 2007 and which serves to bring together local citizens and their public authorities to learn about local democratic processes, hear each other’s concerns and decide on priorities for the community.
Last October, the Congress took stock of the current situation in its report on citizen participation at local and regional levels in Europe, and made proposals for further action.
However, participation for all will be a dead letter without genuine integration, better social cohesion and harmonious intercultural relations within our local and regional communities. This is why the Congress has been actively promoting, through its policy recommendations, local and regional action fostering integration and participation of migrants and minority groups – in particular Roma – as well as polices geared towards interculturalism and management of intercultural and inter-faith relations.
Two good examples in this area are Cities for Local Integration Policy, or CLIP – a network of some 40 municipalities that the Congress helped to create in 2006; and the network of Intercultural Cities, a joint programme with the European Commission that has been expanding across Europe since 2008.
The success of these and other municipal networks on specific subjects – such as Cities for Children, Energy Cities, Eurocities or Cities for Human Rights – as well as of Euroregional groupings highlights the growing importance of direct, cross-border co-operation between cities and regions, allowing for direct interaction between citizens, joint decision-making and joint management of projects. While this cross-border co-operation can be seen as a natural by-product of decentralisation, European integration and multi-level governance, I believe that a solid framework for inter-municipal and inter-regional co-operation and exchanges between citizens should be considered as a fourth component of the participatory model.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
To sum up, a participatory model of democracy will require a new, decentralised system of multi-level governance, based on a comprehensive framework for citizen participation and supported by active democratic citizenship and by possibilities for direct cross-border co-operation and interaction at the level closest to the citizen. Local and regional authorities have a key role to play in the new system by ensuring ‘proximity governance’ and the grassroots implementation of national policies. Participation at local level must go hand in hand with local integration for better social cohesion, as well as policies fostering intercultural dialogue between population groups and engaging them in democratic processes for the benefit of the entire community.
For its part, the Council of Europe and its Congress can bring to this new system its toolbox of legal instruments, its wealth of experience in democracy-building gained over six decades, and its pan-European outreach and direct access to both local and regional authorities AND national governments across the continent.
I would like to conclude by referring to the Democracy Index 2011, published last year in the British weekly The Economist. This index shows that less than half of the world’s population – 48 % - is enjoying democracy, either full or flawed, with another 14 % living under hybrid regimes and some 38 % under authoritarian rule. From these figures, democracy does not seem to be a reigning concept worldwide, and the current crisis placing Western democracy under stress does not help with the issue. And yet, this “worst form of government” (according to Churchill) continues to have the strongest appeal of them all, an appeal of freedom and social justice, an appeal which brought down the Berlin Wall more than 20 years ago, and which has brought people to the streets during the Arab Spring.
In 1949, the Council of Europe was founded by only ten European countries considered to be democratic – today, it embraces 47 member states. Over the past decades, democracy has made a tremendous progress, both in Europe and worldwide. Today’s multiple crises are a reminder to all of us that democratic development is not a status quo but a process of permanent evolution, moving towards a democracy that is truly participative and centred on the citizen.
We must seize this momentum.
Thank you.