I thank the committee for the opportunity to address it. As members are aware, one of the goals of the Lisbon treaty was to reinforce the democratic fabric of the European Union. The European Commission is currently seeking views on how the citizens' initiative, which is a new democratic tool, could take shape. As many are aware, European Movement Ireland is a civil society organisation founded more than 56 years ago with the goal of making Europe much more part of our day-to-day discussion, rather than reserving it until six weeks before a national vote. We felt well suited to review this initiative and welcome the opportunity to share our views with members.
We have taken the European Parliament's definition of the citizens' initiative as the starting basis for building the discussion we had with our members. We addressed the question of the citizens' initiative and what it aims to do. It formalised a system that exists in some form. In reality, it is already possible for EU countries to lobby the Commission and the Parliament on a particular issue. Therefore, citizens can initiate requests for policy change by lobbying a national party. Citizens are also free to lodge a complaint to the institutions through the European Ombudsman and to petition the EU Parliament for a matter to be investigated when they are affected by the issue raised.
It is useful to frame this debate by noting that we need the citizens' initiative. It addresses an existing need and formalises a current ad hoc procedure. A number of member states have some kind of initiative system. While the system is new to us, it is not new to others in the European Union. Not only does the citizens’ initiative formalise a practice that is going on, but it marks a step in the institutional reform that the latest treaty introduced. For many, the citizens’ initiative will be the first tangible outcome of the Lisbon treaty. Given our near habit of double referenda for European treaties, this very tangible outcome of the Lisbon treaty is an opportunity for the European Union to become more part of our day-to-day politics, so we do not need to wait until the six week period before a referendum.
It is important that this initiative has integrity. A failed initiative will reflect badly on the Lisbon treaty as a whole, giving oxygen to groups who are against European co-operation for a variety of reasons. There is no doubt that the citizens' initiative is a step in the right direction but European Movement Ireland feels that we must be realistic when we consider how far-reaching the citizens' initiative might be and that expectations need to be clearly managed. In the discussions with our members and with our advisory council, three key themes for the successful implementation of the citizens' initiative emerged.
The issue of transparency was a major concern during our discussion, more so on the European institutional side than for those organisations or individuals taking part in the initiatives. If the Commission itself is given responsibility for deciding on the legitimacy of initiatives it could be seen as a filtering process and would severely undermine the legitimacy of the tool. European Movement Ireland strongly urges that the European Ombudsman be given responsibility for the admissibility of initiatives and the validation of signatures to reduce any scepticism about the transparency of the initiative. This would involve an amendment to the current remit of the role of the European Ombudsman, and this is something that we would see as significantly worthwhile in terms of transparency and good separation of powers.
Inclusion was the second theme. Overall, our members favoured adoption of a low threshold to the citizens' initiative. We seek to make the process as inclusive as possible so that we can start to erase the image of the EU as being less democratic than it is. I understand that the committee has discussed this topic so we will not delve into the detail on the low threshold. However, we favour setting the signatures at 0.2% and a quarter of EU member states to be part of it. Given our outreach work in schools and colleges and taking a non-formal educational approach to the debate on Europe, the key element we wish to raise is the voting age. The Green Paper suggests that the minimum age for taking part in an initiative should be set at 18 years, matching the age for voting in EU elections. As an organisation that encourages direct involvement with the EU, European Movement Ireland feels this age limit could be lowered to 16 years and relatively easily in this country. The citizens' initiative is an excellent opportunity to get young people involved, engaged and interested in Europe. To forgo this would be an opportunity lost. We have a chance in Ireland to seize this opportunity and to use the signing of an initiative to be almost like a learner permit for fully-fledged voting at the age of 18.
To avoid a nightmare in getting people to register to take part we suggest using PPS numbers or passport numbers as a way of limiting an excessive administrative burden. At a previous event, I noticed that officials from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government started to react when anybody started to discuss the topic so we have tried to find practical solutions to enable lowering of the voting age. One example is to view it as a 'learner voting system'. Another idea is to attach it to the learner driver permit, as young people will apply for a driver permit and can then be given the information, to avoid the burden of trying to get them to apply for it.
The third theme raised during the consultation with members was sincerity of intention. For the individual, this sincerity of intention would mean that an on-line forum with information on initiatives is provided, but that those who want to sign a petition need to do so at a local post office, local government office or in the library. Thus they are required to do more than just add an e-mail address to a list. By going that extra mile to sign a petition rather than being free to do so at the click of a mouse, there would be a tangible, active aspect to this project while encouraging and fostering a greater sense of civic duty. Great and all as it was to have "A Nation Once Again" voted the world's top tune by a BBC World Service survey in 2002, we in Ireland have first-hand knowledge of how powerful the Internet can be and believe that measures need to be in place to ensure the citizens' initiative is taken seriously.
European Movement Ireland feels that the Internet should definitely be utilised in this initiative to inform and mobilise citizens across the EU and provide that sense of horizontal communication. However, we also need to be mindful that access to the Internet in Ireland is very much characterised by demographic variables such as age, income and so on. To leave the citizens' initiative as something that only those with the internet have access to would be contrary to the ideals that form the very basis of this project.
The citizens' initiative is most definitely a step in the right direction, though it is currently unclear where exactly this step will lead. The initiative is in its infancy; it is experimental and a learning curve must be expected. The EU, and most importantly the Commission, needs to manage the expectations of citizens in terms of this initiative so that the results incurred through the submission of 1 million or more signatures are not inflated. We at European Movement Ireland have watched as the debate here in Ireland has devoted much of its time to the responsibility of individuals involved in this process — for example, whether initiatives will have to be written in legal text, how we will register our initiatives and how we will have to verify signatures. Much of the remaining discussion has been devoted to the role to be played by national and local government in ensuring the smooth, swift and successful running of the initiative.
We have noticed that in all this detailed discussion, there is little mention of the responsibility or procedure required by Europe. European Movement Ireland feels that the responsibilities of the European institutions have not received due consideration in the Green Paper or at any of the meetings or discussions we have attended. We presume this information will appear in the next documentation to circulate from Brussels but, given the tight schedule being mooted and the talk of first reading approval through Parliament, it is increasingly unlikely that a White Paper will have time for much discussion. Therefore, we at European Movement Ireland would like to take this chance to raise some issues now regarding institutional responsibility and opportunity. In short, let me summarise it as follows: we have shown them ours, it is now time for them to show us theirs.