Studiu IER Pag 23-44 PDF
Studiu IER Pag 23-44 PDF
Studiu IER Pag 23-44 PDF
Studiul nr. 1
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
Autori:
Bucureşti, 2010
Gabriela Drăgan
Director general al Institutului European din România
MOTTO
Dorim să mulţumim dlui asist. univ. dr. Marian - Gabriel Hâncean fără a cărui
generoasă contribuţie nu am fi avut nici chestionarul, nici prelucrarea acestuia.
Profesionalismul său, bine-cunoscut de altfel, a fost de un real folos evaluărilor pe
care le-am făcut cu ocazia conferinţelor judeţene pe care le-am organizat.
REZUMAT...................................................................................................... 11
I. Introducere .................................................................................................. 15
I.1. Consideraţii generale ............................................................................ 15
I.2. Obiectivele şi ipotezele asumate ........................................................... 17
I.3. Metodele de cercetare şi analiză utilizate.............................................. 19
I.4. Structura studiului................................................................................. 21
II. Uniunea Europeană post tratatul de la Lisabona................................... 23
II.1. Principiile, valorile şi modelul Uniunii Europene ............................... 23
II.1.1. Introducere....................................................................................... 24
II.1.2. O reformă ambiţioasă realizată printr-o metodă clasică............... 25
II.1.3. Principalele noutăţi ......................................................................... 27
II.1.4. Viitorul Europei şi „Europa viitorului”. Strategiile UE intitulate
”EUROPA 2020” şi, respectiv, „EUROPA 2030”.................................. 31
II.2. Spaţiul administrativ european. Modelul economico-social al UE.
Reforma instituţiilor, deciziilor, competenţelor şi politicilor europene ...... 33
II.2.1. Modelul economico-social european. „Mai multă Europă socială”.
Obligativitatea juridică a Cartei ................................................................ 33
II.2.2. Reforma instituţională. Creşterea eficacităţii Uniunii .................. 37
II.2.3. Distribuţia competenţelor. Subsidiaritatea. Rolul regiunilor
şi al colectivităţilor locale.......................................................................... 44
II.3. Europa 2020: creştere inteligentă, durabilă şi favorabilă incluziunii.
Dialogul social............................................................................................. 48
II.3.1 Tratatul de la Lisabona, baza juridică a continuării aplicării
Strategiei de la Lisabona............................................................................ 48
II.3.2. Modelul Social European, mai mult decât o simplă simbioză a
modelelor interne ale statelor membre. Unicitatea sa la nivel
mondial ....................................................................................................... 51
II.3.3 Elementele relevante ale Modelului Social European. Prevederile
Cartei Drepturilor Fundamentale a Uniunii Europene ............................ 54
II.3.4 Rolul partenerilor sociali în viziunea Strategiei Europa 2020 ...... 55
II.4. Europa cetăţenilor. Consolidarea democraţiei europene. Cetăţeanul
român, subiect activ al uniunii .................................................................... 57
II.4.1. Cetăţenia europeană........................................................................ 57
II.4.2. Dificultăţi şi oportunităţi pentru o Europă a cetăţenilor ............... 62
III. România, starea de fapt........................................................................... 64
III.1. Contextul instituţional, administrativ şi legislativ.............................. 64
III.1.1. Tratatul de Aderare a României la Uniunea Europeană încheie
procesul de preaderare şi îl inaugurează pe cel de postaderare............... 64
III.1.2. Îmbunătăţirea capacităţii administrative, element cheie al
maximizării avantajelor aderării ............................................................... 68
III.1.3. Absorbţia fondurilor alocate României de UE ............................ 75
III.1.4. De la Tratatul de Aderare a României la Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Context instituţional, legislativ şi administrativ....................................... 80
III.2. Model european de dezvoltare, dimensiune socială, democraţie,
cetăţeni ........................................................................................................ 85
III.2.1. Dimensiunea socială a Modelului Uniunii European. Strategii în
spaţiul românesc......................................................................................... 85
III.2.2. Democratizarea.............................................................................. 93
IV. Design instituţional şi politic românesc în vederea implementării
prevederilor tratatului de la Lisabona. Recomandări ................................ 98
IV.1. Spaţiul administrativ românesc şi tratatul de la Lisabona. Dezvoltarea
capacităţii administrative. Instituţii, politici, strategii ................................. 98
IV.1.1. Continuarea profesionalizării în domeniul integrării europene
a funcţionarilor din administraţia publică centrală şi locală.................... 98
IV.1.2. Instituirea unei culturi a evaluării programelor şi politicilor
publice, în general, şi a celor europene, în special................................... 99
IV.1.3. Cooperarea mai strânsă cu reţelele patronale, de afaceri şi cele
sociale în vederea atingerii obiectivelor asumate de Uniunea Europeană
prin Strategia Europa 2020. Dezvoltare durabilă, dialog social ............. 100
IV.1.4. Deficit informaţional intern .......................................................... 101
IV.1.5. Parlamentele naţionale, guvernanţă, subsidiaritate. Raportul
legislativ-executiv ...................................................................................... 102
IV.1.6. Îmbunătăţirea capacităţii de absorbţie a fondurilor alocate
României prin intermediul instrumentelor structurale............................. 105
IV.2. Model european. Dimensiunea socială............................................... 107
IV.2.1. Dimensiunea de gen este insuficient abordată............................. 107
IV.2.2. Reducerea discrepanţelor geografice cu privire la nivelul
veniturilor şi accesul la servicii de sănătate.............................................. 108
IV.2.3. Îmbunătăţirea condiţiilor de trai pentru minoritatea Romă, mai ales
prin asigurarea accesului la programe de educaţie şi formare ................ 108
IV.2.4. Dezvoltarea de modalităţi de evaluare analitice, nu descriptive 109
IV.2.5. Încurajarea corelării dintre preocuparea cu privire la excluziune
socială şi Anul European al Voluntariatului 2011 ................................... 109
IV.2.6. Abordarea holistică a incluziunii sociale: acces la piaţa muncii,
participare în societate, acces la servicii de protecţie socială, trebuie
întărită ......................................................................................................... 109
IV.3. Democratizare .................................................................................... 110
IV.3.1. Creşterea rolului mass-media pentru informarea corectă şi
promovarea cetăţeniei active..................................................................... 110
IV.3.2. Creşterea rolului autorităţilor publice abilitate din statele membre
cu privire la informarea şi diseminarea posibilităţilor de cetăţenie activă
din cadrul Uniunii Europene ..................................................................... 111
IV.3.3. Creşterea colaborării dintre instituţiile europene şi partenerii
sociali (patronate, sindicate, ONG-uri) naţionali şi europeni.................. 111
IV.3.4. Promovarea cetăţeniei Uniunii, a cetăţeniei participative .......... 111
IV.3.5. Implementarea recomandărilor formulate în raportul Dismantling
the obstacles to EU citizens’ rights........................................................... 112
IV.3.6. Întărirea societăţii civile inclusiv prin accesul la fonduri
europene ..................................................................................................... 112
IV.3.7. Întărirea participării cetăţenilor aparţinând grupurilor
vulnerabile .................................................................................................. 112
V. Concluzii..................................................................................................... 114
BIBLIOGRAFIE ............................................................................................ 119
ANEXĂ............................................................................................................ 125
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
REZUMAT
11
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
12
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
13
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
14
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
I. Introducere
1
Atunci când vom vorbi despre Tratatul de la Lisabona, ne vom referi la ambele documente
adoptate în decembrie 2007 şi intrate în vigoare la 1 decembrie 2009, adică Tratatul Uniunii
Europene şi Tratatul privind Funcţionarea Uniunii Europene; în toate celelalte cazuri, vom numi
documentul la care facem referire, respectiv unul sau altul din cele două sau, dacă acesta va fi cazul,
Carta drepturilor fundamentale a Uniunii Europene.
15
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
16
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
2
De exemplu, în vederea desăvârşirii modelului economic european, la 29 septembrie 2010 Comisia
Europeană a adoptat cel mai amplu pachet legislativ de consolidare a guvernanţei economice din UE
şi din zona Euro de la lansarea Uniunii Economice şi Monetare. A se vedea pagină DG Afaceri
economice şi financiare: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/articles/eu_economic_situation/2010-
17
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
18
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
5
În acest sens, trebuie menţionată seria de conferinţe regionale intitulate „Tratatul de la Lisabona şi
rolul României în procesul de aprofundare a integrării europene” care a oferit autorilor studiului
prilejul să discute direct cu actorii locali, regionali şi naţionali pe subiecte legate de modul în care s-
a înfăptuit reforma instituţională, legislativă şi de politici după aderarea României la UE, precum şi
despre schimbările ce ţin de aplicarea prevederilor Tratatului de la Lisabona.
19
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
6
Când se utilizează în acest subcapitol termenii de „documente primare”, respectiv, „secundare”,
avem în vedere terminologia oricărei cercetări ştiinţifice, orice altă interpretare neaparţinându-ne.
20
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
7
Denumit în continuare PNAR.
21
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
22
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
8
Despre acest subiect şi în acelaşi spirit, vom numi trei lucrări scrise de reputaţi specialişti europeni
care, prin efortul Editurii Polirom, sunt sau vor fi curând pe piaţa românească de idei. Este vorba
despre Dusan Sidjanski, Jeana Luc Sauron şi Francisco Aldecoa Luzarraga. Astfel, în versiunea
românească a celebrei sale lucrări „Viitorul federalist al Europei”, Sidjanski spune: „aceasta căutare
a unei Carte fundamentale accesibile cetăţenilor se înscrie în curentul unui federalism inedit în plină
evoluţie. Este un răspuns la provocările globalizării şi la ascensiunea marilor puteri actuale sau
emergente. Rolul viitor al Uniunii Europene în plină transformare va depinde de capacitatea sa de a
acţiona eficient, capacitate care, la rândul ei, este în funcţie de organizarea şi coeziunea sa internă.
Or, pentru aceasta, trebuie ca deviza europeană <<unitate în diversitate>> să devină realitate.
Experienţa statelor federale, precum şi cea neterminată a Uniunii, dovedesc faptul că numai metoda
federală poate garanta autonomia şi totodată identităţile proprii ale statelor, regiunilor, oraşelor şi
puterilor locale precum şi uniunea care atrage după sine capacitatea de acţiune necesară. Aplicarea
principiilor subsidiarităţii şi democraţiei participative vine în completarea panopliei metodei
federative. Nu există un model federal unic gata de a fi aplicat. De fapt, pe baza principiilor
federaliste se recurge la spiritul şi metoda federalismului. Este o căutare continuă a celei mai
potrivite metode de guvernanţă” (Sindjanski, Dusan, Viitorul federalist al Europei, Polirom, 2010).
La rândul său, Jean-Luc Sauron, de asemeni în ediţia românească a unei lucrări foarte cunoscute,
„Curs de instituţii europene”, vorbeşte despre complexitatea Uniunii Europene pe care o consideră
un veritabil puzzle şi spune, în acest sens, că „în realitate, Europa, dar şi ceea ce reprezintă ea ca
libertăţi şi valori ale civilizaţiei, necesită o atenţie continuă. Nimic nu este dobândit. Totul se
bazează pe o muncă permanentă şi atentă, la fel de minuţioasă ca şi cea a unui grădinar. Întreaga
construcţie europeană cu multiplele sale organizaţii, răspunde acestei duble constrângeri:
<<neputinţa>> societăţii democratice de a reconstrui zi de zi şi complexitatea unei societăţi
europene foarte eterogene. Titlul acestei lucrări include cuvântul puzzle deoarece fiecare element nu
căpăta sens decât prin raportare la ansamblu. De altfel, deviza Uniunii Europene reluată de proiectul
pentru o Constituţie Europeană rezumă bine această idee de unitate în diversitate” (Sauron, Jean-
Luc, Curs de instituţii europene, Polirom, 2010). În fine, la rândul său, Francisco Aldecoa
Luzarraga (împreună cu Mercedes Guinea Llorente) în lucrarea ce va apărea în curând tot la Editura
Polirom, vorbind despre Tratatul de la Lisabona şi metoda de construcţie europeană, spune: „Ne
aflăm la mai bine de un an de la intrarea în vigoare a Tratatului, timp în care se confirmă treptat teza
centrală a cărţii şi anume că Tratatul de la Lisabona reprezintă o recuperare a Tratatului
Constituţional, tratat ce nu a ajuns să mai fie ratificat. De aceea, el nu este un simplu tratat ce
modifică tratatele anterioare, ci unul care propune o schimbare profundă în direcţia solicitată de
către Convenţia Europeană şi anume aceea a realizării de „mai multă Europa” şi, mai ales, de „mai
multă Europa politică”. Distincţia dintre Lisabona şi tratatele anterioare ale UE este dată de însăşi
natura Convenţiei Europene. Vorbim despre o adunare politică care, spre deosebire de Conferinţele
diplomatice, a conceput un model complet de reformă a Uniunii Europene, o reformă cu viziune pe
termen lung. Stat-candidat la aderare, România a luat parte la Convenţie fiind reprezentată printr-un
membru al guvernului, dar şi prin doi parlamentari. Adoptarea Tratatului Constituţional, respectiv, a
Tratatului de la Lisabona, întreprindere ce presupune o importantă aprofundare a integrării
europene, se datorează, în principal următoarelor două motive: epuizarea metodei reformei
progresive ce avea drept rezultat realizarea, la intervale scurte de timp, a unor revizuiri minimale a
tratatelor. Se ajunsese la situaţia în care Uniunea era într-un permanent proces de reformă, ceea ce
reclama o schimbare a metodei care să permită realizarea unor paşi mai importanţi şi a unei revizuiri
majore a tratatelor; cel de-al doilea motiv, care constituie, de altfel, unul dintre elementele centrale
ale cărţii, îl reprezintă extinderea UE spre centrul şi estul Europei. Încă din Introducere, se afirmă
teza succesului integrării europene şi a formării unei Europe unice, aceasta fiind semnificaţia majoră
23
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
II.1.1. Introducere
Tratatul de la Lisabona încheie un proces de reformă desfăşurat în perioada
2000-2010, conţinutul său reprezentând o revenire la textul Tratatului
Constituţional în scopul creării unei viitoare Uniuni capabile să facă faţă
provocărilor interne şi internaţionale.
Propoziţiile fundamentale de la care plecăm sunt:
- în primul rând, Tratatul de la Lisabona a fost rezultatul unui proces politic,
început la Maastricht şi continuat prin Amsterdam şi Nisa) în cursul căruia s-a
realizat o dublă inovare:
• de metodă (procesul constituţional al Convenţiei);
• de model (explicitarea politică);
24
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
9
DOUE C 306, din 17.12.2007, p. 1.
25
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
10
Trebuie să subliniem amploarea şi importanţa modificărilor pe care Tratatul de la Lisabona le
presupune pentru Tratatul Comunităţii Europene, aceasta schimbându-şi inclusiv funcţiile. Acum,
TCE nu mai are rolul de a regulariza bazele Comunităţii Europene, ci pe cel de a dezvolta Tratatul
Uniunii Europene. În plus, dintre schimbările importante operate în structura sa, trebuie precizat că
aproape toate articolele sale sunt modificate, fie pentru că sunt obiectul unor amendamente concrete,
fie consecinţă a schimbărilor operate în luarea deciziilor sau a celor legate de procedurile legislative.
11
În acest sens, se poate consulta Uniunea Europeană. Versiunea consolidată a Tratatelor. Carta
drepturilor fundamentale, Luxemburg, OPUE, 2010.
26
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
Odată expuse aspectele formale sau structurale, este necesară analiza celor
materiale, adică modificările pe care Tratatul de la Lisabona le operează pe textele
vechilor Tratate.
Primul aspect ce trebuie evidenţiat este acela că Tratatul de la Lisabona
dezvoltă şi consolidează Uniunea Europeană, născută la Maastricht, explicitând
modelul său politic. În acest sens, pe lângă deja comentata dispariţie a
Comunităţii Europene, se introduc schimbări fundamentale precum:
- personalitatea juridică a Uniunii Europene;
- obligativitatea juridică a respectării prevederilor Cartei Drepturilor
Fundamentale a Uniunii;
- stabilirea pachetului de valori şi obiective ale Uniunii;
- stabilirea dispoziţiilor privind funcţionarea democratică a Uniunii;
- continuarea procesului de comunitarizare a celui de-al treilea pilon privind
justiţia şi afacerile interne;
- delimitarea competenţelor;
- stabilirea unei proceduri de control a principiului subsidiarităţii;
- realizarea unei ambiţioase reforme instituţionale;
- realizarea unor inovaţii majore în domeniul politicii externe, apărării şi
securităţii;
- apariţia unor noi baze legale ale Uniunii.
27
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
12
Se va reveni asupra acestor aspecte de-a lungul studiului în cap. II.4.
13
În cap. II.2. vor fi prezentate succint principalele coordonate ale acestei reforme instituţionale.
14
A se vedea Raportul Comisiei de Afaceri Constituţionale a PE asupra Tratatului de la Lisabona,
A6-0013/2008, Anexa 2.
28
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
15
Fără îndoială că lista deciziilor supuse procedurilor speciale este impresionantă, ajungând la 33
conform PE.
29
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
16
Serviciul European de Acţiune Externă este compus din funcţionari ai Comisiei, ai Consiliului şi
personal diplomatic detaşat de la ministerele de externe ale statelor membre.
17
Uniunea Europeană, Concluziile Consiliului European, Bruxelles, 29 octombrie 2010, EUCO
25/10.
30
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
atât prin amploare, cât şi prin conţinut. Presupune un mare pas înainte în
construcţia Europei politice, în măsura în care, pe de o parte, explicitează modelul
acestui sistem politic unic şi, pe de altă parte, sporeşte puterea de acţiune a
Uniunii Europene în domenii care aparţin, tradiţional, de domeniul suveranităţii
naţionale exclusive a statelor membre.
18
Uniunea Europeană, Consiliul European, 17 iunie 2010, Concluziile Preşedinţiei, EUCO 13/10,
CO EUR 9, CONCL 2.
31
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
(valabil pentru membrii zonei Euro), dar şi un spaţiu politic tot mai omogen –
vezi Spaţiul de libertate, securitate şi justiţie –, precum şi unul instituţional şi
decizional din ce în ce mai integrat. În acest scop, trebuie dezvoltată progresiv
ideea unei guvernanţe economice care să evite contradicţiile actuale generate de
existenţa, pe de o parte, a monedei unice şi a pieţei interne şi, pe de altă parte, a
diferitelor politici economice naţionale. Nici Pactul de Stabilitate, nici Euro nu au
cauzat criza, dar s-au dovedit insuficiente pentru depăşirea ei, pentru realizarea
convergenţei economice. Trebuie să se pună la punct organisme financiare şi/sau
mecanisme care să permită evitarea unor crize asemănătoare. UE trebuie să
crească în competitivitate fără a renunţa la modelul său economico-social, fără a
abandona economia socială de piaţă, solidaritatea şi coeziunea, întărind lupta
împotriva schimbărilor climatice. Trebuie investit şi mai mult în capitalul uman
(cercetare, educaţie, inovaţie, formare profesională continuă). Trebuie întărită
piaţa internă în faţa unor tendinţe de naţionalism economic şi puse în aplicare noi
politici comune în materie energetică, incluzând energiile alternative şi chiar pe
cele nucleare. Trebuie reformată şi modernizată piaţă muncii: flexibilizarea sa,
fără a afecta securitatea locurilor de muncă, creşterea productivităţii, adaptabili-
tea etc. Nu în ultimul rând, trebuie asigurată creşterea demografică fără de care
orice efort va deveni nesustenabil. Astfel, trebuie să crească integrarea femeilor în
viaţa activă, trebuie prelungită viaţa activă, impulsionată reconcilierea dintre
carieră, familie şi viaţa privată, dar, foarte importantă este modificarea percepţiei
asupra imigraţiei ce trebuie înţeleasă ca o necesitate. Nu întâmplător Strategia se
numeşte „2030” deoarece se consideră Tratatul de la Lisabona ca asigurând baza
juridică necesară până la orizontul anilor 2030.
19
Idem.
32
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
20
Subiectul abordat poate fi găsit în lucrările lui Bărbulescu, I.Gh. citate la cap.II.1.
21
Această nouă înţelegere a coeziunii este împrumutată din practica statelor federale unde reflectă
solidaritatea federală dintre statele componente ale federaţiei.
33
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
22
În primul Titlu al TFUE se regularizează clauzele transversale ce garantează modelul, aplicându-
se tuturor politicilor şi acţiunilor promovate de către instituţiile comune.
23
Consecinţă a referendumului francez prin care a fost respinsă Constituţia, dar, mai ales, a
renegocierii, de către Franţa, a modelului economic şi social european, au fost consolidate
elementele sale sociale şi redusă influenţa liberei concurenţe înţeleasă ca valoare absolută a pieţei,
lăsându-se cu claritate să se înţeleagă că economia de piaţă europeană este doar un instrument al
modelului şi nu un scop în sine. Scopul final este cetăţeanul, calitatea vieţii acestuia, bunăstarea sa.
De aici, rezultă că modelul european se bazează pe principiile economiei de piaţă, dar şi pe un
anumit grad de intervenţie.
24
În Tratatul de la Lisabona găsim, totuşi, progrese ale politicilor sociale. Acestea îşi modifică, de
exemplu, statutul din cel de „acţiune de sprijin comunitar sau de coordonare” în cel de „competenţe
complementare”. În plus, în majoritatea cazurilor, acestor politici li se aplică procedura legislativă
ordinară.
25
Începând cu anul 2004 au aderat la Uniunea Europeană unele state precum Malta, Cipru, Polonia,
Cehia, Slovenia, Slovacia, Ungaria - subiecte ale unor reforme dure în anii de după căderea Zidului
Berlinului - ce aveau o economie mai liberală şi mai puţin intervenţionistă decât cea a vechilor state
membre.
34
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
26
Trebuie să amintim că în anumite sectoare concrete ale politicilor comune - afaceri interne şi
vamă, de exemplu - s-au creat şi aplicat programe concrete de formare profesională, dar şi altele
privind schimburile de funcţionari şi experţi din respectivele sectoare.
35
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
36
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
PARLAMENTUL EUROPEAN 27
În ceea ce priveşte Parlamentul European, se stabileşte numărul maxim de
deputaţi europeni la 751, fotoliile ce revin fiecărui stat fiind alocate pe baza unui
criteriu proporţional descrescător28. Poziţia instituţională a Parlamentului
European este foarte mult întărită, în principal, prin prevederea co-deciziei ca
procedură legislativă generalizată, fapt ce îi conferă acestuia statutul de co-
legiuitor şi având deplină autoritate bugetară, la paritate cu Consiliul. Parlamentul
European este marele câştigător al revizuirii Tratatului de la Lisabona, aşa cum a
fost şi cu ocazia altor reforme instituţionale. Într-un fel, este un proces legitim
acesta de a atribui puteri crescânde PE, având în vedere că reprezintă instituţional
cetăţenii Uniunii.
27
Art. 14 TUE, art. 223-234 TFUE.
28
Se stabileşte că, înlăuntrul unor limite minime şi maxime, instituţiile Uniunii (Consiliul European,
la propunerea Consiliului) vor fi cele ce vor fixa numărul de locuri corespunzător fiecărui stat
membru.
37
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
Vorbind despre PE, se poate afirma că are loc o explicitare a rolului său
fundamental în funcţionarea instituţională a UE, poziţie datorată înţelegerii sale ca
reprezentant al legitimităţii cetăţeneşti. Astfel, art. 14.1 al TUE stabileşte că:
„PE exercită împreună cu Consiliul funcţia legislativă şi cea bugetară. Acesta
exercită funcţii de control politic şi consultative, în conformitate cu condiţiile
prevăzute în tratate. Parlamentul European alege Preşedintele Comisiei”29.
Această nouă paritate legislativă PE – Consiliu reflectă în practica decizională
dubla legitimitate a Uniunii, de state şi de cetăţeni, în pofida dispariţiei sale din
textul tratatului.
Cel mai relevant aspect în revizuirea PE îl reprezintă, deci, creşterea
substanţială a atribuţiilor sale, atât legislative, cât şi bugetare, dar şi ca parte a
puterii constituente a Uniunii Europene. Tratatul de la Lisabona continuă, şi
încununează chiar, tendinţa anterioarelor reforme de încorporare a legitimităţii
cetăţeneşti – reprezentată de către PE – în puterile legislative şi bugetare
comunitare, înţelegând această încorporare ca parte a tendinţei continue de
democratizare a sistemului decizional european.
CONSILIUL EUROPEAN30
O noutate a Constituţiei şi, deopotrivă, a Tratatului de la Lisabona este
considerarea, pentru prima dată de la apariţia sa, a Consiliului European ca
instituţie a Uniunii şi, în consecinţă, trecerea sa sub imperiul regulilor
sistemului31. Regularizarea Consiliului European apare în art. 15 al TUE, alături
de celelalte instituţii comunitare, unde se şi dispune că:
„funcţia sa este să dea Uniunii impulsurile necesare dezvoltării şi să
definească orientările şi priorităţile politice generale”.
29
Acest articol trebuie interpretat împreună cu art. 10.2. al TUE unde, stabilindu-se că funcţionarea
Uniunii se bazează pe democraţia reprezentativă, se stabileşte dubla reprezentare, cea directă a
cetăţenilor prin intermediul PE şi cea a statelor, deci, indirect tot a cetăţenilor, prin intermediul
Consiliului/Consiliului European.
30
Art. 15 TUE, art. 235-236 TFUE.
31
În acest sens, rezultă important faptul că deciziile sale vor fi supuse controlului judiciar, aşa cum
se arată în art. 263 şi 265 ale TFUE.
38
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
CONSILIUL32
Principalele noutăţi în funcţionarea Consiliului urmăresc îmbunătăţirea
eficacităţii în condiţiile creşterii permanente a numărului membrilor săi. Este
vorba, în principal, despre substituirea actualului sistem al preşedinţiilor
semestriale turnante ale Consiliului European şi ale Consiliului Relaţii Externe, pe
de o parte, şi, pe de altă, de adoptarea unei noi scheme de vot în cazul majorităţii
calificate. Acelaşi obiectiv al creşterii eficacităţii deciziei în Uniunea Europeană a
stat la baza deciziei de a extinde numărul deciziilor Consiliului ce vor trece de la
32
Art. 16 TUE, art. 237-243 TFUE.
39
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
33
Rămân încă o serie de decizii supuse unanimităţii, precum PESC, deciziile politice referitoare la
sistem în ansamblul său, pasarelele, procedura de revizuire a tratatelor de către CIG, cazul « red-
lines » trasate de către unele state membre (fiscalitatea, securitatea socială a lucrătorilor imigranţi,
sau cultura, între altele).
34
A se vedea art. 16.9 al TUE. Mai trebuie precizat faptul că din fiecare „echipă” fac parte trei state
membre care îşi coordonează acţiunile şi urmăresc realizarea unui program comun. Această
iniţiativă se aplică din ianuarie 2006 şi a început cu grupul Germania, Portugalia şi Slovenia.
35
Trebuie reamintit că Eurogrup este formaţia restrânsă a Consiliului Economie şi Finanţe la care nu
participă toţi miniştrii de finanţe şi economie, ci doar reprezentanţii statelor membre ce fac parte şi
din zona Euro, adică au adoptat moneda Euro. Eurogup este organul politic competent pentru a
examina şi decide asupra politicii economice a zonei Euro şi a repercusiunilor pe care le au deciziile
de politică monetară aflate în mâinile BCE.
36
În cazul în care propunerea nu este a Uniunii sau a Înaltului Reprezentant pentru Afaceri Externe
şi Politică de Securitate, procentele cresc, decizia fiind aprobată de 72% din membrii Consiliului
care trebuie să reunească 65% din populaţia Uniunii. Condiţiile pentru formarea unei minorităţi de
40
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
COMISIA39
Comisia este marele perdant al reformei instituţionale, fiind singura instituţie
care nu a ieşit întărită din această reformă. Două sunt totuşi capitolele la care a
fost realizată o anume reformă, ambele urmărind consolidarea dimensiunii
democratice şi creşterea eficacităţii funcţionării sale:
- alegerea sa de către PE;
- compoziţia.
blocaj devin mai dure, de asemenea, fiind necesari cel puţin 4 membri ai Consiliului. Se împiedică
astfel ca deciziile Consiliului să poată fi blocate de 3 din statele mari ale UE considerându-se
imposibil ca patru dintre acestea să se unească într-o asemenea întreprindere. Se include, de
asemenea, un mecanism similar celui de la Ioannina, adică dacă un număr semnificativ de state au
rezerve faţă de adoptarea unei decizii, se amână luarea acesteia şi se continuă discuţiile până la
găsirea unei soluţii acceptate de către toţi.
37
Art. 3 al Protocolului referitor la dispoziţiile tranzitorii, Protocolul nr. 36 anexă a Tratatului de la
Lisabona.
38
Şi tripla majoritate valabilă la ora actuală are virtuţile sale, între care poate fi menţionată aceea că
reflectă opţiunea majoritară a statelor, a populaţiei şi a puterii de vot şi, deci, alianţele posibile.
39
Art. 17 TUE, art. 244-250.
40
Va fi desemnat dintre reprezentanţii grupului politic european care a obţinut cele mai multe locuri
cu ocazia alegerilor pentru Parlamentul European.
41
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
42
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
41
Art. 18, art. 27 TUE.
43
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
42
Art. 5 TUE, art. 2-6 TFUE.
44
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
43
Acestea sunt: uniunea vamală; politica de concurenţă, când este vorba despre piaţa unică; politica
monetară; conservarea resurselor maritime, ca parte a politicii de pescuit comune; politica
comercială comună; încheierea de acorduri internaţionale în sectoarele respective (art. 3, TFUE).
44
Domeniile de competenţă mixte sunt: piaţa internă; politica socială; coeziunea economică, socială
şi teritorială; agricultura şi pescuitul; mediu; protecţia consumatorilor; transporturile; reţelele trans-
europene; energia; spaţiul de libertate, securitate şi justiţie; partea de securitate a politicii vizând
sănătatea publică. Sunt de asemenea competenţe mixte, cercetarea şi dezvoltarea, cooperarea pentru
dezvoltare şi ajutorul umanitar. În aceste cazuri, acţiunea Comunităţii nu poate împiedica acţiunea
statelor (art. 4 TFUE).
45
Uniunea poate dezvolta acţiuni de sprijin, coordonare şi complementare în raport cu protecţia şi
îmbunătăţirea sănătăţii oamenilor, industria, cultura şi turismul, educaţia, tineret, sport şi formare
profesională, protecţie civilă şi cooperare administrativă (art. 6 TFUE).
45
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
46
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
46
Să nu uităm că introducerea elaborării catalogului de competenţe pe agenda procesului
constituţional s-a datorat presiunii landurilor germane care vedeau în acest exerciţiu o modalitate de
a-şi proteja competenţele în faţa tendinţei de a fi „absorbite de către nivelul european”.
47
Protocolul de aplicare a principiilor subsidiarităţii şi proporţionalităţii, Protocolul 2 anexa la
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
48
Se include „principiul conexiunii”, conform căruia, în aplicarea legislaţiei comunitare, regiunile
sau colectivităţile locale să nu fie obligate a suporta greutăţi financiare sau administrative excesive.
47
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
49
Art. 3 TUE.
50
Acelaşi articol 3 (3) care spune că „UE acţionează pentru dezvoltarea durabilă a Europei,
întemeiată pe o creştere economică echilibrată şi pe stabilitatea preţurilor, pe o economie socială de
piaţă cu un grad ridicat de competitivitate, care tinde spre ocuparea deplină a locurilor de muncă şi
spre progres social, precum şi pe un nivel înalt de protecţie şi de îmbunătăţire a calităţii mediului.
Aceasta promovează progresul ştiinţific şi tehnic”.
48
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
51
Bărbulescu, I. Gh., Uniunea Europeana. De la naţional, la federal, Tritonic, 2006, p. 167.
52
Uniunea Europeana, Concluziile Consiliului European, Bruxelles, 28-29 octombrie 2010, EUCO
25/11.
53
A se vedea Documentul Comisiei Europene Governace, tools and policy cycle of Europe 2020,
http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/Annex%20SWD%20implementation%20last%20version%2015-07-
2010.pdf.
49
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
54
Uniunea Europeană, Concluziile Consiliului European, Bruxelles, 17 iulie 2010, EUCO 17/06.
50
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
51
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
52
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
53
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
55
A se vedea scandalul romilor români şi bulgari, declanşat în 2010.
54
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
55
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
56
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
56
Art. 18-25 TFUE.
57
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
Aceste noi dimensiuni pot fi abordate din mai multe perspective. Concepţiile
teoretice asupra cetăţeniei pot fi împărţite în mai multe categorii: concepţii ale
cetăţeniei bazate pe drepturi, incluzând sau nu drepturile sociale (tradiţia liberală
şi cea social-democrată) şi cele bazate pe ideea de apartenenţă la o anumită
comunitate şi o identitate specifică57. Uniunea Europeană, prin Tratatul de la
Lisabona, se revendică de la ambele tradiţii, concepţia sa asupra cetăţeniei
construindu-se atât prin referire la drepturi, cât şi prin demersuri de consolidare a
unei identităţi şi comunităţi europene.
57
Lister, Ruth, Citizenship Towards a feminist synthesis, în Feminist Review, No. 57, Autumn 1997,
p. 28-48; p. 14-15.
58
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
59
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
60
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
61
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
58
Comisia Europeană, 2005, Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the
Council establishing for the period 2007-2013 the programme “Citizens for Europe” to promote
active European citizenship, COM(2005) 116 final.
59
Comisia Europeană, Joint Report on Social Protection and Social Inclusion, 2004.
62
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
60
Van der Zweerde, Evert, „Plurality in Unity”: European Identity and European Citizenship, 2009
în Limes, Vol. 2 Issue 1, p. 5-25, p. 12.
61
Deşi în mare măsură însoţit de lipsa de cunoaştere a modului de funcţionare a Uniunii, acest grad
de încredere poate funcţiona drept catalizator al exercitării drepturilor cetăţeneşti. Pentru mai multe
detalii privind gradul de încredere cu privire la UE în România vezi
Încrederea în UE la români - după modelul încrederii în biserică
http://www.euractiv.ro/uniuneaeuropeana/articles|displayArticle/articleID_14138/Increderea-in-UE-
la-romani-dupa-modelul-increderii-in-biserica.html.
62
Vezi Studiu IPP-CJI: 1 din 5 romani s-a folosit de legea liberului acces la informaţii de interes
public, http://www.euractiv.ro/uniunea-europeana/articles|displayArticle/articleID_18458/Studiu-
IPP-CJI-1-din-5-romani-s-a-folosit-de-legea-liberului-acces-la-informatii-de-interes-public.html.
63
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
Considerăm că acestea sunt coordonatele între care s-a derulat întregul proces
de apropiere progresivă şi aderare la UE, început, aşa cum ştim, prin semnarea
Acordului European de Asociere în anul 1993, ratificat în 1995, şi finalizat în anul
2004, prin încheierea negocierii celor 31 de capitole şi, respectiv, prin semnarea la
25 aprilie 2005 a Tratatului de Aderare a României la Uniunea Europeană,
semnare care a făcut posibilă aderarea la 1 ianuarie 2007. Tratatul specifică, între
altele, obligativitatea adaptării legislaţiei, instituţiilor şi politicilor interne ale
României la prevederile tratatelor constitutive şi modificatoare ale Uniunii
Europene, acestea devenind astfel parte integrantă a legislaţiei interne. În această
situaţie se găseşte şi Tratatul de la Lisabona63, intrat în vigoare la 1 decembrie
2009. Concomitent cu aderarea sa la UE, România este obligată să se conformeze
regulamentelor, directivelor, deciziilor, recomandărilor sau avizelor adoptate sau
formulate de către Parlamentul European, Consiliu, Comisie precum şi de către
alte instituţii ale U.E. Acesta este sensul prevederilor art. 52 şi art. 53 din Actul
privind condiţiile şi aranjamentele referitoare la admiterea Republicii Bulgaria şi
României la Uniunea Europeană:
„De la data aderării, Bulgaria şi România sunt considerate destinatarele
directivelor şi deciziilor în înţelesul articolului 249 din Tratatul CE şi al
articolului 161 din Tratatul CEEA, cu condiţia ca aceste directive şi decizii să fi
fost adresate tuturor statelor membre actuale. Cu excepţia directivelor şi
63
Prin Protocolul privind condiţiile şi aranjamentele referitoare la admiterea Republicii Bulgaria şi
României la Uniunea Europeană, Tratatul de Aderare a României a avut în vedere şi un set de
clauze de adaptare/modificare a Tratatului dacă se ratifica Tratatul de instituire a unei Constituţii
pentru Europa, neintrat în vigoare. Având în vedere că Tratatul de la Lisabona derivă din Tratatul
Constituţional, protocoalele referitoare la acesta au rămas valabile.
64
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
64
Clauza de salvgardare nu are numai acest aspect, să-i spunem punitiv, ci şi unul pozitiv atunci
când permite unui stat membru să deroge temporar de la normele europene în anumite condiţii. A se
vedea Bărbulescu, I. Gh., Dicţionarul explicativ trilingv al Uniunii Europene, Polirom, 2009.
65
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
65
De exemplu, concluziile MCV din iulie 2010 stipulează faptul că „evaluarea Comisiei indică
deficienţe importante în eforturile României de a realiza progrese”. A se vedea Raportul Comisiei
către Parlamentul European şi Consiliu privind progresele realizate de România în cadrul
Mecanismului de Cooperare şi Verificare, Bruxelles 20.07.2010, COM(2010) 401 final.
66
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
66
Zicem „parţială” deoarece, conform regulii de fier a negocierilor de aderare la UE, nici un capitol
nu este considerat definitiv încheiat până la încheierea definitivă a tuturor capitolelor.
67
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
68
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
Numim unele dintre deficienţele pe care le-am constat din această perspectivă
şi enumerăm acţiuni ce considerăm că ar fi fost utile, dar care nu s-au realizat sau
a căror realizare a fost deficitară şi, deci, ineficientă:
• realizarea unei meta-evaluări a stării de fapt care să-şi găsească
referenţialul în perioada scursă de la momentul aderării şi până în prezent;
• evaluarea periodică a gradului de transpunere a acquis-ului comunitar în
legislaţia internă, pe diverse domenii şi priorităţi transversale;
• monitorizări şi evaluări ciclice privind îmbunătăţirea capacităţii
administrative conform unor indicatori expliciţi de performanţă administrativă;
• formarea de specialişti în politici publice şi programe care să evalueze
instituţiile şi aranjamentele instituţionale ce decurg din adaptarea/transpunerea
acquis-ului comunitar în legislaţia internă;
• lipsa unui plan de reformă administrativă fundamentat în mod adecvat în
baza unor evaluări ex-ante şi analize de impact, prin care să se stabilească
priorităţile pe termen scurt, mediu şi lung coroborate cu strategiile şi priorităţile
Uniunii Europene.
În anumite domenii, unele dintre activităţile enunţate au fost întreprinse în
formă de pilotare fără a fi asigurată continuitatea respectivelor demersuri.
Consecinţa neinstituţionalizării acestor acţiuni şi proceduri contribuie, şi ea, la:
• atât de des clamata întârziere şi diminuare a calităţii transpunerii
legislaţiei Uniunii în legislaţia internă;
• participarea redusă a României la procesul de înfăptuire a politicilor
Uniunii;
• îndepărtarea cetăţenelor şi cetăţenilor români de procesul de înfăptuire a
politicilor interne;
• diminuarea dialogului social etc.
Pe de altă parte, se constată că şi după aderarea la Uniunea Europeană sistemul
administrativ românesc a păstrat unele dintre caracteristicile sale negative
enunţate în marea majoritate a rapoartelor de monitorizare realizate de către
69
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
67
Strategia pentru o reglementare mai bună la nivelul administraţiei publice centrale 2008-2013,
Guvernul României, 2008, p. 8, document accesibil la:
http://www.sgg.ro/docs/File/UPP/doc/proiecte_finale/Strategia_BR_varianta_finala_aprobata_de_G
uvern.pdf.
70
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
justificarea politică în urgenţa adoptării lor şi, astfel, se justifica apelul frecvent la
acest mod de reglementare. Este evident însă că nu toate reglementările specifice
adaptării cadrului normativ intern la prevederile acquis-ului comunitar au fost
„chiar atât de urgente” încât să justifice eludarea de către puterea executivă a
procedurilor specifice reglementărilor obişnuite, adică parlamentare.
În conformitate cu art. 115 alin. (4) din Constituţie, Guvernul poate să adopte
ordonanţe de urgenţă numai în situaţii extraordinare a căror reglementare nu poate
fi amânată, având obligaţia de a motiva urgenţa în cuprinsul acestora. În anumite
situaţii, cum ar fi vacanţele parlamentare, Guvernul poate fi abilitat de către
legislativ, prin intermediul unei legi, de a emite ordonanţe în domenii care nu fac
obiectul legilor organice. Însă, în acest caz sunt specificate perioada de referinţă şi
domeniile de referinţă, conform agendei de politici existente la acel moment.
Dacă coroborăm cele spuse până aici, constatăm că în ultimii 15 ani, adică
înainte şi după aderare, puterea executivă a apelat în mod excesiv la aceste
abilităţi în procesul de reglementare, fapt ce încalcă rolul Parlamentului de unică
autoritate legiuitoare, precum şi principiul separaţiei puterilor în stat. Acest fapt
duce la întărirea puterii Guvernului în detrimentul Parlamentului şi totodată
reduce transparenţa procesului legislativ.
Rapoartele de monitorizare realizate de Comisia Europeană în perioada anilor
2002-2006 arătau că procesul de reglementare a fost viciat de apelul abuziv la această
procedură. Persistenţa unei asemenea stări de fapt va contribui, şi pe mai departe, la
menţinerea unei capacităţi reduse a puterii legislative de a răspunde prompt la
propunerile legislative remise de Comisia Europeană. Există un real pericol ca spiritul
Tratatului de la Lisabona exprimat prin sintagme precum „mai multă democraţie”,
„mai multă participare cetăţenească”, „o participare sporită a parlamentelor naţionale
la <viaţa cetăţii>”, vor fi neglijate, dacă nu, chiar încălcate.
Pentru a prezenta empiric această situaţie am analizat conţinuturile
Repertoriului Legislativ al Camerei Deputaţilor pentru secţiunile: legi adoptate de
Parlament, ordonanţe şi ordonanţe de urgenţă. Prin urmare, în primul grafic
prezentăm evoluţia numărului de ordonanţe şi ordonanţe de urgenţă emise de
Guvernul României în perioada 2005-2010, iar în următorul este prezentată
ponderea cumulată a ordonanţelor şi ordonanţelor de urgenţă în numărul total de
legi adoptate de Parlament în perioada anilor 1990 - 2010.
Astfel:
• prima observaţie este aceea că apelul excesiv la acest mod de
reglementare a început în anul 1997, iar apogeul a fost atins în anul 2000, atunci
când numărul ordonanţelor de urgenţă a fost mai mare decât numărul legilor
adoptate de către Parlament, iar ponderea cumulată a ordonanţelor şi ordonanţelor
de urgenţă a constituit 65% din numărul total al legilor adoptate de Parlament,
ordonanţe şi ordonanţe de urgenţă emise de Guvern;
71
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
72
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
73
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
Deşi cele enunţate mai sus nu se încadrează riguros în tiparul celor trei clauze
de salvgardare instituite pentru România şi Bulgaria prin Tratatul de Aderare,
această stare de fapt contribuie la aprofundarea decalajelor existente la momentul
aderării între sistemul administrativ intern şi sistemele administrative ale
celorlalte state membre ale Uniunii Europene, pe de o parte, şi, pe de alta, între
acesta şi instituţiile Uniunii. Or, acest fapt conduce la:
• imposibilitatea asigurării unei reprezentări eficace a României în
instituţiile Uniunii;
• neparticiparea eficientă şi eficace a României la înfăptuirea politicilor
Uniunii;
• deficienţe majore în absorbţia fondurilor alocate prin intermediul
instrumentelor structurale ale Uniunii Europene;
• capacitatea redusă a României de a propune subiecte pe agenda Uniunii etc.
După aderarea României la Uniunea Europeană, sarcina transpunerii legislaţiei
Uniunii în legislaţia internă a revenit Departamentului pentru Afaceri Europene
care avizează actele normative ce transpun legislaţia Uniunii. Pe parcursul anilor
2007-2009, respectivul cadru normativ a fost perfecţionat în conformitate cu
prevederile Strategiei pentru o reglementare mai bună la nivelul administraţiei
publice centrale 2008-2013. Astfel, în prezent, graţie prevederilor HG 115/2008,
precum şi HG 561/2009, au fost eliminate barierele existente în această activitate
de o importanţă crucială pentru integrarea României în UE. Cu toate acestea, se
constată în continuare unele aspecte problematice ce ţin, mai degrabă, de cultura
elaborării actelor normative interne precum:68
• calitatea slabă a actelor normative elaborate în vederea transpunerii
legislaţiei Uniunii în legislaţia internă;
• nerespectarea procedurilor abordării integrate privind prevenirea
declanşării acţiunilor în constatarea neîndeplinirii obligaţiilor României în calitate
de stat membru al Uniunii Europene, precum şi reprezentarea României înaintea
instanţelor şi a instituţiilor şi structurilor Uniunii în legătură cu problemele
privind aplicarea legislaţiei Uniunii;
• lipsa cadrului procedural privind aplicarea directă a unor regulamente;
• lipsa personalului specializat în domeniul fundamentării propunerilor
legislative şi politicilor, experţi care să cunoască în profunzime procesul
decizional şi de înfăptuire a politicilor Uniunii;
• neinstituţionalizarea pe deplin la nivelul tuturor autorităţilor publice
centrale şi locale a mecanismelor oferite de serviciul SOLVIT în vederea
soluţionării problemelor survenite prin aplicarea necorespunzătoare a legislaţiei
68 Aşa cum sunt enunţate unele dintre acestea în Strategia pentru o reglementare mai bună la
nivelul administraţiei publice centrale 2008-2013.
74
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
69
A se vedea Cadrul Strategic National de Referinţă, p. 7.
75
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
Din păcate, constatăm, peste timp, că acest raport continuă să fie valabil şi că
îngrijorările noastre şi ale Uniunii în domeniu persistă, chiar dacă în ultimii ani
cadrul instituţional şi cel normativ au fost îmbunătăţite considerabil.
Trebuie arătat faptul că procesul de creare a unor instituţii şi instrumente
specifice unui management eficient al fondurilor structurale a început în anul
2004, sistemul instituţional de management al fondurilor structurale fiind însă
definitivat abia în anul 200871. Această lentoare în construcţia mecanismelor
instituţionale de accesare a fondurilor a condus la întârzieri în stabilirea
indicatorilor asumaţi prin documentele programatice şi s-a concretizat, în final, în
rate scăzute de absorbţie a fondurilor structurale. Mai mult decât atât, se constată
că nici până în prezent România nu are un model propriu de absorbţie a
fondurilor. Există o adevărată „efervescenţă creatoare”, fiecare guvern şi
guvernare încercând să „pună bazele adevăratei strategii” ceea ce face ca procesul
să se reia mereu de la zero. De exemplu, în ianuarie 2009 a fost creat un nou Grup
de lucru interministerial la nivel înalt sub directa coordonare a Primului-ministru
şi a Viceprim-ministrului. Scopul Grupului de lucru era acela de a acorda sprijin
politic acestui proces (nota bene) şi de a asigura o coordonare strategică a
procesului de absorbţie a fondurilor structurale.72 Din păcate, timpul a trecut şi a
fost consumat mai degrabă pe dezbateri referitoare la „reformarea sistemului de
70
A se vedea Raportul Comprehensiv de monitorizare pe anul 2005 privind România, p. 68.
71
A se vedea HG nr. 457/2008 privind cadrul instituţional de coordonare şi de gestionare a
instrumentelor structurale.
72
A se vedea Raportul Anual de Implementare a Programului Naţional de Reforme pentru perioada
1 octombrie 2008 – 1 octombrie 2009, Guvernul României, Bucureşti, octombrie 2009, p. 15.
76
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
73
A se vedea documentul Absorbţia fondurilor structurale şi de coeziune, prioritate zero a
Guvernului României, prezentat de Guvernul României pe pagina sa electronică la:
http://www.gov.ro/absorbtia-fondurilor-structurale-si-de-coeziune-proritate-zero-a-guvernului-
romaniei__l1a109210.html.
74
A se vedea documentul Situaţia la 30 septembrie 2010 a depunerii şi aprobării de proiecte,
semnării de contracte de finanţare şi efectuării de plăţi către beneficiari, elaborat de Autoritatea
pentru Coordonarea Instrumentelor Structurale, document disponibil în versiune electronică la:
http://www.fonduri-ue.ro/upload/Anexa%201%2030%20septembrie%202010.pdf.
77
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
AT BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE EL ES FI FR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK UK EU27
75
A se vedea Cadrul Strategic Naţional de Referinţă, p. 93.
76
După cum se menţionează în Raportul strategic naţional pentru anul 2009 privind implementarea
Fondurilor Structurale şi de Coeziune, Guvernul României, Bucureşti, ianuarie 2010, document
accesibil în versiune electronică la: http://www.fonduri-ue.ro/upload/127323712758.pdf.
77
În vederea stabilirii unei imagini comparative recomandăm consultarea studiului: EU funds in
Central and Eastern Europe. Progress report 2007-2009 elaborat de KPMG Budapesta,
http://kpmgee.lcc.ch/dbfetch/52616e646f6d49569ec6ca687de886a9319808ff3ecaba5b891f423df6bd
c6a7/eu_funds_in_the_cee_2010_kpmg.pdf.
78
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
78
A se vedea Raportul Anual de Implementare a Programului Naţional de Reforme pentru anul
2007, Guvernul României, Bucureşti, octombrie 2007, p. 23.
79
A se vedea Gheorghe Oprescu, Daniela Luminiţa Constantin, Florinel Ilie, Dragoş Pîslaru, Studiul
de Impact: Analiza capacităţii de absorbţie a fondurilor comunitare în România, Institutul
European din România, Bucureşti, 2005, p. 61.
79
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
80
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
80
De exemplu, Strategia post-aderare, Planul Naţional de Dezvoltare, Cadrul Naţional Strategic de
Referinţă, Programul Naţional de Reforme, evaluările anuale ale PNR etc.
81
Precum Instituţia Avocatului Poporului care, se afirmă în Strategie, „se pronunţă asupra
constituţionalităţii legislaţiei”.
82
Sunt amintite, astfel, zeci de instituţii din domeniile transporturilor, dezvoltării regionale, pieţei
muncii şi al ocupării forţei de muncă, agriculturii, economiei şi industriei, justiţiei, energiei,
telecomunicaţiilor şi tehnologiei informaţiei, educaţiei şi instruirii, administraţiei publice centrale,
drepturilor omului şi protecţiei minorităţilor.
81
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
82
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
83
La creşterea calităţii serviciilor publice probabil ar trebui spus că sunt aduse în discuţii servicii de
e-administraţie pentru comunităţi locale mai puţin dezvoltate, în contextul în care nu există de multe
ori canalizare…
83
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
Raportul Comisiei din luna iulie 201084 în care aceasta atrăgea atenţia asupra
rezultatelor nesatisfăcătoare ale Mecanismului de Cooperare şi Verificare care ar
fi trebuit să contribuie „la instituirea unui sistem judiciar şi administrativ
imparţial, independent şi eficace, dotat cu mijloace suficiente, între altele, de
combatere a corupţiei”. „Nesatisfăcător” nu înseamnă că nu s-a făcut nimic, dar
înseamnă că progresele (este menţionată adoptarea celor două coduri de procedură
civilă şi penală din iunie 2010, dar şi alte iniţiative de reformare a justiţiei) sunt
fie insuficiente, fie – ca şi în alte cazuri – reprezintă doar măsuri agreate formal a
căror implementare întârzie sau nu respectă spiritul cerinţelor europene care au
determinat adoptarea lor (trimiteri în judecată în cazurile de corupţie la nivel înalt
nesoluţionate, procese foarte lungi etc.). Sunt semnalaţi explicit chiar „paşi
înapoi” precum cazul legii Agenţiei Naţionale de Integritate (forma votată în 30
iunie 2010). Comisia a făcut recomandări punctuale pentru continuarea şi
accelerarea reformei sistemului judiciar şi a luptei împotriva corupţiei,
recomandări pe care decidenţii le cunosc şi de care ar trebui să ţină cont. Atragem
atenţia asupra următorului aspect: sublinierea de către Comisie a unei „reticenţe a
factorilor de decizie din sistemul judiciar de a coopera şi de a-şi asuma
responsabilitatea în beneficiul reformei. Cu toate că există soluţii pragmatice în
numeroase cazuri, acestea nu sunt adesea puse în practică, în timp ce magistraţii,
asociaţiile profesionale şi societatea civilă încearcă să elimine lacunele prin
iniţiative individuale”. Acesta este un apel la factorii politici de a se „deschide”
spre celelalte categorii de actori interesaţi de reforma cadrului juridic să instituire
un dialog cu aceştia care să ducă la propuneri viabile şi implementabile.
În general, în documentele Comisiei, evaluarea generală conduce la o notă
mediocră, cel puţin în ceea ce priveşte eficienţa administrativă (indiferent de
nivel) sau cea judiciară, fiind subliniate modalităţile necorespunzătoare de
identificare şi analizare a problemelor şi de implementare a politicilor, pe fondul
unui vid de monitorizare centralizată a procesului de înfăptuire a politicilor şi a
încercărilor de influenţare a factorilor decidenţi.
Documentele europene punctează şi strategii de evitare a situaţiilor delicate:
„Elementul cheie pentru îmbunătăţirea performanţelor rezidă în reformarea
administraţiei publice, identificarea clară a sarcinilor şi responsabilităţilor,
asigurarea independenţei înalţilor funcţionari şi recompensarea în funcţie de
merite, delegarea luării deciziilor în scopul evitării blocajelor la vârf. Au fost
elaborate planuri care acum trebuie implementate” („România - privire generală
84
Raport al Comisiei Europene către Parlamentul European şi Consiliu privind progresele
realizate de România în cadrul Mecanismului de Cooperare şi Verificare, Bruxelles, 20.7.2010
COM(2010) 401 final.
84
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
85
Implementation of the Lisbon Strategy Structural Reforms in the context of the European
Economic Recovery Plan - Annual country assessments: Recommendation for a Council
Recommendation on the 2009 up-date of the broad guidelines for the economic policies of the
Member States and the Community and on the implementation of Member States' employment
policies COM(2009), 34 final, p. 55-56, document accesibil la:
http://ec.europa.eu/archives/growthandjobs_2009/pdf/european-dimension-200812-annual-progress-
report/annual_en.pdf.
86
Implementation of the Lisbon Strategy Structural Reforms in the context of the European
Economic Recovery Plan: Annual country assessments – a detailed overview of progress made with
the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy reforms in Member States in 2008, pp. 90-94, document
accesibil la http://ec.europa.eu/archives/growthandjobs/pdf/european-dimension-200812-annual-
progress-report/annualass_detail.pdf.
85
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
86
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
87
Publicată în Monitorul Oficial, Partea I nr. 301 din 8 mai 2002.
87
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
88
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
88
O pagină Web a agenţiei, existenţa unui clip publicitar şi editarea unei reviste care s-a bucurat de
câteva numere şi un grad de difuzare neclar.
89
Cf. Bărbulescu, Iordan Gheorghe, Dicţionarul explicativ trilingv al Uniunii Europene, Polirom,
2009, p. 435 sau Lambru, Mihaela, Metoda Deschisă de Coordonare (MDC) în domeniul protecţiei
şi incluziunii sociale. Dimensiunea participativă a MDC, în Calitatea Vieţii, XXI, nr. 1–2, 2010, p. 2.
89
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
sociale, procesul de raportare este unul dublu: fiecare stat membru înaintează
propriul raport social, iar la nivel agregat se înaintează un raport comun cu privire
la protecţia socială şi incluziunea socială.
În septembrie 2008, România a înaintat Raportul Naţional Strategic privind
protecţia socială şi incluziunea socială 2008-2010. Acesta a fost un document
amplu care cuprindea evaluarea stării de fapt şi câte un capitol vizând Planul
Naţional de Acţiune în domeniul Incluziunii Sociale, Strategia naţională privind
pensiile şi Strategia naţională pentru sănătate şi îngrijiri pe termen lung. În 2007
fuseseră înregistrate tendinţe pozitive cu privire la veniturile totale înregistrate
într-o gospodărie şi la ratele de activitate şi de ocupare pentru populaţia activă90.
O tendinţă descendentă înregistrau variabile precum rata şomajului de foarte
lungă durată.
În aceeaşi perioadă rata sărăciei se stabilizase, 18,5% dintre cetăţenii României
fiind săraci, majoritatea (70%) trăind în mediul rural. Patru tipuri de gospodării
înregistrau o rată a sărăciei crescută: persoanele singure şi anume 27,9% (22% în
rândul bărbaţilor şi 30,8% în rândul femeilor); familiile monoparentale (31%) -
majoritatea acestor familii fiind feminizate; familiile cu trei şi mai mulţi copiii
(40%); persoanele singure în vârstă de peste 65 de ani (33,4%) - unde sărăcia
feminizată este mai severă.
Preluând obiectivul central din Programul Naţional de Reforme, raportul se
referea la asigurarea funcţionării unei pieţe a muncii favorabile incluziunii active
a grupurilor vulnerabile (similar cu abordarea UE de la acea dată) prin favorizarea
creării de noi locuri de muncă, reducerii fenomenului muncii nedeclarate şi a
managementului adecvat al schimbării la nivelul întreprinderilor şi lucrătorilor;
promovarea incluziunii sociale şi îmbunătăţirea accesului pentru grupurile
vulnerabile; promovarea competitivităţii pe piaţa muncii, mai ales prin mai buna
corelare dintre sistemul educaţional şi de formare şi cerinţele pieţei muncii. În
acelaşi timp, adaptarea sistemului de protecţie socială reprezenta un element
central.
În ceea ce privea domeniul incluziunii sociale, obiectivele prioritare erau:
• creşterea generală a standardului de viaţă al populaţiei şi stimularea
câştigurilor obţinute din muncă prin facilitarea ocupării şi promovarea politicilor
incluzive;
• facilitarea accesului cetăţenilor, şi în special al grupurilor dezavantajate
sau vulnerabile91 la resurse;
• susţinerea familiilor cu copii;
90
Un domeniu central în contextul evoluţiilor demografice.
91
Fuseseră deja dezvoltate programe vizând persoane cu handicap, persoane vârstnice, persoane fără
adăpost, persoane victime ale violenţei domestice.
90
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
Astfel,
„Obiectivul central al Guvernului României, în ceea ce priveşte domeniul
incluziunii sociale se referă la continuarea eforturilor pentru dezvoltarea unei
societăţi incluzive bazată pe acordarea de servicii de incluziune socială integrate
dezvoltate având la bază o evaluare reală a nevoilor individului, prin dezvoltarea
sectorului terţiar şi prin asigurarea oportunităţilor egale pentru toţi cu accent
deosebit pe persoanele vulnerabile” (Raportul Naţional Strategic privind
protecţia socială şi incluziunea socială 2008-2010, p. 21).
În vederea asigurării creşterii gradului de ocupare a persoanelor defavorizate
urmau să fie promovate şi desfăşurate următoarele acţiuni: promovarea economiei
sociale, integrarea pe piaţa muncii a persoanelor cu handicap şi asigurarea
responsabilităţii implementării şi resurselor alocate.
În acelaşi timp, dezvoltarea politicilor familiale se concentra pe promovarea de
măsuri care să încurajeze participarea femeilor pe piaţa muncii, prin dezvoltarea
facilităţilor de îngrijire a copiilor şi dezvoltarea centrelor de zi care să încurajeze
reîntoarcerea mamelor la locul de muncă (RNS 2008-2010, p. 26).
Al treilea obiectiv strategic, continuarea eforturilor pentru îmbunătăţirea
condiţiilor de viaţă ale cetăţenilor de etnie Romă, era susţinut prin desfăşurarea de
studii şi implementarea sistemului de monitorizare şi evaluare elaborat, la nivel
metodologic. Cu privire la programe şi acţiuni concrete, erau vizate favorizarea
accesului la serviciile de sănătate primară prin listele medicilor de familie;
continuarea programelor de formare şi pregătire a mediatorilor sanitari şi a
mediatorilor şcolari; îmbunătăţirea participării şcolare a persoanelor de etnie
Romă; dezvoltarea programelor naţionale destinate încadrării în economia
formală; promovarea politicilor anti-discriminatorii, apelându-se atât la Fondul
Social European, cât şi la fonduri rambursabile acordate de Banca Internaţională
pentru Reconstrucţie şi Dezvoltare (RNS 2008-2010, pp. 29-30).
În domeniul pensiilor, sistemul modificat se constituia din pilonul 1 de pensii,
obligatoriu, pay-as-you-go, pilonul 2 de pensii, voluntar, şi pilonul 1 bis,
obligatoriu, de conturi individuale. Schimbările intervenite vizau: creşterea vârstei
standard de pensionare într-o abordare treptată până în anul 2014; creşterea
stagiului minim de cotizare pentru ambele sexe de la 10 la 15 ani; introducerea
unei noi formule de calculare a pensiilor bazată pe un sistem luând în considerare
veniturile realizate pe toată durata anilor de muncă şi nu doar pe o anumită
perioadă.
91
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
92
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
III.2.2. Democratizarea
III.2.2.1. Instrumente
Art. 6 din TUE se referă la principiile democratice şi ale respectării drepturilor
omului. Astfel, articolul stabileşte că Uniunea Europeană se bazează pe principiile
libertăţii, democraţiei, drepturilor omului şi libertăţilor fundamentale, cât şi ale
statului de drept. În consecinţă, toate statele ce solicitau aderarea trebuiau să
93
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
94
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
95
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
92
Grabbe, Heather, Puterea de transformare a UE, Europenizarea prin intermediul condiţiilor de
aderare în Europa Centrală şi de Est, Editura Epigraf, Chişinău, 2008, p. 221.
93
Raport de monitorizare a instituţiilor publice, Bucureşti, 2008, elaborat de Centrul de Resurse
Juridice – CRJ.
96
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
97
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
98
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
99
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
100
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
101
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
102
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
103
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
104
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
105
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
106
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
şi mai hotărâtă în acest sens. Mai mult decât atât, este recomandabil ca
programele de formare să includă şi module legate de analiza politicilor publice
locale, având şi o componentă de metode şi tehnici de cercetare socială. O
asemenea strategie ar permite ca, în timp, să existe resursele umane necesare
elaborării propunerilor de finanţare care să cunoască necesităţile reale ale
comunităţilor beneficiare, asigurându-se, astfel, adecvarea, relevanţa, pertinenţa şi
sustenabilitatea proiectelor propuse spre finanţare.
Pornind de la ultimele date oferite, deşi în lipsa unui Raport din 2010 pentru
2009, pot fi subliniate următoarele aspecte problematice şi recomandări:
107
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
108
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
109
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
aceştia, 74% considerau că aceste fonduri au contribuit în mică sau foarte mică
măsură la îmbunătăţirea problematicii coeziunii sociale95.
Se impune, deci, pentru asigurarea incluziunii sociale şi a coeziunii:
• respectarea drepturilor cetăţenilor;
• participarea activă a acestora la funcţionarea Uniunii Europene.
IV.3. Democratizare
110
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
111
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
112
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
113
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
V. Concluzii
Constatăm că:
- mai întâi de toate, România trebuie să-şi îndeplinească în mod real obligaţiile
asumate prin aderarea la Uniunea Europeană (altfel spus, să continue demersurile
sale de integrare completă în spaţiul Uniunii), pentru a se putea ulterior adapta la
modificările substanţiale introduse de către Tratatul de la Lisabona. În acest sens,
observăm necesitatea respectării imediate de către România a literei şi spiritului
recomandărilor de ţară formulate în atâtea ocazii şi, mai ales, a propriilor
angajamente făcute, de asemenea, cu tot atâtea ocazii, precum încheierea
negocierilor de aderare97 , aderarea propriu-zisă98 sau diferitele evaluări de ţară
ante şi postaderare99.
De aceea, recomandăm:
a) în plan intern:
- adaptarea şi pe mai departe a legislaţiei, instituţiilor şi politicilor naţionale la
modul de funcţionare al Uniunii Europene, cu atât mai mult după intrarea în
vigoare a Tratatului de la Lisabona, având în vedere că „puterea de transformare”
exercitată de UE asupra României, europenizarea şi modernizarea ţării noastre se
realizează direct şi nemijlocit prin îndeplinirea acestui obiectiv. În plus, România
trebuie să recupereze restanţele acumulate în plan legislativ, în general, şi, în
particular, cele legate de aplicarea deplină şi conformă a acquis-ului Uniunii
Europene. Reformele tergiversate precum şi cele blocate nu se prescriu, ci mai
degrabă se cumulează într-o „cutie neagră” al cărei conţinut, mai devreme sau
mai târziu, va trebui rezolvat. Desigur, odată „acumulate restanţe”, cea mai simplă
formulă este aceea a rezolvării „la pachet” atât a acestora, cât şi a noilor obligaţii,
însă pentru aceasta este nevoie de voinţă politică, de un adevărat „pact politic”,
dar şi de o largă susţinere din partea comunităţilor profesionale afectate de
97
Lunga listă a sectoarelor în care România a cerut şi obţinut perioade tranzitorii vorbeşte despre
aceste angajamente, multe din ele încă neîndeplinite după 7 ani.
98
Aderarea condiţionată de îndeplinirea angajamentelor pe justiţie şi afaceri interne a făcut necesară
introducerea MCV-ului pe aceste domenii.
99
Un exemplu, în acest sens, îl constituie situaţia, deja amintită, din domeniul Justiţiei şi Afacerilor
Interne care a constituit şi continuă să constituie motiv de îngrijorare a Uniunii Europene, deşi au
trecut 7 ani de la încheierea negocierilor de aderare şi 4 de la aderare. Nu întâmplător şi legat de cele
afirmate mai sus, în perioadă definitivării studiului nostru se recunoştea oficial posibilitatea ratării
obiectivului aderării României la Spaţiul Schengen, aderare stabilită pentru martie 2011.
114
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
2. Implementare instituţională
115
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
crearea unui stat modern şi european, adică a unui stat eficient, dar care să
respecte modelul european de societate, adică economia socială de piaţă. O
asemenea reformă majoră trebuie însă realizată cu prudenţa impusă de importanţa
sa, fiind chemaţi să participe la ea partidele, societatea civilă, organizaţiile
profesionale, mediul academic, mass-media şi, mai ales, cetăţenii, adevăraţii
realizatori şi beneficiari ai unei asemenea întreprinderi;
- Absenţa unor programe autohtone care să le înglobeze şi integreze pe cele
europene, vădeşte lipsa de orientare şi deriva naţională şi explică axarea pe
conformare cu programele europene în dauna acţiunii pro-active. Faptul că
programele politice autohtone sunt gândite pe dimensiunea unui singur mandat,
sunt incomplete şi incoerente, iar implementarea este inconsecventă şi ineficientă,
arată că avem nevoie de o clasă politică, în general şi, în particular, de un executiv
mai responsabile (criteriile de performanţă managerială ar putea fi avute în
vedere), dar şi de un pact politic multianual, aşa cum spuneam deja, pact gândit pe
obiective de îndeplinit şi nu pe mandate. Imperfecţiunile sistemului politic, care a
reuşit totuşi aderarea la UE şi NATO, încep să devină o piedică în calea integrării
reale a ţării noastre în cele două organizaţii, cu precădere în UE. Pentru a recupera
rămânerile în urmă ale României, sistemul de management politico-administrativ
naţional trebuie reformat, trebuie să devină inovativ şi să aibă capacitatea de a
depăşi cutumele şi limitele actuale. La rândul său, ştiinţa românească, inteligenţa
academică, trebuie rapid integrate în procesul de reformare a societăţii, orice altă
soluţie văduvind România de expertiza necesară amânând sine die realizarea
clamatei europenizări-modernizări a societăţii româneşti100;
- Prezenţa românească pe scena europeană este insuficientă şi
necorespunzătoare. Autorităţile statului se informează şi învaţă insuficient de la
celelalte state membre şi de la instituţiile europene. Sunt necesare mecanisme
specifice de învăţare, de recurs administrativ şi de corecţie. Pentru aceasta,
sistemul juridic trebuie să asigure interpretarea unitară a cauzelor şi să ofere
repere solide pentru noile reglementări, similar cadrului european. Iar principiile
europene, precum cele din Carta albă a serviciilor de interes general, trebuie
recunoscute şi aplicate, asigurându-se astfel, pe de o parte, stabilitatea şi
neutralitatea instituţiilor de reglementare şi, pe de alta, continuitatea
implementării reformelor şi răspunderea în executarea actului administrativ;
100
Uniunea Europeană dezvoltă de ani buni programele Jean Monnet care au, între altele, scopul de
a sprijini guvernele statelor membre, clasa politică europeană, instituţiile UE, prin punerea la un loc
a expertizei ce există în universităţile din UE. Există deja tradiţia conlucrării cu profesorii Jean
Monnet în toate statele membre, mai puţin în România. Coordonatorul acestui proiect este profesor
Jean Monnet, cunoaşte pe ceilalţi profesori Jean Monnet de la Bucureşti, Cluj, Iaşi, Târgu-Mureş
etc. şi face această afirmaţie în cunoştinţă de cauză. Este doar un exemplu din multele care se pot da
privitor la neutilizarea unei resurse atât de importante precum cea umană, resursă a cărei expertiză a
fost deja validată de către Comisia Europeană.
116
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
101
În faţa obiecţiei legată de dificultatea unei duble subordonări a Reprezentanţei Permanente
amintim că există experienţa dublei coordonări a ataşaţilor militari (MAE şi MApN), ai ministrului
de interne (MAE şi MAI) sau a celor culturali (MAE şi MC).
102
Un studiu realizat de către Direcţia Uniunea Europeană din MAE în anul 1998 arată că nu există
un model unic de coordonare a activităţii europene în statele UE, acestea mergând de la modelul
francez al SGG-ului „care se bucură de autoritatea primului-ministru - până la cel spaniol, unde
coordonarea era la MAE. Concluzia noastră a fost că nu modelul determină buna sau reaua
funcţionare, ci implementarea acestuia. În acest sens, este suficient să amintim că, în ultimii zece
ani, am avut afacerile europene pe lângă primul-ministru, minister de sine-stătător, departament la
MAE etc. şi că, dacă fiecare din aceste formule a funcţionat bine la ea acasă, la noi s-a dovedit
deficitară până la urmă.
117
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
103
Campanii de informare şi dezbateri pe teme precum „Conformarea cadrului legislativ şi
normativ, a instituţiilor şi politicilor interne la prevederile Strategiei Europa 2020, precum şi la
celelalte pachete de documente strategice şi programatice legate de aplicarea Tratatului de la
Lisabona”, „Rolul şi poziţia României în procesul de reformă a principalelor politici ale Uniunii
Europene - Bugetul Uniunii, Politica Agricolă Comună, Politica de Coeziune Economică, Socială şi
Teritorială etc.”, „Cunoaşterea cazurilor de bune practici din alte state membre ale UE, dar şi de la
118
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
BIBLIOGRAFIE
119
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
120
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
121
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
122
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
123
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
124
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
ANEXĂ
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2% 4% 4% 11% 15% 6% 21% 22% 11% 1%
(nota (nota
minimă) maximă)
*missing values 5%
125
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
126
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
127
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
1. Da 20% 2. Nu 76%
*missing values 5%
128
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
DA NU Nu ştiu
1. numărul de reprezentanţi din 1 2 98
fiecare grupă ar trebui modificat 24% 29% 33%
*missing values 14%
2. modalitatea de consultare a 1 2 98
acestuia ar trebui modificată 48% 13% 23%
*missing values 16%
3. ar trebui să se ţină cont, în 1 2 98
mod obligatoriu, de avizele pe 51% 9% 23%
care acesta le acordă
*missing values 16%
4. ar trebui să aibă iniţiativă 1 2 98
legislativă 47% 14% 27%
*missing values 13%
129
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
(nota (nota
minimă) 8% 9% 14% 16% 11% 13% 9% 0% maximă)
9% 0%
*missing values 11%
130
Tratatul de la Lisabona.
Implicaţii asupra instituţiilor şi politicilor româneşti
9. reducerea cu 25% a 5 4 3 2 1 95 98
cetăţenilor ce trăiesc sub 4% 7% 38% 21% 15% 0% 6%
pragul sărăciei
*missing values 9%
131
Institutul European din România - Studii de strategie şi politici SPOS 2010
V3. Vă rugăm să precizaţi categoria din care faceţi parte (vă rugăm să
încercuiţi varianta de răspuns!)
1. Administraţie publică centrală 17%
2. Administraţie publică locală33%
3. Sindicate 1%
4. Patronate 4%
5. Societate civilă 27%
6. Mass-media 5%
7. Alta. Care? 11%
- Cercetare 8%
- Educaţie superioară 3%
*missing values 4%
132
EUROPEAN INSTITUTE OF ROMANIA
Study no. 1
Authors:
Bucharest, 2010
© European Institute of Romania, 2011
7-9, Bd. Regina Elisabeta
Sector 3, Bucharest
[email protected]
www.ier.ro
137
Throughout the elaboration of the above-mentioned study, the team of
researchers has benefited from the active contribution of Iulian Oneaşcă as project
coordinator from the European Institute of Romania, as well as from the support
of a working group, made up of representatives of the main institutions of the
central administration with competencies in the field.
Gabriela Drăgan
Director General of the European Institute of Romania
138
MOTTO
“The hope of the European people will not have been frustrated, to the extent
that the Lisbon Treaty reaffirms the main progresses of the Constitution and
respect its general structure (…). The new treaty describes, with a couple of
exceptions, the landmarks of a federation project. It has the vocation of bringing
forth a peculiar brand of federalism (…). Only the real enactment of the new
revised treaty will allow an analysis of its efficiency and its contribution to the
building of the federalist future of the European Union.”
“Along with the other 26 Member States, Romania takes part voluntarily and
not by means of coercion, to the building up of a new European architecture.
Hence Romania contributes absolutely free to the searching of a new European
federalism based on the common element of the European culture and the
respecting of its rich diversity.”
Dusan Sidjanski
139
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
140
CONTENTS
142
IV.3. Democratization ................................................................................... 244
IV.3.1. Increasing the media’s role of providing accurate information and
promoting active citizenship .................................................................... 244
IV.3.2. Increasing the role of the public authorities to inform in regards to
the opportunities of active citizenship within the European Union ......... 244
IV.3.3. Promoting the European citizenship and the participatory
citizenship ................................................................................................ 245
IV.3.4. Promoting the European citizenship and the participatory
citizenship ................................................................................................ 245
IV.3.5. Enacting the recommendations stated in the Dismantling the
obstacles to EU citizens’ rights report ..................................................... 246
IV.3.6. Strengthening civil society, including through the accession of
European funds......................................................................................... 246
IV.3.7. Strengthening the participation of citizens belonging to vulnerable
groups....................................................................................................... 246
V. Conclusions .................................................................................................. 248
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................ 254
ANNEX.............................................................................................................. 259
143
144
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
ABSTRACT
The study analyzes the European Union after the Lisbon Treaty and
Romania’s place and part in this new European context. Specifically, we identify
the changes the Treaty brings and the way in which the Romanian institutions and
policies should thereat react. We also draw a picture of the state of play in
Romania, 7 years after the conclusion of the EU accession negotiations and 4
years after the accession – i.e., an analysis of Romania before and after the
enactment of the Lisbon Treaty.
We begin the study by highlighting the changes brought by the Lisbon Treaty,
starting specifically with the particular reform method that has allowed the
existence of the Constitutional Treaty – an institutional landmark that “feeds” the
Lisbon Treaty. We also analyze the political and institutional consequences of the
multiple novelties set forth by the document: from the awarding of the legal entity
status to the EU to the disappearance of the EC and the EU’s accession the
EHCR; from the reform of the method to the reform of institutions; from the
drawing up of a new institution of the European council to the development of the
ESEA; from the threefold capacity of Catherine Ashton (High Representative,
President of the External Affairs Council, Vice-President of the Commission) to
the significance and implications of the permanent President of the European
Council position held by Van Rompuy; from the place and the global role of the
EU to the place and the role of the European citizen in the European Union; from
the place and the role of the national parliaments in the decision-making
procedures of the EU to the array of institutional capacities; from subsidiarity to
the regions and local communities and so forth. Last, but not least, we would like
to debate the question of values, of a European model and its possible sprawling.
We would also like to look towards the future and analyze the EU “Europe 2020”
and “Europe 2030” Strategies.
Analyzing the “Europe 2020” Strategy means analyzing the concepts of
intelligent, durable and social-inclusion and social-dialogue friendly growth. In
this context, the Lisbon Treaty appears as the supplier of a judicial basis for the
enactment of the Lisbon Strategy and the “Europe 2020” Strategy stands as an
instrument for enacting the Lisbon Treaty. Furthermore, the European social
model emerges not merely as a symbiosis of the different national models of the
Member States, one being thus able to debate on its global uniqueness.
Concerning this aspect, we place a heavy emphasis on the analysis of the possible
implications the compulsory character of the Charter has, in addition to the
increasing role of the social partners within the EU.
145
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
It is the authors’ opinion that Europe and the European Union are becoming more
democratic, that citizens are becoming more and more prominent and therefore we
commit to analyzing these aspects considering the citizen paramount in its relations
with the Union and the Member States. We therefore discuss the issue of European
citizenship, the institutions and the citizens after Lisbon, their active engagement to
the common European constriction, its limits and opportunities.
An important part of the study is dedicated to the analysis of the Romanian
state of play, being a well known fact that 7 years ago we finalized the accession
negotiations and 4 years ago we became a member of the EU. On both occasions,
Romania undertook some commitments and we wanted to see to what degree were
they followed upon. It is for this precise reason that we considered Romania’s EU
accession treaty as a formal landmark which ends the pre-accession process and
opens up the way for the post-accession process. Consequently, we wanted to find
out to what degree has Romania managed to realize the touted improvement of its
administration capacities, a key element in the enhancing of the advantages of EU
accession. We have analyzed, among others, the intake of European funds, but
also the institutional, legislative and administrative framework. The guiding
marks of the analysis were the situation existing at the moment of Romania’s
accession to the EU and Romania’s situation after the coming into force of the
Lisbon Treaty.
We also wanted to see to what extent are present in the Romanian political
space the European model of development, its social dimension, democracy and
the position of the citizen, all of which being major landmarks of the EU. A
special place, in conformity to its Democracy has been a major focus of our
study, matching the focus the EU has placed upon it, especially after the coming
onto force of the Lisbon Treaty.
Concluding, we would like to advance the proposal of a Romanian political
and institutional design meant to enact the stipulations of the Lisbon Treaty. To
that effect, we focused on the development of Romania’s administrative
capabilities and therefore, the development of its institutions, policies and public
strategies. We discussed the importance of the follow-up on improving the
workmanship of the central and local public administration clerks, instituting a
culture of program and public policies evaluation, concerning both general and
European aspects, enhancing the cooperation with business-owners’ and social
networks in order to reach the goals of the EU set forth in the “Europe 2020”
Strategy, and we also discussed the sustainable development and the social
dialogue. A special place has been allotted to the national parliament,
governance, subsidiarity, the Executive - Legislative relations, but also to the
improvement of European funds allotted to Romania through the structural
instruments intake. The European Model was not neglected, the analysis focusing
146
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
147
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
148
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
Chapter I. Introduction
This study analyzes the main amendments to the EU’s functioning through the
Lisbon Treaty1, identifying both the directions of evolution of the institutions,
policies and legislation of the European Union, but also its role and place in
international relations. Consequently, we take into account:
- the national perspective, paying attention to the extent to which the
objectives set to Romania following the accession have been accomplished
and the situation created by the enactment of the Lisbon Treaty. As a
Member State, Romania is permanently compelled to incorporate in its
legislation both the primary and secondary law modifications that have
occurred after accession, as well as any other decisions of internal or
external policy of the EU;
- the objective of ensuring an increasingly coherent relation between
European regulations and national laws.
The study presents the impact of the enactment of the Lisbon Treaty over the
national institutions and policies, special heed being given to the following
statements:
• The Treaty of Lisbon contributes to the progressive constitutionalization
and federalization of the European Union. The novelties introduced by the
Treaty must be understood as answers to the internal and external
challenges, expectant the 2020s (hence, our references to the “Europe
2020” Strategy) and the 2030s (hence our references the “Europe 2030”
Strategy). Does Romania have a horizon of expectations? If it does, what is
this horizon?
• Is the EU becoming a central actor of international relations? What is
Romania’s place and role, as a Member State of the EU, in the new global
power distribution?
• The European administrative space, and implicitly, the Romanian
administrative space as a part of the latter, suffer a major reform, that of the
European institutions, capacities and policies. What consequences arise
1
When we talk about the Lisbon Treaty we refer to both documents adopted in December 2007,
which became effective since the 1st of December 2009, i.e. the Treaty of the European Union and
the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; in all other cases we will specifically mention
the document we are referring to, or, if it is the case, the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the
European Union.
149
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
from this process generally for Europe and especially for Romania?
• Smart, sustainable and inclusion friendly growth on the one hand and the
European social model on the other are better outlined by the Lisbon
Treaty. What is the European and Romanian level of expectances? Is there
a connection between the Lisbon Treaty and the “Europe 2020” Strategy?
• Is Europe becoming a “citizen’s Europe”? Does the Romanian citizen react
to these opportunities thus becoming an active subject of the Union?
Along the course of the study we will permanently follow the triple model of
the Union:
• politically;
• economically;
• socially.
We will analyze the treaty and its implications over European and Romanian
institutions, policies and strategies in tight connection with the “Europe 2020”
and “Europe 2030” Strategies, because, as we have already argued, the authors of
the present analysis didn’t consider the former political documents, but
instruments designed for the medium and long term enactment of the Lisbon.
A prominent place is given to the understanding of the following statements:
• The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union influences the
new legislative and institutional architecture of the European Union. The
Charter ensures enhanced citizen protection standards at both national and
European level.
• The EU becomes a part to the European Convention on Human Rights,
according to article 6 of the Treaty of the European Union.
• There is a new hierarchy of communitarian norms (legislative acts, acts of
authorization and acts of implementation), an extension of the qualified
majority voting procedure and of the co-decision procedure. Implications at
national and European level.
• There is a Catalogue of capacities and a division of these capacities set
forth by the new treaty. Consequences and implications at national and
European level.
Considering all these aspects, the study offers and analytic image of the state
of play in Romania, proposing a set of recommendations for the adapting of our
national institutions, legislation, policies and strategies to the stipulations of the
Lisbon Treaty, also taking into account the recent package of policies devised by
the European Commission for instituting a new form of political, economic and
social governance inside the EU.
The authors have held meaningful discussions with decision-makers and
specialists in the field of European affairs both during the documentation and the
drafting periods of the present study.
150
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
2
For example, in order to further develop the economic moden, the European Commission has
adopted on the 29th of September 2010 the widest legislative package of consolidating economic
governance inside the EU and the Euro-area since the inception of the Economic and Monetary
Union. For further references consult the Directorate General for Economic and Financial Affairs
page at: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/articles/eu_economic_situation/2010-09 eu_economic
_governance_proposals_en.htm. The decisions of the European Councils in October and December
2010 concerning the EMU or the crisis-avoiding mechanisms inside the EU can be interpreted in the
same manner.
151
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
The study has tried to capitalize on the primary documentary sources, applying
surveys to the participants to the conferences organized in the six development
3
It is suffiecient to look at the objectives undertaken by Romania in its Accession Treaty to the EU
concerning the reform of the judiciary system and the fight agains corruption and consult the
Commission’s Report to the European Parliament and the Council on the Progress in Romania
under the Co-operation and Verification Mechanism, Brussels 20.07.2010, COM(2010) 401 final.
4
For further references see the results of the substantiating documents, containing proposals of
national benchmarks in the fields of intervention of the „Europe 2020” Strategy, elaborated by seven
working groups pertaining to the objectives of the „Europe 2020” Strategy. The abstracts are
available at: http://www.dae.gov.ro/articol/961/strategia-europa-2020-la-nivel-national.
152
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
• The effects of the treaty on the internal politics of each Member State;
• The implications of the Treaty over issues such as the subsidiarity principle
and the relations between the EU and the Member States;
• The opportunity of reforming the Economic and Social Committee;
• The way in which the EU ensures a correct representation of the European
interest groups;
• The importance of business and ownership networks in the decisional and
policy-implementation process of the EU;
• The EU’s budget;
• Accessing the structural funds;
• The contribution of the structural funds to the accomplishment of the
cohesion objectives;
• The extent to which the “Europe 2020” Strategy will reach its targets across
its multiple dimensions.
The results obtained following the sociological survey serve as a rough guide
and offer an image as to how the investigated population’s perceptions are
grouped against particular reference points.
At the same time, the present study is also based on a set of secondary6
documentary sources, amongst which the following can be counted:
• The Treaty on the European Union, the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European
Union, the “Europe 2020” Strategy, the “Europe 2030” Strategy, other
European documents relevant for the study;
• Romania’s National Program for EU Accession;
• Romania’s Accession Treaty to the EU;
• The National 2007-2010 Reform Program;
• Romania’s post-accession strategy;
• Relevant recent studies and analyses published nationally or in other
Member States etc.
The study is divided into four chapters and develops a cascading approach,
starting from the EU level and continuing to the national level (central, regional
and local):
6
The terms „primary” and ‚secondary”documents result form the terminology pertaining any
scientific research; any other meaning does not express the authors’ view or use of the specific
terms.
154
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
• The first chapter enounces the objectives of the study, formulates the
hypotheses and describes the research and analysis methods used;
• The second chapter is focused on the European Union. Therefore, it
analyses the Lisbon Treaty, emphasizing the fact that it constitutionalizes
and federalizes the European Union; even though it formally lacks the
constitutional character, it is the authors’ opinion that its content illustrates
its “constitutional” role of the former Treaty establishing a Constitution for
Europe. We dwell on the novelties introduced by the treaty and we discuss
the European model, its scope, the prominent reforms and the links with the
strategies enforcing the treaty, i.e. the “Europe 2020” and “Europe 2030”
strategies. We emphasize the role of principles, values, political, economic
and social model, the concept of a European society, the citizen;
• The third chapter analyzes the state of play in Romania, using as landmarks
Romania’s accession to the EU and the commitments taken on at that
particular moment, on the one hand, and the new context created by the
enactment of the Lisbon Treaty on the other hand. We analyze Romania’s
adapting to the stipulations of the community acquis and to the other
commitments taken on during before and after its accession to the EU. The
analysis starts from “Romania’s National Program of EU Accession”7 and
from the “Treaty concerning the accession of Romania to the European
Union”, in order to trace the process of institutional legislative and policy-
related adaptation. At the same time, internal programming documents such
as the “National 2007-2010 Reform Plan” and “Romania’s Post-accession
Strategy” are also taken into account.
• The last chapter advances an institutional and political design for Romania,
from the perspective of the study. Several recommendations in regard to the
adaptation of institutions and internal policies to the functioning procedures
of the EU following the coming onto force of the Lisbon Treaty are set
forth. A first set of recommendations regards the Romanian administrative
space and the development of administrative capacities, a special emphasis
being placed on public institutions and policies. Another set of
recommendations is dedicated to applying the principles of the European
mode, reducing discrepancies and inequality. Last, the third set of
recommendations regards the democratization of Romanian society. There
are important recommendations regarding the implications of the Charter’s
compulsory character and the constitutionalization of the European social
model or the consequences of the institutional and decisional reform at the
parliamentary and local or central public administration levels; there are at
7
Hereinafter abbreviated as RNPA.
155
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
156
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
II.1. The principles, the values and the model of the European Union8
8
About this subject and in the same spirit we would like to aknowledge three papers written by esteemed
European specialists which, through the effort of the Polirom Publishing Hous are or will soon be present in the
Romanian intellectual debate scene. We are talking about Dusan Sidjanski, Jean-Luc Sauron and Francisco
Aldecoa Luzaraga. In the Romanian translation of its famous work “The Federal Future of Europe” Sidjanski
sustains that „this search of a fundamental Charter accessable to the citizens falls within the curent of a novel
federal current in full swing. It is an answer to the challenges of globalization and to the ascension of actual or
emergent great powers. The future role of the European Union in full transfiguration will depend on its capacity
to act efficiently, capacity which in turn depends on its internal organization and cohesion. In order to achieve
that though, the European quotation of «unity in diversity» must become reality. The experience of federal states,
as well as the EU’s yet unfinished experience are proof of the fact that only the federal method can guarantee the
autonomy and concurrently the inherent identities of the states, regions, cities and local powers and at the same
time the union that brings forth the necessary action capacity. Applying the subsidiaruty and participatory
democracy principles complements the federal method. There is no such thing as an unique ready-to-apply
federal model. Actually, one turns to the spirit and the method of federalism on the basis of federalist principles.
It is a continuous search of the most appropriate method of governance” (Sindjanski, Dusan, Viitorul federalist
al Europei, Polirom, 2010). At the same time, Jean-Luc Sauron, in the Romanian edition of a well known work,
talks about the complexity of the European Union, a complexity he considers a veritable puzzle and argues
consequently that „in truth, Europe, but also the things it represents, require a continuous attention. Nothing must
be taken for granted. Everything is based on a permanent and attentive work, as painstaking as a gardener’s. The
whole European construction with its multiple organizations answers this double constraint: the «inability» of
the democratic society to daily re-enact the complexity of an extremely heterogenous European society. The title
of this work includes the word puzzle because every element gains meaning only in relation to the encompassing
system. In fact, the European Union’s slogan taken up by the project for a European Constitution encapsulates
this idea of unity in diversity” (Sauron, Jean-Luc, Curs de instituţii europene, Polirom, 2010). Last, Francisco
Aldecoa Luzarraga (together with Mercedes Guinea Llorente) in his work which is to be published soon by the
same Polirom Publishing House, talking about the Lisbon Treaty argues that „We sit at more than one year after
the Treaty’s enactment, an interval in which the central argument of the book is gradually confirmed, namely
that the Treaty of Lisbon is a reclaiment of the Constitutional Treaty, a treaty that failed to be ratified. This is the
reason why we are not dealing with a treaty that modifies the preceding documents, but with one that frames a
profound change in the direction begged by the European Commission, namely that of realizing «more Europe»
and especially «more political Europe». The distinction between Lisbon and the preceding treaties is depicted by
the nature of the European Convention itslf. We are talking about a political assembly that unlike the diplomatic
Conferences has conceived a complete model of European Union reform, a reform with a long-term vision. A
candidate state for the accession, Romania has taken part to the Convention, being represented by a member of
the government, but also by two MPs. The enactment of the Constitutional Treaty and of the Lisbon Treaty
respectively, en enterprise that presumes an important thoroughness of European integration is owed especially
to the following two considerations: the exhaustion of the progressive reform methot that had as results the
enactment at short intervals of minimal revisions of the treaties. This had led to the situation wherein the Union
was in a permanent reform process, which begged for a change of the method, in order to ensure the realisation
of major steps and a major revision of the treaty ; the second reason, which constitutes at the same time one of
the main elements of the book, is represented by EU’s enlargment towards Central and Eastern Europe. We
uphold the thesis of the succesful nature of the European integration and the forming of a single Europe, this
being the major significance of EU’s enlargement from 15 to 27 Member States. That is why we consider the
Lisbon Treaty, on the one hand, and the consolidation of the idea of a single Europe, on the other hand as parts
of the same European political process generating a true «mutation» of European integration.” (Aldecoa
Luzarraga, Francisco & Mercedes Guinea Llorente, Europa viitorului. Tratatul de la Lisabona, Polirom, 2011
(to be published). The same subjects and the same approach to the matter is present also in Iordan Gheorghe
Bărbulescu’s works, who has published over the years several works which analyze from the same federalist-
constitutionalis perspective the reforms undertaken in 2000 and played until 2009. It is the case of the following
works: UE. De la economic la politic, Tritonic, 2005; UE. De la naţional la federal, Tritonic, 2006; UE. Sistemul
instituţional, Tritonic, 2007; Procesul decizional în Uniunea Europeană, Polirom, 2008, whose content, from the
above-mentioned perspective was thoroughly confirmed by the evolution of the EU.
157
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
II.1.1. Introduction
The Treaty of Lisbon ends a process of reform undertaken between 2000 and
2010, its content representing a reversal to the text of the Constitutional Treaty, in
order to create a future Union capable of facing internal and international challenges.
The fundamental starting points of our analysis are:
- First, the Treaty of Lisbon is the result of a political process which began at
Maastricht and continued at Amsterdam and Nice through which a
prominent double innovation has been achieved:
o A method innovation (the constitutional process of the Convention);
o A model innovation (the political development);
- Second, this process can further be divided into three parts:
o The first part, that of the proposals and the agreements – The
Convention and the Constitution;
o The second part, the deadlock – the constitutional crisis;
o The final part, the relieving – The Lisbon Treaty.
Our analysis will focus in the solution found through the Lisbon Treaty, which
entails to a great extent the reclaiming of the content of the European Constitution,
based mainly on the political legitimacy of the drafting stage during the
Convention. One has to remark that whereas the deadlock phase has been
thoroughly debated and scrutinized at European level, overtaking the differences
was a process less observed by the European citizens, knowledge about these
procedures being considered trivial by both the media and high-ranking officials. A
possible explanation for this occurrence may lie in the double interpretation of the
Lisbon Treaty, in terms of both gains and costs, and therefore of the different
individual interests involved. If we have already identified the great gain in
maintaining the content of the Constitutional Treaty, the most important loss is the
disappearance of its constitutional form, its symbolic reference and its constitutional
language.
There has been much writing about the European Constitution inside the EU
and very few references in Romania, and it is for this precise reason that we
consider if the utmost importance for the Romanian citizen the understanding of
the complex political, institutional and decisional reforms brought about by the
Lisbon Treaty, a treaty which should ensure the legislative framework for reforms
over the next 20 years.
Consequently, in this section, we undertake a short but nevertheless rigorous
analysis of the Lisbon Treaty in order to offer the “key” to its understanding. Our
endeavour is based on the text of the Treaty, with the goal of explaining and
analyzing the progresses of the Union in relation to its current state, the field of
implementation and the content of the Treaty as well as the impact it will have
158
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
On the 13th of December 2007, heads of state and government signed at the
Jeronimos Convent, near Lisbon, the Treaty amending the Treaty on European
Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community. 9 The treaty, named
the Treaty of Lisbon after the town in which it was signed underpins the end of
the constitutional crisis, replacing the Constitutional Treaty whose ratification
wasn’t carried through.
The Lisbon Treaty represents the most ambitious amendment of the founding
Treaties, since the establishment of the Communities, over passing in terms of
importance even the Maastricht moment. The number and scope of the reforms
enacted by the Treaty were made possible because the main parts of the
Constitutional Treaty were transferred with the consent of the Member States in
the current Treaty. The New Treaty of Lisbon is in fact the old Constitutional
Treaty losing its constitutional character.
For the European Union and its legal basis, the main consequences of the
Lisbon Treaty are as follows:
- The Lisbon Treaty is a classic reform treaty. As the previous Treaties of
Amsterdam and Nice, the Lisbon Treaty modifies the existing Treaties,
without replacing them with a new text. There is a return to the traditional
amending/complementing technique, different from the innovative form
underscored by the Constitutional Treaty, i.e. a legislative consolidation
through the adoption of a completely new text, the Lisbon Treaty
distancing itself from the radical and simplifying formula of replacing
almost all existing European treaties with a single, simpler and better
structured text.
- The Treaty includes nevertheless an important innovation: the
disappearance of the European Community and its replacement with the
European Union, which becomes a legal entity. The disappearance of the
European Community represents in itself a simplification, thus being
eliminated a legal entity that has on several occasions generated confusions,
the citizens being more accustomed to the political reality named the
European Union and having difficulties in understanding the relation
between the EC and the EU;
- Nevertheless, the Treaty establishing the European Community does not
simply go away alongside the disappearance of the European Community,
9
DOUE C 306, from 17.12.2007, p. 1.
159
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
but, once amended, changes its name, becoming with the enactment of the
Lisbon Treaty the “Treaty on the functioning of the European Union”. It is
not simply a change in terminology, but also a change in functions.10
The Lisbon Treaty is therefore a classic treaty, which includes amendments to
the two fundamental treaties, the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty
establishing a European Community. As in the case of all treaties such as these, at
first sight, all the changes enacted cannot be encompassed, a process which is
greatly facilitated by the consolidated texts.11 At the same time, the treaty includes
a great number of Protocols and Declarations annexed to the two amended
treaties. In addition to that, the fusion between the EC and the EU does not
comprise the fusion with the European Atomic Energy Community
(EURATOM), which continues to function as well as the Treaty which
established it, i.e. the EAEC Treaty. Of course, the EU and the EAEC share the
same institutions in their functioning.
In other words, after the coming into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the primary
law of the European Union will operate with two texts:
- The Treaty on the European Union;
- Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
The first introduces fundamental reforms in the Treaty on the European Union,
including its structure. The second reforms and renames the Treaty establishing
the European Community, as a result of the disappearance of the European
Community, introducing at the same time prominent changes. A material
distinction between the two treaties is therefore instated, the latter becoming the
basic text and the former developing the meaning or the latter. From a judicial
perspective, there is no hierarchic relation between the two treaties.
Moving away from the formal and structural aspects, an analysis of the
amendments the Lisbon Treaty makes to the older treaties is necessary.
The first aspect we must take into account is that the Lisbon Treaty develops
and consolidates the European Union, born at Maastricht, developing its political
model. From this perspective, in addition to the afore-mentioned disappearance of
the European Community, several fundamental changes are enacted:
- The legal entity status of the European union;
- The compulsory character of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the
10
We must emphasize the scope and importance of the amendments of the Lisbon Treaty for the
Treaty establishing the European Community, which undergoes a change in functions. The TEC has
no longer the role of regulating the basis of the European Community, but that of developing the
Treaty on the European Union. In addition to that, taking into consideration the amendments enacted
to its structure, almost all its articles have undergone change, either as a result of particular
amendments as a consequence of changes in decision-making or legislative procedures.
11
For further reference consult Uniunea Europeană. Versiunea consolidată a Tratatelor. Carta
drepturilor fundamentale, Luxemburg, OPUE, 2010.
160
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
European Union;
- Establishing the set of values and objectives of the Union;
- Establishing the dispositions for the democratic functioning of the Union;
- The continuation of the communitarization of the third pillar of the EU,
concerning justice and internal affairs;
- Dividing the competences;
- Establishing a procedure of controlling the subsidiarity principle;
- Enacting an ambitious institutional reform;
- Enacting major innovations in the fields of external policy, defence and
security;
- The establishment of a new legal basis for the Union.
Examining the formal aspects of the Lisbon Treaty and the structural changes
it entails must complement the analysis of its material content. We synthesize
here in brief the novelties and the reforms enacted by the Lisbon Treaty and its
contributions to the changes that will affect the European Union.:
- The Lisbon Treaty strengthens the political dimension of the European
Union, developed in the last years. The European Community ends its
existence, thus being recognized the appearance of a common political
reality, that of the European Union – unlike the previous situation when
two judicial realities corresponding to the two organizations, the EU and
the EC, coexisted. The Union gains legal person status and, by explicitly
establishing its values and objectives the political project and its nature are
more strongly defined. The political character of the Union is strengthened
also by the specification of its functioning principles: representative and
participatory democracy. As to this latter aspect, one has to take into
account the importance of introducing into the functioning framework of
the Union of the legislative initiative of a million citizens. As innovative as
this is the stipulation that, for the first time, a state has the possibility of
voluntarily leaving the Union;
- The Lisbon Treaty clarifies and defines the relations of the Union with the
Member States through the catalogue of competences. To this extent, we
must highlight the novelty of the national legislatures’ participation to the
activities of the Union. In addition to their traditional functions, the Lisbon
Treaty gives the national parliaments the role of guarantor of the national
competences in relation to the Union. Hence, the national legislatures will
be able to take part in the process of “ex ante” political control of the
community’s legislation accordance with the subsidiarity principle and will
161
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
play an important role in the simplified revision of the treaties, through the
possibilities opened by the “gangway” procedure;
- Of utmost importance for the democracy of the Union is the compulsory
character of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
although there are some exceptions for the United Kingdom and for Poland.
The consolidation of fundamental rights protection mechanisms is
highlighted also by the possibility of the Union’s accession to the European
Convention on Human Rights, a prominent document of the Council of
Europe, which entails the EU’s acceptance of an external control
mechanism in the field of the fundamental rights;12
- In order to cope with the challenges which stem from the increase of the
Member States, the Lisbon Treaty enacts an important institutional reform
which strives to ensure the democratic quality of the Unions functioning as
well as guaranteeing its decision and action capacities;13
- The legislative and decisional procedures are profoundly altered. In order to
increase the efficiency of the community’s action, the Lisbon replaces the
unanimous decision of the Council with the qualified majority voting
procedure for 28 new fields of action14. In addition to that, the stipulations
of the Lisbon Treaty entail that in 28 cases the rule of decision-making is
qualified majority. In regards to the legislative procedure, the Lisbon
Treaty stipulates that the rule si the old general rule of the “ordinary”
procedure. This procedure is none other than a reformed version of the “co-
decision” rule, which entails that in order to pass a decision, both the
Council and the EP must, on parity, approve it. The partnership of the
European legislature is thus consolidated15. As to the legislative acts of the
Union, the Lisbon Treaty considerably disentangles the matters by making
a clear cut difference between “legislative acts”, i.e. those approved by
means of a legislative procedure and “executive acts”, i.e. those adopted
through competence declination by the Commission. Furthermore, a clear
hierarchy between these categories is established;
- To clarify and explain the functioning of the EU, the Lisbon Treaty outlines
the competences of the Union, establishing three categories: exclusive
competences, common competences and complementary competences. The
Treaty also lays the foundations for a catalogue of competences belonging
to each of the three afore-mentioned categories. As to the exercising of
12
We will return to these aspects in chapter cap. II.4.
13
The coordinates of this reform will be succintly outlined in chapter II.2.
14
For further refference consult Raportul Comisiei de Afaceri Constituţionale a PE asupra
Tratatului de la Lisabona, A6-0013/2008, Anexa 2.
15
Undoubtedly the list of decisions subjected to the special procedures remains nevertheless
impressive – no less than 33, according to the EP.
162
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
16
The European External Action Service comprises Commission, Council and Foreign Ministries
detached personnel.
163
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
For all these reasons, the Lisbon Treaty can be considered paramount, as it
accomplishes most of the substantive European reforms, both in terms of scale
and in terms of content. The Treaty is a great step forward towards the
construction of political Europe to the extent to which, on the one hand, it
develops the model of this unique political system, and, on the other hand, it
enhances the Union’s power of action in fields that normally lie within the scope
of exclusive national sovereignty of the Member States.
17
European Council, 28-29 October 2010, Conclusions, EUCO 25/1/10.
164
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
II.1.4. The future of Europe and the “Europe of the future”. The EU’s
“Europe 2020” and “Europe 2030” Strategies
The European Union is preparing for a bold step forwards with the
establishing of the instruments and policies of the Lisbon Treaty. In spite of the
crisis, many changes are expected, which account for the reserved optimism
climate and the hope that surrounded the Treaty’s coming into force. The belief
that Lisbon will enact changes is widespread, as well as the conviction that the
coming years, shaped under the Treaty’s influence, will permanently change the
European Union.
As any other treaty, it allows for a minimal, as well as a maximal enacting of
its provisions, the Member States’ political resolve being the key independent
variable. In the decisive years that await us in view of the great potential of the
Treaty, we hope for an ambitious interpretation of its stipulations, in order to
generate “more Europe”, “more political and federal Europe” and “more social
Europe”. Of course, at the same time there is talk about the economic crisis, the
crisis of the Economic and Monetary Union and the abandoning of the Euro.
Moreover, there are voices that argue that Europe is lacking the political projects.
From our point of view, the euro-sceptic visions are insubstantial. We offer two
counter-arguments in support of our opinion:
- The strategy for creating new jobs and economic growth, known as
“Europe 2020” (formally adopted on the 17th of June 2010) entails the
development of a competitive economy, based on knowledge and a better
coordination of political decisions between the supranational and the
national levels, taking into account the division of competences; a solid and
permanent education; the creation of new jobs in order to reach a 75% rate
of employment; reducing poverty and social exclusion etc.
- “Europe 2030” (adopted at the same European Council of June the 17th
201018, and initially drafted as the Reflection Group’s “Project for Europe
2030. Challenges and Opportunities”), seeks to enable the EU to play a
prominent roll in the global reshaping determined by the world crisis so
that Europe becomes an important agent for change at international level.
The EU has to defend a common market, a common currency and a
Stability and Growth Pact (valid for the members of the Euro Area), but
also an increasingly homogenous political space – the Freedom, Security
and Justice Area – as well as an increasingly integrated institutional and
decisional space. To this goal the idea of economic governance able to
avoid the internal contradictions generated, on the one hand, by the
18
European Council, 17 June 2010, Conclusions, EUCO 13/10, CO EUR 9, CONCL 2.
165
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
existence of the common currency and the internal market and, on the other
hand, by the existence of particular national economic policies, must be
progressively developed. Neither the Stability Pact, nor the Euro were
responsible for the crisis, but they have proved insufficient tools to overcome
crisis, and for the enactment of economic convergence. Financial bodies
and/or mechanisms must be established in order to ensure the avoiding of
similar crises. The EU must increase its competitiveness without dropping its
socio-economic model, without abandoning the social market economy,
solidarity and cohesion, and strengthening the fight against climate change.
Further investment in human capital (research, education, innovation,
continuous professional training) is needed. The internal market must be
buttressed in front of economic nationalism and new common energy-related
policies must be enacted, tackling the issues of alternative and even nuclear
fuelled energy. The labour market needs to be reformed – making it flexible
without endangering jobs, through increasing productivity, adaptability etc.
Last, but not least, demographic growth has to be ensured, without which any
effort becomes unsustainable. To this extent, integration of women in active
life must be encouraged, active life must be prolonged, reconciliation
between the professional career, private and family life must be encouraged
but, the most important aspect of them all, social perception of immigration
needs to be changed. It is not for chance that the Strategy is entitled “Europe
2030” as the Lisbon Treaty is considered to be furnishing the necessary legal
basis for the next two coming decades.
It is our opinion therefore that Europe is not lacking medium and long-term
projects. And neither short-term projects: the afore-mentioned European Council19
has proven this fact through the crisis-avoiding and strengthening the EU
decisions it adopted. Therefore, we believe that the following set of questions to
which European decision-making leaders and citizens must answer is the
following:
- How does the political, economic and social model of the European Union
change?
- What benefits does it entail for the citizens?
- What improvements does it bring to the European Union’s functioning
model?
- What new powers does the Treaty add to the EU action?
- Are we dealing with a viable reform or is there a risk of failure, such was
the case of the Constitution? But did the Constitution really fail?!
- What European Union will we have in ten or twenty years’ time?
19
Idem.
166
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
The Lisbon Treaty has generated a whole series of questions in regards to the
socio-economic dimension:
- What economic and social model is established by the new Treaty?
- Can we talk about a social Europe?
- Are there any progresses made in regards to the European social model or,
on the contrary, is a neo-liberal model of Europe instated?
- Is the European social model awarded enough protection?
The Lisbon Treaty develops the economic and social model intrinsic to the
whole European integration process, a model that combines the free market with
public intervention in order to guarantee the achievement of the Union’s social
objectives. There are elements included that ensure the broadening of the
European social model to a supranational scale. Compared to the already existing
judicial framework, by granting constitutional status to the values, principles and
objectives of European integration, one notices an objective choice for a model of
social and economic relations organizations, the European social model i.e.,
which serves the particular combination – market, society and state – specific to
Europe.
In addition, given the Charter’s compulsory character, the fundamental rights
and the principles of solidarity and cohesion, essentials for this social mode, are
strengthened and consolidated, their observance being mandatory for all the
policies drafted by the European institutions. Moreover, cohesion becomes an
identity element of the whole European project, aiming at the spread of welfare to
all the European regions. We notice therefore a shift from economic and social
cohesion to the new form of cohesion, which has social, economic and territorial
characters.21
In its plan of “constitutionalizing” the social model, Lisbon had also included
the instruments necessary for its development at a supranational level. Therefore,
on the one hand, we notice the “horizontal” or transversal provisions, and on the
other hand the constitutionalization of the role of social partners and the Social
20
The tackled subject can be found in the works of Bărbulescu, I.Gh. quoted in chapter .II.1.
21
This new understanding of cohesion is borrowed from the practice of federal states where it
reflects the federal solidarity between the comprising states of the federation.
167
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
22
The first Title of the TFEU regulates the transversal provisions that guarantee the model, applied
to all the actions and policies of the common institutions.
23
As a consequence of the French referendum which has rejected the Constitution, but especially of
the renegotiation by France of the European social and economic model, the social elements have
been strengthened and the influence of the free competition understood as a key vale of the market
has been reduced, thus signaling clearly that the European market economy is only an instrument of
the model and not an end in itself. The final goal is the citizen, his life’s quality, his welfare. From
this we deduce that the European model is based on the principles of the market economy, but also
on a degree of intervention.
24
We nevertheless find in the Lisbon Treaty progresses of social politices. These are subjected to a
status modification, becoming „complementary competences” instead of the old „communautary
support or coordination” politices. In addition to that, in most cases, these policies are subjected to
the ordinary legislative procedure.
25
Beginning with 2004, when states such as Malta, Cyprus, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovenia,
Slovakia, Hungary (which had undergone tough reforms in the years following the fall of the Berlin
Wall and had developed more liberal and less interventionist economies than the old Member
States) joined the EU.
168
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
In short, we argue that there are progresses in the development of social and
economic policies, but strictly speaking, no new social policies, a situation
generated by the lack of political resolve. There are new instruments of
developing the European social model, such as gender equality (TFEU, art. 10);
environmental protection (TFEU art.11), combating discrimination (TFEU, art.
10), consumer’s protection (TFEU, art. 12), the protection of services of general
interest (protocol annex to the Treaty).
The existence of these social provisions, on the one hand and the regulation of
the general interest services on the other hand, reflects the European option for a
particular economic and social model. The Policies of the Union that apply and
develop such a model must respect certain limits or, better said, to carry out
certain objectives with a prominent social content, which reflects the model of a
society based on values such as equality, social development, sustainable
development and environmental protection. Another fundamental instrument in
the development of the European social model is represented by the
constitutionalization of the role of social partners and of the Tripartite Social
Summit in defining and enacting social policies, as per art. 152:
“The Union recognises and promotes the role of the social partners at its
level, taking into account the diversity of national systems. It shall facilitate
dialogue between the social partners, respecting their autonomy. The Tripartite
Social Summit for Growth and Employment shall contribute to social dialogue.”
In addition to that, the Lisbon Treaty, following the path of the Constitutional
Treaty, introduces a judicial basis for the improvement at the EU level of the
administrative cooperation between the Member States. This disposition of the
Convention, taken up by the Constitutional and by the Lisbon Treaty was based
on a recommendation of the “Complementary Competences” Working Group,
which upheld that, to the extent that the effective enacting of Union law is to the
common interest of the Member States, the Union must have competences in
supporting the information and civil servants exchange within national
administrations, as well as their professional training and perfecting programs.
Art. 197 states that:
“Effective implementation of Union law by the Member States, which is
essential for the proper functioning of the Union, shall be regarded as a matter of
common interest The Union may support the efforts of Member States to improve
their administrative capacity to implement Union law. Such action may include
facilitating the exchange of information and of civil servants as well as
supporting training schemes.”26
Nevertheless, the treaty entails that no Member State can be compelled to
26
We must take into account that in certain particular sectors of the common policies – internal
affairs and customs – specific training and exchange programs have already been under way.
169
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
170
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
27
Art. 14 TEU, art. 223-234 TFEU.
28
It is stipulated that within some limits, the institutions of the Union (the European Council or
following a Council’s proposal) will be responsible for determining the number of members allotted
to each Member State.
171
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
Lisbon Treaty, as it was the case in several other institutional reforms. In a way, it
is a fully legitimate process that of attributing increasing powers to the EP, given
its position of representing the citizens of Union.
One can argue that there is a development of the Parliament’s prominent role
in the institutional functioning of the Union, given its position of representing the
civic legitimacy. Hence, art. 14.1 of the TEU states that:
“The European Parliament shall, jointly with the Council, exercise legislative
and budgetary functions. It shall exercise functions of political control and
consultation as laid down in the Treaties. It shall elect the President of the
Commission”29.
This new legislative equal footing between the EP and the council reflects into
decisional practice the Union’s twofold legitimacy, as an organization of both
citizens and states, in spite of its elimination from the text of the treaty.
The most relevant aspect pertaining to the European Parliament is therefore its
substantial increase of competences in the budgetary and legislative fields and as
a constitutive power of the EU at the same time. The Lisbon Treaty continues and
even caps the tendency of previous reforms of incorporating civic legitimacy into
the legislative and budgetary powers, thus reflecting the leaning towards an
increasing democratization of the European decisional system.
A novelty brought about by the Constitution and the Lisbon Treaty altogether
is deeming the European Council an institution of the Union for the first time
since its foundation and, as a consequence, subjecting it to the rules of the
European system.31 Regulating the European Council is stipulated in article 15 of
the TEU, alongside the other communitarian institutions:
“The European Council shall provide the Union with the necessary impetus for
its development and shall define the general political directions and priorities
thereof”.
It is added that it will not perform a legislative function, which still
corresponds to the Council.
Another novelty is represented by the creation of the President of the European
Council office, whose term of office is set at two and a half years, renewable
29
This article must be interpreted along with article 10.2 of the TEU which underlines the fact that
the functioning of the Union is based on representative democracy, thus establishing the twofold
representativeness – the direct representation of the citizens in the EP and the representation of the
states, and indirectly of the citizens, in the European Council..
30
Art. 15 TEU, art. 235-236 TFEU.
31
To this extent, its decisions will be subjected to judicial review as per articles. 263 şi 265 of the
TFEU.
172
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
once. The attributions of the President of the European Council, as per article 15.6
of the TEU are:
- To chair and drive forward the work of the European Council;
- To ensure the preparation and continuity of the work of the European
Council in cooperation with the President of the Commission, and on the
basis of the work of the General Affairs Council;
- To endeavour to facilitate cohesion and consensus within the European
Council.
The Treaty also stipulates the mandatory presentation of a report to the
Parliament at the end of every European Council’s reunion, as well as its
obligation to represent the EU in the CSDP area. By the imposition of this
function the framers of the treaty try to ensure the continuity, the visibility and the
coherence deemed necessary for the EU’s representation, both internal and
domestic. The president effectively becomes “the visible face” of the Union,
whom the citizens can identify with both the leadership of the European Council
and the EU in its entirety.
The office of permanent President of the European Council changes the nature
of the institution, starting with the permanent character of the office, which will
impact on the interinstitutional balance and dialogue, since a new player enters
the game. Finally, this innovation can also lead to a change in the
intergovernmental character of the institution because, for the first time, we have
at the fore front a leading figure that does not represent a state. His functions –
leading the institution and facilitating a consensus by drawing together the
common interests of the Member States - can determine a shift in the institutional
dynamic, from an explicit intergovernmental one to one that aspires to
“communautarization”. This undermining of the state that holds the presidency of
the Council is also determined by the specific state’s losing of the European
Council Presidency and External Relations Council positions, which decreases the
clout of the prime-minister and the foreign minister respectively during the time
of that Presidency.
THE COUNCIL32
The main modifications pertaining to the functioning of the Council regard the
improvement of its effectiveness in the context of an increased number of
members. It is the case of replacing the current system of semestrial Presidencies
of the European Council and the Foreign Affairs Council on the one hand and the
adoption of a qualified majority voting system on the other hand. The same
objective of increasing the effectiveness of decision-making procedures
32
Art. 16 TEU, art. 237-243 TFEU.
173
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
33
There remain certain decisions which continue to require a unanimous decision, such as the
CFSP, political decisions pertaining to the system as a whole, the „gangways”, the procedure of
treaty-revision by an IGC, the issue of the „red-lines” drawn by some Member States (fiscal,
immigrant worker social security or cultural issues among others).
34
We need to remind that the Eurogroup is the closed configuration of the Economic and Financial
Council, to which only the finance and economy ministers of the states in the Eurozone take part.
The Eurogroup is the political entity qualified to examine and decide on the economic policy of the
Eurozone and on the repercussions of the monetary policy decisions of the CEB.
35
In the event that the proposal does not belong to the Union or the High Representative for Foreign
Affairs and Security Policy, the quotas are increased, an approval needing the support of 72% of the
174
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
The Polish renegotiation, enacted with the occasion of the 2007 IGC led to the
postponement of this provision’s coming into force until 2014. In addition to that,
it is stipulated that until the 31st of March 2017 any state can ask for the
maintaining of the present European legislation voting system.36
The double majority voting system has the advantage of both efficiency and
adaptability. Unlike the model of triple majority established at Nice, still
functioning today, the new formula allows an easier decision-making procedure,
reducing at the same time blocking possibilities. At the same time, the new
formula also has the indisputable advantage of being a model much more
transparent towards the European citizen, allowing him to better and easier know
the manner in which a decision was taken, which states approved it and what is
their combined population. To this is added the advantage of adaptability, because
by eliminating the weighting factor, there is no need for a further revision of rules
every time the EU enlarges. Finally, the change adds a touch of democratization
to the procedures, by recognizing indirectly in the weight of every government’s
vote the weight of that state’s ratio in the total population of the EU.37
THE COMMISSION38
The Commission is on the losing side of the institutional reform, being the
only institution that does not emerge strengthened out of this process. There are
nevertheless two chapters that underscore a possible reform, both trying to enact
the consolidation of the democratic dimension and the increase of its functional
efficiency:
- Its election by the EP;
- Its composition.
The first provision will increase the influence of the EP in the election of the
Commission, as the Lisbon Treaty states that: The European Council shall propose its
candidate for President of the Commission in accordance to the results of the EP
Council’s members, representing 65% of the Union’s population. The conditions for forming an
obstruction minority are also toughened, at least 4 members of the Council being need to join in.
The possibility of 3 large states of the Union blocking a decision is therefore eliminated (the
hypothesis of four of them joining in such a move is considered unlikely). A mechanism similar to
the one established the one enacted at Ioanina (entailing that when a significant number of states
have reservations about taking a specific decision, the matter is postponed and negotiations are
continued until the finding of a commonly accepted solution).
36
Art. 3 of the Protocol on transitional provisions, Protocol nr. 36 annexed to the Lisbon Treaty.
37
The threefold majority also had its advantages, such reflecting the the majority of the states,
population and voting power and, therefore of the possible alliances.
38
Art. 17 of the TEU, art. 244-250.
175
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
elections”39. This seems a step forward towards a more political and not only
technical Commission, but not a very bold move if we consider that the right to
advance proposals for the office remains a prerogative of the European Council.
This small step forward nevertheless allows the European political parties to
move forward, in the direction of the personalization of European politics. In this
way, the old proposal of Jacques Delors that the parties may nominate before the
European elections a top-list leader could become reality. Evidently, the European
council could not ignore such a nomination. This important element has the
potential of becoming a window of opportunity for the real democratization and
parlamentarization of the Commission.
The problem of the Commission’s composition was also the focus of other
heated constitutional arguments:
- Efficiency dictates a Commission with fewer portfolios;
- Representativeness entails the maintaining of the “one country-one
commissioner” principle.
In the end, the Constitution outlined the first line of argument, a solution
maintained by the Lisbon Treaty. The number of commissioners will be 2/3 of the
number of Member States, including the President and the Vice-president, who is
also the High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy
(CFSP) and the Common Defence and Security Policy (CDSP). The reduction of
the number of commissioners will come into force on the 1st of November 2014,
thus ensuring that the first commission of the Lisbon Treaty maintains the “one
country-one commissioner” representative principle. The new form of article 17.5
of the TEU states that through a European council Declaration a rotation system
between Member States will be set, that takes into account the Union’s
demographic and geographic diversity.
The reform strengthens the powers of the President in imposing functions on
the members of the Commission. This is a fundamental change because it has the
potential of leading to more homogenous and efficient Commissions unlike the
current situation when, as a result of the imposing of selected commissioners by
the supporting Member States we are often dealing with a very heterogeneous mix
of personalities. Indirectly, the Commission’s powers appear strengthened by the
Lisbon Treaty, because the Commission stands to play a role in inter-institutional
mediation and as a legislative initiator as a result of the extension of the qualified
majority voting and co-decision procedures.
39
He will be designated out of the representatives of the European political group that has obtained
the most MPs in the European Parliament elections.
176
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
40
Articles 18 and 27 of the TEU.
177
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
41
Aricle 5 of the TEU, articles 2-6 TFEU.
178
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
42
These are the customs union, the competition rules when it concerns the common single market,
the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy, the common
commercial policies, the conclusion of international agreements in these fields (art. 3, TFEU).
43
The shared competences pertain to: the internal market; social policy; economic, social and
territorial cohesion; agriculture and fishing,; the environment; consumer protection, trans-European
networks, energy, area of freedom, security and justice, common safety concerns in public health
matters. Research and development, cooperation development and humanitarian help are also shared
competences. In all of these cases the action of the Community cannot result in preventing the
Member States of exercising their competences (art. 4 TFEU).
44
The Union can develop support, coordination and supplementing actions in regard to the
protection and improvement of human health; industry; tourism and culture; education, vocational
training, youth and sport; civil protection and administrative cooperation (art. 6 TFEU).
179
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
subsidiarity. If the negative replies represent at least a third of the votes allocated
to the national parliaments, the draft must be reviewed by the
Commission/states/institutions who submitted it. In spite of the judicial ambiguity
of this provision, it carries sufficient weight to make if not impossible, at least
increasingly difficult a national government’s approval of a draft rejected by its
parliament. This procedure was coined as “the yellow card” procedure, because it
allows the national parliaments to warn on the risks of the violation of the
principle of subsidiarity without formally blocking it.
The “yellow card procedure” was complemented by the 2007 IGC, on the
Netherlands’s request with the introduction in the new indent 3 of article 7 of the
protocol of another “card”, an “orange” one, which allows for an even stronger
impact of parliamentary decisions. The “orange card procedure” is put into effect
each time when, during ordinary legislative procedure, the opinions that signal a
violation of the subsidiarity principle represent the simple majority of the votes
allocated to the national parliaments. In this case the Commission can maintain,
review or withdraw its proposal. If it decides on its maintaining, the Commission
must justify the reasons for the proposal’s compliance with the subsidiarity
principle. This opinion is forwarded to the two co-legislators which will study,
during the first reading of the act, the problem of the proposal’s compliance with
the subsidiarity principle. If a 55% majority of the Council’s members or a
majority of the EMPs votes attests the incompatibility between the proposal and
the subsidiarity principle, the proposal is withdrawn.
The judicial ex post procedure consists of the creation of creating judiciary
contestation possibilities for the Committee of the Regions, but also for the
Member States, when they act in the name of their national parliaments.
The most important political innovation however pertaining to the European
institutional system is the incorporation of national parliaments in this system.
The national parliaments are attributed, on the one hand, a function of controlling
the exercise of European competences, and on the other hand the power to
supervise the transfer of new competences. The incorporation of national
legislatures into the functioning scheme of the EU represents an absolute novelty,
well received by some observers and doubted by others, given the fears
concerning the efficiency of the Union. It is difficult to establish in this moment
what will be the impact of this opening towards the national parliaments. A priori
one might argue that it strengthens the democratic character of the Union and, in
addition to that, it can develop the cooperative character of European federalism
by means of state participation not only at the governmental level, but also at the
parliamentary level. Everything depends however on the national legislatures’
interest for this activity and on their speed of reaction so that the accent falls on
the added value and the democratization of the system and not on the inherent
delays in the decisional process.
180
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
The recognition and the guarantees for the regions’ competences was one of
the stakes “behind” the subsidiarity principle and its compliance and control
judicial and political mechanism. The regions request, formulated ever since
Maastricht is that the subsidiarity principle becomes not only a criteria for the
demarcation of Union and Member States competences, but also a principle
enforced at every political level, including local and regional collectivities.45. On
these lines, article 5 indent 3 of the TEU recognizes for the first time the
enforcing of the subsidiarity principle at the level of local and regional
collectivities. The Protocol on subsidiarity, which details the application of this
principle, reserves a strong role for local and regional collectivities46. Article 2 of
the Protocol specifically states that it is the Commission’s obligation to consult
the regions and local collectivities before drafting a legislative proposal whenever
it is the case. In the end, we are talking about a practice with a long following in
European governance – along with that of consulting interest groups and civil
society – which gains a legal status at the highest level. Article 5 of the Protocol
states that for every legislative draft submitted by the Commission, a subsidiarity
compliance statement must be filed, which shall contain, amongst others: an
assessment of the implication of the respective draft on the regions, the financial
and administrative cost of its enforcement for the local and regional
administrations47; finally, the legislative draft of the Commission must set the
costs for the local or regional administration at the lowest possible level,
proportional with the objectives the draft seeks to achieve.
The Protocol also makes provisions for the possibility that during the
subsidiarity compliance procedure realized by the national parliaments these can
consult the regional Chambers (in the states where these organisms have
legislative competences) - article 6. It also allows for each state the existence of
early warning mechanisms at this level, the regional Chambers thus taking part in
the subsidiarity compliance verification procedure. The regions endowed with
legislative competences can thus play an essential role, given that the Superior
Chamber of these parliaments represents the regions and has the control vote. In
other words, the early warning process is by itself an important instrument by
which the regions with legislative competences can take part in the European
45
One must not forget that the introduction of the catalogue drafting proposal on the agenda of the
constitutional process was the result of the pressure of the German lands, which saw this move as a
way of protecting their competences in front of the “European level’s tendency of incorporating
them”.
46
The Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, Protocol
annex 2 to the Treaty of Lisbon.
47
This comprises the “connection principle” under which, in the enactment of communautary law,
the regions and local collectivities must not be forced to undergo excessive financial or
administrative costs.
181
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
II.3.1. The Lisbon Treaty – the legal basis for continuing the enactment of
the Lisbon Strategy49
The ratification of the Lisbon and its entry into force process overlapped the
setting in and the development of the financial, economic and in the end social
crisis. Undoubtedly, the framers of the Treaty didn’t seek to prevent or counter-
balance the effects of these crises, as there was no explicit search for instruments
capable of stifling, if not eliminating altogether the occurrence of these events,
which makes the Treaty lacking in such compartments. Paying homage to the
truth, we need to mention that the preoccupation for supplementing the Monetary
Union with a true Economic Union, in order to develop a full Economic and
Monetary Union is an old one, the Convention on the future of Europe numbering
among its groups Group number VI, entitled “Economic Governance. It is true
that the group didn’t succeed in imposing its conclusions, since these were not
incorporated into the Project of the Constitutional Treaty. Not even in 2006-2007
48
Art. 3 of the TEU.
49
The same article 3 (3) states that „The EU shall work for the sustainable development of Europe
based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market
economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and
improvement of the quality of the environment. It shall promote scientific and technological
advance”.
182
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
when the debates about “saving” the Constitution were raging, the idea of a
monetary-economic governance of the European Union didn’t seem a priority. In
the present, when in the aftermath of the effects of the crisis the institution of a
crisis prevention mechanism has resurfaced on the agenda, its development has
become a foremost priority, determining the adoption, on the 29th of September
2010 by the European Commission of the largest legislative set concerning the
consolidation of economic governance since the launching of the Economic and
Monetary union. The Commission’s Proposal, adopted in the European Council
of 28-29 October 201050 states that:
“The European Council endorses the report of the Task Force on economic
governance. Its implementation will allow us to increase fiscal discipline,
broaden economic surveillance, deepen coordination, and set up a robust
framework for crisis management and stronger institutions. The European
Council calls for a "fast track" approach to be followed on the adoption of
secondary legislation needed for the implementation of many of the
recommendations. The objective is for the Council and the European Parliament
to reach agreement by summer 2011 on the Commission's legislative proposals,
noting that the Task Force report does not cover all issues addressed in these
proposals and vice-versa. This will ensure the effective implementation of the new
surveillance arrangements as soon as possible. The result will be a substantial
strengthening of the economic pillar of EMU, enhancing confidence and thus
contributing to sustainable growth, employment and competitiveness”.
Consequently, until the end of 2010 and during the course of 2011 the
European Commission will propose other legislative packages pertaining to the
objective of social and economical balanced growth, based on competitiveness
and social inclusion (as per article 3 of the TEU).51 Nota bene, the Lisbon treaty
already offers a legislative framework favourable for the ensuring of a process of
intelligent, durable and social inclusion friendly growth, which underlines the
objective of instituting a mechanism of financial governance at the EU level.
Taking into account that since the 1st of December 2009 the EU already
functions along the lines set by the Lisbon Treaty, we must assert that 2010
represents a turning point of the Union’s economic and social policies, by
establishing explicit obligations for the Member States in regards to the
coordination of the economic policies of the EU (articles 119-126 of the TFEU).
At the same time, Declaration 30 concerning article 126 of the TFEU states that:
50
The European Union, Concluziile Consiliului European, Brussels, 28-29 October 2010, EUCO
25/11.
51
For further reference see the Commission’s Governance, tools and policy cycle of Europe 2020
Document,
http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/Annex%20SWD%20implementation%20last%20version%2015-07-
2010.pdf.
183
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
“The Intergovernmental Conference reasserts its support for the objectives of the
Lisbon Strategy: creating jobs, enacting structural reforms and social cohesion”.
The Lisbon Strategy turned out to be a true coordinating and mutual learning
exercise in the field of forecasting, planning and enacting European, national and
local public policies, in the direction of stimulating employment, enacting
structural reforms and social cohesion. Although the financial, economic and
social crisis led to a decrease in the results expected, for the 2005-2008 period, the
Lisbon Strategy proves to be an instrument that contributed to the progressive
rapprochement of the social models of the Member States in the hope of realizing
the common social model.
The continuation of the objectives undertaken under the Lisbon Strategy will
be carried out through a strategy of economic, social and territorial convergence
which reminds us of the 3 models of EU development and their symbiosis: social,
economical and political.
A new stage was the launching in March 2010, along with the creation of the
institutional and politically appropriate context for structural EU reforms of the
“Europe 2020 - A European strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth”
document. The objectives of the strategy were confirmed by the European
summer Council on the 17th of June 201052. Taking into account the overlapping
between the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, some already briefly mentioned, and
the objectives of the “Europe 2020” Strategy, we hold that from the point of view
of the already enacted structural reforms, the “Europe 2020” Strategy can be
considered an instrument designed for the enactment of the Lisbon Treaty. Social
dimension wise, the Strategy encompasses three fundamental objectives in the
development of the Union:
- Smart growth – the development of an economy based on knowledge and
innovation;
- Durable growth – promoting a more efficient economy resource, ecology
and competition wise;
- Social inclusion friendly growth – promoting an economy with a high rate
of employment, meant to ensure social, economic and territorial cohesion.
Keeping track of these aspects, both the business-owners’ organizations and
the trade unions gain an increasingly prominent role in developing the European
social and economic model, inherent to the process of European integration. The
provisions of article 152 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
need mentioning:
“The Union recognises and promotes the role of the social partners at its level,
taking into account the diversity of national systems. It shall facilitate dialogue
52
The European Union, Concluziile Consiliului European, Brussels, 17 July 2010, EUCO 17/06.
184
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
between the social partners, respecting their autonomy. The Tripartite Social
Summit for Growth and Employment shall contribute to social dialogue.”
Nota Bene, the role of the social partners is not based solely on the provisions
of article 152 of the TFEU, the Lisbon Treaty being framed in the spirit of
involving the social partners in the achievement of the EU’s objectives and the
development of the European social model.
II.3.2. The European Social Model – more than a symbiosis of the Member
States’ internal models. The international uniqueness of the model
The Lisbon treaty develops the European social model based on the principles
of equality and solidarity, defining it as a mix of market economy and public
intervention. The European model is linked to cohesion ever since the beginnings
of the Union (first between workers, than farmers, regions and eventually states)
and expresses the solidarity between citizens and states.
It is our opinion that unlike the previous legislative framework, the provisions
of the Lisbon Treaty ensure the recognition of the model as the EU’s particular
model of development, through the intertwining of markets, societies and
Member States. Thus, by “constitutionalizing” the values, principles and
objectives of European integration, the European social model extends the
traditional limits of the common market and institutes the appropriate
circumstances for the development of a social market economy with a high degree
of competitiveness and social inclusion, as per the provisions of indent 3, article 3
of the Treaty on the European Union. Consequently, following the Lisbon
Treaty’s entry into force, the European social model can be expanded explicitly at
the supra-national level, which justifies the imperative of rethinking the
philosophy of the Union’s public policies in general and the social, employment
and education policies in particular. Let us keep in mind that the Lisbon Treaty
institutes the transversal character of the “social clauses”, i.e. the obligation of
states and European supranational actors of respecting them every time European
or national public policies are drafted or implemented. Hence:
“The Union shall establish an internal market. It shall work for the sustainable
development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a
highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social
progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the
environment. It shall promote scientific and technological advance.
It shall combat social exclusion and discrimination, and shall promote social
justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between
generations and protection of the rights of the child.
185
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
186
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
for in this Article, the Commission shall consult the Economic and Social
Committee.” (article 156 of the TFEU).
The provisions of article 156 ensure the enactment of the principle of
participatory democracy in the building of a democratic governance of the
European Union. If in the preceding decades social dialogue was limited to the
provisions of the aforementioned article 156, nowadays social dialogue transcends
other economic and social policies enacted by the European Union, even if some
of those are shared or complementary, such as education, environment,
competitiveness etc. Social dialogue is inherent to both the process of fast and
durable economic recovery and to the social development of the next decade. This
is the reason why, in the case of the internal structures that define social
partnership, there is a need for overcoming the confrontations and political
divides and developing a social partnership based on competitiveness and
economic convergence, but also on the guaranteeing of the freedom of circulation
of persons, services and capital, thus applying the provisions of article 46 of the
TFEU, which underlines the following aspects:
(a) Ensuring close cooperation between national employment services;
(b) Abolishing those administrative procedures and practices and those
qualifying periods in respect of eligibility for available employment, whether
resulting from national legislation or from agreements previously concluded
between Member States, the maintenance of which would form an obstacle to
liberalisation of the movement of workers;
(c) Abolishing all such qualifying periods and other restrictions provided for
either under national legislation or under agreements previously concluded
between Member States as imposed on workers of other Member States conditions
regarding the free choice of employment other than those imposed on workers of
the State concerned;
(d) Setting up appropriate machinery to bring offers of employment into touch
with applications for employment and to facilitate the achievement of a balance
between supply and demand in the employment market in such a way as to avoid
serious threats to the standard of living and level of employment in the various
regions and industries.
Considering the provisions of this article, the social partners must become
increasingly active and responsible for the enactment of internal public policies,
as well as the Union’s policies, especially in regards to the aspects that continue
to fuel debates over the Union’s politically correct functioning, as well as the
guaranteeing of the freedom of movement of persons, services and capital53.
53
The debate on the affair of Romanian and Bulgarian Roma of 2010 is relevant to the matter.
187
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
II.3.3 The relevant elements of the European Social Model. The stipulations
of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
The Lisbon Treaty enhances the degree of implication of the social actors in
the process of economic and social development, setting at the same time rules
meant to ensure the Union’s citizens’ defence of their fundamental rights.
Hence, as a component part of the Lisbon Treaty, the Charter of Fundamental
Rights of the European Union includes the rights of the social partners in the
development of the European social model from the perspective of social
inclusion. To further our views, we discuss two relevant articles.
The first, article 27, entails the worker’s right to information and consultation
with the undertaking:
“Workers or their representatives must, at the appropriate levels, be
guaranteed information and consultation in good time in the cases and under the
conditions provided for by Union law and national laws and practices”.
The provisions of article 27 guarantee the Union’s citizens’ rights as workers
to be informed and consulting in the relevant fields of their activity. Therefore, on
the one hand, the article sets concrete responsibilities for the Union’s workers in
the setting up of their own employment objectives, taking into account the social
and economic evolution of the national economies and of the European economy
as a whole. N the other hand the stipulations of article 27 develop the idea that the
market and the employment rate depend on the quality of the informing and
consulting services in order to provide a sustainable level of employment.
Actually, the article introduces and teaches the prospective spirit of the citizen’s
implication in the processes of social and economic developments under the
umbrella of complementary competences of the EU in the matters of employment
(for further reference consult Declaration 31 on article 156 of the TFEU).
Then, article 28 of the Charter discusses the right of collective bargaining and
action:
“Workers and employers, or their respective organisations, have, in
accordance with Union law and national laws and practices, the right to
negotiate and conclude collective agreements at the appropriate levels and, in
cases of conflicts of interest, to take collective action to defend their interests,
including strike action”.
This article must be read along with the articles in the Treaty on the
functioning of the EU concerning social and employment policies. For example,
article 151 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU stipulates that the Union
and the Member States have in mind the following objectives: promotion of
employment, improved living and working conditions, so as to make possible
their harmonisation while the improvement is being maintained, proper social
188
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
II.3.4 The role of the social partners in the “Europe 2020” Strategy
One of the stakes of the “Europe 2020” Strategy regards an inclusion friendly
growth which means an economy with a high rate of employment, ensuring
economic, social and territorial cohesion. Given the diversity of the social models
developed in the European space in the past decades, the objectives can be
achieved faster only if social partners interact not only with national and
European Union institutions, but also between themselves, as competitors in the
influencing of decisional processes, especially since the Lisbon Treaty offers a
framework for such an interaction, as mentioned earlier.
Participatory democracy does not comprise only the citizen’s implication in
the process of drafting and enacting Union policies, but also the active and
189
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
This part of the paper analyzes the main contributions of the Treaty as well as
the recent European Union action lines concerning the establishment of
democratic governance and active citizenship within the Member States.
190
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
The vision of the European Union in regards to the concept brings together
several views on the concept. Citizenship primarily represents the recognition of
the belonging to a particular community, in this case the European one. This
affiliation is affirmed by the affiliation to the national communities of the EU
Member States:
“Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of
the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall be additional to and not replace
national citizenship” (article 20 of the TFUE).
Therewith, European citizenship is indirectly constituted, through a national
channel, without replacing national citizenship, but adding new dimensions to it.
These new dimensions can be approached from different perspectives. Theoretical
insights over citizenship can be divided into several categories: theories of citizenship
based on rights, including or not social rights (the liberal and social-democrat
tradition and those based on the affiliation to a particular community and identity55.
The European Union, through the Lisbon Treaty, follows both of these traditions, its
view of citizenship being constructed in reference to both rights and attempts to
consolidate a European community and identity.
54
Art. 18-2 of the TFEU.
55
Lister, Ruth, Citizenship Towards a feminist synthesis, in Feminist Review, No. 57, Autumn 1997,
pp. 28-48. Pp. 14-15.
191
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
four provisions of the Treaty are paramount: the recognition of the rights
mentioned by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Article
6 of the TEU); the equality of all citizens (article 9 of the TEU), the functioning
of the Union founded on representative (article 10 of the TEU) and participatory
(article 11.4 of the TEU) democracy, as well as the ensuring of the dialogue and
transparency between the Union and its citizens (article 11 of the TEU)
Hence, on the first level of analysis, European citizenship is a citizenship
based on rights. The rights it refers to are those established by the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as well as the social rights conferred
through the European Social Charter (Turin, 1961) or those contained by the
Community’s Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers (art. 151,
TFEU). The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union becomes
through the Lisbon Treaty a guarantee for the rights of all citizens. It is
specifically mentioned that the Charter represents “the general principles of EU
law” (article 6.3 of the TEU). Another important aspect is the treaty’s recognition
of the equal judicial value of the Charter and the European Union’s treaties:
“The Union recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, as
adapted at Strasbourg, on 12 December 2007, which shall have the same legal
value as the Treaties” (article 6.1, TEU).
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union is divided into
seven “titles”: dignity, freedoms, equality, solidarity, citizen’s rights, justice and
general provisions regarding the interpretation and application of the Charter. In
this paper, the analysis will focus on two aspects – the provisions regarding the
access to rights of all citizens and the provisions regarding the direct impact on
the participatory citizenship the Union tries to promote.
A first level of analysis focuses on countering of social exclusion and ensuring
the observance of the rights of all European citizens. To that effect, the Charter
becomes an extensive list of rights the citizens of the European Union enjoy and
of criteria which determine their exercise. Consequently:
“Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or
social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other
opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or
sexual orientation shall be prohibited” (article 21.1 of the Charter).
These aspects are mentioned both in the TEU (articles 3 and 9) and in the
TFEU, which holds that the Union can participate in the support and supplement
of the Member States’ action in several fields such as gender equality and fighting
social marginalization (art. 151 of the TFUE):
“The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom,
democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the
192
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
The Lisbon treaty increases both the representation of the citizen’s interests as
well as their possibility to take part in the decisions of the European Union.
Active citizenship is thus established at two independent levels of analysis:
- That of the representative institutions;
- That of the European citizens.
The first level of analysis focuses on the degree of representativeness ensured
by the Treaty, either through institutions of the European Union, either through
national representative institutions.
The second level of analysis focuses in the European citizens and the ways in
which they can become active citizens:
“(1) The functioning of the Union shall be founded on representative
democracy.
(2) Citizens are directly represented at Union level in the European
Parliament.
Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of
State or Government and in the Council by their governments, themselves
193
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
194
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
195
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
supports the project “Citizens for Europe” running between 2007 and 2013. The
proposal recognizes that “citizens should also be aware of their duties as citizen
and become actively involved in the process of European integration, developing
a sense of belonging and a European identity”56; the necessity of simplifying
procedures, of supporting European civil society in order to allow an enhanced
participation of the citizens or of the understanding of cultural diversity and the
forming of a European identity are all comprised in the document. These
objectives are also reflected by the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty.
Therefore, both the general levels of citizenship are taken into consideration.
The European Union uses many programs in order to ensure the active
participation of its citizens and their access to civic rights and the decisional
process. For example, the European Social Fund is established in order to
facilitate access to the labour market (article 162 of the TFEU) and fighting social
exclusion is a priority set by the Open Method of Coordination (OMD), which
allows for the establishment of common fields and indicators for the Member
States57.
Ensuring a European professional training and education (article 165 of the
TFEU) can be understood as serving a twofold purpose: increasing the level of
quality and education and encouraging interactions between the members of the
European states, in order to foster a coherent common identity (by the means of
programs such as Erasmus, supporting the contact between EU members
students). This identity is difficult to appraise and measure, firstly because many
European programs are of a recent date and secondly because “the European
identity” is a concept that underlines mostly a unity of pluralisms58. The diversity
of approaches as to what is the European identity and how is it to be built
constitutes one of the greatest challenges the Lisbon Treaty tries to answer
through the appeal to values common to all Member States (art. 2 of the TEU).
A final aspect that needs to be taken into consideration is the interdependence
relation between national active citizenship and European citizenship. It is
difficult to explain how and if this relation actually works. To what extent, for
example, does the existence of active citizenship in one state lead to the taking up
of active European citizenship? For example, in Romania’s case, to what extent
does the lack of a national active citizenship affect the prospect of taking up an
active European citizenship? Or can the high degree of public trust the European
56
European Commission, 2005, Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the
Council establishing for the period 2007-2013 the programme “Citizens for Europe” to promote
active European citizenship, COM (2005) 116 final.
57
European Commission, Joint Report on Social Protection and Social Inclusion, 2004.
58
Van der Zweerde, Evert, „Plurality in Unity”: European Identity and European Citizenship, 2009
in Limes, Vol. 2 Issue 1, pp. 5-25. P. 12.
196
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
59
Although accompanied most of the time by a lack of knowledge about the Union’s functioning
procedures, this degree of public trust can act as a catalyst for the exercise of civic rights. For further
details regarding public trust in the EU in Romania see
Încrederea în UE la români - după modelul încrederii în biserică
http://www.euractiv.ro/uniuneaeuropeana/articles|displayArticle/articleID_14138/Increderea-in-UE-
la-romani-dupa-modelul-increderii-in-biserica.html.
60
See the Sutdy IPP-CJI: 1 din 5 romani s-a folosit de legea liberului acces la informaţii de interes
public, http://www.euractiv.ro/uniunea-europeana/articles|displayArticle/articleID_18458/Studiu-
IPP-CJI-1-din-5-romani-s-a-folosit-de-legea-liberului-acces-la-informatii-de-interes-public.html.
197
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
61
Through the Protocol concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and
Romania to the European Union, the Accession Treaty of Romania also envisaged a set of clauses
for the adjustment/modification of the Treaty, were the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe
to be ratified, which did not come into force. Given that the Treaty of Lisbon’s origins stem from
the Constitutional Treaty, this set of clauses is still in force.
198
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
Article 254(1) and (2) of the EC Treaty, Bulgaria and Romania shall be
considered as having received notification of such directives and decisions upon
accession” (Article 52 of the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the
Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the EU);
“(1) Bulgaria and Romania shall put into effect the measures necessary for
them to comply, from the date of accession, with the provisions of directives and
decisions within the meaning of Article 249 of the EC Treaty and of Article 161 of
the EAEC Treaty, unless another time limit is provided for this Act. They shall
communicate those measures to the Commission at the latest by the date of
accession or, where appropriate, by the time limit provided for in this Act.
(2) To the extent that amendments to directives within the meaning of Article
249 of the EC Treaty and of Article 161 of the EAEC Treaty introduced by this
Act require modification of the laws, regulations or administrative provisions of
the present Member States, the present Member States shall put into effect the
measures necessary to comply, from the date of accession, with the amended
directives, unless another time limit is provided for in this Act. They shall
communicate those measures to the Commission by the date of accession or,
where later, by the time limit provided for in this Act” (Article 52 of the Act
concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania
to the EU).
As in the case of the ten Member States that had accessed to the EU in 2004,
Romania’s Accession Treaty contained 3 safeguard clauses62 to be applied only
during the first three years after accession:
• the general safeguard clause (economic);
• the safeguard clause concerning the internal market;
• the safeguard clause for justice and internal affairs.
To our analysis only the last clause set by articles 38 and article 39 indent 2 of
the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and
Romania is relevant. To that effect, Annex IX of the Accession Act sets forth a set
of specific commitments undertaken by Romania at the end of the accession
negotiations on the 14th of December 2004 in the fields of Justice and Internal
Affairs. The following commitments undertook by Romania at the end of the
accession negotiations comprised:
• To develop and implement an updated and integrated Action Plan and
Strategy for the Reform of the Judiciary including the main measures for
implementing the Law on the Organisation of the Judiciary, the Law on the
Status of Magistrates and the Law on the Superior Council of Magistracy
62
The safeguard clause doesn’t have only this punitive aspect, but also a positive one, allowing a
Member State to temporarily derogating from the European norms under certain conditions. See
Bărbulescu, I. Gh., Dicţionarul explicativ trilingv al Uniunii Europene, Polirom, 2009.
199
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
63
For example, the conclusions of the MCV of July 2010 states that “the Commission’s report
points to important shortcomings in Romania's efforts to achieve progress under the CVM”. For
further reference consult Report of the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council On
Progress in Romania under the Co-operation and Verification Mechanism, Brussels 20.07.2010,
COM(2010) 401 final.
200
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
focus of the chapter was mainly on the structure and functioning of the institutions
and structures established through treaties or secondary legislation. The chapter was
opened and temporarily closed during the first semester of 2002. The chapter did
not impose a compliance with the communitarian acquis and neither a legislative
coordination, nor implementation measures Romania should undertake before the
accession. Nevertheless, in order to benefit as fast as possible from the advantages
of accession without affecting the institutional balance of the EU, Romania had to
adapt its internal institutional framework and improve its institutional capacity
through the adoption and institutionalization of the administrative culture specific to
the functioning of EU structures and institutions (planning, efficiency, monitoring,
evaluation, subsidiarity, transparency, social dialogue, responsiveness et al.).
Complementary, the provisions of Chapter30 also referred to transversal tasks
regarding the improvement of administrative capacity, a task practically present in
every negotiated chapter, which accounts for the Union’s transformation power
over Romania.
Since the partial closing64 of chapter 30 up to the moment of accession to the
EU Romania undertook a set of structural and functional reforms in the field of
enhancing administrative capacity, reforms which aimed at administrative vertical
and horizontal decentralisation. Specifically:
• The institutions required for the implementation of the communitarian
acquis were created;
• The relations between public institutions and citizens were improved;
• The enactment of public policies and adjacent legislation was improved etc.
Consequently, the Commission’s Reports of 2002-2006 outlined Romania’s
achievements in increasing the efficiency of public institutions and the
enhancement of administrative capacity.
Nevertheless, during the 2005-2006 interval the Commission continued to ask
for immediate action in order to further improve the administrative capacity,
especially in regards to improving the process of drafting, adopting, enacting and
monitoring legislation and public policies proposals, of eliminating the
overlapping of competences between the central public authorities as well as
between the Government and the Parliament, but also of improving the relations
between the public institutions and the citizens, especially through the citizens’
participation to their enactment. For example the Comprehensive Monitoring
Report on Romania of October 2005 stated that at that moment:
“Romania has made very significant progress in aligning its legislation with
the EU legal order. Romania should be able to assume the obligations of
membership at the envisaged date of accession, provided that it accelerates its
64
We call it “partial” because under the iron rule of the EU accession negotiations no chapter is
considered closed until the final closing of all chapters.
201
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
efforts to that end in a number of areas and that it focuses on strengthening its
overall administrative capacity”.
To this extent, the report mentioned a few fields which were serious causes for
concerns, amongst others the absorption and administrative capacity regarding
funds allocated through structural instruments (for further details see the chapter
regarding funds absorption), as well as improving the quality of legislation.
The European Commission underlined the fact that in 2005 the legislative and
policies proposals, the strategies and action plans were drafted by political
consultants, which undermined the role of professional public clerks. In the same
vein, the monitoring report argued that in the drafting, adopting and enactment
process of the laws showed an excessive tendency of resorting to Government
Emergency Ordinances. This aspect was specifically mentioned in almost every
report starting with 2002. The same monitoring reports added that the Parliament
had to improve and increase the efficiency of its legislative capacity.
Around the accession of 2007, the monitoring Reports of May 2006 and
September 2006 showed the persistence of the same kinds of problems, although
the situation seemed to have somehow improved. Moreover, the monitoring
reports stated that on several occasions legislation was subjected to the Parliament
without taking into account the economic indicators, its connection with other
relevant legal provisions or the evaluation of the administrative capacities to
enforce and enact the specific act. The Commission argued that the justification
process of laws and policies, the ex ante evaluations and impact studies were
generally poorly drafted and the consultations with the interested parties were
neither systematic nor consistent. To that effect, the Commission’s conclusions
reflected a state of play in which the citizens and the interested parties did not
effectively take part to the drafting, monitoring and evaluation process of the
adopted and enacted legislation.
After Romania’s accession to the EU, key elements related to the enhancement
of administrative capacity remained only a rhetorical priority, whereas reality
posed a totally different picture. Of course, there are exceptions concerning
certain fields of action and policies.
If we look at the picture from the perspective of maximizing the benefits of
EU membership, we can draw an evaluation and a first statement regarding
Romania’s situation:
Romania has not managed to build a positive appreciation towards its
success of internal reforms, on the one hand, and to contribute to the
general development of the Union, on the other hand.
202
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
We will name some of the deficiencies we have thus identified and some
actions we consider useful, but who have suffered because of a flawed enactment
or because of the lack of their enactment altogether:
• The realization of a meta-evaluation of the state of things referring to the
period of time starting with the EU accession up to the present;
• The periodical evaluation of the acquis’ incorporation into existing
legislation, across different fields of action and transversal priorities;
• Cyclical miniaturizations and evaluations regarding the enhancement of
administrative capacity according to explicit administrative performance
indicators;
• The training of public policies and program specialists to evaluate the
institutions and institutional arrangements resulting from the adaptation/
incorporation of the acquis into the internal legislation;
• The lack of an administrative reform plan based adequately on ex ante
evaluation and impact studies, which should set the short, medium and long
term priorities, in coordination with the strategies and priorities of the
European Union.
In certain fields, some of the afore-mentioned activities were enacted as try-
out measures, without ensuring their continuation. The consequence of a lack of
institutionalization in this regard contributes to:
• The highly debated delay and drop in quality of the process of
incorporating EU law into national legislation;
• A reduced participation of Romania to the enactment of EU policies;
• The alienation of Romanian citizens from the enactment of internal policies
process;
• The reduction of social dialogue etc.
On the other hand, even after the accession to the EU, the Romanian
administrative system has maintained some of its negative characteristics outlined
on most of the monitoring reports of the European Commission. The Strategy for
a better regulation at the level of central public administration 2008-201365
mentions, among others:
• Excessive normativity;
• Low quality regulation of the central public administration;
• The instability of legislation;
• The high frequency of legislative events (amendments, additions and
republications) which affects certain laws relevant in the legislative system;
65
The Strategy for a better regulation at the level of central public administration 2008-2013,
Government of Romania, 2008, p. 8:
http://www.sgg.ro/docs/File/UPP/doc/proiecte_finale/Strategia_BR_varianta_finala_aprobata_de_G
uvern.pdf.
203
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
204
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
205
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
206
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
Although the afore-mentioned elements do not tightly fit the pattern of the
safeguard clauses instituted for Romania and Bulgaria through the Accession
Treaty, this state of facts contributes to the increase of the gaps existing at the
moment of accession between the national administrative system and the
administrative systems of the other Member States of the European Union, on the
207
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
one hand, and between the national system and the Union’s institutions on the
other hand. This in turn leads to:
• The impossibility of ensuring an effective representation of Romania within
the Union’s institutions;
• An inefficient participation of Romania to the enactment of the Union’s
policies;
• Major deficiencies in the absorption of funds allocated through the
European Union’s structural instruments;
• Romania’s reduced capacity of imposing subjects on the Union’s agenda
etc.
After Romania’s accession to the European Union, the task of incorporating
Union law into internal legislation fell on the Department for European Affairs, which
approves the legislative acts that incorporate the Union’s legislation. Over the years
2007-2009, this framework was perfected as per the Strategy for a better regulation
for the central public administration 2008-2013’s provisions. Therefore, in the
present, thanks to the provisions of GD 115/2008, as well as GD 561/2009, the
obstacles in the way of this activity essential for Romania’s integration in the EU
were eliminated. Nevertheless, some problems pertaining more likely to the culture of
drafting internal normative acts have persisted such as:66
• The poor quality of normative acts drafted in order to incorporate EU law
into national legislation;
• The lack of compliance with the integrated procedure approach concerning
the prevention of the initiation of infringement actions on the breaching of
Romania’s obligations as a Member State of the EU as well as the
representation of Romania in front of the Union’s courts, institutions and
structures concerning the problems of enforcing Union legislation;
• The lack of a procedural framework concerning the direct enforcement of
some regulations;
• The lack of personnel specialized in founding legislative proposals and
policies, experts who adequately know the decisional and enactment
process of the Union’s policies;
• The lack of a full institutionalization at the level of central and local
authorities of the mechanisms offered by the SOLVIT service for the
solving of the problems generated by the inadequate enforcement of
legislation concerning the common market by the public authorities,
without resorting to judicial procedures.
66
As they are mentioned by the Strategy for a better regulation for the central public administration
2008-2013.
208
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
67
For further reference consult the Cadrul Strategic National de Referinţă, p. 7.
209
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
68
For further reference see Raportul Comprehensiv de monitorizare pe anul 2005 privind România,
p. 68.
69
See the GD nr. 457/2008 concerning the institutional framework for coordination and
management of the structural instruments.
70
Consult Raportul Anual de Implementare a Programului Naţional de Reforme pentru perioada 1
octombrie 2008 – 1 octombrie 2009, Government of Romania, Bucharest, October 2009, p. 15.
210
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
71
For further reference see Absorbţia fondurilor structurale şi de coeziune, prioritate zero a
Guvernului României, presented by the Romanian Government on its website at:
http://www.gov.ro/absorbtia-fondurilor-structurale-si-de-coeziune-proritate-zero-a-guvernului-
romaniei__l1a109210.html.
72
See Situaţia la 30 septembrie 2010 a depunerii şi aprobării de proiecte, semnării de contracte de
finanţare şi efectuării de plăţi către beneficiari, drafted by the Authority for Structural Funds
Coordination, document available in electronic format at:
http://www.fonduri-ue.ro/upload/Anexa%201%2030%20septembrie%202010.pdf.
211
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
AT BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE EL ES FI FR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK UK EU27
73
See the National Strategi Reference Framework, p. 93.
74
As it is stated in the Raportul strategic naţional pentru anul 2009 privind implementarea
Fondurilor Structurale şi de Coeziune, Government of Romania, Bucharest, January 2010,
document in electronic format at: http://www.fonduri-ue.ro/upload/127323712758.pdf.
75
In order to set up a comparative view of the issues consulti: EU funds in Central and Eastern
Europe. Progress report 2007-2009 drafted by KPMG Budapest,
http://kpmgee.lcc.ch/dbfetch/52616e646f6d49569ec6ca687de886a9319808ff3ecaba5b891f423df6bd
c6a7/eu_funds_in_the_cee_2010_kpmg.pdf.
212
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
76
See Raportul Anual de Implementare a Programului Naţional de Reforme pentru anul 2007,
Government of Romania, Bucharest, October 2007, p. 23.
77
See Gheorghe Oprescu, Daniela Luminiţa Constantin, Florinel Ilie, Dragoş Pîslaru, Impact Study:
Analysis of the communautary funds absorbtion capacity in Romania, European Institute of
Romania, Bucharest, 2005, p. 61.
213
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
An analysis of the impact the Lisbon Treaty has/can have from a political-
institutional standpoint over Romania, as an EU Member State and the
identification of action proposals meant to adapt the institutional and political
practices and norms to the new judicial configuration of the European Union must
take into account two aspects:
• First, the way in which Romania reacted in 2007 to a prominent moment of
its evolution, i.e. the accession to the European Communities;
• Secondly, the constant lack of interest of internal political factors to be
informed and to inform the citizens in regard to short, medium and long-
term benefits of the EU membership status.
The signing of the Accession treaty didn’t mean that Romania fully met the
criteria set by the acquis (a situation in which Bulgaria and other recent Member
States found themselves in too); it meant however that the country had reached a
level that allowed it to access and become a member of the Union, the accession
being seen as an action capable of encouraging national efforts to satisfy the
commitments undertaken at accession. The three safeguard clauses and the
particular case of the last case (the justice and internal affairs situation) can be
understood along these lines. Similarly, we must not leave out of the picture the
institutional and administrative fields which also needed unavailing reforms in
order to cope with the membership requirements.
Most information regarding the tasks Romania faced in the post-accession
period come from mostly foreign sources, many times those of the Union, and
from some national reports that analyze particular aspects of the internal political-
institutional system. Analyzing these official documents of the central
administration78, we come to two contradictory conclusions:
78
For example: Strategia post-aderare (Post-accession Strategy), Planul Naţional de Dezvoltare
(National Development Plan), Cadrul Naţional Strategic de Referinţă (National Strategic
214
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
On the one hand, the fact that we are on the right track, that the accession
will solve all problems or, in any case, that there are only a few problems to
solve in order to reach the European average (the official discourse);
On the other hand, one could conclude that the EU accession caught
Romania largely unprepared and that not even in the last moments was
Romania able to give a good account of it.
We would like to make two observations:
• We do not imply that the accession was a gift made to Romania, because
we are aware of the work of certain institutions and the efforts spent to gain
this remarkable status;
• We only conclude that the major efforts of the pre-accession period were
not equally divided among the concerned institutions on the one hand, and
that they were not adequately followed by post-accession substantive
actions or by coherent visions over the transformations meant to take place
in the system in order to meet Romania’s new commitments.
We argue in favour of the former by appealing first to Romania’s post-
accession Strategy and especially by focusing our research on the “Institutional
Evaluation” Chapter which was limited to:
• Citing a series of institutions recently established79 in the pre-accession
period in order to align Romania to the rigours of the acquis80;
• “Checking off” the formal establishment of social dialogue by
implementing in a non-critical manned of European requirements in this
field, with a minimal recognition of the divides between the social partners
(from the strategy’s point of view, mainly between the trade unions and
business ownership).
In addition to that, the section named “The evaluation of gaps compared to the
European Union average” lacked information concerning the existing institutional
gaps which would have, among others, brought into light the fact that the simple
establishment of new institutions does not represent an answer meeting the European
requirements. Finally, the second part of the document, the one which should have
identified the measures to be taken in the post-accession period lacks provisions
regarding the institutional dimension, focusing on the economic, social, Euro
adoption convergence criteria analysed against the background of “consolidating
Romania’s role in the process of European construction” and enacted through vague
and disputable measures such as “intensifying the communication and national debate
process concerning European construction”, “consolidating institutions for the
enactment of social consensus towards the main socio-economic problems” or
“consolidating the new image of an European Romania”.
The self-appreciative tendency regarding the results is obvious in other
documents too, such as the National Reform Program 2007-2010 (NRP) and its
evaluations of 2007 and 2009. In the NRP the subject of central and local
administration is linked to the need of “developing an [administrative] culture
which allows civil servants to cope with the challenges derived from the status of
EU membership”; or to the improvement of administrative capacity in particular
fields such as the judiciary, competitiveness, public auctions, government spending
(to which the sustainable development dimension, the improvement of public
policies enactment process, simplified administration measures etc are added). The
concrete data about what has really been accomplished or about the impact of a
newly established institution in compliance or not with the undertaken
commitments and the EU norms (and about the institutions timely or delayed
establishment, about the necessary time it needs to deliver the expected results) are
missing. For example, in the NRP’s evaluation for 2007 “the improvement of the
public administration’s capacity to draft and implement public policies” was linked
among others to the executive power’s acceptance of the establishment of an
“analysis mechanism designed to substantiate all normative acts or public policies
proposals, before their governmental debate approval” or to the ex-post evaluation
of the General Secretariat of the Government (GSG) of public polices proposals
drafted by the ministries or by other administrative organisms. The report is mainly
quantitative and in this particular case of normative project substantiation too much
emphasis was placed on the number of substantiated proposals in opposition to the
quality of the substantiation or the manner in which these projects cover system
requirements or the necessary correlation of legislative initiatives in order to
prevent contrary effects.
Besides the data deficit and the tendency to emphasize only the positive
aspects, the official documents raise several other problems which can be reduced
to the following elements:
• Their number is too big;
• The relations between them are unclear;
• They contain overlapping parts;
• Follow different lines even if it is presumed that they answer coordinated
efforts.
For example, statements about the field of national economic and cohesion
policies exist in the Post-Accession Strategy, the National Development Plan, the
216
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
81
The part detailing the increase of public services quality is worth the observation that e-
administration services in less developed local communities, lacking sanitation are debated…
82
Raport al Comisiei Europene către Parlamentul European şi Consiliu privind progresele
realizate de România în cadrul Mecanismului de Cooperare şi Verificare, Brussels, 20.7.2010
COM(2010) 401 final.
217
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
as in many other cases, Romania’s reactions are either insufficient or represent just
formally agreed measures whose implementation is delayed or does not respect the
spirit of the European requirements that had led to their adoption (corruption related
indictments which have not received a formal sentence, long trials etc.). Specific
“steps back” are also underlined by the Report, such as the case of the National
Integrity Agency law (the form voted on June 30 2010). The Commission made
specific recommendations for the continuation and hastening of the judiciary reform
and the fight against corruption, recommendations the political decision-makers
know and should take into account. We point to the following aspect: the
Commission’s emphasis on “degree of unwillingness within the leadership of the
judiciary to cooperate and take responsibility for the benefit of reform. Although
pragmatic solutions are available in many cases, they are often not taken up, while
initiatives of individual magistrates, professional associations and civil society try to
close this gap”. This is an appeal to the political factors of “opening up” and
establishing a dialogue with the other categories of interested actors interested in the
reform of the judicial framework, helping put into place viable and enforceable
proposals.
Generally, the evaluation of the Commission reflected by the documents points
to mediocre results, at least when judiciary and administrative capacity (at any
level) is concerned, emphasizing the unsatisfactory means of identifying and
analyzing problems and policy implementation, against a background of a total
lack of central monitoring of the policy enactment process.
The European documents point also to strategies of avoiding delicate
situations: “The key to improved performance lies in reforming public
administration, clearly identifying tasks and responsibilities, ensuring officials’
independence and rewarding merit, in delegation of decision-making to avoid
bottlenecks at the top. Plans have been developed, and should now be
implemented” (“Romania – overview of progress”83 and Specific country
recommendations 2009”84). The Commission emphasizes the reduced rhythm of
implementing reforms and the insufficient resolve of the authorities to reform
public administration from the perspective of efficiency and effectiveness criteria.
83
Implementation of the Lisbon Strategy Structural Reforms in the context of the European
Economic Recovery Plan - Annual country assessments: Draft for a Council Recommendation on
the 2009 up-date of the broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States and the
Community and on the implementation of Member States' employment policies COM(2009), 34
final, pp. 55-56, accessible at: http://ec.europa.eu/archives/growthandjobs_2009/pdf/european-
dimension-200812-annual-progress-report/annual_en.pdf.
84
Implementation of the Lisbon Strategy Structural Reforms in the context of the European
Economic Recovery Plan: Annual country assessments – a detailed overview of progress made with
the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy reforms in Member States in 2008, pp. 90-94, accessible
at http://ec.europa.eu/archives/growthandjobs/pdf/european-dimension-200812-annual-progress-
report/annualass_detail.pdf.
218
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
What are therefore the final conclusions about the 2007 – 2010 period?
• First, there are, according to official documents three main landmarks of
administrative capacity consolidation: public administration, the judiciary
and structural instruments;
• Second, we are witnessing parallel discourses of national and European
decision-makers: the former emphasize the existing problems in all these
three sectors and the reduced rhythm of reforms, considering the elapsed
period of time since Romania undertook a series of commitments;
• Third, Romania will be unable to benefit from the opportunities of the
Lisbon Treaty as long as these reform gaps persist.
III.2.1.1. The pre-accession period. The strategies and the state of play
November 2001 (the NCFD began its activity in August 2002). The short and
medium term priorities were:
• The elimination of all forms of discrimination (through the functioning of
the NCFD);
• Setting up a public awareness campaign concerning national and European
anti-discrimination legislation;
• Romania’s participation to the European Action Plan for Fighting
Discrimination;
• Training the personnel of the Ministry of Public Information/The
Department for Public Relations.
The social insurance system illustrated the necessity of reforming a complex
pension system based on several components. The highlighted instruments were:
• The National Anti-Poverty and Social Inclusion Plan;
• Developing methods of monitoring the dynamic of poverty, including
annual reports.
The priorities envisaged the creation of an integrated and unitary system of
social assistance and the consolidation of the social services’ structure. A special
attention was paid to disabled persons, by means of measures of training
specialized personnel and observing the vulnerable persons’ rights.
In regards to the poverty rate, according to the National Statistics Institute’s
National progress report. Common Memorandum concerning social inclusion,
the rate was dropping in 2005 (with a significant decrease of poverty in urban
areas, as a consequence of the effects of the introduction of a flat tax on wages).
As to the employment rate, the trends were increasing in the case of the private
and mixed sectors and decreasing on the public sector. Important progresses were
reported also in the connected field of continuous training.
At the same time, the refiguring of the pension point and of certain pensions
for vulnerable categories (farmers) had led to an increase of the medium pension
in the public system by 27.01%. At the insistency of the European Union, Law
no. 204 concerning facultative pensions had been adopted.
In the field of social assistance the implementation of existing programs was
continued, the Report emphasizing the effects of measures concerning families
and poor or institutionalized children (the impact of the state allowance for
children) or of the home-heating aids. Another important group targeted in 2006
was that of families affected by natural calamities.
In the field of healthcare the main evolutions focused on decreasing the
number of beds on the ground of moving towards ambulatory treatment. An
important problem was the effective coverage of healthcare system, the lack of
medical services reaching severe rates especially in rural areas. Another measure
was of enacting citizen vaccination campaigns. In a more substantial manner, the
221
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
insurer’s obligation of offering access to the basic medical services package, the
minimal medical services package to the ensured and the package of services for
the persons with optional insurance were realized through the framework
agreement concerning the conditions of medical assistance. The following
complementary programs: communitarian medical assistance, the development of
social services networks for social assistance in hospitals and the development of
sanitary mediator network (with a big stake in increasing the Roma population’s
access) were already implemented or running at that time. We also need to take
into account the allotment of important funds for the mental healthcare system
and the concern for the increasing number of people suffering from mental illness.
The social services system was credited as having had the most important role
in promoting social inclusion, to that effect the establishment of the accreditation
system of public or private social services providers and the development of
several internationally funded services being paramount.
The protection of disadvantaged groups comprised the field of family and
children protection, disabled persons and Roma population, as well as imprisoned
persons’ protection policies.
Gender equality of opportunities between men and women was a separate
chapter. The gender dimension in regards to the global vulnerable groups
approach was nevertheless missing. At an institutional and legislative level the
establishment of the National Agency for Equal Opportunities and the enactment
of a National Strategy for equal opportunities between men and women for 2006-
2009 were considered the most important results as well as the general action Plan
for the implementation of the Strategy, dating from 2006. The Strategy’s main
objectives were: improving the national judicial framework, improving the socio-
economic status of women an encouraging the women’s participation to the
decision-making process and fighting against gender roles and stereotypes. At the
same time, the supplementing of Law 202/2002’s provisions was another
prominent objective. Public information and awareness campaigns were proposed
too85, but their impact was never mentioned.
In other words, in the field of inclusion the importance of increasing the
coordination with European Union instruments and provisions was emphasized.
In regards to social inclusion, a series of steps needed to be made, taking into
consideration the use of the Open Method of Coordination and the obligation of
filing annual specific reports to the Member States of the Union.
85
A web page of the agency, the development of a video advertising clip and the editing of a
magazine which lasted only for a few issus and had a very ambiguous public rating.
222
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
III.2.1.2. Accession and post-accession. The strategies and the state of play
In the years following Romania’s accession to the EU, the social dimension
was mainly reflected by the reports concerning social protection and inclusion, the
two fields being tackled together within the European Union.
At the same time Romania drafted annual national reports, falling within the
Union’s practice concerning social inclusion. The method used in this field was
know as the Open Method of Coordination (OMC), which “represents a process
by which EU Member States agree to coordinate their policies within a mutual
learning and structured exchange of information process”. The OMC is applied in
the public policies sectors where the EU, as per the EU treaties, has only limited
competences, but where the states consider that they can bring added value
through European cooperation and coordination, The OMC is an instrument that
helps the Member States in their reform efforts, respecting nevertheless their legal
competences”86. It the case of social inclusion, the reporting procedure is a
twofold one: each Member State presents its own social report and at the common
level a common report concerning social protection and inclusion is drafted.
In September 2008 Romania filed the National Strategic Report for social
protection and social inclusion 2008-2010. This was a large document that
comprised an evaluation of the situation and a chapter dedicated in turn to the
National Action Plan in the field of Social Inclusion, the National Pensions
Strategy and the National Strategy for long-term healthcare and nursing. In 2007
positive trends in regard to the total income per household and activity and
employment rates for the active population were observed87. Variables such as the
long-term unemployment rate followed a decreasing trend.
In the same period the poverty rate seemed to have stabilized around the
18.5% level, most of the people in poverty (70%) living in rural areas. Four types
of households registered an increased poverty rate: single people (22% of the men
and 30.8% of the women), single parent families (31%, in most of the cases the
mothers being the single parents), families with three or more children (40%) and
single persons over 65 years old (33.4%) – where female poverty was
increasingly severe.
Undertaking the main objective of the National Reform plan, the report made
reference to the ensuring of a labour market favourable to social inclusion of the
vulnerable groups (an approach similar to the one the EU had during that period),
by supporting the creation of new jobs, reducing the phenomenon of undeclared
86
Bărbulescu, Iordan Gheorghe, Dicţionarul explicativ trilingv al Uniunii Europene, Polirom, 2009,
p. 435 or Lambru, Mihaela, Metoda Deschisă de Coordonare (MDC) în domeniul protecţiei şi
incluziunii sociale. Dimensiunea participativă a MDC , in Calitatea Vieţii, XXI, nr. 1–2, 2010, p. 2.
87
A central field in the context of demographic evolutions.
223
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
Hence,
“The central objective of the Government in the field of social inclusion is of
continuing the efforts for the development of an inclusive society based on the
supplying developed and integrated social inclusion services based on a real
evaluation of the individual’s needs, by developing the third sector and by
ensuring equal opportunities for everyone, with an emphasis on vulnerable
persons” (National Strategic Report for social protection and social inclusion
2008-2010, p. 21).
In order to ensure the employment rate of underprivileged persons the
following actions had to be developed and promoted: promoting social economy,
the integration on the labour market of disabled persons and ensuring the
accountability of allocated resources and implementation.
At the same time, the development of family policies was focused on
promoting measures aimed at encouraging the women’s participation in the labour
market, by developing facilities for children care and the development of day-
centres which encourage the mothers’ return to the working place (NSR 2008-
2010, p. 26).
The third strategic objective, the continuation of efforts to improve the living
conditions of the Roma ethnic minority citizens was supported by the realization
of studies and the implementation of the monitoring and evaluation system,
realized at the methodological level. As to concrete programs and actions,
88
Programs targeting disabled, elderly, homeless persons and domestic violence victims had already
been developed.
224
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
supporting access to primary health services through family doctors lists, the
continuation of sanitary mediators training problems; improving the school
enrolment rate of Roma ethnics; the development of national programs for the
integration in formal economy; promoting anti-discrimination policies using
European Social Fund and World Bank funds and applying for International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development funds (NSR 2008-2010, pp. 29-30).
Regarding pensions, the modified system consisted of pension pillar 1,
mandatory, pay-as-you-go, pension pillar 2, optional, and pillar 1bis, mandatory,
of individual accounts. The enacted changes aimed at increasing the standard
pensioning age gradually by 2014; increasing the minimum payment stage for
both sexes from 10 to 15 years; introducing a new formula of pension calculation
based on a system which takes into consideration the incomes realized for the
whole labour period and not only the incomes realized during a specific period of
time.
The system’s identified vulnerabilities were: the low number of insured payers
among independent workers, the 19% poverty rate at pension and the gender
dimension of the poverty rate (22,0% of the women over 65 years old were under
the poverty threshold compared to only 13% of the men, according to NSR 2008-
2010, pp. 38-39).
In regard to public health services, the main objective was represented by the
improvement of the population’s health state and building a modern and efficient
health system, compatible with the health systems in the European Union. At the
same time, the implementation of programs which answered primary public
health concerns and the needs of vulnerable groups, the development of medical
infrastructure and emergency medicine, as well as the establishing of the list of
prescription drugs essential to the population’s health, entirely or partially
covered through the social health insurance system were considered priorities
(NSR 2008-2010, pp. 44-45).
In order to ensure future development, certain long and medium-term priorities
were established. In order to improve the quality of medical services, in 2007
medical services, medical appliances and sanitary material providers were
subjected to evaluation and a commission of experts for the improvement of the
activity’s monitoring was established within the National Health Insurance
House. (NSR 2008-2010, pp. 45-52). In order to increase the access to medical
services shifting the focus towards preventive health services and the increase of
the health education level, the modernization of services and the development and
the broadening of the integrated communitarian medical assistance were
considered.
A particular problem was that most dependent elderly persons benefited from
family care, supplied mostly by women. This reality posed multiple problems that
225
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
needed to be solved. On the one hand, women wanted to join the jabot market,
impelled by economic needs, on the other hand the report observed that “family
care is realized mostly in rural areas, where traditions and moral values are
observed to a greater extent”. Actually, in spite of social and economic realities
(women can desire to join the labour market regardless of their economic
condition and the traditional ethic of feminized gratuitous care cannot be a
principle of an European Union concerned with gender equal opportunities)
informal care provided by women will continue to be the main pillar of the
system, supported by training and awareness programs as well as cooperation
procedures with employers that are willing to get involved in the implementation
of part-time jobs related policies (NSR 2008-2010, p. 64).
The last annual report of Romania concerning social protection and social
exclusion is Romania – Common Report on social protection and social inclusion
- 2009. The poverty risk identified is set at 19%, with higher values for the rural
population, Roma’s children, unemployed, and elderly women. The question of
the impacts of the financial crisis on vulnerable groups, remains unanswered, to
be tackled probably by the next annual report. We can nevertheless anticipate
some realities, such as the high unemployment rate for women, elderly persons
and young persons, the economic crisis tending to affect the vulnerable
categories, these being the prospective targets to be supported by social policies.
Such an analysis is undermined by the character of the used documents, which
“offer a rather descriptive image of the projects and programs focused on
vulnerable groups, without providing an adequate enough analytic image of the
results. There are indeed progresses, but the presented figures are confusing because
they offer no insights into the measures’ impact within a systemic evaluation”
(Common Report on social protection and social inclusion, 2009, p. 3).
The identified priorities in regards to labour market access were: the increase
of the employment rate of underprivileged persons, the promotion of integrated
policies (packages of remittances and social services) and the continuation of the
efforts to improve the Roma’s living conditions.
In regards to the pension system, the report considers that Romania is facing
major short and long term challenges regarding the system’s durability, and
focuses on increasing the level of contribution turnover and the fight against
undeclared working contracts, as well as on the increase of the contribution
period. Given the major gender discrepancies between the levels of the pensions,
a specific problem is the absence of a law-determined minimum pension.
The healthcare system is facing multiple accessibility, quality and public trust
problems. In regards to public access, the Government proposes the building of
new medical units, the acquisition of ambulances and the hiring of medical
personnel. In regards to quality, the equipment quality needs to be improved, but
226
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
III.2.2. Democratization
III.2.2.1. Instruments
Article 6 of the TEU alludes to the democratic and human rights principles.
The article states that the European Union is based on the principles of freedom,
democracy, human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as the rule of law.
Consequently, all the states that were engaged in the accession process had to
fulfil three criteria: European identity, democratic system of government and
human rights and civic freedoms observance.
The Lisbon Treaty maintains these conditions and develops them in its
content, as we have shown in chapter 1 of this study. For example, the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union consolidates democratic instruments
and institutions. At the same time, in the context of democratization and
participatory citizenship, it is important to highlight the role the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union inclusion’s plays in bringing the
citizens and their interests closer to the EU: according to the research The Lisbon
Treaty and its implications on Romania, 18% of the respondents have considered
that the Charter’s compulsory character is the most important change brought
about by the Lisbon Treaty (the most important change identified by most of the
respondents was the Union’s gain of legal person status).
The Copenhagen criteria stated, among others, that the candidate state must
ensure the stability of the institutions that guarantee democracy, the rule of law,
human rights and the protection of national minorities. In Romania’s case, this
stability was reached at the moment of the beginning of accession negotiations
and consolidated throughout the accession process. The accession process
registered nevertheless a set of shortcomings when it comes to the institutions’
democratization. Against a background of socialist period vestigial influences,
when statism prevailed over pluralism, the former being an essential condition of
democracy, statism was strengthened during the accession period. The
consolidation of statism was the result of the technical process as well of the short
deadlines the candidate states had in order to enact the reforms pertaining to the
negotiation chapters. Democratization thus occurred more through conditional
procedures than by the internalization and self-awareness in regards to
democracy’s indispensable role in the functioning of the state in a market
economy.
227
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
228
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
for social dialogue promotion and development; the involvement of the ownership
and of the trade-unions in the process of implementing and transposing the
acquis, and their preparing for running external financed programs. The
consolidation of the social partners was considered an important step in view of
future evolutions, including through the undertaking of additional responsibilities.
53% of the respondents who participated to the research The Lisbon Treaty and its
implications on Romania considered that at the European Union’s level a
representation of the interest groups is realized to a very great or to a great extent.
At the same time, the role of the ownership and business networks was considered
prominent for the implementation of EU policies by 49% of the respondents. In
regards to the Social and Economic council a tendency of supporting both the
internal reform and the enhancement of its role was observed (28% of the
respondents considered that the number of representatives for each group should
be changed, 57% of the respondents thought that the consulting procedure should
be altered, 61% stated that the committee’s notifications should be compulsory,
53% of the respondents considered the committee should have the right to draft
legislative proposals).
Several studies concerning the process of democratization in Central and
Eastern Europe argue that the negotiation and accession process was conditioned
rather by the dimension of establishing new democratic institutions than by the
transformations of the internal institutional context, respecting nevertheless the
peculiarity of existing institutions. In a prominent study, researcher Heather
Grabbe argued that “the EU’s efforts to promote democratic development were
not fitting the incentives created by the accession process, a case in which the EU
prioritized efficiency at the cost of legitimacy”89. The researcher is of the opinion
that in the accession process, the Executive power was consolidated through the
establishment of a “supreme Executive” at the detriment of the legislative power
or the regional actors. In addition to that, the EU hesitated in offering institutional
design recommendations, focusing mostly on procedural recommendations, which
conditioned the institutions in a sort of way to become more democratic and to
disseminate democratic practices.
The conclusions mentioned above are valid for Romania too. After the
accession, the vestiges of the negotiation and pre-accession mode of public
policies enactment remained prevalent, even though, compared to the ‘90s a
considerable improvement of the state of play was observed. If we are to make an
analysis of the semestrial monitoring reports we find that Romania has made
major progresses herein. For example, several important laws in the field of
transparency (Law 544/2001, Law 52/2003), were adopted, but the effects they
89
Grabbe, Heather, Puterea de transformare a UE, Europenizarea prin intermediul condiţiilor de
aderare în Europa Centrală şi de Est, Epigraf, Chişinău, 2008, p. 221.
229
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
90
Raport de monitorizare a instituţiilor publice, Bucharest, 2008, drafted by Centrul de Resurse
Juridice – CRJ.
230
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
231
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
Chapter IV. Romanian Institutional and political design for enacting the
stipulations of the Lisbon treaty. Recommendations
One of the main reasons for the current administrative deadlock, for the weak
administrative performance is the fact the public administration personnel is still
insufficiently trained in the field if European integration. This is the reason why
on several occasions central and local public authorities are passive in the process
of taking part to EU public policies consulting or promotion. Once the authorities
are not involved, the messages transmitted to the citizens are not transmitted
efficiently, correctly and coherently. The national and local media substitutes the
authorities in this position, thereby assuming the role of solely communicator of
information regarding the EU’s and Romania’s European integration processes.
Without an adequate level of informational support from the authorities, the
media is unable the fully utilize the capacity at its disposal. The research The
Lisbon Treaty and its implications on Romania underlines this last aspect, only
8% of the respondents having the national printed media as a main source of
information regarding EU policies for a better life and only 11% having the
national televisions as the main source of information regarding EU policies..
A low degree of professionalism of the personnel in central and local
administration an adequate and coherent participation to the enactment of Union
policies cannot be achieved. This factor accounts for the authority’s inertia or
formalism when it comes to the launching of public debates or consultations. A
recent example is the recent series of 9 conferences organized by the DEA in
cooperation with the DIREI (NSPAS) which tried to disseminate the provisions of
the Lisbon Treaty across the regions of development. Difficulties in the
organization of the conferences, a relative lack of interest and even of relevant
knowledge about the issues were all observed. If the central and local public
authorities will not build a professional capacity at the decision-making level, the
poor administrative performance will persist. All the more so since, according to
the principle of subsidiarity, these are the institutions responsible for maximizing
Romania’s benefits deriving from its EU membership status.
Besides, the research undertaken in the present study underlines the fact that
35% of the respondents see subsidiarity as situating the decision at the level that
232
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
produces the maximum benefits whereas 48% see it as situating the decision-level
closer to the citizens.
A great deal of clarity, expedience and perseverance in the substantiating,
enactment, evaluation and the reform of Union policies, programs, actions and
strategies is needed, not only in the opaque laboratories of the power, but also
through the consulting of the public central and local administration and of the
citizens, NGOs, social partners etc. A highly trained and informed bureaucratic
class will play a major role in European integration, preparing and informing the
population.
Consequently, we need to:
• develop as many short and medium turn training programs in the coming
years which make direct reference to the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty;
• at the same time, the specialized governmental institutions (such as the
DEA) as well as the higher learning institutions need to develop a series of
itinerary programs which popularize the EU’s policies functioning and
enactment;
• Last, but not leas, the universities must prepare new masters’ studies and
even PhD programmes which achieve these goals, even, if it is the case,
through the accessing of European funds. A good example is the new
masters’ studies program of the DIREI (NSPAS) of training civil servants
in the profession of public program and policy evaluator.
The Lisbon Treaty defines the Union’s and Member States’ obligation of using
policy, actions and strategy evaluation. At the Union’s institutional level,
evaluation has become an indispensable part of the enactment of policies,
programs and actions, thus establishing the measure of success or failure of these
enterprises in order to help substantiate the new proposals subject to approval.
Through this practice the Union’s institutions and policies get increasingly closer
to the interests and aspirations f the European citizens, generating an increasing
degree of transparency and public accountability. The Lisbon Treaty only
strengthens the evaluation culture’s role in the efficiency-based approach of
achieving the undertaken objectives.
In Romania’s case, during the last few years, multiple strategic documents and
programs pertaining to Romania’s European integration have been drafted, stating
the necessity of reforming public programs and policies and connecting them to
the citizens’ needs and interests. If we look at the implementation procedure of
these strategies we are forced to observe a total lack of evaluation, their impact
233
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
being practically unknown. Even though the “Strategy for a better regulation”
states the necessity of establishing a culture of evaluation, in our case, the
evaluation of public programs, policies and even strategies is a sporadic,
pioneering activity. All the more so since the fragile specialized unit of the
government has been subject to reform.
In conclusion, in order to bring the institutions, policies and the content of the
internal strategic documents closer to the citizens’ needs and interests, it is
imperative that:
• Evaluation becomes a current practice guiding the strategic documents’ and
programs’ attempt of reforming internal policies and programs;
• Ensuring a high degree of transparency and public accountability of the
public central and local institutions in relation to the citizens.
The consultations of public institutions with social partners are most of the
time superficial, a procedure that needs to be checked on the list of requirements
for enacting a particular action. Although in the period of pre-accession marked
the development of the necessary legislative and normative framework for the
establishment of the consulting practice, public institutions prefer to unilaterally
enact decisions and procedures. The spirit and the letter of the Lisbon treaty’s
provisions encourage the public authorities of the Member States to tightly
cooperate with the business, ownership and social networks in order to ensure a
more efficient and effective enactment of the Union’s policies and especially
facilitate the achievement of the objectives set forth by the “Europe 2020”
Strategy.
The increase in the information degree over the social partner’s involvement in
the economic recovery process which underlines an intelligent, durable and
inclusion-friendly growth is paramount.
Ensuring the active and responsible participation of the social partners in the
process of drafting, implementing and evaluating European Union policies
requires first of all an adequate knowledge of the EU institutions, decisional
process and policies.
The establishment of a participatory democracy framework which starts from
the level of subsidiary communities and leads to the upper levels can only be
established this way.
The research The Lisbon Treaty and its implications on Romania underlines
234
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
the fact that 50% of the respondents consider to a very great and to a great extent
that the EU ensures a fair representations of the European interest groups’ points
of view. At the same time, the research points out that 19% of the respondents
consider the ownership and business networks as being very important in the
decisional process of the EU, 54% considering them important. As to the
participation of business and ownership networks to the process of implementing
EU policies, 20% of the respondents consider it very important and another 56%
consider it important. In conclusion, the respondents identify the business and
ownership networks as important structures in the enactment of EU policies and
this reality should be reflected at the national level too.
Starting from these considerations supported by our research, we recommend
that:
• Public institutions cooperate tighter with interested parties such as business,
employers and social networks, by establishing consulting mechanisms
based on adequate virtual platforms, similar to the ones used by the
European Commission (the Your Voice in Europe platform for example).
235
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
The Lisbon Treaty increases the possibility for the national parliament’s, as
well as the regional authorities’ involvement in the decisional process. Romania
needs to use the multi-level governance mechanisms, a reality acknowledged by
the survey respondents, who, in half the cases considered the “national
parliament’s participation to the decisional process of the Union” a major change
in the relation between the EU and the Member States as a result of the Lisbon
Treaty’s coming into force. At the same time, we observe that the subsidiarity
principle – central for the past and future development of the European Union – is
not understood by the representatives of the central and local public
administration or by the representatives of the trade unions, ownership and civil
society. Thus, instead of knowing that the principle holds that the decisional
process of the Union must reside at the level that allows it to generate maximum
results (35%), most of the survey’s respondents (48%) considered that
subsidiarity is moving the decision-making level as close as possible to the
citizens. Furthermore, the respondents had difficulties in knowing the
competences of the European and national institutions and organisms that can
intervene in the subsidiarity-compliance verification process. For this reason we
think it is important that knowledge about the subsidiarity principle of the public
administration, private enterprise and civil society representatives is increased for
a better participation of the social partners to the enactment of European Union
public policies.
With the Lisbon treaty’s coming into force, the EU encourages increased
participation of the national parliaments to the Union’s activities and consolidates
their capacity of expressing their opinions on the legislative acts proposals of the
EU (see Protocol 1 on the role of national parliaments in the EU). In this setting,
the Romanian Legislature must increase the efficiency of its activity, so that it
actively, transparently and diligently participates to the processes pertaining to
European integration. At the same time it is needed that the government’s role be
clearly separated to prevent the overlapping between government and
parliamentary competences and to prevent interference with legislative procedures
(such as the case of excessive Emergency Ordinances adoption).
The research The Lisbon Treaty and its implications on Romania shows that
37% of the respondents consider that the national parliament’s involvement in the
European Union decisional system, as a guarantee of respecting the will of the
236
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
citizens in their quality of national citizens of the Union is the main effect of the
Lisbon Treaty’s coming into force. At the same time, 50% of the respondents
consider that as a result of the Lisbon Treaty’s enactment, the relations between
the Member States and the European Union change through the participation of
national parliaments to the Union’s decisional process. Consequently, starting
from these considerations:
• The internal legislative institution must revise its practice and procedures in
order to increase its efficiency, effective and accountable in the process of
participation to the Union’s actions;
• A memorandum between the Parliament and the Government which
specifies the competences of the two parties, the interaction procedures and
the terms of action etc. is necessary.
On the other hand, Romania should be actually concerned in regards to the
decision making process of the EU in all of its stages. To that effect, the
Department of European Affairs of the Romanian Government and other
administrative institutions manage the decision-making issues, placing an
emphasis on identifying the subjects on the European Commission’s agenda and
the analysis these might have on the national interests of Romania, serving the
goal of reaching a consensual position which the representatives in the COREPER
or in the other formats of the Council, as well as other experts taking part to
different working formats should know and promote. It is important to note that
the personnel tasked with the European issues is aware that the national agenda
cannot be fully followed, the European game being based on compromise and the
success of one state depending on the general progress.
Nevertheless, Romania seems to be unaware of the influence it can play due to
its population, transformed in weighted votes in the Council and in the number of
MPs in the EP. The political initiatives that would allow Romanian leaders to
assert themselves as regional leaders and which would allow for the introduction
on the EU’s agenda of issues concerning groups of states in Central and Eastern
Europe are lacking. Therefore the “consolidation of the new image of European
Romania” envisaged by the post-accession Strategy can be accomplished only by
assuming an active role in the political-institutional system of the EU.
The possibilities opened by the European External Action Service in defining
an active policy of the European Union gives Romania the possibly of expressing
its points of view and interests as an EU, OSCE and NATO member and as a
Black Sea Coast country, as a sate interested in the democratic development of the
Balkans and of the Eastern vicinity, predominantly in the Republic of Moldova,
Ukraine, Turkey and Russia or the Caucasus. Romania. Romania has major
interests in the region and can play an important role in defining the strategies for
Turkey, Moldova and the Western Balkans if it capitalizes on the advantage of
237
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
knowing the issues in the region and manages to build wining alliances around its
ideas. Romania must therefore draft studies and based on them 10-20 years
strategies of promoting the EU’s and consequently its interests in its influence
area which should comprise the Turkey, Western Balkans and Moldova perimeter.
WE consider the following observations could be made:
• There is a great opportunity for Romania’s citizens to directly express
themselves in their element of EU Member States citizens through the new
powers the Lisbon Treaty gives the national parliaments;
• The Romanian Parliament must set up the mechanisms that ensure an active
role for the Legislature in European casting at the EP level and not that of a
passive spectator that silently approves every proposal originating from
Brussels; this way the Romanian citizens will be able to take part to the
European decision-making through their representatives;
• The necessity of strengthening the European Affairs Commission of the
Romanian Parliament is all the more so warranted, as well as ensuring
public access to its debates. An opening up of these proceedings to the
public, private or non-profit actors interested in specific issues of the
legislative initiatives examined under the subsidiarity and proportionality
compliance procedures would ensure an increase in transparency and
legitimacy;
• We also recommend the strengthening of the Department for European
Affairs, an authority that must gain the status of an institution with
transversal attribution and competences concerning Romania’s
participation to the EU’s actions. In order to consolidate the legislative
institution’s capacities of taking part to the Union’s activities, the DEA
must become the Government’s national and integrating coordinator in
relation to the Parliament on every issue that implies common attributions.
If in terms of the new alterity of the national parliament the DEA is
“condemned” to cooperate with the Parliament, the same can be said for the
foreign and defence policy, where the DEA must cooperate with the MFA.
After an almost 4 years period inside the EU and having the status of net
beneficiary of funds allocated through structural instruments, Romania’s
administrative absorption capacity remains nevertheless low. Such a situation
only contributes to the increase of economic, social, administrative and
infrastructure disparities instead of eliminating them.
238
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
The fact that Romania is on the last place among Member States in terms of
the absorption of funds allocated through structural and cohesion instruments is
caused, among other factors, by the fact that only a reduced number of potential
beneficiaries take part in the process. For example, the research The Lisbon treaty
and its implications on Romania points out that 76% of the respondents admit
that they have never participated to the accession of funds allocated to Romania
through structural instruments. This aspect proves either that the structural
instruments are not close enough to the competent factors, that the procedures are
too complicated or that the competent factors do not have sufficient information
about the objectives and the accessing procedures to the funds allocated to
Romania through structural instruments. On the other hand, 51% of the
respondents consider that the EU funds accessed by Romania insofar have had a
reduced contribution to the achievement of the cohesion objectives which
somewhat proves that the respondents seem to be aware of what and which are the
adjacent objectives to the structural funds. In the same vein, 19% of the
respondents consider that the structural funds accessed insofar by Romania have
contributed to a small extent to the achievement of the cohesion objectives,
whereas only 15% consider that the structural funds accessed by Romania up to
this moment have contributed to a great extent to the achievement of these
objectives.
On the other hand, 59% of the respondents think that the percent of the EU’s
budget allocated for cohesion should be bigger and 14% consider it should remain
at the present level. These answers certify to their option in favour of the
cohesion, social and territorial policy’s reform. If Romania continues to have a
reduced administrative absorption capacity of the allocated funds, it will be
difficult to support this message at the European level, lacking the legitimacy of
upholding this argument in view of the next financial perspective of the EU.
In order to improve this internal situation in regards to the achievement of the
Union’s objectives set forth by the Lisbon Treaty, we recommend the enactment
of the following measures, complementary to the provisions of the National
Reforms Plan 2011-2013:
• The present way of system functioning must be maintained up to 2013. If it
is absolutely necessary, only a handful of changes must be made to the
systemic and institutional design of the management and coordination of
the operational programs. In the meantime debates concerning the
institutional and systemic design for the next financial perspective 2014-
2021 must be started;
• In order to increase the system’s efficiency the procedures of applying,
selection, contracting, monitoring and evaluation projects adjacent to the
operational programs must be adapted and simplified;
239
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
240
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
Starting from the recent data (in spite of the fact that the 1010 Report for 2009
has not been drafted yet) the following problems and recommendations can be
emphasized:
91
At a lower level, a good example of a coherent and concise working model is the document
Methodical Instructions for the Organisation of Work when Meeting the Legislative Obligations
Ensuing from the Membership of the Czech Republic în the European Union drafted by the
Executive of the Czech Republic in 2005. Available online http://www.vlada.cz/assets/evropske-
zalezitosti/kompatibilita-s-pravem-es-eu/app1_methodical_instructions.pdf
241
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
To the extent that the Government continues to rely on informal caretakers, the
Government should ensure that it promotes this type of care by ensuring the men
undertake this responsibility too, and by ensuring that this type of labour is
decently paid and is not creating another poor and feminized working
environment.
The last wage measures in healthcare seriously affect the living standards of
female workers in a system already poor and feminized. There are no signals that
the Government understands this threefold role and that it establishes coherent
policies in the field. Moreover, the association of family caretaking with moral
highlights a flawed understanding of professional healthcare, as well as a
complete misunderstanding of equal chances opportunity and gender
emancipation strategies at the European Union’s level. At the same time, the
drafting and monitoring of national gender policies is hampered by the disbanding
and recent reorganization of the NAEO.
IV.2.3. Improving the living standards for the Roma minority, especially
through providing access to education and professional development
programs
categories: women, Roma minority or disabled persons. For example, the analysis
of the situation of the Roma minority needs or of the disabled persons needs to be
correlated with the gender dimension, in compliance with the gender integrative
approach (gender mainstreaming).
92
See chapter IV.1.6.
243
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
IV.3. Democratization
The Lisbon Treaty is a turning point for the consolidation and the hastening of
the democratization process, By facilitating the citizens’ access to European
institutions and information regarding these, by encouraging civic initiatives and
ensuring the possibility for the challenging of the European institutions’
decisions, European citizens have at their disposal the institutions for a
participatory citizenship vital for the confirming of democracy. According to the
research The Lisbon Treaty and its implications on Romania the respondents
graded with 6.30 the manner in which the EU informs its citizens (60% of the
respondents). For this reason we formulate the following recommendations:
244
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
a secondary position in relation to the trade unions and ownership within the
Government’s social dialogue priorities. 68% of the respondents in the research
The Lisbon Treaty and its implications on Romania consider that the Romanian
state observes the rights of its own citizens to a small and very small extent.
Strengthening participation and democratization through the support of civil
society by the national authorities must be stepped up.
245
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
The respondents to the research The Lisbon Treaty and its implications on
Romania considered in a proportion of 62% that the European budget for social
cohesion should be larger. Out of the respondents a significant part had accessed
European funds (79%), but only 33% had accessed lower value grants (500,000),
and 74% believed that these funds had contributed to a small or very small extent
to improvements in the field of social cohesion. An evaluation of the social
actors’ accession of European funds and of the social partners who encounter
institutional and financial difficulties in accessing them (to what extent does co-
financing encourage or prevent certain categories of social actors and to what
extent the eventual disparities can be corrected) needs to be undertaken.
93
European Commission, EU Citizenship Report 2010, Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens’
rights, COM (2010) 603 final.
246
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
247
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
Chapter V. Conclusions
We conclude that:
- First of all, Romania needs to truly fulfil the commitments undertaken
through its accession to the European Union (in other words, to continue its
efforts of complete integration in the Union’s space), in order to
subsequently adapt to the substantial changes introduced by the Lisbon
Treaty. To that effect, we outline the necessity of Romania’s compliance
with both the spirit and the letter of the recommendations repeatedly made
on several occasions and to the own commitments undertaken on repeated
occasions as well, especially after the conclusion of the accession
negotiations94, the accession itself95 or the different pre and post accession
evaluations96.
For these reasons we recommend:
94
The long list of sectors for which Romania asked and obtained transitory periods speaks by itself
about these commitments, some of them not accomplished even after 7 years.
95
The accession conditioned by the fulfillment of internal affairs and justice commitments led to the
introduction of the CVM in these fields.
96
A relevant example is the already mentioned situation of the field of Justice and Internal Affairs
which continues to be a reason for concern for the European Union, although 7 years since the
conclusion of the access negotiations and 4 years since the accession have passed. It is not by
chance during the finishing states of our study the possibility of missing the deadline of Schengen
Space accession, initially set for March 2011, was officialy recognized.
248
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
2. Institutional enactment
249
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
97
The European Union has been developing the Jean Monnet programs for many years, aimed at,
among others, supporting the Member States’ governments, the European political class, and the EU
institutions by bringing together the expertise present in the EU universities. There is already a
tradition of cooperating with Jean Monnet professors in all Member States, except for Romania. The
coordinator of this project is a Jean Monnet professor, is acquainted with the other Jean Monnet
professors from Bucharest, Cluj, Iassy and Târgu-Mureş etc. and makes this statement knowingly. It
is only one example of the unemployment of important resources, such as human resurces already
underlined by the European Commission.
250
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
offer solid landmarks for new regulations, the same way the European
system does. The European principles, such as those comprised by the
General Interests Service Charter must be endorsed and enforced, thus
ensuring the regulating institutions stability and neutrality on the one hand
and the continuity in implementing reforms and public accountability for
the exercise of the administrative act on the other hand;
- At the central administration level there is the need for a clearer
demarcation of responsibilities between the DEA and the MFA by
eliminating the overlapping of competences through the legal revision of
current legislation pertaining to the coordination of European affairs and
the adequate division of competences between the two concerning
ministries. If the decision is in favour of the DEA becoming the national
coordinator of integration, its association alongside the MFA to the
coordination of the Permanent Representation of Romania with the EU98 on
the fields lying in its responsibility is necessary, due to the imperative of
Romania upholding a single position within the different European
institutions. On these lines, the role of the DEA needs to be that of
disseminating information received from the European institutions and the
Permanent Representation and ensuring the coordination of the different
concerned ministries, mediating between them if necessary99. Taking into
consideration the fact that the specific European training of Romanian civil
servants is still lacking, the DEA alone or in cooperation with an academic
institution could become a centre of expertise on European affairs, offering
stages and other permanent forms of training for the civil servants involved
in this process generally and to those dealing with European funding in
particular;
- Given the increase in the role of the national parliaments in the decision
making procedures of the EU, the modification of the national legislation is
warranted, so that the Parliament becomes involved inn the national system
98
Faced with the legal objection concerning the twofold subordination of the Permanent
Representation we point to the experience of the double coordination of military attaches (the MFA
and the MND), the ministry for internal affairs (the MFA and the MIA) or of the cultural attaches
(the MFA and the MC)
99
A study realized by the European union Direction of the MFA in 1998 shoes that there in no
single model of coordination of the European activity in the EU Member States, the dynamic
varying from the French model of the GSG “which enjoys the authority of the prime-minister” to
the Spanish model, where the MFA is in charge of the coordination procedures. Our conclusion is
that not the model determins the good or bad functioning, but its implementation is responsible for
the flawed results. To this extent, it is sufficient to observe that in the last ten years Romania has had
European affairs organizations subordinated to the prime minister, an independent ministry, a
department with the MFA etc. and in the end, if any of these formulas worked in its country of
origine, their dynamic was eventually flawed in Romania.
251
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
252
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
100
Information and debate campaigns on issues such as „The compliance of the normative and
legislative framework, institutions and internal policies to the provisions of the Europe 2020
Strategy” as well as strategic documents and programs concerning the enactment of the Lisbon
Treaty, „The role and position of Romania in the reform process of the main European Union
policies – the European Union’s Budget, the Common Agricultural policy, the Social, Economic
and Territorial Cohesion Policy etc.”, “Knowing the good practices of other EU Member States and
the internal level ones regarding the involvement of social partners in proposing and substantiating
the decisions and policy enactment et al.” ş.a.
101
See the initiative of the International Relations Department of the NSPAS to train through a
master program Romanian specialist in European programs and policy evaluation (a position non-
existent in Romania). It is also important to talke into account that although approved since 2009,
the project, which would have allowed the funding of such a crucial enterprise with European
money, finds itself in the present still in stand-by with the Ministry of Education, waiting for
financing. A logical and necessary measure would ensure the program’s increase from 30 to a
couple hundreds of students, in other words, to allow the rapid training of civil servants in the
evaluation of European public policies and programs.
253
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
BIBLIOGRAPHY
254
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
255
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
256
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
258
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
ANNEX
1 10
2% 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1%
(minimum 4% 4% 11% 15% 6% 21% 22% 11% (maximal
value) value)
*missing values 5%
259
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
Q3. Which is the main impact you think the Lisbon Treaty will have on
the internal policy level of each state?
1. by communautarizing 70 extra fields, the competences of the states is
decreased in favour of the Union’s 19%
2. by creating new institutions (the European Council, the High Commissioned
for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) the degree of coordination between states
in defining a coherent foreign policy increases 26%
3. by creating permanent structural cooperation the premise of building a
common defence at the EU level is enacted 7%
4. through the entry of the national parliaments in the EU’s decisional system,
the Member States have a better guarantee of their citizens’ will being respected
in their alterity of national citizens 37%
95. it will not have any impact 2%
98. I don’t know 1%
*missing values 8%
Q4. Through its provisions, the Lisbon Treaty strengthens the subsidiarity
principles. To what does this principle refer to in your opinion?
1. the decision is placed at the level where it produces the maximum impact
35%
2. the decision level is placed closest to the citizens as possible 48%
3. it has no bearing on decision making 2%
95. Another variant. Which one? 1%.
98. I don’t know 6%
*missing values 8%
260
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
Q5. Following the Lisbon Treaty’s coming into force, what changes in the
relation between the European Union and the Member States?
1. the participation of the national parliaments in the decision-making process
of the Union 50%
2. the new role of the national parliaments of being the warrants of national
competences in front o the Union 13%
3. a better demarcation between the exclusive, shared and complementary
competences 28%
95. Another variant. Which? 0%.
98. I don’t know 2%
*missing values 7%
Q6. According to the Lisbon Treaty, what do you think is the role of the
Committee of Regions and of the national parliaments in applying the
principle of subsidiarity?
1. The Commission must forward the Committee of Regions and the national
parliaments any legislative proposal pertaining to this principle 42%
2. The Committee of Regions can block any decision violating the principle of
subsidiarity 12%
3. Any national parliament has a veto right regarding any legislative proposal
of the Commission 16%
95. Another answer variant. Which? 1%.
98. I don’t know 9%
*missing values 20%
Q7. To what extent do you believe the Economic and Social Committee
needs to be? (Please select the answer that best fits your opinion!)
261
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
To a very To a very
To a great To a lesser I don’t
great small Not at all
extent extent know
extent extent
5 4 3 2 1 98
6% 44% 26% 12% 0% 7%
*missing values 6%
Q9.1. How important are, in your opinion, the business and business
owner’s networks in the decisional process of the European Union? (Please
select the answer that best fits your opinion!)
Q9.2 How important are, in your opinion, the business and business
owner’s networks in the European Union’s policies enactment process?
Q10. Do you think the EU budget allocated for cohesion should be:
1. larger 59%
2. the same 14%
3. reduced 5%
98. I don’t know 17%
*missing values 5%
262
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
Q11. Did you take part, until now, to the accessing of structural funds?
If yes, please indicate the approximate value of the structural funds accessed:
1,359,000 EURO (medium value)
Q12. In your opinion, to what extent have the structural funds accessed by
Romania insofar contributed to the achievement of the cohesion objectives?
To a very To a very
To a great To a lesser I don’t
great small Not at all
extent extent know
extent extent
5 4 3 2 1 98
1% 15% 51% 19% 5% 5%
*missing values 5%
Q13. Which is the main information media you turn to in order to obtain
information about the EU’s policies for a better life? (Please select a single
answer variant!)
263
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
I don’t
YES NO
know
1. the number of
representatives of each group 1 2 98
should be modified 24% 29% 33%
*missing values 14%
2.their consulting procedure
1 2 98
should be changed
48% 13% 23%
*missing values 16%
3. its notifications should be
1 2 98
mandatory
51% 9% 23%
*missing values 16%
4. should have the right to
1 2 98
propose legislation
47% 14% 27%
*missing values 13%
Q15. On a scale from 1 to 10 please specify how content you are with the
activity of the Social and Economic Committee of Romania. (1 is the minimum
value where 10 is the maximal one. Please select the answer that best fits your
opinion!)
1 10
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
(minimum (maximum
value) value)
8% 9% 14% 16% 11% 13% 9% 0%
9% 0%
*missing values 11%
264
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
To a To a To a To a Not It has no I
very great lesser very at connection don’t
great extent extent small all with the know
extent extent Strategy
1. 75% 5 4 3 2 1 95 98
employment 2% 17% 45% 16% 1% 0% 8%
rate
*missing
values 9%
2. 3% GNP 5 4 3 2 1 95 98
investments in 4% 28% 26% 26% 1% 0% 6%
research and
development
*missing
values 11%
3. reducing by 5 4 3 2 1 95 98
20% 5% 23% 40% 8% 6% 0% 8%
greenhouse gas
emissions
*missing
values 11%
4.maintaining 5 4 3 2 1 95 98
the public debt 1% 20% 34% 19% 8% 1% 8%
level under the
60% of GNP
threshold
*missing
values 9%
5. increasing 5 4 3 2 1 95 98
by 20% the 2% 29% 42% 12% 0% 0% 6%
weight of
regenerable
energy within
total energy
consumption
*missing
values 9%
265
European Institute of Romania - Strategy and policy studies SPOS 2010
6.increasing 5 4 3 2 1 95 98
energy 1% 30% 40% 9% 1% 0% 8%
efficiency by
20%
*missing
values 11%
7. increasing 5 4 3 2 1 95 98
the 2% 20% 27% 24% 7% 1% 8%
contrinbution
of the
agricultural
sector to 45%
of the GNP
*missing
values 11%
8.reducing the 5 4 3 2 1 95 98
rate of early 4% 30% 28% 13% 9% 1% 6%
dropping out
of school to
10%,
*missing
values 9%
9. reducing by 5 4 3 2 1 95 98
25% the 4% 7% 38% 21% 15% 0% 6%
number of
people living
under the
poverty line
*missing
values 9%
Q17. To what extent to you think that the European Union gets closer to
its citizens through the Lisbon Treaty? (Please select the answer that best fits
your opinion!)
To a very To a very
To a great To a lesser I don’t
great small Not at all
extent extent know
extent extent
5 4 3 2 1 98
2% 57% 24% 8% 2% 1%
*missing values 5%
266
The Treaty of Lisbon. Impact on Romanian institutions and policies
Q18. To what extent do you think the citizens’ rights are observed by
the... (Please select the answer that best fits your opinion!)
To a To a To a To a Not at I don’t
very great lesser very all know
great extent extent small
extent extent
1. 5 4 3 2 1 98
Romanian 2% 17% 37% 28% 11% 0%
state
*missing
values 5%
2. 5 4 3 2 1 98
European 20% 50% 22% 1% 1% 0%
Union
*missing
values 6%
Q19. To what extent do you consider that the mass-media can contribute
to the increase of citizen participation in the decisional process of the
European Union? (Select the answer that best fits your opinion!)
To a very To a very
To a great To a lesser I don’t
great small Not at all
extent extent know
extent extent
5 4 3 2 1 98
21% 48% 19% 6% 1% 0%
*missing values 6%
267
Strategy and policy studies - SPOS 2010
V3. Please select the category you belong to (please circle one answer only!)
1. Central public administration 17%
2. Local public administration33%
3. Trade Unions 1%
4. Bussiness owners’ organization 4%
5. Civil society 27%
6. Mass-media 5%
7. Another. Which? 11%
Research 8%
Higher Education 3%
*missing values 4%
268