TRANS-NATIONAL EU PROJECT

 “THE FUTURE OF EUROPE – OUR OPINION COUNTS“

 Results of the survey carried out in Bulgaria

Section One: Democratisation and Institutions

Representation by EU institutions

100 people in total filled in the questionnaire. Most of them (67%) feel represented by the European Parliament, followed by the Commission (22%), The Council of Ministers (8%), the European Council (3%) and the European Central Bank (0%) were found at the end of the list. 

Equal decision rights for the EP

A majority of 78% supported that the EP should have equal decision rights with the Council on all legislative matters.

Presidency of the Council

A majority of 64% favoured maintaining the present rotation system. 53% supported changes in terms of the duration of the presidency and 39% in the number of countries carrying out the presidency (“team presidency”).

Council as exclusive legislative body

71% stood for the preservation of the status quo and 38 % wanted the Council to become solely a legislative body.

Publicity of Council meetings

82% clearly supported that the meetings of the Council should become public.

Unanimity

64% were in favour of reducing the number of cases where unanimity is applied. Maintenance of the present unanimity situation was supported by 31%. 5% were undecided.

Commission as exclusive executive body

The idea of the Commission becoming the EU´s exclusive executive body was supported by 76 %.

Number of Commissioners

78% wanted that the Commission will have one member per country after the enlargement. 22% supported less than one Commissioner per country, according to a rotation principle based on equality.

Appointment of the President of the Commission

74% preferred that the President of the Commission in the future should be elected by the EP.

 Appointment of the Commissioners

81% supported the appointment of the individual Commissioners by the President of the Commission with a later approval by the EP.

Role of the European Council

69% supported the idea that the European Council should become the collective head of the Union holding general discussions on the overall development of the integration process, but refrain from interfering in the Union’s daily business or any legislative procedures.

Section Two: Division of Competencies

Economic and social cohesion

87% stood for a policy aiming at economic and social cohesion between the member states for the EU.

Harmonisation of taxation policies

73% of the respondents wanted the EU to have the competence for the harmonisation of member states taxation policies.

European tax

58% wanted an “EU tax” to replace the national contributions to the EU budget.

Agriculture

72% were in favour of the Common Agricultural Policy to remain an exclusive European competence and 28% against.

EU´s role in certain policy areas

76% of the respondents voted for a strong EU influence in Environmental policy, Justice and Home Affairs. 72% wanted a weak EU influence in Economic, Employment and Social policy.

EU´s foreign policy

67% supported the EU foreign policy to be carried out by the Council and the Commission together.

Following the opinion of 74% future EU Foreign Minister should be a member of the Commission. A clear majority of 86% was in favour of the EP´s involvement in defining the EU´s foreign policy priorities.

EU´s defence policy

16% favoured the Council, 23% the Commission and 61% wanted both institutions to carry out the defence policy.

62% wanted the European Defence Minister to be a member of the Commission.

As in the case of foreign policy, people overwhelmingly wished the EP to be also involved in defining the EU´s defence policy priorities.

European Army

63% of the respondents supported the European Army.

European Court of Justice

91% considered that the ECJ should remain the body which handles disputes regarding the distribution of competencies between the EU and the Member States.

Section Three: Treaties and shape of the Union

Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR)

79% wished the CFR to become a legally binding part of a future European “constitution” and 21% wished the CFR to become a preamble to a future European “constitution”.

Structure of the treaties

81% supported the idea to merge the different treaties establishing the Communities and the Union.

European “constitution”

An overwhelming majority supported the creation of a future European “constitution” (87%).

Decision making

67% wanted the community method to become the only decision making modus in the future constitutional treaty and 29% supported the three pillar structure. 4% were undecided.

Further Enlargement after 2007

78% supported further enlargement after the supposed accession of Romania and Bulgaria in 2007.

EU-membership of Turkey and Russia

Membership of Turkey was favoured with 54% while the opposition against the EU-membership of Russia was 52%.

Section Four: Changes to the Treaties and Ratification Procedure

Ratification of the constitutional treaty

66% wanted that a future European “constitution” would be ratified by all Member States in order to become effective while 34% thought that the ratification by two thirds of the Member States would be enough.

Europe-wide constitutional referendum

59% supported a Europe-wide constitutional and 41rejected it.

Future of the convention method

76% supported the idea of a convention conducting further changes to a European “constitution”.