Full proposal

From that link:

  • a more bicameral system and fewer deadlocks in the Council, through more decisions by qualified majority voting and the ordinary legislative procedure;
  • a fully-fledged right of legislative initiative, and a co-legislator role for Parliament for the long-term budget;
  • an overhaul of the rules for the Commission’s composition (rebranded as the “European Executive”), including the election of its President (with the nomination to be done by Parliament and the approval by the European Council - a reversal of the current process), limiting the number of Commissioners to 15 (rotating between the member states), enabling the Commission President to choose their College based on political preferences with geographic and demographic balance in mind, and a mechanism to censure individual Commissioners;
  • significantly greater transparency in the Council by publishing EU member state positions on legislative issues;
  • more say for citizens through an obligation for the EU to create appropriate participatory mechanisms and by giving European political parties a stronger role.

Some changes missing from that link that I found interesting:

  • Switch from «High Representative» to «Union Secretary» and «President of the European Council» to «President of the European Union».

I very much prefer the old names, and I don’t like the downgrade from High Representative to Secretary.

  • Parliament now chooses by itself how to divide its seats between member states.

Not really in favor of this, this should be the European Council’s job.

  • More power to the CJEU for resolving inter-institutional disputes, and involving it in the process for suspension of EU membership.
  • Gives more agency to the European Defence Agency and gives the CSDP its own budget. It also copies NATO’s article 5 wording for mutual defense.
  • Amending the treaties needs the approval of 4/5 of member states.

That would currently mean 22 out of 27, so no more French-Dutch veto.

  • Adding the risk to cross planetary boundaries when considering environmental policy (?)
  • Adds a more concrete language, from «may» and «suggest» to «shall» and «enforce».
  • uis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    including the election of its President

    Sounds like bad idea for union.

    more say for citizens through an obligation for the EU to create appropriate participatory mechanisms

    Good EU.

    and by giving European political parties a stronger role.

    Not so good EU. I hope it’s not something like article 6 of USSR constitution. On the other side last part of article is interesting.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        (with the nomination to be done by Parliament and the approval by the European Council - a reversal of the current process)

        Doesn’t look like more direct. Last time a union had president, it was quickly dissolved before first term ended. I don’t think having one person on position like this is good for union. But whatever.

        • Parodper@foros.fediverso.galOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Doesn’t look like more direct.

          EP parties usually have a candidate for the Commission that they show during election, so voters know who they will support. On the other hand, the European Council members are usually chosen from internal politics and issues, and at different times.

          Last time a union had president, it was quickly dissolved before first term ended.

          That’s just a name though. The election would stay the same, even if it were called «First Janitor».

          I don’t think having one person on position like this is good for union.

          The position is the same.