Jo Leinen

UEF President

Many thanks for your support. A UEF President in the European Parliament will mean more opportunities and chances. We now have our foot in the door and are no longer left outside closed doors.

The first thing I will concentrate on is the formation of a Parliamentary Intergroup for a "European Constitution". The idea is that federalists from all political parties can work together closely to promote the adoption of a constitution. About 100 MEPs have already expressed their interest in such an initiative.

The Member States want to start another Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) at the summit in Helsinki, which should be concluded by the French Presidency. The European Parliament should make it very clear that it will neither accept the method nor the outcome of such a conference. Many citizens, parliaments, as well as many in the media, do not want another IGC where decisions are made with the exclusion of the public. Limiting the political discussions of this conference to the "left-overs" from Amsterdam will not suffice if the challenges lying ahead of the Union are to be met. Here the Parliament needs to enter into a critical dialogue with the governments. The result of this debate should be a decision on whether the European Parliament should present a draft European Constitution, as already happened once under Spinelli.

European policy demands public scrutiny through the European Parliament. It must be politicised and not left to faceless technocrats. It is vital to organise parliamentary conferences involving the European Parliament, as well as the national and regional parliaments.

Some recent events, such as the joint gathering of the UEF and the WFM in Montreux (September 1997) and the association of UEF to the WFM deliberated by the UEF Congress in Bonn (April 1999), seem to show that the slow rapprochement between the world’s largest federalist organisations is proceeding today with renewed energy. Do you agree with this statement? What are the reasons for this speeding up? What are, in your opinion, the principal similarities between the Union of European Federalists (UEF), the World Federalist Movement (WFM) and the Young European Federalists (JEF), and what are the gaps to be filled? Do you believe that the reshaping of The Federalist Debate as a body of permanent discussion among different federalist trends can contribute to strengthening this process?

The UEF and the WFM share common roots and common goals. During World War II, many people already realised that freedom, peace, democracy and tolerance would only be possible if nation states gave up some of their sovereignty to international institutions. The European federalists have largely concentrated on the project of European integration. While there is much room for improvement regarding the state of European integration, what has been achieved so far can be considered to be of historical importance. Throughout the EU freedom, peace, democracy, and to a large extent prosperity, prevail.

In the age of globalisation Europe is much more interlinked with the rest of the world and is consequently more affected by all types of crises occurring in far away regions. It is for these very reasons that Europe needs to have a strong interest in global stability. This world order must neither be dominated by only one superpower nor by a small group of powerful states. An acceptable world order will only be achieved if and when nation states world-wide are prepared to give up part of their sovereignty to international institutions as prescribed by the federalist model. At the turn of the XXI century, European federalists will therefore have to adapt their vision more and more to the establishment of a global order. It is against this background that closer co-operation between the UEF and the WFM seems to be the logical next step. After all both organisations were formed on the same day in Montreux more than 50 years ago with similar objectives in mind. Nowadays young people across the globe share a strong sense of "belonging together".

They also have a special interest in their future being shaped and not having it destroyed by global crises. The Federalist Debate should become a forum of discussion for the different federalist schools in order to guarantee an exchange of information and to give our goals a stronger profile.

The new format of The Federalist Debate envisages a section devoted to opinions from exponents of NGOs and representatives of civil society wishing to discuss European and World federalism with us. Taking into account the decline of political parties and of voter turn-out, what role can these political entities play in the process of European and world unification?

One of the major changes that the so-called "Information Society" has brought about is that every individual can become an "actor". Political parties have lost their monopoly over political projects and debates. NGOs and the institutions of civil society have taken the initiative, and are fulfilling important political functions. Organisations such as Greenpeace, Amnesty International, the Campaign against Landmines, and other pressure groups, are clear indicators that a new map of the political arena is now being drawn. The "Federalist Debate" should provide NGOs with a platform for discussion. Quite often NGOs have been pioneers in the field of transnational co-operation and could therefore be interesting partners in the construction of a World Federation.

Everywhere in the world, the European Union is considered to be the model of transnational integration. In Latin America, Asia and Africa this form of continental integration is sure to be followed. This is why it is necessary, after having established the Single Market and monetary union, to go ahead with the completion of political union with a constitutional basis.

Important lessons for a world federation can be learnt from the EU experience. It is, for example, of the utmost importance to balance the rounds of intergovernmental negotiations with adequate parliamentary input. It is an urgent goal to establish a parliamentary assembly and eventually a world parliament at the UN.

The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg has come to play a crucial role in the process of European integration. The principles and values of European unification have often been defended by it against the resistance of national governments. This is why it is important to support the International Criminal Court in its work.

The Economic and Social Committee (ECOSOC) and the Committee of the Regions (COR) are important institutions representing the interests of civil society and the decentralised levels of government in European politics. This representation should also be guaranteed at UN level. Bodies from civil society, as well as the municipalities and the regions, have to be institutionalised by the UN. Additionally, the "Charter of Local Self-Governance" of the Council of Europe should have its equivalent at world level. Local democracy all over the world represents an important basis for people to take control of their own destiny and to overcome the limitations of national barriers.