Home page > Europe > The Commission > **Updated** European Commission (...)

Background to Plan D

Against the backdrop of the French and Dutch No to the constitutional treaty and the impossible agreement on the budget in June 2005, Plan D aims to open up a debate built on a clearer view of citizens’ expectactions. It follows the European Commission action Plan on communication.

The major points include:

- the organisation of national debates by Member states with the support of the European Parliament and the European Commission. It intends to be a two-way process: informing citizens abou the EU’s role and listening to people’s feedback;

- Visits by Commissioners to Member States and to National Parliaments;

- The appointment of goodwill Ambassadors, along the line of several United Nations Agencies (eg UNICEF);

- The launch of a European Round Table for Democracy with civil society actors, aimed to gather different views, particularly from young people.

- The role of the Commission representations and the network of Europe Direct centres will be enhanced, as a valuable tool for bringing Europe closer to the citizens.

It should be noted that a strong emphasis is displayed on young people, future voters. Plan D also gives NGOs key roles in organising round tables, promoting consultation and improving the access of citizens to the European debate, at national and European level.

Although the plan D should be followed throughout the lifetime of the European Union, Margot Wallström expects the intitial feedback process to take place in April 2006 in order to define a concrete road map for the future of Europe.

Conference on "Plan D and the citizens’ right to know", June 2006

European Citizens Action Service (ECAS) organised the conference "Plan D and the citizens’ right to know, on 7 June 2006. The debate aimed at benchmarking the national and European contributions to the Commission’s Plan D and to review the state of play after the one year "period of reflection" on the failed ratification of the Constitutional Treaty.

The discussions were characterized by disagreement over options and strategies, leaving participants with the impression that much remains to be done at EU level, but clearly illustrating that the debate is very much "alive".

Further information -
- Civil Society Contact Group Bulletin 43
- EurActiv article

Forum on "Bringing Europe and its citizens together", November 2005

The means and ways of bringing the European Union and its citizens closer have been further explored at a ¨Stakeholders’ Forum on Bridging the Gap: how to bring Europe and its citizens closer together?¨, organised on 7-8 November 2005 by the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and the European Commission in Brussels.

It intended to answer the following questions:

- Does a European public sphere exist? If not, is it necessary to encourage its evolution?

- How can the sense of distance be overcome?

- What concrete initiatives might be taken to achieve a real impact on narrowing the communication gap between the European ‘project’ and the European people?

The results of the forum, noticed that the European Union institutions fail to convey info to a wide audience which should have opportunities spread its own views across. In order to support the creation of a European public sphere, the bottom-up approach must be enhanced in order to strengthen the emergence of a European identity. Hence the need to decentralise the communication of Europen to national representations.

The Forum also identified the role of the EU25 governments: the European and national political agendas shoudl be interchangeable and national governments should no longer throw the blame on Brussels for their domestic difficulties.

The role of civil society was also highlighted as a very efficient way to bring the EU closer to citizens. A focus on young people was also pointed out with a concrete suggestion to create Young European Teams together with national yough councils, in parternship with Youth organisations.

White paper on a European Communication Policy

Developing further the citizens` involvement, the Commission launched a White Paper on a European Communication Policy and an open online consultation on 1 February 2006. The White Paper should meet the challenge to lay down the European Union Communication Policy.

The paper intends to mobilise all the key actors (EU institutions, the Member States, regional and local authorities, political parties and civil society) to reach the ordinary European citizens.

Five areas for joint action are proposed in the paper:

- common principles for communication on European issues;
- citizens’ empowerment;
- cooperation with the media and new technologies;
- listening to the public opinion;
- coordianted and joint actions.

The consultation period will run till the end of July 2006. Conclusions will be drawn after in order to create a real plan of action.

However, there are critical voices. Some journalists have expressed their concerns about a pan European press agency runned by the Commission, and highlighted the danger to the freedom of press: "In essence, the Commission is clearly intent on funding a more positive image of the Union than genuinely independent media seem willing to deliver." says the EU Reporter in the front page of their issue of 13th February 2006.

Internet debate on the future of Europe

The European Commission has launched an internet discussion on the future of Europe, as part of the ’Plan D’.

It is expected that the debates that will take place on the online forum will feed into the European Commission’s report on the period of reflection on the European Constitution.

Given the particular timeline with the negotiations on the EU budget, the health community is strongly encouraged to comment on the EU health strategy, the EU constitution and the EU budget using some of the materials available on EPHA website:

- EU budget

- Health and the EU constitution - the right to health

- Health and Consumer Programme


For more information:

- Speech by Mr Vladimír Špidla, European Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities (French version)

- Speech by Ms Margot Wallström, Vice-president, European Commissioner for Institutional Relations and Communication

- Video, slide show and picture gallery from the Forum could be viewed at http://www.esc.eu.int/stakeholders_forum/index_en.asp

- Article on the EU Reporter

Last modified on August 31 2006.

Your feedback is valuable to us!

Was this article interesting and relevant for you? Do you have any comments?

1 Message

Our readers have published these comments:

7 November 2005 07:02, by Mario

> European Commission Plan D: regaining the trust of European citizens

The article, which remains descriptive in nature, highlights the general lines of Plan D. It appears quite clearly that Plan-D provides a coherent information delivery system. However, I will raise two main concerns. Firstly, the European Commission is only to act as “facilitator” or “assistant” while national governments are ultimately the ones who must steer national debates. Allow me to doubt the will of individual Member States, which will have to prove themselves as early as next April 2006, which is when the Commission will evaluate the national debates through a first feedback process. Secondly, if the main goal is to win back citizens’ confidence and approval, we should focus on the content of the information provided through Plan-D. Does it proposes concrete solutions to EU’s current democratic and communication deficits? Does it answer to increasing requests for more transparency in decision-making processes? The fact is that the content of the information is not yet specified. We still don’t know if anything new is to come out of it. If it reiterates information which is already available, where excactly is the added value of the plan? Plan-D cannot replace the institutional reforms which are needed for years.

In conclusion, the effort to reach and listen to European citizens, and the creation of a “European public sphere” are excellent ideas. I however sincerely doubt the efficiency of a plan -which is closer to a set of initiatives than an actual plan- without any content and that relies on the goodwill of individual Member States. Mario

Reply to this message