What kind of European Union do we need?

Considering that it was in our city of Maastricht that Robert Schuman’s dream of a united Europe was achieved in 1992, it seems only appropriate that Maastricht University should name its an annual lecture about the European Union after the French statesman, who is often regarded as one of the founding fathers of the European Union.

Dutch professor of economics Rick van der Ploeg was the keynote speaker for this year’s Schuman lecture titled: “Political Economy of Reinventing Europe”.

The lecture was introduced by Maastricht Mayor Gerd Leers, who delivered a very short but precise and well worded history of Robert Schuman and briefly outlined the main message that Van der Ploeg was going to convey that evening, namely that “Brussels must do less, but must do it better”. Although somewhat unexpected and unusual, this summary of the lecture was useful, because it allowed the keynote speaker to start straight at the heart of the matter.

Political Economy of Reinventing Europe – Rick van der Ploeg from European Journalism Center – on Vimeo.

Van der Ploeg introduced himself in an unassuming manner, stating that he was nervous at having to live up to many “much more prestigious predecessors.” He also defined himself as a European, partly because of he is the son of a British mother and a Dutch father.

Van der Ploeg dedicated the first five minutes to show some slides about Robert Schuman and his collaborator Jean Monnet and the reason that led them to the idea of creating a European Community.

Robert Schuman (right), Jean Monnet (left)

“It was all about not having a war again in Europe,” explained Van der Ploeg. “But as we have witnessed,” he noted, “there was war again, in Bosnia, our own backyard, a mess that needed cleaning up, by the Americans”. What would Schuman have said about this? This question was rhetorical, and set up the atmosphere for the rest of the lecture, which gave a rather negative outlook on the current state of the European Union.

Cemetery in Sarajevo, photo: watchsmar via Flickr

“How come it is so easy to criticise the European Union today? Why is it so unpopular?”
Part of the answer, according to Van der Ploeg, is that EU politics don’t grip the electorate. The voter turnout in European elections is disappointingly low. On the positive side however, Van der Ploeg explained that those who did vote, voted along party lines and beliefs rather than according to nationality.

Van der Ploeg’s lecturing style was original and entertaining. He talked a lot with his hands and the funny random comments he made about the pictures of certain politicians and cartoons kept the audience attentive and laughing. This proved an overall good tactic to lighten up the otherwise quite somber tone of the lecture itself.

And so with the same liveliness, Van der Ploeg carried on with statements such as: “And the European Parliament, it’s a joke, it’s pathetic! It needs more teeth. It cannot achieve a lot because it does not have enough bargaining power to be effective. There is also a big democratic deficit, as people are not aware of what is going within the EU institutions”.

European elections, photo: European Parliament via Flickr

Referring to the monetary change-over to the Euro, Van der Ploeg thinks that European citizens were not sufficiently informed about what was happening. “No wonder people don’t like EU project!”, “How can you take those suckers seriously?” At which point the audience cracked up in a ripple of giggles, not expecting a keynote speaker to use such language!

Another reason Van der Ploeg gave for the apparent ineffectiveness of the EU, is that it is unable to deal with certain issues – environment, economic recession, terrorism – on a pan European level. This is where the EU is “screwing up” and needs to do better.

The current economic crisis should be seen as a good moment to implement much needed structural reforms and solutions with long term effects as opposed to short term effects. According to Van der Ploeg however “the G20 was an error of astronomical scale,” because “pumping money into industries to get them out of trouble is not the solution. The current system is fragile, and the G20 has only served to make it more fragile.”

Economic recession, photo: landahlauts via Flickr

And so, in Van der Ploeg’s view, the EU has failed to deliver where it should have and has meddled too much where it shouldn’t have, such as in cultural matters.

On a last note, Van der Ploeg returned to the topic of politics. In his opinion, the rise of Geert Wilders, the leader of the Dutch extreme right “Party for Freedom”, is not just a Dutch phenomenon. He believes that it is the anti-European sentiment that is leading to an increase in extreme party politics, and not the other way round. “As long as the European Union is not able to communicate its plans and agenda to its citizens,” Van der Ploeg argued, “the risk will remain that populism continues to undermine the European project, for research shows that it is the unskilled and uneducated who do not trust the EU.”

“The EU needs to be alive and kicking”
Van der Ploeg concluded by claiming that there is a huge democratic deficit and that the EU is not winning the hearts and minds of the people. His advice for the EU is to focus on policy delivery and to be more transparent, more accountable and appealing: “The EU needs to be alive and kicking.”

The lecture was followed by a question and answer session, which lasted a good half hour. The questions were of a more specific nature, about different instruments of the EU and the workings of its institutions. Van der Ploeg’s answers however, echoed what he had said earlier during the lecture, namely that the EU needs a political battleground, on which ideas can be disputed, instead of being a consensus-based institution. “The EU needs an exciting menu to attract Europeans, or it would be committing political suicide.”

EU commissioner Viviane Reding

Perhaps the ambitious question of how the EU could re-invent itself, which was asked at the start of the lecture, was a little misleading. Indeed, although the speaker did pinpoint a few critical shortcomings in the workings of the EU and did bring some solutions forward, he did not argue for a new form for the European Union, but rather for an improved and more efficient one.

All in all Van der Ploeg’s presentation was perhaps a little less formal or prestigious than expected by some, but it had the merits of gripping the audience and retaining their attention. A sound knowledge of the European Union, its treaties and institutions, as well as some economic knowledge were probably necessary to fully understand the depth of his lecture, but it was meant after all for a well educated audience.

Rick van der Ploeg needn’t be worried about his lack of “prestige”, as his zeal and interdisciplinary knowledge of the European Union kept his audience on tiptoe throughout his honest lecture.

By Amandine de Rosnay

Amandine de Rosnay is a Mauritian/French student at University College Maastricht. She is now focusing her studies in Social Sciences, more specifically in international relations and law.

Interview with Rick van der Ploeg from European Journalism Center on Vimeo.