From National to International Linkages
Edited by William A. Maloney and Jan W. van Deth
Chapter 3: The Associational Impact on Attitudes Towards Europe: A Tale of Two Cities
William A. Maloney and Jan W. van Deth 3.1 INTRODUCTION The EU White Paper on Governance CEC, 2001, outlined the need to stimulate a more engaged and vibrant European civil society.1 The policymaking process is to be made more open, transparent and participatory, and is to involve a wider range of actors from varying institutional and territorial levels – that is, from Eurogroups to local groups. The key aim is to ‘bring citizens closer to the European Union and its institutions and to encourage them to engage more frequently with its institutions . . . [and] to stimulate initiatives by bodies engaged in the promotion of active and participatory citizenship’ Oﬃcial Journal 2004: 30/7–37/8). Sloat (2003: 130) cites a speech from Commissioner Prodi to the European Parliament in February 2000 in which he ‘called for a civic participation in all stages of the policymaking process’.2 The Commission believes that the legitimacy of the EU would be greatly enhanced through the encouragement of greater and more meaningful citizen involvement (CEC, 2004b: 12) – and it has idealistic (strong democracy-type – Barber, 1984) expectations. As Michalowitz (2004: 152) notes: the Commission demands a certain ‘inner democracy’ including the expectation of a civil society organisation to ‘itself follow the principles of good governance’. The expectation is that groups should be open and internally democratic purely to enhance a thriving EU democracy. This requirement essentially means having transparency of internal decision-making processes and a guarantee that all members have the opportunity to have some input into a decision.3...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.