Less talk, more action

Chris Jones spoke to new CoR president Luc Van den Brande about his priorities – and aspirations – for his time in the regional hot-seat

The February plenary of the Committee of the Regions played host to one of the least suspenseful elections of the last 12 months. In accordance with an agreement thrashed out between the two main political groups in the CoR (the EPP-ED and the Socialists) back in 2006, president Michel Delebarre (a Socialist) and first vice-president Luc Van den Brande (a Christian Democrat) swapped roles for the second half of their five-year mandate. Although the change was subjected to a formal vote at the plenary, in reality it was a ‘done deal’, with CoR members broadly in agreement that the arrangement is a good way of ensuring both consistency of leadership and some fresh ideas.

Delebarre and Van den Brande are very different in their approach, not only because of their different political affiliations but also because of their nationalities. As a Frenchman, Delebarre comes from a country where the regions have relatively little power compared to the all-pervading central government. Belgian Van de Brande comes from a nation – as has so vividly been shown by the lengthy attempts to form a national government – where the regions are the real holders of power in many key areas, and where the state plays an almost secondary role. And it is clear from Van den Brande’s comments on the broad lines of his presidency that he, unlike his predecessor, will not lay as much emphasis on the need, pure and simple, to give the regions more power.

“For me, the EU represents the shared values of the European continent, and it is important that we start from that point. There has been too much emphasis on institutional issues in recent years; we now need to look at the quality of life – housing, education, social and health protection, job creation, inter-generational solidarity – these are all more important than wrangling over who has the most power.” Which is not to say, of course, that Van den Brande does not think that the regions have a role to play – far from it. “The regions must be part of the multi-level governance of Europe if we want to improve all these areas. But governance is not a pyramid, run from the top down – it should be a partnership between every level, and I want to continue to build that.”

Where Van den Brande appears – at least at first glance – to differ primarily from his predecessor is that he seems to believe in getting the regions – and the Committee of the Regions – involved in far more of the day-to-day business of the EU. This, he seems to think, is a better way of raising their profile, and ultimately changing attitudes to the regions, than talking about them. Delebarre, it could be argued was an eloquent orator on the need to involve the regions in more decision-making, and undoubtedly raised the profile of the CoR during his time as president, but the sheer number of events that Van den Brande has taken part in since his time in charge – not least being the first CoR president to attend the European Council (see page 11) – suggests that the Belgian is likely to be more of a doer than a talker.

And he wants to incite the regions themselves to follow suit, by getting on with their work and showing the other levels of EU governance how it should be done. “Energy, climate change, sustainable development, the Lisbon strategy for jobs and growth – these are key goals set by the EU as a whole where the regions have a major part to play. The countries where the Lisbon targets have not been drawn up in collaboration with the regions are the ones that are farthest away from achieving these targets. Cohesion policy should focus not simply on “economic cohesion but also on social cohesion – another area where the regions have a great deal of experience. Intercultural dialogue is at the forefront of the EU this year, and it is important that we are part of this, since local communities are the places where this dialogue mainly takes place.”

So much for the broad lines of what Van den Brande thinks needs to be done – how, then, does he want to do it? He has a number strategic goals set for his time in the CoR hot-seat. “In 2009, it will be the 15th anniversary of the CoR – and what a challenging time it is for the regions within Europe. I want to see that 15th birthday celebrated with a change to the way decisions are made – the regions need to be involved much earlier in the decision-making process, and that will mean that we have to be more proactive in our relations with the other legislators. We have good relations already with parliament, and with the commission, but we need to do more to work more closely with council” – hence Van den Brande’s attendance at the Spring Summit earlier this month. He also calls for more cooperation between the CoR and the raft of other regional associations – the AER, the CPMR, etc. – which he believes will lead to a “cross fertilisation” of ideas that will benefit everyone.

Raising the profile of the CoR will be key to getting the voice of the regions heard more clearly, he says. “We have a communications strategy in place, but we need to ensure that the content is good. I want the Committee of the Regions, and its work, to be in the member states themselves, to show the people in each country what we do. Communication starts right there, from the bottom up. We need to make it clear that we are part of our local communities and that we can see the concerns of everyone in those communities.” One way of raising the profile of regions is to give them more of a voice on the national stage. “Decisions on urban planning or mobility, for example, are generally taken at the local or regional level. Why don’t we then shout more about it when these decisions are taken well, and try to communicate that not only at the regional level but also at the national level as well?”

He believes that the political climate of the last few years has helped the cause of the regions. “After the rejection of the constitution, the people in Brussels took notice of the gap between the goals of the EU and needs of its citizens. I think that that frame of mind can help us. More people are now aware that we can only achieve solutions to our problems through partnership – one decision-making level cannot it alone. This has been a hard message to get through: just look how long it took the European parliament to get the powers of co-decision. That’s why we need to seize this opportunity.”

Van den Brande is aware that many member states are wary of too much decentralisation. “I say that the regions should not be seen as competitors to national government, but as partners. We have this tricky situation now: the reform treaty gives the CoR the right to go directly to the European courts in cases where we consider that the member states are not complying with the rules on subsidiarity – letting the level of governance that is closest to the people implement the laws. But we do not necessarily want to be seen to be ‘against’ member states by taking them to court – we want to work with them. We see this as a positive mechanism for change, but it may be tricky to handle.”

In the end, perhaps Van den Brande will be judged in much the same way as Delebarre: both men, who will of course continue to work together for the next two-and-a-half years, certainly have the same goal – to get the regions higher up the political agenda. It will be interesting to see whether Van den Brande’s high profile of his first month-and-a-half will be sustainable – Delebarre was hardly a shrinking violet when it came to public appearances, but even he never seemed to be in so many places at once as Van den Brande – but the Belgian’s philosophy seems clear: people are fed up with the rhetoric, and what we need is less talk and more action. How successful he will be remains to be seen.