editorial" "
With 238 votes against, 211 in favour and 15 abstentions, the European Parliament, meeting in Strasburg on 24 September, rejected an amendment of the European People’s Party (EPP) asking for an explicit reference to the Judeo-Christian roots to be included in the draft Constitutional Treaty, due to be discussed by the Intergovernmental Conference in Rome on 4 October. So the Parliament in Strasbourg said “no” to the proposal to insert a reference to the Christian roots in the Preamble of the future constitutional Treaty of the European Union. The EPP group, backed by the right, joined battle over the issue, but lost. In actual fact the proposed amendment did not even obtain all the votes of the EPP and the right, which had promised its support. The contrary vote by the majority of MEPs, and the failure of a part of the EPP group (especially British conservative MEPs) to support it, doomed the amendment to defeat. What remains on the positive side is that it was necessary to make this proposal. However, the European Parliament was forced into a position in which it had to evaluate it and show its hand. This confirmed that those in favour of the amendment, and those against it, did not reflect party divides, but were a cross-section of the political forces represented in Strasbourg.What remains on the negative side is some bitterness about a debate that could have been of higher level, with an open and honest exchange on the essentially historical and cultural (as well as religious) value of the recognition of the Christian roots of the continent. Some, on the contrary, tackled the question with a decidedly ideological bias. Now the initiative passes to the intergovernmental Conference that is due to open its doors in Rome on 4 October. It is called to decide on the text of the future European “constitution”. But no positive encouragement on the need to recognise the Christian roots will reach it from the European Parliament. Once again, the history, tradition and cultural significance that Christianity represents for Europe risk being ignored or passed over in silence, doing an injustice not so much to Christians as to the very history of the “old continent”. Sir Towards the IGCThe countdown has begun for the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) that will begin in Rome on 4 October. While it seems certain that Giscard’s draft will represent the backbone of the future European Constitution, some points still remain open. The Commission, in particular, seems now be concentrating its attention on guaranteeing the principle: “one State, one Commissioner” against the proposal for a more restricted College supported by the majority of the member countries. “The IGC say the members of the task force “Future of Europe and International Questions of the European Commission”, Paolo Ponzano and Pieter Van Nuffel ought not to review the compromises reached in the Convention, nor re-open to discussion important gains and successes, such as the incorporation of the Charter of fundamental rights; the increased powers of legislative co-decision of the European Parliament; the principle of the complete transparency of the legislating role of the Council; the introduction of a simpler and more democratic definition of qualified majority vote in Council; the reinforcement of controls relating to the principle of subsidiarity and of the role of the national Parliaments in European construction; the application of the community method to the whole space of freedom, security and justice; the creation of the office of EU Foreign Minister; and the development of a common defence and security policy”.
