ЛААКЕНСКАЯ ДЕКЛАРАЦИЯ БУДУЩЕЕ ЕВРОПЕЙСКОГО СОЮЗА (ДЕКЛАРАЦИЯ ЛААКЕНА). Декларация. Европейский Союз. 15.12.01

A better division and definition of competence
                        in the European Union

     Citizens  often  hold expectations of the European Union that are
not  always  fulfilled.  And  vice  versa  -  they  sometimes have the
impression  that  the  Union  takes  on  too  much  in areas where its
involvement  is  not  always essential. Thus the important thing is to
clarify,  simplify  and  adjust the division of competence between the
Union  and the Member States in the light of the new challenges facing
the  Union. This can lead both to restoring tasks to the Member States
and  to  assigning  new  missions to the Union, or to the extension of
existing  powers, while constantly bearing in mind the equality of the
Member States and their mutual solidarity.
     A first series of questions that needs to be put concerns how the
division  of competence can be made more transparent. Can we thus make
a clearer distinction between three types of competence: the exclusive
competence  of  the Union, the competence of the Member States and the
shared competence of the Union and the Member States? At what level is
competence  exercised  in the most efficient way? How is the principle
of  subsidiarity  to  be applied here? And should we not make it clear
that  any powers not assigned by the Treaties to the Union fall within
the  exclusive  sphere  of  competence  of the Member States? And what
would be the consequences of this?
     The  next  series  of  questions  should  aim,  within  this  new
framework   and   while  respecting  the  "acquis  communautaire",  to
determine  whether there needs to be any reorganisation of competence.
How can citizens` expectations be taken as a guide here? What missions
would  this  produce  for the Union? And, vice versa, what tasks could
better be left to the Member States? What amendments should be made to
the  Treaty  on  the various policies? How, for example, should a more
coherent common foreign policy and defence policy be developed? Should
the Petersberg tasks be updated? Do we want to adopt a more integrated
approach   to   police   and   criminal   law   cooperation?  How  can
economic-policy  coordination  be  stepped  up?  How  can we intensify
cooperation  in the field of social inclusion, the environment, health
and  food  safety?  But then, should not the day-to-day administration
and  implementation of the Union`s policy be left more emphatically to
the  Member  States  and, where their constitutions so provide, to the
regions?  Should  they  not  be  provided  with  guarantees that their
spheres of competence will not be affected?
     Lastly,  there  is the question of how to ensure that a redefined
division  of  competence  does not lead to a creeping expansion of the
competence of the Union or to encroachment upon the exclusive areas of
competence  of  the  Member  States  and, where there is provision for
this, regions. How are we to ensure at the same time that the European
dynamic  does not come to a halt? In the future as well the Union must
continue  to be able to react to fresh challenges and developments and
must  be  able to explore new policy areas. Should Articles 95 and 308
of the Treaty be reviewed for this purpose in the light of the "acquis
jurisprudentiel"?