The Convention Method: An Institutional Device for Consensus-building

Abstract

The ‘Convention on the Future of Europe’ assembled 105 full members and 102 alternates as well as observers and a plethora of external actors from think tanks, NGOs or business lobbies. Its task was Herculean: “to consider key issues arising for the Union’s future development”, and at the same time to “pave the way for the next Intergovernmental Conference as broadly and openly as possible” (Laeken Declaration, 25). In terms of cleavages, arguably, it was more complex than any prior institution charged with preparing treaty change, since it included not only government representatives from member states, accession countries and prospective members, but also representatives of national parliaments, the European Parliament and the Commission. This paper addresses a basic question: how can we understand the relative success of the Convention? What were those characteristics of the Convention’s proceedings that finally made it possible to reach ‘consensus’ on a single text entitled ‘draft treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe’? What were the conditions and mechanisms that allowed for dealing with the hitherto most broadly formulated mandate for treaty change?KeywordsEuropean ConventionPlenary SessionGovernment RepresentativeNational ParliamentAccession CountryThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.