Religious meetings in EU Parliament are not transparent, says secular MEP
NSS honorary associate and Dutch MEP, Sophie in ’t Veld has demanded to know why meetings between the Presidents of the European Commission and the European Parliament and religious groups have not been held “transparently” and openly as is demanded by EU Treaties.
After it was announced that there was to be a meeting between the two presidents and religious groups, Ms in ’t Veld wanted to know who exactly would be at the “interfaith” meeting and how they had been chosen. She also wanted to know whether any secular or non-religious groups had been invited to attend.”
Back came a rather bad-tempered response from Mr Jorge César das Neves, an “Adviser” to the European Commission’s President and the grandly titled “Dialogue with Religions, Churches and Communities of conviction.” He told Ms in ’t Veld that there was no list of participants concluded yet and that anyway, it was an informal meeting with no agenda and there was no intention of finalising any documents. He concluded: “President Barroso and the European Commission have indeed plans to convene other meetings in the framework of the dialogue with religions, humanisms [sic] and communities of belief, including with non-confessional philosophical organisations."
Undeterred, Sophie replied: “I maintain that the dialogue with churches and non-confessional organisations does not meet the requirements of the Treaties on openness and transparency. Labelling these meetings as “informal” is a way of circumventing the normal standards of transparency required by the EU Treaties. The relevant article foresees an open and transparent dialogue. That means that the agenda, participants’ list and other documents for the meeting should be available to the public. You state that no documents will be adopted, but so far each year there has been a public statement on the outcome of the meeting.
“Furthermore, in his interpretation of the Treaty article on the dialogue with Churches and Non-confessional Organisations, Mr Barroso has clearly favoured the contacts with churches and religious leaders, whereas contacts with secular groupings or liberal religious groups has been somewhat of an afterthought. That does not do justice to the fact that most European citizens are not religious, or not practising their religion. The fact that non-religious citizens are not organised is no justification for the President of the European Commission having privileged relations with religious leaders. The same applies to the participants list: it is not remotely representative of the population of Europe. Solemn statements on diversity or indeed human dignity (one of the previous themes) sound rather hollow if made by a gathering that is (almost) exclusively male. I am looking forward to receiving the agenda and participants’ list.”
Clearly stung by this, Mr das Neves responded: “Many thanks for your message in which you reiterate your well known positions. As President Barroso has made it clear in successive replies, the Commission does not agree with those views. I furthermore signal to you that the growing number of humanistic non-confessional associations that have meanwhile joined this dialogue also don’t share your assessment of this meeting as well as of the dialogue of the Commission with religions and humanisms.”
Mr Barroso and Mr Pöttering, the President of the European Parliament, are well known Catholics, and their religious views are also well-known. Can we ever hope to have fair dealings with such people? We have to hope that our secular MEPs are successful in the 4th June elections to enable them to continue challenging the Vatican’s latest ploys.
Sophie in ’t Veld is chair of the Separation of Religion and Politics working party in the European Parliament, of which the NSS is a member.
