I think that the Committee of the Regions is a good basis for a full-fledged second chamber. It is a relatively unique institution today. Most European issues are discussed here, across the acquis communitaire, and are confronted not only with the views of member countries and with EU or global perceptions, but also with regional and local practice. By further enhancing its institutional role, it can be a guarantee of reducing the democratic deficit that most Europeans feel today, and it is a more concrete and perhaps even a realistic move than the creation of a completely new institution.
This would, of course, mean, inter alia, the approximation of the nomination system for members of the Committee, with certain consideration and modifications taking into account national and regional differences in the public administration of the Member States. The aim should be to maximize the simplification of national nomination procedures so that there is a single legal basis, ideally set forth directly in primary EU law, according to which the Committee of the Regions would be created. We can also discuss how its institutional role should be strengthened, or what other policy areas should be included in its scope, or which could be taken over by the Commission or the Council, whether the provisions should include compulsory coordination meetings with government representatives, Members and members of the Committee of the Regions in all EU countries (today is a minority practice), etc., etc.
The comparison of the position of the Committee of the Regions and the European Parliament in relation to the European Court of Justice should be the fastest. The Committee of the Regions can now turn to the European Court of Justice whenever it believes that the principle of subsidiarity has been violated, unlike the Chamber of Deputies, which is a privileged subject, the Committee of the Regions is only a semi-privileged entity.