Just before the European Council makes a decisive step in the direction of common economic governance and at the very moment when a compromise is being outlined on the European diplomatic service, the horizons are beginning to broaden. The two developments indicated here, represent two significant stages on the path towards European unity, even if current fashion highlights shortcomings and difficulties. It will be up to future historians to assess the events themselves. In the meantime, we can observe that certain major players are already looking further ahead. This time, I am not referring to Jacques Delors (who for 15 years had called for economic governance and who is now suggesting that a European Energy Community be set up) but those who are calling for and preparing for other developments: (a) a new Treaty putting the Economic Union into practice; (b) reflection on future funding of Community activity.
How to consolidate economic governance? Revision of the current Treaty has been urged by Germany, as a way of strengthening economic governance. This would particularly involve the introduction of possible political sanctions (such as the loss of voting rights) for member states that do not respect budgetary rules. Initial reactions were negative - most governments are horrified at the idea of rekindling the complications and difficulties that accompanied the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. Herman Van Rompuy, in principle, shares these misgivings. He considers that the institutional battle is over for a number of generations to come. He then toned down this rejection, doubtless in an effort to remain loyal to the principle according to which his role is to report on the positions of the European Council but, if no unanimity exists, to reflect those differences. The way in which he has evolved goes as far as recognising that there are no taboos - “if there is consensus on a change to the Treaty, I will not be opposed to it”. If a situation is difficult, excluding this or that solution “would not be wise”. Nonetheless, he added: “But at the moment we are working within the framework of the existing Treaties”. (EUROPE 10159). After this, the German and French positions became closer: Nicolas Sarkozy did not rule out that countries which failed to control their budgets could be deprived of their voting rights, but he explained that it would be up to legal experts to examine whether such a measure effectively required amendments to the Treaty. Certain European political forces reject the very idea of this kind of sanction.
A project for 2014. In the meantime, the federalists have broadened the debate. Jean-Guy Giraud (now the president of the Union of Federalists in France, after heading the Parisian office of the European Parliament for many years,) has launched the project for a Treaty for Economic Union, which would replace the Maastricht Treaty. He recognises the need for urgent measures and considers that constitutional transformation is indispensable if the economic dimension of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) is to be consolidated and if public and private operators are to be convinced in Europe and throughout the world by the EU's political determination.
Mr Giraud has indicated that the operational launch of this project would be in 2014 because this will be the year in which new European elections take place, the Commission is renewed and a new permanent president of the European Council is nominated, as well as a new high representative for foreign policy. Moreover, the financial perspectives for 2014-2019 enter into force in 2014. The new treaty would introduce the provisions needed to “place EMU on a solid legal and politically legitimate and democratic basis”. This procedure is already included in the Lisbon Treaty: Parliament submits a draft revision to the Council and the Council decides by qualified majority voting on whether to open revision procedures. Negotiation takes place within a Convention (which brings national and European parliamentarians together) and the result is submitted to an intergovernmental conference (IGC), which decides by unanimity. Mr Giraud considers that the EP should take the initiative and activate this procedure.
For the time being, such a project is submerged in scepticism, dictated by past experience and the risk that in a Convention many other aspects that go beyond the remit of Economic Union will be discussed. Mr Van Rompuy has underlined the urgency of focusing efforts on the economic governance that can be accomplished with the texts that currently exist. The federalists, however, believe that they have good arguments for defending their project.
Reflections on the budget. The second substantial project involves reflection about future EU funding and spending. The debate has already kicked off within the framework of preparations for the new financial perspectives 2014-2019 on which the Commission has been working for a long time. Alain Lamassoure, the president of the “budgets” committee at the Parliament, however, is calling for a broader reflection process and has provided a number of orientations in this connection. This column will return to this subject next week.
(F.R./transl.fl)