Outlook and solutions. EU life will follow its course even if at the beginning of next year it doesn't manage to iron out at unanimity the current divergences between the member states on the financial framework for the seven year period of 2014-2020. This binding framework could be replaced by an indicative framework, followed by annual budgets that the Council would adopt by qualified majority, on the basis of Commission proposals and with the majority agreement of the European Parliament.
The EU would develop its evolution alongside. The meetings that await it are essential - the election of the new European Parliament; the renewal of the European Commission; reforms of the common agricultural policy (CAP) and cohesion policy, which have been under discussion for a long time and will be accomplished anyway. In the meantime, the president of the European Council will have presented - with representatives from the other institutions - his suggestions on the institutional reforms.
A step towards sincerity and clarity. Community life will not be blocked at all - it will follow its course. Obviously a unanimous agreement on the multiannual budgetary framework for 2014-2020 would in principle be preferable, but if the impossibility of reconciling the current divergences is confirmed at the second attempt planned for the beginning of the year, the possible breakdown in this regard could even have positive elements, leading each member state to unveil its European intentions and expectations.
We could then better understand (1) the degree of European integration that each wants and in which it is ready to participate; (2) the resolve and ability of each to respect the commitments signed up to.
In this exercise of clarity and sincerity, the responses would not be uniform - some of the member states want to move forward on integration, others have neither the desire nor the possibility. The result of this would automatically be two-speed Europe - which some think should be avoided and others think is inevitable.
The argument that rejects the two speeds is based on abstract principles of uniformity and equality. In theory it would block any bold development in European construction. What is more, the two speeds are already written into the treaties in force by the arrangements relating to enhanced cooperation and other formulas that open the door to progress for those who believe in it and want it.
Jacques Delors' differentiation. The recent positions taken by Jacques Delors go far in the same direction. At the annual dinner of the institute bearing his name, he insisted on differentiation, which in particular involves enhanced cooperation between the euro countries and the creation of a Parliamentary committee of the eurozone bringing together MEPs and national MPs from the countries concerned.
Other countries would choose their degree of integration. As for Mrs Merkel, Mr Delors calls us to take her literally when she recommends political union - we will then see how much she really believes in it. At the same time, he insisted greatly on the need for the EU to finance economic recovery as much as possible. Will the EU really do this? Overall, Mr Delors remains dissatisfied and quite pessimistic. In particular, he does not believe that Britain will remain a member state.
This Europe that is on the move. In conclusion, I don't believe that decisive significance should be given to last week's blockage on the financial framework. It is just one element among the developments already under way or that await this Europe that is on the move.
The battle against the abuses of the financial world is ongoing and will continue to develop at a significant pace - the setting up and application of the arrangements is slow but a great deal of abuse will be removed. The reform of the most significant common policies (agriculture and cohesion) is already under way. The energy domain is evolving rapidly - admittedly involving great shake-ups and problems - but the controversial aspects are finally debated openly. This column will come back to this. In the domain of the institutions, the debates are lively - moving into sensitive aspects such as gender equality (not only in principle but in deed), and the weight of the most financially powerful countries in the management of the ECB instead of the one man, one vote rule. These are just two examples.
Everything is on the move and under discussion. The problem of the financial framework for the seven year period of 2014-2020 is great and controversial but it is only one aspect of the ongoing evolution. The next two years will noticeably transform European construction.
(FR/transl.fl)