After having deliberated with national delegations in the Committee of Permanent Representatives (Coreper I) on Wednesday morning, 27 March, the Romanian Presidency of the Council of the EU decided to postpone the vote on the provisional interinstitutional agreement to Coreper on Friday 29 March.
The reason behind this postponement can be explained by the very large number of technical and political questions raised by several national delegations, known as the "like-minded", namely Germany, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium, Austria and Denmark.
On the previous day, they sent a seven-page document setting out a series of technical questions, specifically the applicable legislation, (which addresses the issue of posted workers), and unemployment benefits (see EUROPE 12222/31).
During the round table session, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Denmark would have immediately taken the floor to make known their fears. The Presidency would then have proposed that these questions were taken up at technical level on Thursday 28 March, to be returned to Coreper on Friday 29 March.
A proposal that would not have satisfied the "like-minded", who stated that this would not change their position. On the contrary, several Member States would have supported this approach, including Portugal, Slovenia, Malta, Ireland and France.
According to some, it would be a symbolic gesture to those delegations dissatisfied with the agreement reached, with a number of questions relating to sections presented in the Presidency text of last 11 March, or even to certain aspects prior to the general approach reached in the EU Council in June 2018.
According to several sources, a favourable majority is likely. The Visegrád group (Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia) would seem to be leaving in a disorganised manner. Poland could abstain, we are told, while Slovakia might vote for the agreement that has been reached.
The members of the Visegrád group are faced with a difficult choice: they either accept the agreement, which tightens the terms of the legislation applicable to the posting of workers, or they reject it and risk seeing the issue of family indexation come in through the back door at the next revision, explained one source. Another source added that some provisions of the agreement are already favourable to them, such as responsibilities for delivery being shifted to the Member State where it is taking place.
There are still other unknowns – Sweden, Cyprus and Belgium – who could abstain.
On the European Parliament side, a majority would be in favour of the agreement. It would garner support from the GUE/NGL, the Greens/EFA, a very large majority of the S&D, and also some delegations from ALDE and the EPP, the Italian delegation from the EFDD and, perhaps, the French delegation from the ENF. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)