Renaming certain configurations of the Council of the European Union, promoting a more cross-cutting approach in the field of foreign affairs and ensuring better follow-up to the European Council's guidelines are among the recommendations that the previous Finnish Presidency of the Council of the EU made in mid-December 2019 to ensure that the EU Council's preparatory bodies better reflect the political priorities set out in the strategic agenda adopted by the Twenty-Seven in June.
While Member States consider the current EU Council formations to be “broadly appropriate”, “there was support for some limited changes, notably as regards denominations”, notes the Finnish report on working methods sent to Member States, of which EUROPE has received a copy.
In particular, as mentioned in a preliminary report (see EUROPE 12359/2), the Environment Council could be renamed the Climate Change and Environment Council. Similarly, the Telecommunications, Transport and Energy Council could be renamed the Digital Communications, Transport and Energy Council.
This would require a decision of the European Council by reinforced qualified majority.
In addition, the need to “revitalise” the Competitiveness Council is mentioned. This would require changes in the frequency of meetings of this sectoral ministerial formation and focusing its agenda more on pending legislative files.
Coreper's central role. The meetings of Member States' ambassadors (Coreper I and II) should play a central role in the organisation of the EU Council's preparatory bodies, according to the previous Finnish Presidency.
Coreper should thus adopt, or amend, the mandates for negotiations with the European Parliament on legislative texts to be adopted under the codecision procedure. It should also be the place where the six-month Presidency informs the national delegations of the ongoing interinstitutional negotiations. According to the Finnish report, specific rules should also be drawn up on the participation - which should remain “exceptional” - of “external guests”, such as the Chairs of European Parliament committees, in Coreper meetings.
In the area of foreign affairs, the previous Finnish Presidency noted that the Member States supported the need to develop a “more holistic” approach that better mobilises the trade, development and defence dimensions.
It is also proposed that all texts to be discussed at a Foreign Affairs Council should be submitted early enough to be finalised, at the latest, at the last Coreper II meeting, taking into account the work of the Political and Security Committee (PSC). This Coreper II meeting would take place on the Thursday of the week before the meeting of EU Ministers of Foreign Affairs.
European Council. The Finnish report is also of the opinion that the link between the work of the EU Council and the European Council can be optimised.
Before a European summit, the General Affairs Council and Coreper II could better isolate the political issues to be dealt with at the level of European leaders. Informal Coreper meetings, held on the day of a summit, could thus facilitate collective engagement on a specific issue.
The Foreign Affairs Council preceding a European Council should be able to identify the common messages that the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, would relay at the level of the Twenty-Eight. Avoiding the adoption of conclusions on the same subject by both the European Council and the Foreign Affairs Council should be the rule, notes the Finnish document.
Finally, the European Council's guidelines should be better transposed into the work of the EU Council. This would be done through the presentation of specific progress reports in the different EU Council formations and/or through formal or informal meetings of the relevant Coreper immediately after a summit.
See the Finnish document: http://bit.ly/2N3vNzq (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)