One of the main requests of the Conference on the Future of Europe, taken up by the European Parliament, is to move from unanimity to qualified majority voting by the Member States in the EU Council, particularly on tax matters (see EUROPE 12966/21).
At the beginning of July, the EU Council experts listed 67 legal bases for which a “passerelle” clause (Article 48(7) TEU) allowing this switch from unanimity to qualified majority voting could be used to adopt a legal act in the EU Council.
Examples include legislative initiatives to combat all forms of discrimination, to strengthen social protection, police cooperation or tax harmonisation, to adopt international agreements or to modify the EIB’s tasks.
The experts also list the decisions of the European Council that cannot be subject to a “passerelle” clause, such as a finding that a Member State violates fundamental EU values, the composition of the European Parliament or the establishment of a rotation system between Member States for the composition of the European Commission.
See their analysis of the legal bases of the treaty allowing the use of the “passerelle” clause: https://aeur.eu/f/2oz
We want the Member States to identify “the points on which we could move from the unanimity rule to the qualified majority rule”, said Czech Minister Mikuláš Bek on Friday 15 July in Prague, at the end of the informal meeting of European Affairs Ministers. He said that the Czech Presidency of the EU Council was carrying out “a preliminary survey to see if Member States are willing to discuss issues such as voting in the EU Council” and the reform of EU electoral law to introduce transnational lists of candidates headed by ‘Spitzenkandidaten’ (see EUROPE 12944/1).
The Czech Minister noted that Member States didn’t have “the same willingness” to discuss treaty changes, especially because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Maroš Šefčovič, who was present in Prague, estimated that “80-90%” of the Conference conclusions could be achieved with a constant treaty. He supported the willingness of the Czech Presidency to “give the Member States enough time to have a thorough discussion” on these institutional issues, because, he stressed, if a Convention is convened, the results will have to be targeted in advance in order to minimise the risks.
At the beginning of June, the EU Council’s experts provided an initial analysis of the requests of the Conference on the Future of Europe, noting that 18 of them would require an institutional revision of the EU in order to be realised (see EUROPE 12971/25). (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)