Brussels, 08/03/2000 (Agence Europe) - Turkey like the twelve EU applicant countries (see EUROPE of 28/29 February, p.11) presented its contribution to the Intergovernmental Conference on the institutional reform of the EU, while underlining that its thoughts are based on its own "experience of the Union and are limited in scope, due to the fact that we are not yet a member." The Turkish government essentially expresses itself over institutional questions that were not settle in Amsterdam and on the European Parliament in a widened Europe, feeling that the present ceiling foreseen of 700 MEPs could be challenged "after 2004 when the membership of the EU expands." While underlining that a Parliament "of 28 members will require a balanced representation from each country," Turkey feels that it would be preferable to maintain a ceiling of 700 MEPs and to modify the number of seat per country while taking into account the need to "preserve the demographic representativness of the Union." Furthermore, Turkey is taking a stand on:
1. Size and shape of the Commission. "Ideally each member should have at least one Commissioner" asserts Turkey, while recognising that, in the European Union having "nearly double the number of members" than presently, "it may call for flexibility and sacrifices" on the part of the Member States. "It may be preferable to preserve the current number of 20 Commissioners" feels the Turkish government, who proposes two solutions so as to enable each Member State to be present within the Commission during each mandate; - a division of the market into two (twice two and a half years or two and three years); - the creation (and according to Ankara the method is preferable) of posts of Deputy-Commissioners, in ensuring that, so as not to discriminate against the small member States, the large member States would also accept to have Deputy-Commissioners.
2. Weighting of votes in the Council. According to Turkey, the present system worked satisfactorily until now and the 71% ceiling needed to reach qualified majority decision seems sufficient.
3. Extension of qualified majority voting. According to Turkey it is a "useful device that should be extended as far as possible" especially in the second and third pillar areas. For Ankara, the qualified majority voting should be the rule, while "certain questions" where unanimity will be maintained should be "identified as clearly as possible".