Strasbourg, 06/07/2000 (Agence Europe) - The debate on the purpose of Europe must begin by 2002 "at the latest", and must be a debate "geared to decisions", otherwise there is the risk of heading towards a "major crisis", said German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, speaking to the European Parliament's Committee on Constitutional Affairs during an extraordinary meeting convened on Thursday morning in Strasbourg for dialogue on the ideas expressed in the speech pronounced on 12 May at Humboldt Universität. "We must ask ourselves how a thirty-member Europe can work and what kind of Europe it would be if we do not want the EU to simply become a customs union", he stressed in his brief introduction. The decision on the euro was "the first step towards achieving the purpose of Europe", said Mr Fischer, going on to add: "In Berlin, I spoke of federation. I tried to find another word and could not find one, but there is already a federation between the countries of the euro area … The debate on the purpose of Europe could not circumvent the constitutional question, that of a 'constitutional treaty'", repeated Mr Fischer. He also insisted, throughout his dialogue with MEPs, on the need for a compromise between what should come under Community competence and what should be national.
In response to Inigo Mendez de Vigo (Partido Popular) and Jo Leinen (German Social Democrat), who wanted indications on his ideas concerning a European "government" and, in this context, on the role of the Commission, Mr Fischer specified: "I can well imagine a Commission with fewer members, with a strong president, who would be the future European president, directly elected. This European president would have to reconcile what comes under Community powers with what is national, and the European government would be formed from what is now the Council, he added, specifying that the president would have the right to choose his private office from the national governments. The Parliament should also reconcile these two levels, stressed Mr Fischer. He said he was in favour of a two-House system based on a directly elected House, like the current European Parliament, and an Upper House also elected but formed of members with a national mandate. "This idea came to me mainly after my first visit to Westminster, where I noted that the British Parliament does not wish to lose its 'identity' and that it will not do so", pointed out Mr Fischer. He stressed on several occasions the need for greater involvement of the national parliaments in the European process. "I have had very interesting discussions on this subject also with the Danish, Swedish and Finnish parliaments", said Mr Fischer, while stating: "I am in favour of making the EU fully 'parliamentary', but with a two-House system".
In response to questions, Mr Fischer spoke of:
- The "hard core" and increased cooperation. Why would a hard core be needed?, asked British Labour member Richard Corbett. It is not, replied Joschka Fischer, who felt that the "euro group" will entail "true dialectic" and that a hard core could be formed for "a brief period". But, when the others see that "it is serious", they will take part". The "vanguard" concept is the "best definition", said Mr Fischer, who stressed that those who cannot or who do not wish to, cannot determine the rate. In response to Italian Radical Emma Bonino, who asked whether there would be several "groups" in the fore in different areas, Mr Fischer said one should go in the "direction of a single group", even if differentiation is possible. Georges Berthu, French member of the Union for a Europe of Nations Group, asked how decisions would be taken within the hard core. He acknowledged his preference for decisions by consensus. "If this were the case, it would not be progress", said Mr Fischer.
- Prospects for Summit in Nice, mainly for starting up the constitutional process. Will the European Council in Nice give a mandate for launching this process? To this question put by German Green member Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Mr Fischer began by saying: "I must be careful". He added: "I would hope so, but there is no answer yet, even if one can anticipate that, in the Nice conclusions, there will be something on the 'follow-up' to the summit. In the present situation, I do not think it likely the Charter of Fundamental Rights will be included in the Treaty", he remarked, recalling that, in Feira, Chancellor Schröder was in favour of such integration. Alain Lamassoure (UDF), who noted the "difference" between the longer term prospects and the IGC's agenda, felt that, if the process mentioned by Mr Fischer does not take place now, then one could miss a favourable period, that would not be found again immediately. But, according to the German minister, there is no contradiction between the two processes. If one is hoping for a "big leap forward" in Nice, then there might be disappointment. Nice will be a "first step" and a major first step, without which it would not be possible to go any further, he said. On the subject of the "timetable", he recalled that, this autumn, there will be a referendum on the euro in Denmark, that in 2001 there will be elections in Italy and no doubt in the United Kingdom (which should decide on the "role it is to take on" in Europe), and, in 2002, elections in France and Germany, to be followed by the first accessions.
- Democracy and breakdown of powers between the different levels. In response to Jens-Peter Bonde (Europe of Democracies and Diversities) who expressed concern about a "loss" of democracy at European level, Mr Fischer said that he did not agree, though did acknowledge the fact that there was a "democratic deficit". The minister said he was in favour of a "flexible" Europe, stating in passing that he did not understand why there should be the same rules in Europe on a question such as hunting.
- Validity of the Monnet/Schuman method. In answer to questions put by British Liberal Democrat Andrew Duff, Mr Fischer affirmed that this method has been successful but that it is "exhausted due to its own success", that is, because of the degree of integration reached since. "I would not like to cast it away", he added, noting that he sees "intergovernmental" authority as an "intermediary step".
- Enlargement, the frontiers of Europe. In response to British Conservative Christopher Beazley, who wished to know whether Nice would give "target dates" for new memberships, Mr Fischer replied that he was a firm believer in dates but only if they are realistic, and that one should stick to promises. Furthermore, he reassured Cecilia Malmström (Liberal Group, Sweden) who feared that the debate on the purpose of Europe would slow down enlargement. "This will be a "New Years Eve" party during which, at an extraordinary European Council, we shall solemnly proclaim the end of the Cold War frontiers", he said. Addressing elected PDS member Sylvia Kaufmann, who raised questions about the frontiers of Europe and, above all, about Russia, Mr Fischer replied by stressing the EU's "existential interest" in having very close ties with Russia, but he did not wish to contemplate the prospect of this country's membership. "At the Helsinki Summit, which was really historical from the enlargement point of view, we did not define the frontiers of the EU, but we did get close to this definition", remarked Mr Fischer, who felt that one should keep to the Helsinki conclusions and focus on the "very difficult" task that they involve for the European Union.
- European Identity. In this Europe, the national states no longer have the "ugly face" of the hegemony and nationalism of the past, said Mr Fischer, speaking of a "familiar flat in which one is happy to live" in a house that one knows equally well.
Giorgio Napolitano announces Jacques Delors will be speaking to the constitutional committee in September
- Since your speech of 12 May "the air is already sweeter regarding the debate on Europe", said the Chairman of the Constitutional Committee, Giorgio Napolitano (Democratici di sinistra), who welcomed the fact that, after the major contributions made by "eminent supporters of previous phases of the integration process", like Helmut Schmid, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing and Jacques Delors, one of the main actors of the current phase of European policy has now "come down into the arena". "You have finally reintroduced into the political debate key themes with a great deal of attention for complex aspects such as the persisting role of the national states", said Mr Napolitano, who announced that the constitutional committee will, in September, be inviting Jacques Delors "as we are convinced that the discussion on the future of the Union, on the future of Europe, is a help to us in the present".
