Speaking to MPs from the EU Member States and prospective Community member countries (candidate countries) on 17 October in Versailles, the President of the Council of Ministers made a statement about the enlargement process. Below are featured the highlights of the speech and his replies to candidate countries' MPs taking part in the debate, in the light of the summary report on the meeting of COSAC (Conference of Community and European affairs committees of the parliaments of the European Union).
Mr Hubert Vedrine. "It is no longer a question of being for or against the enlargement process. This is now taken as read: all sides are in favour of it. What has to be done now is to make a success of enlargement, for the candidate countries and for the European Union. The progress achieved in the negotiations does not depend on given sympathies or political affinities, but on each country's ability to take on board the EU's legislative achievement (« acquis »). Problems cannot be pushed to one side out of friendship or because it is easier that way. We have to get to the bottom of things, otherwise we will be left with issues ticking away like time bombs and this could have dramatic implications for the countries concerned and the EU. A serious-minded and disciplined attitude is the best reply in this stage of the talks to the often justified impatience of the candidate countries and the no less justified concern of the EU Member States. Some of the negotiations therefore have to be tackled again seriously and as soon a possible. I am not saying this in a bid to slow down the talks.
The French Presidency is planning to give a fresh impetus to the negotiations. This resolve is already beginning to have an impact; We are going to address the key issue bound up with the requests for transitional periods. Some of the realistic ones can be dealt with at technical level. Owing to their scale, others are in danger of undermining the basic condition of membership, which is taking on board the EU's legislative achievements.
The European Union is not going to set an membership date, even though some countries are calling for this, believing this could help to increase domestic support for the process. It would be somewhat arbitrary to the say the least to start setting the date for the end of the negotiations. After all, how can the same date bet set for all sides? Nobody would want that. The fact is a date would have to be set for each country: it is easy to imaging the endless rows, the unpleasant comparisons that this would spark off. However, there is a target available for rallying the candidate countries: 1 January 2003 was chosen by EU leaders, at their EU Summit in Helsinki, as the date when the EU would be ready to welcome members who meet the relevant conditions. The EU regards this as a binding date. Meeting this obligation means the talks on the four Inter-Governmental Conference issues have to be wrapped up at Nice. What we want is for you, the candidate countries to lend us your backing for this reform and to stop regarding it as an excuse invented to slow down the pace of enlargement.
Making a success of enlargement implies developing an approach to Europe that is shared both by the Member States and the members-to-be. This is why France decided in 1997 to float the idea of a "European conference" with a view to debating all the European-related issues. The conference is due to be convened twice this year: the first one will be held at Ministerial-level on 23 November in Sochaux, whilst the second one will be held on 7 December in Nice, when it will be attended by heads of state and government. We will take the opportunity then to review the progress made on reforming the institutions and we may hold a joint political debate on the functioning of an enlarged Europe.
Replying to statements by candidate countries' MPs, some of whom made no bones about their impatience or dissatisfaction (« I would like to be able to return home with more upbeat messages », according to Ms Freyberg from Poland ), the Council President said:
" One of the problems thrown up by enlargement is the process lends itself too easily to popularity-seeking programmes. How should this delay be considered? Why, solely in the light of the pledges made here and there in a bid to gain popularity. What is required is to be more respectful towards people, and to tell them the truth. We have to be quite open. Making statements about a timetable will only complicate matters. What is more, the candidates themselves would not be able to agree on a single membership date. There are no longer any groups. The only way to proceed is to treat each party according to its merits. I believe the issue is becoming too emotionally charged with some parties suspecting the EU of shying away from enlargement. The EU is well aware of the historical significance of enlargement and the need to open up to European countries that have returned to the democratic fold.. The candidate countries do not need lawyers during this phase but reformers and negotiators. They will join when all the problems have been settled. It is as simple as that. I understand why the candidate countries should be so impatient, but it is up to their politicians to launch a root-and-branch information campaign to tell their citizens about what the EU represents and how it is in everyone's interest for it to be strong. Instead of complaining about an alleged delay, you should lend your support to our action to make a success of the institutional reforms. They are vital for the enlargement process and they are certainly not an excuse for holding it up."