Brussels, 19/01/2001 (Agence Europe) - The next reform of the Institutions, scheduled for 2004, should, unlike the Intergovernmental Conference that has just ended, be conducted with a real project and effective method in mind, said European Commissioner Michel Barnier, in a first determined and unaccomodating speech on the "post-Nice process", given "personally" on Thursday evening, at an invitation from the regions of Aquitaine, Emilia Romagna and the Land of Hesse.
The Commissioner's speech focused on the need to base discussions on a specific project. "There will never be a successful IGC without a project that answers these questions (what is being discussed and why), and without a public opinion that can take it on board", he said. Discussions held at the European Council of Nice, like Amsterdam, lacked the "clear project" needed for their success, unlike the Maastricht Treaty, which was the "result of two years of discussions on Monetary Union and Political Union". The project must be built on a debate "without taboo", and the four subjects indicated at Nice for the post-Nice process "should be included in this overall project".
In response to several questions, Mr Barnier welcomed the recent interventions by several European officials on the future of Europe, but also hoped that Fischer, Chirac and Verhofstadt would take the floor again, if only to restate what they have already said, and to verify "whether this is really what they think", or to present other ideas. "They must not be prevented from doing so by the elections", he said.
The working method, "which did not always work well" in Nice, was covered at length by the Commissioner, who mainly took on board the three stages proposed by President Prodi to the European Parliament (see yesterday's EUROPE, p.13): first of all reflection open to all, then, after the December Council in Laeken, a more structured reflection phase, and finally the "compulsory Intergovernmental Conference that should be short and decisive".
For the first two phases, Commissioner Barnier greatly insisted on the public debate, considering that "not a single move forward for Europe can in future be carried out behind closed doors". The Commissioner believes in the existence of a "European public opinion" in formation, an opinion that should be woken up and informed, and listened to by the Member States which "for as long as they refuse to consider its existence" will only find "static compromises" that come from their excessive concern about the possible reaction of national opinion and national parliaments.
Is the right method that of the Convention responsible for drafting the Charter of Fundamental Rights? While recognising that "many States are opposed", Commissioner Barnier felt, in response to a question, that something resembling this should be done, at least for an intermediary period after Laeken". At any rate, he said one should get over the "quarrel of dogma" between an intergovernmental method that is "still necessary but not sufficient" and the Community method "which remains, given that there is no new method, what one has best found to build Europe", but which has been "shaken up and made breathless" by enlargement. In his view, "it is possible to breathe new life into the Community model, new life that could last for the next 50 years".
Finally, Mr Barner sketched out several "personal reflections" for this renovation of the Community model, saying it is necessary to: 1) preserve the role of the Commission and not make it just a secretariat for the common market, with a question mark on the election of the Commission president; 2) find a place for the national MPs in EU Councils; 3) hold European referenda at "historic moments"; 4) work on a constitutional treaty; 5) create, as Jacques Delors had suggested, a European Affairs Council with ministers residing in Brussels, who would prepare the Councils but who would also take part in their Council of national ministers.