Brussels, 14/02/2001 (Agence Europe) - The British Labour member, Richard Corbett, member of the European Parliament's Constitutional Committee, underlines the consequences of a rejection of the Nice Treaty by the European Parliament, in a contribution entitles "How to lead a "salade nicoise"?" aimed at the special meeting by the group recently dedicated, in Verviers, to the Nice Treaty and post Nice. If we reject the Treaty, we are in fact calling on the national parliaments not to ratify it and, if one or several of them "follow our words", it will require calling another European Council, with "the same procedures, the same people, submitted to the same pressures, and which will lead to the same results with as few small changes", said Mr Corbett. Under these conditions, he feels that "the procedures for the post Nice are a branch to be grabbed", and puts forward the following timetable: - in 2001, technical work on the codification of reorganisation of the Treaties; - in 2002, regional and national hearings; - in 2003, European Convention; - in 2004, new IGC. As for the themes broached, Mr Corbett raises:
- A European Constitution. By recalling that the Florence European Institute drew-up a draft which shows that it is possible to gathered together the present treaties and protocols onto a "single codified text", Mr Corbett feels that this work should be continued and exploited by "lawyers representing the Member States and the institutions", do that an "agreed text, codified and simplified can be used as a basis by the Convention and by the IGC". According to him, if the technical work is completed in 2001, the political leaders "could be coupled by 2002 to the basic changes, from the basis of a clearer fundamental text". Of course, admits the British member, "under the codified treaties we will see the clearer emergence of a Constitution", even if some are opposed to it fearing the idea of a Constitution "which announces a Federal State" - because, in their minds, federalism means "centralism". Rather that divide ourselves over vocabulary, it would be better to unit over the fundamental changes needed for the Union to become more effective, democratic and responsible, stated Mr Corbett.
- The allocation of competences to different levels. To advocates of a "Charter of competences" to be added to the treaty are, here to, "pushed by the fear of an excessive centralisation", while these fears are excessive", underlined Richard Corbett, who notes in particular that the EU budget only covers 3% of public spending in the EU. He also asserted: "We are not creating a centralised super-State. And a Charter of competences is a unnecessary protection against this "so called" excessive centralisation".
- Place of national parliaments. According to Mr Corbett, the reservations already expressed over the idea of creating a chamber formed of representatives from national parliaments (launched by France during the negotiation of the Amsterdam Treaty) remain viable today. Mr Corbett, for whom the COSAC (Conference of bodies specialised in Community affairs) has become a "useful forum" that should be put to greater use, raises objections both against the suggestion to create a sort of second "chamber of subsidiarity" and that to entrust this new chamber with dealing with issues of security, taking over from the WEU Assembly (Do we want to give the EU two parliaments, one mainly responsible for the Community pillar?" "In what way would this help us?" questioned Mr Corbett).
According to Richard Corbett, other than the issue of the incorporation of the Charter off Fundamental Rights into the Treaty, the up-coming reform should also examine to issues not cited in the Nice declaration, such as the extension of codecision and the role of the High Representative for CFSP.
