Report by Presidency indicates alternatives for "organised debate" wanted by all

Brussels, 13/06/2001 (Agence Europe) - On Friday morning, the Gothenburg Summit will discuss the future of Europe, after having raised with the Taoiseach the consequences of the Irish "no" to Nice (Monday in Luxembourg, the Minister for Foreign Affairs Brian Cowan had not given any indication on the solution envisaged - declaration on the Irish neutrality, for example - while saying that the rejection of Nice was mainly due to fears of a "militarisation" of the EU and also in the face of an increase in the areas where the decision will be taken in the future by qualified majority. In the meantime, the government decided to establish a Forum on Europe, to prepare a solution in the coming months: see following page).

The debate over the future of Europe should be relatively short, starting from the Presidency's report that outlines the initiatives taken at the European and national level since 7 March and which, for the continuation of the process feels that the next IGC should not only broach institutional issues, but also modifications concerning "policies". For the "structured reflection" phase that should precede the IGC, the Presidency notes that "no single model" seems able to answer "all the demands" and that decision will be made in Laeken. The report raises the use of:

• A group of government representatives, "at an appropriate point in the process". The Presidency recognises that this "proven method" hardly answers the Nice Declaration that envisages a "process with a wider base". According to it, a role for a group of this kind could possibly be defined at a future stage of the process, as a walkway towards the Intergovernmental conference";
• A small group of wise, which raises the same objections than the previous formula (but the Member States would be free to create such a group, and Belgium intends to do so: Ed).
• A similar wide and open forum, but not necessarily identical, to the Convention, which prepared the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The report notes that the mandate, the dimension and the balance of the participants contingents will be crucial issues, and that the tasks of this forum will seemingly be far more complex, certainly more diverse, than in the convention on the charter.