Strasbourg, 11/12/2001 (Agence Europe) - The presentation in Strasbourg on Tuesday of the Commission's work programme for next year by the Commission President was the scene of sometimes very scathing criticisms of the method used by the Prodi Commission, although the substance was hardly contested by MEPs. Romano Prodi stressed the political nature of the programme and highlighted several breakthroughs in 2001, particularly the creation of a Convention to pave the way for the IGC, saying they were risking a lot but the Convention should finally give them the opportunity to talk to citizens.
Romano Prodi was in a pretty combative mood on Tuesday when he defended the European Commission's working programme for 2002. He anticipated criticism, saying he knew that some of the MEPs were amazed at not receiving an annexed catalogue of planned legislation for the year ahead but that on 13 February 2001 many MEPs had called for the list system to be replaced with a new system, which the Commission had "diligently" done. Mr Prodi again stressed that he considered "full and transparent" co-operation between the institutions as a sine qua non for the good functioning of the Union and hoped to find an innovative working method for achieving additional efficiency and transparency while respecting the two basic principles of safeguarding the European Commission's right of initiative ("because a strong Commission makes the European Parliament stronger"); and defending the tripartite nature of interinstitutional collaboration with full participation of the "two legislators" - Parliament and Council. He hammered home that from now on, the Commission's working programme would no longer be a "catalogue" but a "political programme in the true sense of the word" as MEPs had demanded. In order to get more transparency, the Commission wanted to replace the catalogue with a "much more reliable" quarterly programming instrument which the EP would be provided with on a regular basis. Mr Prodi announced that he was intending to carry out a "more structured" "political dialogue" with the EP next year with two focus points: the presentation to Parliament in February of the Commission's political priorities for 2003; and the presentation in November of the working programme adapted to match these priorities. He added that the European Commission Vice-President Loyola de Palacio would continue to lead the dialogue, noting that her meeting with the Conference of Presidents the week before had shown the agreement between EP and Commission on the broad picture.
After outlining the great "successes" of 2001 (preparing for the euro, enlargement negotiations, the Balkans, dialogue with Russia, opening the next WTO round, sustainable development and relaunching the creation of the Common Justice and Security Area), Mr Prodi presented the four broad areas covered in the 2002 programme: 1) Internal security: the Commission will present a series of measures on an integrated external border control system, civil protection, public protection and strengthening transport security. 2) The euro and the economy. Mr Prodi wondered what the impact of 11 September would have been like if it weren't for the euro. He stressed the need to improve the coordination of the eurozone countries' budgetary policies (a code of conduct taking account of how these policies were interconnected could strengthen the coherence and credibility "of our economic policy", expressing some concern for the long-term, making a veiled reference to structural reforms adding that the cost of no-Europe, one could almost say the cost of no-Lisbon, would soon become unbearable, mentioning blocked issues like the European patent and GALILEO. He noted that the Commission could not do everything by itself; the European Parliament had to do its bit. He regretted that the absence of an agreement on new legislation on mergers had prevented a positive development in the EU's financial markets. 3) Enlargement and the "Greater Europe": Mr Prodi highlighted the need for all the institutions and the Member States to adopt to Europe's new size and help citizens appreciate the human, cultural and economic opportunities of enlargement. 4) The constituent process. Mr Prodi noted that several times at Parliament since September 1999 he had canned for a wider agenda for the next IGC than the "Amsterdam leftovers" and sketched the board outline of the Communication on the Convention unveiled by the Commission last week (see EUROPE of 6 December, p.4). Mr Prodi said that in his view, the essential part of the Convention wasn't the "name" to be given to a new text, but fort the text to be capable of being considered by everyone as a "constitution" because of its "content and the open and democratic nature of the process that gave rise to it".
For the first time, the Council is taking part in a debate on the Commission's programme, but it is a Council at the end of its term of office, said Annemie Neyts on behalf of the Belgian Presidency. She simply made a few remarks on the need to strengthen consistency of action by the different institutions, mainly in order to combat terrorism, to enhance coordination of economic policies after changeover to the euro, for the Barcelona Process and for enlargement. She said the document presented by the Commission does have the merit of focusing on the key objectives.
MEPs were severe, but above all with regards "form".
Although some of your collaborators do not take the Parliament seriously, said EPP-ED President Hans-Gert Pöttering, one should think about renewing certain structures. Mr Pöttering supports the Commission in substance but calls for the presence of all Commissioners at the sessions (he exclaimed that it was only a matter of four days per month. Mr Prodi replied that, in 80% of the issues, the Commissioners in charge answer to MEPS). In the same group, British Conservative James Elles was much firmer. He said the programme "lacks focus" and is not sufficiently detailed. As far as the work programme is concerned, he said "we were better off" with the Santer Commission. Partido popular elected member, José Ignacio Salafranca, on the other hand, focused more on substance. President of the Socialist Group Enrique Baron insisted that agreements should be respected. He invited the Commission's secretariat to improve its postal services so that the MEPs may receive its texts in time. Mr Baron spoke of the response expected on the Spanish linen affair. Mr Prodi, in response to a more general criticism, affirmed that the Commission had responded, on 5 December, to the presidents of four groups, but that the postal services had apparently not been able to keep up with the responses. Mr Baron agrees with Mr Prodi when he defends the Community method, which seems to him to be the central problem of the forthcoming European Council in Laeken. Austrian Social Democrat Hannes Swoboda shares this positive judgement on the aims of the Commission, but criticises a language that he finds often ambivalent, and hesitating. We must not unilaterally amend agreements, they should not be torn up, exclaimed British Labour member Richard Corbett, who, as a demonstration, torn up the text of the Parliament/Commission agreement on the latter's programme. The "process" is also a cause for concern for the leader of the Liberal Group, Pat Cox, who believes that it is only by eliminating the problems of "process" that one can avoid this "superfluous degree of mutual misunderstanding". The Commission has the right of own initiative, but the Parliament has the right to examine its proposals at an early stage, he said. Cecilia Malström, Swedish Liberal, also called for greater clarity on the timetable, the legal base, the budgetary consequences and a better follow-up and assessment. The Parliament, said Paul Lannoye speaking for the Greens/EFA, refuses to be treated as no more than an accomplice. As far as substance is concerned, the Belgian Green member notes that 50% of the initiatives taken in 2001 were not in the legislative programme, and that this situation is only partially justified by what is unforeseeable. Commitments towards the Parliament must be respected, said Sylvia Kaufmann (PDS) on behalf of the United Left/Nordic Green Left. She finds the Commission's reflections on Laeken "interesting" and invites it to carry out its driving role with energy. Jens-Peter Bonde, President of the Group of a Europe of Democracies and Diversities, said that promises had not been kept, that the Commission and Council officials humiliate the Parliament but that "this will go against" them. "You run the risk of being chased away", he added. Olivier Dupuis, from the Bonino Lista, noted that defence of the Community method has become an alibi for some, and a religion for others (Jacques Delors, Romano Prodi, Ferdinando Riccardi in his Agence Europe editorials, he noted). In his opinion, if the Commission is not to become the Council's Secretariat, then radical reform is needed, "American style", with separation of powers and direct election of the President. The Community method, albeit "sometimes useful", concludes Georges Berthu (Mouvement pour la France) must not be systematized, as it is too rigid. In his view, the aim of institutional reform must be essentially to better organise the control that nations have on Brussels.
On Thursday, the Parliament will vote a resolution. A draft text by the leaders of the EPP-ED, Socialist, Liberal and Greens/EFA groups criticises not the content but the way the Commission document is presented. For us, the debate on the legislative programme has not yet taken place, Mr Pöttering told the press.