Brussels, 22/02/2002 (Agence Europe) - The European Commissioner responsible for institutional affairs (and who will, with Commissioner Antonio Vitorino, responsible for issues of JHA, be part of the Praesidium of the Convention on the future of Europe), Michel Barnier noted, when speaking before the Centre for European Policy Studies, Friday, that "the spirit of Laeken is no longer that of Nice, focused on issues of institutional mechanics and relations of strength". On that occasion, Mr. Barnier set out his ideas on the reform process that is about to begin, grouping the issues he raises into three categories:
(1) effectiveness of the decision-making system: "The Commission recognises the difficulties", says Mr. Barnier, recalling that he had "never concealed" his personal preference for a College with a maximum of up to 20 members. "The Treaty of Nice does not rule out this option, which could be put in place before the EU expands to 27 Member States", he remarks, considering as "very encouraging" the fact that Jean-Luc Dehaene "has endorsed this view". "As far as the Commission is concerned, solutions do exist, and I hope that together we will have the political courage to apply them", he states.
As for the Council, "the situation is more difficult", notably because of the "obliteration of the Council by the European Council", but especially due to unanimity. According to Barnier, unlike other institutional issues, "the issue of unanimity cannot be solved in several different ways, but only one: majority decisions in Council, which should become the general rule". In addition, he raises the problem of the Presidency, stating: "I do not have a pat answer to this - and certainly do not propose those solutions put forward of some directorate or other which are discussed with alarm in European circles. Yet it is clear that the current system of rotating Presidencies promotes a less coherent management of our collective interests than should be the case."
(2) the role of the Union in as multi-polar world, which raises the question of "power". Mr. Barnier states in particular that "an effective formula must now be developed for the euro zone so that it can be represented abroad," acknowledging that this question may "be a somewhat vexing task, but must be dealt with urgently". In addition, while remarking that "the attitude of Europeans after 11 September gives reason for hope that Europe will be more assertive on the world stage", he considers that, at a time when "the USA's superpower status is stronger than ever (…), what's at stake, if we really want a multi-polar world, is an independent Europe, partner of the United States, which means respected by the United States. Especially as the enlarged Union will have a border with Ukraine and there will be a Russian enclave on EU territory, which will extend to the gates of the Middle East". In a situation like that, Mr. Barnier goes on, "our external activities cannot afford to be watered down".
(3) "re-harnessing public opinion", which raises the problem of the "legitimacy of the system as a whole", which will become "a central issue in the Convention". Mr. Barnier attaches great importance to the contribution of civil society, while contradicting those for whom there are "too few elected representatives in the European decision-making process". According to him, "it is the national leaders who hold the key to change", as "as long as they fail to explain to their citizens what they have been discussing and deciding in Brussels, the public debate will be ensnared by issues of a purely national dimension".