Don't forget what is essential. Tough battles over a word or semblance of a word at the Seville Summit and in the ECOFIN Council preceding it didn't do much for me. They referred to subjects, which deserved the maximum of respect, such as the Stability Pact and the fight against illegal immigration. But it was obvious that compromise formulas could be found and that quarrels over semantics had been blown out of proportion and were liable to create the false impression of serious disagreements between Member States by shoving what was essential into the background. On the eve of the Summit, certain newspapers were announcing, "Immigrants, EU agreement kicked out". Nothing in fact was in danger of getting kicked out, the essential had been achieved. After the Summit, emphasis was still being put on the two details ironed out at Seville.
Citizens have been listened to. On immigration and security, detail is the final part of the sentence involving co-operation with third countries in the fight against illegal immigration - to impose sanctions or not? The text approved allows for this possibility, if the Council observes "an unjustified lack of co-operation on the part of a third country in the area of immigration controls". A Minister asserted that this would make sanctions "almost un-operable", which isn't true. If there are serious cases, unanimity is possible. In any case, this is a minor detail. The essential is the change in course, the taking into account of citizens' worries about security, the decision of Europe to control its own borders and make decisions about its own immigration policy (see yesterday's issue in this section). For the first time a firm line has been taken on the different parts of the policy - illegal immigration, legal immigration, asylum, integration - the principle of joint border control is part of a binding timetable and legal measures for application.
Budgetary balance. The essential concern of the Economic and Monetary Union, is the unanimous re-affirmation of the desire to abide by the Stability Pact and the overall commitment made by all to have budgets "close to balance" by 2004 or the following yea if the rate of growth is lower than that forecasted. Budgetary balance is such a battle that in some Member States, such a revolution (even psychological) in former attitudes is such that any delay by certain countries should not be over-dramatised. In the past, systematic deficits were dealt with by monetary devaluation. Today, the budgets of ten Member States are in balance or surplus, the others will be in balance or close to it in 2004 or the following year. The Summit called on the ECOFIN Council to formally adopt the Broad Economic Guidelines and Member States to follow these recommendations. The Summit clearly indicated that flexibility had to go in both directions: if growth was low, deficits could increase (within the limits outlined in the Stability Pact) but if growth improved, reduction in annual deficits and debt (still excessive overall in Euro-zone countries) has to be accelerated. The rest is of secondary importance.
Some important details. Institutional decisions were modest for the large part but there are some aspects that should be stressed. Summit preparation is within the Community framework: the General Affairs Council will have total control for it, drawing on institutional measures, the "Sherpas" now being obsolete. What remains is ambiguous and there is little progress and divergences remain with regard to the six-month rotation of the Presidencies. This will have to be re-examined, as well as the annex on the structure and function of the Council, which creates the impression of a lame duck compromise.
The chapter on ESDP (European Security and Defence Policy) is restricted to action within the course of current developments, with nothing new to be added. But it is a policy that's advancing slowly but surely and is destined to become one of the pillars of the Union. The Summit also confirmed the objectives and deadlines for the Strategy of Lisbon, with regard to financial services, the fiscal package (with moderate criticism of Switzerland and its savings taxation policy), enterprise governance, reforms, innovation and competitiveness, by calling on the Council to put into place the strategy proposed by the Commission in the field of bio-technology. Lengthy developments on enlargement negotiations, based on the same principle, re-affirmation of the positions and objectives already known (which isn't always that banal, see point 24 on Cyprus).
General remark. The European Commission appears to be progressing in responding to the intellectual control of the Summit's work. Almost all the papers submitted to the Heads of Government come from the Commission and represent the results of Council's work on its proposals. This is important within the perspective of institutional reform.
(FR)