Jacques Delors' views and guidelines on the reform of the Treaties are pretty familiar to our readers because he tends to talk about them clearly and openly, and I tend to report back on this. But there is something new - in front of the Mouvement européen/France meeting chaired by Anne-Marie Idrac and attended by Convention Members Pervenche Berès, Humbert Haenel and Alain Lamassoure on 6 July he supplemented his previous views, bringing them together in a single structure to sketch out an overview of the European Union's future institutional structure. I think that an introduction to Jacques Delors' views is valuable for all Convention Members, even those who have always closely followed changes in his ideas, and for this reason, I outline it below for readers, dividing it into sections under my own responsibility.
1. Enlargement. Let us stop seeing enlargement as a constraint and make the reunification of Europe our ideal. Candidate countries are part of Europe's multiple heritage and enriching the European spirit. The "wedding presents" are quite balanced - they are giving us at least as much as we are going to give them. The spirit of our welcome must not simply be that of a "giver of lessons" (you should do this or you should do that) but also of understanding for the efforts being demanded of them.
2. Reasonable objectives. After the accession of the 12 countries with which accession negotiations are underway, a pause will be needed and, at the same time, reflection on a new strengthened association status that could be offered to other countries that would like to join but are not ready. For the 27-member EU, reasonable objectives have to be set. Jacques Delors wants three: a space of peace and security for all; a framework for sustainable development and solidarity, meaning stimulating competition, strengthening cooperation and unifying solidarity. If one of these pillars were to disappear in the enlarged Europe, the EU would be no more than the world's soft centre, a free exchange area without its own trends, without vigour and without personality; and an area where all countries can develop their diversity and preserve their identity while creating federal links between one another.
3. "Differentiation" and strengthened cooperation. The three great objectives outlined in point 2 are valid for everyone and will form a kind of Constitution (whatever legal definition is chosen). But this doesn't mean that other progress cannot be considered - on the contrary, other progress is necessary but it cannot be an obligation on everyone. Jacques Delors says he is aware of being "clearly in the minority" in defending this theme, because too many politicians want to avoid hurting countries which fear being relegated to a "second category". He feels, however, that "claiming that all 27 will advance together (although we can't manage to do so with 15 states) is to lie to ourselves. Differentiation doesn't mean a two-speed Europe since the door is always open to everyone, but it is the only way of allowing those who want to to progress without being blocked by those who don't want to. Differentiation is nothing new - it was used well before any talk about the avant-garde or strengthened cooperation. If we had had to wait for a unanimous decision of all 15, the euro would not exist. He quotes examples of strengthened cooperation in the future: a) an economic policy coordination pact (in addition to the current Stability Pact) in order to balance out Economic and Monetary Union; b) organising Foreign and Defence Policy. It's in the interest of the small countries that want to be involved in the Foreign and Defence Policy to call for strengthened cooperation, since the big countries are not concerned about it because they'll carry out the policy among themselves in any case. But this would be outside the Treaties, excluding the small counties. In terms of defence, the structures have to be built but one also has to give oneself the means.
4. Institutional operations. Jacques Delors favours a sharing of powers among the European Union and its Member States, not to fix Community powers in a restrictive list but to clearly indicate areas where states can keep their autonomy and responsibilities. He sees five such areas - education, culture, employment, social security and health. In other words areas underlying a nation's cohesion. Cooperation between countries is clearly desirable in these sectors and a basic package of minimum social rights can be envisaged, but harmonisation should not be pursued to make national characteristic uniform.
1) That said, an effective institutional system is essential, while being aware that there is no "institutional miracle" determining in itself the success of the EU. A good compromise has to be worked out between the Community Method (which has proved its effectiveness)
subject to a few changes and the "Intergovernmental Method" that remains essential in a few areas. There shouldn't be any attempts to invent convoluted European government formulae. The EU's government cannot be anything other than the Council/Commission tandem, improving the functioning of the Council (Jacques Delors remains true to the idea of a General Affairs Council meeting once a fortnight and separate from the External Relations Council), respecting the Commission's right of initiative. He feels that the annual European Council programmes (like the one decided in Seville) already impose restrictions on the Commission's right of initiative and the Commission must give itself a rigorous programme since too many projects, too many White and Green Papers don't make a political agenda. A strong Commission is the only guarantee for small countries against the risk of the big ones dominating.
5. The two Presidents. In Jacques Delors' opinion, it is perfectly possible for a President of the EU (appointed for two and a half years or longer by heads of state) to exist side by side with the President of the Commission and this two-leader formula already exist with the difference that the President of the European Council will no longer change every six months (an aberration with regard to the outside world) and will deal with Europe full-time. These are two improvements as long as their respective powers remain clearly separate of course and the Commission's autonomy is protected, like its exclusive right of initiative.
6. Reuniting instruments. Jacques Delors invited his listeners to imagine a situation where the leader of a big EU country (the German Chancellor, French President or UK prime minister, etc) in discussions with the leader of a big non-EU country (the US, Russia, China, Japan, India, etc) would be forced to interrupt the discussions on several occasions because they started discussing trade or development aid to say that it's somebody else and not me who's responsible for this. It would be ridiculous, but this is the situation in Europe. Solana can discuss war and peace, but not trade or funding and vice versa for the External Relations Commissioner. Europe's political partners in discussion don't understand this. Solana and Patten's jobs need to be united (preferably within the Commission) and at a higher political level the "two Presidents" should represent the EU together faced with non-EU countries. Effective European presence on the world stage requires this.
7. Federation of nation states. Some federalists in the 1930s wanted to abolish nations. Today, globalisation forces each state to strengthen its identity and they are a necessary link between the various levels of local communities and Europe. Citizens who are moving away from politics have to be reassured by providing benchmarks while at the same time, at the European level, a federal approach is vital. This is why he feels the formula of a federation of nation states is appropriate, combining the idea of federalism and national identity.
Delors is very prudent over regional competencies at European level since introducing regions with legislative powers into the EU's mechanisms would conflict with the idea of a federation of nation states. Each country decides for itself how to organise its territory and this is not an area where the EU should get involved.
Delors argues that the EU budget should rise to 2% of European GDP if the EU wants to give itself the means to implement its objectives. In generally, he feels that the Convention has the great merit of achieving what was impossible for many a long year, making governments break their silence and give their view on the institutions.
See my 4 July column for other issues not mentioned here, for example the hypothesis of the European Parliament electing the President of the Commission (an idea that Jacques Delors disapproves of).
Ensuring accuracy of referenda. Along with other speakers and on top of the vital issue of how to avoid the future draft Constitutional Treaty being destroyed by any parliament voting against it (see second page of my 10 July column), Alain Lamassoure raised another sensitive political issue - in decisive referenda on the final outcome of the Intergovernmental Conference, how to avoid a mix-up between "justified" voting against by citizens disagreeing with the substance of the project and voting against by people unversed in EU law who could vote "No" to express disagreement with the President or the government in power while being in favour of the European project and thereby help create a majority against the project that doesn't correspond to the views of the majority of the population? Lamassoure sees a way of countering this danger, as far as France is concerned, by not holding a referendum on the President's initiative but on the parliament's initiative with the support of the pro-European forces of the opposition. Pervenche Berès (Socialist) agrees. (F.R.)