Brussels, 11/02/2003 (Agence Europe) - During a debate on the European Convention and trade policy organised by the European Policy Centre think tank last week, the British Liberal Democrat, Nick Clegg, regretted that the Convention had rather neglected the democratisation of trade policy and appealed for more qualified majority voting in decisions in this area, as well as the European Parliament's assent on trade agreements. Clegg pointed out that the European Parliament, (according to a synthesis of debates carried out by the EPC) had given its assent to concluding trade negotiations that produced the World Trade Organisation (WTO) because the treaty demanded Parliament's consent on trade agreements that have institutional or budgetary implications. Nevertheless, this was a unique situation and it will not be the same after the next round of trade negotiations in Doha in 2004, he warned, insisting therefore on an amendment to Article 133, in the framework of the current revision of the treaties. In this connection he indicated that the European Commission would continue to negotiate but with the awareness of Parliament's "Sword of Damocles" hanging over the whole process, like in the USA. He was asked a number of questions during discussions on the powers of Congress in trade matters and certain participants asked, in this context, whether trade Commissioner, Pascal Lamy, would be prepared to play a similar role to that of the President of the USA, in attempting to get MEPs more involved in trade policy decision (the example of President Clinton was used, who personally addressed member of Congress in an effort to obtain a vote in favour of China joining the WTO).
Pascal Lamy considers that the secret of success in European trade policy has up until now depended on what is called the "Golden Triangle", which is based on the political will to act together and the balanced and effective decision-making mechanism, according to which Council decides whether to open negotiations, the Commission carries out the negotiations and the Council approves the results of the negotiation by qualified majority voting. Mr Lamy acknowledged that the system was not perfect and that they ultimately needed to deal with the issue of legitimacy and the role of the European Parliament. According to Mr Lamy, it was "absolutely abnormal" that trade policy was the only common policy in which the treaty does not designate a role for the European Parliament. At the moment when the treaty is currently being amended, Mr Lamy gave assurances that the European Commission would fight to enhance Parliament's rights, which they had not managed to obtain during the Treaty of Nice negotiations. The Commissioner also recognised that in a Europe of 25 or 30 members, unanimity risked provoking paralysis.
During the date, the British Trade Minister, Patricia Hewitt noted that the national Parliaments would play a role providing consultation and democratic control on their governments. Drawing some conclusions, Stanley Crossick, founding member of the EPC, stated that Article 133 should be adapted to reflect current economic fundamentals and also appealed for qualified majority voting on all aspects of trade policy, as well as for the EP's assent on the inter-institutional agreements (see EUROPE yesterday p 11 on the subject of France's request to keep unanimity).