The EU's four symbols - Time not right for a common initiative by six founder members

Symbolic amendment. This Friday evening, on the deadline for the presentation of amendments to the 16 draft articles of the European Constitution, the Convention Praesidium will be faced with an avalanche of texts. It appears that virtually all the draft articles will be challenged by one Convention member or another, correcting either the substance or the form. Awaiting a clearer view, I would like to highlight an amendment by Pervenche Beres and Olivier Duhamel because it aims to add a more symbolic tone to the Constitution. The two French Socialists are suggesting adding the four symbols of the European Union to the first article, namely the emblem (blue flag with twelve gold stars in a circle), the anthem (last movement of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony, Ode to Joy), the slogan (Peace, Freedom and Equality) and the holiday (9 May would be a holiday everywhere).

A nice contribution to the objective of bringing citizens closer to the Convention.

Two reasons for predicting failure. I think there is practically no chance of the Italian government saving its initiative of a "declaration by the six founder countries" ("The Six") whereby they would adopt a common position on the work of the Convention, particularly on institutional reform (see p.4 of yesterday's bulletin). For two reasons:

a) France and Germany did not appreciate (diplomatic euphemism) Berlusconi's signature of the "eight country letter" supporting President Bush's in the Iraq crisis. Paris and Berlin stressed that Italy was the only country of The Six to sign the letter and congratulated the Netherlands on resisting pressure to do so. My remarks do not concern the substance (it is widely accepted that the EU's responsibilities and views are not in line). I simply note that a division between the founder countries and time does not favour a common initiative at the moment;

b) Positions do not coincide on institutional reform and it seems naïve to imagine that a simple declaration, to be approved in a few weeks (for 25 March, anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome) could unite them. According to the information available, the first declaration drafted by Italy was flatly rejected by the Benelux countries because in practice it adopted the Franco-German ideas on the Presidency of the European Council and called for a scaled down European Commission. Italy therefore rejigged the text, but the dilemma remains - either the declaration takes a position and therefore fails to win the agreement of all The Six; or it becomes a vague "fit-all" document bereft of meaning and likely to pointlessly irritate other Member States (by affirming, for example, that the future IGC should in no way challenge the results of the Convention).

What Italy wanted to ignore. In terms of the above controversial areas, Italy's initial draft declaration (since amended) called on The Six to come out in favour of:

• In the long-term, a single European Council and Commission President (without merging the two bodies and therefore keeping two separate bureaucracies). In the meantime there would be two Presidents, a President of the European Council elected by heads of state, and a President of the Commission selected using a procedure where the European Parliament would have a greater role. This is the two Presidents idea rejected by the Benelux countries. It is true that compromise efforts are being made, but they are part of complex and delicate negotiations and certainly cannot result in a solemn declaration;
• abandoning the principle of "one Commissioner per country" for the European Commission since the Italian document claimed this would turn the Commission into a bloated, inefficient assembly. But most current and future Member States remain attached to the idea of "one Commissioner of the nationality of each Member State", and France and Germany have already put forward an alternative suggestion.

As far as the rest is concerned, the Italian plan includes the Convention "acquis" (defining the European Union, legal personality, incorporating the Charter of Fundamental Rights into the Constitution, etc) but adds two significant elements: a) the tasks and functioning of the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) which will decide on the Constitutional Treaty. The IGC will have to exclusively decide on some issues left hanging by the Convention, while issues already settled by the Convention will be acquired and no longer negotiable; and b) a timetable. The Convention would have to finish its work this year, allowing citizens to vote for the renewal of the European Parliament aware of the EU's new constitutional architecture. The Constitutional Treaty will be signed in Rome on 1 May 2004, the date when the new Member States will be joining. (F.R.)