Brussels, 03/04/2003 (Agence Europe) - It was difficult to reach a common road after the debates of Convention Members on the broad principles of cooperation for justice and home affairs and on the asylum and immigration policy on Wednesday afternoon. The Convention Members were only to tackle judiciary and police cooperation that evening. There was considerable support for the transition to qualified majority, but also obvious reticence. There were many speakers who called for abolition of the articles to be found in other parts of the Treaty, and also on the role of the European Council, for example, or again on key Article 31, which in a first part announces the draft treaty of principles which are then to be found in the specific part of justice and home affairs issues. After the discussion, that he chaired, Vice-Chairman Giuliano Amato stressed, when speaking to the press, that there is indeed opposition and differences and that opposite amendments were submitted on the same articles, either for keeping unanimity or for transition to qualified majority. One can assess the weight of the different stances, he added, but without taking the risk of doing so himself, saying that it was necessary to wait until June. In his view, one of the trickiest issues is the German position on asylum and immigration - not to go beyond minimum rules.
Commissioner Antonio Vitorino considers that the text proposed by the Praesidium is "quite balanced". For asylum, he considers that the EU cannot be content with common minimum norms and that a common asylum policy is needed. Regarding immigration, he strongly criticised the German opposition to harmonising rules for access to the labour market, considering it would in that case be impossible to reach a common policy. Unanimity is "paralysis", he said. "If we do not agree to the majority rule for a given subject, then we must have the courage to say that we do not accept the Union's intervention for the subject in question", affirmed MEP Alain Lamasssoure. Speaking on behalf of the Finnish government, Teija Tilikainen considers Article 31 to be superfluous. She took a stance in favour of transition to qualified majority for asylum and immigration. Manuel Lobo Antunes, on behalf of the Portuguese government, also took a stance in favour of passing on to qualified majority. Frans Timmermans, of the Netherlands parliament, criticised those who put forward amendments against transition to qualified majority. René van der Linden, of the same parliament, finds that unanimity must be purely and simply excluded. Luxembourg MEP Ben Fayot rose up against keeping the right of initiative of Member States and against a role for the national parliaments that is different from what it is in the other fields. MEP Andrew Duff called for the right of initiative of Member States to have a full framework and to admit Commission defeat to guarantee coherence of initiatives.
Erwin Teufel, for the Bundesrat, insists on the fact that, with regards asylum and immigration minimum norms are enough, and that the Member States must be able to keep their own rules for access to the labour market. Dick Roche, speaking for the Irish government, considers that the 700 amendments submitted show that it will be difficult to reach an agreement and suggests that the Convention should focus its work where possible to reach a consensus. MEP and French sovereignist William Abitbol states it is totally dangerous to introduce qualified majority for legal immigration. MEP Timothy Kirkhope wants operational cooperation rather than legislative harmonisation. Gianfranco Fini insists, for the Italian government, on respect of national judiciary systems.
Andrew Duff: Constitution must be able to take effect before being ratified by all Member States
Liberal Democrat Andrew Duff - in anticipation of the presentation on Friday morning of the draft articles concerning the Union's democratic life (see EUROPE of 29 March, p.5), pointed out a series of elements that, in his view, are needed to obtain radical democratisation of the Union, namely: - the constitutional treaty must foresee the possibility for the Constitution to take effect before being ratified by all Member States. Otherwise, all Europeans could be taken hostage if one single State objects; - the Member States must have the possibility to withdraw from the Union if they so wish: belonging to the Union as an associate or partner must be foreseen for them; - the Council must meet in public and publish its minutes each time that it acts as legislator; - no special provision must be included for churches or free masons; - and the importance of regional and local government must be recognised in the Constitution.