At a time when the European Convention is preparing to experience its last week of activity, a few ideas expressed by Convention Members or other European figureheads can help explain the atmosphere of the debates, what they mean and the Convention stakeholders' state of mind.
1. Elegant concessions. At a time when mutual concessions by Convention Member became indispensable if consensus were to be reached about the draft Constitution, Chairman Valéry Giscard d'Estaing set the example by giving up his idea of a Congress of European People (a body made up of MPs and MEPs). This was one of his fondest ideas but he gave way to majority feeling. The next day, the different components of the Convention held separate meetings to examine the full preliminary draft, but two components (the EP and national parliaments) held a joint meeting with a single spokesperson reporting back to the plenary. VGE smiled and said that if he understood correctly, they had held a mini Congress. He thanked them for it “posthumously”.
I quote his remarks since they display style and irony (and self-irony). It doesn't mean giving up, however. A few days later, when outlining the draft Constitution to heads of government at their meeting in Thessalonica, VGE said "I am convinced that in the long term, cooperation between MPs and MEPs will have to regularly occur if we want to see a European political constituency arise one day as the first step towards a real European demos." This sentence reveals coherence and confidence in his own ideas, two characteristics of VGE's complex personality.
2. Going beyond apparent national interests. Iñigo Mendez de Vigo, Spanish MEP and member of the Convention Praesidium, told a Spanish newspaper: "Member States' influence is not measured in votes at the Council but in capacity to influence decisions. Spain had been able to win admiration and interest in Europe for the outcome of its economic policy and cooperation policy in combatting unemployment. This has much more influence than any blocking minority could. A country's authority does not lie in blocking minorities." The Spanish government may take inspiration from these ideas at the IGC when it comes to its reservations about voting procedures on the Council. It would be pleasant to hear a Polish deputy expressing the same views as Mendez de Vigo.
3. Public opinion and the veto. Responding to a reporter who pointed out that in a Eurobarometer poll, 47% of the population of Europe wanted the veto to be kept for major European affairs, the President of the Commission, Romano Prodi, replied: "I myself called for keeping unanimous voting in a few cases, new Member States joining the EU for example. Therefore, according to the polls, I should be one of the supporters of the veto. All the same, God knows the extent to which I oppose it. We should always be very prudent and circumspect with regard to statistics and opinion polls.”
4. Eurosceptic views. Statement by Esko Seppänen, Finnish MEP and member of the United Left group: "We are faced with a federalist consensus resulting from a Politburo diktat, a big country coup d'état". When Finns are called upon to give their views of the European Constitution, it will be easy to see whether this statement corresponds to Finland's position. Likewise for other countries. If they give a positive verdict, people will continue to wonder what gives eurosceptics the right to claim to represent the will of the people.
5. Two slogans for Europe. Looking to the future, Convention Chairman Valéry Giscard d'Estaing said he planned to submit the final draft version of the Constitution to the President of the European Council with the sub-heading: "more than a text, a promise". This will joint the expression already incorporated in the draft: "united in diversity", which VGE says would be a good slogan for the EU itself and its population (it comes from a poll of young people in the whole of Europe).
On the words used by heads of state to describe the draft Constitution ("a good starting point"), VGE commented: : "This expression was coined by foreign ministers before the Summit. It does not reflect the warm and more committed atmosphere of Thessalonica. A number of heads of state said they were prepared to adopt the Constitution in its current form."
(F.R.)