Two points out of four. In the final phase of the Convention's work, I did indicate four points that were likely to come up again at the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) due to the dissatisfaction of some governments regarding the solutions that were being outlined. The four points involved: immigration, culture, voting procedures at the Council, composition and functioning of the Commission. The first two points were skilfully solved at the last minute in the additional week that Valéry Giscard d'Estaing managed to obtain from Heads of government and they have fortunately disappeared from the IGC programme (see this section yesterday). There's still two left over. It is imperative that the Presidency of the IGC prepares from the opening of the IGC (in September), the appropriate solutions via high level preliminary meetings. The overall institutional debate should not be opened up again; the two points for discussion must remain isolated and the draft compromises elaborated in advance. The Italian Presidency agrees totally with this tactic; President Berlusconi has even indicated that he would be prepared to begin consultations in August if there were not the problem of holidays.
Explanation for Spanish reservations. The first of the outstanding two points is expected to be solved without too much difficulty. I'll just recall what the content was. The draft constitutional treaty is planning from 2009, to reach majority decisions at the Council by double majority voting: most Member States (half of them plus one), representing at least 60% of the Union's population. Spain, supported by a certain number of other Member States (current and above all accession countries) have harboured certain reservations. Why? Because in the Treaty of Nice it had obtained more weight, almost as much as the most populous four Member States (Germany, France, Italy and the United Kingdom), namely 27 votes versus 29. This benefit did have a "price" to pay, through concessions on other institutional aspects, such as the composition of the European Parliament and Mr Aznar thought it incorrect that the balance as defined at Nice should be modified without taking into consideration the totality of the problem. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ana Palacio, Member of the Convention Presidium did not want to threaten the consensus gained by Convention Members and supported the given draft, while explaining that her country would raise the question at the IGC. It is therefore necessary to discuss it again but a general debate that would give every government the chance to reopen debates on other matters, should be avoided.
VGE has a ready made solution. Before the close of the Convention, President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing had already indicated what in his opinion could be the solution. I'll let him speak, quoting the interview in "La Stampa" on 10 July in which to my knowledge he provided a detailed account of exactly what he thought. He explained, "On the issue of majority voting and the way of measuring it, consensus will be reached by a new rule: through the majority of the States and the majority of people. It is a principle that should not be challenged and I am sure that the Spanish government does not wish to challenge it. Discussion can take place again with regard to the ceilings for these majorities. With regard to the percentage of the population of the Union, which should be considered as the majority, I proposed 62%, while the British had come up with 65%. In the end 60% was decided upon. If Spain had chosen at that moment to climb on the "percentage bandwagon" we would have perhaps decided on 66% and the country would have been pleased. I can affirm that in the IGC, we cannot discuss the principles again but we can revise the ceilings. By going down this road, Spain could get what it wants". VGE therefore believes that by bringing the necessary minimum ceiling to 66% of the population, a Council decision can be acquired (by making it less easy for the more populated countries to impose their points of view) and the issue can be solved.
Former EP President, José-Maria Gil Roblès considers that "proportional degression" could be used for the number of MEPs in relation to the scale of the population.
This first obstacle should not prove too difficult to get over. With understanding and good will, compromise should be within our grasp. It is exactly the opposite for the second obstacle regarding the composition of the European Commission and how it works. I'll try and examine this complex issue tomorrow, without forgetting that the Commission hopes to suggest, in its September recommendation regarding the convening of the IGC, modifications on other aspects of the draft constitutional treaty, focusing on common Union policies. (F.R.)