Brussels, 30/09/2003 (Agence Europe) - A few days away from the opening of the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC, Commissioner Michel Barnier address the European Parliament's constitutional affairs committee regarding the recent proposals of the Commission (see EUROPE 18 September p 5). At the outset, committee Chairman, Giorgio Napolitano (PES, Italy) was keen to point out this resolve in the face of the worries surrounding the uncertainty about the number of observers the Parliament is to send to the IGC (EUROPE 30 September p 7). He declared that, "We still don't know what the methods governing the Parliament's participation will be", before adding that he hoped, "that Parliament will be informed of the results immediately".
The debate, which followed lacked any real passion, although some parliamentarians attempted to liven it up with some criticism and a little bitterness of the "lone ranger" approach of the European Commission. Johannes Voggenhuber (Greens, Germany) criticised the Commission of, "wanting to upset the balance attained at the Convention between national parliaments, governments an European institutions". The Commission. He told Mr Barnier that the Commissioner hadn't allowed himself to undo the "dynamic consensus" achieved by the Convention, preferring to put the responsibility onto the governments, "these same Ministers who have the power to decide, who participated in this consensus and who are not ashamed to upset the different parts of the consensus". Michel Barnier minimised the differences of approach between the two institutions; "the differences between the European Parliament and the European Commission are more semantic than fundamental". He also downplayed the importance of the amendments requested; "We are striving to propose some improvements (on the composition of the Commission, extension of qualified majority, the evolution of the future Commission…without having illusions about going any further" on the result. He also pointed out his conviction that, "We can and we must try our best to improve, clarify and make more precise (the current draft). He hammered home the fact that, "the Commission is the memory of Europe. Since the beginning, since the High Authority on Steel and Coal, we are aware of some of the attitudes and methods that lead to progress and others that lead to impasse. He highlighted the agreement with the Presidency, "The Italian presidency has identified eight points of progress on which the Commission agrees. We simply added another point on economic governance".
He informed Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD, Denmark) who questioned him on the role of Commissioners, that he "defended the fact that every country is represented at the Commission". He added that, "it is important that each Commissioner is able to therefore do his work of raising awareness among his own people". He also asserted that, "all the Commissioners must have the right to vote.
On the revision procedure, the Commissioner followed the line of Jo Leinen (PSA, Germany) on the need to act. Contrary to, "Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, who estimated that the Constitution could last for 50 years", the MEPs said that he was "less optimistic", adding that, "I would say five years. In 2009 they'll be 27 of us around the table". Without entering into a crystal ball gazing quarrel, Michel Barnier pointed to his, "agreement on a more subtle revision of the Constitution: at least on Chapter 3, using the Convention method with a 5/6 ratification of Member States". A point that was singly pertinent in the response to a question posed by Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufman (GUE/NGL, Germany), the Commissioner recognised that certain areas of the draft constitution deserved corrections. "Better coherency between parts I and 3 on research, health, economic and social cohesion. To be quite frank, a rewriting of the policies will be needed, further revision or at least the chance to amend later on". If not, he warned, "the real risk after 2006 is that there won't be a change to change anything".
On the ratification of the constitution, the Commission again looked at his simultaneous ratification idea, accompanied with a genuine European debate, possibly for 9 May. "I am for a large European debate rather than 25 juxtaposing national debates…I can't imagine how the election campaigns are going to get going and that the work has not been finished", he said. With regard to the IGC, Michel Barnier was optimistic, "If all the demands of Member States are put together, there is a risk, if they are neutralised, when this year we are looking at a new treaty of Rome".