Luxembourg, 14/06/2004 (Agence Europe) - On Monday, the Foreign Ministers of the EU made progress in negotiations at the IGC on the Constitution, and certain compromises seem to be developing (such as on extending qualified majority), but due to the global nature of the negotiations, it has not yet been possible for the Irish Presidency to announce partial agreements prior to the European Council this Thursday and Friday. Everything is linked, and the final compromise will be found in the package to be discussed by the Heads of State and Government, said Brian Cowen, the Irish Foreign Minister. On the basis of Monday's work, the Presidency will draw up a new compromise document to be submitted to the Member States on Tuesday evening or Wednesday morning, Mr Cowen told the press. He said that he was optimist that an agreement will be found "by the end of the week". There is a "good working mood", and "if the political will is there, we will succeed", he underlined. Last weekend's European elections also influenced Monday's work to a certain extent, because several Ministers (such as the Italian Franco Frattini, and his counterparts from Portugal and the Netherlands) stressed that the alarming results (low turnout rates, the rise of the Eurosceptics, etc) put more pressure on the EU to agree quickly on the Constitution which is up to the citizens' expectations.
The starting point for Monday's debate was a new Presidency document published on Saturday; it has proposed compromised texts on all of the issues still outstanding, with the exception of three institutional subjects (definition of qualified majority, composition of the Commission, division of seats in the EP) which will be settled at the level of the European Council. After the meeting, Mr Cowen told the press that the "nature of the document" enjoyed a "broad welcome". The French Minister, Michel Barnier, also welcomed the "intelligent work" of the Presidency, and said that he was convinced that it would be possible to agree on a "good Constitution" by the end of the week.
Last weekend's new Presidency document includes new proposals on the important issue of the extension of qualified majority. The Presidency has introduced "emergency breaks" into articles III-171 and III-172 on judicial co-operation in criminal matters, and on social security (article III-21). Under the terms of this clause (which was developed in particular to take account of the United Kingdom's reluctance), if a Member State considers that a decision taken by qualified majority runs counter to the fundamental principles of its own legal system, it may call upon the European Council to look into the issue. The European Council will then have four months to: - either send the dossier to the Council which must then decide by qualified majority; or ask the Commission or a group of Member States to make a new proposal. For social security issues, the procedure would stop here. However, in case of judicial co-operation, if no decision has been taken after 12 months, a group made up of at least one-third of Member States will be able to start reinforced co-operation on this, having notified the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. According to diplomats, co-operation in JHA affairs is "on the right path", and the Irish Presidency's text should end up being adopted, even if countries such as France and Belgium said on Monday that they consider this proposal to be "disappointing" and "not ambitious enough". Austria also said that it wanted to look at the proposal in greater detail. The United Kingdom also seems satisfied: this is the "right approach", although the exact wording of the text has not been decided upon.
On common foreign and security policy (CFSP), the new Irish proposal includes the text of the Convention, grosso modo. Thus Council will decide by qualified majority on the adoption of: -decisions defining an EU action or position based on a decision taken by the European Council; -a decision defining an EU action or position based on a proposal by the European Foreign Minister (on his or her own initiative, or by request of the European Council); -a decision needed to implement another decision which itself defines an EU action or position; -a decision on the appointment of an EU special representative. In all of these scenarios, if a Member State declares that, for vital national reasons, it is opposed to a decision's being taken by qualified majority, "the vote shall not take place". In this case, the European Foreign Minister, in consultation with the Member States, will look for a solution acceptable to the Member State in question. If such a solution cannot be found, the Council can decide by qualified majority to put the issue to the European Council in view of a decision which, itself, must be taken unanimously. On Monday, the Presidency's proposal on CFSP seemed broadly acceptable to a very large majority of delegations, even if Belgium and other delegations have stressed that this is a step backward compared to the earlier text.
Fiscality is another field in which there is a move toward agreement on the basis of the new Presidency proposal,. althoug some countries, like France, Belgium and Germany, say they are "heavy-hearted" about the idea of accepting such a compromise, which is less ambitious than the Convention's text. In the document published by the Irish on Saturday, substantial amendments were made to the text discussed so far. The Presidency thus clarified in Article III-62(2) the fact that the Council can decide by qualified majority about measures relating to administrative cooperation and to the fight against fraud and tax evasion, but only if these measures do not affect the tax regimes of Member States (a compromise formula which mainly tends to reassure the United Kingdom). Another substantial change proposed by the Presidency is that it quite simply suggests deleting Article III-63 on company taxation, thus only leaving decisions relating to fraud and tax evasion that could come under qualified majority. In this field also, the United Kingdom was far firmer than before, although it continues to argue in favour of keeping unanimity in all tax matters.
The rules for adopting the EU's financial perspectives were also discussed on Monday. The new Presidency text stipulates that the multi-annual financial framework is adopted by unanimity but that the European Council could unanimously decide to grant the Council the right to adopt financial perspectives by qualified majority. While France and Belgium continue to call for a deadline for transition to qualified majority (for example 2014), the Netherlands restated on Monday their "red lines", saying they wish to maintain unanimity until their net contributor problem ahs been resolved (the Dutch are the largest net contributors per capita within the EU).
Decisions on establishing strengthened cooperation should in principle be decided by unanimity, according to the new Presidency text, but the Council may decide, by unanimity, to go on to qualified majority (bridging clause). Poland, Slovenia and Malta still seem to have serious problems with the bridging clause. The United Kingdom, on the other hand, seems far less firm about this issue than before. The British minister simply said he was "not convinced" of the need for such a clause. Decisions with military or defence implications will be excluded from strengthened cooperation, according to the new Presidency proposal.
The Dutch Presidency also slightly amended the text of the preamble to the Treaty to introduce a new paragraph that refers to the cultural, religious and humanist inspirations that the European people have drawn from their European heritage, etc. For many delegations, this text would be a good compromise and should be accepted as it is. On the other hand, the countries that would like an explicit reference to Christianity reiterated their request on Monday. Poland even suggested taking up the wording used in the Polish Constitution which, more or less, mentions those who believe in God and those who draw their inspiration from "other sources". According to this Polish proposal, the Constitution should not therefore open with the long list of names of Heads of State of the 25 Member States (as planned in the latest Presidency document) but with a simple "We, the people of Europe". The countries that are the most opposed to the reference to Christianity (Belgium, France) also reaffirmed their stance. The issue is expected to be discussed by the leaders during the summit.
Ministers also discussed on Monday three problems that arise in the economic and monetary field and which are also evoked in the latest Presidency document. Thus, France would like the Treaty to specify that the members of the euro zone should give their agreement by qualified majority to any new members to the zone - even before the Council of Ministers (as a whole) takes its decision on such accession. On Monday, France won the support of Belgium and Germany but came up against strong opposition from the British. The second problem concerns the Stability and Growth Pact. Further to the "letter of Four" (Germany, Italy, Greece and Poland) last week, which called on the Commission not to make proposals but only simple recommendations in the case of excessive deficit (see EUROPE of 12 June, p.5), the Presidency proposes in its new text that a declaration should be annexed to the Treaty stipulating that the Commission may possibly make proposals with a view to strengthening and clarifying implementation of the Stabilty Pact. "The Member States will take all necessary measures to raise the growth potential of their economies. Improved economic policy coordination could support this objective", the draft Declaration concludes. On Monday, the four countries restated their point of view (the Commission should not have the power to make formal proposals) but others (Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria) were opposed to the fact that the role of the Commission in this field is limited to recommendations. Belgium also considers that such a declaration does not have a fitting place in a Constitution.
Finally, there was always the question of economic policy co-ordination. The Convention stipulates that the EU has competency in promotion and co-ordination of economic and employment policies in Member States. However, some delegations prefer to maintain the draft of the current treaty. The Irish presidency has therefore proposed the following compromise formula, "the Union will have competency for promoting and co-ordinating, through the Member States, their economic and employment policies…Member States will co-ordinate their economic policies in the EU. To this end, the Council will adopt measures, particularly guidelines for these policies".