Brussels, 07/06/2005 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday, the European leaders tried to play down the impact the British decision to postpone the referendum on the Constitution may have on the whole of the ratification process. On Monday, Jack Straw told the House of Commons that the government had suspended the legislative work on the bill to allow the referendum to be held in 2006. "We are reserving the right to reintroduce the bill if the situation changes. But we see no point in continuing for the time being", Mr Straw explained, stressing that the EU " remains a unique and precious success story, which is central to the prosperity and well-being of the United Kingdom" and warning against any action " which could sap the skills and all that the union has achieved over 50 years".
In the view of the President of the European Council, Jean-Claude Juncker, the British decision in no way means the end of the ratification process. "The process is not dead. It would be dead if the British government wanted to abandon the process, but this is not the case", he said on Monday evening after the meeting of the Eurogroup. I did not take Mr Straw's speech to mean that the United Kingdom did not want to ratify the constitutional treaty, he explained. "I understood, and was pleased to do so, that the United Kingdom would base its decision on the European Council of 16 and 17 June", which means that the referendum is "hanging on the words of the other European leaders". The President of the Commission, José Manuel Barosso, also stressed that the United Kingdom had not definitively decided to abandon the ratification of the Constitution. "I have not heard any Member State say that it intends to take any definitive decisions. Quite the contrary; up until now, all the indications coming from the Member States, including the United Kingdom, show that they want to discuss this at the European Council of 16 and 17 June", during which all the member states will decide "collectively" on the next steps to be taken, said Mr Barosso, stressing: "we must use the remaining time before the summit to think and to analyse the situation". The European Commission "understands that certain Member States need time to think. Every Member State is responsible for its own process of ratification. There is not one single ratification, but 25 different ratification procedures. But each Member State is just as important as every other . We must listen to the opinions of all 25 Member States".
Tony Blair himself tried to calm things down, stating that the Constitution was not dead. In an interview with Tuesday's Financial Times, Mr Blair stressed that with the continuing enlargement (which the United Kingdom has always actively supported), "we will need that set of rules (contained in the Constitution), and it is not for Britain to turn round and say the Constitution is dead". Instead, the British Prime Minister pleaded for the EU to consider the current crisis as an "opportunity" to hold an in-depth debate and to reach a new agreement on the future of the Union. "We must make this into an opportunity for Europe (...). And the opportunity now is to have a serious debate on why this happened and how we set out a clear future direction for Europe on a basis around which Europe can unify ", he said. Mr Blair also feels that the lesson learned from the referendums was that the citizens expect results from the EU in terms of the fight against unemployment, the negative impact of globalisation and insecurity. If the Member States discuss their economic future and achieve some consensus, " you will find that then people will give us permission to take Europe forward". If, however, the political leaders of the EU do not learn from the lessons of the referendums, "people will rebel against that", Mr Blair warned.
Although Poland, Denmark and Portugal have repeated their intentions of continuing with preparations for their referendums-unless there is a decision to the contrary at the European Council of 16 and 17 June-the British "freeze" will have immediate consequences in the Czech Republic, where Prime Minister Jiri Paroubek has declared that London's decision has made it impossible for his country to hold a vote at the moment. "I am a bit disappointed" by this decision, Mr Paroubek told the BBC, because it will have a "serious influence on the political situation in the Czech Republic" in that it will boost the camp of opponents to the Constitution (including President Vaclav Klaus, who continues to call for a "replacement text").
On Monday, Sweden, Belgium, Germany and France also spoke out in favour of the ratification process continuing, irrespective of the British decision.
In the meantime, the Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schüssel rallied to the side of those such as Gerhard Schröder, Jacques Chirac and Jean-Claude Juncker, who feel that agreement must be reached on the financial perspectives of the EU at next week's European Council. "If we wait, we won't become any more intelligent, but in the meantime, we will have lost more than we will have gained ", he said at the Europa-Forum Wachau. Austria (which is a net contributor and a signatory of the "letter of the six" calling for the budget to be limited to 1% of EU GDP). Austria clearly wants the budgetary situation to be sorted out, but, as Mr Schüssel said, "what is even more important is that Europe is running at full strength. A weak Europe is of no use to anybody".
This dialogue should allow a more detailed diagnosis of the current situation and open up “a more consensual road”, Mr Baroso feels, calling for two other traps to be avoided: - the “blame game” consisting in making “Brussels” the scapegoat of all our difficulties (“We must avoid national selfishness that has already and continues to do so much harm to Europe”, he urged); - and the consolidation of ideological division, between “market monotheism and State monotheism”. Europe is the “intelligent synthesis” of these two, Mr Barroso stressed, saying “there is no single European way of thinking” because Europe is “by definition, multi-faceted”. He went on to launch an “appeal to the gathering around European values, our European spirit, in order to reach a dynamic, constructive political consensus” to prevent Europe from becoming the “first victim of globalisation”.
On the subject of financial perspectives, Mr Barroso admitted that changes to the Commission's proposals are “inevitable” but said this should not cast doubt on its coherency. In this last phase, he added, he would like the Commission and Parliament to remain in close contact, recalling that a ministerial conclave is to be held on Sunday, as well as a trialogue, on this subject.
Mr Barroso also stressed the importance that the Commission pays to development aid: thousands of human beings die every day from hunger and thirst and ”We must say: enough! That's enough!”, he exclaimed. Europe must be in the fore, Mr Barroso said, recalling two major events in this context: - the G8 Summit (in Scotland, in July) and the UN Summit on the Millennium Development Goals (in September in New York).
Agreement on need for open and detailed discussion on Union objectives - There seems
to be a majority in favour of pause for reflection in ratification process
The crisis caused by the French and Dutch no-votes on the Constitution has acted like the crack of a whip. The presidents of the political groups spoke out passionately, calling once again for the language of truth to be spoken. When it comes to continuing the ratification process, there is not unanimity: the Constitution is dead, it is not worth continuing, some say, while others simply call for a pause for reflection. Such is the case of the president of the EPP-ED Group, Hans-Gert Pöttering, who, during this phase, calls for the principle of subsidiarity to be reasserted with force and for reflection on citizens' concerns regarding enlargement. Are we going too fast?, the CDU member asks, adding, for Bulgaria and Romania: “pacta sunt servanda”, but this is valid for both sides. Turkey must recognise Cyprus, as a country cannot negotiate with another country that it does not acknowledge. According to the president of the Socialist Group, Martin Schulz, who admits to feeling “distraught”, the moment of self-criticism is upon us all. “The signs of citizen alienation from Europe were there before the referendums, but we chose not to see them”, Mr Schulz said. In the past, citizens did not know what was written in the treaties (How many citizens have read the ECSC Treaty?), but they had a “fundamental trust” in the European project, the German Social Democrat pointed out. The responsibility of losing this trust is largely the fault of the governments which, instead of blaming Brussels, would do better to ”say what they are doing and do what they say”. On the subject of enlargement, Mr Schulz warns about the dangers that the disappearance of the prospect of joining the EU would have for some countries. “A little rebellion now and then is a good thing” were the words used in 1777 by Thomas Jeffereson and recalled by the president of the ALDE Group, Graham Watson, who also denounces the States that are now faced with the “outcome of their duplicity” and the weaknesses of a Europe that is over secret. On substance, Mr Watson admits that, in its current form, the Constitution cannot survive, adding: “But we need a treaty. In the meantime, much can be done on the basis of amendments to the treaty to restore public faith in the European project”. Today, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Co-President of the Greens/EFA Group, cried out: “We have the impression that everyone wants to spell out the truth and I, personally, I no longer want to lie”. For those who wanted the Constitution, the French and Dutch no-vote is not a “disappointment” but a true defeat. “I, too, have lost, and I no longer want to lose”, exclaimed the German Green member, restating his invitation to the Luxembourg Presidency to “open up the Council's black box” and hold an open, public debate on the problems of Europe.
This crisis shows that it is necessary to speak the language of truth, Francis Wurtz said on behalf of the European United Left/Nordic Greens Left Group, of which he is president. It is an existential crisis, it is the “heart of the system that the citizens have begun to aim at”, Wurtz said, concluding that it is necessary to: - declare the treaty is obsolete; - announce withdrawal of the most controversial texts; - and open a “citizens' debate” to take stock of Europe as it is today. The French Communist also calls on all representatives of the left to undertake to reforge Europe.
Commit to found Europe anew. The Constitution died in Paris and was buried in Amsterdam, said the French Sovereignist Phillipe De Villiers (Independence and Democracy), suggesting a series of immediate initiatives: -suspending the decision to open negotiations with Turkey; bringing in a freely accepted "multiform cooperation": -creating a mechanism to allow a return to the "European preference", at least in sensitive fields such as textiles. The institutions must genuinely talk to the citizens, rather than imposing choices decided on at summits, said Cristiana Muscardini, copresident of the group Union for a Europe of Nations. She feels that the institutions should also look at what parts of the Constitution could be applied, and opt for a new way of resolving reports with the Central Bank, allowing economic considerations to take precedence over excessive monetarism. "The mass has been sung (...), the Constitution has been buried", said Jean-Marie Le Pen (National front, Independent), renewing his appeal for national sovereignty to be respected.
The Constitution is dead, long live the Constitution? Should Part III be decoupled from the Constitution?
The time has come for a debate on what kind of Europe the people want: during the debate, this point was not challenged. At the same time, many MEPs, including British Conservative Timothy Kirkhope, said that they must not be swayed from policies which are in the interest of the citizens, and therefore we must go forward with the Lisbon Agenda, sustainable development, liberalisations. We can organise all the Conventions we want, said the President of the Party of European Socialists, the former Danish Prime Minister Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, but during this period of reflection, we must not ignore the need to carry out certain policies, to face up to problems such as unemployment and globalisation. The Europe needs a Constitution, said French Socialist Bernard Poignant, noting that on 29 May, the electorate from the region represented by Mr De Villiers, La Vendee, took position in favour of the Constitution. Mr Poignant said that the notion of founder country should be "handled with care": there are countries which could not have been among the founding countries because they were living under dictatorship. It was with great bitterness that Austrian Green Johannes Voggenhuber, who took a very active part in the work of the Convention, criticised the behaviour of governments "which delivered Europe to the anger of the people", making Europe the scapegoat. Mr Voggenhuber said seeing those same governments gathered at the foot of Europe's sickbed made him feel quite nervous.
Where do we go from here, what do we keep from the existing Constitution? British Liberal Democrat Andrew Duff (who was also very active within the Convention) feels that a "pluralist" Convention should be convened, whose mission that will above all be to "modernise and refresh" part III to agree on policies which come closer to the concerns of the European people. We should, he said, "break the rigidity between the three parts of the Constitution" by establishing a more appropriate hierarchy, in which the third part would be "explicitly subordinate" to the first. This Part III has no place in the Constitution, said Erik Meijer (GUE, the Netherlands), who feels that it should be a "normal" piece of legislation, subject to the Parliament. His Liberal countryman Jules Maaten called for a Convention with a new mandate, a new composition, a new president. Whether the instrument be called Convention, Assises or anything else does not matter, in the view of the president of the constitutional committee, German social Democrat Jo Leinen: the debate must be democratic and it must be extended, and the "plan D" announced by Mr Barosso is a step in the right direction. As for the ratifications, maybe we should give ourselves some time to think, but each country must decide for itself, noted Mr Leinen, who does not agree with the idea of a "collective appeal" to stop the ratifications. British Labour member Richard Corbett took position in favour of a two-stage reflection: at national level, each country stating clearly what changes it would like, and a European reflection, which should not be a "speeded-up IGC", but a new Convention, why not. The mandate of this new Convention could be limited to one year, suggested the former vice president of the Convention chaired by Valery Giscard d'Estaing, Belgian Christian Democrat Jean-Claude Dehaene, who calls upon the European Council in the meantime to ensure that Europe is in a fit state to do its job, internally and externally. This is the opportunity to take stock of what we have achieved up to date, said the copresident of the UEN group, Brian Crowley (Ireland), pointing out that the individual and collective interest of the Europeans lay in "understanding their interdependence", not only as a single market but also on a human level. The Constitution also answered some of the calls for democratisation expressed by the people, said German Christian Democrat Elmar Brok, who feels that the debate should kick off by examining the causes and consequences of the "revolution" of the French and Dutch no. All those who said no should explain clearly what they want, said Spanish Socialist Enrique Baron, who paid tribute to the opposition in his own country, campaigning by speaking of Europe and not Spain's internal problems. Joao de Deus Pinheiro (EPP-ED, Portugal) believed this debate would allow subsidiarity to become a reality in every field, and also make it possible to ascertain a possible rate of enlargement without deepening. If the referendum had taken place before enlargement, would the ten new member countries have been able to enter the “Europe of the Constitution”? Polish Social Democrat Genowefa Grabowska asked, noting that Poland does not want ratification to be brought to a close. This, on the whole, is what all the representatives of the new Member States want, especially Stan Jalowiecki (EPP-ED, Poland), who insists on commitments towards candidate countries being kept.
There could not fail to be some discordant voices in this debate in which representatives generally called for more Europe (as did Nicola Zingaretti, DS Italy, who denounced her “country's follies over the euro”). Nigel Farage (UK Independence Party), on the other hand, said Europe - and the Barroso Commission - is not going too fast, but in the wrong direction. Jens-Peter Bonde, Co-President of the Independence and Democracy Group, calls on his colleagues to examine the text that he himself proposed which contains claims on transparency, subsidiarity, flexibility in enhanced cooperation. A poll on this text in Denmark won 80% of the votes, which is a good reason why it should be read, Mr Bonde stresses.
Debate must be held till the very end, Council president states
The Parliament is standing firm on the Constitution and it is a good thing, Nicolas Schmit, Council President, said after the debate. He went on to add that “if a vote were to be held in Parliament now, you would see that the Constitution is not dead”. He admitted that, despite its “enormous merits”, this Constitution does not live entirely up to expectations, hence the need, whether or not there is a pause in the ratification process, for reflection “which cannot be limited to chancelleries alone” and which must be carried out till the very end. For ratification, each State must decide how to proceed. “As a Luxembourg national, I am personally involved” seeing as a referendum is foreseen in Luxemburg on 10July, Nicolas Schmit said.
Josep Borrell says EP majority backs continuation of the process
A majority of MEPs is in favour of continuing the ratification process, President Borrrell told the press on Wednesday. While regretting the EP's inability to adopt a joint resolution on this subject from this session on, he summarised the message that the EP hopes to send the European Council next week. It is: the EPP-ED Group calls for a pause before continuing the process, the Socialists want to continue in an uninterrupted manner, and the Greens/EFA are not opposed to continuation of the process. According to Mr Borrell, “one can therefore say that there would be a majority in favour of continuing the process after having marked a pause that remains to be defined” and “with every possible precaution”. Josep Borrell specified that, before going to the European Council, he would meet the presidents of the political groups in Parliament to make sure he has properly interpreted what they say, as some were very clear and others less so.