The role of the EPP-ED parliamentary group is fundamental in the lead-up to the 2009 European elections and for the development of the Union. This is the biggest group in Parliament, whose weight and authority continue to grow. Last week the new president of the group, Joseph Daul, indicated some important orientations in his first press conference (see Mathieu Bion's report in EUROPE 9341). After the preliminary indications about the general programme, and the searching questions from journalists that followed, the new president did not confine himself to vague answers or one-size fits all kind of formulas. Instead, he took a position on sensitive issues such as the location of the European Parliament, Turkish accession, the future composition of his group and the future of European agriculture. What he said on these points warrants some comment.
Possibilities, on certain conditions, for negotiation on European Parliament location? Pressure within the Parliament for a transfer of its location to Brussels is becoming increasingly sharp. This can be put down to budgetary reasons and the effectiveness of parliamentary work, on which our bulletin has regularly provided reports. The French authorities oppose this hypothesis and even rule out a debate on the subject, claiming that no Community institution has a remit for duly deciding on the matter: the question of where institutions are located is the exclusive remit of Member States and decided on by a unanimous vote (French parliamentarians usually say this too). Joseph Daul has obviously not questioned the actual legal situation but his attitude does appear to be an opening up, on certain conditions, in the direction of a debate between Member States.
The president of the EPP-ED group pointed out that in the EU there were other important institutions (which he explicitly cited), such as the Court of Justice and the European Investment Bank. Mr Daul ruled out any a priori possibilities for inter-governmental negotiations that focused exclusively on the location of the European Parliament. This assertion could be interpreted as there being a possibility for more general negotiations that involve other important institutions (which would provoke all kinds of problems, because the Court of Justice and the EIB are currently expanding and modernising or have just completed renovation work on their premises in Luxembourg.) Any hypothesis would remain open: in another context Daul raised the possibility of concentrating the parliamentary activities in Strasbourg. These activities are currently shared with Brussels.
A place for British Conservatives. Daul indicated that he would do his best to help British Conservatives feel at home in the EPP-ED group (and that they therefore abandon plans to leave it). In his opinion, this would imply certain concessions from both sides. The question is still pending.
Turkey - it's not a question of religion. Turkish accession is not an immediate question because neither the EU nor Turkey is ready. Mr Daul sees more of a “privileged agreement” but says negotiations should continue. He doesn't think that this is a question of religion: there is no question of the EU being a “Christian club” because Christians in Europe will, in any case, live in harmony with non-Christians, without giving up their traditions and values.
A broader vision of agriculture. In the context of the reflexion (planned for 2008 but which in reality has already begun) on the Union's financial perspectives and therefore, in particular, on funding the Common Agricultural Policy, agriculture should be seen within the perspective of “food safety”, given the double importance of product availability and quality. The CAP is not impervious to change, it is permanently evolving and Mr Daul himself pointed out that, as president of the EP's “agriculture” committee, he has always supported reforms, even when they were criticised by farming organisations. CAP adaptations will continue but the “food safety” factor cannot be separated from other aspects. This assertion appears to me to be important given the new challenges to the very existence of the CAP (to which I will return). He was specifically asked about the recent affirmations by the European Commissioner for Agriculture, Mariann Fischer-Boel, who said that most farmers should prepare themselves for getting another job in addition to farming. Mr Daul declared that he considered these remarks as “provocations” in the positive sense of the word, that of provoking a debate. Daul believes that anything that helps or provokes discussion is welcome, including, therefore, the recent positions taken by the Commissioner.
(F.R.)