Brussels, 15/06/2007 (Agence Europe) - The discussion among EU foreign Ministers on Sunday evening (17 June) on the future EU treaty will be based on the working paper which the German presidency sent to member states on Thursday (see EUROPE 9446) and on a number of “structuring questions” which Berlin will put to Ministers just before the meeting, German presidency sources said on Friday. The meeting will be followed, in Brussels on Tuesday 19 June, by a meeting of heads of state and government “focal points” (sherpas), who will give clearer guidance to Chancellor Angela Merkel so that she can prepare her compromise paper to be submitted to the European Council, beginning on Thursday evening, which is entirely devoted to the treaty (the other parts of the Summit conclusions - JHA, economic, social and environmental issues, external relations - are not controversial). The aim of Sunday's and Tuesday's meetings is to restrict the number of open questions on the treaty to be debated by leaders at the Summit “There is a whole range of issues that can be settled beforehand,” said presidency sources on Friday.
Thursday's note from the presidency identified six open questions (symbol and primacy of Community law, possible changes in terminology, what to do with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, specificity of the CFSP, delimitation of competences between the EU and member states, the role of national parliaments), without mentioning the “double majority” which, of course, remains a major problem for Poland. The note also takes stock of the consultations carried out, summarises the main demands from the member states and indicates where compromise might be found on several points.
Thus, the presidency proposes to give up on the idea of a Constitution, which would have replaced the existing treaties, for that of an “amending treaty”, which would only amend them. In concrete terms, the 1992 “Treaty on the European Union” will retain its current name, while the “Treaty establishing the European Community” will be re-named the “Treaty on the Functioning of the Union”. The two treaties will have the same legal value, and the EU will have its on legal personality. The presidency says in its note that it has made this proposal to take account of the request of “a certain number” of member states (including the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, the Czech Republic, Poland and France: Ed.) to avoid “the impression which might be given by the symbolism and the title 'Constitution' that the Union is undergoing radical change”. Those member states also want a number of terminological changes, including the removal of the word “constitution”. “such an approach is not compatible with the demand from those Member States which have already ratified that as much of the substance of the Constitutional Treaty as possible should be preserved,” the presidency says. These countries “are ready to consider the alternative method of treaty change if it helps to reach a result acceptable to everyone”,” the note says. These same countries have, however, made it clear that this would be a “major concession”.
Several member states want “to underline the respect for the identity of the Member States” and are calling for greater clarity over the delimitation and definition of the competences of the Union and of the member states. There is also a “clear demand from some delegations” (the Netherlands, the Czech Republic: Ed.) for further enhancement of the role of national parliaments, it says in the note. Finally, “some delegations” have requested that the text of the Charter of Fundamental Rights be removed from the treaty, while “others strongly oppose this move”. “Most of the latter could however accept it, provided that the legally binding character of the Charter is preserved by means of a cross-reference in the body of the Treaty”. (hb)