Viana do Castelo, 10/09/2007 (Agence Europe) - The chances of completing the negotiations on the new treaty to reform the EU at the informal European Council on 18/19 October in Lisbon are good, because of “The constructive positions and availability shown by all Member States, without exception, in carrying out the mandate” received from the intergovernmental conference (IGC) in June, a pleased Portuguese Foreign Minister Luis Amado told the press on Friday 7 September in the evening following the first day of the informal meeting (“Gymnich”) at Viana do Castelo. The first political debate for the ministers on the draft treaty, which was prepared by a group of experts from the Member States (EUROPE 9494) was “very positive and constructive. Everyone is prepared to respect the mandate, which should allow us to have a treaty as quickly as possible, preferably during the informal Summit in Lisbon in October”, the President in office of the Council said. “We will stay the course. The debate today and all the other indications (particularly the noises from the expert group - ed.) strengthen our hope of being able to reach an agreement in October in Lisbon, in spite of a few small problems which persist”. These “small problems” have been well known for several weeks, Mr Amado replied to those journalists looking for more precise information and transparency on these difficulties. The main thing, the minister explained, was that he had not heard any “new surprises or new demands” from the ministers which could actually jeopardise the political agreement reached in June.
Another reassuring piece of news (although it has yet to be confirmed on the ground) came from the Polish minister Anna Fotyga, who reassured her colleagues regarding the internal political crisis in Poland when last Friday afternoon Warsaw announced the dissolution of the parliament and the calling of elections, which are planned for 21 October, just two days after the informal Summit in Lisbon. The election would have “no influence” on the IGC because there is a “consensus” in Warsaw on the need to conclude negotiations on this treaty, which is considered “satisfactory” by all the political parties. “The government in charge of affairs at the time will respect the commitment given by Poland. There is no fear that the internal events in Poland might halt or slow down the process”, Ms Fotyga's spokesperson told EUROPE. Despite these verbal assurances, many diplomats nonetheless dread a “catastrophic scenario” whereby the Kaczynski brothers could be tempted to use the Lisbon Summit on the eve of the elections for electoral purposes, with untold consequences for the result of the Summit and the IGC.
Even in playing down the Polish political crisis, the Viana do Castelo meeting has shown that the road to concluding the treaty is still littered with obstacles and that the situation is not as “rosy” as Luis Amado's optimistic declarations following the meeting would have us believe. Although all the ministers have reiterated their support for the June mandate, several have tabled demands for “clarifications” of the text. Some of these demands have been known about for weeks, but others have not. Among the well-known demands is that of Poland regarding the Council voting mechanism (“double majority”) applicable from November 2014. Warsaw is demanding the incorporation of the “Ioannina compromise” (currently just a political declaration) into the treaty itself, not as a mere declaration annexed to the treaty as the June mandate has it. Incorporating it into the treaty would give the Ioannina compromise a binding legal status for an undetermined time period. This demand, which was reiterated on Friday by the minister Ms Fotyga, stands no chance of being accepted, as shown on Friday by the “almost unanimously negative” reaction of the other ministers, diplomats say.
The Polish minister also clarified her country's position on Friday on other subjects which Warsaw has been rather hazy on up to now, and even raised some new questions. Ms Fotyga announced to the ministers, for example, that Warsaw would very probably take advantage, like the UK, of its right to “opt-out” of the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. At the negotiations in June, Poland and Ireland obtained the right to “reserve their position” on the special protocol which London had imposed to guarantee that the Charter would not apply to it. According to the IGC mandate, Poland and Ireland are therefore perfectly within their rights to sign up to this protocol. Although Dublin has already set this option aside (EUROPE n° 9457), Warsaw will probably opt in favour of it. “The final decision has not yet been made, but the chances that we will choose the opt-out are greater than 50%”, Ms Fotyga's spokesperson said. The minister also formally tabled the Polish government's demand for an increase in the number of advocates-general at the European Court of Justice, in order to have better representation from the new Member States in that institution. The current treaty (article 222) stipulates that the number of advocates-general at the Court (which is currently 8, 5 of them from the five biggest countries: Germany, France, Italy, Spain and the UK, and the other three chosen on a rotating basis) can be increased by a simple unanimous decision of the Council. A modification to the treaty would therefore not be absolutely necessary to satisfy this Polish demand. At Viana do Castelo there was no indication of whether this subject will be discussed at the IGC. Finally, the Polish minister raised another question which she wanted to see addressed in the IGC: the methods for granting loans from the European Investment Bank (EIB) to third countries. In order to have a veto on these loans, Warsaw is demanding that in future decisions granting them should be taken unanimously among the Member States.
Austria also made a demand in Viana do Castelo which, up to now, had not been mentioned at political level. Minister Ursula Plassnik suggested to her colleagues that a provision be added to the treaty that foreign students' access to universities should come under the exclusive competence of the Member States, in the context of “services of general interest”. The draft constitutional treaty stipulates in part II (article 96) that the European Union recognises and respects access to services of general economic interest "as provided for in national laws and practices”. It is known that some Austrian universities (in particular medical faculties) have a large percentage of foreign students, particularly from Germany. Following a judgement by the Court of Justice in 2005, Austria introduced new measures restricting access (quotas); these are currently being examined by the European Commission, which has concerns regarding their compatibility with the rules of the treaty. The question has not been debated in more detail by the ministers, but will probably be raised by Austria in the legal experts group.
At the demand of several Member States and the European Parliament, which stresses the importance of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and wants it to be more visible in the treaty, the ministers discussed the possibility of organising a formal proclamation of the text by the Presidents of the three European institutions (Council, Commission, Parliament), shortly before or after the signing of the future treaty. Furthermore, instead of having a simple reference in the treaty to two annexed protocols covering and explaining the full text of the Charter (which is the option chosen by the June mandate), it seems that the tendency now is to publish the text of the Charter in the EU Official Journal. In that case, the treaty would refer directly to the text published in the OJ, diplomats explain. “We are looking in that direction”, Vice-President of the European Commission Margot Wallström confirmed.
The British minister David Miliband reiterated his government's intention not to submit the new treaty to a referendum, despite increasing pressure to do so from the conservative opposition (which has just launched a broad pro-referendum campaign) and a large section of the press. “Parliamentary ratification is the right path to take”, he said.
The ministers' debate was introduced by a presentation by the head of the Council legal service Jean-Claude Piris on the state of play in the group of Member States' legal experts. This group, which is responsible for preparing the draft treaty, will launch its second reading of the draft text this week. (hb)