Luxembourg, 15/10/2007 (Agence Europe) - The meeting of the senior foreign ministers' level inter-governmental conference (IGC) meeting on Monday in Luxembourg has still not definitively opened the way to adopting the amending treaty at the Lisbon summit at the end of week (18/19 October) but it did, nonetheless, allow the Portuguese presidency to identify and clearly define the remaining pending issues. Curiously, none of these problematic subjects are covered in the mandate adopted by the European Council in June: strengthening of the “Ioannina compromise”, distribution of seats at the European Parliament, number of Advocates General at the Court, access to Austrian universities, writing for Euro in Bulgarian version of the treaty. On the other hand, the text approved on 2 October by legal experts from the member states does not appear to have been opposed by any of the delegations. The United Kingdom, whose requests for derogation occupied a significant part of the legal experts' work is, “satisfied with the text”, including the arrangement found for JHA, affirmed the Portuguese secretary of state for European affairs, Manuel Lobo Antunes, to the press. He highlighted the fact that the, “UK is happy with the text, I see no major problem from their side”. Ireland also spoke very positively about the text of the treaty approved by the legal experts. Antunes declared that, “pending issues are well defined. I don't expect member states to raise any other questions in Lisbon. The framework for the final negotiations is now quite clear”. He welcomed the fact that, “the atmosphere is excellent, there is a determination and everyone is committed” in finding an agreement in Lisbon. Antunes said that, “our confidence is now greater than before” and explained that if the atmosphere of commitment and understanding could be maintained till the summit, “things may move quite fast in Lisbon”.
Poland and the Ioannina compromise. On Monday the Polish minister, Ana Fotyga, reiterated the Polish demand for transforming the Ioannina compromise (a political declaration adopted in 1994 in relation to decisions made at qualified majority at the Council) into the Union's primary law by incorporating it into the treaty itself or into a protocol annexed to the treaty (which would confer it with the same legal status). Contrary to the sometimes nebulous declarations of the past, however, Mr Antunes explained to the press, “its intervention today was positive and constructive”. The Portuguese secretary of state believed that Ms Fotyga's message was very clear, “Poland wants to reach an agreement in Lisbon…We find this intervention encouraging, even if the solution to the problem still has to be found”. Bilateral negotiations with the Polish continue behind-the-scenes and, “we are now closer to a solution than a few weeks ago”, affirmed Antunes. According to diplomats, one of the most promising ways ahead appears to be the idea of “completing” the declaration of Ioannina (without transferring it into primary law, by adding a sentence to it stipulating that the declaration can only be amended by unanimity.
Italy and seat distribution at the European Parliament. Italy reiterated on Monday its opposition to last week's EP proposal (EUROPE 9521). Nevertheless, Rome does not want to block the IGC, on the contrary it is asking for the decision on EP seats to be taken at the Council only after adoption of the treaty. Even if this issue is therefore not directly linked to the conclusion of the IGC (the treaty simply stipulates that distributing the 750 seats is governed by a Council decision), the Portuguese presidency wants the decision to be taken during the Lisbon IGC, at the same time as adoption of the treaty. Mr Antunes said that, “the question was raised by the Italian minister. We want a solution that is acceptable to all. W are striving to find a solution” in view of the summit.
Poland and the number of Advocates General at the Court. Poland, supported by other new members, is demanding that the number of Advocates General at the European Court of Justice be increased, in order to ensure better representation of new member states at this institution. The current treaty (Article 222) stipulates that the number of Advocates General at the Court (currently 8, with 5 from the five biggest countries: Germany, France, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom, the three others are chosen by rotation) can be increased by a simple Council decision at unanimity. An amendment to the treaty will therefore not necessarily satisfy this Polish demand but the question may, at the end of the negotiations, be part of the global agreement on the treaty.
Bulgaria and the Euro. As it did so for the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) with
Montenegro (see other article), the Bulgarian government want the Bulgarian version of the new treaty of the Union to include the term “Euro” in Cyrillic alphabet. The other member states are refusing because in the Cyrillic alphabet, the Euro is written with a “v” and not a “u”: “evro” and not “euro”.
A European Council decision stipulates that the name “Euro” has to be the same in all official EU languages, taking into account the different alphabets (Latin, Greek and Cyrillic). The Bulgarian demand is not without some foundation, given that Bulgaria's accession treaty in the Bulgarian language writes Euro in Cyrillic as “evro”. On Monday, even the Portuguese presidency was optimistic given that the solution to the problem may be found in the same “intermediate formula”, which saved the signing of the SAA on Monday with Montenegro. In this case, the Euro will be written “EUR” in the Bulgarian version of the treaty, while awaiting a definitive solution.
Austria and university access. On Monday Austria reiterated it demand (already made to the informal Council of Viana do Castello, EUROPE 9498 on 11 September) for finding a solution to the problem of access for students from other member states to its universities. The Austrian government wants the treaty to facilitate access for foreign students to the universities, considered as an exclusive competency of member states, as part of “services of general interest”. The draft constitutional treaty stipulates in part II (Article 96) that the EU recognises and respects access to services of general economic interest, “such as that included in national legislation and practices”. We are aware that some Austrian universities (especially departments of medicine) are highly subscribed to by foreign students, particularly Germans). Following a Court of Justice ruling in 2005, Austria introduced new access restriction measures (quotas); these are being examined by the European Commission which has doubts about their compatibility with treaty rules. On Monday, Austrian diplomats explained that the main objective was to guarantee “sustainable legal guarantees” for the current quota system (which is working quite well according to Vienna) is maintained permanently, without fearing new infringement procedures from the Commission. Austrian diplomats said that the “form that that this guarantee would finally take is secondary” even if Vienna prefers explicit mention in the treaty. This is a welcome to the increased awareness of the Austrian problem by many other member states, “including Germany”. The Portuguese presidency is, “encouraging Austria and the European Commission to find a solution to this problem”. (H. B.)