Preparation for the implementation of the institutional innovations contained in the Lisbon Treaty will be gradual and articulated. The largely technical discussions to be undertaken by the Slovenian presidency of the Council will seek to bring several decisions that are needed for the new treaty to be applied at the start of 2009. Before taking up the chairmanship of Coreper, the Slovenian permanent representative, Ambassador Igor Sencar, said that at least 40 texts had to be prepared for this purpose, most of which would probably be adopted in the second half of the year, under French presidency (see bulletin 9553). This remark does not hide the fact that some institutional changes have raised puzzlement and reservations, and already seen stances being adopted. This column gave instances yesterday and the day before with regard to the extended presidency of the Council and the future composition of the European Commission. This, however, is nothing to do with the forthcoming technical negotiations. The first priority is the ratification of the new treaty; its content is what it is, and, in the normal way of things, it will be ratified as it stands.
Importance and difficulties of future common foreign office. The preparatory technical work will, nonetheless, in some cases, be decisive. In particular, the discussion on the Union's future common foreign office (made up of Commission officials, the Council and member states), will reignite the debate which began in 1994 but was interrupted following the no-votes on the Constitutional Treaty in France and the Netherlands. The matter proved to be a sensitive and difficult one, and no definite outcome was achieved. Our bulletin, last month, took stock of the issues to be resolved and on the widely varying stances adopted (see bulletin 9557). Discussion went up to the highest political level: Commission President José Manuel Barroso and High Representative for the CFSP Javier Solana spoke about it with heads of state and government (summit of June 2005). In practice, through this common foreign office, the whole working of Europe's foreign policy is under discussion. Will the range of areas entrusted to the European foreign office extend to future EU enlargements, the neighbourhood policy, and development policy? Will the Council military staff be involved? The respective responsibilities of the member states, Council and Commission will depend to a large extent on the answers to these questions, and other similar ones, without forgetting that the high representative will also become Commission Vice-President. EU delegations in third countries will be answerable to the high representative. However, the activities of these delegations also cover areas such as trade matters and development aid, which are the responsibility of other commissioners. Mr Solana already has at his disposal a staff made up of Council officials and national diplomats, but things will change if responsibilities are extended. It will not be easy to regulate now things that weren't in 2005.
What has been established. I add, however, one key point: most of the institutional innovations introduced by the new treaty are not as problematical as the future composition of the European Commission (of which this column took stock yesterday) or the common foreign office. Implementation measures are often necessary, but they are not controversial. As examples I would point out: a) the strengthening of the Union's democratic nature, resulting from the fact that (with some exceptions) the Parliament will have the same powers as the Council in the adoption of legislation - in particular, EP-Council co-decision making has been introduced for trade policy and agriculture; b) within the Council, majority voting will be extended to some 40 additional areas and, from 2014 (or 2017 at the latest), calculation of the majority will take account of the number of states and also, for the first time, population; c) the current three “pillars” will disappear, the European Union will cover all areas of Community activity, with specific procedures for foreign policy and defence; d) the division of responsibilities between the Union and member states has been clarified and national parliaments “will make an active contribution to the functioning of the Union” with specific responsibilities; e) there will be more, and more easily set up, “enhanced cooperation”, thereby allowing those member states which wish to push on to closer integration among themselves to do so.
These innovations, with the others that accompany them, will transform the working and change the face of the Union. They have been established. (F.R.)