| |
|
|
| |
|
         
|
Fact Files The European Union Editor Assistant Editor Contents
Preface
1. The Maastricht and Amsterdam Treaties: Prospects for the European Union
2. Summary
of the Treaty of Nice
Preface
Whereas the concept of a United Europe is quite old, the
present integration process of Western Europe commenced after World War II
(1939-45). This has been extended to Eastern Europe after the end of the Cold
War and dismantling of the Soviet Union in 1991. Noor ul Haq
The Maastricht And Amsterdam Treaties: Prospects For The European Union European Parliament Fact Sheets I. The Maastricht Treaty Legal Basis Treaty on European Union, signed in Maastricht on 7 February 1992; it came into force on 1 November 1993. The Union's Structure By instituting a European Union, the Maastricht Treaty marks a new step in the process of creating an ever-closer union among the peoples of Europe. The Union is based on the European Communities and supported by policies and forms of cooperation provided for in the Treaty on European Union. It has a single institutional structure, consisting of the European Council, the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice and the Court of Auditors. The European Council's task is to define general political guidelines. The Parliament, Council, Commission, Court of Justice and Court of Auditors (the Community Institutions) exercise their powers in accordance with the Treaties. The Council, Commission and Parliament are assisted by an Economic and Social Committee and a Committee of the Regions, which both have advisory powers. A European System of Central Banks, a European Central Bank and a European Investment Bank have been set up under the provisions of the Treaty. The Union's present structure is commonly described as being based on three pillars.
Titles V and VI provide for intergovernmental cooperation using the common institutions, with certain supranational features such as associating the Commission and consulting Parliament. Objectives 1. The European Community (First Pillar) The Community's task is to promote throughout the Community a harmonious, balanced and sustainable development of economic activities, a high level of employment and of social protection, equality between men and women, sustainable and non-inflationary growth, a high degree of competitiveness and convergence of economic performance, a high level of environmental protection, the raising of the standard of living and quality of life, economic and social cohesion and solidarity among Member States. The Community pursues these objectives, acting within the limits of its powers, by establishing a common market and related measures set out in Article 3 of the EC Treaty and by initiating the economic and single monetary policy referred to in Article 4 (3a). Community activities must respect the principle of proportionality and, in areas that do not fall within its exclusive competence, the principle of subsidiarity (Article 5 (3b) EC). 2. The Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) (Second Pillar) The Union has the task of defining and implementing, by intergovernmental methods, a common foreign and security policy. The Member States must support this policy actively and unreservedly in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity. Its objectives are:
3. Cooperation in the Fields of Justice and Home Affairs (Third Pillar) The Union's objective is to develop common action in these areas by intergovernmental methods to provide citizens with a high level of safety within an area of freedom, security and justice. It covers the following areas:
II. The Amsterdam Treaty Legal Basis Treaty of Amsterdam amending the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties establishing the European Communities and certain related acts, signed in Amsterdam on 2 October 1997; it came into force on 1 May 1999. Objectives The Treaty of Amsterdam amends and amplifies the content of the Maastricht Treaty in five main areas:
It also contains provisions aiming to simplify and codify the Treaties. Background Article N.2 of the Maastricht Treaty laid down that a conference of representatives of the Member States' Governments (IGC) was to be convened in 1996, to examine the Treaty provisions for which revision was provided. At its meetings in Brussels and Corfu, the European Council widened the mandate of this IGC [Intergovernmental Conference] to include institutional issues thrown up by the enlargement process. A reflection group was set up, and on 5 December 1995 it approved a report which in its first part set out a strategy for Europe and in its second part proposed an annotated agenda for the IGC. At its meeting of 15 and 16 December 1995 in Madrid, the European Council considered that the guidelines set out by the reflection group constituted a good basis for the IGC's work, and decided that Parliament should be closely involved in this work. On the basis of a first draft put forward by the Irish Presidency and further versions of these texts proposed by the Netherlands Presidency, the Amsterdam European Council at its meeting of 16 and 17 June 1997 formally brought the IGC to a conclusion in the morning of 18 June and, after legal and linguistic editing, the new Treaty was signed on 2 October 1997 in Amsterdam. Substance The Amsterdam Treaty represents substantial progress on the 'constitutional' bases of EU and Community policies and the process of democratisation. However, it does not include all the institutional reforms which enlargement will render necessary. While removing the much-criticised social policy opt-out, the new Treaty lays the foundation for closer cooperation between some Member States within the framework of EU Institutions. It has also simplified the Treaties to a certain extent, in particular by renumbering the articles. 1. Increase in EU Powers a. European Community
b. European Union
2. A stronger Position for Parliament a. Legislative Power
b. Power of Control
c. Election and Statute of Members With regard to the procedure for elections to Parliament by direct universal suffrage (Article 190 (138)), the Community's power to adopt common principles has been added to the existing power to adopt a uniform procedure. A legal basis making it possible to adopt a single statute for Members of the European Parliament has been included in the same article. However, there is still no provision allowing measures to develop political parties at European level (cf. Article 191 (138a)). 3. Closer Cooperation For the first time, the founding Treaties contain general provisions allowing some Member States under certain conditions to take advantage of common institutions to organise closer cooperation between themselves. This option is in addition to the closer cooperation covered by specific provisions, such as economic and monetary union, creation of the area of freedom, security and justice and incorporating the Schengen provisions. The areas where there may be closer cooperation are the third pillar and, under particularly restrictive conditions, matters subject to non-exclusive Community competence. The conditions which any closer cooperation must fulfil and the planned decision-making procedures have been drawn up in such a way as to ensure that this new factor in the process of integration will remain exceptional and, at all events, can only be used to move further towards integration and not to take retrograde steps. 4. Simplification The Amsterdam Treaty removes from the European Treaties all provisions which the passage of time has rendered void or obsolete, while ensuring that this does not affect the legal effects which derived from them in the past. It also renumbers the Treaty articles. For legal and political reasons the Treaty was signed and submitted for ratification in the form of amendments to the existing Treaties. In order to make it more comprehensible and facilitate practical work, the Council Secretariat, responding to a request from the IGC, has published a consolidated version of the EU Treaty and the Treaty establishing the European Community, incorporating all the changes made by the Amsterdam Treaty. 5. Institutional Reforms with a View to Enlargement The Amsterdam Treaty has set the maximum number of Members of the European Parliament, in line with Parliament's request, at 700 (Article 189 (137)). Composition of the Commission and the question of weighted votes is covered by a 'Protocol on the Institutions' attached to the Treaty. This provides that, in a Union of up to 20 Member States, the Commission will comprise one national of each Member State, provided that by that date, weighting of the votes in the Council has been modified. At all events, at least a year before the 21stMember State joins, a new IGC must comprehensively review the Treaties' provisions on the Institutions. There is certainly provision for the Council to use qualified majority voting in a number of the legal bases newly established by the Amsterdam Treaty (see above and the decisions on employment guidelines (Article 128(2) (109a(2)) and on very remote regions (Article 229(2) (227(2))). However, of the existing Community policies, only research policy has new provisions on qualified majority voting, at Articles 166(130i) and 172 (130o). In the EC Treaty alone, 44 articles still require unanimity, of which 20 concern legislative areas such as tax harmonisation (Article 93 (99)), approximation of laws (Article 94 (100)), culture (Article 151 (128)), industrial policy (Article 157 (130)), the Structural Funds (Article 161 (130d)) and some aspects of environmental policy (Article 175 (130s(2)). 6. Other Matters
Role of the European Parliament Parliament was involved in negotiations leading to the Maastricht Treaty through the Interinstitutional Conference. Before conclusion of the Amsterdam Treaty, Parliament was for the first time in the history of European integration directly involved in the procedure to amend the Treaties. The principle of Parliament's involvement in the preparatory work was agreed at the meeting of Foreign Affairs Ministers at Ioannina on 29 March 1994, a few weeks before Parliament voted on the accession treaties with Austria, Finland, Norway and Sweden, which took place on 4 May 1994 under the assent procedure. On 17 May 1995, Parliament adopted its resolution on the functioning of the EU Treaty with a view to the 1996 IGC - implementation and development of the Union. In its resolution of 13 March 1996, Parliament gave its opinion on the convening of the IGC, together with an evaluation of the work of the reflection group and a list of political priorities for the IGC. It confirmed Mrs Guigou and Mr Brok as its representatives to the IGC work. The Turin European Council at the opening of the IGC on 29 March 1996 approved the arrangements for Parliament's involvement with the IGC's work. In addition to the usual exchanges of views with Parliament's President at meetings of the European Council, ministerial sessions at the IGC were preceded by an exchange of views with Parliament's President and representatives. Every month during the IGC, representatives of the Ministers met representatives of Parliament, at least for an in-depth exchange of views; in addition, there were numerous informal meetings and bilateral contacts with the Presidency. In its resolution of 19 November 1997 on the Amsterdam Treaty, Parliament recommended that the Member States ratify it and added a critical evaluation to this recommendation. Parliament endorsed a declaration that the Governments of Belgium, Italy and France had made when the Treaty was signed, and insisted in particular that before any enlargement:
Prospects The Amsterdam Treaty has only partially satisfied expectations and makes provision for further institutional adjustments as the enlargement process proceeds. For this reason the Intergovernmental Conference convened in February 2000 was mostly concerned with points which had not been resolved in Amsterdam (extension of qualified majority voting, re-weighting of votes in the Council and composition of the Commission). In the 'Protocol on the Institutions', the Amsterdam Treaty provides that in the event of up to five new Member States joining, the Commission should comprise one national of each of the Member States, provided that weighting of votes in the Council has been adjusted by then. The European Council meeting in Cardiff on 16 and 17 June 1998 recognised in principle the need for new reforms before enlargement. The European Council meeting in Cologne on 3 and 4 June 1999 decided that a further intergovernmental conference should be convened at the beginning of 2000 and be wound up by the end of that year. The mandate of the conference should cover institutional issues which had not been resolved in Amsterdam and further amendments to the Treaty which would be deemed necessary in that context. Accordingly, Parliament hoped that the negotiating brief for the Conference would cover as wide an area as possible. With regard to substance, it called for:
The Intergovernmental Conference opened on 14 February 2000 in Brussels.
European Parliament Fact Sheet,
16 November 2000 Summary of the Treaty of Nice
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a brief summary of the Treaty of Nice, which enters into force on 1st February 2003. A list of provisions which change over to qualified-majority voting is attached.
The Institutions Changes within the Institutions during the Enlargement Process The Treaty restricts itself to setting out the principles and methods for changing the institutional system as the Union grows. The number of seats in the European Parliament for the new Member States, the number of votes allocated to them within the Council, and particularly the qualified majority threshold applicable in the future, will be legally determined in the accession treaties. The changes brought by the Treaty of Nice to the composition of the Commission and the weighting of votes will be applicable from 1 November 2004 onwards and the new composition of the European Parliament will apply as from the elections in 2004. For the applicant countries joining before these dates, the accession treaties must therefore also establish the number of MEPs [Members European Parliament], commissioners, votes within the Council which will be allocated to them, and the qualified majority threshold, up until the entry into force of the new rules. These temporary provisions will be based on the principles which have applied up until now in the accession negotiations, i.e. the extension of the current system, ensuring equal treatment with the Member States of equivalent size. European Parliament Composition The IGC has introduced a new distribution of seats in the European Parliament looking ahead to a Union of 27 Member States, which will be applicable as from the next European elections in 2004. The maximum number of European Members of Parliament (currently set at 700) will rise to 732. The number of seats allocated to the current Member States has been brought down by 91 (from the current 626 to 535). Only Germany and Luxembourg retain the same number of MEPs. However, this reduction will be applicable in full only for the assembly elected in 2009. As the Union will undoubtedly not yet have 27 Member States in 2004, it has been decided for the 2004 European elections to increase on a pro rata basis the number of MEPs to be elected (in the current Member States and in the new Member States with which accession treaties will have been signed by 1 January 2004) to reach the total of 732 (although the number of MEPs to be elected in each Member State cannot be higher than the current number). On the basis of Nice, the following table has been agreed for 25 Member States for inclusion in the accession Treaty. See for source: <http://www.eu2002.dk/ewebeditpro2/upload/OW.StaticContent/294/pakke2.pdf>
As the likelihood is that new Member States will enter the Union during the 2004-2009 term of office and that as a result additional MEPs will be elected in these countries it is anticipated that the maximum number of 732 seats in the European Parliament may be temporarily exceeded in order to accommodate MEPs from the countries which will have signed accession treaties after the 2004 European elections. Other Changes Article 191 of the EC Treaty has been supplemented by a legal base which allows the adoption via the codecision procedure of a statute of European level political parties and particularly of rules concerning their funding. The regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the duties of members of the European Parliament will be approved by the Council by qualified majority, with the exception of the provisions relating to taxation (Article 190 of the EC Treaty). The European Parliament will henceforth be able, in the same way as the Council, the Commission and the Member States, to institute proceedings to have acts of the institutions to be declared void without having to demonstrate specific concern (Article 230 of the EC Treaty) and to seek a prior opinion from the Court of Justice on the compatibility of an international agreement with the Treaty (Article 300 (6) of the EC Treaty). As will be described in greater detail hereafter, the responsibilities of the European Parliament have been extended by expanding the scope of the codecision (cf. infra point II.A) and by the assent required to establish enhanced cooperation in an area covered by the codecision process (cf. infra point II.B). The European Parliament will also be called upon to state its opinion when the Council intends to declare that a clear danger exists of a serious breach of fundamental rights occurring (cf. infra point III.A). The Council Definition of Qualified Majority The decision-making system by qualified majority will be changed as from 1 November 2004. In future, a qualified majority will be obtained if: o the decision receives at least a specified number of votes (the qualified majority threshold) and o the decision is approved by a majority of Member States. The number of votes allocated to each Member State has been changed. While the number of votes has been increased for all Member States, the increase is higher for the most populated Member States. The five biggest Member States' population-wise will in the 15-strong European Union have 60% of votes compared with 55% at present. The qualified majority threshold was at the centre of debates during the closing stages of the IGC. The final compromise is complex. This notwithstanding, the qualified majority threshold will be fixed in the successive accession treaties on the basis of principles determined by the Treaty of Nice, particularly by the declaration on the qualified majority threshold. On this basis and for the accession Treaty in view of enlargement with ten new countries, the following table has been agreed. This system would enter into force in November 2004. A qualified majority vote requires a minimum of 232 votes(1) See for source: <http://www.eu2002.dk/ewebeditpro2/upload/OW.StaticContent/294/pakke2.pdf>
The Treaty also provides for the possibility for a member of the Council to request verification that the qualified majority represents at least 62% of the total population of the European Union. If this condition is not met, the decision will not be adopted. However, this condition applies only if verification is requested.
Commission Composition The IGC has decided to defer imposing a ceiling on the number of members of the Commission.
With effect from 1 November 2004, the Commission will
comprise one national per Member State(2).The
biggest
Member States thus lose at that time the opportunity of proposing
a second As from the first Commission which will be appointed once the Union reaches 27 Member States, there will be fewer Commissioners than there are Member States. The Commissioners will be selected by a system of rotation that will be fair to all countries. In concrete terms, once the accession treaty for the twenty-seventh Member State has been signed, the Council will have to take a unanimous decision: o on the exact number of Commissioners; o on the arrangements for a fair system of rotation, bearing in mind that all Member States will be treated on an equal footing and that each Commission must satisfactorily reflect the different demographic and geographic characteristics of the Member States. Appointment The IGC has decided to change the procedure for nominating the Commission (Art. 214 of the EC Treaty). Henceforth, the nomination of the President is a matter for the European Council acting by qualified majority. This appointment must be approved by the European Parliament. Thereafter, the Council, acting by qualified majority and in agreement with the appointed president, will adopt the list of the other persons it intends to appoint as members of the Commission, drawn up in accordance with the proposals made by each Member State. The purpose of this is solely to ensure that the Council cannot designate as a member of the Commission a person not proposed by the government of the Member State of which he/she is a national. It has no effect on the procedure whereby the president appointed, before he gives his/her agreement to this list, undertakes political contacts with each government to ensure that the new Commission is composed in a harmonious and balanced manner. Lastly, the president and the members of the Commission will be appointed by the Council acting by qualified majority after approval of the body of Commissioners by the European Parliament. Increased Powers for the President The new wording of Article 217 of the EC Treaty increases the president's powers, who will decide as to the internal organisation of the Commission; will allocate portfolios to the Commissioners and if necessary reassign responsibilities during his term of office; will appoint, after the collective approval of the body, the vice-presidents, whose number is no longer established in the Treaty; may demand a commissioner's resignation, subject to the Commission's approval. The Union's Legal System The IGC has made major reforms to the Union's legal system. These reforms are meant to tackle the case overload that confronts the Court of Justice currently. As a result, there are long delays in obtaining judgments, which is detrimental to the working of the EU and unsatisfactory for the parties concerned. The main provisions concerning the Court of First Instance, and particularly its responsibilities, are henceforth to be found in the Treaty. In addition, the Treaty provides for the possibility to set up internal chambers to deal at first instance with certain proceedings. The Treaty has introduced greater flexibility in order to prepare the legal system for the future, settling certain issues in the Court's statute, which can henceforth be amended by the Council acting unanimously at the request of the Court or of the Commission. The approval of the rules of procedure of the Court of Justice and of the Court of First Instance will henceforth be by qualified majority. Composition While the Court of Justice will, as before, be composed of one judge from each Member State, steps have been taken to maintain the effectiveness of the jurisdiction and coherence of its jurisprudence. The "grand chamber", comprising eleven judges (including the president of the Court and the presidents of the five-judge chambers), will generally deal with cases today handled by plenary session. The presidents of the five-judge chambers will be elected for a three-year term of office which will be renewable once. The Court of First Instance will have at least one judge from each Member State (the number is determined in the statute, which currently makes provision for fifteen judges). As before, the number of judges in the Court of First Instance (stipulated up to now in the Decision establishing the CFI) can be changed. Distribution of Responsibilities between the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance The Treaty sets out the distribution of responsibilities between the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance but it will be possible to make adjustments through the statute. The Court of First Instance becomes the common law judge for all direct actions (particularly proceedings against a decision (Article 230 of the EC Treaty), action for failure to act (Article 232 of the EC Treaty), action for damages (Article 235 of the EC Treaty), with the exception of those which will be attributed to a specialised chamber and those the statute reserves for the Court itself. The Court of Justice retains responsibility for other proceedings (particularly action for failure to fulfil obligations, Art. 226 of the EC Treaty), but the statute can entrust to the Court of First Instance categories of proceedings other than those listed in Art. 225 of the EC Treaty. The idea is to maintain within the Court, as the jurisdictional supreme body of the European Union, disputes concerning essential issues. The IGC has accordingly asked the Court and the Commission to review the distribution of responsibilities as soon as possible so that appropriate proposals can be examined as soon as the Treaty of Nice comes into force. The Court of Justice, which is responsible for ensuring uniform application of EU law within the European Union, in principle retains competence for investigating questions referred for a preliminary ruling; however, pursuant to Art. 225 of the EC Treaty, the statute may entrust to the Court of First Instance the responsibility for preliminary rulings in certain specific matters. Specialised Chambers The Council can set up specialised chambers to examine at first instance certain categories of actions in specific matters (e.g. in the area of intellectual property). The IGC through a declaration asks that a draft decision be prepared to set up such chambers in order to settle disputes between the EU and its civil servants (Article 236 of the EC Treaty). An appeal in cassation can be made before the Court of First Instance against a decision by the specialised chambers. European Patent Lastly, the new Article 229a of the EC Treaty will allow the Council, acting unanimously, to attribute to the Court of Justice the responsibility for settling disputes related to intellectual property rights. This provision is aimed essentially at disputes between private parties in which the future European patent is involved. This Council decision will enter into force only after it has been adopted by the Member States (i.e. after ratification). Court of Auditors The Treaty henceforth stipulates explicitly that the Court of Auditors will consist of one national from each Member State. The Court of Auditors may establish internal chambers to adopt certain categories of reports or opinions. European Central Bank and European Investment Bank The Treaty of Nice does not change the composition of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank (comprising the members of the executive board and the governors of the national central banks) but allows for changes to the rules on decision-making (at present, decisions are generally adopted by simple majority of the members, each having one vote Article 10 of the statute of the European Central Bank). This change requires a unanimous European Council decision which must then be ratified by the Member States. The IGC has stated that it expects the Governing Council to submit as quickly as possible a recommendation for amending the voting rules. As far as the EIB is concerned, the Treaty of Nice allows for the possibility of altering the composition of the board of directors and the rules on decision-making by a unanimous Council decision. Economic and Social Committee and Committee of the Regions The IGC has not altered the number and distribution per Member State of the seats of the ESC and the COR. The Treaty henceforth stipulates that the number of members of these committees cannot exceed 350 (Art. 258 and 263 of the EC Treaty), but this ceiling is not reached with the seats envisaged for the new Member States. The description of the members of the ESC has been changed and the Treaty states that the Committee is to consist of "representatives of the various economic and social components of organised civil society" (Article 257 of the EC Treaty). For the COR, the Treaty of Nice henceforth explicitly stipulates that the members must hold a regional or local electoral mandate or be politically accountable to an elected assembly.
The Decision-making Process Extension of the Qualified Majority Vote The Treaty of Nice to some extent widens the scope of decision-making by qualified majority. A list of the 27 provisions which change over completely or partly from unanimity to qualified-majority voting is attached. The most important provisions which do so as soon as the Treaty of Nice enters into force are: o measures to facilitate freedom of movement for the citizens of the Union (Article 18 of the EC Treaty); o judicial cooperation in civil matters (Article 65 of the EC Treaty); o the conclusion of international agreements in the area of trade in services and the commercial aspects of intellectual property (Article 133 of the EC Treaty), with exceptions (see below); o industrial policy (Article 157 of the EC Treaty); o economic, financial and technical cooperation with third countries (Article 181a of the EC Treaty, new provision to adopt measures hitherto based on Article 388 of the EC Treaty); o approval of the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the duties of members of the European Parliament (Article 190 of the EC Treaty), with the exception of matters relating to the fiscal regime; o the statute of the political parties at European level (Article 191 of the EC Treaty, new provision); o the approval of the rules of procedure of the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance (Articles 223 and 224 of the EC Treaty). It should be noted that the appointment of members of certain institutions or bodies will henceforth be done by qualified majority (President and members of the Commission, of the Court of Auditors, of the Economic and Social Committee and of the Committee of the Regions; the High Representative/Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General of the Council; the CFSP special envoys). The changeover to qualified majority voting has been deferred until 2007 for the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Funds (Article 161 of the EC Treaty), and for the adoption of the financial regulations (Article 279 of the EC Treaty). Lastly, for the provisions of Title IV of the EC Treaty (visas, asylum, immigration and other policies linked to the free movement of persons), the IGC has agreed on a partial and deferred switch to qualified majority voting by means of different instruments (amendment of Article 67 of the EC Treaty, protocol or political declaration) and subject to different conditions (either from 1 May 2004, or after the adoption of EU legislation setting out the common rules and essential principles). The picture is somewhat mixed for the five areas the Commission had identified as key areas: o Taxation (Articles 93, 94 and 175 of the EC Treaty): maintenance of unanimity for all measures; o Social Policy (Articles 42 and 137 of the EC Treaty): maintenance of the status quo. However, the Council, acting in unanimity, can make the codecision procedure applicable to those areas of social policy which are currently still subject to the rule of unanimity. This "bridge" cannot, however, be used for social security; o Cohesion Policy (Article 161 of the EC Treaty): it has been decided to switch to qualified majority voting but this will not apply until after the adoption of the multi-annual financial perspectives applicable as from 1 January 2007; o Policy on Asylum and Immigration (Articles 62 and 63 of the EC Treaty): application of the qualified majority rule has been postponed (2004) and will not concern the central elements of these policies, e.g. the "sharing of the burden" (Article 63(2)(b) or the conditions for entry and residence of nationals from third countries (Article 63(3)a); o Common Commercial Policy (Article 133 of the EC Treaty): this henceforth includes the negotiation and conclusion of international agreements in the area of trade in services and the commercial aspects of intellectual property. These agreements are concluded by qualified majority, except when the agreement includes provisions for which unanimity is required for the adoption of internal rules or when the agreement concerns an area on which the EU has not yet exercised its responsibilities. In addition, the agreements concerning the harmonisation of cultural and audiovisual services, education services, social services and health services continue to be the subject of responsibility shared with the Member States. The Treaty of Nice has extended the scope of codecision. This procedure will be applicable for seven provisions which change over from unanimity to qualified majority voting (Articles 13, 62, 63, 65, 157, 159 and 191 of the EC Treaty; this concerns respectively incentive measures to combat discrimination; a number of issues related to Justice and Home Affairs such as border controls and measures concerning asylum, refugees and immigration policy; issues related to industrial policy; regulations governing political parties at European level; for Article 161 of the EC Treaty which concerns cohesion policy, the Treaty stipulates assent by the EP). Accordingly, most of the legislative measures which, after the Treaty of Nice, require a decision from the Council acting by qualified majority will be decided via the codecision procedure. The IGC has not, however, extended the codecision procedure to legislative measures which already come under the qualified majority rule (e.g. in agricultural policy or trade policy). Enhanced Cooperation The IGC has comprehensively overhauled the provisions on enhanced cooperation, particularly by listing in a single provision the ten conditions necessary to establish enhanced cooperation. While the essential characteristics of this instrument are largely unchanged (such as the principles whereby enhanced cooperation can be undertaken only as a last resort and must be open to all Member States), substantial changes have nevertheless been agreed. The minimum number of Member States required to establish enhanced cooperation is now set at eight, whereas the Treaty currently stipulates that the majority of Member States is needed. Thus the minimum number of States needed to establish enhanced cooperation will fall, with the successive enlargements, to under one-third of the members of the Union (as had been proposed by the Commission). In the Treaty establishing the European Community (first pillar) the possibility of opposing enhanced cooperation (the "veto") has been removed. It has been replaced by the possibility for a Member State to take the matter up with the European Council. In such an event, the Council may nevertheless act by qualified majority on any proposal for enhanced cooperation. Furthermore, when enhanced cooperation concerns an area which comes under the codecision process, the assent of the European Parliament is required. The Treaty of Nice has introduced the possibility of establishing enhanced cooperation in the area of common foreign and security policy (second pillar), for the implementation of joint action or a common position. Enhanced cooperation of this kind cannot be used for issues which have military implications or which affect defence matters. The authorisation for enhanced cooperation is given by the Council after receiving the opinion of the Commission, particularly on the consistency of this enhanced cooperation with the Union's policies. The Council will decide by qualified majority but each Member State may ask that the matter be referred to the European Council for the purposes of a unanimous decision ("emergency brake"). For police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (third pillar), the possibility of the "veto" has been removed in line with what is envisaged for enhanced cooperation for the first pillar. Other Changes The Treaty of Nice brings other changes to the treaties. The most significant are: Fundamental Rights Pursuant to Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union, the European Council can declare the existence of a serious and persistent breach of fundamental rights. If this occurs, the Council may suspend certain of the rights of the country concerned. The Treaty of Nice has supplemented this procedure with a preventive instrument. Upon a proposal of one-third of the Member States, the Parliament or the Commission, the Council, acting by a four-fifths majority of its members and with the assent of the European Parliament, can declare that a clear danger exists of a Member State committing a serious breach of fundamental rights and address to that Member Statre appropriate recommendations. The Court of Justice will be competent (Article 46 of the Treaty on European Union) only for disputes concerning procedural provisions under Article 7, and not for the appreciation of the justification or the appropriateness of the decisions taken pursuant to this provision. Security and Defence The Nice European Council adopted the Presidency's report on the European security and defence policy which inter alia provides for the development of the Union's military capacity, the creation of permanent political and military structures and the incorporation into the Union of the crisis management functions of the WEU. While this is not a precondition for making the security and defence policy quickly operational on the basis of the current provisions of the Treaty, the Nice Treaty amends Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union by removing the provisions defining the relations between the Union and the WEU. In addition, the political and security committee ("PSC", a new designation of the political committee in the Treaty) may be authorised by the Council, in order to manage a crisis and for the duration of that crisis, to itself take the appropriate decisions under the second pillar in order to ensure the political control and strategic leadership of the crisis management operation. Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters The IGC has not added, as the Commission proposed, a provision which would have made it possible to create a European prosecutor to protect the financial interests of the EU. However, the Nice Treaty does supplement Article 31 of the Treaty on European Union with reference to and the description of the tasks of "Eurojust", a unit of seconded magistrates whose task it will be, within the framework of judicial cooperation in criminal matters, to contribute to proper coordination of the national authorities responsible for criminal proceedings. Inter-institutional Agreements The IGC adopted a declaration attached to the Treaty of Nice on inter-institutional agreements. This declaration states that relations between the European institutions are governed by the duty to cooperate sincerely and that when necessary to facilitate the application of the provisions of the Treaty, the Parliament, the Council and the Commission can conclude inter-institutional agreements. These agreements can neither change nor supplement the provisions of the Treaty and can be concluded only with the agreement of these three institutions. Social Protection Committee Through a new Article 144 of the EC Treaty, the Treaty of Nice incorporates within the Treaty the Social Protection Committee which had been established by the Council pursuant to the conclusions of the Lisbon European Council. Name of the Official Journal The name of the Official Journal of the European Communities will be changed to "Official Journal of the European Union" (Article 254 of the EC Treaty). Venue for European Council Meetings The IGC adopted a declaration annexed to the Treaty of Nice stipulating that "as from 2002, one European Council meeting per presidency will be held in Brussels. When the Union comprises 18 members, all European Council meetings will be held in Brussels". It should be noted that this declaration relates only to the formal European Council meetings, and the presidencies are free to organise the informal European Council meetings wherever they like (or even not to organise any), in line with the informal Council meetings which can be organised in places other than those stipulated in the protocol on the seat of the institutions. Financial Consequences of the Expiry of the ECSC Treaty The European Coal and Steel Community Treaty expired on 23 July 2002. At the request of the Council, the Commission in September 2000 put forward a draft decision on the transfer of ECSC funds to the European Community to be used for research in sectors related to the coal and steel industry. For reasons of legal certainty, it has been deemed preferable to settle this matter through a protocol annexed to the Treaty of Nice. Declaration on the Future of the Union
In December 2000, the Intergovernmental Conference adopted a
declaration concerning the future of the Union whereby it calls for a deeper
and wider debate about the future of the European Union. This has eventually
led to the Laeken declaration, adopted at the Laeken European Council in
December 2001. Herein, the European Council has established a Convention on
the Future of the Union, which is likely to finish its work in June 2003. A
new IGC will be convened afterwards with a view to adopting a Constitution for
the European Union. In the view of the Commission, the Treaty of Nice will be
useful to manage the first stage of an enlarged Union; it has, however, not
given a fully adequate answer to make a Union of 25 and more Member States
work effectively and democratically. Annex
List of Provisions to which the Qualified Majority Rule will Apply Qualified Majority as from the Entry into Force of the Treaty of Nice
Article 23, paragraph 1, of the EC Treaty: appointment of special representatives Article 24, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the EC Treaty: international agreement implementing joint action or a common position (but with a clause providing for appeal to the European Council) Article 13 of the EC Treaty: countering discrimination (applies only to incentive measures) (codecision) Article 18 of the EC Treaty: facilitating freedom of movement for the citizens of the EU (but limitation of the field of application) (already the subject of codecision since the Amsterdam Treaty) Article 65 of the EC Treaty: judicial cooperation in civil proceedings (with the exception of aspects relating to family law) (codecision) Article 100 of the EC Treaty: financial assistance in the event of serious difficulties Article 111, paragraph 4, of the EC Treaty: representation of the European Community at international level as regards issues of particular relevance to EMU Article 123, paragraph 4, of the EC Treaty: measures necessary for the introduction of the Euro Article 133 of the EC Treaty: for the negotiation and conclusion of international agreements on services and the commercial aspects of intellectual property (with exceptions) Article 157, paragraph 3, of the EC Treaty: specific support measures in the industrial field (codecision) Article 159, indent 3, of the EC Treaty: specific actions outside the Structural Funds (codecision) Article 181a (new) of the EC Treaty: economic, financial and technical cooperation with third countries (consultation) Article 190 of the EC Treaty: regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the duties of members of the European Parliament (with the exception of aspects relating to taxation) (approval of the decision of the Parliament) Article 191 of the EC Treaty: statute and financial regulations governing political parties at European level (codecision) Article 207 of the EC Treaty: appointment of the HR/SG and Deputy-SG of the Council Article 214 of the EC Treaty: appointment of the President and the members of the Commission Article 223 of the EC Treaty: approval of the rules of procedure of the Court of Justice Article 224 of the EC Treaty: approval of the rules of procedure of the Court of First Instance Article 247 of the EC Treaty: appointment of the members of the Court of Auditors Article 248 of the EC Treaty: approval of the internal rules of the Court of Auditors Article 259 of the EC Treaty: appointment of the members of the Economic and Social Committee Article 263 of the EC Treaty: appointment of the members of the Committee of the Regions Deferred Quality Majority: Article 62, paragraph 2(a), of the EC Treaty: (checks at external borders): after agreement on the field of application of these measures (Conference declaration) (codecision) Article 62, paragraph 3, of the EC Treaty: (movement of nationals of third countries in possession of a visa): in 2004 (Conference declaration) (codecision) Article 63, paragraph 1, of the EC Treaty: (policy on asylum): after adoption of a Community framework (codecision) Article 63, paragraph 2(a), of the EC Treaty: (persons under temporary protection): after adoption of a Community framework (codecision) Article 63, paragraph 3(b), of the EC Treaty: (clandestine immigration): in 2004 (Conference declaration) (codecision) Article 66 of the EC Treaty: (administrative cooperation in areas under Title IV): in 2004 (protocol) (consultation) Article 161 of the EC Treaty: (cohesion ): as from 2007 (assent) Article 279, paragraph 1, of the EC Treaty: (financial regulations and rules on the responsibility of financial controllers, authorising officers and accounting officers): as from 2007 (consultation).
(1) In between 1 May 2004 (date of enlargement) and 1 November 2004, a transitory system will apply based on the current one. (2) From 1 May 2004 onwards, a national for each new Member State will join the current Commission.
Brussels, 31 January 2003
Britain, France and Germany have reached an informal agreement on a joint
defence arrangement for Europe.
It would not appear on the official agenda but would be put to other delegates at dinner on Friday, they said. The EU launched its first-ever peacekeeping operation, in Macedonia, in March. It has also deployed troops under French command in the Democratic Republic of Congo and is working on plans to succeed Nato peacekeepers in Bosnia. The US is said to be particularly upset at calls for a European defence headquarters. But a British official has said that "any EU operations planning capability has to be compatible with Nato". Britain has said its right to control its own defence policy is one of the "red lines" it will not allow the new EU constitution to cross. It has reportedly also maintained that it envisages the European defence body will tackle missions Nato does not want to get involved in. Possible UK Veto The EU countries are discussing a European constitution which is designed to bring it closer to citizens, and to streamline decision-making in the future enlarged union of 25 nations. EU president Italy hopes to reach final agreement on the text this weekend, but analysts say this is highly optimistic. On Friday, UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said the UK would reject the draft if it meant states would lose their veto over foreign policy. Spanish Foreign Minister Ana Palacio, meanwhile, has said provisions in the text which dilute the voting power Spain and Poland won at the Nice summit three years ago are "unacceptable". Dutch Minister for Europe Atzo Nicolai said small countries like his tried without success earlier this week to force heavyweights France and Germany to play by EU rules. Under the draft constitution the number of voting commissioners will be held at 15 - meaning 10 countries would not have fully-fledged commissioners when the union expands. The major disagreements are expected to be left for heads of state to resolve at a summit in Brussels on 12 and 13 December. The ratification process is due to start in mid-2004. The constitution is expected to come into force in 2006 at the earliest.
EU Enlargement and the Transatlantic Relationship Introduction It is a great pleasure to be with you today in Chicago, a city with longstanding economic and family ties to Europe. Chicago has a famous history of immigration from all parts of Europe in continuous waves during the past centuries. Many residents of Chicago have familial bonds with the new EU Member States of Central Europe, and Poland in particular, where my own ancestry is also based. The soon to be realized enlargement of the European Union and its implications for the transatlantic relationship are indeed very happy reasons to return to the Executives’ Club, following my last visit in 2001. I wish to thank again Kaarina Koskenalusta for her kind invitation. Kaarina has already witnessed the accession of her native Finland to the European Union in 1995, and I know that she has done much to encourage transatlantic understanding in this important city. She will now see Hungary, the country she represents, join the EU as well. I am also grateful to Charles Sheehan, Consul General of Ireland, which currently holds the EU Presidency—as capably as before—for his assistance in coordinating my visit, and to John Estey, President and CEO of S&C Electric Company, for serving as chair of the international committee. We have much to discuss because EU Enlargement is truly a historic step for Europe, with many benefits for the transatlantic relationship. EU Enlargement: State of Play On May 1, 2004, only a few weeks from today, ten new countries will join the EU as fully-fledged members. From the Baltics to the Mediterranean, the eight Central European countries (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and Slovenia) and two Mediterranean island states (Cyprus and Malta) will increase the EU’s population by more than 80 million, from 370 million to over 450 million, expand its territory to one-and-one-half million square miles and nearly double its official languages from eleven to twenty. In comparison, the United States has a population of around 290 million with a territory of 3.7 million square miles and English as its common if not official language. To give you some idea of the magnitude of what EU enlargement means politically, imagine a United States not just of the current fifty states, but of ten sovereign nation-states stretching from Canada’s Arctic Circle all the way down to the Panama Canal. I would not wish to upset our hostess with such a federalist vision, having noted that the formidable Margaret Thatcher is her heroine. Nor would I presume to make a direct comparison between the US and the still undetermined outcome of the EU’s ongoing constitutional process. That process is itself a consequence of enlargement, addressing the logical concerns that the political institutions of an EU extended to twenty-five would come to a grinding halt, and aimed at keeping the process of European unity resolutely on the path to a "sui generis" federation of nation-states. Whatever terminology one wishes to use, however, the EU represents much more than a Free Trade Area à la NAFTA [North American Free Trade Agreement] or the recently concluded CAFTA [Central America Free Trade Agreement] between the US and Central America. To be comparable, NAFTA and CAFTA together would have to require that all members are part of a fully-fledged customs, economic and monetary union evolving toward political union. They would negotiate all trade agreements, be they bilateral, regional or in the WTO, as one block. All members would be subject to the same anti-trust and internal market rules. And these rules would be administered by a supranational authority, perhaps in the shape of a Guatemalan anti-trust czar headquartered in Quebec. All members would also subject themselves to the ultimate jurisdiction of a Joint North and Central American Court, interpreting disputes based on a body of supranational law. That Court might still have headquarters in Washington, but with only one American among the ten justices, and perhaps a Mexican jurist presiding as Chief Justice. The North and Central American House of Representatives, naturally based in Miami, would include three times as many seats for Mexican delegates as for those from California. This may seem totally outlandish to most Americans, but these and many other steps toward a more unified regional political and economic entity are precisely what the enlargement of the European Union entails. With entry into the EU, the ten new members will be represented in all the European institutions through Commissioners at the European Commission, directly elected Members of the European Parliament and their governments will have seats and votes in the European Council of Ministers, the ultimate decision-making body of the EU. They will immediately be part and parcel of the decision-making process, enjoying the same rights and obligations as the existing fifteen. The fact that the new members represent some 20% of the existing EU population, with only 5% of the actual GDP of those already there, also indicates the magnitude and challenge of the undertaking. With enlargement, the gap in income distribution within the EU25 will rise by about 20%—twice as much as the increase when the EU took in Greece, Spain and Portugal in the eighties. Much work has been done to prepare the new members for accession—the EU has already spent the current dollar value equivalent of two Marshall Plans on the accession process, with more "structural" funding planned to assist new members to improve their infrastructure and administrative capacities. Beyond the 1 May enlargement to twenty-five members, negotiations are continuing with Romania and Bulgaria with a view to these countries joining in 2007. This year the Commission will also make a recommendation to the European Council on Turkey, assessing whether progress made in its reform process will allow negotiations on accession to start sometime next year. These prospective further enlargements raise many additional challenges. Let me illustrate that in the area of agriculture. The ten new members joining on May 1 have in total four million farms, as compared to nearly seven million in the current EU15, for a total of eleven million farms in the EU of twenty-five. By comparison, there are only a little more than two million farms in the US. An EU of twenty-seven, with Romania and Bulgaria, adds another five million for a total of about sixteen million farms. Similarly, the numbers of people working in the agricultural sector will grow considerably, from four percent of total working population in the EU15, to five-and-one-half percent in the EU25, and seven-and-one-half percent in the EU27, again adding Romania and Bulgaria. The comparable figure for the US is a little more than two percent. In dealing with these challenges, financial support within the Common Agricultural Policy in the EU of twenty-five will stay at about today’s level for the EU15, while structural funding will be devoted to creating employment and sustainable economic development in rural areas. The door to eventual membership is also open to the Balkan countries. For Croatia, the process has already started, and if Zagreb manages to meet the political criteria fully, negotiations on accession may start soon. Macedonia would also have recently presented their application were it not for the tragic air crash that took the life of President Trajkovski. Political Impacts of EU Enlargement That is a thumbnail overview of the current state of EU enlargement. What will this mean for the future of Europe and the transatlantic relationship? In a political context, EU enlargement is a historic step towards the long cherished goal, on both sides of the Atlantic, of a Europe "whole, free, at peace and growing in prosperity," as articulated by successive US Presidents. After generations in which internal conflict in Europe posed one of the most serious security threats to the United States, the Western alliance and world peace, the unification of Europe by consent is a major strategic prize for the US as well as Europe. EU enlargement ensures that the democratic transition in Central and Eastern Europe is irreversible. Projecting security and political stability east and south, the EU serves not only its own security and geopolitical interests, but those of the United States too. The prospect of EU accession for Cyprus and eventually Turkey is also contributing significantly to the easing and possible resolution of disputes in the Eastern Mediterranean, a longstanding security concern for both Europe and the US. We have indeed seen very hopeful progress recently in Cyprus, bringing the possibility of a negotiated solution to a situation that since 1974 has often seemed intractable. The enlarged EU, in the context of the EU’s developing Common Foreign and Security Policy and European Security Strategy, will enable Europe to become an even more effective international partner of the US in tackling regional and global problems of mutual concern, from stabilizing the Balkans and the Caucasus to dealing with instability in the wider Middle East and beyond, and tackling terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and international crime. As more and more countries seek closer and deeper relations with the EU, and the question is raised of how far Europe’s frontiers extend, full membership cannot be the only response on the menu. That is why we have developed a “European Neighborhood” policy aimed at creating an area of stability and prosperity—a ring of friendly countries around the EU—stretching from Morocco all the way along the southern and eastern Mediterranean up to Russia. With these countries we intend to share everything except participation in our institutions, basing our relations on a community of values and interests. The ultimate, long-term aim is to extend to these countries the four freedoms on which the Union is based—free movement of goods, services, labor and capital—in giving tangible form to our commitment not to erect new barriers across Europe. In May, the Commission will present a set of practical proposals to further develop the substance of the European Neighborhood Policy, also building on already longstanding policies to consolidate what is nowadays referred to as the "Greater" or "Wider" Middle East. Economic Impacts of EU Enlargement That is the political side; what of the economic impacts? As I have already noted, the GDP per capita of the ten new member states on average is only about 35% that of the current fifteen. Looking to the future, however, one can see the new members as potential engines of growth. The accession countries have growth rates of between 5% to 8% of GDP, far outstripping those of the current EU15, and are likely to do so for the next decade. The new member states have also enjoyed an “accession premium” with bonds trading at tighter spreads than equally rated countries from other parts of the world. All of this has been well understood by European, but also American, investors who have significantly increased their presence in these countries anticipating their accession, correctly evaluating the economic opportunities that exist for these countries in an enlarged internal market. By joining the European Union, the acceding countries also become members of Economic and Monetary Union. They are committed to adopting the Euro eventually, and steps are being taken in that direction. But accession to the EU does not mean automatic adoption of the Euro. Specific criteria must be met first, as laid out in the Maastricht Treaty. The new members will continue on a path of economic restructuring and economic and policy convergence as part of the process of getting in shape for the Euro—a process that is guided and encouraged by the Commission and other EU institutions. It is likely that, by the end of the decade, in a number of them the Euro will have replaced the national currency. So what else does the EU enlargement imply for US industries and business trading with the new Member States? First – A larger and More Open Market: The EU represents the largest single market in the world. Despite fears of our trading partners that the creation of the EU Single Market in 1992 would lead to some kind of "fortress Europe," the EU is now one of the most open trade areas in the world. There are no more internal borders between the Member States and goods imported into the EU at a customs office of any of the Member States will be able to circulate freely throughout twenty-five countries. Equally, companies producing in any of the new Member States can serve customers in the entire EU without any impediments. The extension to the new Member States of the EU’s external tariff alone will lead to a decrease of their current average tariff of 9% to an average of 4%. In most cases, US exporters will consequently enjoy lower tariff in their trade with the new Member states. Second – A Single Set of Rules: Enlargement will extend the EU’s trade policy regime to the new Member States. Thus, the present system whereby US exporters are faced with various import regimes will disappear. The enlarged EU will have a single set of trade rules, a single tariff system and a single set of administrative and customs procedures. Third – A More Trade Friendly Regulatory Environment with High Standards: The gradual adoption by the new Member States of norms and standards developed in the EU started already a long time ago and should roughly be completed by May 1. Higher standards in technical regulations and the principle of "one standard for all," the highest protection of intellectual property rights or strict subsidy disciplines are just a few examples of the obvious advantages for US companies doing business with the new Member States. Thus, they will be able to operate in the new Member States under the same high level regulatory environment they are already accustomed to when doing business in the current EU. Fourth – A Single Voice: The enlarged EU will speak with one voice in its bilateral and multilateral trade relations. The new Member States will apply the commitments undertaken by the EU in its trade relations with third countries in international fora, such as the WTO, or with its partner countries, such as the US. This applies notably to a number of bilateral EU-US agreements, such as on mutual recognition of standards and conformity assessment procedures, on co-operation on Customs and competition issues and the arrangement of regulatory co-operation. As of May 1, US industry, investors and exporters will benefit from these agreements also in their trade relations with partners in the new Member States. As a consequence, some technical adjustments in the existing framework for bilateral and multilateral trade relations were necessary: · The Bilateral Investment Treaties concluded between some new Member States and the US were modified in order to ensure that US investors enjoy a similar investment environment but no premium on EU investors in all Member States. · Existing Import Quotas maintained by the EU, notably in the agricultural sector, are adjusted to take into account trade flows between the new Member States and third countries. · The present EU Tariffs Levels will apply also in the new Member States. In areas where such alignment could result in higher tariffs applicable to imports into the new Member States, the EU, fully respecting its WTO obligations, is already engaged in discussions with its main trading partners to determine the level of possible compensation. As these areas are, however, very limited, the EU expects that trade partners will quickly realize that the positive consequences of enlargement will by far exceed any negative impact. · The new Member States will automatically be part of the WTO Government Procurement Agreement through the existing EU membership in this important agreement, opening up further government procurement markets. Enlargement will thus further strengthen the crucial nature of the overall transatlantic economic relationship. The combined EU and US GDP is around 60% of the world total on a market exchange rate basis, while we constitute only around 10% of the world’s population. Together, we command 40% of world trade, and our bilateral economic relationship is worth just short of $3 billion per day in trade of goods, services and foreign direct investment. Even more important is our cumulative mutual investment stake in each other’s economy. In 2000, Europe’s investment stake in the US represented 75% of all European investment abroad and roughly 60% of all foreign direct investment in the United States. Meanwhile, the US investment stake in Europe grew to roughly half of all US investment abroad. In 2001, this investment yielded half of all foreign earnings for US companies. The totally interdependent nature of our economies requires that we work closely together in dealing with a variety of regulatory issues, including those related to the financial securities industry so important to Chicago. Particularly in those areas where we may be competitors, it is vital to establish common rules of the road to bring down regulatory or other hurdles that prevent valid competition. While I realize it was not without controversy, the agreement on the entry of Eurex into the US will foster greater efficiency in the marketplace. The benefits of the transatlantic relationship most definitely extend to Illinois, squarely focused on the greater Chicago area. Illinois exported six billion dollars in goods to the EU in 2002, representing 23% of your total exports, and making the EU your largest export market beyond North America. Europe is also by far your largest source of foreign direct investment. As of 2001, European investment amounted to more than 26 billion dollars or 54% of total direct investment in Illinois. Taken together, the US Department of Commerce estimates that European trade and investment supports nearly 250,000 jobs in Illinois, largely in highly skilled and well-paid sectors. Conclusion: Win-Win for the EU and the Transatlantic Relationship To conclude, I should not hide the fact that EU-US relations have navigated a particularly difficult period. However, that should not obscure the larger truths of our common future, based on common interests, common goals and all that we have accomplished together in the last fifty years. Put simply, EU enlargement to Central Europe would not have been possible without the longstanding support of the United States for European integration. In fact, it represents a substantial dividend on that support, with the EU now taking responsibility for peace and stability in its own neighborhood and increasingly beyond. Some have expressed concern that the new member states might be tempted to curry favor with the US at the expense of their allegiance to the EU—this modified version of a "Trojan horse" strategy was en vogue at many think tank discussions in Washington during the Iraq war. And, prompted by the rather rash statements of some officials, it was also linked to a kind of new division in Europe, not between the East and West, but between the "old" and "new." Such thinking is based on an entirely false assumption. It is rather like being forced to choose between being a fan of either baseball or football, a choice that I am sure would not be popular in the land of the Chicago Cubs and the Chicago Bears. It discounts formal obligations all member states have towards each other under the European Common Foreign and Security Policy, and it ignores the impact of participation within the EU institutions and EU policies upon new member states. It also ignores the obvious point that, despite occasional policy differences, the EU as a whole is committed to the transatlantic relationship and furthering our global partnership with the US. EU membership and Atlanticism are fully compatible.
I hope, in turn, that our US partners will seek to engage more
effectively an enlarged and even more capable European Union in addressing the
many regional and global challenges that we face today. That said, I also
recognize that this is a transition year both in Europe and in the US, with
much focus on elections here and there and, in Europe, the appointment of a
new European Commission. While we can do much good work together this year, as
in Afghanistan and hopefully Iraq, as well as in the ongoing fight against
terrorism elsewhere, just to name a few examples, we may have to wait until
2005 before attempting a strategic review of our relationship. When that
review takes place, however, I firmly believe we must base our cooperation on
a partnership of equals, with full consultation and mutual respect. This would
constitute yet another welcome enlargement—that of the transatlantic
partnership—and provide the basis for a second half-century of great
accomplishment.
EU At A Glance The European Union (EU) is a family of democratic European countries, committed to working together for peace and prosperity. It is not a State intended to replace existing states, but it is more than any other international organisation. The EU is, in fact, unique. Its Member States have set up common institutions to which they delegate some of their sovereignty so that decisions on specific matters of joint interest can be made democratically at European level. This pooling of sovereignty is also called "European integration". The historical roots of the European Union lie in the Second World War. The idea of European integration was conceived to prevent such killing and destruction from ever happening again. It was first proposed by the French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman in a speech on 9 May 1950. This date, the "birthday" of what is now the EU, is celebrated annually as Europe Day. There are five EU institutions, each playing a specific role:
These are flanked by five other important bodies:
A number of agencies and other bodies complete the system. The rule of law is fundamental to the European Union. All EU decisions and procedures are based on the Treaties, which are agreed by all the EU countries. Initially, the EU consisted of just six countries: Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom joined in 1973, Greece in 1981, Spain and Portugal in 1986, Austria, Finland and Sweden in 1995. In 2004 the biggest ever enlargement took place with 10 new countries joining. In the early years, much of the co-operation between EU countries was about trade and the economy, but now the EU also deals with many other subjects of direct importance for our everyday life, such as citizens' rights; ensuring freedom, security and justice; job creation; regional development; environmental protection; making globalisation work for everyone. The European Union has delivered half a century of stability, peace and prosperity. It has helped to raise living standards, built a single Europe-wide market, launched the single European currency, the euro, and strengthened Europe's voice in the world. Unity in diversity: Europe is a continent with many different traditions and languages, but also with shared values. The EU defends these values. It fosters co-operation among the peoples of Europe, promoting unity while preserving diversity and ensuring that decisions are taken as close as possible to the citizens. In the increasingly interdependent world of the 21st century, it will be even more necessary for every European citizen to co-operate with people from other countries in a spirit of curiosity, tolerance and solidarity.
Idealism Should Not End Today
Sunday Mirror
Dr Denis MacShane MP, UK Minister for Europe
Question: The UK referendum: why are other Europe capitals so
concerned? Are you? If not why not?
Chirac: UK is a Real Problem Jacques Chirac has attacked Tony Blair for limiting Europe’s “ambitions” by holding on to national vetoes on tax and welfare. The French president did not hide his dismay at Britain’s blocking of his vision of European progress. “The ambitions foreseen have been reduced, especially in taxation and social security, by the clear position of one country, essentially the UK,” he told journalists. “This is a real problem that we are going to have to discuss.” “This is against the very spirit of the EU.” UK officials warned Chirac off any bid to sink concessions won by London over plans to extend EU decision-making to 'red line' policy areas. "These are choppy waters," he said. "They are trying to test our positions. If they want to object, they can take the rap for pulling it all down - not us." Chirac also backed Guy Verhofstadt and rejected Chris Patten a candidate for European Commission president. EU leaders are meeting in Brussels to choose Romano Prodi's successor, but there is still no consensus on the man for the job. The centre-right party in the European Parliament which at last week's elections reaffirmed its position as the largest political group is lining up UK commissioner Chris Patten as their favourite. “I do not belong to a political party and am not bound by EPP decisions.” But the French president is rejecting any jobseeker from a country which does participate in EU 'Schengen' border rules and the euro. “It would not be a good idea to have a candidate of a country that does not participate in all EU policies,” he said.. Chirac's move also rules out Irish leader Bertie Ahern, Dublin is not a full Schengen member, and Danish PM Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Copenhagen has not signed up to the euro. France, backed up by Germany made clear its continued support for the Liberal Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt. "We need someone of exceptional quality. We need someone with strong European experience, who has authority and competence," he said. “Verhofstadt is one of the possible candidates, I think he is good.”
Bruno Waterfield and Henrietta Billings, 17 June 2004
<http://www.eupolitix.com/EN/News/200406/e3120b37-1b23-4f0a-
EU Has A Constitution Europe’s leaders have agreed a constitution for the EU after talks went into extra time. A sometimes bitter gathering of EU heads of state and government is said to have burst into applause as Irish leader Bertie Ahern ended a two year debate over the future of Europe. "We have all achieved a fundamental advance for the European Union," said a jubilant Ahern. "The text enables everyone to say that their specific concerns were accommodated. We have listened to each other and understood each other's concerns. This is a win-win solution." Debate has reflected Europe's unique character with God, ‘golden mullets’, vetoes, and voting rights all playing a part in making an EU constitution. The new constitution falls short of a specific name-check for a Christian God but gives new recognition for churches and a reference to Europe's religious heritage. For the first time Europe's flag - 12 'golden mullets' circling on a field of azure - is hardwired into an EU treaty, along with a motto, "united in diversity". National vetoes have gone in a range of mainly technical areas with progress towards EU-decision-making in social security and justice - an 'emergency brake' clause is included allowing capitals to call a temporary halt on sensitive policy issues. Ahern, who insists the constitution can be sold to EU citizens, believes the EU is now clearer to Europeans ahead of key referendums in his own country, the UK, France and others. Popular votes and tests in national parliaments are the next hurdle for Europe’s constitution, which must be ratified in all 25 member states in the next two years if it is to become a new EU treaty. Declining turnout in recent European elections and a growing eurosceptic or anti-establishment vote have raised the prospect of referendum setbacks in major EU countries such as Britain. "Many of us have been involved in the nitty-gritty of the negotiation during the past few months. We have discussed at some considerable length the details of issues such as the weighting of votes, the scope of qualified majority voting and the number of commissioners. These, of course, are all critically important issues," Ahern said. "But we shouldn't forget that we have also agreed the values and objectives of the European Union. And we have done so in such a way that the ordinary person on the street can understand." But the final deal is short on headline political principles and has been overshadowed by a bitter euro-squabble over who should be the European Commission president. After constitution negotiations collapsed in December 2003 eventual agreement was delayed not by haggling over voting rights but by a fight over the EU’s top job. Europe’s institutional blueprint has balanced competing national interests and power in a text short on clarity. And the new European constitution text has failed to make EU decision-making more clear or effective, says a senior MEP. Socialist spokesman for constitutional affairs Richard Corbett argues that a compromise proposal setting out two different EU voting systems is a failure. "One of the aims of the constitution was to have a simple, clear and effective system," he told EUpolitix. "So having two different formulae each with a different percentage and with higher thresholds achieves none of the above objectives." Ireland secured a compromise deal on EU voting rights. The compromise focuses on an increased population threshold of 65 per cent and builds in a safeguard against a 'big three' blocking minority. "A qualified majority shall be defined as 55 per cent of the members of the council, comprising at least 15 members states, representing member States comprising at least 65 per cent of the population of the [EU]," states the new paper. In the areas of justice, foreign policy, economic governance and EU membership a higher ministerial threshold is set when proposals come from member states or ministers. This is a move that may dismay some capitals keen to move towards more EU decision-making - rendering a majority at Europe's council of ministers difficult. "When the council is not acting on a proposal from the commission or from the [EU] minister for foreign affairs, the qualified majority shall be defined as 72 per cent of the members of the council, representing member states comprising at least 65 per cent of the population of the EU," the constitution says. The development is not entirely new - the original text set a similar mechanism but with a ratio of 66 per cent of ministers and 60 per cent of the population. Irish foreign minister Brian Cowen denied that rounds of number crunching and horse trading has generated an overly complex voting system. "I think there is a simplification in all of this, everyone agrees that the 'double majority' system is the system we should move to. It is certainly a less complicated system than the Nice system," he told journalists. "I think the bottom line is that we are trying to achieve an outcome which will be transparent, which will make it easier for the EU to make decisions in the future in its enlarged format going forward." Ahern is sticking to the principle of ‘double majority’ – a majority of ministers and a majority of the EU’s population. An original draft proposal ‘double majority’ set at 50 per cent of ministers who also represent 60 per cent of the population has been dropped. Countries such as France, Germany, the UK and Italy backed this balance as a move toward a simplified and transparent decision-making process. Dublin’s latest plan is less complex that existing voting rights based on political horse trading but still sacrifices simplicity to expediency. Ahern is suggesting a balance of 55/65 “as part of an overall balanced outcome”, a move that brings in a third element. Smaller countries are concerned at higher population thresholds of over 60 per cent, because it is harder for them to push through proposals. Germany, France, and Britain have over 42 per cent of EU’s population, raising the spectre of built in blocks benefiting Europe’s heaviest hitters. To counter a structural imbalance in favour of Europe’s ‘big three’ Ahern is pushing for a “compensating mechanism” setting a minimum blocking minority. "However, the qualified majority shall also be attained if the negative votes are cast by fewer than four members of the council," states the new draft.
Bruno Waterfield, 18 June 2004
Main
Contributions of Turkey’s Membership to · Economy: Turkey will greatly contribute to the EU’s economic power on the global scene. With a population of 69 million, a GDP level of 460 billion euros (PPP), an export oriented economy and rapidly developing information society, Turkey’s accession will increase the size and competitiveness of the European internal market. · Growth: Growth in Turkey will have a positive effect on the EU economy. Turkey’s young, dynamic and entrepreneurial population and economy are large enough to generate growth both in Turkey and in an enlarged EU. · Consumers: Turkey’s large economy and potentials will be beneficial to European consumers. Elimination of technical and non-technical barriers to trade and adoption by Turkey of the EU legislation and standards are increasing the competitiveness and the product quality in an enlarged Union. · Business: In addition to the existing customs union in industrial goods, liberalisation of services and public procurement markets will provide invaluable opportunities for European companies. With a services sector constituting 65% of its GDP and a public procurement market of over 30 billion euros, Turkey offers high potentials for European companies in development projects. · Investment: After accession, European companies will benefit from higher rates of return on their foreign direct investment in Turkey. Given the country’s qualified labour force, high absorption capacity, tourism potentials and its location at the crossroads of Eurasian markets and energy networks, EU membership will boost the economy by attracting even more investments. · Global Politics: Turkey’s membership will be an invaluable asset for the EU in its global aspirations. Turkey’s geographical position, relations with the neighbouring countries and connection to the Islamic world, Russia and the Central Asia will endow the EU with greater saying in the international arena. · Multiculturalism: Turkey’s membership will strengthen the EU’s multicultural society. It will be a solid confirmation refuting ‘clash of civilisations’ scenario and proving the essence of the EU, namely a union built upon and through common values. · Stability: Improvements in the Greco-Turkish relations resulting from Turkey’s membership will provide further stability in the Aegean region and the Balkans. Greater stability and cooperation in the region have countless potentials for trade, energy, transport and environment projects. · Peace: Turkey’s membership will promote and defend common European interests. As an EU member, Turkey will contribute further to democracy, peace and stability, as well as economic development, in the Mediterranean region, Balkans, Caucasus and Middle East. · Security: As a reliable NATO ally, Turkey’s membership will consolidate both the military and the civilian aspects of the Common Foreign and Security Policy. A European Union including Turkey will be more efficient in tackling political problems and crises among which threats from undemocratic regimes, terrorism, illegal immigration and trafficking in drugs, arms, human beings… <http://www.eupolitix.com/EN/Forums/Turkey+in+Europe/contacts.htm>\ [The EU Budget 2004]
Introduction It is committing another 11bn euros or so to programmes that are starting but will not finish in 2004. So the total level of commitments comes out at 111.3bn euros. Of this, 11.8bn euros (10%) is devoted to spending programmes in the 10 new member states.
Cashflow
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/europe/04/money/html/introduction.stm>
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3750467.stm>
Regional
Aid
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/europe/04/money/html/regional_aid.stm>
Agriculture/Rural Aid
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/europe/04/money/html/agriculture.stm>
Administration
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/europe/04/money/html/administration.stm>
Foreign Aid
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/europe/04/money/html/foreign.stm>
Research
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/europe/04/money/html/research.stm>
Other Spending
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/europe/04/money/html/who_pays_what.stm> Eurosceptics Storm the Citadel
Anti-EU parties had their best results in the latest European Parliament
elections.
UKIP demands Britain's outright withdrawal from the EU. It took 12 seats in the Strasbourg parliament, against 27 for the Conservatives. In Poland, the Catholic, anti-EU League of Polish Families won second place among the parties and 10 seats. Maciej Giertych, one of their leaders, says Poland must quit the EU to enjoy real independence. His group is sworn to stop the birth of a "Federal Republic of Europe". Another band of seven Poles from the Self-Defence of Poland party also oppose Poland's terms of EU accession and the "Brussels system". Small Victories Even in France, the leader of the French "Souverainistes", Philippe de Villiers, held on to three seats for his Movement for France, which rejects both the euro and France's EU membership. Eurosceptics of various colours won small victories elsewhere, too. In the Netherlands, Paul van Buitenen, the "whistle-blower" against EU corruption, won two seats for Transparent Europe. In Austria, ex-journalist Hans Peter Martin won a surprise two seats for his personal list, after he exposed the expense-fiddling of MEPs (Members of the European Parliament). And in Sweden, another new-born Eurosceptic group, the June Movement, captured 3 seats. Extremist Backing A Dane, Jens-Peter Bonde, leads the main Eurosceptic group in the parliament, called "Europe of Democracies and Diversities".
He expects his group to roughly double in size from just 18 to around 40. That would include the Poles, Swedes, the de Villiers' group from France and UKIP. They have more potential allies for their cause among other right-of-centre groups, including the British Conservatives and 9 Czech Civic Democrats, who are likely to sit, officially, with the integrationist Christian Democrats from Germany in the main centre-right grouping.
Loud anti-EU
talk also comes from the political extremes, both the far-left communists and
the far-right National Front of France, which has won eight seats.
But overall, the Euro-critics still face a solid block of about two-thirds of MEPs in the 732-seat parliament, who believe in the motto of the integrationists - an "ever-closer union" for Europe. The EU's political calendar now bristles with dates for the political battle to be engaged. On 17 June, EU leaders will try once more to agree the text of a legally-binding EU constitution. On 20 July, the new European Parliament meets for the first time. Ahead lies the prospect of popular referendums in up to half the EU's 25 member-states, on the constitution and the future of Europe.
The outcome will decide the fate of nations, and of
many of Europe's politicians on both sides of the great debate. The European View
Press review: How the European papers saw the debate over the new
constitution.
Excerpts: Europe's Draft Constitution
The following are excerpts from the draft European Union constitutional treaty, including amendments agreed by EU leaders at a summit in Brussels on 18 June 2004. Preamble ...Drawing inspiration from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe, from which have developed the universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights of the human person, democracy, equality, freedom and the rule of law. Believing that Europe, reunited after bitter experiences, intends to continue along this path of civilisation, progress and prosperity, for the good of all its inhabitants, including the weakest and most deprived... Convinced that, while remaining proud of their own national identities and history, the peoples of Europe are determined to transcend their ancient divisions, and, united in an ever closer fashion, to forge a common destiny, [members of the European Convention... have agreed as follows:] Part 1 - Definition and Objectives of the Union Establishment of the Union: Reflecting the will of the citizens and States of Europe to build a common future, this Constitution establishes the European Union, on which the member states confer competences to attain objectives they have in common. The Union shall co-ordinate the policies by which the member states aim to achieve these objectives, and shall exercise in the Community way the competences they confer on it. The Union shall be open to all European States which respect its values and are committed to promoting them together. The Union's Values: The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, liberty, democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the member states in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between men and women prevail. Relations Between the Union and the Member States: The Union shall respect the equality of member states before the Constitution as well as their national identities, inherent in their fundamental structures, political and constitutional, inclusive of regional and local self-government. It shall respect their essential state functions, including for ensuring the territorial integrity of the state, and for maintaining law and order and safeguarding internal security... Legal Personality: The Union shall have legal personality. Fundamental Rights: The Union shall recognise the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights which constitutes the second part of this constitution... Fundamental Principles: The limits of Union competences are governed by the principle of conferral. The use of Union competences is governed by the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality... Competences not conferred on the Union in the Constitution remain with the Member States... Union Law: The Constitution, and law adopted by the Union's Institutions in exercising competences conferred on it, shall have primacy over the law of the Member States... The Common Foreign and Security Policy: The Union's competence in matters of common foreign and security policy shall cover all areas of foreign policy and all questions relating to the Union's security, including the progressive framing of a common defence policy, which might lead to a common defence. Member states shall actively and unreservedly support the Union's common foreign and security policy in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity and shall comply with the acts adopted by the Union in this area. They shall refrain from action contrary to the Union's interests or likely to impair its effectiveness... The Union's Institutions: European Parliament: The European Parliament shall be composed of representatives of the Union's citizens. They shall not exceed 750 in number. Representation of citizens shall be degressively proportional, with a minimum threshold of six members per member state. No member state shall be allocated more than 96 seats. European Council President: The European Council shall elect its President, by qualified majority, for a term of two and a half years, renewable once... The President of the European Council shall chair it and drive forward its work. In co-operation with the President of the Commission, and on the basis of the work of the General Affairs Council, he shall ensure proper preparation and continuity. He shall endeavour to facilitate cohesion and consensus within the European Council. He shall present a report to the European Parliament after each of its meetings. The President of the European Council shall in that capacity ensure, at his level, the external representation of the Union on issues concerning its Common Foreign and Security Policy, without prejudice to the responsibilities of the Minister for Foreign Affairs. The President of the European Council may not hold a national mandate. The Council of Ministers: ... Except where the Constitution provides otherwise, decisions of the Council shall be taken by qualified majority... Qualified Majority: A qualified majority shall be defined as at least 55% of the members of the council, comprising at least 15 of them and representing member states comprising 65% of the population of the union. The European Commission: The Commission shall consist of a number of members including its President and the Union Minister of Foreign Affairs corresponding to two-thirds of the number of member states, unless the European Council, acting unanimously, decides to alter this figure. They shall be selected among the nationals of the member states on the basis of a system of equal rotation between the member states. The President of the European Commission: Taking into account the elections to the European Parliament and after having held the appropriate consultations, the European Council, acting by a qualified majority, shall propose to the European Parliament a candidate for President of the Commission. This candidate shall be elected by the European Parliament by a majority of its members. If he or she does not obtain the required majority, the European Council, acting by a qualified majority, shall within one month proposed a new candidate, who shall be elected by the European Parliament following the same procedure. The Foreign Minister: The European Council, deciding by qualified majority, with the agreement of the president of the Commission, shall appoint the Union Minister of Foreign Affairs... The Union Minister of Foreign Affairs shall conduct the Union's common foreign and security policy. He or she shall contribute by his or her proposals to the development of that policy, which he or she shall carry out as mandated by the Council. The same shall apply to the common security and defence policy... The Union Minister of Foreign Affairs shall be one of the Vice-Presidents of the Commission. He or she shall ensure the consistency of the Union's external action... In fulfilling his or her mandate, the Union Minister of Foreign Affairs shall be assisted by a European External Action Service. This service shall work in co-operation with the diplomatic services of the member states... Specific Provisions for Implementing Common Foreign and Security Policy: The European Union shall conduct a common foreign and security policy, based on the development of mutual political solidarity among member states, the identification of questions of general interest and the achievement of an ever-increasing degree of convergence of member states' actions. The European Council shall identify the Union's strategic interests and determine the objectives of its common foreign and security policy... Specific Provisions for Implementing the Common Security and Defence Policy: The common security and defence policy shall be an integral part of the common foreign and security policy... [It] shall include the progressive framing of a common Union defence policy. This will lead to a common defence when the European Council, acting unanimously, so decides... If a member state is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other member states shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. This shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States. Commitments and co-operation in this area shall be consistent with commitments under Nato, which, for those states which are members of it, remains the foundation of their collective defence and the forum for its implementation... Part 2 - The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union ... It is necessary to strengthen the protection of fundamental rights in the light of changes in society, social progress and scientific and technological developments, by making those rights more visible in a Charter... Workers and employers, or their respective organisations, have, in accordance with Union law and national laws and practices, the right to negotiate and conclude collective agreements at the appropriate levels and, in cases of conflicts of interest, to take collective action to defend their interests, including strike action... Part 3 - The Policies and Functioning of the Union Fiscal Provisions: A European law or framework law of the Council shall lay down measures for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation provided that such harmonisation is necessary for the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition... Social Policy: ... The Union shall take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion and a high level of education and protection of human health. Policies on Border Checks, Asylum and Immigration: ...The Union shall develop a common policy on asylum and temporary protection with a view to offering appropriate status to any third-country national requiring international protection... Judicial Co-Operation on Criminal Matters: ...In order to combat crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union, a European Law of the Council may establish a European Public Prosecutor's Office from Eurojust... The European Public Prosecutor's Office shall be responsible for investigating, prosecuting and bringing to judgement, where appropriate in liaison with Europol, the perpetrators of, and accomplices in, offences against the Union's financial interests...
What The EU Constitution Says
A constitution for the European Union was agreed in Brussels on 18 June, 2004. The constitution brings together for the first time the many treaties and agreements on which the EU is based. It defines the powers of the EU, stating where it can and act and where the member states retain their right of veto. It also defines the role of the EU institutions.
Powers of The EU What the Constitution Says: The Union is said to be subsidiary to member states and can act only in those areas where "the objectives of the intended action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the member states but can rather... be better achieved at Union level." The principle is established that the Union derives its powers from the member states. What it Means: The idea is to stop the Union from encroaching on the rights of member states other than in areas where the members have given them away. Critics say that the EU can act in so many areas that this clause does not mean much but supporters say it will act as a brake and is an important constitutional principle. Division of Responsibilities What the Constitution Says: The EU already has rights to legislate over external trade and customs policy, the internal market, the monetary policy of countries in the euro zone, agriculture and fisheries and many areas of domestic law including the environment and health and safety at work. The constitution will extend its rights into some new areas, perhaps most importantly into justice policy, especially asylum and immigration. It does away with the old structure of pillars under which some policies came under the EU and some under "inter-governmental" arrangements. What it Means: It means a greater role for the EU in more aspects of life. In some areas, the EU will have exclusive competence, in others a shared competence and in yet more, only supporting role. Decision Making What the Constitution Says: The principle of voting by qualified majority will be generally applied. It is felt that otherwise getting the agreement of all 25 members would be a recipe for inaction. There will however be a veto for members in foreign policy, defence and taxation. And there is to be what's called an "emergency brake" in which a country outvoted on an issue can take its case to the European Council, though it can still be outvoted there. The European Parliament will have an equal say on decisions requiring majority voting. Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) What the Constitution Says: "A qualified majority shall be defined as at least 55% of the members of the Council, comprising at least 15 of them and representing Member States comprising at least 65% of the population of the Union."
What it Means: This system replaces the old one under which countries got specific numbers of votes. There were objections that Spain and Poland had too many votes and this method is felt to represent a fairer balance between large and small countries. The new one will still lead to complicated permutations of voting but the final results of the "double majority" should command more general respect. An amendment does away with a proposed procedure under which the European Council could have changed an area of policy to QMV. Now such a proposal will have to go before national parliaments and if one objects the measure fails. President What the Constitution Says: The European Council, that is the heads of state or government of the member states, "shall elect its President, by qualified majority, for a term of two and a half years, renewable once." The candidate will then have to be approved by the European Parliament. The President will "chair (the Council) and drive its work forward and ensure, at his level, the external representation of the Union." What it Means: This is a new post. At the moment, the Council presidency rotates through the member states every six months, so continuity is lost. The new President will therefore be a permanent figure with much greater influence and symbolism. But since he or she will be subject to the Council, the powers of the post are limited. Foreign Minister What the Constitution Says: "The European Council, deciding by qualified majority, with the agreement of the president of the Commission, shall appoint the Union Minister of Foreign Affairs... [who] shall conduct the Union's common foreign and security policy." What it Means: It sounds grand, but the minister will only be able to speak on the EU's behalf when there is an agreed or common policy, for example over the Middle East roadmap which members have accepted. The post will combine the present roles of the external affairs member of the Commission with the High Representative on foreign policy so it will be more prominent, especially in negotiating trade and aid agreements. The EU is also to set up its diplomatic service, which will strengthen the Minister's hand. Foreign and Defence Policy What the Constitution Says: "The Union shall have competence to define and implement a common foreign and security policy, including the progressive framing of a common defence policy." What it Means: It does not mean that a common foreign or defence policy will be imposed on member states. Each one will retain a right of veto and can go its own way. There is nothing that could stop divisions over Iraq for example. The aim however is to agree on as much as possible. Defence is even more sensitive and has been ring-fenced by references to the primacy of Nato for relevant members. Reform of the Commission What it Says: The Commission, the body which proposes and executes EU laws, "will consist of one national from each Member State" for its first term of five years starting in November 2004. After that it will be slimmed down to "a number of members... corresponding to two thirds of the number of Member States, unless the European Council, acting unanimously, decides to alter this figure." What it Means: As a transitional measure to reduce the fears of small states that they will be ignored, each member state will have a Commissioner (only one each) from November. The idea after five years is to slim down the Commission from 25 to 18 (or one or two more if there are more member states by then). It is felt that the current Commission is too big with not enough jobs to go round. European Parliament What the Constitution Says: The European Parliament is to have powers of "co-decision" with the Council of Ministers for those policies requiring a decision by qualified majority. What it Means:
The European Parliament has over the years acquired real power
and the constitution confirms this. If the parliament does not agree to a
piece of relevant legislation, it will not pass. This idea is to strengthen
democracy because the parliament is the only EU institution in which voters
have a direct say.
What the Constitution Says: It sets out "rights, freedoms and principles." These include a whole list from the right to life and the right to liberty down to the right to strike. What it Means: The Charter is wide-ranging but has to be tested in the courts before its exact status is established. The British government says that rules for interpreting the Charter mean, for example, that national laws on industrial relations will not be affected. Legal Supremacy What the Constitution Says: The EU will for the first time have a "legal personality" and its laws will trump those of national parliaments: "The Constitution and law adopted by the Union institutions in exercising competence conferred upon it by the Constitution shall have primacy over the law of the member states." What it Means: This really just confirms the status quo, which is that if the EU is allowed to legislate in an area of policy, its law will overtake any national laws. Equally in areas where it does not legislate, national law prevails. By having a "legal personality", the EU will be able, as an organisation, to enter into international agreements. The old European Community had this right but the EU as a whole did not so its status in world diplomacy increases. Leaving The EU What the Constitution Says: A new procedure describes how a member would leave the EU: " A member state which decides to withdraw shall notify the Council of its intention... The Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that state, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal." What it Means: It was always the case that a member state could leave by simply repealing its own legislation. Now there is a formal procedure designed to show that the EU is a voluntary association. However a departing member would have to agree terms so there is an implied threat that it would not be that easy. This clause is presumably designed never to be used.
US Under-Secretary, Economic, Business, and
Question: Are there any headline issues at the forthcoming EU-US summit? Alan Larson: This summit will focus on the deep and comprehensive partnership between the European Union and the United States on a range of issues: including security issues like non-proliferation and counter-terrorism; economic issues, like promoting the success of the Doha development agenda and strengthening the Trans-Atlantic marketplace; as well as our cooperation on a range of issues including Iraq and Afghanistan and HIV/Aids. It is important to understand to understand this is a very broad-based relationship. Now, having said that, of course right after the successful discussions on Iraq in the context of the United Nations Security Council resolution, and Sea Island, and the imminent transfer of sovereignty to an Iraqi government, I am sure that Iraq will be a very, very significant topic of discussion among the leaders at this summit. Questions: In terms of the Iraq security challenge, the UN has warned that the situation doe not yet permit the return of its staff, how confident are you about the June 30 handover and a leading role for the UN? Alan Larson: The handover will take place as scheduled, we think that the government is a strong one and will perform well, including in the area of security. We believe that it is going to be important for the entire international community to give support to Iraq as it works to become a free, democratic and prosperous country. We think it will be important for everyone to provide support and assistance to the elections that are going to take place no later than January 31 for next year. We think it is going to be very important for all to join in the economic revitalisation of Iraq and to focus on the priorities that the Iraqi government is setting. We think it is going to be very important for the Iraq to benefit from debt reduction this year, and to have that debt reduction be sufficient to ensure sustainability, taking into account the analysis that has been done by the International Monetary Fund. And it is going to be very important for the multinational force in Iraq to succeed in its mission of helping to restore security – including the protection of the UN. The UN has already been very active through, among other things, the important role that Mr Brahimi has played. Question: Moving on to another international issue, is Europe too willing to turn a blind eye to Iran, amid the ongoing questions over the country’s nuclear programme, and will that be on the agenda? Alan Larson: We look forward to having a strong discussion of the proliferation challenges and will try to expand on the statement that we made last year on the importance of US-EU cooperation against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. It is very, very important for us to have a united approach to Iran in ensuring compliance with the International Atomic Energy Agency’s standards. And I am sure that is one of the things that will be discussed at this summit. Question: On the war against terrorism, how can Europe and the US cooperate more in this area, and could the EU do more to crack down on the financing of terrorist groups and their associates? Alan Larson: I think there is always more to be done in an area as important as the global war on terror. We appreciate very much that we have been able to have a strong cooperative relationship with the European Union. In the area of transportation security we launched a bilateral initiative on transport and border security. We have agreed to share information through Interpol on lost and stolen passports. We have agreed to arrangements on passenger name records that will help each of us better screen passengers for terrorists. And we agreed to arrangements under the Container Security Initiative to enhance the security of sea-borne cargo containers. So there is a very, very strong basis for cooperation. We moved that forward at the G8 summit at Sea Island, a week or two ago, and we look forward to strengthening further our cooperation. The point is, no one in the world is immune form terrorist threats and, since both Europe and the US have been victims of terrorist acts, we have a shared interest in doing everything possible. Question: Moving on to economic affairs, is the EU-US economy becoming more integrated, and in terms of regulation and convergence, what can both sides of the Atlantic do to boost growth? Alan Larson: Certainly our businesses and our economies are becoming very integrated, we have a two-way trade of nearly $500 billion, we have investment in each other’s countries that totals over $1.5 trillion. There is a strong a symbiotic relationship between the EU and US economies. In many areas the convergence of regulatory approaches takes place as result of informal consultations, and informal harmonisation, and that can sometimes be the most effective way to achieve that type of complementing regulatory structures. In other areas, like basic trade rules we have a shared interest in seeing the Doha development agenda come to fruition. And as two of the largest trading entities in the World Trade Organisation we have particular responsibility to get those negotiations back on track. Question: What implications, if any, does a European constitution have for the Trans-Atlantic relationship? Alan Larson: The United States has followed with great interest the process in Europe of developing a constitution. And one indication of that deep interest is that President Bush himself has made a point of asking about it at last years EU-US summit, as well as at the Sea Island summit. Our attitude is that we welcome the enlargement of the European Union to 25 members, this will be our first summit since that has taken place. We have welcomed the progress toward a Europe that is whole and free and at peace with itself. We have welcomed Europe’s move to greater unification. Obviously the details of all this is up to Europeans to work out but we do follow them with very close interest, including at the highest level.
Battle Lines Drawn In New Europe
The European Parliament has elected a new president
in a power-sharing deal between its two most powerful groups. NEW PARLIAMENT [Extract]
Profile: Josep Borrell
The
newly enlarged European parliament has elected Spaniard Josep Borrell as its
president.
Enlarged Parliament Marks Historic Day At last, the big day had arrived. Extra seats had been added, all the translators were in place, most MEPs had turned up ready to take part in that momentous event - the first plenary session of the enlarged parliament in Strasbourg. Most MEPs were in attendance, with 700 present out of a possible 732 members - probably the fullest the chamber is likely to be over the next five years. Even the public gallery was two-thirds full. The especially enlarged hemicycle - with an extra two rows of EU-blue seats at the back of the chamber - was made bigger to accommodate about 160 newbies in Strasbourg. Also in place were the extra translating booths allowing for all 20 languages of the new EU to be translated simultaneously. It was a day of weighty declarations and talk of freedom and solidarity. The oldest member of parliament, Giovanni Berlinguer, a 79-year-old Italian MEP, opened the proceedings with three blows of his hammer. Feminine Colour
He welcomed
members of the new countries and spoke of a reunited Europe based on democracy
and the rule of law - "a Europe of work, of solidarity, of social justice, a
united Europe which promotes integration". Polish MEP Bronislaw Geremek, one of the three candidates to the presidency of the parliament and a renowned European historian as well as a former Polish minister, was moved to quote Martin Luther King: "There is no politics without the initial dream." Francis Wurtz, a French communist MEP and third candidate to the presidency, was the rare voice to sound a note of discord during the proceedings and perhaps one of realism given the recent disappointing result in the European elections. "The image of Europe has become very grey," he said "People cannot find their way in Europe." He pointed, for example, to the way the liberal market "was taking over" or to the support of a number of European countries - including a number of the new member states - for US President George W Bush's war on Iraq. Women MEPs, who represent about a third of the new chamber, threw a spot of colour here and there, particularly the leader of the Green party, Monica Frassoni, whose colourful stripy jacket seemed to match the joy of the day. Old and New The mood was light as MEPs proceeded to vote to elect their new president. A mixture of old and new faces could be spotted - French far-right leader Jean-Marie Le Pen and his daughter Marine, veteran Italian MEP Emma Bonino, Franco-German former May 1968 icon Daniel Cohn-Bendit, as well Polish MEP Malgorzata Maria Handzlik, distinguished by her short crop of red hair. Dutifully, MEPs stood in an orderly queue to cast their ballot in transparent plastic boxes before being called back to their seats by Mr Berlinguer who was the last to cast his own vote, formally closing the ballot. Then the verdict came. Josep Borrell, a Socialist from Spain, was elected by an absolute majority in the first round by 388 votes against 208 votes to Mr Geremek and 51 votes to Mr Wurtz - although in his impatience to congratulate the new president, Mr Berlinguer almost forgot to announce the result for Mr Wurtz. The 57-year-old economics academic, born to a family of bakers in a small village in the Catalan Pyrenees, was active in the Socialist government of Felipe Gonzalez in Spain. He also sat on the convention that drafted the European Constitution. Because of a back-room deal between the centre-right EPP party and the Socialists, Mr Borrell was a shoe-in for the job - although many members voted for Mr Geremek to express their discontent with the way European politics is conducted, observers say. Mr Borrell is expected to be succeeded by Hans-Gert Poettering, the current leader of the EPP group in the second half of the legislative period of the current parliament which will sit till 2009. Mr Borrell promised to conduct detailed consultation with leaders of political groups to form a consensus view of opinions in parliament, and promised to follow in particular the debate on the European constitution, especially in the countries which plan to hold referendums on the matter.
Alexandra Fouché, BBC News Online, European Parliament, Strasbourg, 20 July 2004 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3911165.stm> Q&A: European Elections
The
first European election since the enlargement of the European Union to 25
states took place on 10-13 June.
How Many MEPs does Each Country Elect? This varies according to the size of the country. Germany, the biggest country in the EU, has 99, while Malta, the smallest, has only five at present. Smaller countries generally have more seats per head of population: Luxembourg has one MEP per 76,000 people, whereas the UK has one MEP per 760,000 people. Do MEPs Represent their National Party or a European Party? MEPs often represent both a national party (such as the German Christian Democratic Union or the French Socialist Party) and a European party (such as the European People's Party or the Party of European Socialists).
Some MEPs (such as British Conservatives) only belong to a
national party - but even then, they are nearly always a member of one of the
assembly's parliamentary groups. Groups vote as a united bloc when they can,
and have whips whose job is to promote group discipline.
[The Fifth Enlargement]
“The political significance of this enlargement for Europe and its people is, without any doubt, momentous. The objective is nothing less than to create a Europe that is free, democratic and peaceful. The whole of Europe, and not only part of it.” EU Enlargement Commissioner Günter Verheugen, September 25, 2003, Tokyo.
Source: European Commission Services;
Eurostat
(EU Statistical Office)
On May 1, 2004, the European Union enlarged to twenty-five member countries, a momentous achievement that signalled Europe’s unification after fifty years of division, while simultaneously creating a new political order that for the first time in contemporary history is based on common values and a shared desire to construct a space of security and peace. This enlargement can be compared with the historic foundation of the European Union and its institutions in the 1950s, not only in dimension—it is the first time that ten nations joined the EU simultaneously—but also in its political impact. Indeed, this process has led to a profound transformation in the political, economic and judicial systems of these nations. This “fifth enlargement,” the largest in EU history, continues past May 1, 2004, to include Bulgarian and Romanian accession, anticipated for 2007. By the end of 2004, the European Council will decide whether Turkey is ready to begin accession negotiations. On June 18, 2004, the European Council accepted Croatia as a candidate country. On March 22, 2004, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) applied for EU membership.) Previous enlargements occurred in 1973 (Denmark, Ireland, the United Kingdom), 1981 (Greece), 1986 (Spain, Portugal) and 1995 (Austria, Finland, Sweden). From the Baltics to the Mediterranean, the eight Eastern European and two Mediterranean countries augment the EU’s population to over 455 million, its territory to 3.9 million square kilometers and its official languages from eleven to twenty. In comparison, the United States has a population of over 293 million with a territory of 9.4 million square kilometers and English as the common, if not official, language.
Source: European Commission Services; Eurostat (EU Statistical Office)
Applicant countries must fulfill the following conditions for EU membership: · democracy, the rule of law, human rights, respect for minorities; · a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competitive pressures; · the ability to take on the obligations of membership (in other words, to apply effectively the EU’s rules and policies—the acquis communautaire). For further background on enlargement, please see: <http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/enlargement/index_en.htm >
“After the Second World War our aim was to create peace through prosperity and economic integration. And we have succeeded…A more dynamic Europe will...be to the benefit of us all—on both sides of the Atlantic." European Commission President Prodi, Economic Club of New York, November 3 2003.
Enlargement and Transatlantic Relations—Political Rewards "I applaud the action by the European Union (EU) to welcome into their membership ten new countries from Central Europe and the Mediterranean. This enlargement will bring opportunity and hope to millions of Europeans. Along with NATO's expansion, the EU's enlargement further unites the new and the established democracies of Europe, and helps create a Europe whole, free, and at peace. We welcome the prospect of further enlargement of the EU to qualified countries, including Romania and Bulgaria, and we support Turkey's European Union aspirations. "This new European Union will more effectively play its essential role as a force for democracy, prosperity, and stability. This action strengthens the enduring partnership between the United States and Europe, and marks a major advance for the common values and purposes of our transatlantic community." Statement on EU Enlargement, Statement by the [US] President [George W. Bush], May 3, 2004. After generations in which internal conflict in Europe posed one of the most serious security threats to the United States, the Western alliance and world peace, the unification of Europe by consent is a major strategic prize for the US as well as Europe. EU enlargement ensures that the democratic transition in Central and Eastern Europe is irreversible. Projecting security and political stability east and south, the EU serves not only its own security and geopolitical interests, but those of the United States too. EU accession for Cyprus and the prospect of eventual accession for Turkey are also contributing significantly to the easing and possible resolution of disputes in the Eastern Mediterranean, a longstanding security concern for both Europe and the US. Also, since the political criteria of EU accession require candidate states to resolve border conflicts and ethnic disputes and to adopt acceptable policies on the treatment of minority communities, enlargement entails the removal of longstanding sources of instability in Central and Eastern Europe, further serving the strategic interests of Europe and North America. The enlarged EU will enable Europe to become an even more effective international partner of the US in tackling regional and global problems of mutual concern, from stabilizing the Balkans and the Caucasus to dealing with instability in the wider Middle East and beyond, and tackling terrorism and international crime. “My nation welcomes the consolidation of European unity, and the stability it brings. We |
