EU has a constitution

By Bruno Waterfield, updated 23.30 - 18th June 2004

---

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 diffrent 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.