By Bruno Waterfield - 17th June 2004
Bertie Ahern has tabled ideas aimed at breaking Europe’s constitution deadlock “without being straitjacketed by text”.
The Irish leader – currently sitting in the EU’s rotating presidency hot seat – has circulated a discussion paper to tackle Europe’s fundamental issues.
Voting strengths at the EU’s key decision-making body, the council of ministers, the size of the European Commission and a country’s minimum number of MEPs form the core of Ahern’s strategy.
“This nexus remains absolutely critical,” said an Irish diplomat. “The institutional issues remain at the heart of the matter.”
Also among the tough issues to be resolved by Europe’s leaders are questions over Brussels budget policing powers and the legal clout of the EU Charter of Fundamental rights.
Numerical power
A December summit collapsed amid bitter rows over proposals to reform EU voting rights.
Spain and Poland came out fighting to preserve the existing EU Nice Treaty deal that allows both countries to punch above their population weight in key votes of ministers.
Madrid and Warsaw have both softened a hard-line stance over the method used to calculate votes but are still holding out for a percentage deal that benefits both.
Ahern is sticking to the principle of ‘double majority’ – a majority of ministers and a majority of the EU’s population - but despite agreement on the principle the numbers are yet to be crunched.
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.
In the aftermath of low turnout at European elections the mission to make EU decision-making clearer and to bring an enlarged Europe closer to its 450 million citizens has assumed a greater imperative.
Double but not simple
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.
“The presidency… believes that the new system must have due regard to balance among all member states,” states the discussion paper.
“It considers that a requirement that a blocking minority should not be possible without the participation of at least four member states would contribute to this.”
Commission cuts
Ahern’s plans to cut the size of the European Commission have been criticised by Austria, Denmark and Greece – and backed by France, Germany, Spain, Belgium and Britain.
Constitution plans to reduce the number of places at the EU executive's table are also meeting resistance from new European members.
Paris, Berlin, Madrid, Brussels and London have used constitution negotiations to mount a “strong plea for collegiality”.
Diplomats backing cuts to commissioner numbers are stressing that the EU executive represents the “general interest” – unlike the council of ministers which represents national governments.
Other capitals – and the commission – are pushing for a ‘one EU executive for each EU member state’ principle to be maintained.
The proposals tabled by the Irish EU presidency will cut places at the European Commission table after 2014.
If agreed, a new constitutional blueprint for Europe’s institutions will set commission places equal to two thirds of member states or 15 to 18 places.
The latest move was heralded at last year’s constitution talks in Naples where agreement was found to keep a fully-fledged commission with the “door open” for future changes after 2014.
The compromise is aimed at soothing new European countries concerned at losing their voice in Brussels in 2009; just one commission term into EU membership.
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.