The Main Issues On The Agenda
Description
This article is from the European Union FAQ, by Roland Siebelink & Bart Schelfhout with numerous contributions by others.
The Main Issues On The Agenda
In its issue of 21-27 March 1996, the deputy editor of the weekly newspaper
European Voice, Rory Watson, put forward a list of the main issues on the
agenda for the Intergovernmental Conference starting at the end of that
week:
Flexibility
Should member states with the will to do so be specifically allowed
to integrate their policies further and faster than their more reluc
tant EU partners? The European Commission, European Parliament, Franc
e, Germany and the Benelux firmly believe the answer must be yes, arg
uing the Union should not be forever bound to advance at the speed of
its slowest members.
To some extent, flexibility already exists. Social policy, a single
currency and the Schengen border-free arrangement all involve fewer
than all 15 member states. But critics fear it could create a permane
nt two-tier Union, with a small cohesive inner core and a looser oute
r group of countries. The practical implications, especially for the
uniform application of EU law, are an even greater obstacle.
Flexibility could apply mainly to defence/security and justice/home
affairs areas, but not to the single market, or to the Union's insti
tutions and basic objectives.
Citizenship
Almost every contribution to the IGC debate has placed citizenship
in pole position. The gesture is more symbolic than substantive, brin
ging under one heading principles already in the treaty such as free
movement and non-discrimination. Of greater interest to non-governmen
tal organisations is closer involvement in the EU's decision-making p
rocess.
Instead of +citizenship;, talk is now moving towards bringing the U
nion closer to its citizens. Achieving that involves simplifying the
treaties, increasing the transparency of Council of Ministers' meetin
gs when legislation is debated, and strengthening democratic control
by the European and national parliaments.
That, cobmined with guaranteed access to documentation would, says
supporters, enable people to know and influence what is going on, and
rekindle public confidence in the EU.
Common Foreign and Security Policy
By common agreement, this is one of the major disappointments of th
e Maastricht Treaty. But recipes for achieving a respectable CFSP dif
fer.
Some argue that the basic structure is sound and is only prevented
from operating by the almost insurmountable hurdle presented by the r
equirement for unanimity. But the dominant view that more majority vo
ting is required is opposed by the UK in particular. It argues that i
ssues so close to the heart of national sovereignty demand unanimity.
Talk will focus on diplomatic techniques such as +constructive abste
ntion; or +unanimity minus one; to skirt round the problem.
There is general agreement on the need to create an analysis unit t
o prepare CFSP strategy. However, there is no consensus on whether a
Mr or Mrs CFSP should be appointed to give the policy an internationa
l personality, on the financing of initiatives taken by some, but not
all, member states, and on the roles of the Commission and Parliamen
t.
Defence
At stake is the relationship between the Union and the defence alli
ance, the Western European Union, whose founding treaty expires in 19
98. The UK wishes to keep the WEU as an autonomous organisation repre
senting the European defence arm of the Atlantic alliance. It is conf
ronted by Franco-German calls for eventual full WEU integration in th
e Union.
The defence debate will also cover the status of neutral members an
d the ability of some Union states to take military action.
It will focus not just on the collective defence of territorial int
egrity, but also on ways of managing regional crises and the Petersbe
rg tasks of humanitarian aid and peacekeeping. There is growing suppo
rt for the Union to develop a European armaments policy. It would ens
ure more effective integration of the industry, establish a consisten
t approach to arms exports and create an armaments agency.
Decision-making
Streamlining is the order of the day for EU decision-making. Over 2
0 separate complex systems are now used to adopt legislation and pres
sure is growing to reduce these to three.
The main battlegrounds will be extending majority voting in the Cou
ncil and equal co-decision powers to the Parliament. Both ideas have
wide-spread support, but are firmly opposed by the UK.
Supporters of change believe maintaining the unanimity requirement
could paralyse a larger Union and prevent future treaty reform. They
also suggest more majority voting would not prevent a country from us
ing the Luxembourg Compromise to veto a proposal if a vital national
interest really was at stake.
Within the Council, attempts will be made to re-weight voting right
s to reflect the size and populations of larger EU countries more acc
urately. In exchange, there may be moves to strengthen the role of th
e Commission and the Parliament to reassure smaller member states.
Employment
Fighting unemployment is near the top of the Union agenda, but only
in the past few months has a head of steam built up to table the iss
ue at the IGC. The initiative to inject a specific employment chapter
to the treaty was launched by Sweden, but now has majority backing i
n the Union.
Swedes believe its presence would give the policy more weight, esta
blishing common objectives and procedures and a joint commitment to o
bserve certain principles in employment policies.
Cynics suggest mechanisms for getting more of the EU's 18 million u
nemployed back to work already exist in the White Paper on Growth, Co
mpetitiveness and Employment. But political reality dictates that EU
governments cannot consider the future without discussing an issue of
the greatest importance to their electorates.
Justice and Home Affairs
Progress in this area has been minimal, yet some of the issues invo
lved--organised crime, terrorism, illegal immigration and drug traffi
cking--have a direct impact on the quality of the daily lives of EU c
itizens. Like the CFSP, progress on improving the overall climate of
security in the face of pan-European threats has been thwarted by the
need for unanimity.
Widespread agreement exists on the need for clear objectives, speci
fic timetables and less complex working methods. Support is growing f
or all the elements involved in crossing external frontiers--arrangem
ents for aliens, immigration policy, asylum and external border contr
ols--to be moved from the intergovernmental to the Community framewor
k.
But given the national sensitivity of these issues, the UK for one
insists that they must remain matters for intergovernmental cooperati
on to be agreed by unanimity.
Source: WATSON (R.) The main issues on the agenda, in: European Voice, 21-27
March 1996, pp16-17.
Continue to:
My Books
