All to play for in treaty review

Date: 16/11/1995

Much of the coverage of the latest report by the Reflection Group charged with preparing the ground for the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) has emphasised what has not been agreed, rather than what has.

But it would be wrong to conclude, as some commentators have done, that the course of next year's IGC has therefore already been predetermined and that it will fail to result in radical reforms which will make a substantial difference to the way the EU operates.

Reflection Group members have apparently expressed frustration at the tight leash imposed on them by national governments, restrictions which have contributed to the uncontroversial nature of Reflection Group chairman Carlos Westendorp's draft report.

But moves are already underway behind the scenes to sharpen the thrust of the report before it is presented to EU leaders at the Madrid summit next month. Whether those in favour of a blunter approach succeed or fail in their attempts to toughen up its wording, that is not the end of the matter.

It should be remembered that the report circulated this week is intended as a factual description of how representatives are lining up on key issues. A political statement to be attached to the report when it goes to Madrid has yet to be finalised and it is that which is designed to set the tone of the debate.

Those experienced in the ways of EU decision-making also know full well that the parties to any negotiation rarely reveal their hand until the eleventh hour. Premature disclosure of their plans at too early a stage in the game risks antagonising potential opponents unnecessarily and gives them time to rally support for any blocking moves they may be contemplating.

Germany and France, in particular, also know they must avoid giving the impression that the EU's two most influential players have “stitched up” bilateral deals ahead of time in order to railroad other member states into accepting their proposals.

But there are increasing signs that, despite initial German concern over French President Jacques Chirac's attitude towards Europe, the two countries which have served as the driving force behind previous moves towards closer integration are beginning to move towards a common agenda for 1996.

Eurosceptics everywhere, and the UK government in particular, are bound to seize on the Reflection Group's report as a sign that, in the words of a recent British minister fond of claiming the argument in Europe was moving the UK's way, the rest of the EU “is singing our song”.

UK Prime Minister John Major's government would be wise to avoid such a complacent approach. There may be caution over the best approach, and doubts about the wisdom of moving too far, too fast after the turmoil which followed the signature of the Maastricht Treaty. But other member states determined to continue steering Europe towards closer union will not be stopped so easily.