Finns face Herculean task in drawing up IGC agenda

Date: 02/12/1999

By Gareth Harding

YOU have to pity the Finns, whose six-month presidency of the EU staggers to a close this month.

Drawing up a report reflecting the views of 15 different countries is a difficult enough task on any issue. But when the topic in question happens to be reform of the Union treaties, the task is positively Herculean.

EU governments have spent most of the year talking about what they should be talking about during next year's Intergovern-mental Conference on treaty reform. But the discussions have only served to prove that drawing up an agenda for the IGC is as hard as the treaty negotiations themselves.

At the Cologne summit in June, Union leaders appeared to have ring-fenced the agenda when they concluded that the conference should focus on the three issues left unresolved at the Amsterdam Treaty talks, namely: the reweighting of votes in the Council of Ministers; the extension of qualified majority voting; and reducing the number of European Commissioners in an enlarged Union.

But they also opened up a Pandora's box by agreeing to look at other changes needed to reform Europe's institutions before admitting new members. "The genius of the Cologne formula was that you could interpret it as you liked," says one diplomat.

Most EU member states have chosen to concentrate on the Amsterdam left-overs and have so far refused to entertain the thought of a wide-ranging IGC agenda. However, under intense pressure from the European Parliament and Commission, both of which favour a far-reaching treaty reform, Finland will recommend widening the scope of next year's talks when it formally launches the IGC next weekend.

In an apparent softening of the Council's stance, the presidency will split its report on the talks into two parts. The first will deal with the three issues left unresolved at the end of the last round of treaty negotiations and the second will touch on other institutional questions raised by enlargement.

Finnish European Affairs Minister Kimmo Sasi told MEPs late last month that these would include dividing the treaty into two parts, allowing groups of member states to go it alone on certain controversial issues and reforming the EU's other institutions.

The last of these points is likely to prove uncontroversial as there is a growing recognition that in a Union of 27 countries, it is not only the number of Commissioners that will have to be scaled back but also the number of MEPs and judges in the European Court of Justice.

However, diplomats believe the Commission's proposal to split the treaty into two parts is unlikely to get off the ground. There is also deep-seated suspicion about extending rules on flexibility even further.

Like a priest at a confessional, Finnish Premier Paavo Lipponen has spent the last fortnight listening attentively to the views of EU leaders. But drawing firm conclusions from his 'fireside chats' might prove tricky given the divisions between governments on some issues.

Member states are still split over whether to grant MEPs a bigger role in the talks, how far to extend majority voting in the Council and a host of other matters.

Union officials say they would be "surprised" if EU leaders agreed lengthy conclusions on the IGC at Helsinki because member states are "still so far apart".

However, heads of state and government are likely to take a stance on Parliament's participation in the talks - which is unlikely to flatter the Strasbourg-based assembly - and sketch out a timetable for next year's negotiations.

The real debate on the issues is only expected to begin in February or March after the Commission and Parliament have presented their detailed proposals for change. EU leaders are expected to call for substantial progress to be made by their next summit in June. But Sasi believes that decisions on the crucial issues will ultimately be taken "on the last night, among prime ministers in a closed room".