| Author (Person) | Spinant, Dana |
|---|---|
| Series Title | European Voice |
| Series Details | Vol.9, No.35, 23.10.03, p15-16 |
| Publication Date | 23/10/2003 |
| Content Type | News |
|
By Dana Spinant Date: 23/10/03 Belgium and Luxembourg are backing calls by their big neighbours against giving every state in the enlarged Union its own commissioner. Dana Spinant got a sneak view of what they said in the summit minutes THE composition of the European Commission is subject to an increasing power struggle, with several government leaders warning that the future of the institution - seen as the driving force of the European project - may be in jeopardy. Leaders were divided at last week's summit in Brussels over whether the College should be composed of one commissioner per member state or instead be smaller, potentially leaving some countries unrepresented. One prime minister said the stakes could not be higher for the Commission, as the nature of its composition will implicitly determine how much power it wields in an enlarged European Union. "What is at stake is having a Commission that can become this government that [Commission President Romano] Prodi has been talking about, or else be a "bureau" in which member states have representatives, as [French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre] Raffarin has mentioned," he said. "A large Commission cannot be a strong one. For me, it is unbelievable that Prodi supports one commissioner per member state." Every member state, as well as the Commission, is contesting the controversial proposal put forward by the Convention on the EU's future, under which only 15 countries in the enlarged Union would have a commissioner with full voting rights. Under this plan, other member states would only be able to appoint a junior commissioner. Critics of the Convention plan, mainly small and medium-sized countries, argue that it is vital for each member state to be equally represented in the Commission. However, some have broken ranks. Belgium and Luxembourg, for instance, back the position of France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Poland, who warn that a large Commission would be incapable of functioning efficiently. "A Commission with so many people will create disorder, it will never work," Jean-Claude Juncker, the prime minister of Luxembourg, told his colleagues on 16 October, according to the meeting's minutes, seen by European Voice. "There will not be enough work for everybody. All prime ministers know how dangerous it is to have ministers who are not busy enough," he joked. Belgian premier Guy Verhofstadt added fuel to the fire by warning that "the Commission cannot be a Council bis [a second version]. It must respect the general European interest, not the national interest. "For me, the key principle is the egalitarian treatment of member states by the Commission, and not one commissioner per member state. Otherwise, we will end up with a Commission of 40 that cannot function." The leaders of France and Germany, accused of "bullying tactics" by some small member states, have "played a more subtle card", as one diplomat put it, by keeping a low profile during the debate. Jacques Chirac, the French president, declared: "I have nothing to add to the proposals of Jean-Claude Juncker and Guy Verhofstadt, who embody the European culture and experience." Gerhard Schröder, the German chancellor, said nothing on the subject. A Swedish diplomat commented: "It is smart [for France and Germany] to let Belgium and Luxembourg speak for them, to avoid the impression of an argument between big and small states." Reijo Kemppinen, the Commission's spokesman, insisted that anything short of one commissioner per member state is unsatisfactory. "Egalitarian rotation between member states having the right to appoint a full commissioner will not work," he told this paper. "I cannot imagine the French commissioner standing in for Germany in a state-aid case, for the recycling of cans, for instance. We are not there yet," he added. Verhofstadt and Juncker both described the summit as "a bit boring" as it brought forward no fresh arguments on the debate over the institutions. The present deadlock, whereby everybody seems content to endlessly restate their position, should be broken by the presidency coming up with a compromise, they argued. Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, whose country chairs the EU until the end of the year, pledged to table such a proposal in a month's time, ahead of an informal meeting of foreign ministers - and possibly government leaders - in Italy. However, even though officially there was no progress towards an agreement on the Commission composition, the summit pointed to the shape of a likely compromise. "Exit the idea of a two-tier Commission [as proposed by the Convention] and enter the large Commission with one full commissioner per member state," a Spanish official said. "Even if France, Germany and the Benelux countries do not admit it, they will give up on this," he added. No sign of progress was detected on the second front of the intergovernmental conference (IGC) - the system of voting in the Council of Ministers - as Spain and Poland continue to strongly oppose the Convention's proposal to introduce a double majority system. Under this, decisions would be carried if backed by at least 50% of the member states representing 60% of the population. Madrid and Warsaw do not want to give up the more advantageous deal they won through the 2000 Nice Treaty, under which each obtained 27 votes in the Council - only two less than Germany, which has double their population. Spain's Foreign Minister Ana Palacio has previously hinted that Madrid could accept the new deal if the double majority threshold is increased from 60% to 66%. That extra 6% would make Spain's vote more important, diplomats say, as it would allow it to be a key country for forming "blocking coalitions" to prevent the adoption of laws in the Council. However, leaders of five member states have ruled out raising the threshold. Belgium, the Czech Republic, Austria, Latvia and Finland pointed out they would prefer a double majority based on 50% of the member states representing 50% of the Union's population. "Sixty per cent is already a compromise, but there is no way we will go beyond that," Verhofstadt warned his colleagues. The Belgian premier added that he would only contemplate increasing the threshold above 60% if the scope of majority voting was extended to areas on which decisions are still taken by unanimity. Spain has, for the first time since the beginning of the IGC, shown signs of flexibility on this issue, as premier José María Aznar declared that "Nice is not the Bible". Aznar indicated he was ready to discuss alternatives, although he did challenge his colleagues to convince him why a treaty that was negotiated only three years ago now has to be dropped. However, the Polish government is still in a "Nice or death" mood, as one Council of Ministers official put it. "They still do not want to consider any alternative. Here you see the difference between a country that, although it [Spain] defends its national interest aggressively, knows that it must compromise in the end, and another one [Poland] that does not get it." Diplomats say the general mood among EU leaders is that an accord must, and will, be found before the end of the year. "The options are very clear, it is a matter of choice," a Portuguese official said. "Going beyond December will bring no new ideas, no new alternatives. "There is no point in prolonging the negotiation, and they know it." Article looks at the controversial issue of the composition of the future European Commission. |
|
| Related Links |
|
| Subject Categories | Politics and International Relations |
