Treaty proposals which fell by the wayside

Date: 26/06/1997

EVERY Intergovernmental Conference has its winners and losers. While EU institutions seek to shift the balance of power in their favour, individual member states use the talks as an opportunity to press the case for particular hobby-horses.

The outcome of the talks proved a major let-down for those who had hoped the new treaty would expand the EU's responsibilities in areas such as civil protection, energy and tourism.

And while the European Commission saw its competition powers eroded in some specific areas, German hopes of stripping the institution of responsibility for vetting company mergers by creating an independent cartel office were dashed.

This, like many other proposals which failed to make their way into the treaty, was already dead before heads of government came together on the eve of the summit.

Believing the Commission was too open to pressure from EU governments, Bonn wanted to create an agency above political influence. It envisaged that the Commission would continue to take decisions on vetting state aids and policing state monopolies, but approvals of company mergers would pass to the new body.

But although negotiators rejected suggestions that an enabling clause allowing for the later creation of such a body should be written into the treaty, the Germans are confident it is only a matter of time.

Bonn was similarly unsuccessful in persuading its Union partners that member states should be allowed to propose changes in the salaries and working conditions of EU officials - currently the responsibility of the Commission alone.

Encouraged to act by disgruntled domestic civil servants feeling the pinch of national austerity measures, Germany had been looking to send out a signal that 'Eurocrats' were not immune to changed economic circumstances in the lead-up to monetary union.

Although the plan found sympathy in some quarters, it failed to generate sufficient support to get off the ground.

Energy and Tourism Commissioner Christos Papoutsis was another who came away from the summit with less than he had been hoping for.

EU governments proved unreceptive to the idea of including a specific chapter on energy in the Amsterdam Treaty and increasing Union responsibility for tourism.

In the wake of its White Paper on energy, the Commission suggested that the diverse strands of policy be brought together under one hat.

Papoutsis argued it was nonsensical to have different goals in three different treaties: Euratom, the European Coal and Steel Community and Maastricht.

He also urged greater coordination between member states, given that the Union is expected to import two-thirds of its energy by 2020.

Despite his assurances that the Commission was “not asking for new powers”, Papoutsis' calls fell on deaf ears.

Tourism was another area where several member states and the Commission had suggested EU policies could be more all-embracing. With the industry accounting for 5.5&percent; of Union gross domestic product and 6&percent; of total EU employment, tourism has eased its way into Union business over the past few years, with several initiatives to boost the sector and ensure fair practice.

But concerns about subsidiarity and doubts about what sort of role the EU could play scotched attempts to take this further.

Italian calls for greater EU cooperation on civil protection also failed to make it beyond the drawing board. Rome and the Commission felt the cross-border nature of floods, earthquakes and other natural disasters made it logical to have a legal undertaking to improve coordination between the emergency services in different member states.

As with so many of the thousands of projects thrown into the melting pot of the latest IGC, this will have to wait for another day.