Why this talk of a rift between Paris and Berlin? C’est une exagération!

Date: 22/02/01

When French minister Pierre Moscovici outlined his vision for the future of Europe earlier this month, many observers were looking for signs of something else: a split between the EU's two largest countries. Moscovici tells Simon Taylor that reports of a rift are wide of the mark

PIERRE Moscovici looks like - and has the reputation of being - a smooth operator.

But as he sits in his functional office overlooking the Seine on the Quai d'Orsay, it's clear that the French European affairs minister is more than a little non-plussed about the reaction to his recent speech to the Franco-German Institute in Ludwigsburg.

His remarks were widely seen as a response to German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer's call for increased European integration after public differences between the two countries emerged during talks on the Nice Treaty and in farm policy negotiations.

Moscovici draws a breath before trying to put that myth to rest. All the reports suggesting that Paris' relationship with Berlin is on the rocks and that his speech was an olive branch are well wide of the mark, he suggests.

"Franco-German divergences have been exaggerated," he shrugs. "It is true that in the IGC we did not have identical positions, any more than we did in the Agenda 2000 negotiations."

Indeed, Moscovici argues that the Franco-German relationship remains "absolutely vital".

He notes that Paris had promised six months ago to respond to Fischer's speech on the future of Europe once its EU presidency was finished.

"We had to think about a French vision on the future of Europe taking into account German concerns. That was the spirit of the Ludwigsburg speech," Moscovici claims. "[It was about] how to get to the point of thinking in terms of an enlarged Europe, and the subjects which we have in common with Mr Fischer."

But despite the attempts to bring the two sides closer together, it is clear that France and Germany do have different views on key aspects of the post-Nice agenda. For example, Paris does not seem to share Berlin's enthusiasm for a European constitution. Moscovici says he thinks it is essential to clarify what it would look like. "I am the first to welcome a constitution for Europe without restrictions," he explains. "I agree that the Charter [of Fundamental Rights] which was agreed at Nice should be a preamble."

But he stresses that even the word constitution is open to very different meanings. "To take an example from the political debate in France of a politician like [François] Bayrou who is from a centrist, federalist party. For him a constitution is the transfer of almost all competences to the European Union. Others like [Alain] Juppé and [Jacques] Toubon, who are friends of [President Jacques] Chirac, propose a constitution which is practically intergovernmental.

"A constitution, yes, but you need to choose what type of constitution is at stake. I think we need to have this fundamental debate."

The minister also denies that Paris is nervous about German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder's call to clarify how power should be shared among EU, national and regional authorities.

"That's not true," Moscovici said. "The Chancellor asked for that in the Nice conclusions and we accepted that this would be among the four subjects which will be the subject of reflection."

But he rejects suggestions that France believes the initiative could lead to a watering down of the EU's powers. "I think that the Europe of tomorrow will develop above all shared competences, shared powers between Europe, the member states and the regions. I don't believe that you can say that there will be a movement downwards or a movement upwards. It's a movement which will pull [in both directions]."

Moscovici is also pushing for a new 'Super Council' made up of European affairs ministers - and thinks it should be set up quickly to help prepare for the next IGC. "It should be tomorrow morning as far as I am concerned," he said. "It's not just a question of the big negotiations. It's question of current problems."

He argues that General Affairs Council meetings have become increasingly dominated by foreign policy and defence issues, preventing ministers from focusing on Community affairs.

"That's why I think, like Jacques Delors, that you have to cut the General Affairs Council in two in such a way that the Council continues to be effective in both areas. It's a reform we should have had years ago. The more we delay, the more powerless we will make the Council and the more complicated the task of the European Council."

Moscovici denies that his plan flies in the face of UK Prime Minister Tony Blair's proposal to put more emphasis on summiteering. "There is no contradiction," he says. "The European Council is the decision-making body of heads of state and government which decides the strategic priorities. It's the Council which settles big negotiations, it's the [European] Council which takes the big decisions which have to be followed by the Council [of Ministers]. The Council [of Ministers] is the day-to-day decision-making body of the European Union."

Moscovici also wants to boost the Commission's legitimacy by directly electing its chief executives. "The President of the Commission should be the leader of one of the coalitions of parties running in the European Parliament elections," he says. "This would have the double advantage of politicising the European elections and making the President more responsible and more legitimate."

Turning to the challenges ahead for the EU, Moscovici rejects suggestions that Paris will try to block efforts by Farm Commissioner Franz Fischler to reform the Union's agricultural policy in 2002. "That is not true," he insists. "France proposed a substantial reform in Berlin: the introduction of modulation of aids based on the size of farm holdings; a second pillar of farm policy - rural development - based on sustainable agriculture; and an agriculture of quality.

"We were never closed to reform. On the contrary, we were the precursors of a socially-orientated reform."

Moscovici says that in the light of recent events - a reference to the mad cow disease crisis - "the emphasis of this reform is the order of the day". But he stressed that there could be no change in the EU's budget limits agreed at Berlin in 1999. "One should adapt and reorientate [policy], but France will not accept a review of the financial perspective."

He confirmed that Paris would stick to its reform vision when Fischler tables new proposals next year. "We still have the same ideas," he smiled, adding that the changes suggested by Schröder and his Green farm minister, Renate Künast, would be compatible "with those of a minister concerned about the environment".

Major interview with Pierre Moscovici, France's European Affairs Minister. When French minister, Pierre Moscovici, outlined his vision for the future of Europe in February 2001, many observers were looking for signs of something else: a split beween the EU's two largest countries.