ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ

The treaty's new clothes

• Mark Mardell
• 7 Sep 07, 05:42 PM

I’m going abandon my objective approach above and say fervently that I wish all European Union meetings were held like this. Not just because it’s a sunny day in a pretty town, but because an incredibly informal walkabout by the foreign ministers gave such wonderful access.

So much better and simpler than standing around in a crush at the VIP entrance of building in Brussels.

The French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, played to the gallery, kissing a woman kitted out in Portuguese national dress, after shaking hands with the Portuguese foreign minister. The ministers watched from a balcony as the local music school band played the .

I asked a number of them whether the was just the constitution in drag, and got replies tailored to each minister's own national audience.

For instance, in Luxembourg on the old constitution, so Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn told me: "That is a very British question. The most important thing is we have a treaty. Not the form but in the basis, the substance we are not far away from the constitutional treaty. All the important things for Britain and for the European Union are in this treaty."

In France they , so Mr Kouchner said: "No, one is shorter than the other, one is a constitution and the other is a treaty." So will they have another referendum? He laughs. "No, not now. We'll go through the parliament."

The Portuguese foreign minister said: "What a question!" But then, he’s chairing all these meetings and wants no trouble.

In Austria, the government was enthusiastic about the constitution, so Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik answered the same question in this way: "We have slimmed it down. It has undergone a diet. But for Austria it was important to keep the essence, to keep the institutional side of it intact, and also to keep the . This is the essence, and we were able to safeguard that."

In Poland, there were more concerns about the constitution, and the government won new concessions in the treaty, so Anna Fotyga said: "Absolutely not. We have gone much further and got a good outcome."

I asked her about the worries I mentioned before, about the Poles derailing the timetable. After making the point that the election date was not certain, she said: "There is no reason to think so. We are pretty united about the mandate we are able to discuss, and the government still has a mandate to act."

The British foreign secretary said: "The prime minister and I have both made this very, very clear - that the constitutional treaty has been abandoned... This is a treaty to make the European Union's institutions work better, and in line with all precedent it should be considered by Parliament.

"That is the right way of doing it, rather than referendum. Politicians of all parties are saying they want Parliament to play a bigger role in British national life, and here's an opportunity for Parliament to play that role."

When I asked if it was basically the same as the old constitution, he said, "It's completely different. This is not a new constitution for Europe, it's some institutional reforms."

• Permalink
• Comments

Tricky treaty timing

• Mark Mardell
• 7 Sep 07, 10:48 AM

Could a Polish poll upset the timetable for the European reform treaty? While the campaign for a referendum in Britain gathers pace with the launch of a Poland’s political turmoil could upset the plans to have the new treaty signed off in October.

The Portuguese are pretty desperate for the presidents and prime ministers of the EU’s 27 countries to agree the deal then in Portugal rather than in December in Brussels. (No-one particularly wants a Treaty of Brussels.) The date for a Polish general election should be announced any day now and there’s a strong possibility it will be just a couple of days after the intended big meeting on 18 October, which will be Gordon Brown’s first as prime minister.

There’s perhaps a problem for any government signing up to a major international treaty just days before it might lose office, but that isn’t the real worry. The concern among governments here is that the , which is of a nationalist bent, will either make new demands to look tough or simply ask for the deal to be put off to the December summit in the Belgian capital.

I am at a in Portugal. It’s what’s known as an β€œinformal” because originally these were intended as a chance for ministers to chew the fat in a relaxed location without an agenda. Now it just means no official decisions are taken.

There’s one other big difference: β€œinformals” are held in the country holding the presidency. Time was when all major summits were also held in the nation states but that ended a couple of years ago. Now it’s only two summits a year and these informal meetings. All the rest are held in Brussels rather than at an impressive castle or rather less impressive exhibition centre.

The reason is obvious, that the EU wants to avoid giving the impression that it’s wasting money and paying for a junket. From a media point of view, it is certainly cheaper and much, much easier to operate from a home base than lug equipment half way across Europe and set up mobile studios and the like. The support staff from Brussels doubtless have an easier time of it as well, for similar reasons.

But I wonder if something is lost, at least from the view of those trying to promote the EU? I doubt the Portuguese people will be overly impressed by 27 foreign ministers and their staff descending on a seaside town in the north of the country. Certainly, driving from Oporto I wasn’t particularly endeared to the whole concept when I was forced out of the fast lane by police motor cyclists, lights flashing, ahead of a convoy of cars containing, presumably, some foreign minister, trailed by a minibus of support staff.

But it does make the point that the EU is made up of member states, whereas having all the meetings in Brussels makes it look like an organisation run from the centre.

• Permalink
• Comments