Convention broadly supports draft EU constitution
By Honor Mahony
Although they had little over an hour to debate the draft outline for a future EU constitution on Tuesday, Convention delegates were welcoming of the "skeletal" proposal as a start-off point. However, as soon as the details of the outline were examined, criticisms were raised.
Asked by Convention president Valéry Giscard d'Estaing to just debate the "structure," it was clear to all delegates that the task ahead, "putting the flesh on the bones" as several speakers put it, was where the difficulties would lie.
An intergovernmental leaning?
Join EUobserver today
Get the EU news that really matters
Instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.
Choose your plan
... or subscribe as a group
Already a member?
It was those who want a more federal EU who voiced the most concerns. Elmar Brok, conservative MEP, spoke of the "intergovernmental" nature of the treaty which he said "could be circumnavigated if we so desire." He was backed up by fellow EPP member Hanja Maij-Weggen who said "there is too much intergovernmentalism in this treaty."
Similarly, concerned about the draft constitution's reference to a Council President and a European Council President as well as a Commission President, several delegates pointed out the need to strengthen all the institutions and not just the Council.
Mr Gijs de Vries, the Dutch government representative, said that "we do not need a more intergovernmental union" and called for a maintaining of the "balance" among the institutions and "strengthening" each one. Dick Roche, his Irish counterpart, made exactly the same plea and wondered at the necessity of both a Council president as well as European Council president. Peter Hain, the UK government representative, also called for a "strengthening of each institution."
Eurosceptics also concerned
For some, however, the document was too federalist. David Heath-Coat Amory, a UK conservative MEP called it a "very dangerous document indeed." He said that it would take power away from voters.
Presidium to forge compromise on institutional issues
Klaus Hänsch, presidium member and therefore privy to the drawing up of the draft reminded delegates that "nothing was set in stone." Referring to the sensitive issue of institutional layout in a future EU treaty, Mr Giscard said this would have to be debated "in plenary." It would then be up to the presidium to forge a compromise.
Later he went on to express his support for the council having a president: "Why shouldn't it have a single president?" The rotating presidency, whereby member states head the council on a six-month basis, is "not constructive or realistic," added the Convention chairman.
Lengthy debate not very constructive
Although not many delegates had aired their views, Mr Giscard said a "lengthy debate over the architecture would not be very constructive." Reminding convention members that an early outline had been drawn up at their behest, he said that when the rest of the working groups had submitted their views, there will be a "new outline" - most likely at the beginning of next year. He summed up by saying the outline had received a "very encouraging response" although there were "obviously lots of outstanding issues."