"The seat in Strasbourg belongs to the treaty. Parliament has stayed in Strasbourg for a long time and it represents German and French reconciliation and European unity. It makes sense to stay in Strasbourg," the contact told EUobserver.

The Strasbourg seat has long divided MEPs, some of whom believe that the monthly trek to the Alsatian capital is a waste of time and tax payers' money.

Built at huge cost in the 1990s, the Strasbourg parliament is used just 12 times a year, but some MEPs believe that a deal to place the institute in Strasbourg could be a way of axing the EU parliament’s seat there without offending French pride.

"We have never previously offered Strasbourg or the French government something tangible to replace the European Parliament," said German MEP Jorgo Chatzimarkakis.

"Now we have something to offer. The people of Strasbourg would welcome being at the crossroads of worldwide scientific research and innovation. This would dramatically change the image of Strasbourg," added Mr Chatzimarkakis.

Other MEPs are also taken with the idea.

"Then we MEPs could stop meeting there [Strasbourg] and the money saved could help pay for the institute!" said British conservative MEP Giles Chichester, when the idea for an EU technology institute was launched.

But education commissioner Jan Figel has rejected the proposal.

"This institute is definitely not going to be an instrument to solve the problem of the two sites of the European Parliament," he told EUobserver.

France has a veto over any plan to move the site of the parliament under a deal agreed in 1992. Since then, it has resisted all attempts to shift Strasbourg, seeing the matter as one of national prestige.

It is estimated that the parliamentary sessions in Strasbourg, which take up around one week each month, cost the European taxpayer €200 million.