Reforming the EU's institutions before enlargement
by Anthony Manduca
Last week's European Union summit in Helsinki agreed to conclude the EU's Intergovernmental Conference by December 2000 under the French presidency. The summit also pledged that individual member Sates would ratify the results of the IGC by 2002, thus paving the way for enlargement to take place from 2002 onwards. The IGC is important for Malta for two main reasons: without its successful conclusion and ratification, no enlargement can take place, and the reform of the EU's institutions, such as the Commission, the weighting of votes in the European Council and the possible extension of qualified majority voting, will change the nature of the EU, which Malta hopes to join soon. The presidency conclusions of the Helsinki summit says that the presidency (Portugal for the first half of 2000 and France in the second half), will take the necessary steps to ensure that candidate States, such as Malta, are regularly briefed within existing fora on the progress of discussions and have the opportunity to put their points of view on matters under discussion.
An EU presidency report entitled "Options for the Intergovernmental Conference" was presented at the Helsinki summit. The report says that the presidency's consultations have highlighted consensus on three clear ambitions for the IGC:
First, the agenda of the IGC should be focused on the institutional reforms necessary for enlargement. The Conference should endeavour to undertake comprehensive and lasting institutional reforms so that the Union is able to increase its membership to include all the States involved in the enlargement process.
Secondly, the Conference should work towards a balanced outcome which can be politically defended. The results should be understandable to and acceptable also by the public in the member States.
Thirdly the Conference should finish its work by the end of 2000, given the importance of maintaining momentum in the enlargement process.
The report then gives the various options that are being considered for the issues that have to be tackled, namely the size and composition of the Commission, the re-weighting of votes in the Council and the possible extension of qualified majority voting.
The size and composition of the Commission
There are two basic options which have emerged in the consultations.
The first option is a college consisting of one national from each member State. This is considered by some to be the best way of ensuring the Commission's legitimacy.
The second option is a Commission consisting of a limited and fixed number of members, which would result in a Commission with fewer members than member States. This is considered by some to be the best way of enabling it to fulfil effectively its functions as a College. The report says that based on these consultations, the overwhelming view is that there should be one national from each member State in the Commission.
It is therefore very likely that Malta will be able to nominate a Commissioner once it joins the European Union and its representation in the Commission will be equal to that of any country. At the moment the five large countries of the EU, namely France, Germany, Spain, Britain and Italy, each nominate two Commissioners, while the other countries nominate one Commissioner.
The weighting of votes in the Council
The original weightings allocated to each Council member were constructed to reflect respective population size and a balance between groupings of larger, medium and smaller member States. With each successive enlargement, the new member State or States have been slotted into categories following the same principle.
The threshold for attaining a qualified majority has remained largely unchanged at around 71 per cent of total votes. The report says that there is widespread support for finding an acceptable outcome on this issue on the basis of a system which is simple, transparent and does not give rights to further adjustments in the course of the process of enlargement. An acknowledged link exists between the changes to be made in the size and composition of the Commission and the weighting of votes in the Council.
The options being considered are:
A reweighting of votes
Introducing a so-called dual majority system (that is, an agreed majority of both votes and population).
The report says that in the consultations, very broad support has emerged in favour of the option of reweighting of votes. In addition, the need for any change in the Qualified Majority Voting threshold in relation to enlargement should be examined.
It is therefore likely that the larger countries will be given more votes in the European Council at the expense of the smaller countries, and Malta will probably have less votes in the Council that it would have if it was an EU member today.
Possible extension of Qualified Majority Voting
The issue at stake is how much further should QMV be extended in view of EU enlargement in order to preserve the efficiency of Council decision-making. Two points have emerged:
Qualified Majority voting is the key to efficient decision making.
Even in an enlarged Union, a number of issues will remain subject to unanimous decision-making.
The report says that in the consultations, a broad degree of preparedness was expressed for extending QMV with the prospect of enlargement. The presidency has suggested the following areas where sound arguments exist for considering the extension of QMV:
Provisions in closely related areas of Community policy where QMV already applies, such as the single market, the community budget or external economic relations.
Provisions contained in articles which, as such, cannot be subject in their totality to QMV, although it might be possible to envisage QMV for certain matters within these articles if they are specified in greater detail.
Provisions on visas, asylum and other policies related to the free movement of persons for which the Treaty of Amsterdam envisages passage to QMV.
Provisions regarding certain appointments to the institutions so that they can proceed more smoothly after enlargement.
Provisions which constitute so-called institutional "anomalies" such as those where co-decision is coupled with unanimity in the Council.
It is therefore clear from the report that the national veto will remain in place for certain policy areas, although it will probably be further limited. Malta will therefore still retain the right to a veto, when it joins the EU.
| 
