June 23, 2008
An ingenious UK proposal
With the European Union’s Lisbon treaty in deep trouble, some of the finest minds in Brussels are at work devising solutions to problems of which the general European public is wholly unaware. For example, the size and composition of the European Commission.
If the Lisbon treaty doesn’t come into force next year, the next Commission will have to be selected according to rules set out in the EU’s 2003 treaty of Nice. These state that when the EU has grown to include 27 countries (which it now has), the number of commissioners should be “less than the number of member-states”.
But Nice does not say how EU governments are to achieve the reduction. In the light of Ireland’s No to Lisbon, this gives ample scope for political and bureaucratic deal-making over coming months.
Fear of losing their commissioner played a part in the Irish voters’ rejection of Lisbon, but few seemed to understand that Ireland would be worse off under Nice. Lisbon contained a provision stating that, if all member-states agreed, they could abandon the commitment to reducing the Commission’s size and keep one commissioner per member-state. Before the Irish vote, many in Brussels had quietly assumed this was exactly what would happen after Lisbon took effect. By contrast, Nice has no such provision.
So if the Nice treaty remains in force next year, what can be done? One member-state has already proposed an answer. Cut the Commission in size, as Nice stipulates, but only from 27 to 26 members. Let the country which loses its commissioner take the job of High Representative for foreign policy (at present, Javier Solana of Spain). Let him or her attend Commission meetings. Hey presto! Everyone’s still in the room.
You have to admit, it’s an ingenious proposal. In fact, it’s so ingenious that it almost makes you ask, “Why bother with Lisbon, after all?” Which, of course, cannot possibly have been the question at the back of the mind of the country which floated the proposal … the UK!
Thhere must be an international award (somewhere) for ingenuity: and this has to be front-runner!
Can the genius who thought this one up now come up with an idea for reforming the voting rules in the EU (am I right in understanding this is another Nice pre-requisite to enlargement?)?
Once that’s solved, there are then plenty more “ideas needed” on my list.
Posted by: Derek Tunnicliffe | June 23rd, 2008 at 2:22 pm | Report this commentPerhaps there should be two definitions of ingenuity, one for what you can do despite the objectives of the treaty, and another one for how to make the Commission less unwieldy.
Posted by: Ralf Grahn | June 23rd, 2008 at 2:34 pm | Report this commentOK, my first contribution was in response to what I took to be a joke. If it is a real proposal (which it is, I now understand) then it takes the breath away!
This may be a way of getting Gordon Brown off the hook (?) but will it satisfy the Czechs, or Nicolas Sarkozy (”Lisbon or nothing”)?
For the many EU supporters, like me, who hoped for something better from a Treaty, signed in Lisbon or wherever, this UK botch won’t do.
Posted by: Derek Tunnicliffe | June 23rd, 2008 at 5:37 pm | Report this comment“Why bother with Lisbon?”
Exactly! The EU as it is, is already a dictatorial federal regime. Lisbon backfired, because it has made everyone aware of this fact.
Now, aware of the true nature of the EU, it is Europe’s task to restore democracy within the EU-states, either with a new EU-leadership or without the EU.
More on this and on the question if we have got enough of the EU’s “ingenious” proposals, in the article:
“Is there a democratic life after a dead Lisbon Treaty?”
Posted by: Howard | June 23rd, 2008 at 7:07 pm | Report this commenthttp://www.indymedia.ie/article/88033
If you followed blogs about EU affairs you would see that I had already floated this idea on 15th June, just 2 days after the Irish No. Of course it’s not clear where the UK found the idea…
Posted by: Jon Worth | June 24th, 2008 at 9:51 am | Report this commentThe previous defeat of Nice I in Ireland should have given warning to all. One of the arguements in favour of Nice Referendum II was that like express busses another better one would be along shortly but this would be just a an interm stage. It would appear that in many peoples opinion a better one has not come along and the defecects of Nice are showing up quicker. This begs the question as to why it was run at all.
Posted by: Donal | June 24th, 2008 at 12:02 pm | Report this comment[…] Blog made me very much realise how marginal blogging is to EU affairs. Tony Barber of the FT posted an entry about how the UK has come up with an ingenious proposal to deal with the challenges …. He reckons the fine minds devising solutions are in UKRep. Well, if he had been reading this blog […]
Posted by: Jon Worth » Remind me, why do I blog about the EU? | June 25th, 2008 at 9:54 am | Report this comment