The World

I always assumed that only a small group of weirdos followed the European Union. However, I have noticed that most-read posts on my blog recently have been the ones about the Lisbon treaty. (Actually, those two statements may not be mutually exclusive).

So, I am encouraged to return to the subject.  I have recieved a response from Wolfgang Munchau, to my question about what exactly it is in Lisbon that he finds so attractive and indispensable.

Let’s start with Wolfgang. He denies my accusation that he is willing to destroy the European Union in order to save it, and writes:

“There is a lot I don’t like in the Lisbon Treaty – for example the
Charter of Fundamental Rights (from a German perspective it is actually
a step backwards. I have more fundamental rights now!). Nor do I care
very much about the council president, and the foreign minister (the
diplomatic service is probably a sensible idea). But the improvements to
enhanced co-operation are quite possibly the most important bit in the
treaty. Enhanced co-operation allows us to circumvent the Maastricht
problem, which left dissenters like Denmark or the UK initially with the
unenviable choice of vetoing it for everybody, or accepting it
against better judgement. Opt-outs have proved to be a very messy and
lengthy way to resolve this conflict.

The new rules of enhanced co-operation will allow projects like EMU or
Schengen to proceed without the need for new treaties (there won’t be
many, if any, post-Lisbon treaties in any case). So I am not at
all proposing to break up the EU. The problem with the Amsterdam/Nice
enhanced co-operation rules is that they have been too onerous, and have
in fact not been used once. So if we were to revert to Nice, the only
way to do something like EMU or Schengen in the future is go outside the
treaty. That would indeed be divisive. For me, this is the main reason
why I support the Lisbon Treaty. It is the best bet we have to keep the
EU together.”

Well, I understand better – even if I don’t agree. Surely the establishment of the euro is precisely proof that groups of EU countries can indeed proceed with big projects – within the current confines of the EU and without the others stopping them? Yes, it is difficult. But maybe it should be.

However, I will concede defeat on one of my other fond hopes – that killing Lisbon kills further institutional debate. Not at all – apparently. The problem, as a British diplomat explained to me this week, is that when the Nice Treaty comes into operation it demands that the size of the European Commission should be reduced to below the current number of member states – 27. But it doesn’t specify how many commissioners there should be. This has to be negotiated.

Disaster. Once you talk about that – you re-open the whole debate: the balance between commission and council, membership of the European Parliament, QMV…etc etc etc. This is truly the debate that will never end.