Information pack on the EU reform treaty (January 2008)

In January 2008, ahead of the first referendum on the Treaty, the Greens held a members conference and produced a balanced information pack bringing together some of the more relevant facts and opinions on the treaty.

A PDF version of the document can be downloaded here (1.8Mb). The web version of the document is available below.

Table of contents:

• Introductions
• Background to the treaty
• The treaty in a nutshell
  Sustainable development, environmental protection, climate change, energy and the charter of fundamental rights
• Key institutional changes
• Foreign and defence policy
• Justice and Home Affairs
• Democratic legitimacy and other issues
• The European Greens and the reform treaty
• The Green Party and European treaties – an overview
• Summary of cases for and against the treaty

Introductions

Introduction by Green Party Leader Minister John Gormley

The Green Party has always engaged fully in debate on the EU over the past 25 years and, regardless of the stance we adopted, we have always seen ourselves as a pro-European party. Now we have an important decision to make on the EU reform treaty – or Treaty of Lisbon as it may become known – and I am appealing to every party member, and the public at large, to engage fully in this process.

This information pack is an effort to prepare the ground for a full and informed debate at our special convention in January. It is designed to identify key facets of the Treaty and is especially framed to help party members and members of the public to find ways of further informing themselves. I believe it is a very objective summary of the treaty.

In the run up to the Party's convention we have an opportunity to show our uniqueness as a party. I urge you all to help produce a full and frank debate which respects the views of all members and also preserves our strong unity of purpose.

Introduction by Senator Deirdre de Búrca

As EU Affairs spokesperson, I am happy that the Green Party is engaging with the forthcoming campaign on the EU reform treaty in the kind of open, democratic way that it has approached all of its major decisions to date. I believe that we are one of the few Irish political parties that have engaged fully over the years with the debate on European integration, and successive EU treaties. In doing so I believe that we have made a significant contribution to the broader political debate surrounding Ireland’s evolving relationship with the European Union.

Our approach to the European reform treaty will reflect the same active engagement as with previous treaties. At a special convention on the reform treaty, which the Party will hold on 19 January 2008, grassroots members will have an opportunity to listen to speakers present arguments both in favour of and against the treaty. Questions and comments from the floor will be encouraged. The aim of the convention is that, following a lively debate, members will be asked to make an informed decision about what position the party should adopt in relation to the reform treaty.

Every member of the party has received this document and, in the weeks leading up the convention, I hope you will find the time to read some of this information. And I hope that you will be able join us on January 19th to participate in the debate that will occur. The Party – and the Irish public – have an important decision to make on the EU reform treaty. I would like to encourage every one of you to be part of making that decision.

Background to the treaty

The road to reform

The Nice Treaty, which paved the way for the enlargement of the EU, did not go far enough in terms of defining voting arrangements in a 25-, and subsequently 27-member bloc. In the Belgian suburb of Laeken in December 2001, heads of state and government committed the EU to improving democracy, transparency and efficiency, and set out the process by which a constitution could be arrived at. The European Convention, headed by former French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, produced the first draft of a constitution based on the consultation of as wide a group of stakeholders as possible – including representatives of heads of state and governments, national parliaments (including John Gormley), regional parliaments, the European Parliament (including Austrian Green Johannes Voggenhuber), the European Commission and social partners. The Convention published its fi nal draft constitutional text in July 2003 and an amended text was agreed upon at the summit meeting on 18-19 June 2004 during Ireland’s presidency of the EU.

The constitution was signed in Rome on 29 October 2004 and ratifi ed by a majority of member states, but then rejected by voters in France and the Netherlands over the last weekend of May 2005. This led to what was optimistically described as a ‘period of reflection’ on the reform process.

Under the German Presidency of the EU, member states adopted the ‘Berlin Declaration,’ outlining their intention to agree on a new treaty in time for the 2009 European parliamentary elections. In June this year the European Council agreed upon the foundation of a new treaty to replace the rejected constitution. They mandated the Lisbon intergovernmental conference to produce the text of a ‘reform treaty’ and set a new timeline, which envisaged a fi nal agreement on the text at the European Council in Lisbon in October 2007; the signing of the treaty by heads of state and government in Lisbon on 13 December 2007; and by the end of 2008 the ratification of the treaty by all member states. With no upsets, the EU reform treaty would enter into force on 1 January 2009.

The reform treaty is on course to be signed by An Taoiseach, and 26 other heads of state and government, in Portugal on 13 December 2007. It is due for ratification in all member states next year. At the time of going to press it is likely that Ireland will be the only country to hold a referendum – probably in May/June of 2008.

The treaty in a nutshell

The treaty seeks to update the European Union’s institutional system and streamline its working
methods.

• It will simplify the qualified majority voting procedure in the Council and expand it to new areas.
• It gives binding legal force to the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
• It establishes the European citizens’ initiative which will create the possibility for a million citizens from different member states to trigger an invitation to the Commission to bring forward new legislative proposals. This was originally proposed by Green Party Leader John Gormley.
• It potentially creates the legal basis for the liberalisation of public services.
• It sets out explicitly the EU’s values and objectives – amongst them dealing with environmental problems and combating climate change.
• It enhances the participation of the European Parliament and national parliaments in the decision- making process.
• The treaty commits the EU to creating a common defence policy if, or when, heads of state unanimously decide to do so.
• It will extend to the EU a single legal personality.
• It gives sustainable development a much higher profile and a clearer definition, including in the EU’s relations with the wider world.
• It will re-categorise and define more clearly the competences of the EU vis-á-vis the member states.
• It will extend the European Parliament’s ‘co-decision’ procedure to put it on an equal footing with the Council as co-legislator.
• It recognises the European Defence Agency, set up by member states in 2004 and pledges to coordinate research and help improve military equipment and arms procurement.
• It will give the European Council a president with a two-and-a-half-year term (renewable once) and create a single representative in charge of foreign policy.
• It will strengthen the role of ‘enhanced cooperation’ to allow sub groups to take action in particular policy areas without all member states having to participate.
• It reaffirms the Union’s commitments to liberalisation and competitive markets.
• It allows certain member states to form a military ‘inner core’ to deepen defence and military cooperation.

Sustainable development, environmental protection, climate change, energy and the charter of fundamental rights

The EU has been the driving force behind the improvements in many aspects of the Irish environment, including air quality and recycling. Common European action has made pan-European environmental protection a reality and the reform treaty will enable European countries with common interests to work more effectively together to meet these pressing challenges.

This is the first time any EU treaty has cited the fight against climate change in its objectives, and this change was inserted at the request of the new Irish Government.

The articles which set out the aims and values of the Union specify that the internal market will work for the sustainable development of Europe including a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment. The treaty, in its objectives on environment policy, pledges to promote “measures at international level to deal with regional or worldwide environmental problems, and in particular combating climate change.”

Although the existing treaties refer to the concept of sustainable development, it is not very clear or visible. The reform treaty gives it a much higher profile and a clearer definition. Sustainable development is also listed as one of the fundamental objectives of the Union in its relations with the wider world. This is totally new.

The environment is one of the competencies shared between the Union and the Member States. When the Union takes action in this field, it must be in pursuit of clear objectives: preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment; protecting human health; promoting prudent and rational utilisation of natural resources; and promoting measures at international level to deal with regional or worldwide environmental problems.

For the first time, the reform treaty contains a section on energy. It says that the EU’s objectives in this fi eld are to ensure the proper functioning of the energy market, in particular energy supply and the promotion of energy efficiency and energy saving, and the development of new and renewable forms of energy.

As far as the Union’s nuclear energy policy is concerned no material changes are made to Euratom – the atomic energy treaty which promotes nuclear energy. However, the governments of Germany, Austria, Ireland, Sweden and Hungary have added a declaration calling for the revision of Euratom.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights sets out and guarantees a catalogue of rights and greater freedom for European citizens, including civil, political and social rights. The charter upholds basic Western values such as the right to freedom of speech and thought, and equality before the law. It also recognises the right to strike, subject to national law, and fair working conditions, and it bans reproductive cloning. Other articles cover the right to life; full equality in all areas, including employment, work and pay; the right of access to preventive health care; and the integration of a high level of environmental protection into the policies of the Union.

The reform treaty recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter and gives its provisions a binding legal force (the Court of Justice will ensure that the Charter is adhered to). This is not part of the current treaties. The Irish Government considered making use of a protocol to restrict the application of the Charter in the UK and Poland. But, following lobbying from the Green Party and other organisations, that option was not exercised and the Charter will be fully applied in Ireland.

Key institutional changes

COMMISSION: From 2014 the number of EU commissioners will be capped at two-thirds the number of member states. Member states will take turns missing out on a commission nominee, on basis of strict equality, for one in three of the fi ve year terms. The role of the Commission President is to be strengthened and MEPs will have greater say in choosing him/her. A new post of EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy will be created. This person will be a Commission vice-president and will chair meetings of EU Foreign Affairs ministers.

EUROPEAN COUNCIL: These leaders’ summits are to be put on statutory basis. A permanent chairperson or President is to be appointed for a 30-month term which is renewable once. This will replace the current six-month rotating presidency system for summits.

COUNCIL OF MINISTERS: The rotating six-month Presidency with member states chairing councils will be retained. But member states will be grouped in three in an attempt to achieve greater continuity over an 18-month period. A new ‘double-majority’ for qualifi ed majority votes (QMV) will be introduced. A measure will require 55% of member states, representing 65% of the EU’s population, to pass. Decision by QMV will be extended to new policy areas including: transport; public health, energy, sport, space, civil and criminal law; election of the European Council President.

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: MEPs emerge with enhanced powers with co-decision (via which the Parliament is an equal law-making partner with the Council of Ministers) being extended to new areas. These include agriculture, fi sheries, external trade, intellectual property law, services and more EU budgetary procedures. Parliament membership is to be capped at 751 MEPs with a minimum of six MEPs and a maximum of 96 for any member state. Ireland will have 12 MEPs.

Foreign and defence policy

• A new post of EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy will be created. This will fuse the existing jobs of EU Commissioner for foreign affairs and the Council of Ministers’ representative for foreign affairs. The HR will be a member and vice-president of the Commission and also chair meetings of the Council of Foreign Ministers.
• A new EU External Action Service – drawn from member states and EU institutions – is envisaged to allow the HR work in conjunction with member state governments.
• The Treaty commits the EU to creating a common defence policy when and if EU leaders unanimously decide to do so. Under the Irish Constitution, Ireland could NOT join this without a referendum. It also stipulates that national security remains a matter for each member state and the position of neutral and non-aligned states, Finland, Austria, Sweden and Ireland is recognised.
• Unanimity remains the general rule for foreign policy decisions. But EU leaders, acting unanimously, can decide to allow use of QMV for certain foreign policy matters. Security and defence decisions must be taken unanimously.
• The European Defence Agency, set up by member states in 2004, is given recognition. This is designed to help coordinate research, help improve military equipment and arms procurement and share information. Member States undertake to ‘progressively’ improve their military capabilities and create a competitive market for European defence equipment and strengthen the Union’s defence, technological and industrial base.
• The ‘Petersberg tasks’ are expanded. These originally envisaged humanitarian and rescue work, peacekeeping and crisis management, including ‘peace-making.’ New areas include disarmament, conflict prevention, post-conflict stabilisation, and the fight against terrorism.
• A new European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps is provided for to help coordinate development aid.
• A solidarity clause provides for all member states to come to the aid of another in case of terrorist attack or natural disaster.
• A new device of ‘permanent structured cooperation’ is established, allowing certain member states to form a military ‘inner core’ to deepen defence and military cooperation. Decision to launch EU defence and security missions must be taken unanimously. Ireland can remain outside of any such cooperation.
• Ireland’s triple lock remains in place. Service abroad by Irish troops requires Government and Dáil approval and UN authorisation.

Justice and Home Affairs

• Justice and home affairs moves from being a matter for inter-governmental cooperation to become a central issue involving the EU institutions, including the Commission and the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
• To date, the ECJ has had limited powers to rule on cases dealing with EU justice and home affairs legislation (laws on asylum and visas, illegal immigration, or judicial co-operation, etc). The new treaty would remove most of the earlier restrictions.
• Issues include police and court cooperation in the fight against crime; mutual recognition of judgements; attempts to standardise offences and penalties; border security cooperation and a common immigration and asylum system.
• Qualified majority voting will apply in many areas. But a special ‘emergency brake’ is provided for to allow a member state object to any measure it fears will undermine its own legal systems.
• Ireland, along with the UK, will ‘opt out’ of these procedures. In doing so the Justice Minister has cited Ireland and Britain’s different legal system to that of continental Europe and the common travel area between both islands. But the Irish Government has also declared its intention to try to ‘opt in’ to as many of these proposals as possible. The ‘opt out’ is to be reviewed in three years.
• There is to be a European Public Prosecutors’ Office to combat fraud against EU funds.
• A standing committee on internal security (COSI) within the Council of Ministers will be created to strengthen operational cooperation on internal security. Both national and European Parliaments will be kept informed of its proceedings.

Democratic legitimacy and other issues

• A frequent criticism of the EU is that it a top-down organisation which lacks democratic legitimacy. EU reform treaty supporters argue the treaty seeks to address this lack in a number of ways – critics disagree.
• Under the treaty the directly-elected European Parliament gets enhanced powers.
• National parliaments will get the opportunity to show a ‘yellow card’ to draft proposals from the Commission. The parliaments will have eight weeks to consider the proposed text and if one third of them object – or one quarter in case of justice proposals – the item must be reviewed, but not necessarily abandoned, by the Commission.
• If half the national parliaments object to a proposal, the Commission must justify their case or face being blocked by the Council of Ministers or the European Parliament.
• A popular petition signed by one million citizens can call on the Commission to submit a new draft law in a given area. This idea was championed by John Gormley as a member of the Constitutional Convention in 2003.
• Other features of the reform treaty include giving the EU a single legal personality. This will allow the Union to accede to international treaties in all areas of its competence – but will not preclude member states from acting in international affairs.
• A ‘ratchet/escalatory clause’ allows some revisions of EU treaties by unanimous decision of EU leaders and national parliaments’ approval. Other changes will require a treaty-framing IGC and ratification, which in Ireland’s case means a referendum.
• The treaty contains a statement of values shared by member states and future applicants. This includes a commitment to democracy and the market economy. But a commitment to ‘free and undistorted competition’ was removed at the insistence of France.

The European Greens and the reform treaty

The Green Parties in Europe will approach the reform treaty in much the same ways as they approached the constitutional treaty. That is to say, the large majority of parties, and the Green MEPs in the European Parliament, while not uncritical, are in favour of the treaty. The exceptions to this are the English Greens, Swedish Greens, and, perhaps, the French Greens, who – as in 2005 – are divided on the treaty. Some of the parties this time around will be in favour of their countries organising referendums for ratifi cation. It seems highly improbable that any of the Green parties currently in government (in Italy, the Czech Republic, Finland and Latvia) will be pushing strongly for referendums. None will campaign against the treaty.

Is the reform treaty just the same as the constitutional treaty?

The people who say there is, actually, little difference between the treaties include: An Taoiseach, Valéry Giscard d’Estaing (who chaired the body that framed the original constitution) and the UK Independence Party, who want Britain to withdraw from the European Union. Those claiming there are significant differences include the UK Government, who wish to avoid holding a referendum on it, and the Green Group in the European Parliament, who argue that there has been in some areas a “considerable deterioration compared to what the constitutional treaty was aiming for.” The UK Government argues that “the constitutional concept has been abandoned” and “there are substantial differences between the two treaties, in form and in content.”

The Green Party and European treaties – an overview

Since 1987 there have been four referendums on new EU treaties. Each of them increased the level of involvement of the EU in foreign policy, security and defence in what was often described by opponents as a ‘salami’ approach – gradually slicing away at Irish neutrality. The Greens were also concerned at the way in which the single market and economic matters in general were given explicit priority over social and environmental concerns. On each referendum campaign, the Green Party campaigned for a No vote.

When the EU constitution was proposed, there were more mixed feelings in the Party about the balance of pros and cons. A series of three seminars with guest speakers was organised around the country for members to discuss the contents of the constitution and the intention was to hold a special convention of members to decide our position. The constitution was, however, killed off by No votes in referendums in France and the Netherlands before the Party could hold its convention.

Accession to the European Community (1972)

Outcome: A referendum was held on 10 May 1972 and 83% voted yes, with a turnout of more than 70%.

The Single European Act (1987)

Purpose: to bolster free trade through establishing an internal market and introducing political cooperation to harmonize laws and resolve policy discrepancies. To reform the operating procedures of the European institutions (following enlargement from six to 12 members) and extend qualified majority voting to new areas.

Outcome: approved on 26 May 1987 by 69.9% (turnout: 44%)

Treaty on European Union, aka the Maastricht Treaty (1993)

Purpose: To expand the scope of the then European Community from economic, social and trade to included defence, foreign policy and justice and home affairs. To reduce the power of the ‘supranationalist’ institutions (European Parliament and Commission) in favour of the ‘intergovernmental’ Council of Ministers. To introduce economic and monetary union, thus paving the way for a single currency.

Outcome: Denmark rejected the treaty, sparking a referendum in France. With four ‘exceptions’ the Danes then ratifi ed it. John Major’s government came close to collapsing when trying to get Westminster to approve it. Ireland approved it on 18 June 1992 with a majority of 69% in favour (turnout: 57%).

Treaty of Amsterdam (1999)

Purpose: to simplify the existing treaties and enable the EU to legislate on rules relating to the free movement of persons. To allow for more intergovernmental cooperation on police work and criminal justice. To enhance the EU’s foreign and security policy and increase its roles in for peacekeeping and humanitarian work. To expand the European Parliament’s rights of codecision and make the Commission more politically accountable.

Outcome: Ireland approved it on 22 May 1998 with a majority of 61.74% (turnout: 56%)

Treaty of Nice (2001/2002)

Purpose: to reform the institutional structure of the EU to accommodate the fi rst enlargement from 15 to 25 members.

Outcome: the Treaty was rejected by 53.87% of Irish voters on 7 June 2001 (turnout: 35%). The Government put forward another referendum with qualifi cations on Dáil consent for ‘enhanced cooperation’ and preventing Ireland from joining a common defence policy. This second referendum (Nice II) passed on 19 October 2002 by 62.89% (turnout: 48%).

Green position: many in the Party believed that the treaty was a technocratic – as opposed to democratic – creation. Some argued that it would marginalise smaller states and impact on neutrality. It was also claimed that the Treaty would create a two-tiered EU and enable an ‘inner-club’ of powerful states to press ahead with closer cooperation.

Summary of cases for and against the treaty

For the EU reform treaty:

• Ireland will have a strong voice in a more effective EU. This treaty is largely about modernising structures that were originally framed for six member states to make them work in today’s 27-state Union.
• This treaty will, for the first time, empower member states to act together against climate change and to collaborate on energy policies.
• The Dáil and other parliaments will have greater input into EU lawmaking.
• It gives legal force to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which clearly sets out the rights of European citizens.
• Sustainable development, and the application of sustainable development criteria in the EU’s relations with the wider world, is defined as one of the Union’s fundamental objectives.
• Ireland retains its right of action on the international scene but pooling its resources with its EU neighbours makes its voice more effective.
• Ireland will have the same right to appoint a Commissioner as the biggest EU states.
• Taxation remains a matter solely for the Irish Government.
• This treaty – and any further significant changes to EU workings – must be put to Irish voters who have the final say.

Against the EU reform treaty:

• The EU being given a legal personality for the first time is another move towards a ‘federal’ Union.
• Member state cooperation is replaced by direct EU action in key areas like justice and decisions by QMV are vastly extended.
• Ireland would lose its automatic right to an EU Commissioner for five out of every 15 years and a new voting system would give bigger states more say.
• The ECJ would get enhanced powers and have final say in the case of Irish citizens’ rights in addition to the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and Ireland’s Supreme Court.
• The Treaty would be self-amending allowing changes to be made without a treaty-changing Inter Governmental Conference. National vetoes would be further diluted by extending qualified majority voting to eight key law-making areas.
• It would extend the creeping military dimensions of the EU.
• It would advance market competition and promotes the principles of commercial trade in the provision of public services such as health and education.
• It commits member states to ‘progressively’ improve their military capabilities.
• EU democratic unaccountability is highlighted by Ireland probably being the only member state to allow its people to vote on the treaty via a referendum.