91热爆

Poles apart

• Mark Mardell
• 17 Jun 07, 11:57 PM

It never rains but it pours. As foreign ministers trooped out of their meeting, the pelting rain on the roof over the VIP area made them difficult to hear. I was just thankful there was a roof. But listening back to the recordings several messages emerge out of the storm...

The Poles have told the other European Union foreign ministers that "they cannot accept" the currently proposed voting system. Even if Blair and Brown can be kept happy, the Poles may still veto any new treaty.

And the British government still has a hard job on its hands.

Other countries have, according to the German foreign minister, agreed to "take a step" in the direction of those countries like Britain who have problems, by agreeing to give up the title 鈥渃onstitution鈥� and consenting to a smaller treaty. In return, the plan to give the EU a single legal personality and make the legally binding are "not to be touched." Technical stuff, but believe me, it could make Mr Brown thunderous.

In the meeting itself, sheltered from the weather, I'm told spoke last, after the dessert and coffee, and gave something of a lecture on the state of public opinion in Britain. Often these meetings are about technicalities. But she told her colleagues that a referendum would be extremely hard to win in Britain, and there will have to be one if any treaty is too big or too ambitious. There was a bit of a hush when she finished.

But there's a perennial problem for British governments. While Mrs Beckett was telling the plain truth, it is also a tough negotiating position. One of the most common ploys of trade union leaders is to tell the bosses, "It鈥檚 not me: I just couldn't sell this to the lads, they'd go mad." In any negotiation you go in hard and then have to modify your position. And that's what some call betrayal.

You could say that is part of the problem of negotiating in secret. But it鈥檚 actually the problem about negotiating in dimly-lit semi-public.

Read about the questions the Germans put to the other countries here, and about the British government鈥檚 red lines here.

• Permalink
• Comments

Sandwiches and pillar collapse

• Mark Mardell
• 17 Jun 07, 07:14 PM

The sandwich supper has started and so have the disagreements. The German foreign minister has said, "We're in for a very long night." But the expected it all to be over in a couple of hours. Still, it'll take quite a while for the foreign ministers of 27 countries to answer the Germans鈥� questions.

The are trying to sort out some fundamental issues. This is what they are asking:

• Is it OK to drop the term constitution and call this an amending treaty?

• Should the EU have a single legal personality?

• Shall we drop the from the treaty but make sure it is legally binding?

And for many the big one:

• Shall we treat foreign affairs just like any other subject, instead of leaving nation states to sort it out between themselves?

In the jargon, this last one is, to the Germans, 鈥渙vercoming the existing pillar structure鈥�; to the British government, 鈥減illar collapse鈥�; and to Eurosceptics, their worst nightmare鈥� although some will rub their hands with glee at the fight to come.

Read my account of the British government鈥檚 red lines here.

• Permalink
• Comments

Into the padded cell

• Mark Mardell
• 17 Jun 07, 10:01 AM

The , goes to the foreign ministers meeting in Luxembourg for sandwiches and the first face-to-face chat/argument/blazing row about the new treaty between elected politicians this evening.

All such meetings are called Gaerc (). For my first few months here I was convinced some chap called Gary was calling all the shots on the world stage. And why Luxembourg when there鈥檚 a big building called the Justus Lipsius in Brussels for such meetings?

Well, it鈥檚 the summer and in the summer, we have to go a warehouse with attached padded cell (if we can find a picture you鈥檒l see what I mean) in the one bit of Luxembourg that鈥檚 grey, horrible and has more roundabouts than Milton Keynes. Because of an agreement made in the dawn of time to help out Luxembourg, one of the poorest counties in the EU. Oops my mistake it鈥檚 the richest isn鈥檛 it? Excuse my bile. Oh well, a two-and-a-half-hour drive on a Sunday rather than four stops on the metro. This is what people call a 鈥渏olly鈥�. I鈥檇 rather have a few more hours with the family.

Still, back to business. Mrs Beckett goes armed with new, or at least clearer, British red lines:

• No changes to labour laws. That鈥檚 aimed at the .

• Nothing that would over-rule British (I think I mean English and Scottish) common law. That鈥檚 aimed at the plan to get rid of the veto in the area of justice.

• Nothing that threatens the ability to conduct an independent foreign and defence policy or removes the UK seat on the UN Security Council. That鈥檚 about the creation of an EU foreign minister and all that goes with it.

• Nothing that would change the cost of social security. That鈥檚 also aimed at new rights in the charter.

I鈥檒l try to keep you updated on what happens, if I can make my laptop work in the press centre. This usually takes as long as driving there.

On the World This Weekend (at 1pm on Radio 4) Shaun Ley will be interviewing the Europe Minister, . They asked me to write something on what ideas in the new treaty could mean in practice.

This is my effort:

鈥淲hat will it mean for you and me? Well, it depends who you believe. The argument about the new treaty will be a battle for interpretation. So the Germans suggest that the existing Charter of Fundamental Rights should not be in the treaty because that would make it look like a constitution. But they say there should be a few words stressing that it鈥檚 legally binding. The government is against that: they are alive to fears from the that for instance the right to strike and to association enshrined in it could lead to challenges to British labour law in the .

What about proposals to drop the veto in policing and justice? This would mean Britain could be outvoted by other countries. To take one idea that鈥檚 floating around, it could mean extensive new rights for suspects - police could be made to give people a document setting out their legal rights. It鈥檚 also a bit like taking a way a trump card. If countries know anyone can block an idea, they take more care to give concessions. On the other hand, this takes much longer and can end up with a ragbag of amendments to a simple proposal.

And if you believe one gentleman, who writes to me regularly, it will mean armoured cars full of German police trundling through the channel tunnel to stop us ever leaving the EU.

It鈥檚 pretty likely Britain will get an opt-out, as it already has on migration policy. But diplomats say the trouble with opt-outs or opt-ins is that you can opt into something that looks great, and in the course of a year鈥檚 negotiation it changes beyond recognition. Or you can opt out and sit on the sidelines wish you could help design something the government is now rather keen on.

But I think it鈥檚 perhaps a rather dull-sounding proposal that highlights the gulf of interpretation. At the moment when ministers meet, whether it鈥檚 the fisheries ministers or the presidents and prime ministers who are their bosses, it鈥檚 organised and chaired by a different country every six months. At the moment it鈥檚 , before it was , next it will be Portugal. The proposal is to make it the work of an individual, a president elected by the heads of government. Senior sources say this is much better. The little countries can make a hash of things, while this gives continuity and so strengthens the hand of the traditional nation state.

Nonsense, says the think tank , it鈥檚 more power for a Brussels-based bureaucracy, and takes power away from the nation states. There鈥檚 nothing to stop the president of the council and the being the same person. That would be a hugely powerful role and people will say it should be directly elected. Hey presto! You have a president of Europe, like the president of America.

Fantasy? Well it鈥檚 all crystal ball gazing really, but the debate and its outcome rest on such unprovable predictions.鈥�

• Permalink
• Comments