FOLLOWING THE EUROPEAN UNION

Couldn't the EU go the same way as Britain, i.e. with no artificial constitutional "superstructure" but simply considering the existing body of law (of course incorporating all treaties) as sufficient for constitutional purposes?

Pressure mounts on Britain over EU rebate
Fri Jun 10, 2005

By Jon Boyle and Katie Allen

PARIS/LONDON (Reuters) - France and Germany mounted a fierce campaign by European Union leaders on Friday to persuade Britain to accept a reduction of its annual EU budget rebate to help reach a deal on the bloc's long-term finances.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair, looking isolated, opened the way to a compromise by suggesting a deal would be possible if EU leaders agreed to a major overhaul of the budget

But tension rose after his finance minister said London could veto any move to cut the multi-billion euro payback and President Jacques Chirac ruled out any compromise over the big farm subsidies that France receives from Brussels.

A showdown is looming at an EU summit next week. Failure to agree the 2007-2013 funding programme would ruin efforts to show the 25-nation bloc is back on track after French and Dutch voters' rejection of the Union's planned constitution.

"I think there'll be a deal in the next week ... There is political pressure. It is easier to get a deal when there is pressure," European Monetary Affairs Commissioner Joaquin Almunia told reporters in London.

But asked about the chances of a quick deal, Swedish Prime Minister Goran Persson said: "I am not over-optimistic."

Each side is taking a tough position over the budget, fuelling tension that has been rising over the constitution, intended to make the enlarged bloc run more smoothly.

Germany and France reiterated calls on Friday for each member state to continue the ratification process, although Britain has suspended moves to hold a referendum.


GERMAN-FRENCH PRESSURE

Britain's rebate was won in 1984 when it was one of the poorest EU countries and got little back from Brussels in farm subsidies, which at that time made up 75 percent of the EU budget.

Although Britain is much richer now, it says that even with the rebate its net contribution to the EU is much greater than that of France.

Chirac, who hosts Blair on Tuesday, reached a joint position on the budget with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder at talks in Paris.

"Our British friends must be aware of how things are changing and therefore of the necessity of a greater fairness in the burden carried by each (member)," Chirac said.

He ruled out any reduction in EU subsidies to French farmers, saying: "I am not willing to compromise".

Sweden's Persson backed Paris and Berlin, saying other EU member state want the British rebate to be gradually reduced.

"We all are in favour of phasing out the British rebate," he told reporters after a meeting in Copenhagen.

Britain is clearly isolated among the EU's 25 member states in demanding to keep the annual rebate, won by Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and worth 4.6 billion euros before the bloc's enlargement last year, diplomats say.

British finance minister Gordon Brown stood firm, telling BBC radio that Britain would use its veto at the EU "if in the national interest it was necessary to do so".

Blair said that even with the rebate, London would pay 2-1/2 times more into EU coffers than Paris under the new budget blueprint.

But he held out an avenue for compromise, calling for wider negotiation about the entire financing of the bloc.

"If you have a fundamental review of how Europe spends its money, then everything is open to debate," he said.

The Common Agricultural Policy took up 40 percent of EU finances to cater for 5 percent of its population and less than 2 percent of its output, Blair said.

"If people want to look again fundamentally at the Common Agricultural Policy of course everything then can be looked at properly," Blair said.

COMPROMISE BID

Enshrined in EU regulations, Britain's rebate would require unanimity to abolish or modify.

Luxembourg, holder of the EU's presidency until July 1 when London takes over, has proposed freezing Britain's rebate at its 1997-2003 level in 2007 and later "set it on a downward path".

Its compromise deal also includes a proposal to cut planned spending to 1.06 percent of gross national income in commitments and 1.0 percent in payments.

Britain, one of six net contributors to the EU budget, wants spending capped at 1.0 percent of gross national income (GNI), a stance backed by Austria, the Netherlands and Sweden.

Schroeder signalled his cash-strapped country might be ready to compromise, although Berlin has indicated it also wants spending held at 1.0 percent.

Walter, Your chart shows only 15 countries. What happened to the other ten?

To remember:




Reuters reports slightly different to the BBC, showing Blair more ready for compromise.


(An aside: when this agreement - more than 30 years ago, not "almost 20" - was arranged, I couldn't understand that the majority agreed to it.
Fortunately, it didn't open the floodgates to every 'receivable' as I had feared.]

I have never expressed any delight or pleasure whatever on these threads concerning the French/Dutch rejections of the EU constitution.

More than a month ago I did express the opinion that, at 400+ pages, the document was more a body of settled law than a constitution, and that I thought it an unsuitable charter for such a rapidly expanding political body with so many, as yet unresolved, local differences. Francis and Walter pointed out that the constitution, of necessity, incorporated the provisions of the several layers of previous treaties which defined the Union and governed the admission of member states, albeit in a more compact form. I acknowledged the logic of that argument, and that the EU had previously put that kind of complexity to good use in working out things over time. It has indeed been a component of its success so far. Then came the polls suggesting wavering support in France for the constitution, accompanied by reassurances from Francis, and many others in the press as well, that as the hour drew near French voters would see their responsibilities and vote yes. I believe the result surprised us all equally.

[..] there is something to learn from Timber's comparison with America, Australia, and Britain. (To which he could have added Ireland, Slovakia, and the Baltics, but hasn't.) It is that maybe, contrary to the dominant political philosophy in Western Europe, big government isn't giving the people their money's worth in welfare.