The European Commission has presented far-reaching proposals, including reducing the number of commissioners and moving away from unanimity, testing member states’ appetite for internal reforms that fall short of changing the treaties.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
These proposals are part of a wider package aimed at making the EU’s structures and decision-making suitable for membership of 30 or more countries. They are sure to spark controversy in European capitals.
“The main question was: Is the EU ready for further enlargement? And there is a clear yes, future enlargement is possible. Our assessment shows that in most policy areas the EU is already ready for enlargement,” Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos told journalists.
Unanimity
The Commission proposes to identify the areas in which so-called bridging clauses could be activated, allowing the Council to move from unanimity to qualified majority. However, the activation of these clauses itself requires unanimity.
The idea of expanding qualified majority voting is not new, particularly in foreign and security policy, where a veto can undermine the EU’s ability to project its geopolitical weight abroad.
Last month, 11 countries, including France and Germany, circulated a joint letter calling on the bloc to consider reducing obstructive foreign policy vetoes on the basis of sincere cooperation, including through increased use of constructive abstention.
When asked whether member states support the move, Kos acknowledged that positions diverge significantly across EU countries. “It won’t be easy, but it’s worth a try,” she said. She identified one specific area where less unanimity could be used: precisely during accession processes.
“Our proposal is to make our decision-making process more efficient. We suggest using qualified majority voting more, which is not new. What is new is that we propose to reduce the number of unanimous decisions in the accession process,” Kos said.
Unanimity is required to grant a country candidate status and close negotiations. However, between the two, the current methodology gives any member state a veto over 150 steps.
The Commission also wants to make greater use of enhanced cooperation, which allows at least nine Member States to pursue deeper integration on issues of crucial or strategic interest where blockages persist.
The most recent examples are the support loan to Ukraine, from which Hungary, Czechia and Slovakia withdrew, as well as the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
Here too, Brussels could face resistance from some capitals, notably from the “Friends of the Western Balkans”, a group that includes Italy and Austria. They opposed differentiated membership and regulatory asymmetry.
Institutional changes
The Commission also proposes abandoning the principle that each EU country has a commissioner, which could prove problematic in a Union of 30 or more members.
According to the Lisbon Treaty, the Commission should be composed of a number of members equal to two-thirds of the member states, chosen according to a “strictly equal rotation” which reflects the demographic and geographical distribution of all EU countries.
The system never took effect. In 2013, the European Council unanimously decided to retain one commissioner per member state, a concession to Ireland to get a yes vote in its second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
Ireland was simply the most vocal opponent of losing a permanent presence on the Commission. Smaller member states are widely concerned that their voices will be harder to hear in Brussels.
The rotation could also be difficult to accept for large countries like France and Germany, which could find themselves excluded from the College of Commissioners while countries like Malta or Luxembourg are included.
“Some candidates say, don’t worry, this country can represent us. Other countries say yes, but not at the beginning. We would like to see how it (the Commission) works,” Kos added.
The proposal to streamline the European executive comes at the right time. The Commission is currently undergoing what is known as a “large-scale review” and capitals are holding intense negotiations over the next long-term EU budget, under which the EU administration risks facing significant budget cuts.
Skeptical reception
Proposals that primarily affect candidate countries, such as guarantees against democratic backsliding and gradual integration, are likely to encounter less resistance.
However, reform advocates point out that as candidates move closer to joining the bloc, the question of how to maintain the effectiveness of an enlarged Union will become harder to ignore.
However, this suggestion is sure to raise eyebrows among European governments. Four European diplomats who spoke to Euronews on condition of anonymity said these internal reforms were unlikely to succeed.
The first test will come next week, when enlargement-related reforms will be brought to the table of EU leaders gathered for the European Council on October 15-16.
“Some things are written to be killed,” said a European diplomat.
Gn world
