Voilà.....

After several months of discussions, some harsh confrontations, some squeezes to the rules of procedures and to the patience of MEPs the Martin Bourlanges report on the 1996 Intergovernemental Conference was finally adopted yesterday, wednesday the 17th of May 1995.

The pourpose of the report was, as our faithful readers remember, to give a clear mandate to the two EP representatives to the Reflection group that will prepare the IGC conference of 1996 and whose work will start in June 1995 under spanish presidency.

The preparation of the final part of the report was not easy; time restraints, delays and disagreements between the draftsmen made it impossible for the committee to have a proper discussion on the contents of the document. At the beginning of May a long night was necessary to vote on the 657 amendements presented and in plenary members had to seat for three hours and a half to finally vote on the 226 amendments coming above all from the Europe of the Nations, the Gaullist, the Greens, the Radicals, but also from the socialists (25) and the Christian democrats (9).

At the end the report was adopted with 289 votes in favour, 103 votes against and 74 abstentions:

Among those who voted against, beside some representatives of all parties coming from the new member states, we find the right wing, the Europe of the nations, the Groupe of the United left, the gaullists, some greens, some conservatives, greek socialists and a couple of labour members; most greens, most labour members, some conservatives, most Forza Europa MEPs abstained.

Long forgotten are the times in which much more federalistoriented texts passed with huge majorities...

Some interesting signs of this "change of times" can be mentioned: the two amendements explicity referring to the need for a constitution or a consolidated short text containing the founding principles of the Union (presented by Greens and ARE) got only some 40 votes in favour on more than 500 voters...; there is still a short reference to the possibility that in case of disagreement in the IGC the majority can proceed without the minority only because the leader of the Socialist Group made a mistake in voting.

All mentions to a possible modification of art. N to allow the revision of the Treaty to be adopted by qualified majority have been rejected. On the second pillar, that is foreign and security policy, the worst parts of the reports (on WEU and NATO have been rejected, as well as some too "militaristic" amendements. The final result on this subject is not too bad seen the premises and seen the fact that our amendement on the Civil corp has been adopted.

On the third pillar, that is the cooperation in justice and internal affairs, the text adopted is long and complicated and hides the crucial point that is instead as clear as water: full integration of this issus in the Community pillar; full democratic controll of the EP on issues like Europol. One of ouramendements (n. 39) was defeated for only three votes (our votes, I am afraid..).

Equally, the possible extension of the powers of the Court of Justice to human rights issues has been rejected.

Even the reference to the need to tackle the problem of the uniform electoral system has sadly fallen: openly, the british MEPs, above all the labour members, have a solid grip on their groups..

On more technical and institutional issues, the report respects the EP tradition; it demands co-decision it asks the extension of the majority vote in the Council as well as the strengthening of the autonomy of the Commission.

In short, the resolution adopted, despite the quality of the two draftsmen, is a faithful mirror of the reality of the majority of the MEPs today: a bunch of mostly timid politicians who are more tied than ever to their national parties, scared of the confrontation with the Council, not too interested in the 1996 IGC if it is not to make sure they run after the supposed majority feelings of their respective public opinions.

There is really little battle to be expected in 1996, unless Mrs. GUIGOU, M. BROK will surprise us all in the reflection group and unless Mme DURY and Mme MEIJ WEGGEN - the two ladies who will prepare the final proposal of the EP for 1996 -will be more convincing than their male predecessors.

Time will tell

Monica