On 1 January, Spain has started its six month presidency of the Council with an ambitious working programme. The European Parliament held from 11 till 19 January the confirmation hearings of the 26 designate commissioners. These sessions have given us an idea of what the commissioners are up to.
Under the Lisbon Treaty, Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero will no longer chair the EU summits. The European Council has now a permanent president, Herman Van Rompuy. The Lisbon Treaty created the post of permanent president of the European Council but the system of rotating Presidencies was kept. The presidency of the different configurations of the Council continues to be held by representatives of the member States in an equal rotation system. Spain is, therefore, the first member state to take the rotating presidency under the Lisbon rules. As Diego López Garrido, Spanish Secretary of State for EU Affairs said "Spain will create precedents (…)”
José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, has ensured Herman Van Rompuy, that he is at his service, saying “Mr Council president, the rotating presidency is at your disposal to support you in taking up appropriately the role of leadership and political steering of the European Council.” Although the EU leaders are attempting to display an idea of consensus there would be clashes between the rotating EU Presidency and the European Council president over the division of tasks. The Lisbon treaty is not clear and leaves room for contention. Obviously, the member states holding the presidency of the council do not want to have a marginal role and Spain is unwilling to give up certain prerogatives.
The main task of the EU President will be to chair and lead the European Council work in order to ensure continuity in EU initiatives. It remains to be seen how the EU president will interact with the presidency of the Council’s different configurations. The Lisbon Treaty stipulates that General Affairs Council which will be chaired by the Prime Minister of the Council rotating presidency “shall ensure consistency in the work of the different Council configurations” and “prepare and ensure the follow-up to meetings of the European Council, in liaison with the President of the European Council and the Commission.” Spain will be responsible for chairing the Council meetings, except foreign affairs. Moreover, the member state holding the rotating EU presidency continues to chair the Coreper meetings and working groups. Coreper assists the Council in dealing with proposals for legislation. It prepares every Council decision taken at Ministerial level and seeks to reach agreement at its own level on each dossier otherwise it may suggest solutions to the Council. Hence, Spain will keep its influence over EU policymaking.
Van Rompuy has a low international profile but he also has a role in the EU’s external relations. The Lisbon Treaty is very vague, the Union will be represented by the High Representative for matters relating to the common foreign and security policy, together with the President of the European Council, on issues other than CFSP, the external representation of the Union, will be ensured by the Commission. There is no indication in the Lisbon treaty how the relationship between the European Council President, the High Representative, and the President of the Commission will work. It seems than Herman Van Rompuy represents the EU in international summits at head of state or government level. However, Spain will host several international summits: EU-Chile Summit, EU-US summit, EU-Andean Community Summit, EU-MERCOSUR Summit, EU-Central America Summit, EU-Egypt Summit, Union for the Mediterranean Summit, EU-Mexican Summit. This shows that Spain is keen to strengthen EU relations with its Mediterranean neighbours as well as the EU political, trade and economic relations with its former colonies. Van Rompuy will be formally representing the EU but José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero is eager to a have a leading role at these summits. Having a look at Mr Van Rompuy’s profile it seems he will be more concern with his job as an “internal conciliator” rather than projecting himself on the international stage.
The Foreign Affairs Council will now be chaired by the High Representative, Catherine Ashton, whereas the Commission will be represented by the development commissioner. Although most of the preparatory bodies of the Foreign Affairs Council are chaired by a representative of the High Representative others will continue to be chaired by the six-monthly presidency, including those in the areas of trade and development. Spain is also hosting ministerial meeting with China, India whish are supposed to be chaired by Ms Ashton but Spain Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos may want to have the host’s role.
The Spanish Presidency Programme is based upon four main priorities. First is the economy – “Coordination of economic policies to promote recovery and sustainable growth throughout Europe: launching of Europe 2020.” The European Council President, Van Rompuy, has also announced that economic reform and Europe's recovery from the financial crisis will be the main focus of his two and half year mandate. He has already called for an informal meeting of EU leaders, on 11 February, to discuss a 10-year programme aimed at replacing the Lisbon strategy, the so called “2020 strategy.” It will be another behind closed doors meeting and, according to the EuropeanVoice, Van Rompuy “has proposed not holding a press conference after the event to maintain maximum discretion about the content of the talks.” That is the reason Brussels chose Herman Van Rompuy, a “discrete conciliator.” He has been called “the master of the back room deal.”
Ten years ago the EU leaders adopted the Lisbon Strategy aiming at transforming the EU by 2010 into “the world’s most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy.” The Lisbon strategy has failed, targets, including employment and economic growth, were not met. Spain presently has one of the highest unemployment rates in Europe, at around 19.3%. But, Brussels want to give it another go setting up a new target date, 2020. Spain is very keen in playing a prominent role in the approval and implementation of the new EU 2020 Growth and Employment Strategy. It is hoping that it will be adopted at the spring European Council or, at the latest, June European Council.
Spain takes the view that the Lisbon strategy has failed due to the absence of binding mechanism to monitor the member states performance on the different issues such as employment. Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero has said "It is absolutely necessary for the 2020 Economic Strategy … to take on a new nature, a binding nature,(…)" According to Zapatero the new Economic Strategy should set up binding economic goals and "corrective measures" for member states that do not comply with their obligations and fail to reach agreed economic targets. However, he has not given yet details what the corrective measures could entail. He said "The informal summit on 11 February must bring up, in my opinion, measures including incentives and corrective measures for objectives set out in our economic policy (…)" Well, taking into account the present state of the Spanish economy, Spain would be, probably, one of the first member states to who such sanctions would apply.
According to Zapatero “The Lisbon Treaty allows for more co-ordination, and for that to be truly effective, we need to equip the European Commission with new powers,(…)” However, Spain suggestions entail even more powers to Brussels than those foreseen in the Lisbon Treaty. Under Article 136 TFEU, the Council may adopt measures specific to euro-area Member States “to strengthen the coordination and surveillance of their budgetary discipline (…)”
In the meantime, the presidents of the European Council and European Commission have recently called for the member states to accept tighter co-ordination of their economic policies in order to recover from the financial crisis. Although they have not mentioned “biding goals” and corrective measures, Herman Van Rompuy has said "We need a stricter method of government and a better control of the process (…)" Whilst Germany’s economy minister, Rainer Bruderle is willing to back better economic co-ordination, he said "I do not think the idea of imposing sanctions on member states for not fulfilling fixed targets is sensible,"
It seems that lack of support from Germany has lead Spain to back away from his proposal. According to Euractiv, Mr Moratinos has said that Spain has not put forward an official proposal for binding economic goals and sanctions to be included in the 'EU 2020'. Diego Lopéz Garrido, Spain's Europe minister said, according to the EuropeanVoice, “The way in which the Lisbon Agenda is applied must be changed, which does not mean imposing sanctions.” Nevertheless, they are calling for tight surveillance of economic targets.
Spain is calling for further integration and better supervision of the European financial system. However, further coordination of Member States’ economic policies within the Union might harm the economic interests of several Member States. Unsurprisingly, Zapatero has the support of Sarkozy in his call for greater economic co-ordination. In fact, Zapatero has said that "a certain number of countries back greater economic unity, France for example". But, Merkel is not so keen on the idea.
Olli Rehn, the Commissioner-designate for Economic and Monetary Affairs, at his confirmation hearing at the European Parliament Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee has called for improved coordination and supervision of the member states economic policy. He has stressed that the Lisbon Treaty offers an opportunity to reinforce economic coordination, chiefly in the euro area. He is therefore keen in using “these new opportunities to take real steps forward in economic coordination.” He is planning to put in place “a system of enhanced policy coordination based on broader and deeper surveillance for euro area Member States.”
Presently, Member States still represent themselves at financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the G20. In 2008, the Commission adopted a Communication “EMU@10: successes and challenges after 10 years of Economic and Monetary Union” where it suggested the creation of a single seat in the relevant international financial institutions and fora. Obviously, France, Germany, Italy and the UK are not willing to lose their influence in those institutions. But, this idea is again on the spotlight.
The EU has been represented at the G20 by the rotating Council presidency and the European Central Bank. Mr Rehn is in favour of an EU “unified representation” at the international economic fora, particularly the G20 and the IMF. He is planning to present a Communication recommending “strengthening European participation and representation in international financial institutions and fora.“ According to the EuropeanVoice, after a Eurogroup meeting which took place on 18 January, Jean-Claude Juncker has said that the eurozone ministers for Economic and Financial Affairs have recognised the need “for a for a more unified representation of the Eurogroup in international institutions.” The Financial Times quotes him saying “The eurogroup has to become a member of the G20, because the currency isn’t at the moment represented by its political president, if I may say so, but only by its monetary policy arm, which is Mr Trichet,(…)”. According to Mr Juncker, the Commission is set to present proposals in this regard.
Unsurprisingly, it is a priority for Michael Barnier, Commissioner-designate for the Internal Market and Services, “to complete the reform of supervision in Europe with the Parliament and the Council.” Spain also wants to have the approval of the new European financial supervisory framework: the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB), and the European System of Financial Supervisors, during its presidency. The UK’s Financial Services Authority would see its powers substantially reduced if such proposals are adopted. On 2 December, the EU finance ministers reached a ‘general approach’ on the European System of Financial Supervisors. According to the EuropeanVoice, Mr Barnier said that the EU finance ministers’ agreement “needs to be improved.” It is important to recall that according Jose Manuel Barroso the EU finance ministers have watered down a “bit to much” the Commission’s proposals on the EU's financial supervision.
It is also a priority for Spain the adoption of the draft directive of alternative investment fund managers which has been heavily criticized by the hedge fund and private equity industries over the costs and red tape that it entails. Spain being in charge of the negotiations is not good news for the UK as Spain supports the Commission’s proposal. According to the Guardian, Spanish Economy Minister, Elena Salgado, has said, “They need to be regulated, and our regulation (in Spain) on alternative investment funds is strict and has been for a long time. Not only hedge funds, but other funds as well, like property funds.”
Spain also favours the introduction of EU harmonised instruments to face cross-border banking crises. It intends, therefore, to foster “a new legal harmonising and coordinating measures in three areas, of crisis management i.e.: early or preventive intervention, intervention of entities in trouble (and their financing), and bankruptcy matters derived from the liquidation of cross-border banks.” It is important to mention that last October the European Commission adopted a Communication on an EU framework for crisis management in the banking sector. The European Commission is considering new supervisory tools, and particularly the possibility for troubled banks to "transfer assets between different legal entities and across borders within a group.” As regards the financing of bank resolution measures, it has stressed the need of burden sharing between Member States. Furthermore, Mr Barnier has said to the MEPs that he is planning to present a proposal creating a legal framework for crisis management and resolution, aiming at reinforcing and harmonizing “the supervision of financial groups in terms of equity and liquidity and the financial stability of each Member State and of the Union as a whole.”
Unsurprisingly, the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty is a major priority for Spain. Mr López Garrido has said "Today we are not a global player. We have some expressions of foreign policy. (…), but we do not have a real external policy in Europe(…)" According to Mr López Garrido the Lisbon Treaty provides all the necessary instruments for the EU to become “a real global player.” Hence, the Spanish Presidency will closely work with the President of the European Council and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy “to make the most of all the possibilities rendered by the new Treaty.”
Under the Lisbon Treaty the High Representative has the role of ensuring the unity, consistency and effectiveness of the EU's external action. Ms Ashton assumed her new post, as High Representative, on 1 December, but as vice president of the Commission, she had to go through a confirmation hearing at the European Parliament Foreign Affairs Committee. The High Representative is both the Council’s representative for the common foreign and security policy and one of the Commission’s vice-presidents. Being a vice president of the Commission Ms Ashton will be responsible within the Commission for responsibilities given to it in external relations and she will be bound by Commission procedures. The CFSP is an intergovernmental matter and, in this way, a Commission member will be too involved in the Council’s work. The High Representative is supposed to act as a bridge between the Council and the Commission. She will serve the Council and the Commission interests which are quite often conflicting. The Commission will use the High Representative to seek agreement at the Council on all matters related to the Union’s external policy. At the hearing some MEPs asked her about "the difficulty of pursuing a coherent foreign policy with the overlap between the Commission and the Council". However, Ms Ashton, said, according to the European Parliament press release, “the overlapping nature of the post was an "asset.””
Baroness Ashton will be assisted in carrying out her mandate by the so called European external action service. The organisation and functioning of the EEAS will be established by a Council decision, acting by QMV, on a proposal from the High Representative, after consulting the European Parliament and obtaining the consent of the Commission. In her written reply to the European Parliament questionnaire, Ms Ashton said that “My first priority will be to build the European External Action Service as an efficient and coherent service that will be the pride of the Union and the envy of the rest of the world.” Moreover, Ms Ashton told the MEPs that it was a "once in a generation opportunity to build something that brings together all the elements of our engagement – political, economic and military – to implement one coherent strategy" in foreign policy. In fact, the EEAS will be a melting pot, combining sensitive intergovernmental policies (security, defence, foreign policy) and community policies. One could wonder if the CFSP intergovernmental nature would be respected.
Ms Ashton is planning to present the proposal as soon as possible and Spain is very keen in collaborating with her “so that the Council can take a decision by the end of April.” The EEAS’s administrative expenditure will be funded from the EU’s budget, consequently Ms Ashton will also present proposals to amend the Financial Regulation and the Staff Regulations, as well as a draft amending budget for 2010. The European Parliament has been calling for the EEAS to be part of the Commission administrative structure. Ms Ashton has stressed that the EEAS will be "sui generis" structure distinct from the European Commission but ensure that the EEAS body "would be subject to full scrutiny by Parliament.” Obviously, the European Parliament would have its say on the budget to be proposed by the High Representative. Ms Ashton said that she would “involve the European Parliament closely in this process, including in the course of the preparation of the proposals and look forward to consultation with the Parliament on the draft decision.” However, the European Parliament has made unacceptable suggestions such as that the EU delegations in third countries “could in many cases take over consular services and deal with Schengen visa issues” and the creation of a “European diplomatic college” to provide “training based on fully harmonised curricula” to Union officials and officials of the Member States.
The EU has been represented by the Member State holding the rotating presidency, but now the High Representative is in charge of expressing the “Union” common positions at international organizations and international conferences. Ms Ashton is, therefore, responsible to conduct political dialogue with third countries such as the US, Russia, China, etc. However, when questioned about foreign policy issues such as the EU's strategy on the Afghanistan, she gave, as Charles Tannock noted "very evasive answers." Moreover, he said that "her knowledge is still fairly shallow and clearly she shows her lack of experience". Although Baroness Ashton fulfils all the requirements of the EU leader’s unwritten agreement, she is from the centre left, from a big country and she is a woman, she has no foreign policy experience.
Catherine Ashton may speak on behalf of the Union in the United Nations Security Council. Under the Lisbon Treaty, Member States which are also members of the United Nations Security Council, meaning UK and France, will have to “request that the High Representative be asked to present the Union's position” if there is a common position on a subject which is on the agenda of the United Nations Security Council. The UK would no longer be free to act independently within the Security Council. According to the Mail Ms Ashton when asked about her views on calls for the EU to replace the UK and France in the United Nations Security Council, she answered: "I don't know", as she has not thought about it yet.
Ms Ashton might be a low profile figure with lack of international experience but the powers are there for her, and subsequent High Representatives, to use. Plus, she has Barroso to help her out who, in the end of the day, is her boss. Barroso will take the opportunity to exercise more influence over foreign policy. Geoffrey Van Orden has said, "Her whole thrust is in the direction of the Commission. Her office is in the Commission. It is providing the resources. Her power base is there. I would say to national governments – beware your foreign policy is at risk."
It is important to recall that the Lisbon Treaty introduced a "solidarity clause" whereby the Union as well as each Member State are required to provide assistance to a Member State affected by a human or natural disaster or by a terrorist attack. The decisions on the implementation of such clause would be taken by the Council, acting by QMV, on a joint proposal by the Commission and the High Representative. The Spanish Presidency already announced that that it will “fully backed” the “efforts” of the European Commission and the High Representative in putting forward a joint proposal to develop the solidarity clause.
The Lisbon Treaty provides a legal base for the Union to accede to the Council of Europe’s European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. In fact, it requires the Union to accede to the ECHR. The European Convention on Human Rights is an international treaty which only member States of the Council of Europe may sign. Consequently, the EU accession to the ECHR will be another example of the EU acting as a State. The EU accession will be a complex process. There are procedural issues about the relationship between the EU and its Member States in proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights, institutional issues about the place of the EU on the Court. The EU accession will enable individuals to bring complaints against the European Union institutions directly before the European Court of Human Rights. Moreover, the EU is enabled to bring Member States before the European Court of Human rights. The EU accession to the ECHR is likely to entail conflict of jurisdiction as both courts, ECJ and ECHR would have jurisdiction on the matter. According to the EuropeanVoice Françoise Tulkens, a Belgian judge at the European Court of Human rights, has said that if the EU accedes to the convention “the result could be that an EU-appointed judge would sit at the European Court of Human Rights to hear cases related to EU law. It would also entitle the European Court of Human Rights to rule on EU law (…)”
Viviane Reding, Commissioner-designate for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship has said to the MEPs that she is planning to present as soon as possible the proposal for a negotiation mandate for the accession of the EU to the ECHR. Spain is also ready to start the EU accession process to the ECHR. The Spanish presidency programme reads “Based on the proposal submitted by the Commission, the Spanish Presidency will promptly start the accession process and foster the negotiations.” Under the Lisbon Treaty the Council continues to “authorise the opening of negotiations, adopt negotiating directives, authorise the signing of agreements and conclude them.” The Council is required to decide unanimously on the EU accession to the ECHR and must obtain the consent (assent procedure) of the European Parliament.
It is also a priority to Spain “The development of an energy security policy.” Günther Oettinger, Commissioner-designate for Energy has said to the European Parliament Committee on Industry, Research and Energy that he is planning to present “legislative proposals for a new EU instrument for security of energy supply and energy supply infrastructure.” It is important to recall that the Lisbon Treaty expressly states that energy policy should be carried out in a “spirit of solidarity” between Member States. The reference to solidarity is strengthened by an amendment to Article 100 stating “(…) the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, may decide, in a spirit of solidarity between Member States, upon the measures appropriate to the economic situation, in particular if severe difficulties arise in the supply of certain products, notably in the area of energy." It is not clear how such solidarity will take place. But the UK might be required to supply energy to another Member State in case of crisis. Günther Oettinger also said that he will “strengthen further the solidarity between Member States and the EU's ability to speak with one voice in international energy matters and to secure the supply of all Member States.” Moreover, he will also present a new action plan for energy efficiency. When asked about introducing binding targets for energy efficiency, he replied "I'm prepared to talk to you about a legally binding goal in two years if we don't achieve the results on a voluntary basis.”
As regards taxation, the review of the Directive on energy taxation is a priority for the Spanish presidency as well as for Algirdas Šemeta, Commissioner-designate for Taxation and Customs Union, Audit and Anti-Fraud. He said to the European Parliament Committee on Budgetary Control that he is planning “to revise the Energy Taxation Directive to complement the Emission Trading System with a CO2-tax element within the broader perspective of a green taxation framework.” Such proposal would breach the principle of subsidiarity. According to a draft prepared last year by the Commission's taxation and customs department, Member States would be obliged to levy a CO2 tax on fuels in order to cut emissions. The Commission wants to introduce minimum levels of taxation on different types of fuels related to the intensity of their emissions. The UK government is against such proposal of a harmonised EU carbon tax.
Spain is also planning to carry on with the debates on the future of the CAP beyond 2013. Dacian Ciolos, Commissioner-designate for Agriculture and Rural Development said at his confirmation hearing that "The CAP needs to be reformed” but for him “reform does not mean reducing financial support but adapting it to tackle the new challenges.” When asked by James Nicholson "What budget level do you see for the CAP?", he said "I will be putting forward arguments for a well-funded CAP: we can't build the new CAP without a commensurate budget!" Janusz Lewandowski, Commissioner-designate for Financial Programming and Budget, said at his confirmation hearing, that the CAP's share of the EU budget it is unlikely to be reduced further than 33 percent of the total EU budget in 2013.
