let battle commence ! © Baron Frankal

The new EU Reform Treaty, born at last week’s Summit, was both six years and six months in the making. Years, because its content is essentially the changes to the EU made by the Constitution: a new EU President, a more efficient Commission, a single EU foreign policy supremo, the reweighting of the voting power of different Member States and the rest. Months, because it was the Merkel Presidency that has single-mindedly, and against the odds, tried to find a way forward for an EU in need of reform despite France and the Netherlands rejecting the Constitution in 2005.

Although the task of finalising the process now passes to the Portuguese, the Germans made sure that the top European leaders signed off on the provisions of the new Treaty to an incredibly detailed extent, meaning that it should be ready by the end of the year and will probably be signed in early 2008 while the first new Member State, Slovenia, holds the Presidency.

For the new Treaty to enter into force before the 2009 European Parliament elections (and new Commission), all that needs to happen is for 27 Member States to ratify the thing. That of course is when last week’s agreement will really be tested.

For the 18 Member Statesthat ratified the old version, this should not represent a problem. That leaves the four “friends of the Constitution”, Ireland, Sweden, Denmark and Portugal, the two rejectionists, France and the Netherlands, and the awkward squad from Prague, Warsaw and London.

All of these countries may hold a referendum. Clearly, very strong consideration has been given in drafting the new Treaty to ensure that a plausible case can be made that no “national sovereignty” will pass to the EU. This could make referendums unneccessary in every country bar Ireland (even Denmark). For the others, it is essentially a political decision, and varying amounts of popular pressure will now be put on leaders to hold one. In the strongest position to resist is Sarkozy, who explicitly said a referendum may not be necessary before receiving his shiny new electoral mandate.

In the weakest position is Gordon Brown, who wasn’t at the Summit, has no popular mandate and must contend with a strong eurosceptic opposition which will make huge amounts of political capital by arguing for a referendum. Around 80% of Brits say they want a referendum,and it appears unwinnable, whatever the contents of the Treaty. Having said that, the Summit agreement is riddled with strong text, e.g. on national security (that – repeated and underlined – remains the sole responsibility of each Member State) which is clearly designed to help convince the British public that the “blessed plot” of Europe has not advanced.

The Netherlands too can show that changes have been made for them, in incorporating the political criteria for new countries to join the EU and strenghening the role of national parliaments. The Poles got what they wanted – for ten years, at least.

And so now the leaders have agreed and it is time for the citizens in each and every Member State to have their say, either indirectly, by allowing the decision to be taken by their parliaments or directly in referendums. Logic strongly suggests that if citizens want the EU to survive and be effective in the years to come, the new Treaty must be ratified. Amongst many other things, it empowers European citizens and their Parliament. Unfortunately, these things often have very little to do with logic. Merkel has done her work, the rest of us must now do ours.

First published in the budapest sun, 27 june 2007,