Ask any EU foreign minister about the purpose of enlarging the Union and you are likely to hear a stirring homily on the healing of Europe's political division. After almost 50 years in which half the continent lived under communist dictatorship, the two parts of Europe are preparing to come together again.
Speak to a finance minister, however, and you will notice a very different tone. Like central bankers, finance ministers are acutely conscious of every economic threat, real or imaginary. And the prospect of accepting up to a dozen relatively poor countries into the EU is fraught with risks.
If the mood of the enlargement negotiations has become more tense of late, it is partly because EU finance ministries are becoming more involved. And as they calculate the potential cost of enlargement, EU member-states are moving to protect their own interests.
It started with Austria and Germany, which were concerned that an influx of cheap labour from eastern Europe could create social problems in their countries. They sought to ban central and eastern Europeans from working in the EU for seven years after enlargement. They also attempted to protect some services, such as construction, from cheaper competition - but this suggestion was shot down almost immediately.
Most EU states acknowledged that Austria and Germany, which border on a number of candidate countries, had real concerns about the free movement of labour. But a deal was blocked at last month's foreign ministers' summit in Sweden when Spain said it would only agree if it received an assurance that its own poorer regions would continue to receive EU cohesion funds after enlargement.
Cohesion funding, which aims to bring poorer regions closer to the average EU standard of living, goes to regions with an income of less than 75 per cent of the average. Once poorer countries from eastern Europe join the EU, the average income will fall and some regions in Spain, Portugal and Italy would no longer qualify for funding.
Madrid claims this would be unfair because it would represent "statistical cohesion" rather than a real rise in living standards. Spain backed down this week after receiving assurances that its concerns would be addressed and the EU agreed a position on the free movement of labour that would impose an initial two-year ban but would allow individual member-states to extend the measure for up to seven years.
Apart from the direct threat to individual states' interests represented by enlargement, accepting new members could precipitate other changes in how the EU spends its money.
At present, almost half the EU budget goes towards supporting farming through the Common Agricultural Policy. But the recent food scares and a decline in the political power of farmers has led many EU politicians to call for a radical overhaul of the farm subsidy system.
Extending the present level of subsidies to millions of farmers in central and eastern Europe would be expensive. But it would also highlight the inadequacy of the present system, which subsidises production rather than quality or environmental responsibility.
France, which benefits hugely from farm subsidies and regards agriculture as an important part of its national heritage, is worried that enlargement could precipitate an early reform of the subsidy system. Paris has recently attempted to link the free movement of capital to negotiations on agriculture, a ploy that could complicate negotiations.
As they assess the economic risks of enlargement, which could in the future include a threat to the stability of the euro, EU policy makers are looking at ways of improving economic policy co-ordination. This is one of the motivating factors behind proposals, which are unpopular in Ireland, to ask EU finance ministers to consult one another about their budget plans.
Economic experts agree that, although enlargement is an economically hazardous undertaking, the rewards for the EU could be enormous.
The addition of tens of millions of new consumers to the European single market will benefit businesses in the existing EU member-states.
And the experience of earlier enlargements shows that improving the economic conditions of poorer neighbours tends ultimately to benefit the entire Community.
On Monday: The ESRI's Prof John FitzGerald says euro-zone fiscal policy co-ordination may yet prove welcome to Ireland
All articles in the New Economy, New Europe series can be found at www.ireland.com/special/nice
