Can the European Union reinvent itself in a way more acceptable to the people on whose behalf it is supposed to work? Denis Staunton in Brussels examines the options
The bleak, concrete and steel structure that houses the European Parliament is an unlikely setting for a turning point in history. But when over 100 European politicians gather in the Parliament's chamber this afternoon, they will launch a process that could determine Europe's future for the 21st century.
The Convention on the Future of Europe is in part a response to what Bertie Ahern has described as a sense of "disconnection" between the EU institutions and Europe's citizens. This alienation manifested itself most dramatically in Ireland's rejection last year of the Nice Treaty, but it is shared by citizens in most member-states.
The Convention will do more, however, than consider ways of moving the institutions closer to the people. It will seek to make the EU more efficient, more democratically accountable and better equipped to play a greater role on the world stage.
Above all, it will try to determine, for once and for all, how power should be shared between Brussels and the national governments. And if its leading lights have their way, this division of responsibilities will be enshrined in a constitution for the European Union.
This prospect of drawing up a constitution has invited comparisons between today's event and the Philadephia convention in 1787 that produced the American constitution.
Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, the former president of France who will chair the Convention, will be assisted by two vice-chairmen - the former Italian prime minister, Giuliano Amato, and the former Belgian prime minister, Jean Luc Dehaene.
They will be members of a 12-person praesidium that will set the agenda for the Convention's meetings, which will probably take place every two weeks. The Convention will also call on the resources of a 15-person secretariat, led by a former British diplomat, Sir John Kerr.
At their meeting in Laeken last December, EU leaders outlined 50 questions for the Convention to consider, ensuring the agenda will be broad.
Like other small countries, Ireland will resist any major move to shift power away from the Commission, which is seen as an important check on the influence of the EU's bigger states. The Government opposes the abolition of the rotating presidency of the EU that sees a different member-state taking charge of everything from foreign policy to fisheries negotiations every six months. But Mr Cowen sees some merit in allowing three member-states to share the presidency over an 18-month period.
The Government is lukewarm about the idea of an EU constitution, but has been careful not to reject it out of hand. And Mr Cowen expressed doubts about the wisdom of agreeing a strict division of responsibilities between national governments and EU institutions.
The Government's representative at the Convention, Ray MacSharry, is a former Commissioner with an unusually deep understanding of how the EU works. And the two representatives from the Oireachtas, John Bruton and Proinsias De Rossa, are among the most knowledgeable of politicians on European issues.
Ireland will need this strong team if it is to succeed, with other small countries, in thwarting the alleged ambitions of some larger states to move power away from the Commission towards the Council of Ministers, where national government representatives meet.
Finland's Prime Minister, Paavo Lipponen, this week accused the large member-states of seeking to sideline smaller countries.
"It is clear that there are intentions to convert the system into some kind of board made up of the big countries, and that the Commission and small nations will be pushed aside," he said.
In fact, the intentions of the big states are not yet clear and elections this year in France and Germany will influence the European policies of those two countries. Besides, as EU diplomats point out, European alliances are flexible and, just as small states agree on some issues and disagree on others, so do larger states.
The Convention will today discuss its rules of procedure but it is expected to agree to operate by consensus rather than by taking votes. It will issue reports and perhaps draw up a draft constitution for the EU.
But the final decision on what action to take will rest with member-state governments when they hold a new Inter-Governmental Conference, probably in 2004. Given that the Convention is dominated by national politicians, it would be politically difficult for EU leaders to ignore its conclusions or to modify them too dramatically.
Denis Staunton is Europe Correspondent for The Irish Times