The European Commission yesterday set off a number of familiar hares when it submitted its proposals on the EU's future institutional architecture to the Convention on the Future of Europe.
Not least, from an Irish perspective, was its insistence that the continued use of the veto at the Council of Ministers will lead to decision-making gridlock.
Specifically, the Commission argues, "abandoning the principle of unanimity must therefore also apply to the fiscal and social issues which have an impact on the smooth operation of the internal market." Not surprisingly, both the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs have bluntly rejected the idea that decision-making on corporate tax harmonisation could move to qualified majority voting.
The problem is that while it is clear that such matters as income tax rates do not impinge on the internal market's functioning, several member states believe that differential corporate tax rates make for a pitted playing field and unfair competition. The Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, on the other hand, sees such differences as measures of economic efficiency and legitimate tools for enhancing competitiveness.
Such contradictory interpretations of the Union's role make a reconciliation of positions on the veto impossible. The only way the Commission can win Irish support for a move to abolish the veto will be if it can persuade the Convention to clearly and unambiguously define Union competences in such a way that member states are in no doubt as to the treaty-limits of the Union's remit. Then the veto could be addressed.
The Commission's paper, otherwise, has much to commend it. It speaks of a "renewal of the Community method", and the proposals are clearly conceived around a welcome reaffirmation of the need to preserve the triangular balance of power between the Commission, the Council, and Parliament which has to date successfully reconciled both large and small states and individual interests and those of the whole.
Mr Cowen yesterday gave a welcome hint of support for bringing the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) supremo, currently Mr Javier Solana, partially under the wing of the Commission. The move would undoubtedly add to the coherence of the Union's external actions.
But the Government unfortunately remains suspicious of Parliament and hostile to the idea of electing a President of the Commission there. Although there are understandable fears at the prospect of MEPs taking a Commission President "hostage", no other single measure would do more to add to the democratic legitimacy of an otherwise remote and unaccountable Commission. And, thankfully, the Commission has thought better of the deeply offensive idea, floated in a now-amended draft constitution, of relegating states "unable" to approve new treaties to a non-voting peripheral status. Try that one out on an Irish electorate.