Two auspicious sets of negotiations have been formally opened this week in the European Union: an inter-governmental conference to amend its institutions, and talks with 12 accession States seeking to become members. They are closely linked, since more effective decision-making will be essential ahead of enlargement if the EU's methods of work are not to be damaged. Ireland's position and interests in the EU could change profoundly over the course of these negotiations. Despite their complexity and technical character they, therefore, deserve the closest political attention in the months and years to come.
The inter-governmental conference (IGC) agenda is often referred to as the leftovers from the Treaty of Amsterdam. This is simple and accurate insofar as its three major issues - representation of member-States in the institutions, the extent of majority voting and the reweighting of votes - were not resolved at those negotiations in 1997; but it is misleading insofar as their importance is underplayed. It was precisely because they were so sensitive that these issues were deferred. They raise profound questions about the legitimacy and democratic accountability of the institutions in question.
This was freely acknowledged by the president of the European Commission, Mr Romano Prodi, when he spoke in the European Parliament this week. "We would like to govern Europe in a way that is closer to the citizens, more efficient, and in a way citizens can participate", he said. The Commission is an important but essentially secondary player in the IGC, which is dominated by the member-State governments, several of which are determined not to cede constitutional initiatives. But uncertainty arises over the conclusions of the body representing member-States, national parliaments and EU institutions appointed by the Helsinki summit last December to draw up a draft charter of fundamental rights. Their work has been made much more politically relevant following EU governments' reactions to the Haider affair in Austria.
From Ireland's point of view there are crucial issues at stake in this IGC. In addition to these institutional changes there is the question of whether the rapidly developing EU security and defence identity will require treaty changes, thus necessitating a referendum. The Government has indicated a willingness to be more flexible on qualified majority and weighted voting in return for keeping this State's representation on the European Commission. It is a credible and correct approach. From the point of view of the smaller EU member-States, representation on the Commission is intimately linked with maintaining the existing balance between the institutions, including the Commission's current role - thus guaranteeing the rule of law which moderates and constrains the sheer power of the largest states.
That balance has been the kernel of the EU's historic success as an innovative experiment in sharing sovereignty. Spreading it to a continental level through an enlargement doubling the number of member States over the next 15-20 years is as great a test of political and diplomatic ingenuity as any modern challenge faced by Europe's leaders. Ireland's interests will change as this State becomes more prosperous, achieves average EU incomes and becomes a net contributor to the EU budget. But although Ireland will be a richer State it will remain a small one, requiring the protection of the EU's institutions and resources for development. In order to preserve those interests it will be worth supporting some of the more adventurous proposals to enhance the Union's legitimacy and democratic accountability.