Briefing item

 

As of March 2007 16 Member States have completed ratification, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Romania, Slovenia and Spain,  two of which (Spain and Luxembourg) voted by referendum. A further two (Germany and Slovakia) have almost finished  ratification; and two have rejected it (France and the Netherlands). That leaves seven countries where the constitution is still on ice (UK, Ireland, Denmark, Poland, Czech Republic, Portugal and Sweden)

 

 

On 12 January 2005, the European Parliament adopted a report by a large majority, endorsing the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe and says it "wholeheartedly supports its ratification." The report by Richard CORBETT (PES, UK) and Íñigo MÉNDEZ DE VIGO (EPP-ED, ES) was adopted by 500 votes in favour to 137 votes against, with 40 abstentions.

 

 

Italy ratified the constitution on 6 April 2005 with an overwhelming majority in the upper house of parliament - 217 votes to 16. The text, which was signed by EU leaders in Rome in 2004, was approved by the Italian lower house (the Chamber of Deputies) in January 2005. Centrist parties backed the constitution, however, the Northern League and the Communist Party, argued that it eroded regional and national sovereignty.

 

The Italian Prime Minister has recently said that reviving the European constitution is fundamental to Europe's future survival.  Romano Prodi, who was also president of the European Commission from 1999 to 2004, said that Britain had to decide whether to stay in or not.  A divided Europe will not survive, Mr Prodi says.  Mr Prodi, who was speaking ahead of celebrations to mark the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome, which established the Common Market, said he was for the constitution.

 

"We have to have it before the European Parliament elections of 2009 because we are 27 countries and we need the rules," he said.  "Like it or not, if we have a united Europe we survive. If not, we are dead. I am absolutely convinced that process is irreversible.  We need time. We needed 45 years to have the euro; I don't know how long before we have the constitution but we need it," he added.

 

 

The Dutch, who rejected the constitution in a referendum in 2005, want amendments to be made to existing treaties to improve the running of the EU, not a renewed attempt to introduce a constitution. They also want a clear separation between European and national roles.

 

In a letter from the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister for European Affairs to the Dutch House of Representatives on the status of discussion on a new European treaty, dated 19 March 2007, the Dutch set out their latest position on their aims for discussions on amending European treaties:

 

"[...] Whether or not the Member States have ratified the Treaty, they seem to agree on a number of points. Many of them see 2009 as a good target date for a new treaty, due to the European Parliament elections in June 2009 and the installation of a new Commission in November 2009. There is also a broad consensus that the treaties must be amended to prevent future stagnation brought on by eroding public support or an inadequate capacity for action. It is becoming increasingly clear that the Constitutional Treaty will not enter into force, and that the reasons for its rejection or non-approval in nine member states must be taken into account in any new attempt to amend the treaties. From the Dutch point of view this is a positive outcome of the period of reflection which offers good prospects for a new treaty. Of course, while the Netherlands is ready to do its part to conclude a new treaty in a timely manner, the treaty’s substance will ultimately be the deciding factor.