INTERNATIONAL

Achievements of French Presidency of the European Union

Institutions adapted to allow the Union's enlargement:

In accordance with the mandate it received from the European Council, the French Presidency has achieved reform of the institutions opening the path for the enlargement of the Union. At the same time, it has contributed to strengthening the European social model and advanced community action on subjects of direct interest to European citizens.

The French presidency of the EU ended on 31 December 2000 and handed over to Sweden.

# In accordance with its mandate from the EU council, the French presidency brought to a successful conclusion the Intergovernmental Conference on reforming the institutions and thereby paving the way for the Union's enlargement. The advent of political Europe, becoming a fully-fledged power on the international stage, also involved affirming its security and defense dimension. The French presidency thus contributed to preparing the establishment of the appropriate political and military structures.

# The strengthening of the European social model, marrying economic efficiency and social cohesion, was a priority of French presidency. The agreement reached on a European social agenda for the next five years is a contribution to it. Similarly, greater coordination of economic and tax policies, particularly within the Eurogroup, will allow full advantage to be gained from the benefits of the euro.

# Finally, the French presidency was determined to take forward the EU action on matters of direct concern to European citizens, particularly as regards food safety and maritime safety.

An effective Commission for the enlarged Europe: In an enlarged Europe with 27 more members, an effective Commission able to embody the general interest and ensure the coherence of the whole EU will be more necessary than never. To this end, the Nice Treaty has provided for some major reforms.

# The President of the Commission, whom the member states will henceforth appoint by a qualified majority and no longer unanimous vote, sees his role significantly strengthened:; he will have full powers as regards the Commission's internal organization; he will have full authority over the Commissioners in the execution of their duties and will, if necessary, be able to demand their resignation.

# The principle of capping the size of the commission has been explicitly included in the Treaty. Consequently, in the enlarged Union, the number of Commissioners will have to be lower than the number of member States. Rotation on a strictly equal basis will ensure that each State will in turn have a Commissioner of its nationality.

More appropriate voting rules in the Council: The rules for voting in the Council of Ministers have been adapted to the configuration of an enlarged Europe, marked in particular by the great disparity between the sizes of its member States' populations.

# In order to correct the trend, constant since the European Community's birth, towards an over-weighting of the least heavily populated States in the decision-making mechanisms of the Council of Ministers, which, in an EU with 27 or more members, would have jeopardized the democratic nature of the decision making process, the Treaty of Nice strikes a new fairer balance between the member States' voting strengths. The ration between the group of least heavily populated States-Latvia, Slovenia, Estonia, Cyprus, Luxembourg and Malta- and that of the most heavily populated States-Germany, France, UK and Italy-will thus go from 1 to 5 present to almost 1 to 10 in the enlarged Community. Additional guarantees have been provided for to prevent two possible obstacles will be optional: where a qualified majority decision would place in a minority States representing at least 62% of the Union's population and conversely, where a decision passed by qualified majority would be imposed on more than half of the EU members who were opposed to it.

# The scope of qualified majority voting has been markedly expanded. Over 90% of decisions will now be taken this way. However, some issue will continue to require unanimity. At France's request, this will be the case for decisions on the negotiations on the services in the areas of culture, education, vocational training and health, which can not be regarded merely as marketable goods. On the insistence of several of French partners, some other spheres such as social policy and taxes, will also continue to require unanimity.

Heightened powers for the European Parliament: The size of the European Parliament has been increased and the distribution of seats modified to make room for the elected representatives of the future new members.

# Voice of the peoples, the European Parliament will grow, in the enlarged Union, to 732 members from the current 626. The number of each member States' seats will depend on the size of its population, calculated according to a system of adjusted proportionality so as to take account of the tremendous range of different population sizes in the Union, since Malta has fewer than 400,000 inhabitants and Germany over 82 million, a strictly proportional distribution would have resulted in a European Parliament with over 1,200 members. The share-outs of seats between the larger States reflects their respective populations.

# The European Parliament's powers with respect to co-decision are to be extended. Furthermore, this institution will enjoy, on an equal footing with the member States, Council and Commission, a full right to refer matters to the Court of Justice.

# Finally, for the first time, the Nice Treaty provides for the possibility of rules for political parties at the European level.

A more flexible "enhanced cooperation" mechanism: # Thanks to this mechanism, those States which so wish, will be able to maintain a ground-breaking momentum.

# In the enlarged Europe, enhanced cooperation may be initiated by groups of at least eight member States wishing to go faster and further in the Union framework. Any such areas of cooperation will remain open to States, which subsequently wish to join them. They must not infringe upon the acquis communautaire.

# The right which each member State had to veto the establishment of enhanced cooperation is rescinded, as except as regards the common foreign and security policy.

The basis of a Defense Europe has been built: The strengthening of the common foreign and security policy requires the Union to have the ability to mobilize a vast range of both civil and military assets and instruments thereby giving it a comprehensive crisis-management and conflict-prevention capability. This strengthening presupposes a genuine strategic partnership between EU and NATO in crisis management.

# The European Council concluded the discussion embarked on in Cologne and Helsinki and approved the military forces commitments' declaration. These commitments do not signify the creation of a European army; whether or not to make national assets available will remain a matter of sovereign decision. Nonetheless, these commitments will provide the Union with a real instrument for taking action under its common policy. Between now and 2003, a pool of 100,000 men, 400 combat planes and 100 naval vessels will be established for this purpose.

# Finally, the European Union will have the permanent bodies it needs for the conduct of the common foreign and defense policy: a Political and Security Committee, Military Committee and European Military Staff.

"The Irish Co-Operative Movement"

By Sean McKiernan Junior, student of the Irish Institute of Public Administration

I read with tremendous interest a report in the January 13th edition of the online version of The Rising Nepal regarding the potential of the co-operatives medium to strengthen your country of Nepal. It centred around the inaugural annual general conference of Shirijunga Multi-Purpose Co-Operative Society Ltd, which was presided over by Minister of State for Industry, Commerce and Supplies Narendra Bikram. This report rekindled my interest in the Irish Co-Operative Movement in the agricultural sector of the late 19th and early 20th Century. This movement owes its existence to one man, Sir Horace Plunkett. Plunkett was a member of the Protestant Ascendancy class in Ireland, they are often portrayed as harsh 'British' overlords in Ireland's history, however Plunkett was a patriotic Irishman who nonetheless felt an affinity with the British Empire of which Ireland was then a member. He spent ten years as a rancher in the United States of America, and absorbed the great dynamism and expansionist instincts which were intrinsic to the New World at that time. In 1888 he returned to his native Ireland, and was appalled by the poverty of Irish farmers which he witnessed. He noted that Irish farmers had lost their share of neighbouring British markets during the 1880's, and he blamed this on their inefficient methods in the preparation and distribution of their products and on a failure to work together. As a result he threw himself into the economic and political life of the country. However, this was often with greater enthusiasm rather than tact, and his outspoken utterances won him so much hostility from such a cross section of Irish life that his impact was greatly reduced.

At this time each Irish farm was a single economic unit. The farmer bought his seed, tools, and fertiliser in very small quantities from local shops, where he paid the highest prices as a result. His produce (e.g. butter, grain or calves) was then sold to local dealers at a very low price in comparison to his initial investment and volume of work expended in the interim. Essentially Irish farmers were at the mercy of middlemen. There were no standards of quality or hygiene for this produce, nor was there anybody to instruct Irish farmers in these areas.

Sir Horace Plunkett firmly believed that co-operation would solve the social and economic problems of rural Ireland. He felt that by combining their resources, farmers could buy inputs such as seed cheaply, process and sell their produce with lower overheads, thus optimising their profits at each stage. As a result living standards would rise, and farmers would become more self-reliant.

Plunkett used the example of agriculture in Denmark as a case in point. Here farmers had faced many problems similar to those of their Irish colleagues. They had established co-operatives, setting up shops to avail of cheaper seeds etc. by purchasing in bulk. In Denmark they processed their own produce, set high standards of quality and sold their produce at the best prices. Not only had this co-operation made Danish farmers more prosperous, but they actually began to displace the Irish as the key suppliers of butter and bacon to the British market.

In 1891 the first Irish co-operative was established in Doneraile, at Plunkett's suggestion that the Irish imitate the Danes. The movement quickly gathered momentum, mostly in areas affable to dairy farming. In 1894 the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society was formed. Its aims were to co-ordinate the work of local societies. The following year Sir Horace Plunkett established a newspaper; "The Irish Homestead", to spread his message. It was edited by George Russell. Despite its cosy title it offered nothing less than a platform for an objective critical analysis of Irish life.

Whilst Plunkett always emphasised the non-political nature of his work, his movement was opposed by many groups who disliked his personality, his politics were "pro-British" at a time when Ireland was striving for self determination, his religion was Protestant and thus he was a member of the ruling Ascendancy class. However the basic reality was that a broad alliance of priests, Catholic/nationalist politicians and the mostly Catholic/nationalist merchant class feared the way his polices were restricting their power and profits, irrespective of his background - which was merely an cosmetic grievance in comparison to those regarding his policies.

However Plunkett's movement spread despite this opposition. By 1914 the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society had over 1,000 affiliated societies, with an annual turnover of £3.5 million in 1914 money terms. It was most successful in the dairying regions where the small co-operative creameries provided work for local people and an income for co-op members. It had little impact in other farming sectors. The creamery butter they produced was better than the home made farm butter and very soon it captured the Irish market, however the co-ops were too small and uncoordinated to recover the lucrative export market in Great Britain.

In 1899 at the suggestion of Sir Horace Plunkett the British Government set up a Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, which Plunkett himself headed. It had debatable success. The department set up training colleges, ran courses and appointed advisors, but these did not bring about the seismic changes that Plunkett had dreamed of. Irish farmers were generally too conservative and too poor to utilise new techniques, and whilst the farm advisors were technically very competent they lacked practical experience and were essentially bureaucrats.