| | | |

| Home : | Speeches and documents > 2007

|

European Council statements made by M. Nicolas SARKOZY, President of the Republic, during his final joint press conférence with M. bernard KOUCHNER, minister of Foreign and European Affairs - excerpts -

Print

Brussels, 23 June 2007

THE PRESIDENT – Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to give you some very good news: Europe has shown it was capable of ending the deadlock, taking difficult decisions, even with 27 members. We have just agreed on a very detailed mandate, entrusted to an Intergovernmental Conference which will have to have finished working before the end of 2007 with a view to adopting a simplified Treaty. It's very good news for France and for Europe! We promoted the idea of this simplified Treaty and it's important that it can be achieved.

I'd also like to say how fruitful the work with Mrs Merkel and our German friends has been. We worked with them throughout the past two nights, the many hours of discussion, in a perfect spirit of cooperation, agreement, friendship and trust.

So, there you are, the Intergovernmental Conference has a clear, extremely precise mandate which the Portuguese presidency is going to implement very soon, since the work is scheduled to be completed before the end of 2007. The Poles have agreed, both the President and Prime Minister. Things have been sorted out.

On the fundamental issues, with Bernard Kouchner and Jean-Pierre Jouyet, we have obtained a major shift in the EU's objectives. Competition is no longer an EU objective or an end in itself, but a means of serving the internal market. A protocol confirms that competition issues are linked to the organization of the internal market, it's a major point.

Moreover and in its relations with the rest of the world, it's now clearly stated, for the first time, that the EU must contribute to ensuring the protection of its citizens. The word "protection" is no longer taboo.

The role of public services in Europe has been recognized and endorsed by a protocol making it clear that they play a major role in it, that Europeans are committed to this and that organizing these services is the responsibility, first and foremost, of member States. This, like competition, is deemed a means and not an end in itself.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights becomes legally binding. It isn't incorporated into the Treaty, but the latter confers on it an obligatory legal value. For the sake of compromise, the Charter won't apply to the United Kingdom, but will apply to all the other 26 countries. We have got the reform of the institutions: a president of the European Council elected for a two-and-a-half year term, renewable once, without any national responsibility, an EU high representative for foreign policy, and, above all, the extension of qualified majority voting. This will allow us to establish a genuine immigration policy, a genuine European energy policy and genuine judicial cooperation.

As foreseen, the most difficult point was the move to the double majority voting system. Saying there were lengthy discussions is a bit of an understatement. The proposal which resolved the deadlock is the following: the Nice Treaty is going to apply until 2014. From 2014 to 2017, there will be the double majority rule, unless any member State asks for Nice to be applied. This is the basis of the agreement which was discussed at length.

After paying tribute to the President, Angela Merkel, I'd also like to say how fruitful the collaboration was with José Luis Zapatero and Tony Blair. I'd also like to say how happy I've been with all the French team and everyone who worked with us. Bernard Kouchner and Jean-Pierre Jouyet spared no effort in their bilateral contacts.

We wanted the simplified Treaty; we've got the simplified Treaty. We wanted to end the deadlock; we've ended the deadlock. On the fundamental points, we wanted to give the EU a new direction; this shows it's possible.

Also I want too to pay tribute to Mr José Socrates who displayed solidarity on every point. This is very important, since he's going to be the next president of the Council and so will have to implement what is a very detailed mandate. You'll see the documents, and we are satisfied. This morning there was an agreement and yet the discussions had been close to breaking down. But I can tell you that France never gave up. On behalf of France, I told the Council that it wasn't possible, after the fall of the Berlin wall, to leave out the largest of the East European countries. I want everyone to appreciate what, after its reunification, the decision for 26 members to move forward without the 27th would have meant for Europe. In the event of a crisis, that possibility would have clearly had to be contemplated. It was contemplated, but I believe it was really important to keep Europe's unity.

(···)

TONY BLAIR/GORDON BROWN

Q. – This is Prime Minister Blair's last summit. You said that yesterday evening you had worked closely with him. How do you assess his contribution to Europe?

THE PRESIDENT – His contribution to yesterday evening's agreement was very important. I greatly regret Mr Blair's departure. He has always been a man who sought compromise in Europe and brought the United Kingdom into the heart of Europe. I have talked to Gordon Brown and Tony Blair. I hope and am sure that, moving from 11 to 10 Downing Street, Gordon Brown will be keen to be positive.

WESTERN BALKANS/ENLARGEMENT

Q. – President Sarkozy, Mr Kouchner, what's the situation regarding Europe's reunification with the Western Balkans? What's the situation with respect to future enlargements with the new Treaty and do you envisage negotiations being started with Macedonia?

THE PRESIDENT – I'll let Bernard Kouchner answer on the Balkans, a region he's extremely familiar with.

As for enlargement, it was already so difficult, so complicated, so extraordinary to find a compromise that we didn't raise that issue. I want you to understand: it was a matter of ending two years of total inertia. Europe is going to give itself institutions which are going to work. The simplified Treaty, which so few people across Europe believed in, is a reality. Now we're going to be able to do other things, talk about enlargement. But I tell you frankly that had we put that question on the table we wouldn't have had the agreement. Just think what has happened over these two days, it's nevertheless amazing.

(···)

SIMPLIFIED TREATY/COMPETITION

Q. – You've talked about tough negotiations. There was also a sort of rebellion of the somewhat maximalist camp which feared that the draft wasn't ambitious enough. Do you think the final text seems ambitious enough today?

THE PRESIDENT – The text is very ambitious. What did we want? To be able to undertake enhanced cooperation projects more easily; we can! This paves the way for a European energy policy and a European immigration policy. We wanted an EU president for two and a half years, devoting his/her efforts solely to Europe; we've got one. We wanted someone to promote Europe's foreign policy, we've got one: the high representative. The legal instruments, we've got them. We'll have the double majority voting system from 2014 or, if need be, from 2017.

Finally, I note that for two years there's been nothing at all. We wanted the simplified Treaty; we've got it. We wanted movement on competition; there's movement on competition. We wanted movement on public services; there's movement. We didn't want to lose the Charter of Fundamental Rights; we've got it.

If that isn't ambitious, then what is? What's missing? Now admittedly, it isn't a Constitution, but it's the mandate the French gave us. We fought to explain our conception of competition, but this is the mandate the French had given us. On the institutional package, I'd like to ask you to tell me what we've given way on? What have we given up?

Frankly, I think it's a good balance. Of course, there are people who are going to regret the lack of an anthem, flag. But the mandate wasn't to have a Constitution. It isn't a constitutional Treaty. We didn't want one, because the French didn't.

National parliaments have stronger powers to monitor subsidiarity, and here there was a real fight, right up to the last moment, between the Dutch and the Belgians. We've got a greater power of co-decision for the European Parliament.

(···)

Q. – To come back to the European Union's objectives, on competition and protection of the citizens: what exactly do the changes you've proposed in the text mean for the daily lives of the French, the Europeans?

THE PRESIDENT – It's going perhaps to give Europe a bit more humanity. Because as an ideology, as a dogma, what has competition given Europe? It's resulted in fewer and fewer people voting in European elections, fewer and fewer people believing in Europe.

There was perhaps a need to reflect. I believe in competition, I believe in markets, but I believe in competition as a means and not an end in itself. Perhaps that's going to give the Commission a different take on competition issues: competition is there to encourage the emergence of European champions, to promote a genuine industrial policy. "Protection" perhaps reminds all the heads of State and government that Europe is here to protect, not to worry people. But if everything were going well in Europe, if everything were perfect, I really wonder why we've been having so many problems.

The aim wasn't to produce an economic textbook for all Europeans on the economy or the free market. It was to turn our backs on ideology, dogma and naivety.

Now, of course, you can think that this is politics. But precisely, we are political leaders, and it's perhaps because we haven't done enough politics in Europe that we've found ourselves with a Europe which people no longer recognize as theirs. From this point of view, I pressed the point, with my friends, that France and the Netherlands weren't lagging behind, that what happened to us could happen to others. In this respect, I believe that something extremely important has been recognized. We're in a country which voted "no", and it was a way of saying to our colleagues and friends in Europe: "let's wake up, we have to see things differently". We have proved that the 27 of us, without leaving anyone behind, could do this. I have to say that I would have been really unhappy, after the fall of the Berlin wall, for us to have left the largest East European country behind.

(···)

FRANCE/GERMANY

Q. – Traditionally, at every important stage in Europe's history, people talk about the Franco-German tandem. In this summit what role did this tandem play? And what role is it going to play in the future Europe?

THE PRESIDENT – I think I can say that Mrs Merkel and I have been in agreement since I took office. I went to see her, the first evening, and she gave me her agreement on the simplified Treaty that day. We had already talked about it before. We have done things openly. We agreed on the same text and worked hand in hand.

The only thing which perhaps signals a development is that I did the utmost to ensure that the British and the Spanish were associated with the Franco-German tandem. This is what I have always thought, the Franco-German tandem is essential. Mrs Merkel has done a remarkable job, but others had to be involved too, and the constant support of Mr Zapatero and Mr Blair strengthened things. (···).

|