What was the result?
First, an acrimonious row over Britain’s demands to retain national control over key affairs, then an agreement on the constitution was reached late on Friday night. However, the leaders failed to agree on a new president
Does this mean that Britain won the things that it wanted?
Tony Blair set out “red lines” defining areas where Britain would not concede control to Brussels. These included tax, social security, foreign policy and defence. The agreement reached on Friday means that Britain retains a veto giving it national control in all of these areas
So why are the Eurosceptics still concerned? They do not believe that Blair’s red lines will prove bullet-proof in the long term, arguing that they will be overruled by the EU courts. Moreover, article 22 of the new constitution enshrines the EU’s influence in many policy areas. It allows measures to be passed by majority voting. This means that even if Britain wanted to block some policies, it might not be able to do so
Advertisement
Do the sceptics not have more specific concerns?
They are especially worried about the charter of fundamental human rights. They fear that this particular document, which enshrines rights such as the freedom to strike, could be used to override national laws, reversing the reforms of the Thatcher years. Blair says he has ensured that national law will take precedence over EU law in key areas such as the liberty to strike. However, businesses and the Tories disagree. Which side is right may only become clear if cases are tested in court
Does this affect the euro and are we more or less likely to get the single currency?
Less likely, probably. The new constitution may encourage several countries that are already in the eurozone to harmonise their taxes. That would probably deter Britain from joining the euro, even if Blair wanted to do so. There is now a grudging acceptance that the time for joining has passed. As one official said: “The train may now have passed the platform and we are not on it.”
Advertisement
Would missing out on the euro matter?
While Gordon Brown, the chancellor, who is wary of joining the euro, will not lose any sleep over it, Blair, who vowed to put Britain at the “heart of Europe”, may wish he had tried to join earlier
Is the EU becoming a “two-speed” institution?
Yes. In return for keeping our red lines intact, it was agreed that countries which wanted to move forward on issues such as tax harmonisation could get on with it themselves. Over time a widening gap is expected to emerge between those allied to the Franco-German axis and those which are not
Advertisement
Who are our allies?
Poland and some of the smaller eastern European states which have just joined the EU seem to like us. They are wary of creating an EU superstate, fearing that their voices might then be lost. Several sided with us in blocking the French choice of president last week, for example
Will voters have a say on the new constitution?
Blair has said that he will hold a referendum on whether Britain should accept the constitution. However, the vote will not be held until after the next election — and possibly not until 2006. The Eurosceptics will now prepare for a long campaign to persuade people to vote against the constitution. It may not come to that, though. If another country — Poland perhaps — votes against it first, then the constitution may never see the light of day in its current form
Advertisement
If the constitution is voted down, would it matter?
Proponents say that a new constitution, including majority voting, is necessary if the enlarged EU is to function successfully.
Without it, making decisions with 25 nations may be impossible. If the constitution is voted down, it could hasten moves towards a multi-tier Europe, with countries that want closer integration pressing ahead on their own. Or it could leave the EU mired in wrangling for many more years to come. Either way, the fundamental problem still remains to be surmounted: some EU leaders want a federalist superstate while others, it is quite clear, do not.