Strategies for Fundamental EU reform

There seems little appetite in the rest of the EU for far-reaching treaty change—rightly or wrongly, leaders across the continent fear opening a Pandora’s Box, and having to ask their people for assent in a referendum1. So, to achieve significant reform of the EU, the UK government will need to be creative.
 

Treaty change is desirable for a number of reasons and a ‘grand bargain’ could still be struck to secure the rights of the non-euro states in return for the changes needed to firm-up the euro.
 

Of 13 other significant reforms proposed by the Fresh Start Project to improve competitiveness, flexibility and democratic accountability, only four of them (ever closer union, policing and criminal justice, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the Strasbourg Circus) could only be achieved by treaty change—the others could be achieved through other means as the table below summarises.
 

Substantive reform can be achieved through qualified majority voting (QMV) among national governments and co-decision with the European Parliament, through unanimity among member states with the European Parliament’s consent, through ‘inter-institutional agreements’, through a ‘promissory note’ along the lines of that agreed with Ireland following the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty, or through the EU treaties’ ‘flexibility clause’.

However, there is a clear trade-off between the permanence of treaty change on one hand, and the relative ease of achieving change through the current structures on the other. This paper examines these trade-offs. One thing is clear, if the political will is there, there is always a means to make the change happen.

Read More