EU TFEU: Competition law: Abuse of dominant position

Yesterday we saw that agreements to distort competition continue to be prohibited in the internal market. In the same way the EU Treaty of Lisbon bans the abuse of a dominant position by a firm.


***

Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/89:

Part Three ‘Policies and internal actions of the Union’

Title VII Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws

Chapter 1 Rules on competition

Section 1 Rules applying to undertakings

Article 102 TFEU
(ex Article 82 TEC)

Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within the internal market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market in so far as it may affect trade between Member States.

Such abuse may, in particular, consist in:

(a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices or other unfair trading conditions;

(b) limiting production, markets or technical development to the prejudice of consumers;

(c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;

(d) making the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.

***

In Article 2, point 75 of the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) laid out the specific amendments to Article 80 TEC and point 76 amended Article 85 TEC. Thus, no specific amendments were made to Article 82 TEC (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/68).

***

The TFEU table of equivalences tells us that Article 82 TEC first became Article 82 TFEU (ToL) in the original Treaty of LIsbon, but later renumbered Article 102 TFEU in the consolidated version (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/211).

***

The current Article 82 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found under Title VI ‘Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws’, Chapter 1 ‘Rules on competition’, Section 1 ‘Rules applying to undertakings’, in the latest consolidated version of the treaties in force (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/74–75).

The only change made by Article 102 TFEU was to replace, twice, the words ‘common market’ by ‘internal market’ in the first paragraph, according to horizontal amendment 2(g). Cf. above and OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/41.

Therefore, Article 82 TEC is not reproduced here.

***

For the sake of a systematic comparison, we look at the Article during the previous treaty reform stages.

First, we turn to the European Convention, which located the provisions on competition in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 5 ‘Rules on competition’, with Subsection 1 ‘Rules applying to undertakings’.

In Article III-51 of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe the words ‘internal market’ were used in the first paragraph instead of ‘common market’, and the provision was exactly the same as the future Article 102 TFEU (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/36).

***

The location and wording of Article III-162 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was the same as for the corresponding provision of the draft (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/69).

***

We have seen that Article 102 TFEU is almost exactly the same as the current Article 82 TEC, the only difference being the systematic use of ‘internal market’ instead of the older expression ‘common market’.

Two reminders:

First, according to Article 3(1)(b) TFEU the EU has exclusive competence in ‘the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market’.

Second, yesterday’s posting looked at the discussion caused by the disappearance of ‘free and undistorted’ competition from the objectives of the European Union between two intergovernmental conferences.

***


What has been said about Article 102 TFEU?


United Kingdom

Professor Steve Peers covered the Treaty of Lisbon in a number of Statewatch Analyses. ‘EU Reform Treaty Analysis no. 3.3: Revised text of Part Three, Titles I to VI of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC): Internal Market and competition’ (Version 2, 23 October 2007) includes the current Title VI Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws.

Peers highlighted the amendment to Article 82 TEC and TFEU (ToL), to be renumbered Article 102 TFEU in the consolidated version, without comment (page 24–25).

The analysis 3.3 and other useful Statewatch analyses are available through:

http://www.statewatch.org/euconstitution.htm

***

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) offers a convenient source of brief annotations on Lisbon Treaty amendments in ‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon’ (Command Paper 7311, published 21 January 2008). It offers the following comment on Article 102 TFEU, Article 82 TFEU (ToL) in the original Lisbon Treaty (page 11):

“Unchanged from Article 82 TEC.”

The FCO comparative table is available at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7311/7311.asp

***

The UK House of Commons Library Research Paper 07/86 ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community’ (published 6 December 2007) discussed competition on page 57 to 60. It commented on Article 81 TEC (the subject of yesterday’s posting) and Article 82 TEC on page 58:

“Present Article 81 TEC prohibits agreements, decisions and concerted practices (“anticompetitive agreements”) which prevent, restrict or distort competition. As one of the EU’s two main competition provisions, a substantial body of case law surrounds the interpretation of this Article. It forms the basis in the Competition Act 1998 for the Chapter I Prohibition of the UK’s domestic competition regime (ss.2, 9). Article 82 TEC is the other main competition article, prohibiting abuse of a dominant position (i.e. monopolistic abuse), which forms the basis for section 18 of the Competition Act 1998. There are no significant changes to either of these provisions in the TFEU.”

The Library Research Paper 07/86 is available at:

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007/rp07-086.pdf

***

The House of Lords European Union Committee report ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment, Volume I: Report’ (HL Paper 62-I, published 13 March 2008) discussed the internal market and competition on pages 218 and 219.

The main discussion centred around concerns about the removal of ‘free and undistorted competition’ (according to Article I-3(2) of the Constitutional Treaty objectives), but the Committee offered the following statement on the contents of the competition provisions (page 218):

“9.14. The rules on competition contained in previous treaties would be unchanged by the Lisbon Treaty. Articles 101–103 of the TFEU are the same as Articles 81–83 of the TEC. They give the EU power to legislate to combat practices “which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition”.

The report is accessible at:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/62/62.pdf

***

Sweden

The consultation paper of the government of Sweden, ‘Lissabonfördraget; Statsrådsberedningen, Departementsserien (Ds), Ds 2007:48’ published 20 December 2007, deals with the internal market on pages 261 to 269, ’22.1 Inre marknaden’. On pages 265 to 266 the consultation paper explains the amendments to the competition rules (Konkurrensregler), but there are no specific comments on Articles 81 and 82 TFEU (ToL).

The consultation paper ’Lissabonfördraget’ is available at:

http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/09/49/81/107aa077.pdf

***

Finland

The Finnish ratification bill, ‘Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan unionista tehdyn sopimuksen ja Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen muuttamisesta tehdyn Lissabonin sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta’ (HE 23/2008 vp), includes only a short comment on the unchanged nature of Article 82 TFEU (ToL), renumbered Article 102 TFEU (on page 207):

”82 artiklaa (uusi 102 artikla), joka koskee määräävän markkina-aseman väärinkäyttöä, ei muuteta.”


The Finnish ratification bill is available at:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf

The Swedish language version of the ratification bill ‘Regeringens proposition till Riksdagen med förslag om godkännande av Lissabonfördraget om ändring av fördraget om Europeiska unionen och fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen och till lag om sättande i kraft av de bestämmelser i fördraget som hör till området för lagstiftningen’ (RP 23/2008 rd), offers the same brief observation about Article 82 TFEU (ToL), the future Article 102 TFEU, on page 210:

”Artikel 82 (blivande artikel 102), som gäller missbruk av en dominerande ställning på marknaden, ändras inte.”

The ratification bill in Swedish can be accessed at:

http://www.finlex.fi/sv/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf



Ralf Grahn

EU TFEU: Competition law: Anti-competitive agreements

The Constitutional Treaty would have offered the citizens of the European Union an internal market where competition is free and undistorted. The EU Treaty of Lisbon does not mention free and undistorted competition among the objectives of the European Union.

Therefore, most of the discussion about EU competition law in the light of the Lisbon Treaty has centred upon the symbolic downgrading of competition, whereas the unchanged substantive provisions have generated sparse comment.

The first competition Article deals with anti-competitive agreements between firms.


***

We enter a new Title, Chapter and Section in order to look at competition rules in the EU Treaty of Lisbon.

Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/88–89:

Part Three ‘Policies and internal actions of the Union’

Title VII Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws

Chapter 1 Rules on competition

Section 1 Rules applying to undertakings

Article 101 TFEU
(ex Article 81 TEC)

1. The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the internal market, and in particular those which:

(a) directly or indirectly fix purchase or selling prices or any other trading conditions;

(b) limit or control production, markets, technical development, or investment;

(c) share markets or sources of supply;

(d) apply dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;

(e) make the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.

2. Any agreements or decisions prohibited pursuant to this Article shall be automatically void.

3. The provisions of paragraph 1 may, however, be declared inapplicable in the case of:

— any agreement or category of agreements between undertakings,

— any decision or category of decisions by associations of undertakings,

— any concerted practice or category of concerted practices,

which contributes to improving the production or distribution of goods or to promoting technical or economic progress, while allowing consumers a fair share of the resulting benefit, and which does not:

(a) impose on the undertakings concerned restrictions which are not indispensable to the attainment of these objectives;

(b) afford such undertakings the possibility of eliminating competition in respect of a substantial part of the products in question.

***

In Article 2, point 75 of the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) laid out the specific amendments to Article 80 TEC and in point 76 Article 85 TEC was amended. Thus, no specific amendments were made to Article 81 TEC (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/68).

***

The TFEU table of equivalences tells us that Article 81 TEC first became Article 81 TFEU (ToL), but later renumbered Article 101 TFEU in the consolidated version (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/211).

***

The current Article 81 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found under Title VI ‘Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws’, Chapter 1 ‘Rules on competition’, Section 1 ‘Rules applying to undertakings’, in the latest consolidated version of the treaties in force (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/73–74).

The only change made by Article 101 TFEU was to replace the words ‘common market’ by ‘internal market’ twice in the first paragraph, according to horizontal amendment 2(g). Cf. above and OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/41.

Therefore, Article 81 TEC is not reproduced here.

***

For the sake of a systematic comparison, we look at the Article during the previous treaty reform stages.

First, we turn to the European Convention, which located the provisions on competition in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 5 ‘Rules on competition’, with Subsection 1 ‘Rules applying to undertakings’.

In Article III-50 of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe the words ‘internal market’ were used in the first paragraph instead of ‘common market’. The third paragraph dropped the words ‘The provisions of’, but otherwise the provision was exactly the same as the future Article 101 TFEU (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/35).

***

The location and wording of Article III-161 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was the same as for the corresponding provision of the draft (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/68–69).

The IGC 2007 did not bother to delete the words ‘The provisions of’ at the beginning of the third paragraph, but otherwise the Constitutional Treaty and Article 101 TFEU are identical.

***

We have seen that Article 101 TFEU is almost exactly the same as the current Article 81 TEC, the only difference being the systematic use of ‘internal market’ instead of the older expression ‘common market’.

But, this picture would be incomplete if we did not venture outside the wording of the Article.

First, according to Article 3(1)(b) TFEU the EU has exclusive competence in ‘the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market’.

Second, we mention the revised objectives of the European Union. According to the Lisbon Treaty version of Article 3(3) TEU:

“The Union shall establish an internal market.”

The current Article 3(1)(g) TEC ‘system ensuring that competition in the internal market is not distorted’ was deleted from the objectives of the European Union. Having satisfied the French demands to make competition not an objective, but a means, the governments of the member states agreed on a Protocol (No 27) on the internal market and competition (OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/309):

PROTOCOL (No 27)
ON THE INTERNAL MARKET AND COMPETITION

THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES,

CONSIDERING that the internal market as set out in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union includes a system ensuring that competition is not distorted,

HAVE AGREED that:

To this end, the Union shall, if necessary, take action under the provisions of the Treaties, including under Article 352 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

This protocol shall be annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

***

In principle, the IGC 2007 followed the agreements of the IGC 2004, but Annex 1 of the IGC 2007 Mandate (Council document 11218/07), point 3 (page 11) contained the wording of Article 2 about the internal market without the words ‘where competition is free and undistorted’. The text of the draft protocol is on the same page.

The Council’s legal service gave the following opinion about the scope of Article 308 of the EC Treaty (the ‘flexibility clause’), dated 22 June 2007 (Council document 11198/07):

1) It results from the practice of the Institutions that, for the implementation of Article 308 of the EC Treaty ("flexibility clause"), the reference to "the objectives of the Community" has been interpreted widely by the Institutions, in order to cover all purposes and objectives coming within the general framework of the Treaty, and not only to cover those listed in Article 3. A recent example of this practice is the adoption of the Regulation establishing the Agency on Fundamental Rights(1). This corresponds to the case law of the Court of Justice(2): the Court of Justice has said that Article 235 of the EC Treaty (now Article 308) "cannot serve as a basis for widening the scope of Community powers beyond the general framework created by the provisions of the Treaty as a whole and, in particular, by those that define the tasks and the activities of the Community".

2) The fact that, in a future Treaty, Article 3 listing the objectives of the Union would not contain a specific reference to "a system ensuring that competition in the internal market is not distorted" would not, therefore, prevent the EU legislator to act in order:

− to "establish an internal market" (future Article 3, paragraph 3), and

− that the activities of the Union "shall include (…) the adoption of an economic policy which is based (…) on the internal market (…) and conducted in accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free competition" (future Article 4).

3) The future IGC may deem it appropriate, for reasons of transparency, to accompany the text of the future Treaty by a Declaration stating that "with regard to the establishment of the internal market as set out in article 3 TEU, the Conference confirms that the Union will, if necessary, take action under Article 308 to ensure that competition is not distorted".

4) The future IGC might also choose to add a Protocol to the future Treaty, in order to confirm the above. Such a Protocol would be in conformity with the Treaty but legally superfluous.


The footnotes:

(1) Regulation No 168/2007 of 15 February 2007, OJ L53, 22.2.2007, p. 1.

(2) See Opinion of the Court of Justice of 23 March 1996, Opinion 2/94 [1996] ECR, p. I-1759.

***

What has been said about Article 101 TFEU?


United Kingdom

Professor Steve Peers covered the Treaty of Lisbon in a number of Statewatch Analyses. ‘EU Reform Treaty Analysis no. 3.3: Revised text of Part Three, Titles I to VI of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC): Internal Market and competition’ (Version 2, 23 October 2007) includes the current Title VI Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws.

Peers highlighted the amendment to Article 81 TEC and TFEU (ToL), to be renumbered Article 101 TFEU in the consolidated version, without comment (page 24).

The analysis 3.3 and other useful Statewatch analyses are available through:

http://www.statewatch.org/euconstitution.htm

***

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) offers a convenient source of brief annotations on Lisbon Treaty amendments in ‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon’ (Command Paper 7311, published 21 January 2008). It offers the following comment on Article 101 TFEU, Article 81 TFEU (ToL) in the original Lisbon Treaty (page 11):

“Unchanged from Article 81 TEC.”

The FCO comparative table is available at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7311/7311.asp

***

The UK House of Commons Library Research Paper 07/86 ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community’ (published 6 December 2007) discussed competition on page 57 to 60, not without doubts being expressed with regard to the abolition of free and undistorted competition from among the EU’s objectives.

The Library Research Paper 07/86 is available at:

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007/rp07-086.pdf

***

The House of Lords European Union Committee report ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment, Volume I: Report’ (HL Paper 62-I, published 13 March 2008) discussed the internal market and competition on pages 218 and 219.

The main discussion centred around concerns about the removal of ‘free and undistorted competition’ (according to Article I-3(2) of the Constitutional Treaty objectives), but the Committee’s conclusion was the following:

“9.18. We would be concerned if any possible symbolic downgrading were translated into efforts to depart from the principles of free competition that have formed the cornerstone of the internal market. However, Article 51 of the TEU gives equal weight to the Treaty Articles and Protocols and Articles 81–83 of the TEC will remain the same as Articles 101–103 of the TFEU. Therefore, the change does not appear to be significant.”

The report is accessible at:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/62/62.pdf

***

Sweden

The consultation paper of the government of Sweden, ‘Lissabonfördraget; Statsrådsberedningen, Departementsserien (Ds), Ds 2007:48’ published 20 December 2007, deals with the internal market on pages 261 to 269, ’22.1 Inre marknaden’. On page 264 the consultation paper describes the Protocol on the internal market and competition (Protokollet om den inre marknaden och konkurrens), and it refers to the opinion of the Council’s legal service (document 11198/07).

The consultation paper ’Lissabonfördraget’ is available at:

http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/09/49/81/107aa077.pdf

***

Finland

The Finnish ratification bill, ‘Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan unionista tehdyn sopimuksen ja Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen muuttamisesta tehdyn Lissabonin sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta’ (HE 23/2008 vp), includes only a short comment on the unchanged nature of Article 81 TFEU (ToL), renumbered Article 101 TFEU (on page 207), but mentions competition among the EU objectives on page 19:

”Perustuslakisopimukseen verrattuna unionin tavoitteita koskevasta määräyksestä on poistettu viittaus siihen, että kilpailu unionin sisämarkkinoilla on vapaata ja vääristymätöntä. SEUT 2 b artiklassa sisämarkkinoiden toimintaa varten tarvittavien kilpailusääntöjen vahvistaminen määritellään kuitenkin jatkossakin unionin yksinomaiseen toimivaltaan kuuluvaksi. Tähän muutokseen liittyen sopimukseen on liitetty kilpailua ja sisämarkkinoita koskeva pöytäkirja, jossa sopimuspuolet katsovat, että SEU 2 artiklassa määritelty tavoite sisämarkkinoiden luomisesta käsittää järjestelmän, jolla taataan, ettei kilpailu vääristy. Sopimuspuolet sopivat, että unioni toteuttaa toimenpiteitä tämän tavoitteen toteuttamiseksi.”

More or less the same factual and non-committal remarks are made on page 132, when Article 2 TEU (ToL), renumbered Article 3 TEU, is dealt with.

The Finnish ratification bill is available at:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf

The Swedish language version of the ratification bill ‘Regeringens proposition till Riksdagen med förslag om godkännande av Lissabonfördraget om ändring av fördraget om Europeiska unionen och fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen och till lag om sättande i kraft av de bestämmelser i fördraget som hör till området för lagstiftningen’ (RP 23/2008 rd), offers the same brief observation about Article 81 TFEU (ToL), the future Article 101 TFEU, on page 209.

The remarks about the role of competition among the objectives of the EU is on page 19:

”Jämfört med det konstitutionella fördraget har omnämnandet av en inre marknad där det råder fri och icke snedvriden konkurrens strukits från bestämmelsen om unionens mål. Enligt artikel 3 i EUF-fördraget ska unionen dock även i fortsättningen ha exklusiv befogenhet när det gäller fastställandet av de konkurrensregler som är nödvändiga för den inre marknadens funktion. I anslutning till denna ändring åtföljs fördraget av ett protokoll om den inre marknaden och konkurrens där de fördragsslutande parterna beaktar att den inre marknaden enligt definitionen i artikel 2 i EU-fördraget innefattar en ordning som säkerställer att konkurrensen inte snedvrids.
De fördragsslutande parterna enas om att unionen ska vidta åtgärder för detta ändamål.”

The description on page 132 of the Finnish version is found on page 135 of the Swedish one.

The ratification bill in Swedish can be accessed at:

http://www.finlex.fi/sv/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf



Ralf Grahn

EU TFEU: Land, sea and air transport

The EU Treaty of Lisbon continues to make a distinction between rail, road and inland waterway, to which the TFEU Transport Title applies, and sea and air transport, still treated as optional with regard to EU legislation.


***

Article 100 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/87–88:

Part Three ‘Policies and internal actions of the Union’

Title VI TFEU ‘Transport’

Article 100 TFEU
(ex Article 80 TEC)

1. The provisions of this Title shall apply to transport by rail, road and inland waterway.

2. The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, may lay down appropriate provisions for sea and air transport. They shall act after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.

***

In Article 2, point 75 of the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) laid out the specific amendments to Article 80 TEC (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/68).

75) In Article 80, paragraph 2 shall be replaced by the following:

‘2. The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, may lay down appropriate provisions for sea and air transport. They shall act after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.’.

***

The TFEU table of equivalences tells us that Article 80 TEC first became Article 80 TFEU (ToL), but later renumbered Article 100 TFEU in the consolidated version (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/210).

***

The current Article 80 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found under Title V ‘Transport’ in the latest consolidated version of the treaties in force (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/73):

Article 80 TEC

1. The provisions of this title shall apply to transport by rail, road and inland waterway.

2. The Council may, acting by a qualified majority, decide whether, to what extent and by what procedure appropriate provisions may be laid down for sea and air transport.

The procedural provisions of Article 71 shall apply.


***

For the sake of a systematic comparison, we look at the Article during the previous treaty reform stages.

First, we turn to the European Convention.

Article III-143 of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe looked like this (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/55):

Article III-143 Draft Constitution

1. This Section shall apply to transport by rail, road and inland waterway.

2. European laws or framework laws may lay down appropriate measures for sea and air transport. They shall be adopted after consultation of the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee.

***

Article III-245 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe adopted the wording of the European Convention without change (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/108).

***


What has been said about Article 100 TFEU?


United Kingdom

Professor Steve Peers covered the Treaty of Lisbon in a number of Statewatch Analyses. ‘EU Reform Treaty Analysis no. 3.3: Revised text of Part Three, Titles I to VI of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC): Internal Market and competition’ (Version 2, 23 October 2007) includes the current Title V Transport.

Peers highlighted the amendment to Article 80 TEC and TFEU (ToL), to be renumbered Article 100 TFEU in the consolidated version, and he added the following comment (page 23):

“In practice, legislation on sea and air transport is already adopted by the co-decisions procedure.”

The analysis 3.3 and other useful Statewatch analyses are available through:

http://www.statewatch.org/euconstitution.htm

***

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) offers a convenient source of brief annotations on Lisbon Treaty amendments in ‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon’ (Command Paper 7311, published 21 January 2008). It offers the following comment on Article 100 TFEU, Article 80 TFEU (ToL) in the original Lisbon Treaty (page 11):

“Draws and Article 80 TEC. QMV already applies, co-decision applied to paragraph 2.”

The FCO comparative table is available at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7311/7311.asp

***

The UK House of Commons Library Research Paper 07/86 ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community’ (published 6 December 2007) wrapped up Transport in a brief comment on page 56:

“F. Transport

Title V, Articles 70-80 (Constitution Articles III-236 – 245) are on transport and are based largely on Articles 70 – 75 TEC, but with a change in the voting procedure to the OLP with QMV, except for Article 72, which replaces unanimity in the Constitution Article III-237 with a “special legislative procedure”. Other, minor, changes are Article 75(c), which adds the EP to those bodies to be consulted, and Article 78 (Constitution Article III-243), allowing the Article concerning German unification to be repealed after 5 years.

Present Articles 154 – 156 on Trans-European Networks (TENS) have been moved to Title VII and contain only minor amendments.”

The Library Research Paper 07/86 is available at:

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007/rp07-086.pdf

***

The House of Lords European Union Committee report ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment, Volume I: Report’ (HL Paper 62-I, published 13 March 2008) made no explicit reference to Article 100 TFEU.

The report is accessible at:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/62/62.pdf

***

Sweden

The consultation paper of the government of Sweden, ‘Lissabonfördraget; Statsrådsberedningen, Departementsserien (Ds), Ds 2007:48’ published 20 December 2007, bundled together transport and trans-European networks under the headline ‘Transporter och transeuropeiska nät’ (page 280 to 282).

The text offers an overview of the coming Title VI ‘Transport’, and it remarks that in practice provisions on air and sea transport are already adopted by co-decision:

”Åtgärder på sjöfarts- respektive luftfartsområdena ska antas i enlighet med det ordinarie lagstiftningsförfarandet (artikel 80.2 i EUF-fördraget). I praktiken antas lagstiftning på områdena redan idag gemensamt av Europaparlamentet och rådet med kvalificerad majoritet.”

The consultation paper ’Lissabonfördraget’ is available at:

http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/09/49/81/107aa077.pdf

***

Finland

The Finnish ratification bill, ‘Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan unionista tehdyn sopimuksen ja Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen muuttamisesta tehdyn Lissabonin sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta’ (HE 23/2008 vp), includes a systematic commentary on the treaty provisions. The explanation on Article 80 TFEU (ToL), renumbered Article 100 TFEU, is one example of this methodical approach (page 206):

”80 artiklan (uusi 100 artikla) 2 kohtaa, joka koskee meri- ja lentoliikenteestä annettavaa säännöstöä, muutetaan siten, että parlamentti ja neuvosto antavat tavallista lainsäätämisjärjestystä noudattaen meri- ja lentoliikennettä koskevat aiheelliset säännökset alueiden komiteaa sekä talous- ja sosiaalikomiteaa kuultuaan. Nykyisen SEY 80 artiklan 2 kohdassa määrätään neuvoston voivan määräenemmistöllä päättää, annetaanko meri- ja lentoliikennettä koskevia aiheellisia säännöksiä sekä missä laajuudessa ja mitä menettelyä noudattaen niitä annetaan, ja että tällöin sovelletaan SEY 71 artiklan määräyksiä menettelystä. SEY 71 artiklassa tarkoitettu menettely vastaa SEUT 80 artiklan 2 kohtaan nyt kirjattavaa menettelyä. SEUT 80 artikla vastaa perustuslakisopimuksen III-245 artiklaa säädösinstrumentin yksilöintiä eurooppalaiksi tai -puitelaiksi lukuun ottamatta.”

The Finnish ratification bill is available at:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf

The Swedish language version of the ratification bill ‘Regeringens proposition till Riksdagen med förslag om godkännande av Lissabonfördraget om ändring av fördraget om Europeiska unionen och fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen och till lag om sättande i kraft av de bestämmelser i fördraget som hör till området för lagstiftningen’ (RP 23/2008 rd), offers the same observations on page 209:

”Artikel 80.2 (blivande artikel 100), som gäller bestämmelser för sjöfart och luftfart ändras så att parlamentet och rådet i enlighet med det ordinarie lagstiftningsförfarandet får fastställa lämpliga bestämmelser för sjöfart och luftfart efter att ha hört Ekonomiska och sociala kommittén och Regionkommittén. I nuvarande artikel 80.2 i EG-fördraget bestäms att rådet får med kvalificerad majoritet besluta huruvida, i vilken omfattning och på vilket sätt lämpliga bestämmelser ska kunna meddelas för sjöfart och luftfart och att procedurreglerna i artikel 71 ska tillämpas. Det förfarande som avses i artikel 71 i EGfördraget motsvarar det förfarande som nu skrivs in i artikel 80.2 i EUF-fördraget. Artikel 80 i EUF-fördraget motsvarar artikel III- 245 i det konstitutionella fördraget med undantag för att rättsaktsinstrumentet individualiseras som europalag eller ramlag.”

The ratification bill in Swedish can be accessed at:

http://www.finlex.fi/sv/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf

***

The Treaty of Lisbon retains traces of the historical dichotomy between transport in the internal market (by rail, road and inland waterway; first paragraph) and sea and air transport, at least initially more concerned with relations to third countries (second paragraph).



Ralf Grahn

EU TFEU: Transport advisory committee

The EU Treaty of Lisbon retains the advisory committee of national experts on transport matters.


***

Article 99 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/87:

Part Three ‘Policies and internal actions of the Union’

Title VI TFEU ‘Transport’

Article 99 TFEU
(ex Article 79 TEC)

An Advisory Committee consisting of experts designated by the governments of Member States shall be attached to the Commission. The Commission, whenever it considers it desirable, shall consult the Committee on transport matters.

***

In Article 2, point 74 of the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) laid out the specific amendments to Article 79 TEC (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/68).

74) In Article 79, the phrase ‘without prejudice to the powers of the Economic and Social Committee’ shall be deleted.

***

The TFEU table of equivalences tells us that Article 79 TEC first became Article 79 TFEU (ToL), but later renumbered Article 99 TFEU in the consolidated version (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/210).

***

The current Article 79 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found under Title V ‘Transport’ in the latest consolidated version of the treaties in force (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/73):

Article 79 TEC

An Advisory Committee consisting of experts designated by the governments of Member States shall be attached to the Commission. The Commission, whenever it considers it desirable, shall consult the Committee on transport matters without prejudice to the powers of the Economic and Social Committee.

***

For the sake of a systematic comparison, we look at the Article during the previous treaty reform stages.

First, we turn to the European Convention.

Article III-142 of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe looked like this (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/55):

Article III-142 Draft Constitution

An Advisory Committee consisting of experts designated by the governments of Member States shall be attached to the Commission. The Commission, whenever it considers it desirable, shall consult the Committee on transport matters.

***

Article III-244 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe adopted the wording of the European Convention without change (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/107).

***

We see that the Lisbon Treaty amendment was part of the draft Constitution.

***

What have others said about Article 99 TFEU?


United Kingdom

Professor Steve Peers covered the Treaty of Lisbon in a number of Statewatch Analyses. ‘EU Reform Treaty Analysis no. 3.3: Revised text of Part Three, Titles I to VI of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC): Internal Market and competition’ (Version 2, 23 October 2007) includes the current Title V Transport.

Peers highlighted the amendment of Article 79 TEC and TFEU (ToL), to be renumbered Article 99 TFEU in the consolidated version, but made no comment (page 23).

The analysis 3.3 and other useful Statewatch analyses are available through:

http://www.statewatch.org/euconstitution.htm

***

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) offers a convenient source of brief annotations on Lisbon Treaty amendments in ‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon’ (Command Paper 7311, published 21 January 2008). It offers the following comment on Article 99 TFEU, Article 79 TFEU (ToL) in the original Lisbon Treaty (page 11):

“In substance the same as Article 79 TEC.”

The FCO comparative table is available at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7311/7311.asp

***

The UK House of Commons Library Research Paper 07/86 ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community’ (published 6 December 2007) wrapped up Transport in a brief comment on page 56:

“F. Transport

Title V, Articles 70-80 (Constitution Articles III-236 – 245) are on transport and are based largely on Articles 70 – 75 TEC, but with a change in the voting procedure to the OLP with QMV, except for Article 72, which replaces unanimity in the Constitution Article III-237 with a “special legislative procedure”. Other, minor, changes are Article 75(c), which adds the EP to those bodies to be consulted, and Article 78 (Constitution Article III-243), allowing the Article concerning German unification to be repealed after 5 years.

Present Articles 154 – 156 on Trans-European Networks (TENS) have been moved to Title VII and contain only minor amendments.”

The Library Research Paper 07/86 is available at:

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007/rp07-086.pdf

***

The House of Lords European Union Committee report ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment, Volume I: Report’ (HL Paper 62-I, published 13 March 2008) made no explicit reference to Article 99 TFEU.

The report is accessible at:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/62/62.pdf

***

Sweden

The consultation paper of the government of Sweden, ‘Lissabonfördraget; Statsrådsberedningen, Departementsserien (Ds), Ds 2007:48’ published 20 December 2007, bundled together transport and trans-European networks under the headline ‘Transporter och transeuropeiska nät’ (page 280 to 282).

The text offers an overview of the coming Title VI ‘Transport’, but it makes no reference to Article 79 TEC and TFEU (ToL).

The consultation paper ’Lissabonfördraget’ is available at:

http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/09/49/81/107aa077.pdf

***

Finland

The Finnish ratification bill, ‘Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan unionista tehdyn sopimuksen ja Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen muuttamisesta tehdyn Lissabonin sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta’ (HE 23/2008 vp), mentions the words deleted from Article 79 TFEU (ToL), renumbered Article 99 TFEU, and adds the observation that the contents are the same as in ArticleIII-244 of the Constitutional Treaty (page 206).

The Finnish ratification bill is available at:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf

The Swedish language version of the ratification bill ‘Regeringens proposition till Riksdagen med förslag om godkännande av Lissabonfördraget om ändring av fördraget om Europeiska unionen och fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen och till lag om sättande i kraft av de bestämmelser i fördraget som hör till området för lagstiftningen’ (RP 23/2008 rd), offers the same observations on page 209.

The ratification bill in Swedish can be accessed at:

http://www.finlex.fi/sv/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf



Ralf Grahn

EU TFEU: Transport and Germany

Here is a question for sadistic quizmasters: Can the Council amend the EU Treaty of Lisbon without later ratification by national parliaments?

The answer is ‘yes’ in at least one, highly atypical situation. Article 98 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union offers the Council the possibility to repeal a privilege enjoyed by Germany as a legacy of the division of that country.


***

Article 98 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/87:

Part Three ‘Policies and internal actions of the Union’

Title VI TFEU ‘Transport’

Article 98 TFEU
(ex Article 78 TEC)

The provisions of this Title shall not form an obstacle to the application of measures taken in the Federal Republic of Germany to the extent that such measures are required in order to compensate for the economic disadvantages caused by the division of Germany to the economy of certain areas of the Federal Republic affected by that division. Five years after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission, may adopt a decision repealing this Article.

***

In Article 2, point 73 of the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) laid out the specific amendments to Article 78 TEC (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/68).

73) In Article 78, the following sentence shall be added:

‘Five years after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Council, acting on a proposal
from the Commission, may adopt a decision repealing this Article.’.

***

The TFEU table of equivalences tells us that Article 78 TEC first became Article 78 TFEU (ToL), but later renumbered Article 98 TFEU in the consolidated version (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/210).

***

The current Article 78 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found under Title V ‘Transport’ in the latest consolidated version of the treaties in force (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/73):

Article 78 TEC

The provisions of this title shall not form an obstacle to the application of measures taken in the Federal Republic of Germany to the extent that such measures are required in order to compensate for the economic disadvantages caused by the division of Germany to the economy of certain areas of the Federal Republic affected by that division.

***

For the sake of a systematic comparison, we look at the Article during the previous treaty reform stages.

First, we turn to the European Convention.

Article III-141 of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe used the word ‘Section’ where the current Article 77 TEC says ‘title’, but otherwise the text was unchanged (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/55).

***

Article III-243 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe added a sentence to the text of the European Convention (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/107):

Article III-243 Constitution

The provisions of this Section shall not form an obstacle to the application of measures taken in the Federal Republic of Germany to the extent that such measures are required in order to compensate for the economic disadvantages caused by the division of Germany to the economy of certain areas of the Federal Republic affected by that division. Five years after the entry into force of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission, may adopt a European decision repealing this Article.

***

We can see that the IGC 2004 agreed on the possibility to repeal the provision on derogations on the basis of the division of Germany. This was taken over by the IGC 2007 as part of the 2004 package, if nothing in the IGC 2007 Mandate said anything to the contrary.

Naturally, the effects of the division of Germany are not over yet, almost two decades after German unification.

Sozialpolitik aktuell in Deutschland, Universität Duisburg, Essen, Institut für Soziologie, offers web pages with social indicators in Germany. In 2007 the unemployment rate in the old ‚Bundesländer’ was 8.4 per cent, but twice as high (16.8 per dent) in the new states. See Arbeitslosenquoten in neuen und alten Bundesländern 1975 – 2007:

http://www.sozialpolitik-aktuell.de/datensammlung/4/ab/abbIV35.pdf


On the other hand, increasingly a special rule for the rich Federal Republic of Germany is an anomaly in a European Union with ten poorer former Communist member states, without a richer big brother to help them out.

In principle, of anecdotal value only, one of the consequences of the stalled ratification process of the Constitutional Treaty was that this German special arrangement got an extra two year lease of life (if the Lisbon Treaty enters into force according to plan).

***

What have others said about Article 98 TFEU?


United Kingdom

Professor Steve Peers covered the Treaty of Lisbon in a number of Statewatch Analyses. ‘EU Reform Treaty Analysis no. 3.3: Revised text of Part Three, Titles I to VI of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC): Internal Market and competition’ (Version 2, 23 October 2007) includes the current Title V Transport.

Peers commented on the last sentence of Article 78 TEC and TFEU (ToL), to be renumbered Article 98 TFEU in the consolidated version, in the following way (page 23):

“The amendment is entirely new. It permits this Treaty Article to be amended (repealed) by QMV.”

The analysis 3.3 and other useful Statewatch analyses are available through:

http://www.statewatch.org/euconstitution.htm

***

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) offers a convenient source of brief annotations on Lisbon Treaty amendments in ‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon’ (Command Paper 7311, published 21 January 2008). It offers the following comment on Article 98 TFEU, Article 78 TFEU (ToL) in the original Lisbon Treaty (page 11):

“In substance the same as Article 78 TEC, with a new power for the Council, by QMV, to repeal this provision.”

The FCO comparative table is available at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7311/7311.asp

***

The UK House of Commons Library Research Paper 07/86 ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community’ (published 6 December 2007) wrapped up Transport in a brief comment on page 56:

“F. Transport

Title V, Articles 70-80 (Constitution Articles III-236 – 245) are on transport and are based largely on Articles 70 – 75 TEC, but with a change in the voting procedure to the OLP with QMV, except for Article 72, which replaces unanimity in the Constitution Article III-237 with a “special legislative procedure”. Other, minor, changes are Article 75(c), which adds the EP to those bodies to be consulted, and Article 78 (Constitution Article III-243), allowing the Article concerning German unification to be repealed after 5 years.

Present Articles 154 – 156 on Trans-European Networks (TENS) have been moved to Title VII and contain only minor amendments.”

The Library Research Paper 07/86 is available at:

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007/rp07-086.pdf

***

The House of Lords European Union Committee report ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment, Volume I: Report’ (HL Paper 62-I, published 13 March 2008) made no explicit reference to Article 98 TFEU.

The report is accessible at:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/62/62.pdf

***

Sweden

The consultation paper of the government of Sweden, ‘Lissabonfördraget; Statsrådsberedningen, Departementsserien (Ds), Ds 2007:48’ published 20 December 2007, bundled together transport and trans-European networks under the headline ‘Transporter och transeuropeiska nät’ (page 280 to 282).

The text offers an overview of the coming Title VI ‘Transport’, and Article 78 TEC and TFEU (ToL) is explained on page 282:

“Vidare har genom Lissabonfördraget införts en möjlighet för rådet att, efter fem år från ikraftträdandet av fördraget, upphäva artikel 78 i EUF-fördraget, som möjliggör att vissa åtgärder vidtas för att uppväga de ekonomiska nackdelar som uppkommit genom Tysklands delning för näringslivet i vissa av de områden i förbundsrepubliken som påverkats av delningen. I en gemensam förklaring (28) till artikel 78 i fördraget om Europeiska unionens funktionssätt anges att bestämmelsen ska tillämpas i enlighet med gällande praxis från EU-domstolen.”

The consultation paper ’Lissabonfördraget’ is available at:

http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/09/49/81/107aa077.pdf

***

Finland

The Finnish ratification bill, ‘Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan unionista tehdyn sopimuksen ja Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen muuttamisesta tehdyn Lissabonin sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta’ (HE 23/2008 vp), describes Article 78 TFEU (ToL), renumbered Article 98 TFEU, mentions Declaration 28 and refers to a more detailed treatment of declarations (page 206).

The Finnish ratification bill is available at:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf

The Swedish language version of the ratification bill ‘Regeringens proposition till Riksdagen med förslag om godkännande av Lissabonfördraget om ändring av fördraget om Europeiska unionen och fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen och till lag om sättande i kraft av de bestämmelser i fördraget som hör till området för lagstiftningen’ (RP 23/2008 rd), explains Article 78, mentions Declaration 28 and refers to the detailed text on declarations (page 209).

The ratification bill in Swedish can be accessed at:

http://www.finlex.fi/sv/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf

***

Among the declarations annexed to the final act of the intergovernmental conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, we find Declaration number 28 (OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/347):

28. Declaration on Article 98 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

The Conference notes that the provisions of Article 98 shall be applied in accordance with the current practice. The terms ‘such measures are required in order to compensate for the economic disadvantages caused by the division of Germany to the economy of certain areas of the Federal Republic affected by that division’ shall be interpreted in accordance with the existing case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.


Ralf Grahn

Histoire de la construction européenne

Sixty years from the Congress of Europe is a good enough cause to take a long view of European integration. Reflection is needed as much as celebration.

Marie-Thérèse Bitsch has written a book, which should be translated into every European language and read by each citizen. The new pocket edition of her « Histoire de la construction européenne de 1945 à nos jours » manages to take the reader through the main developments from the end of World War II to the great enlargement of the European Union in 2004.

The 401 pages are not confined to the European Union and its predecessors, but include the other manifestations of European integration, such as the OECE (OECD), the Council of Europe, the defence alliances and the CSCE (OSCE).

The book is not only a good read, but it is detailed enough to serve as an introductory source for serious students who want to explore certain developments.


***

Marie-Thérèse Bitsch: Histoire de la construction européenne de 1945 à nos jours ; Nouvelle édition mise à jour (Editions Complexe, 2008 ; 11,90 €)


Ralf Grahn

Alfred the Ordinary

You take up so many levels of matters and such various grounds for discontent in your comment on transport support and protection that it is difficult to answer within the space of comment of normal proportions. In a way, my writing about the Lisbon Treaty is a running commentary, although only one Article is dealt with each time.

Treaties: In spite of the fact that my postings are excruciatingly dull to read, I think that they have some merit in that they deal with every provision of the Lisbon Treaty, including the unchanged ones of little interest to national governments and parliaments with regard to the ongoing ratification processes.

Importance of treaties: Like it or not, but the European Community (European Union) is based on the rule of law. Thus, what the treaties say and what they omit forms the basis for secondary legislation and subsequent action.

Transport: I have to admit that the vagueness of the (unreformed) transport Articles is somewhat disturbing. Yesterday I proposed that the treaties should be overhauled as to the internal policy areas. The common agricultural policy and the common transport policy are two examples of practically unreformed areas, and there are many more or less redundant provisions elsewhere, which have been technically adjusted, but just clutter up the coming TFEU.

EU studies: If, as some purport, 80 per cent of national legislation emanates from “Brussels” (or even significantly less, as I believe), curricula for EU law and politics should be extended significantly. Yesterday I noted that students probably learn nothing about EU transport (or most other policy areas) from the standard EU law coursebooks in English. I also noted that many continental students seem to get a more complete view of the EU.

Internal market, competition and protectionism: French protectionism has deep roots; a sense of inferiority running back to at least German unification in the late 19th century. But if you abolish the internal market and its competition rules, as well as the supranational Commission as the guardian of the treaties, what would result? Enforcing and improving competition rules is a hard slog for the Commission, but have you thought through the alternatives to the EU (countries) as a whole, or even the situation for the United Kingdom after possible secession?

CAP: In my view, the EU would be much better off if the resources spent on the common agricultural policy were used to improve the conditions for Europe to compete in a globalising world. But how can the resources and expenditure of the EU be reformed decisively as long as the member states’ governments have to reach unanimous decisions on the financial perspectives?

Fisheries: Is not the global root problem overfishing? What should be done about that?

Black and white: Any working human society requires some sort of adaptation, be it family, work, municipality, region, state or the EU. Wholesale rejection is seldom the right answer. I have to adjust to the fact that some of the decisions and actions of these entities are less palatable, even distasteful. When in a minority, I can try to influence opinions and to work for what I believe to be a more constructive future majority. Where does anger lead, if not turned into action for improvement?

Intergovernmentalism: Many of the basic problems of the European Union have much to do with the defects and limits of intergovernmental cooperation. Often it would be better to ask about the interests of EU citizens, instead of brandishing barren concepts like ‘sovereignty’ when the nation state is incapable of offering solutions.

In my humble opinion, we Europeans need a European Union, but a better EU based on effective decision-making, democracy and solidarity.

Imperfect as it is, the Treaty of Lisbon is a step in the right direction, but many more are needed.


Ralf Grahn