Romano Prodi, president of the European Commission, demands stronger powers for the commission

What kind of Europe? The battle of ideas

By Robin Oakley CNN.com European Political Editor

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Reshaping Europe's institutions to cope with enlargement has been proving a nightmare for the European Union. It has also become a jousting ground for Europe's big players, all of them charging at the problem from their own angles.

EU leaders have long agreed that the institutions must be reshaped so that enlargement -- to as many as 25 or 30 countries -- does not paralyse decision-making. But with most national leaders casting an eye over their shoulders at their domestic electorates, they have had great difficulty agreeing on the precise shape of reform.

The mix has been complicated by the president of the European Commission, Romano Prodi, who is seeking additional powers for his central machine. And some, like UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, want further reforms to address the so-called "democratic deficit" that leaves Europe's citizens feeling that the EU institutions are remote from their lives.

IN-DEPTH   •  Embarking on expansion   •  EU enlargement map   •  History of EU growth   •  Nice: Europe's next steps   •  What kind of Europe?   •  Key leaders' views

EU countries spent most of 2000 arguing in an Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) over proposals to slim down the European Commission and alter the system of national voting weights in the Council of Ministers. Crucially, they tussled over national voting weights and over calls to have many more decisions in the EU taken by qualified majority voting, rather than the unanimity that gives veto power to any single country objecting to a particular change.

First into the field of wider reform in the summer was Joschka Fischer, the German foreign minister, who is an avowed enthusiast for greater integration. In a speech at Humboldt University in Berlin in May, in which he emphasized he was giving a personal view rather than outlining German government policy, he called for a federal European government and a long-term "transition from a union of states to full parliamentarisation as a European Federation."

In July came a hefty, if rather less specific contribution from Jacques Chirac, the French president, who was seen as stealing a march on his prime minister, Lionel Jospin, a likely future rival for the presidency, by becoming the French voice on the future of Europe. The French and Germans have long been in the vanguard pushing for greater integration in Europe, and significantly Chirac outlined his ideas on a two-tier Europe in a speech to German parliamentarians in the Bundestag in Berlin.

Chirac, however, stressed the importance of nation-states as Europe's basic unit. In a sense, that concept would enshrine the notion of "subsidiarity," under which decisions are taken at the lowest level appropriate. In many cases, it would leave decisions to be taken regionally or nationally, with supranational EU institutions only determining policy where it could not be done effectively at a lower level, as on the environment.

Early in October, former Italian prime minister Prodi made his pitch. He complained that EU governments that agreed to things between themselves were creating "conflicting centres of power" and fragmenting the EU. He demanded stronger powers for the commission.

Prodi, who complains that EU governments have been "bypassing" his commission, has echoed Chirac in calling for groups of states that wish to do so to be allowed to proceed with integration projects even if others object. He also wants use of the national veto to be reduced to the "absolute minimum."

This runs directly counter to those like Blair, who want the powers of the commission reduced and more agenda-setting done by the Council of Ministers, formed of elected heads of state or government.

Later in October, Blair too entered the battle of ideas in a speech in Warsaw in which he urged a speeding-up of the enlargement process. He called for the EU to develop its strength as a superpower and echoed some of the other leaders' ideas. But he put the emphasis on national governments and national parliaments to help people feel more engaged with Europe's institutions.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair puts an emphasis on national governments and parliaments

At the Nice summit in December 2000, the EU leaders eventually agreed to some rather fudged reforms. They tackled the size of the European Commission, the voting weights of European states in the decision-making Council of Ministers, and the extent of qualified majority voting -- thus helping to equip the EU for expansion to as many as 28 states over the next decade.

They also, significantly for the longer term, gave a blessing to the development of a two-tier Europe by backing the idea of enhanced co-operation. Groups of countries are now allowed to go ahead with integration projects so long as they do not create an exclusive club.

As the tensions between the big and small states turned Nice into a marathon summit, the leaders did not set out a full new constitution for the EU. But they did heed the arguments of Germany and Italy for another inter-governmental conference (IGC) in 2004 to discuss the definition of powers between nation states and EU institutions.

Some countries see that as an opportunity to centralize more power and intensify integration, to move towards greater federalism and to have another go at trimming national vetoes. Others see it as the chance to draw definitive boundaries limiting what the EU’s supranational institutions are allowed to do.

In May 2001, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder set off a new wave of debate with an SPD party document calling for a full-fledged European government.

Schroeder's plans included a big expansion in the powers of the European Commission and Parliament, with national representatives on the Council of Ministers subsumed into a new second chamber of Parliament.

Parliament would become the prime supervisor of the European budget, including the Common Agricultural Policy. Harmonisation of taxation policies would be intensified, and Europol would become a Europe-wide police force.

Paris and London treated the Schroder proposals coolly, welcoming a “contribution to the debate” but dismissing them as being designed for German domestic consumption in the run-up to a 2002 election.

French Minister for Europe Pierre Moscovici said Schroeder’s ideas were “unbalanced” and out of the mainstream. But they were warmly received by Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt, who held the revolving EU presidency in the second half of 2001.

With Schroeder’s call for the drawing up of a new European constitution, the subject of Europe’s “democratic deficit” was very much back on the agenda.