Opening All the Chapters – the Portuguese Presidency
Opening All the Chapters – the Portuguese Presidency
The Cologne Summit of the European Council in June 1999 articulated that negotiations with parties which started accession talks on 31 March 1998 based on the Luxembourg decision should open all the chapters by mid-2000. “All” implies that this pertains to a total of 29 chapters. “Institutional Issues” (chapter 30) and “Miscellaneous” (chapter 31) will be opened only later.
The Portuguese presidency, which took office in January 2000, drafted the negotiation schedule in light of this. The program contained two “deputy” and one “ministerial” level round for the “Luxembourg countries”. Negotiations with the “Helsinki Countries” also started on 15 February 2000. It is worth noting that the EU used striking differentiation in the initial phase of opening chapters in their case. The “Luxembourg Group” more or less moved together during the first two years of opening the chapters, and the only minor difference between them was in the number of chapters closed.
During the first half of the year, the agenda for the first “deputy” round (chief negotiators) - the seventh round in all - had six chapters to it. Of these two belonged to the last package (regional policy and financial control), while four have been opened earlier (free movement of goods, corporate law, social policy, common foreign and security policy). The closure of the CFSP chapter was attributed to a statement made by Cyprus on the issue in Helsinki and the intensive negotiations of the Portuguese presidency and a few member states. In respect of financial controls the closure of the rounds became dependent on the submission of supplementary information. The fact that the issue of regional policy was opened was a significant event in itself because it was one of the most sensitive chapters. When it came to the most significant (financial) issues the European Union also postponed the articulation of its position. It was evident that the Union did not want more than a formal opening of the chapters at this stage.
Social policy was discussed for the second time. Although there were fewer open issues, the uncertainty caused by the lack of supplementary information became the most evident in this case. It was not quite clear what the objective behind requesting “further and more precise information” was. It is a fact that the majority of the member states considered this chapter to be “delicate” one and at least indirectly linked it to the free movement of people. In respect of the free movement of goods and corporate law, the fact that the Hungarian government submitted a compromise proposal for pharmaceutical products is considered a tangible development. The issue of patents still remains in the chapter on corporate law (“absolute ground refusal”).
During the course of preparations for the next deputy-level negotiations the member states got into a “family row” while consolidating their opinions internally. (The press reported on this at length in relation to the free movement of people.) It was presumable that that there would be no definite EU position on further chapters after the issue of “Regional Policy”. Contrary to the case when the EU had a tangible position or an important matter to discuss, this time the sensitivity and the complexity of the issue was only referred to, but member states postponed taking any real positions. This on the one hand is undoubtedly an unfavorable development, since this wait-and-see tactic can question the viability of dynamic negotiations. Two other elements also have to be taken into account in order to come up with a balanced assessment. The opening of a chapter, in itself constitutes a step ahead, since when considering questions, problems and issues, member states would start negotiating among themselves. Naturally, Hungary expected and still expects the EU to tangibly reveal its confronting positions, but this first requires that the fifteen come to a common stance on the issue. Another, seemingly technical, result is the act of opening chapters. All in all, it has to be taken into account that the EU ruled out the possibility of tangible negotiations as long as there were “unopened envelopes” on the table.
In accordance with this the second round of “deputies” there were three new chapters opened on 26 May. Discussions started on issues related to cooperation in justice and home affairs, budgetary issues and the free movement of people. Among these issues, budgetary questions encompass items too early to be answered because of certain cross-referencing problems. We received a large number of questions in respect of justice and home affairs issues and when providing answers, significant attention will have to be paid to establishing an effective institutional background. The EU put forward several questions relating to the free movement of people but when it came to the most important issue, its readiness to apply the acquis for their case from the moment of accession, the EU postponed its response.
There were three other items also on the agenda. In the case of two (industrial policy and telecommunications) the Helsinki decisions provide an answer for the reasons behind the altered Hungarian working hypothesis. Considering the fact that the earliest date of accession was changed from 1 January 2002 to 1 January 2003, there was no further need to maintain two earlier requests for derogation. The IGC formally stated that there was no need in these chapters for temporary derogation, so “these issues require no further discussion at this stage of the talks”. In the chapter pertaining to the free movement of goods the EU confirmed the receipt of the supplementary information it had requested and the parties affirmed that there was only one outstanding issue left open in this extremely significant and complex chapter, which was the problem of the pharmacopoeia. Since this is closely related to the problems of patents discussed under the corporate law chapter and taking into account the fact that on 6 April the Hungarian government submitted a complex supplementary discussion position, the review of which has not finished within the EU institutions, more time will be needed before the last missing step is taken.
At the next, fifth, round of discussions at ministerial level, the EU and the Portuguese executed the mandate bestowed upon them by the members in Cologne in June 1999, i.e., every chapter was opened. The agriculture chapter was also opened on 14 June, alongside with the topics of the agenda of the meetings of chief negotiators in April and May. There were no unopened envelopes left, and the second, intermediate part of the discussions could be started.
Opening the agriculture chapter was an achievement in itself, but here again it became evident that when it came to the most significant issues (direct support to farmers, and quotas) the EU postponed announcing its position. The number of chapters closed temporarily rose to 11 with the closure of “Financial control”.
In summary: the first phase of negotiations was concluded on 14 June 2000. Twenty-eight months after the opening statement and 21 months after the first tangible talks it could be said that the parties had adhered to the minimum technical schedule agreed to earlier. Hungary did not conceal its opinion that there would have been room for faster progress, but was not unsatisfied with the results achieved, provided that these did allow faster dynamism in the future.
The results of the 28 months - however technical in nature - are quite substantial. The screenings and two supplementary audits have been completed. All the negotiation chapters have been opened and in the case of close to one third of them, we have come to the stage of “no further discussion needed at this stage”. We have provided additional information in more than 20 cases, which has brought us closer to closing further chapters. The “monitoring system” aimed at supervising the implementation of commitments is taking shape more and more.
