Europaudvalget 2003-04
EUU Alm.del Bilag 58
Offentligt
1464912_0001.png
Uo¡NRtGsMtNtsrERtET
Alm.
del -
btlag
58
loffentlrqt)
EUAOPAUDVAf,GET
Medlemmerne
¿f
Folketingets Europaudvalg
og
detes
stedfotrædere
,Asiatisk Plads
2
DK-1448 København
K
Tel. +45
33 92 00 00
Fax
+45
32
54
05 33
E-mail: [email protected]
Telex3l292 ETR
DK
Tclegr.
adr. Etrangeres
Bilag
1
Journalnummer
400.c.2-0
I(ontor
EUK
Gi¡okonto 300-1806
21.
oktober
2003
Til
underetning
for
Folketiagets
Europaudr"lg
vedlægges
øvnge
medlems-
l¿ndes besvarelse
af formandsk¿bets
spørgeskemaú19.
september
2003
om
Rådet
(dok.
CIG t0/03
-34/03).
Ã/4 /\â
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0002.png
CONIERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRF,SENTATIVES
OF
TIIE
GOVER¡IMENTS
OF
TIIE
MBMBER
STATES
Brussels,
15
October
2003
crc
10/03
DELEG
1
NOTE
from:
Subject:
Benelux
IGC
2003
-
Reply
from
Benehu
to
the
questíonnaíre
on
the
Legßlatíve Functíon,
the
FormaÍions of
the Council
and the Presídency
of the Councíl
of
Mínísters
(doc.
CIG
9/03)
Delegations
will
find
attached the
reply
from
Benelux to the questionnaire on the
Legislative
Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and the
Presidency
of
the
Council
of
Ministers
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
()
cIG
10/03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0003.png
ANNEX
I.
The
Legislative Function
l.
In the
view of
the
Bene'lux the
Legislativc'
Function
should not
be
conlerred on
a
single Council
tirr¡lation.
Doing so
r.vould
constitute
an unacccptable
dinlinishing
of
thc'role
olthe
secroral
Councils.
The
Benelux,
as
was
expressed
in
the
Benelux-memorandum
of
4 December
2002,
is
in favour
of distinguishing
between
the
legislative
and
executive
function
of
the
Council's work.
Such can
be
done
within
each
Council-formation, including
the
General
Affairs
Council,
whose
coordinating
role could
entail
the
possibility of
being
seized
of legislative
proposals
being
discussed
in
other
Council-formations,
at
the request
of
either the Commission or
the
respective
Council-formation.
2.
futicle
I-49
does
not
limit
the
requirement
of
public
meetings
solely
to
the
normal legislative
procedure. The
Benelux
sees
no reason
why
the
IGC
should
inuoduce
such
a
limitation.
II.
3.
The
Formations of
the
Council
As
the Benelux made clea¡
in
its
contributions
to
the
Convention we
should
stick
to
the
Council
formations
as
they
were
agreed
at
Sevilla,
with
the exception
of splitting
up the
GAERC in
a
Relex Council and
a
General
Affairs
Council.
The Convention
text
(anI-23
para
3)
implies
that decisions on the number
of Council
formations
are
taken
by
consensus.
The
Benelux
sees
no reason
why
the
IGC
should
change
this.
ru.
The
presidency of
the
Council
of
Ministers
The Benelux considers
the basic
choice
with
regard to
the
Council
presidency
to
be between
three
options:
current
system
ofrotation ("unitary
rotation"),
elected presidens
and
teampresidents.
The
questionnaire is rather biased
in
that
it
explores
only
the
option
of
teampresidents
in
great detail.
The Benelux
would
like
to
have
a
balanced discussion,
in which
elected
presidents and
the
curent
system
of
rotation
are
also
thoroughly
examined. Both
options
carry
distinct
advantages
that
need to
be
taken
into
consideration. Elected
presidents can
serve
for
longer than
the
cunent
six
months period
which
enables thern
to better
ensure coherence
of
the
Council-agenda. They
can
be
chosen
by their
peers
based
on
merits, which
will
ensure
quality.
A
rotational presidency
based
on
the
current
system
carries the
advantage
of
unity of
command throughout
the
GAC
and
the
sectoral Councils.
crc
10/03
2
ANNEX
E¡{
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0004.png
4.
Questions 5
to
11:
looking
forward
to
an open exchange
with
partners
on
the
subject
of
teampresidencies
as one
of
the
possible
options.
At
this
time
it
is
not possible
to give
detailed
answers
to
all
questions regarding
the
nature
and
composition
of
team
presidencies.
However,'
some
Vy'e
are
observations
apply:
Team
presidencies
raise
the
question
of
coordination
within
the
team,
especially
the
larger
the
teanl becomes.
This
coordination
s'hould
be
a
responsibilit,v
of
the
nrenlbc'r
states that crrnlpose
the
teanr.
lvleanwhile
the
GAC
is responsiblc
tìlr
general
coordination
of
all
Council
activitie.s.
The Member
State
chairing
the
GAC
should also
chair
Coreper
I
and
IL
This
member
states bears
a
special
responsibiliry, in
that
it
needs
to
ensure
coherence
between
the
work in
the
Sectoral
Councils
and
the GAC,
in its
role
of
preparing the European
Council. Committees/working
parties
should be
chaired by
the
member
state
holding
the
presidency
of
the
Council
in
question.
Membership
of
any team presidency
should
be
based on equal
rotation.
Teams must
be composed
taking
into
account
a
geographical
and
demographical balance,
determined
in
advance
by unanimity.
)
crc
10/03
3
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0005.png
CONIERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRESENTATIVES
OF
TIIE
GO\¡ERNMENTS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
SÎATES
Brussels,
15
October
2003
CIG
1UO3
DELEG
2
from:
Sabject:
the
Bulguian
delegation
IGC
2M3
-
Replyfron
Bulgaríato
the questíonnøíre
on
the
lægíslatíve
Functíon,
tIæ
Formotíotts
ol
the
Councíl
and the
Fresídency of
thc
Couttcíl of Mínísters
'doc.
CIG
Delegations
will
find
attached the
reply from
the
Bulgarian delegation to the questionnaire on
the
I-egislative Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and tt¡e
Presidency
of
the
Council of Minisærs
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
crc
l1103
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0006.png
ANNEX
Bulgaria
would
not
oppose
the
creation
of
a
single Legislative
Council
(as provided
in
Article
23.1
of
the
drafi)
even
though we
would
slightly prefer
the
legislative functions
ro
be
dedicated to
each
Council
tbrmation.
The
decision
on the list
ol
Council
t'ornrations shor¡ld
be
taken
unanintouslv
as
prol'ided
in
An.
23.3
and
art. 20.4.
of
the
drati
For
the presidency
of
the
Council formations we would
prefer
to
apply
the
rotation
system
as
provided
in
fut.
23.4
of
the
draft. We
do not
exclude the
possibility
of
introducing the
team
presidencies
but further clarifications
are
needed
in
this
respect
-
the team
might include
three
Member
States;
its composition would
be
fixed in
advance
with
due
regard
to
the
principle
of
equal
rotationi
the
allocation
of
the different
Council
formations
would be
left
to
the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the team. The Member
State
chairing the
General
Affairs
Council
should
chair
Coreper as
well. The
committees/working
parties
subordinate
to
a
particular
Council
will
not
necessarily
be
chaired
by
the
Member
holding
the presidency
(each
committee
might
elect
its
chairman
on
the basis
of
his/her competencies).
The
PSC
and
other
external relations
working
groups
should
preferably
be
chaired
by
a
representative
of
the
Foreign Minister.
We do not
see
the
necessity
for
the
creation
of
a
permanent
informal
structure
for
coordination
between
the
representatives
of
the
Member
States
holding
the
Presidency
(ad
hoc
informal coordinating
structures could
be created
when
necessary).
The
essential
elements
for
future
arrangements
for
the
rotation
of
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
should
be
agreed
during
the
IGC but
the
details
could
be
left
for
further
decisions
in
the European
Council.
)
crc
11/03
2
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0007.png
CONFERENCE
OF
THE
REPRESENTATTVES
OFTIIE
GOVER}IMENTS
OF
THE MEMBERSTATES
Brussels,
15
October
2fi)3
ctG
t2t03
DELEG
3
the
Czech delegation
Subject:
IGC
2M3
-
Reply
from
the
Czech
Republíc to
the
qaestìonnaíre on
the
Legßlatívc
Fanctíon,
the
Formatíons of the Coancíl
ønd the Presìdency
of
the
Coancíl
of
Mínísters
doc.
CIG 9/03)
Delegations
will
find
attached
the
reply
from
the
Czech
delegation
to
the questionnaire on
the
Legislative
Function, the Formations
of
the
Council
and the
Presidency
of
the
Council of Ministers
(see
doc.
CIG
9103).
ctG
ta03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0008.png
ANNEX
I.
LEGISLATIVE
FUNCTION
OF
THE
COUNCIL
Each
Council
fornration should
work in
its public
le-gislative
fìrnction
as
wcll
as
c¿u'ry
out
other
activities
(as
opposecl
to
a sin_9le
legislative council).
l.
2.
The
public
legislative function
should
cover
all
laws
and framework
laws
undergoing
the
legislative
process.
A
provision
stipulating
the
possibility
to
deviate
from
the
rule
in
exceptional
and
justified
cases
by
a
qualified
majority
decision
of
the
Council would
be
included.
II.
THE FORMATIONS
OF
THE COUNCIL
3.
The
individual
Council formations should
be
laid
down by
unanimous decision
of
the
European
Council. The
number
of
formations
should
be
limited
in
line
with
the
Seville
European Council
conclusions.
III.
THE
PRESIDENCY
OF
THE COUNCIL
OF
MINISTERS
4.
No
other Council
formation
apart
from
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
should have
a
fixed
presidency.
5.
There
should
be
a
Team Presidency system
of
rotation
in all
the Council formation
with
the
exception
of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council.
6. (a)
The Team Presidency should
comprise
3 member
states.
(b) The
term
of
the
Presidency
should be
l8
months.
(c) The
composition of
the teams
should
be
fixed in
advance.
(d) The
allocation
of
the
various
Council
formation
should
be
left
to
the discretion
of
the member
states
in
the
team.
)
7.The
chain
of
command should be
maintained
(for
a
period
of six
months)
while
the member
state
in question
wouìd
simultaneously
chair
the General
Affairs
Council
and
the Coreper
I
a
II.
8.
The
committees/working
parties
subordinate
to
a
particular
Council
should
automatically
be
chaired by the member
state
holding the
Presidency
of
the
Council
in
question.
9.
The PSC and other external
relations
working
parties
should
be
chaired by
the
representatives
the
member
state
which
is
at
that
point
chairing
the General
Affairs
Council
and
Coreper
I.
a
II.
of
ctG
t2/03
ANNEX
2
B¡\T
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0009.png
10. There
should
an
informal
structure
for
coordination
between the representatives
of
the member
states
holding
the Presidency,
in
which
the President
of
the European
Council,
the
President
of
the
Commission
and the
Minister of
Foreign
Affairs
could participate.
11.
The
detailed arangements
for
the
rotation
of
the
Presidency
could
be unanimously adopted
at
a
later
stage,
if
the
assential
elements
of
the
future
arrangements were
agreed
at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty
establishing the
Constitution.
The
composition
of
the
Team
of
the
Presidency
is
considered
an
essential
point.
t2t03
ANNEX
ctc
3
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0010.png
CONTIERENCE'
OF
THE
REPRESDNTATTVES
OF
TIIE
GOVERNMENÎS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
STATES
Brussels, 15
Ocûoben
2003
crc
13/03
DELEG
{
the Danish delegation
Sabject:
-
IGC
2M3
Replyfrom Denmarkto
the questíontwire
on
tlu l*gßIaríve
Functbn,
tlæ
Forma,tíons
of
the Councíl
and
the
Presídercy
oltlæ
Coancíl
of
Mínísters
kloc. CIG
9/03)
Delegations
will find
atached the
reply
from
the
Danish delegation
o
the
questionnaireon
the
Legislative
Function,
ttre
Formations of
úe Council
and ttre Presidency
of
the
Council of Minisærs
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
crG
t3t03
1
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0011.png
ANNEX
General
remarks
The
following
Danish replies to
the
questionnaire on
the le,eislative
function/the
formations
of
the
CouncilÆhe
Presidency
of
the
Council
oliVlinisters
shor¡lcl be
re_earded
as
prelintinarv
and
subjecr
to funher
s¡recitìcation
in
the course
ol
thc
fCC
discussions.
I.
The
Legislative
Function
1.
2.
Denmark holds
the
position
that each
Council formation
should
perform
the
legislative
function
within
its
a¡ea
of
work.
Denmark
is
sceptical towards
a
separate
legislative
Council.
Denmark supports the decision
in Seville
to
open
Council
debates
on
acts adopted
in
accordance
with
the procedure
for
codecision
with
the
European
Parliament to
ttre
public.
It
is
important for Denmark
that this
principle of
openness
in
the
work
of
the Council
is
extended
to
all laws
and
framework
laws
in all Council
formations.
II.
The
Formations of the Council
3.
Denmark
supports
the decision
in Seville
limiting
the
list of Council
for*orionr.
Denmark
is
flexible
with
regard
to
the
decision-making procedure of
the
European
Council
on
the
list
of
Council
formations.
{
III.
The Presidency
of the
CouncÍl of
Ministers
4.
5.
6.
Denmark
supports
the
principle of
full
and
equal
rotation
among
Member
States
with
respect
to
the
Council
Presidency. The presidency
of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
must
be seen
in the
lighr
of
the tasks
of
the
EU
Foreign
Minister, including
the
role
of
the
EU Foreign Minister in
the
Commission.
Denmark
is open
towards
the idea
of
Team
Presidencies.
Team Presidencies
would
require
clear measures
to
ensul'e
efficient
and
coherent decision-making
and
coordination.
Denmark is ready
to
discuss various ways
of
organising
Team
Presidencies.
If it
is decided to
opt
for
a
Team Presidency
system,
principles for
the composition
of
the Teams
and
for
the
allocation
of Council formations
within
the
Teams must
be transparent and based
on
full
and
equal
rotation
among
Member
States.
cIG
13/03
2
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0012.png
7,
8.
9.
l.
Denmark
is
open towards
discussing
the idea
of
a
vertical
chain of co¡n¡nand.
In
general,
Denmark
finds
it
preferable
that
the
same
Member
State
or institutional
representative
normally
chairs
a
Council
formation
and the
corresponding
committees
and/or
working
parties
in order
to
ensure
vertical
co-ordination. The
possibility of chairing
of
certain
cornmiüees and/or
working
parties by
tlrc General Secretariat
of
the
Council,
by
the
Commission, or
by
an
elected
member
of
tt¡e
committee or
working
party should not be
ruled
out.
See
question
7.
See
quesdon
7.
10.
tt
is
important to
achieve greater coherence and
coordination
in
the
Council's
proceedings.
Denmark
is
open to discuss
modalities
of
an
informal
sructure
ftrr
coordinadon
among
the
presidents
of
the various insticutions.
It
is
important to
achieve the
above-mendoned
results
during
the
Intergovemmental
I
Conference,
but
details
can
be sort€d
out
at
a
laær stage.
cIG
13/03
ANNEX
3
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0013.png
CONIERENCE
OF
THE
REPRESENTATIVES
OF
TIIE
GOVERNMENTS
OFTIMMEMBER
STATES
Brussels,
15
October
2003
crc
1sl03
DET,EG
ó
from:
Subject:
theEstonian
delegation
IGC
2M3
-
from
Estonía
to
the questíonnøíre
on
th.e
legíslatíve Functíon,
thc
Formalíons of the Councíl
and the
hesídency
of tlæ
Couttcíl
of Mínísters
(doc.
CIG
9/03)
Reply
Delegations
will
find
anached the
reply from
the
Estonian delegation to the questionnaire
on
the
Iægislative Function, the Forrnations
of
the
Council
and the
Presidency
of
the
Council
of
Ministers
(see
doc.
CIc
9/03).
crc
l5l03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0014.png
ANNEX
I.
THE LEGISLATIVE
FUNCTION
1.
Should
exercise
of
thc legislative
function
be
confcrrcd
on
a
single Cot¡ncil
fornration
or
legislative
function (public)
and
determined
for
each
Council
formation?
should
a
a
part
dedicated
to
other
activities
be
Estonia is
of
the
opinion
that the present system
in
which
the
legislative function
of
the
Council
is
conducted
by different
council formations should not
be
changed.
Therefore,
ttre
provisions
of
the
draft
Treaty,
which
provide
for
the creation
of
a
single legislative and
general
affairs
council,
should
not
be
maintained.
2.
Should
the
public
legislative
part
be
concerned
only
with
laws and framework
laws
adopted
under the
normal legislative procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption
by
the
European
ParlÍament and
the
Council)
g!
with
all
laws
and framework
laws?
Estonia holds the
view
that the
public legislative
part
of
the
work
of
different
council
formations
should
concern
all
laws
and
framework laws
adopted
by
the
Council.
II.
THE
FORMATIONS
OF
THE COUNCIL
3.
Should
the
European Council's decision on
the
list
of Council formations
-
as
envisaged
by
the Convention
-
be
taken
unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft
Convention?
by
a
qualified
majority?
or
by
a
simple
majority?
Should
the
list
be
confÏned
to a
small
number of formations
in
line
with
the decision taken
in
Seville?
o
Estonia
supports
the
wording
of
article 23(3)
of
the
draft
Treaty, according
to which
the
concrete
list of
different
Council
formations
is to
be
adopted
by
the
European
Council. Taking
into
account
the
importance
of
the
issue,
we
are
of
the view
that
the European
Council
decisions
on the
list
of
Council
formations
should be taken unanimously.
As for
the
number
of
Council
formations,
it
should
be
in line
with
the decision taken
in
Seville.
l5l03
ANNEX
crc
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0015.png
III.
THE
PRESIDENCY
OF
THE COUNCIL
OF
MINISTERS
4.
Should
other Council formations apart
from
the Foreign
Affairs
Council
have a
fixed
Presidency
(i.e.
not
applying
the
rotation
system
provided
for
in
Article
23(4))?
which formations?
of
what
duration?
using what procedure (election by the members
of
the
Council
formation
concerned)?
Estonia holds
rhe
vierv
th¡t
ihe
Presidenc.v
of all
Council
tbnnarions
shoulcl be
basecl
on
rhe
svstr.lìì
of
equal rotation
between
the
Nlenrber
States.
The
issue
ol'
rhe
Presiclency
of
rhe
Foreign
Aftìirs
Council
will
have
to
be
discussed together
with
the
whole
complex quesrion
of
the
insritution of
the
Foreign Affairs Minister,
which
is
a
separate
agenda
point
at
rhe
IGC.
5.
Should
there be a
Team
Presidency
system
for
the Council
formations that
continue to
use the
rotation
system?
As
an
altemative
to
the
present
rotation
system, Estonia supports
the
Team
Presidency
system.
However,
in
order
to
make
the
Team Presidency system
acceptable
and
efficient, a
number
of
conditions
have
to
be
met.
Firstly,
respect
for
the principle
of
equal
rotation
of
Member
States
should be
explicitly
stipulated
in
the Treaty. Secondly, the organisation
of
coordination
between
different
Member
States
presiding
over different Council
formations, as
well
as
coordination
between
different
levels
of
decision-making (Coreper,
working
groups) should
be
elaborated,
in
compliance
with
the
general quest
for
simplicity
and
transparency,
as
well
as efficiency
and
continuity.
6.
If
it
is decided
to
optfor
(a)
(b)
(c)
a
Team Presidency system
(d)
how many
Member
States
should
there
be
in
the
"team"?
three?
four?
five?
what should
be
the
duration
of
its term?
a
year?
18
months?
longer?
should the
composition of
the
teams be
fixed
in
advance
or
teft
open on the
basis
of
criteria
to
be
determined,
with
due
regard
for
the principle
of
equal
rotation
(which
would
take
into
account
political
and
geographical balance
and
the
diversity
of
Member
States
as
defined
in
Article
23(4)
of
the
draft
Convention)?
should the
allocation of
the
different Council formations
within
the
team be fïxed
in
advance
q
left
to
the
discretion of
the
Member
States
in
the team?
Estonia
sees
the advantages
of
a team
of
3
members
for
18
rnonths
or
of
a
team
of
5
members
for
2,5
years.
We
find
that the
different
proposals
should
be subject
to
further
discussions,
taking into
account
that some
states
have also
suggested
other models.
The
composition
of
the
teams
should not be
fixed
in
advance,
but
the
criteria
should be clearly
defined
in
the Treaty,
guaranteeing
the
respect
for
the
principle
of
equal rorarion.
Also
the
allocation of
the
different
Council
formations should not
be
fixed
in
advance,
but
should
be subjecr
to
a
unanimous
decision
of
the
Member
States
in
the
team.
The
idea
of
rotation
within
the
team
should
also
be discussed.
cIG
15/03
3
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0016.png
7.
Given the
need
for
increased coordination
under
a
Team
Presidency system,
should
a
"chain of command"
be
maintained, at
least
partially, with
the
Member
State
chaíring
the General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing
Coreper
[I
and
II?]?
Estonia is
of
the
view
that
the
chain
of
command under a
Team
Presidency should be maintained,
with
the
Member
State
chairing the General
Affairs
Council
also chairing Coreper
I
and
II.
8.
Should committees/
working
pârties subordinate
to
a
particular
Council automatically
be
chaired
by
the
lllember
Stâte
holding
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
in
question
(
vertical structure)?
Committees
and
working
panies subordinate
to
a
particular
Council
should
be
automatically
chaired
by
the
Member
State
holding
the
Presidency
of
rhe
council in
question.
9.
By
the
same
token,
if
the
Foreign
Affairs Minister
chaired
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council,
should
the
PSC
and other
external relations
working parties
be
chaired
by
a
representative of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister?
Estonia is
of
the
view
that
if
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
is
chaired
by
a
Member
Srate,
the
pSC
and
other
extemal
relations
working
parties
should
be
chaired
by
the
Member State
holding
the
Presidency
of
the
Foreign
Affai¡s
Council.
If,
on
the contrary, the Foreign
Aftairs
Council
is
chaired
by
the
Foreign
Affairs Minister
(see
point 4), then the
PSC and
other exrernal
relations
working
parties
should be chaired
by
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister
or,
in
his
absence,
by
his
representative.
10.
In
order to
achieve
greater
coherence
in
the
Council's
proceedÍngs,
should
there
be
an
informal
structure
for
coordÍnation
between
the
representatives
of
the
Member
States
holding
the PresÍdency,
in
which
the President
of
the
European Council,
the
president
of
the Commission and
the
MÍnister
for
Foreign
Affairs
could
participate?
We
attach importance
to
horizontal
coherence,
but
see
no
need
to
include provisions
on
such
informal coordination
in
the
Treaty.
11.
Should
the detailed arrangements
for
the
rotation
of
the
Presidency
of
the Council
be
the
subject of
a decision
to
be
taken unanimously
. by
the
European
Council?
If
so:
should
it
be
adopted
at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty
establÍshing the
ConstÍtutÍon?
could
it
be adopted
later
if
the
essential
elements
of
the
future
arrangements
were
agreed
at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty
establishÍng the
Constitution?
)
The
detailed
arrangements
for
the rotation
of
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
should be
subject
of
a
unanimous
decision
of
the European
Council.
Essential elements
of
the
future
arrangements should
be
stipulated
in
the
Treaty.
At
present,
the
list
setting
out
the order
in
which Member
States assume
the
Presidency is
adopted
by
the
Council unanimously.
r5l03
ANNEX
crc
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0017.png
CONFERENCE
OFTHE
REPRESENTATIVES
OF TTIE
GOVERNMENÎS
OF
TIM
MEMBER
STATF,S
Brussels,
15
October
2003
cIG
16/03
DELEG
7
from:
the Greek
delegation
subiect:
'-o?#fo"*
Greece
to the
questíonnøíre on the
l*gßIatíve
Fanctíon,
the
Formalíons of
the Coancílandthe
Presídency
of tlæ
Councílof
Mínkterc
(doc.
CIG
9/03)
Delegations
will
find
attached
the
reply from
the
Greek
delegation to the questionnaire on the
Iægislative
Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and
the Presidency
of
the
Council
of
Ministers
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
ctG
t6103
1
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0018.png
ANNEX
I.
TTIE
LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION
l.
Shor¡ld exelcise
oIthe
legislrtive function
be
contèrred on
a
single
Council
tbrrnation
or
should
a
legislative
tinction
(public)
and
a
part
dedicated
each
Council formation?
The
exercíse
of
the
legßlatíve
functíon
and
determíned
for
eac
h
C
oancíl
formation.
a
co
other
activities
be
detennined
for
part
dedícafed to
other
actívitíes
should
be
Atl
Councítforrnøtìons
should
functíons;
otherwìse,
they øre
bound to
lose theír
polítícal
character
and
dynamí.cs
and
thus the
ínterest
of theír partícípants
(i.e,
the
respectíve
mínísters).
So
the
provísíon
of
the
Draft
Constítutíonfor
ø
legíslative
Councíl
(along
wíth
the
General
Affaírs
Councíl)
should
be
dropped.
exercíse
legistafíve
Should
the
public
legislative part
be concerned
only
with
laws
and
framework
laws
adopted
under
the
normal
legislative procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption by
the
European Parliament
and
the
Council)
q
with
all
laws
and
framework
laws?
The
public
legßlatíve
pøt
of the
Councílformøtíons
should
be
concerned wíth
øll_laws
and
framework
laws ín
the
spírít
of
transparency
and
símplífícæíon
of
procedures.
II.
TTIE
FORMATIONS
OF
TTIE
COUNCIL
()
3.
Should
the
European Council's decision on
the
list
of
Council formations
-
as
envisaged
by
the Convention
-
be
taken
unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft
Convention?
by
a
qualified
majority?
or
by
a
simple
majority?
Should
the
list
be
confined
to
a
small
number
of
formations
in
line with
the
decision taken
in
Seville?
The
ìnítial
decísíon
on the
líst
of Councilformations
should
be
taken
withín
the
framework
of the Intergovernmental
Conference.
The
líst
should
be
in,
lhte
wíth the
one øgreed
in
Sevílle,
allowíngfor
the separatíon
of the GAERC ìnto
twoformations
(GAC and Foreígn
Affaírs
Council).
The
líst
could
be
annexed to
the Constítutíon.
However,futare
amend.ments
on
the
list
of Councílformatíons
should
preferøbly
be
agreed.
ín
the European
Council
by
a
qualified
majorþ,
øs
it
would
be unwíse
tu
ftx
¡n
a
rígíd
manner
the
C
ouncíl formatíons.
crc
16t03
2
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0019.png
Itr.
TTIE
PRESIDENCY
OF
TTIE
COUNCIL
OF
MINISTERS
4.
Should other
Council
formations
apart
from
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
have
a
fixed
Presidency
(i.e. not applying
the
rotation system provided
for
in Article B@))2
which
formations?
of
what duration?
using
what procedure (election by
the
members
of
the
Council formation
concerned)?
lYitlt tlrc
exception
of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Couttcil,
tlrc
fíxed
Presídency
sltould
not
be
applied to
the
Councilformations.
They
must
be
subject
to
the
rotatiot,
sjstem on
a
stríct
equal
hasís
among Member
States.
5.
Should
there
be
a
Team Presidency
system
for
the
Council formations
tìat
continue
to
use
the
rotation system?.
ínfavour
of
the
íntrodactíon
of
a
systern
of
Team Presídencíes.
In
the enlarged
European Uníon,
thís
system
would
øllow
Me¡nber
States
to
share
ín
the
function
of the
Presídency
øt
regular
tíme
scales.
Greece ís
6.
If
it
is
decided to
opt for
a
Team Presidency
system
(a)
how many Member
States
should
there
be in the "team"? three? four?
five?
A
Team Presídency shoald
preferably
consist
of
3
Member
States.
Greece
wíll
consíder
any other
alternatíve
proposal on
its
meríts.
(b)
(c)
('
what should
be the
duration
of
its
term?
ayeu?
18
months? longer?
The
duration of
the
Presídency
tertn should
be one
year.
should
the
composition of
the teams be
fixed
in
advance
or
left
open
on the
basis
of
criteria
to
be
determined,
with
due
regard
for
the
principle
of
equal
rotation
(which
would
take
into
account
political
and
geographical balance
and the
diversity
of
Member
States
as
defined
in
Article
23(4)
of
the
draft
Convention)?
The composítíon
of
the
teams
should
be
tixed
ín
advance
on
a
predetermíned
order
based
on
the
criteríon
of
equal
rotatíon
and
tøkíng
into
account
the
politícal
and
geographícal
balance and
the
diversíty of Member
States as
defined
in
Article I-
23(4)
of
the
draft
Constitutíon.
(d)
should
the
allocation
of
the
different Council
formations
within
the team be
fixed
in
advance
or
left
to
the
discretion
of
the Nlember
States
in
the
team?
The
allocatíon
of
the
dffirent
Councílformatíons within the
Team
Presidency
should
befixed
ín
advance.
crc
16/03
3
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0020.png
7.
Given
the need
for
increased
coordination
under
a
Team Presidency
system,
should
a
"chain
of command"
be
maintained,
at
least
partially,
with
the Member
State
chairing
the
General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing
Coreper
[I
and
II?]?
In
order to
enhance
coordinatíon
under the
team
presídency,
ít would
be
advßable
for
the
Member
States
chaíríng the
Generø.LAffaírs
Cauncil to
chaír
the Coreper,
thus
maintaining
a
certaín
degree
of
chaín of
command.
8.
Should conlmittees/
working
parties
subordinate
to
a
particular Council
automatically
be
chaireclby
rhe
ñlenrber.State holdirrg thc Prcsidcncy
ot
the
Council
in qucstion
tvcrtical
structure)?
The
applícatíon of the vertícal structure
ís
essentìal
to the coordínøtion
of
each
Council
formatíon.
So,
as
a
rule,
commífrees
/
workíng parties subordinøte
to
apartícular
Councíl
should
be
chaíred by the
Member
Støte
holdíng
the Presídency
of
the respectíve
CouncíL,
unless
the Councíl
íßelf
decìd.es
otherwíse.
9.
By
the
same
token,
if
the Foreign
Affairs Minister
chaired
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council, should
the
PSC and
other extemal relations
working
parties be chaired
by
a
represent¿tive
of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister?
thís
issue
pendíng
a.
tnore detaíled descríptíon
of
the
role
of
the
Míníster of
Foreign A,ffaírs of the EU and of
the
European External
Action
Semice
that
wíll
assíst
hím.
We
reserve
comment
on
10.
ln
order to achieve greater
coherence
in
the
Council's
proceedings, should
there be
an
informal
structure
for
coordination
benveen the
representatives
of
the
Member
States
holding
the
Presidency,
in
which
the
President
of
the
European
Council,
the
President
of
the
Commission
and
the
Minister
for
Foreign
Affairs
could
participate?
Greece
ís
of the
opinion that
such
øn
ínformal coordínøing
structure would hardly
be ø
c
o
ns
tìtutío
nal-
ty
p
e
provßíon.
ínfonnal
stracture
for
coordínøtíon (not
built
ínto
the
Constitutíon)
between
the
representnÍives
of
the Member
Støes
holdíng
the Presídency,
ín
whích
the Presídents
of
the
European
Council,
of the Comtnßsion,
of the
European
Parlíatnent
ønd
the
Minísterfor
Foreign
Affaírs
could.
participate
on an
ad hoc
basís
and
followíng
a consensual decísíon
of
the teøm
Presidency to ínvite
them.
We
believe
that there could
be
an
o
crG
t6/03
ANNEX
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0021.png
I
l.
Should
tl¡e
detailed anangements for
the
rotation of
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
be the
subject
of
a
decision to
be
tal¡en
unanimousþ
'
by
the
European
Council?
If
so:
should
it
be
adopted at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty
establishing
the
Constitution?
could
it
be
adopûed
later
if
the
essentÍal elements
of
the
future arrangements
were
agreed at the same
time
as ttre
Treaty establishing the Constitution?
The essentíal elemenß
and
parameters
of
the
future
arrangetnerrts
for
the
rotatíon
of
the
Presídency must
be
agreed
at
the
sa,ne
time
as
the
Treaty
establísltíttg
the Constídttíon.
The
very
specífic
arrangenents (i.e.
Iíst
of
Member
States
in
tlrc
Presitlency),
could
beJíxed at
a
latter
snge
by
a unanímous
decisíott
of the European Council.
'
cIG
At
present, the
list
setting
out
the order
in which
Member
States
adopted
by
the
Council unanimously.
16103
assume
the Presidency is
5
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0022.png
CONI|ERENCE
OF
TTIE
REPRESENTATTVES
OF
TIIE
GOVERNMENTS
OFTIIE
MEMBER
STATES
Bnrssels,
15
October
2003
ctc
t7t03
DELEG
8
NOTE
the
Spanish delegation
Subject:
IGC
2M3
-
Spaín to
the qaestìonnahe
on
thc
l*gíslatíve Fuwtíon,
the
Forma.tíans
of
tho
Coarcíl
and the Presídency
af
tltc
Councíl of Mínísters
Reply
from
(doc.
CIG 9/03)
Delegations
will
find
attached
the
reply from
the
Spanish
delegation
to
the questionnaire on the
Iægislative
Function,
the Formations
of
the
Council
and
the Presidency
of
the
Council
of
Minisærs
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
ctc
17103
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0023.png
ANNEX
I.
TTIE
LEGISLATIVE
FUNCTION
L
shoulcl
exercise
of
rþe
le-eislativc'
fìrnction
be
conttn'ed
on
a
single
Council
fomration
or
should
a
legislative function (public)
ancl
a
part
cledicated to
other
acdvities
be de¡erminecl
tbr
each
Council formation?
Each Council
formation
should meet
in
public
whenever
it
legislates
(including
debates
and
not
only
the
final
stage
and
vote).
In
order
to facilitate this, Council
agendas
would
have to
differentiate
clearly legislative items
from
others and
regroup
the
fomter.
2.
Should
the
public legislative
part be
concerned
only
with
laws
and
framework
laws
adopted
under
the
normal
legislative
procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption by
the
European Parliament
and the
Council)
g
with
all
laws
and
framework
laws?
The
public legislative part
should cover
as
a
rule
all
laws
and
framework
laws.
II.
TtrIE
FORMATIONS
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
3.
f \/
't
Should
ttre
European Council's decision on the
list of
Council formations
-
as
envisaged
by
rhe
Convention
-
be taken
unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft
Convention?
by
a
qualified
majority?
or
by
a
simple
majority?
Should the
list
be
confined to
a
small
number
of
formations
in line
with
the
decision taken
in Seville?
Unanimity
is a
bad
solution
since
it
would
increase
the
possibility
of
internal
quarrels
within
Governments.
A
simple
majority
could
make
changes
too
easy.
Therefore,
a
qualified
majority
seems
the
right
answer.
Caveat:
Any
acceptance
by
Spaín
of any
quaffied
maiority
at
the
IGC
is made on
the
assumption that
the
llnion
keeps
the
current definítion
of
qualified
maiority
as
provídedfor
ín the
TreatY
of Nice.
The list
should
follow
the Seville precedent.
crG
t7/03
ANNEX
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0024.png
III.
TIM
PRESIDENCY
OF TTIE
COUNCIL
OF
N{INISTERS
4.
Should other
Council
for.mations apart
from
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
have
a
fixed
Presidency (i.e.
not
applying
the
rotation
system
provided for in
Articleß@))?
which formations?
of
what duration?
using what procedure
(election
by
the members
of
the
Council formation
concerned)?
Spain
does
not favour
a
sy'stenr
of
fixed (that
is to
sa-v,
basicall-v
elected)
Presidencies at
the
Council of Nlinisters.
5.
Should
there
be
a
Team Presidency
system
for
the
Council
formations that continue
to
use
the
rotation
system?
Yes.
Spain clearly supports
such
a
system.
6.
If it
is decided to opt
for
a
Team Presidency
system
(a)
how
many
Member
States
should
there be
in
the "team"?
three?
four?
five?
\{e
think
that
four
/ five
members
per
team
is the
right figure.
Not all
teams
need
tó have exactly the
same
number
of
members,
taking into consideration that the
number of Member
States is
not
always
perfectly divisible by
a
given
figure
and
that the number of Member
States
will
fluctuate
in
the
future.
(b)
(c)
what should
be
the duration
of its
term?
a
year?
18
months?
longer?
Two
years. We
should
try
to avoid
in
any
case
cutting
a
budgetary
year
up
in
two.
should the
composition
of
the
teams be
fixed
in
advance
or
left
open on
the basis
of
criteria to
be
determined,
with
due regard
for
the
principle of
equal
rotation
(which
would
take
into
account
political
and
geographical
balance and the
diversity of Member
States
as
defined
in
Article
23(4)
of
the
draft
Convention)?
)
Composition of the
teams
should
be
fixed in
advance,
by
unanimity, including
a
rearrangement
once
a whole
tttout''has
been
completed.
The
teams
would
be
revised when
there
were
new
accessions.
Composition would
have
to take
into
account
political
and geographical balance
as
well
as
the
diversity
of
Member
States.
(d)
.should
the
allocation of
the
different Council formations
within
the
tearn be
fìxed in
advance
or
left to
the discretion
of
the Member
States
in
the team?
It
should
be
left to
the
discretion of
the
Member
States
in the
team, where
agreement
would require,
of
course, consensus.
But
Spain
would not
oppose a
system
of allocation fixed
in
advance (i.
e.,
similar
to
the one
presented
by
Peter
Hain
at the
Convention)
t7/03
ANNEX
crc
3
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0025.png
7.
Given the
need
for
increased
coordination
under
a
Team
Presidency system,
should
a
"chain
of command"
be
maintained,
at
least
partially,
with
the
Member
State
chairing the
General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing Coreper
[I
and
II?]?
It
could
be
but,
in
that
case
and
in
order
to
avoid
too much power being
concentrated
into
one
hand,
that
"chain
of
command"
shor¡ld
rotate
among
the members
of
the
team
(i.
e.,
every
six
months).
8.
Should committees/
workin_e
parties
subordinated
to
a
particular
Council
autorlatically
be
chaired
by
the lvlernber State
holding thc
Presidcnc¡,
of
thc
Council
in qucstion
(vertical
structure)?
It
sounds
reasonable.
9.
By
ttre sarne token,
if
the Foreign
Affairs
Minister
chaired
the
Foreign
Affairs Council,
should
the PSC
and other
extemal relations
working
parties be
chaired
by
a
representative
of
the
Foreign
Affai¡s
Minister?
It
depends
on the status
finally
agreed
for
the
MFA
of
the
Union.
Spain
would
oppose
that
the
PSC
and
other Council working parties
were chaired
by
Commission
officials.
10.
In
order
to
achieve greater coherence
in
the
Council's
proceedings,
should
there
be
an
informal
structure
for
coordination
between the representatives
of
the
Member
States
holding
the
Presidency,
in which
the President
of
the European
Council,
the
President
of
the
Commission
and
the
Minister for
Foreign
Affairs
could
participate?
Yes.
I
l.
Should the
detailed
¿urangements
for
the
rotation
of
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
be the
subject of
a decision
to
be
taken
unanimously
by
the
European
Council?
Yes.
(
.
If
so:
should
it
be
adopted
at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty
establishing
the
Constitution?
Preferably,
yes.
could
it
be
adopred
later
if
the
essential
elements
of
the
future
arrangements
were
agreed
at
the same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing the Constitution?
This
might
also be acceptable,
but
it
could prove
difficult
to
agree
on
what
are
the
essential elements.
crG
t7103
ANNEX
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0026.png
lt
I
I
CONrERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRESEI\TATIVES
OF
TIM
GO\¿ERNMENTS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
STATES
Brussels,
15
October
2003
crc
19/03
DELEG
10
NOTE
from:
the
Irish
delegation
subiect:
:otr;ï|r"*
Iretand
to
the
questíonnaíre
on the
l*gístaríve
Fanctíon,
the
FormaÍíons of the Councíl and the
Presídency
of
the
Councíl
of
Mínísters
(doc.
CIG
9/03)
Delegations
will
find
attached the
reply from
the
lrish
delegation to
the
questionnaire
on
the
Legislative
Function,
the
Formations of
the
Council
and the
Presidency
of
the
Council of Ministers
(see
doc.
CIG 9/03).
o
crc
r9t03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0027.png
ANNEX
I
l.
A
THE
LEGISLATIVE
COUNCIL
Should
exercise
ol
the
le_eislative
flnction
be
confell'c'd on
a
single
Council tbrmation: or
Should
a
le-rislative
function
tpublict
an<1
a
part dedicatccl to
orhcr activities bc detemlinecl
f'or each
Council
tbrmation'l
The
legislative
function of
the
Council
of
Ministers
should continue to
be
carried
out,
as
a
present,
in
the relevant
expert Council formations.
When
the
Council
legislates,
it
should
meet
in public.
This
will
cause a
natural
divide
in
the
public/private
exercise
of
each
formation's
functions.
2.
A
Should
the
public
legislative part be
concerned
only with
laws
and
framework
laws
adopted
under
the
normal legislative procedure
(ie
joint
adoption
by
the
European Parliament
and the
Council)
or
With
all
laws
and
framework
laws?
Whenever
the
Council
legislates,
it
shor¡Id meet
in
public
(whatever
the
legislative
instrument or
procedure
used).
il
3.
THE FORMATIONS
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
Should
the European
Council's decision
on
the
list of
Council
formations
-
as
envisaged
by
the Convention
-
be taken
unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft
Convention?
By
a
qualified majority?
Or by
a
simple
majority?
Should the
list
be
confined
to
a
small
number
of
formations
in line with
the
decision
taken
in Seville?
A
The
decision on
Council formations
might
be
taken by
qualified majority
vote
in
the
European Council.
While
there
does
not appear
to
be
a
need
at
present
either to
expand
or
to reduce
the
number
and
function
of the
formations identified
at
Seville
(other,
perhaps,
than
separating
General
Affairs from External
Relations),
to
provÍde
for
greater
flexibility
in
the
future
there
is no need
for
this
detail
to
be set
out in
the
Constitutional
Treaty.
r9l03
ANNEX
crc
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0028.png
III
4.
TTIE
PRESIDENCY
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
OF
MIMSTERS
Should other
Council formations
apart
from
the
Foreign
Affairs Council
have
a
fixed
Presidency
(ie not
applying
the
rotation
system
provided for in
ArticleB@))?
Which
formations?
Of
what duration?
Using
what
procedure
(election
for
the
Council
formations
concerned)
r\
Ireland
does
not
support
antending the approach
agreed
at the
Convention
to provide
for
elected
or
fixed
Presidencies
in
the
Council formations. The
Presidency should
be
carried out
by
Member
States
under
a
system
of
equal
rotation
as
provided
for
in
Article
23.4
of
the
Convention draft.
Ireland
does
not
believe
that
the Foreign
Minister
should
chair
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council. This
places
too great
a
responsibility
in
the hands of an
individual,
who
will
be
fully
occupied ensuring the external
representation of
the
Union
and
carrying
out the
roles
currently
performed by
the
High
Representative and the
External
Relations
Commissioner.It
also
prevents the
Council
from
playing
its
proper
role Ín holding
the
Foreign
Minister
to
account
in
the exercise
of
hislher functions. RotatÍon
among
Member
States
should
apply.
We
are
open to considering special arrangements
in
the
Foreign
Affairs
formation,
where
continuity
and
coherence
will
be
provided by
the
contribution
of
the
Foreign
Mnister
and
the
proposed
External
Action
Service.
We
note,
in particular,
the arrangements
for
chairing of
the
UN
Security Council (rotation
among
Member
States
every
month)
and
believe these
meritfurther
study. The
Member
State
chairing the Council would
have
no role
in external representation.
5.
Should
there be
a
Team Presidency
system
for
the
Council formations
that continue to
use
the
rotation
system?
A
Ireland
supports
the
Convention
text
which
provides
for
Council for:¡rations
to
be
chaired
by Member
States on
the basis
of
an equal
rotation.
It
is
open
to
considering
models
through
which this
can
be
achieved,
including
a
"Team
PresÍdency system".
If
a
Team Presidency system is adopted
by
the
IGC,
this should
provide
for
each
member
of
a
team to have the
opportunÍty
to
chair
every
Council
formation during
the
team's
term
in
office.
)
In
a
Union of
25
or
more
Member
States,
continuing
to strengthen the
multi-annuat
and annual
programming
provided
for
at
Seville
will
be
vital
to
the
success
of
whatever
arrangement
for
the Presidency
is agreed.
crc
19/03
a
J
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0029.png
6.
If it
is decided to opt
for
a
Team Presidency
system:
a)
How
many Member
States should there
be
in
the
"team"?
th¡ee?
Four?
Five?
b)
Whac
should
be
the
duration of its
terms?
A
year?
18
montis?
Longer?
left
open
on the
basis
of
c) Should
the
composition of
the
teams
be
fixed in
advance
criteria
to be
determined
with
due
regard
for
the
principle
of
equal
rotation
(which
would
taken
into
account
political
and
geographical
balance
and
the
diversity
of
Member
g
States
as
defined in
Anicle
23(4) of
the
draft Convention'l)
d)
Should
the
allocation of
the
different
Council
formation.s
within
the team
be
lixed
in
advance
or leti
to the
discretion
ol
the rVlerlbel'
State's
in
the
team'l
A
Presidency
system,
it will
need
to
strike
an
appropriate
balance between
the
need
for
the greatest
possible coherence
(which
points
towards
a
small
team)
and
the
need
for
each
team to
be
representative
of
the
Union
in
terms
of
geographic and demographic balance
(which
points towards
a
larger
team).It
shor¡ld
be
possÍble to meet
both
requirements
in
a
team of five,
but
we
are
open
to
other
ideas.
(a)
If
the
IGC
decides
to opt
for
a
Tearn
This
question
is
linked
to
(a) above.
While
we
are
open to team
Presidencies
of
shorter
duration,
there
might
be
advantages
in organising
the team
Presidency
system
to reflect
the
rhythm that
operates
in
the
Union's other institutions. A period
in
ofüce
of
30
months
mighf
therefore,
be
considered.
The
IGC
should decide
the essential elements
governing
a
Team Presidency
system
(the períod
in
office, the
need
for
equality
between
Member
States,
the
need
for
balance
in
its composition
etc).
There
is no
need
for
it
to
determine
the
composition of
teams.
However,
the
European Council
will
need
to
take an
early
decision
Ín
the
matter
to
ensure
that
the
Council
is prepared,
in
good time,
for
the entry
into force of
the
new
Constitutional
Treaty.In
the
future,
it
will
be necessary
to
decide on
team
Members at
least
two
teams
in
advance.
every
Member
State should
have
the
opportunity
to
chair
each
formatÍon
of
the Councíl
during
the
team's term in
office. Once
this
principle
is
established,
it
should
be
possible
for
the members of the team
to
decide
the
sequence
Ín which
they
chair
each
formation.
7.
(b)
(c)
(d)
If
a
team
system
is adopted,
Given
the need
for coordination
under
a
Team Presidency
system,
should
a
"chain of
command"
be
maintained,
at least
partially,
with
the
Member
State
chairing
the
General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing
Coreper
[I
and
II]?
Yes.
The lVlember
State
chairing
the
General
Affairs
Council
should
also
chair
Coreper.
Should
committees/working
parúes
subordinate
to
a
particular Council automatically
be
chaired by the
Member
State
holding
the
Presidency
of
the Council
in
question
(vertical
,4,
8.
structureX
Yes,
in
general. However consideration
should
also be
given
to
the extent
to which
the
Council Secretariat
can
chair
more technícal groups.
crc
l9l03
ANNEX
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0030.png
9.
By
the
same
token,
if
the
Minister for
Foreign
Affairs
chaired
the
Foreign
Aftairs
Council,
should
the PSC and other
external relations
working
parties be chaired
by
a
representative
of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister?
As noted
above,
Ireland
does
not support
the Foreign
Minister
chairing the Foreign
Affairs
Council.Ireland
also
considers
that
the PSC
should
continue to be
chaired by
the
Member
State
chairing
the Foreign
Affairs
Council. The
question
of how
the
CFSP
and
other
external
relation related
working
parties
should
be
chaired
will
have to
be
considered
b"v-
the
IGC
in
the
light
of
its
decision
regarding
the
chairing
of
the Foreign
Affairs
Council.
In order to
achieve greater coherence
in
the
Council's
proceedings, should there be
an
informal
structure
for
coordinating
benveen the
representatives
of
the
Member
States
holding
the Presidency,
in which
the President
of
ttre
European
Council,
the President
of
the
Commission
and the
Minister
for
Foreign
Affairs
could participate?
A
r0.
A
The General
Affairs
Council should
continue to
coordinate
the
work
of the Council
of
Ministers.
If
the
IGC
decides
to
put
a
Team Presidency
system
in
place, there
will
need to
be
arrangements
for
coordination
between
the
members
of the
team.
This should
take
place
in
a
meeting of
their
GAC
representatives
(rather
than
a
meeting
of the
individual
Chairs of
each
Council formation).
There
will
also need
to
be
appropriate
coordination
in
the
preparation
of European
Council
meetings
including
all
relevant
figures.
I
l.
Should
the
detailed
arrangements
for
the
rotation of
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
be the
subject of
a
decision
to be
taken unanimously
by
the
European
Council?
If
so:
Should
it
be
adopted
at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing
the
Constin¡tion?
Could
it
be adopted
later
if
the
essential elements
of
the
future
arrangements
were
agreed
at
the same
time
as
the Treaty establishing the
Constitution?
A
Yes,
unanimity
is
required
for
deciding
on detailed
arrangements
for rotation.
As
noted
above,
the
IGC
should decide the
essential
elements
of
the
system
of
rotation
(the
period in
office, the
need
for
equality
between
Member
States
etc).
Details
can then
be
decided by the
European Council
in
good
time
for
the
entry into
force
of the
o
Constitutional Treaty.
l9l03
ANNEX
ctc
5
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0031.png
COhIFERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRESENTATI\¿ES
OF
TIIE
GO\¡ERI\IMENTS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
STATES
Bnrssels,
15
October
2003
ctG20t03
DELEG
II
NOTE
the
Cypriot
delegation
-
IGC
2OO3
Replyfrom
CWrus
to
the
questíonnøíre
onthe
l*gßløtìve Functío4
the
Formalìons
of tlæ Councíl
and the Presídency
of
the
Councíl of
Mínßters
(doc.
CIG
9/03)
Delegations
will
find
attached
the
reply from
the
Clpriot
delegation to
the
questionnaire on the
Legislative Function,
the Formations
of
the
Council
and
the Presidency
of
the
Council of
Ministers
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
1
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0032.png
ANNEX
I.
The
Leeislative Function
l.
2.
Exercise
of
the legisladve
tunction
and
a
part
dedicated
to
other activities
should
be
deterntined
tbr
each
Council
fbrnlation..Setting
up
a
sepûrate
Legislative Council
as
proposed
in
the
Drati
Treaty
will
give
rise
to
problems in
determinin_e
rhe paniciparion
of
Ministers.
In
the spirit
of
openness
and accountability,
all
laws
and
framework
laws
should
be
adopted
through
the
public
legislative
procedure.
II.
The
Formations
of the
Council
3.
The
European
Council's
decision
on
the
list
of
council formations should
be
taken
unanimously
as stipulated
by
rhe Draft
Constitutional Treaty.
The
decision
on
the
number
of formations
should be
left
to
the
European
Council
as
provided
for in
the draft
Constitutional Treaty.
III.
The Presidencv
of
the
Council of
Ministers
In
the
spirit of
equality
of
member-states
and
equitable participation
in
the workings
of
the
Union, Cyprus
does
not
favour
the extension
of
fixed
presidencies
to
Council
formations other than
that
of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council. The rotation
system provided
for in
article 23
(4)
should apply.
5.
Cyprus
supports
the establishment
of
team
presidencies.
6.
[a]
Cyprus considers that there should
be
four
member-states
in
each
team presidency.
[b]
the
duration
ofeach
presidency term should be one
year.
[c]
the composition
of
each
team
should
be
left
open
on the
basis
of
criteria
to
be
determined,
with
due regard
to
the principle
of
equal rotadon,
political,
geographical
and
other
criteria
and
the
diversity of
member-states
as
defined
in
article 23
(4).
[d]
the allocation
of
the
different
Council
formations within
the
team
should
be
left
at
the
discretion on the members
of
the
team
7.
The
ta.sk
of coordination
should be allocated
to
the General
Affairs
Council,
as
provided
in
the
Draft Constitution.
with
the Member State
holdin,e the
Presidency
of
the
GAC
4.
8.
9.
)
also
chairing
Coreper.
Subordinate
committees
and
working
groups
should
be
automatically
chaired by the
member-state
holding
the Presidency
of
the
Council
in
question.
The
PSC and the
other
external relations
working
parties
could
be chaired
by
representatives
of
the
External Relations
Representative.
crG
20t03
ANNEX
1
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0033.png
10.
Coordination
should
be
entrusted
to
the
GAC.
11.
The detailed
arrangements
for
the
rotation
of
ttre
Presidency
of
the
Council could
be
decided
by
unanimity,
as
per
the cunent practice
and
could
be
adopted later
if
the
essential elements
of
ttre
future
arangements
are
agreed
at
the same
time
as
the
Treaty
establishing
the
Constitution.
General
Comment:
The
responses
to
¡hese
specitìc
questions does
not
implv.
and
should nor
be intc.rprered
as
implyin-e, that
Cyprus accepts that
only
the above subjects
presenrecl
by
rhe
Presidency
are
open
for discussion
and
formulation.
Cyprus
reserves
the
righr
ro make
suggestions
on
other
issues
in
due course.
crc20t03
ANNEX
-
J
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0034.png
CONIERENCE
OF
TIIE
RDPRESENTATIVES
OF
TIIE
GOVERNMENTS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
STAIF"S
Brusselsn
15 Ocûober
2003
crc2u03
DELEG
Í¿
the
I¿wian
delegation
Sabject:
-
rcc
2u,3
Replyfrom l^afyíato
the
questìantuìre
ontlæ lzgísløtíve Functíonrthe
Fomaíow
of
üre
Councíl
øttd the
Presídency
ol thc
Councíl of
Mínßters
(doc.
CIG 9/03)
Delegæions
will
find
anached
the
reply from
the
Lawian
delegation
to the questionnaire
on
the
Iægislative
Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and
the
Presidency
of
the
Council of
Minisærs
(see
doc. CIG 9/03).
ctG21t03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0035.png
ANNEX
I.
TIIE
LEGISLATIVE
FTJNCTION
l.
Shoutd
exercise
of the legislative
function
be
conferred
on a
single Council
formation
gI
shot¡ld
a
legislative
function
(public) and
a part
dedicated
to
other activities
be
determined
for
each
Council fonnation?
Lawia
does
not support creation
of
the
Legislative Council
therefore
rhe
legislative function
should
be
determined
for
each
Council
formation.
,O
2.
Should the
public
legislative
part
be
concerned
only
with
laws
and
framework
laws
adopted
under the
nonnal
legislative procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption
by
the
European
Parliament
and the
Council)
q
with
all
laws
and
framework
laws?
The
public legislative
part
could
be
concemed
only with laws
and
framework
laws
adopted
under
the
normal legislative procedure.
II. TIIE
FORMATIONS
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
3.
Should
the
European Council's
decision on
the
list
of
Council formations
-
as
envisaged
by
the Convention
-
be taken unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft
Convention?
by
a
qualified
majority?
or
by
a
simple
majority?
Should the
list
be
confined
to
a
small
number
of
formations
in
line
with
the
decision
taken
in
Seville?
The
Convention's
proposal
on
this
issue
is
acceptable. The
European
Council's
decision on
the
list
of
Council
formations could be taken unanimously.
The
list of
formations could be
in
line with
the decision taken
in
Seville.
crG2l/03
ANNEX
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0036.png
III.
TTM PRESIDENCY
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
OF
MIMSTERS
4.
Should other Council formations
apart
from
the Foreign
Affairs
Council
have
a
fixed
Presidency
(i.e.
not applying
the
rotation
system
provided
for
in
Article
23(4))?
which
formations?
of
what duration?
using
what procedure
(electÍon
by
the
members
of
the Council
formation
concerned)?
Latvia
supports equal
rotation
of
the
Member
States
within
the
Presidency
of
the Council
of
Ministers. Different
mechanisms
of
functioning
of
a
Council formations'
Presidency
could
be
considered.
5.
Should
there be a Team Presidency
system
for
the Council formations
that
continue
to
use
the rotatíon
system?
A
Team
Presidency system
for
the
Council
formations
could
be one
of
rhe
possible
solutions.
O
6.
If
it
¡s
decided
to opt
for
a
Team
hesidency
system:
(a)
how many
Member
States
should there
be
in
the
"team"?
three?
four?
five?
(b)
what should
be the
duration
of
its tenn?
a
year?
18
months?
longer?
(c)
should the composition
of
the teams be
fixed
in
advance
q
left
open on the
basis
of
(d)
criteria
to
be
determined,
with
due
regard
for
the
principle
of
equal rotation
(which
would take
into
account
potitical and
geographical balance
and
the
diversity
of
Member
States
as
defined
in
Article
23(Ð
of
the
draft
Convention)?
shot¡ld the
allocation
of
the
different
CouncÍl formations
within
the
team be
fixed
in
advance
q
left
to the discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the team?
The
issue
of
a
Team
Presidency
requires
further
negotiations.
While
definite
mechanism
is
not
elaborated,
it
is
difficult
to
assess
the option
for
a
Team
Presidency.
However,
possible
models
of
a
Team
Presidency
could
be:
a.
A
Team Presidency,
which
could
consist
from
three
states
with
a
one-year duration
of
its
term.
The composition
of
the teams
could be
left
open
on
the basis
of
criteria
to
be
determined,
with
due regard
for
the principle
of
equal
rotation.
Allocation
of
the
different Council formations
within
the team could
be
left
to
the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the team.
(
)
b.
A
Team
Presidency
where every
Council's
formation
is
chaired
by
the
different
Member State.
A
coordination committee
could
be
established
to
guarantee
coherence
in
the
Council's work.
ctc2t/03
ANNEX
J
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0037.png
7.
Given the ¡eed
for
increased
coordination under
a
Team
Presidency
system,
should
a
"chain
of command"
be maintained,
at
least
partially, wÍth
the
Member
State
chairÍng
the General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing
Coreper
[I
and
II?]?
The
coordination
should
be
increased
-
the
Member
State
holding rhe
Presidency
of
the General
Affairs
Council
could chair Coreper
[I
and
tr].
8.
Shor¡Id committees/
working
parties
subordinate
to
a
partÍcular Council
automatically
be
chaired
by
the Member
State
holding the
Presidency
of
the
Council
in
question
(vertical structure)?
Comminees/ working
parties subordinate
to
a
particular
Council automatically could
be
chaired
by
the
Member
State
holding
the Presidency
of
the
Council in
question.
9.
By
the
same
token,
if
the
Foreign
Affairs Minister
chaired
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council,
should
the
PSC
and other
external relations
working parties
be
chaired
by
a
representatÍve of
the
Foreign Affairs Minister?
The
PSC and
other
external
relations
working
parties should
be chaired
by
the
Member
States.
10.
In
order
to
achieve
greater
coherence
in
the Council's
proceedings
should
there be an
inforrral
structure
for
coordination
between
the
representatives
of
the Member
States
holding
the Presidency,
in
which
the
President of the European
Council,
the President
of
the Commission and
the
Minister for
Foreign
Affairs
could
partÍcipate?
There could be
an
informal structure
for
coordination
be¡ween the representatives
of
the
Member
States
holding
the
Presidency,
in
which
the
President
of
the European
Council,
the
President
of
the
Commission
and the
Minister for
Foreign
Affairs
participate.
11.
Shot¡Id
the detailed
arrangements
for
the rotation
of
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
be
the
subject
of
a
decision
to
be
taken
unanimously
'
by
the
European Council?
If
so:
should
it
be
adopted
at
the
same
time
as the Treaty
establishing
the
Constitution?
could
it
be
adopted
later
if
the essential
elemenæ
of
the
future
arrangements
rvere
agreed
at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty
establishing the
Constitution?
Decision on
detailed
¿urangements
for
the
rot¿tion
of
the Presidency
of
the
Council
could be taken
unanimously.
It
could
be
adopted
on
a
later
stage.
However,
tle
essential elements
of
the
anangements
should
be
agreed
upon
at the
same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing
the
Constitution.
At
present, the
list
setting
out
the
order
in which Member
States
assume
the
Presidency
is
adopted
by
the
Council
unanimously.
crG2l/03
ANNEX
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0038.png
CONTERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRESENTATIVF,S
OFTIM
Go\¡ERNMENTS
OF
TIM
MEMBER
STAIF"S
Brussels, 15
October
2003
ctg?:u03
DELEG
13
from:
Subject:
the
Lithuanian delegation
IGC
2N3
-
on
the Legßlatíve
Fanctíon,
tlæ
Formølíarc of
thc
Councíl
and
the
Presídency
of
the
Couræíl
of Minísters
Øoc. CIG 9/03)
Reply
fron
Líthaanía
to the
quest'nnnaíre
Delegations
will
find
attached
the
reply from
the
Lithuanian
delegation to
the
questionnaire on
the
Legislative Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and
the Presidency
of
the
Council
of
Minísærs
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
crG22t03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0039.png
ANNEX
I. TIIE LEGISLATI\¡E
FT]NCTION
1.
Should
exercise
of
the
legislative function
be
confened
on
a
single
Council formation
g
should
a
legislative
function
(public)
and
a
part
dedicated
to other
activities
be determined
for
each
Council
formation?
YES
2.
Should
the
public
legislative
part be concerned
only
with
laws
and
framework
laws
adopred
under the
normal
legislative
procedure (i.e.
joint
adoption
by
the
European Parliament
and the
Council)
YES
q
with
all
laws
and
framework
laws?
II.
TTIE
FORMATIONS
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
3,
Should
the
European Council's decision on the
list
of
Council formations
-
as
envisaged
by
the
Convention
-
be taken
unanimously
as
stipula¡ed
in
the
draft
Convention?
by
a
qualifîed
majority?
or
by
a
simple
majority?
Should
the
list
be
confined
to
a
small number
of
formations
in
line
with
the
decision
taken
in
Seville?
UNANIMOUSLY:
YES SEVILLE
IfI.
THE
PRBSIDENCY
OF
TTIE COUNCIL OF
MINISTERS
4.
Should other
Council
formations
apa$
from
the Foreign
Affairs
Council
have
a
fixed
Presidency
(i.e.
not
applying
the
rot¿tion
sysrem
provided
for
in Arricle B@))?
which
formations?
of
what duration?
using what
procedure (election by
the
members
of
the
Council formation
concerned)?
NO
5.
Should
there be
a
Team Presidency
system
for
the
Council formations
that
continue to
use
the
rotation
system?
YES
ctG22t03
ANNEX
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0040.png
6.
If it
is decided
to opt
for
a
Team
hesidency
system
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
how
many
Member
States
should
there be
in the
"team"?
th¡ee?
four?
five?
FIVE
what
should
be
the
duration
of
its terrn?
ayeu?
18
months?
longer?
2.5
YEARS
should
the
composition of
the teams be
fixed
in
advance
or
left
open
on
the basis
of
criteria
to
be
determined,
with
due
regard
for
the
principle
of
equal
rotation
(which
would
take
into
account
political
and
geographical
balance
and
the
diversity of
Member
States
as
defined
in
Article
23(4)
of
the
draft ConventionX
FDGD
IN ADVANCE
should
the
allocation of
the
different Council
formations
within
the
team be
fixed
in
advance
or
left to the disc¡etion
of
the
Member
States
in
the
team?
FDGD
IN
ADVANCE
7.
Given the
need
for
increased
coordination
under
a
Team
Presidency
system, should
a
"chain
of
command"
be
maintained,
at
least
partially,
with
the Member
State
chairing
the
General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing Coreper
[I
and
II?]?
YES
Should commiuees/
working
parties
subordinate
to
a
particular Council
automatically
be
chaired
by
the
Member
State
holding
the Presidency
of
the
Council
in
question
(vertical
structureX
YES
9.
By
the same token,
if
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister
chaired
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council,
should
the PSC and other external
relations
working
parties be
chaired
by
a
representative
of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister?
NO
10.
ln
order
to
achieve greater coherence
in
the
Council's
proceedings,
should there
be
an
Ínformal
structure
for
coordination
between
the representatives
of the
Member
States
holding
the
Presidency,
in
which
the
President
of
the
European
Council,
the
President
of
the
Commission
and
the
Minister
for Foreign
Affairs
could
participate?
NO
Should
the detailed arrangements
for
the
rotation
of
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
be
the
subject
of
a decision
to
be
taken
unanimously
'
by
the
European
Council?
If
so:
should
it
be
adopted at the same
time
as
the
Treaty
establishing the
Constitution?
YES
could
it
be adopted
later
if
the
essential
elements
of
the
future
arraügements
were
agreed
at the same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing the Constitution?
11.
()
At
present,
the
list
setting
out
the
order
in which Member
States assume
the
Presidency is
adopted
by
the Council unanimously.
crc22/03
ANNEX
J
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0041.png
CONTERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRESENTATI\MS
OF TTIE
GOVERNMENTS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
STATES
Brrusels,
15
October 2003
crg23103
DELEG
14
from:
Subject:
the
Hungarian delegation
IGC2M?
-
Reply
from
Hangary
to the
questíonnaíre
on the
Ingíslatíve Functíon, the
Formúíons of
the
Councíl
øttd
the Presídency of the
Councíl of Mínísters
@oc.
CIG
9/03)
Delegations
will
find
attached
ttre
reply
from
the
Hungarian delegation
to
the questionnaire on
the
Legislative Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and the
Presidency of the
Council of
Ministers
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
ctG23103
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0042.png
ANNEX
I.
TIIE
LEGISLATIVE
FUNCTION
t.
Hungary
does
not
support the establishment
of
the
Legislative Council.
Consequently
for
determined.
2.
each
Council formation
a
legislative
function (public)
and
a
part
dedicated
to
other
activities
are
to
be
The public
legislative part
should
be
concemed
only with
laws
and
frarnework
laws
adopted
under
the
normal
legislative
procedure.
II.
THE FORMATIONS
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
[)
3.
In
our
view
the European Council's
decision on
the
list
of
Council formations should
be
taken
by
a qualiñed
majority.
The
decision
on
the
list
of
Council formations
should
cover
the
nine
Council formations
defined
by
the
Council Decision
adopting the
Council's
Rules
of
Procedure
(20021682tE,C,
Euratom),
from
which the draft Constitutional
Treaty
splits
the
current
General
Affairs
and External
Relations
Council
into
two
formations:
Foreign
Affairs
Council
and
General
Affairs
Council.
III.
THE
PRESIDENCY
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
OF N4INISTERS
4.
No
Council formation
apart
from
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
should have a
fixed
presidency.
Each Council formation
apart
from the
Foreign
Affairs
Council should
operate
under
the
rotation
system.
5.
)
Hungary favours
to
continue
to
use
the
rotation
system.
The Team
Presidency
might
be
one
option to
be considered,
but we
are
open
to
take
into
consideration other
modalities
of
rotation
as
well.
6.
If it
is decided
to
opt for
a
Team Presidency
system
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
It should
be composed
of
4
or
5
Member
States.
Its
term should
be2
or
2.5
years.
The
composition of
the teams
should be
left
open.
The
allocation of
the
different Council formations
should
be
left
to
the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the team.
crc
23t03
2
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0043.png
7.
8.
9.
Yes, the Member
Scate
chairing the
General
Affairs
Council, should also
chair
the
Coreper
I
and
II.
Yes, rhe
Member
Staæ
holding the
Presidency
of
the Council
in
question
should chair
the
subordinated comminees/
working
parties.
No. The
rotation
should
be
applied
for
PSC
and
external
relations
working
parties.
10.
We
agree
that
informal
co-ordination should
take
place
but
it
should not
be
institutionalised.
ll.The
rules
on
essential elements
of
the
decision
making
should
be
set
out
in
the
Treaty
establishing the Constitution,
while
the
detailed arangements
could be
adopted
later
benveen
the
date
of
the
signature and
the
entry
in
force
of
the Constitutional Treaty
by
the
European
Council
acting unanimously.
crG23/03
ANNEX
3
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0044.png
CONIERENCE
OF
TIM
REPRESENTAÎIVES
OF
TIIE
GOVERNMENTS
OF TITE
MEMBER
STATES
Bnrssels,
15
Ocûober
2003
crc?/,t03
DELEG
15
the Malæse
delegation
Subject:
-
IGC
2M3
Replyfrom
Maltato
tIæ
qucstíonnøíre on
the
lagísløtíve
Funcfioq
thc
Fomaríons
of tlto Councíl
and
thc
Presídency
of
tlu
Coancíl oÍ Mínísærs
Delegations
will
find
ætached the
reply from
the
Malæse delegation
to
the
questionnaire on
the
Iægislative
Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and
the Presidency of the
Council
of
Minisærs
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
ctG
24t03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0045.png
ANNEX
I.
TIIE
LEGISLATIVE
Ft'NCTION
l.
Should exercise
of
the
legislative function
be
conferred
on
a
single
Council formation
should
a
legislative
function (public)
and
a
part
dedicated to
other activities
be
determined
for
each
Council formation?
9I
Malta
is
in favour
of the
latter
option.
Z.
Should
the
public
legislative part
be concerned
only
with
laws
and
framework
laws
adopted
under
the
normal legislative procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption by the European Parliament
and
the
Council)
gT
with
all
laws and
framework
laws?
Malta
is
in favour
of the
latter
ootion.
II.
TIIE
FORMATIONS
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
3.
Should
the
European
Council's decision on
the
list
of Council
formations
-
as
envisaged
by
the
Convention
-
be
taken
unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft
Convention?
by
a
qualified
majority?
or
by
a
simple
majority?
Should
the
list
be
confined to
a
small number
of
formations
in line with
the decision taken
in
Seville?
The
decision
bv
the
European Council
should
be
taken
unanimouslv.
with
the
list
confined
to
a
small
number of formations in line
with
the
Seville decision.
III.
TTIE
PRESIDENCY
OF TTIE
COUNCIL
OF
MINISTERS
4.
Should
other
Council formations
apart
from
the
Foreign
Afrairs
Council
have
a
fixed
Presidency (i.e. not
applying
the
rot¿tion
system
provided for
in Article
23(4))2
which
formations?
of
what
duration?
using
what
procedure
(election by
the members
of
the
Council formation
concerned)?
Malta
Ís
of the
ooinion
that
no
other Council formation apart
from
that on Foreisn
AffaÍrs
should
have
a
fixed
Presidencv.
crG
24103
ANNEX
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0046.png
5.
Should
there be
a
Team PresÍdency
system
for
the
Council
formations
that
continue
to
use
the
rotation
system?
Malta
is
in favour
of
the Team Presidencv svstem foT the
formations
using
the
rotation
svstem. However.
the
Member
State
of
the
nationalitv of
the European
Council
President would
not
fonn part
of
a team
durins
the
term of
such Presidencv.
6.
If
it
is decided to opt
for
a
Team
hesÍdency
system
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
how many Member
States
should
there be
in
tìe
"team"?
tì¡ee?
four? five?
what should
be
the
duration
of its
term? ayear?
18
months? longer?
should the
composition of
the
teams be
fixed
in
advance.or
left
open
on the basis
of
criteria
to
be
determined,
with
due regard
for
the
principle of equal
rotation
(which
would
take
into
account
political
and
geogaphical
balance
and the
diversity
of
Member
States
as
defined
in
Article
23(4)
of
the
draft
ConventionX
should
the
allocation of
the
different
Council
formations
within
the
team
be
fixed in
advance
or
left
to
the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the
team?
The
team
should
consist
of
four
Member
States.
with
the
duration
of
each
term beins
of
one
vear.
The
composition
of
the
teams
should
be
left
open on
the
basis
of
criteria
to
be
determined.
with
due
resard
for
the
principle
of equal
rotâtion
which
would tåke
into
account
political
and
eeographicâl
balance and
the
diversitv of
Member
States.
The
allocation of
the
different Council formations
within
the team should
be
fixed
sufficientlv in
advance
7
.
Given
the need
for
increased
coordination
under
a
Team Presidency
system,
should
a
"chain
of command"
be
maintained,
at least
partially, with
the
Member
State
chairing the
General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing
Coreper
[I
and
II?]?
To
ensure consistency and
continuity.
the
Member
State
chairing
the
General
Affairs
Council should
also
chair
Coreper.
8.
Should committees/
working
parties
subordinate
to
a
particular Council
automatically
be
chaired
by
the Member
State
holding
the Presidency
of
the
Council in
question
(vertical
structure)?
Committees/Workins
Parties
should
be
chaired
bv
the
Member
State
holdine
the
Presidencv
of
the related
Council formation.
()
9.
By
the same
token,
if
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister
chaired
the
Foreign Affairs Council,
should
the
PSC and
other
external
relations
working
parties
be chaired
by
a
represent¿tive
of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister?
PSC
and other
external
relations workine parties should
be
chaired bv
a
reuresentative
of
the
Minister
of Foreisn Affa¡rs.
Ihe
crc24/03
ANNEX
J
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0047.png
10.
In
order
to
achieve greater coherence
in
the
Council's
proceedings,
should
there
be
an
informal structure
for
coordination
berween
the
representatives
of
the
Member
States
holding
the Presidency,
in
which
the
President of
the European
Council,
the
President
of
the
Commission
and
the
Minister for
Foreign
Affairs
could participate?
Malta
is
in
favour
of
such an
infonnal
structure
for
coordination.
t
1.
Should the
detailed
a¡rangements
for
the rotation of the
Presidency
of
the
Council
be
the
subject
of
a
decision
to
be
taken
unanimously
'
by
the European
Council?
If
so:
should
it
be adopted
at
the same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing the Constitution?
could
it
be adopted later
if
the
essential elements
of
the
future
arrangements
were
agreed
at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty
establishing
the
Constitution?
The
decision
on the detailed arrangements
for
the
rotation of
the Presidencv
of
the
Council should
be
taken
unanimouslv.
and could
be
adopted
later
if
the essential
elements
of
the
future
arrangements were
agreed
at
the
same
time
as
the
Treatv
establishine the Const¡tution.
At
present, the
list
setting
out the
order
in
which
Member
States
assume the
Presidency is
adopted
by
the
Council
unanimously.
cIG24/03
ANNEX
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0048.png
CONFERENCE
OF
TTIE
REPRBSENTATI\¿ES
OF
TIIE
GOVERNMENTS
OF
THE MEMBER
STATES
Brussels, 15
October
2003
cIG
25103
DELEG
16
NOTE
from:
Subject:
the
Austrian
delegation
IGC
2OO3
-
Replyfron
Austríø
to
the
qucstíonnøíre on
th.e
I*gíslatíve Functbn,
the
Fonnatìons
of the
Coancíl and the Presìdency
of
the Coancíl of
Mínísterc
(doc.
CIG
9/03)
Delegations
will
find
attached the
reply
from
the
Austrian
delegation
to
the questionnaire on
the
Legislative
Function, the Formations
of
the
Council
and the
Presidency
of
the
Council
of
Ministers
(see
doc. ClG9103).
crG25t03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0049.png
ANNEX
I.
TIIE
LEGISLATIVE
FUNCTION
L
Should
exercise
of
the
legislative
function
be
conferred on
a
single
Council formation
q
should
a
legislative
function (public)
and
a
part
dedicated
to
other
activities
be
determined for
each
Council
formation?
_)
The
legislative
function
should
not
be
conferred
on
a
single Council
formation.
Each
Council
formation should
be
responsible
for
both legislative
and
non-legislative
work
within
its
area
of
responsibility. In
each
Council
formation legislative
agenda
items (public
in
accordance
with
Art 49
oara
2)
should
be separated
from
other items.
2.
Should
the
public
legislative part
be concerned
only with
laws
and
framework
laws
adopted
under
the
normal
legislative
procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption by
the
European
Parliament
and the
Council)
gI
with
all
laws
and
framework
laws?
The
transparency
provision of
Art
49
para
2
applies to
all
legislative
procedures.
II.
TIIE
FORMATIONS
OF TTIE
COUNCIL
3.
Should
the European
Council's
decision
on
the
list
of Council
formations
-
as
envisaged by
the Convention
-
be taken
unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft Convenrion?
by
a
qualified
majority?
or
by
a
simple
majority?
Should the
list
be
confined to
a
srnall number
of
formations
in
line
with
the
decision
taken
in
Seville?
The
current
practice
should
be
kept. On
the basis
of
general
orientations given
by
the
European
Council the
General
Affairs
Council should
decide on
further Council formations
in
accordance
with Art.IIl-247
par.3
(simple
majority).
crG
25/03
ANNEX
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0050.png
Itr.
TIIE
PRESIDENCY
4.
OF
THE COUNCIL
OF
MINISTERS
Should
other
Council
formations
apart
from
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
have
a
fixed
Presidency
(i.e. not applying
the
rotarion
sysrem
provided
for
in
Arric\e?l,g))2
which formations?
of
what
duration?
using
what procedure (election by
the members
of
the
Council
formation
concerned)?
Apart
from
the
Foreign
Affai¡s
Council
no
Council formation should
have
a
fixed
or elected
Presidency.
5.
Should
there
be
a
Team Presidency
system
for
the
Council
forrnations
that
continue to
use
the
rotation
system?
Ausria
is
prepared
to
examine alternatives to the
cunent rotation system
with
an open
mind.
However,
we
will
not
accept
a
new
model
unless
it
respects the
principle
of equality
between member
states, ensures
the
necessary
chain
of
command benveen
Council
bodies
and
provides
a
clear
added value
to
the
6.
If
it
is decided
to
opt
for
a
Team
Presidency
sysrem
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
how many Member
States
should
there
be
in
the "team"? three? four? five?
what should
be the
duration
of
its
term?
a
year?
18
months? longer?
should the
composition
of
the
teams
be
fîxed in
advance
left
open on
the
basis
of
criteria to
be
determined,
with
due
regard
for
the
principle
of
equal
rotatÍon
(which
would take
into
account
political
and
geographical
balance
and the
diversity of
Member
States as
defined in
Article
23(4)
of
the
draft
Convention)?
should
the
allocation of
the
different Council
formations
wirhin
the
team
be
fixed
in
advance
left
to
the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the
team?
q
q
Subject
to
the
conditions
mentioned under
point
5) Austria would
be
willing
to
consider
a
Team
Presidency
model.
(a), (b)
A
team presidency
could
consist
of
4-5
Member
States
for
a
period
of
2
- 2,5
years.
o
(c),
(d)
Ministerial
level
and Coreper
Each team member
chairs
all
formations
of
the
Council of Ministers
and
the
Coreper
meetings
during
a
six
month period. The composition
of
the teams
would
be
decided
in
advance respecting the
principle of strictly
equal
rot¿tion
and
taking into
account
political
and geographical balance
and the
diversity of
Member
States.
Subordinated
workine
sroup
level
The
Chairs
of
the
committees/
working
parties
should
be
decided
by
Member
States
in
the
tea.m.
Chairs
at
this level
should be
held
for
a
period
of
2 -
2,5 years.
(see
answer
to
point
8.)
crG
25t03
ANNEX
3
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0051.png
7.
Given
the
need
for
increased
coordination
under
a
Team Presidency system,
should a
"chain
of
conrmand"
be
maintained,
at
least
partially, with
the
Member
State
chairing
the
Ceneral
Affairs
Council
also
chairing Coreper
[I
and
II?]?
In
our model (point
6)
there
is no
need
for
increased
coordination
as
the
chain
of
command
would
be
maintained.
Should
comminees/
working
parties
subordinate to
a
particular
Council
automatically be
chaired by
the
Member
State
holding
the Presidency
of
the
Council
in
question
(vertical
structure)?
The
Chairs of
the
committees/
working
parties should
be
decided
by Member
States
in
the
team.
Chairs
at
this
level
should
be
held
for
a
period
of
2
- 2,5
years.
Alternatively,
the
Chairs
of
the
committees/ working
parties could
be
elected
by
their
members
from
amons
the
representatives
of
the
Member
States
in
the
team.
9.
By
the
same
token,
if
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister
chaired the
Foreign
Affairs
Council,
should
the
PSC
and
other external
relations
working
parties be chaired
by
a
representative
of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister?
No.
10.
In
order
to achieve greater coherence
in
the
Council's
proceedings,
should
there be
an
informal
structure for coordination
between the representatives
of
the Member
States
holding
the Presidency,
in which
the
President
of
the
European
Council,
the President
of
the
Commission
and
the
Minister for
Foreign
Aftairs
could participate?
Coordination
is
a
core
function
of
the General
Affairs
Council.
Austria strictly
opposes
informal
süuctures
for
coordination.
1
1.
Should
the
detailed arrangements
for
the
rotation of
the Presidency
of
the
Council
be
the
subject
of
a
decision
to be
taken unanimously
*
by
the European
Council?
If
so:
should
it
be
adopted
at
the same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing the Constiturion?
could
it
be adopted
later
if
the essential elements
of
the
future
arrangements were
agreed at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing the Constitution?
Detailed
¿urangements
for
the
rotation of
the Presidency
of
Council
of Ministers formations
should be
agreed
as
a
part
of
the
institutional
package
by
this IGC.
At
present, the
list
setting out the order
in
which
Member
States
assume
the Presidency
is
adopted
by
the
Council
unanimously.
ctG25t03
ANNEX
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0052.png
CONIERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRESENTATIVES
OF
THE GOYER}ÍMENTS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
STATES
Brussels, 15
October
2003
ctc
26t03
DELEG
17
NOTE
the
Polish delegation
Sttbject:
rcc
2003
-
Reply
Poland
to the
qaestionnøíre
on the
l*gíslafíve
Functíon, the
Formatíons of the
council
and the Presídency
of the
councìl
of
Mínßters
(doc.
CIG 9/03
fron
Delegations
will
find
anached the
reply from
the
Polish
delegation to the questionnaire
on the
Legislative
Function, the Formations
of
the
Council
and
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
of
Ministers
(see
doc. CIG 9/03).
o
crG26t03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0053.png
ANNEX
I.
TIM
LEGISLATIVE
FT]NCTION
I.
Should
exercise
of
the
legislative
function
be
conferred
on
a
single
Councilformation
should a
legíslative
function
(pablic)
and
a
part
dedicated
to
other
activities
be
determined
9!
for
each
C
ouncil
formation?
Poland
favours
the
presently functioning model,
in
which
the
legislative
function
is
performed
by
each
Council
formatÍon. lVe
believe this
to
be a
better
solution
from
the
po¡nt
of
view
of
ensuring
the
necessary
expertise
in
the
legislative
process as
well
as
committing various
sectors
of
the
national
admÍnistration
to
the process
of
integration.
At
the
same
time,
the
General
Affairs
Council
could
monitor
the
consistency
of
legislation
beÍng processed
in
the respective
Council
formations.
2
Should
the
public
legislative
part
be
concerned
only with
laws
andframework
laws adopted
under
the
normal
legislative
procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption
by
the
European
Parliament
and
the
Council)
with
all
laws
andframework
laws?
9!.
In
our
view
all
the
legislative
works of
the
Council
of
Ministers
should
be
conducted
in
a
transparent
manner.
Therefore
rve
support
the
second
option,
i.e.
that
debates
within
the Council on
all
laws and
framework
laws should
be accessible
to
the
public.
II.
THE FORMATIONS
OF TTM
COUNCIL
(-
3.
Should
the
European Council's decision on
the list of
Council
formntions
-
as envísaged
by
the
Convention
-
be taken
unanimously
as
stipulated in
the
draft
Convention? by
a
quaffied
møjorþ?
or
by
a
símple
majoríty?
Should
the list
be
confined
to
a
small
number
of
formations in line with
the
decision taken
ín
Seville?
We
could
envisage
the
sitr¡ation
in
which the
European
Council
decides
by
qualifîed
majority
on the
list of
Council formations.
It
is
preferable
to
have
a
rather
small
number
of
formatÍons
whÍch
would
be
in line
with
the decisions
taken
in
Seville.
crG26/03
ANNEX
)
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0054.png
III. TIM
PRESIDENCY
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
OF
MINISTERS
4.
Should other
Councilformations
apartfrom
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
have
aftxed
Presídency (i.e. not
applying
the rotation
system
providedfor
in
Article
23(4))?
whíchformntions?
of
what
duration?
using
what
procedure (election
by the members
of
the
Councilformation
concerned)?
We
propose
that all
the other
formations
of
the
Council
of
Ministers
apart
from
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council and the
General
Affairs
CouncÍl hâve, as
a
rule,
a
presidency
for
two
years.
The presidency would not
be
attributed to
a
specifîc person
but
to
onô
Member
State
within the
Team
Presidency.
The
Member States
within
the
Team
Presidency
should
decide
by
themselves
which
country holds the
presidency
in
which
formatÍon.
The division
of labour
wor¡ld be
done
on
the basis
of specialisation.
As
to
the
General
Affairs
Council and the COREPER the
half-yearly rotation
system
shot¡ld
be
continued,
but
it
should
be
in
line
with
the
sequence
of
the Team
Presidencies,
e.g. members
of
the
team would
rotate
at
the
helm
of
the GAC and
COREPER.
Consistentlyr w€ propose
to
change
the
Article
I-
23(4)
in
order
to
allow
half-yearly
presidencies
in
the GAC.. We
believe
that the
option should
be
preserved
for
the
sectorial
councils
to rotate
on
annual
basis.among
members
of the
Team Presidency,
so
as
to take account of the
national political
cycles
and
the
demands
of
the
job.
I
Should
there
be
a
Team
Presidency
systemfor
the
Councilformatíons
that continue
rotation
system?
Yes,
as
explained
above
to
use
the
GAC
and the
Coreper
we
should
retain
the
half-yearly,rotation
system
which
would
exclude dominance
of
the Team Presidency
by
one
of
the
participating
states
and
wor¡ld
ensure the
necessary
efficiency.. The other
formations would
be
allocated
for
two
years.
6.
it
should apply
to
alt
the
Council
formations
except
the Foreign
Affairs
Council which would
have the Foreign
Minister
of
the
Union
at
the
helm.
In
the
If
it
is
decided
to
opt
for
a
Tearn Presidency
system
(a)
how rnany Member states should
there
be
in
the "team"?
three?
four? five?
(b)
what should
be rhe
duration of its
term?
ayeu?
18
months? longer?
(c)
should the
composition
of
the teams be
fîxed
in
advance
or
lefr
open
on
the basis
of
(d)
criteria to
be
determined,
with
due
regard
for
the
principle of
equal
rotation
(which
would take
into
account
political
and
geographical
balance and
the
diversity of Member
States
as
defined
in
A¡ticle
ßg)
of
the
draft Convenrion)?
should the
allocation of
the
different Council
formations
wirhin
the
team be
fixed
in
advance
or
lefr
ro the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the team?
o
Our
model
for
Team
Presidency
is
based
on the assumption
of
four
countries holding
the
Team Presidency
for
two
years.
The European Council should
at
an
appropriately
early
stage decide
on the
composition
and
the
sequence
of
the
Team
Presidencies,
according
to
the criteria listed
above.
Team
Presidencies
should
reflect the
balance
between
small,
medium-sized
and
large countries
as
well
as
the
geographical
balance.
The
Member
States
within
the
Team
wÍll
decide
on
the
allocation of formations, at
least
a
year before
taking
over the presidency.
crc26/03
ANNEX
J
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0055.png
Given the
need
for
increased
coordínaÍíon
under a
Team
Presidency
system,
should
a
"chaín
of
command"
be
maintained,
at
least
partially,
with
the
Member
State
chairing
the
General,
ffairs
Coancil also
chaíring
Coreper
fi
and
II?l?
Yes.
There
is
a
need
for
horizontal
consistency
as
far
as
the
chain
of
corunand
is
concerned
and
therefore
it
is
all
the more
important
to
retain
the
half-yearly rotation
in
the General
Affairs
Council.
Should committees/working
parties
subordinate
to
a
particular
Council
automatically
be
chaired by
the
Member
State
holding
the
Presidency of
the
Coancil in
question
(vertìcal
structwe)?
Yes.
Vertical
chain of command
should
be extended
not
only to
the
relationship
between
the
General
Affairs
Council and
the
Coreper
but
also
to the
respective committees and
working
groups. The
attribution
of
the
presidency
of
working
groups should
be
conducted
on
the
basis
of
expertise
provided
by
the
members
of
the
team.
The
presidency
of
a
working group would
be assumed
for
the
period of
2
years.
9.
By
the
same
token,
if
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister
chaired
the
Foreign Affairs
Council, should
the
PSC
and
other
external
relations
working
parties
be
chaired
by
a representative of
the
F
o
re
ign
Affairs
Minis
te
r
?
Yes.
HÍs representatives
should
chair
the
working
parties
related to external affairs.
We
also believe
that
the
Foreign
MinÍster
should
have
a deputy who could
chair
the
PSC.
The Team
Presidency
could
assist
the Foreign
Minister
in
the task of
chairing
external
relations
working
parties.
However,
it
has
to
be made
that
the
Foreign
Minister
is
in
the
driving
seat
as
far
as
the
entire
exercise
is
concerned.
10.
In order
to achieve greater coherence
in
the Council's proceedings, should there
be
an
ínformal
structare
for
coordínatíon
benveen the representatives
of
the
Member
States
holding
the
Presidency,
in
which
the
President of
the
European
Council,
the
President of
the
Commission and
the
Mínisterfor
Foreign Affairs
could
participate?
Yes.
Co-ordination
will
be necessary between members
of
the Team
Presidency.
At
the
same
time,
we
should avoid
creating
new
structures or institutions. Therefore
we believe
that
the
President
of
the General
Affairs
Council
shorild
chair
an
informal
Steering
Committee
consisting
of
the
Presidents
of
the
respective
Council
for:nations.
The
Steering CommÍttee
would
draft
the
Presidency's
programme
and
oyersee its
implementation.
It
would meet
four
times
a
year.
President
of
the
General
Affairs
Council
would
be responsible
for
working
together
with
the
President
of
the
European
Council
and
President
of
the
European
Commission on
the
preparation
of
the
work
of
the European
Council.
Such
a
system
would
ensure efficiency,
cohesion
and proper
division
of labour.
It
would
also
preserve the
advantages
of
the
system
of rotation
such
as
bringing
European
politics
closer
to
the
electorate
and
ensuring
that
all
Member
States
take
part
on
an
equal
basis
in
running
the
European
Union.
ctG26t03
ANNEX
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0056.png
IL
Should
the
detailed
arrangements
for
the
rotation
of
the
Presidency of
the Councíl
be
the
subject
of
ø
decísíon to
be
taken unønímously '
by the
European
council?
If
so:
should
it
be
adopted
at
the same time as the
Treaty establishing the
Constitution?
could
it
be
adopted
later
if
the essentíal ele¡nents
of
the
funre
afta,ngements
were
agreed
at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty
establishing
the
Constitution?
concerning
the
Team Presidencies.
It
should
take
place
at
an
appropriately
early
stage
prior
to
the
entry into
force
of
the Constitutional
Treaty.
We
have
a
preference
for
tñe
term
in
office
of
the
Chair of
the European
Council to
be
in
line
with that
of the
Team
PresÍdency.
The
European
Council should
decide
by
unanimity
on
the
detaÍled
arrangements
o
At
present, the
list
setting out the order
in
which Member
States assume the
Presidency
is
adopted
by
the
Council
unanimously.
cIG26/03
ANNEX
5
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0057.png
CONTERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRFSENTATI\¿ES
OF
TIIE
GOVERJ\IMENTS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
STATES
Brussels,
15
October
2003
ctGnn3
DELEG
18
NOTE
from:
ttre
Portuguese delegation
Subject:
-
IGC
2003
Reply
from
Portugøl
to
the qaestíonnaíre
on
the
l*gíslatíve Functíon,
the
Fonnatíons of the
Councíl
and.
the Presídency
of
the
Councíl of Mínísters
(doc.
CIG
9/03)
Delegations
will
find
attached
the
reply
from
the Portuguese
delegation
to the
questionnaire on the
Legislative
Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and the Presidency
of
the
Council of Ministers
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
ctc27103
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0058.png
ANNEX
I. TIIE
LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION
l.
Should exercise
of
the
legislative
function
be
confened on
a
single Council formation
A:
WE
AGREE
WITH
or
TFIE
SOLUTION
PROPOSED
IN
ARTICLE
23
OF
TFIE
CONVENTION:S
DRAFT
TREATY.
should
a
legislative function (public)
and
a
part
dedicated
to other
activities
be
determined
for
each
Council formation?
2.
Should the
public
legislative part be
concerned
only with laws
and
framework laws
adopted
under the
normal
legislative procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption
by
the European Parliament
and
the
Council)
A:
YES
or
with all
laws
and
framework laws?
II.
TIIE
FORMATIONS
OF TTIE
COUNCIL
3.
Should the European
Council's decision on the
list
of
Council
for.mations
-
as envisaged
by
the Convention
-
be
taken
unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft
Convention?
by
a
qualified
majority?
or by
a
simple
majoríty?
Should
the
list
be
confined
to
a
small
number
of
formatiirns
in line
with
the
decision taken
in
Seville?
(
)
A:
TFIE
DECISION SHOULD
BE
TAKEN UNANMOUSLY:
FOR THE
TIME
BEING.
THE DECISION
TAKEN IN SEVILLE
IS
APPROPRTATE.
TFIE
EUROPEAN
COUNCIL
SHOULD
HAVE
ENOUGH FREEDOM
TO
CREATE TFIE FORMATIONS
IT
DEEMS
NECESSARY.
crc27/03
ANNEX
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0059.png
Itr.
THE
PRESIDENCY OF TTIE
COUNCIL
OF
MIMSTERS
4.
Should other
Council
formations
apart
from
the Foreign
Affairs
Council have
Presidency
(i.e.
not
applying
the
rotation
system
provided for in
Article23(Ð)?
which
formations?
of
what duraúon?
using
what
procedure
(election
by
the members
of
the
Council
formation
concerned)?
a
fixed
A:
5.
NO.
WE DO NOT
AGREE
WITH FIXED
PRESIDENCIES
Should there
be
a
Team Presidency
system
for
the
Council
formations that
continue
to
use
the
rotation
system?
A:
6.
NO.
WE
PREFER TFIE PRESENT
SYSTEM.
a
,.,)
!f
it
is
decided to opt
for
Team Presidency
system
(a)
how many Member
States
should
there
be
in
the "team"?
th¡ee?
four? five?
a:3
(b)
what should
be
the
duration
of its
term?
a
yeu?
l8
months?
longer?
A:
18
MONTHS
(c)
should
the composition
of
the
teams
be
fixed
in
advance
or
left
open
on
the
basis
of
criteria
to
be
determined,
with
due
regard
for
the principle
of
equal
rotation
(which
would
take
into
account
political
and
geographical balance
and
the
diversity
of
Member
States
as
defined
in
Article
23(4)
of
the
draft ConventionX
PRESIDENCTES.
TFTE
COMPOSTTION
OF
TFIE
TEAMS
SHOULD
NOT BE
DEFINED
IN
TTTE
TREATY BUT LEFT
OPEN
FOR
DECISION
BY
THE
EUROPEAN
COUNCIL. APPLYING
THE
PRINCIPLE
OF
EQUAL
ROTATION.
A:
IN
TFIE
EVENT OF
TEAM
(d)
should the
allocation
of
the different
Council formations within
the
team
be
fixed
in
advance
or
left
to
the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the
team?
A:
LEFT TO
TFIE
DISCRETION
OF
MEMBER
STATES
7.
Given
the need
for
increased
coordination
under
a
Team
Presidency
system,
should a
"chain
of
command"
be
maintained,
at
least
partially,
with
the
Member State
chairing
General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing
Coreper
the
[I
and
II?]
A:
YES.
INCLUDING
GAC.
COREPER
AND
PSC
crc
27/03
ANNEX
J
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0060.png
8.
Should committees/
working
parties
subordinate
to
a
particula¡
Council
autornatically
be
chaired
by
the Member
State
holding
the
Presidency
of
the Council
in
question
(vertical
structure)?
A:
YES
9.
By
the
same
token,
if
the Foreign
Affairs Minister
chaired the
Foreign
Affairs
Council,
should
the
PSC
and other external
relations
working
parties
be chaired
by
a representative
of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister?
A:
NO.THE
PRESIDENCY SHOULD
BE
ASSUMED
BY MEMBER
STATES
10.
In
order
to
achieve greater
in
the
Council's
proceedings,
should there be
an
infonnal structure
for
coordinatÍon
between
the
representatives
of
the
Member
States
coherence
holding
the
Presidency,
in
which
the President
of
the European
Council,
the President
of
rhe
Commission
and the
Minister
for Foreign
Affairs
could participate?
A: NO.
WE DO
NOT
AGREE
WITH
INFORMAL
ONES.
1
TFIE
SET
TJP
OF
NEW
STRUCTURES.
EVEN
L)
l.
Should
the
detailed
arrangements
for
the rotarion
of
the
Presidency
of
the Council
be
the
subject
of
a
decision
to
be
taken unanimously
'by
the European
council?
A:
If
YES
so:
should
it
be
adopted
at the
same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing
the
Constitution?
A:
NO
tl¡e essential elements
of
the
future
arrangements
were
agreed at the same cime
as the
Treaty establishing
the
Constitution?
could
it
be
adopted
later
if
A:
YES
()
'
At
list
sefting
out
the
order
in
which Member
States
assume the
Presidency
is
adopted
by the
Council
unanimously.
present,
the
crc27t03
ANNEX
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0061.png
CONIERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRESENTATIVES
OF
TIIE
GOVERNMENTS
OF
TTIE
MEMBER
STATES
Brussels,
15
October
2003
crc28/03
DELEG
19
from:
the Romanian
delegation
Subjecr:
IGC
2003
-
Romanìa
to
the
questíonnaìre
on the Legíslatíve
Functíon, the
Formafíons
of
the
Councíl and the Presìdency
of
the
Councíl of Mínísters
(doc. CIG 9/03)
Reply
fron
Delegations
will
find
attached the
reply
from
the
Romanian delegation to
the
questionnaire on the
Legislative
Function, the Formations
of
the
Council
and the
Presidency
of
the
Council of Ministers
(see
doc.
CIG9103).
ctG28103
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0062.png
ANIYEX
I.
1.
TIIE LEGISLATIYE
FUNCTION
Sltould
exercise
of
the legislative
function
be confened
on
a
single
Council
formntion or
should
a
legislative
function
(public)
and
a
part
dedicated
to other activities
be
determined
for
each
C
ouncil formation
?
Romania
considers
that
the legislative
function
should
continue
to
be
exercised, as
it
is
the
case
currently, by
the
Council's
formations.
The
distinction
benveen
the
legislative
and
the executive
funcrions
should be
ensured
by
separating
the
items
on the agenda
in
two
categories.
2.
Should
the
publíc
legislative
part
be concerned
only
with
laws
andframework
laws
adopted
under
the
normal
legislative
procedure
(joint
adoption
by the European
Parliament and
the
Council)
or
with
all
laws
andframework
laws?
Whenever
the
Council
exercises the
legislative function (adopting all
laws and
framework laws), its
meeting
should be
public.
il.
3'
THE
FORMATIONS
OF
THE COUNCIL
Should
the
European Council's
decísions on
the
list
of
Councilformatíons
- as envisaged by
the Convention- be taken unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft
Convention? by
a
quatified
majoriry
or
by
a
simple
majoriry? Should
the
list
be
confined
to
a
small
number
of
formations
in
line with
the
decision taken in Seville?
Romania is
of
the
opinion
that the
list
of Council's
formations should
be
decided by
the
European
Council
by
consensus,
as
stipulated
in
the
draft Constitutional Treaty. In line
with
the
decision by
the
European
Council
in
Seville,
the
number
of Council's formations
should be
limired.
)
UI.
4.
TTIE
PRESIDENCY
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
OF
N{INISTERS
Should
other
Council
formations apart
from
the
Foreign
,Affaírs Coancil have
a
fixed
Presidency?
Which
formationsT
Of
what
duration?
Using what procedure
(election
by
the
members
of
tlze
Councílformation
concerned?
Romania believes
that
the
Presidency
of
the
Council's
formations,
apart
from
the
Foreign Affairs
Council,
should
be held
by
the
Member
States representatives,
on
the
basis
of
an equal rotation.
This principle
should
be cleæly
stated
in
the Constitutional
Treaty.
Detailed
Íurangements
for
the
council
Presidency
should
be
submitted
ro
a
European
council
decision.
ctG28/03
ANNEX
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0063.png
5.
Should
there be
a
Team
Presidency
system
for
the
Council
formøtion
that contínues
to
use
the
rotation
system?
Rornania
is
in
favour
of
a
Team Presidency system
for
ttre
Council's
formations.
6.
If
it
is decided to
opt
for
a
Team
Presidency
system:
a)
how mnny
Member States
should there
be
in the
"team"
?
three?
four?
five?
The
number
of
the Member
States
composing
the
Team Presidency
may be
limited,
but
not
less
than three.
b)
What
should
be the
duration
of
its
term?
a
year?
I8
month? longer?
Romania considers
that
the duration
of
the
term
of
the
Presidency
of
each
Council's formations
should
be
at least one
year
(as
stipulated by
the
draft
Constitutional Treaty).
c)
Should the composition
of
the
teams
be
fixed
in
advance
or
left
open
on the basis
of
uiteria
to
be
determíned, wíth due regard
for
the
principle
of
equal
rotation
(which
will
take
into
account
political
and
geographical balance
and the diversity
of
Member
States as
defined
inArticle
23(4) of
the
draft
Convention)?.
Romania
is
of
the
opinion
that
the
Constitutional Treaty
should
provide
only
the general
principles
for
the
formation
of
the
Team
Presidency,
on a
basis
of
an
equal
rotation,
taking
into
account
European
polirical
and
geographicai
balance and
the
diversity of
Member
States.
d)
Should
the allocation
of
dffirent
Council
formations
within
the team
be
fixed
in
advance
or
left
to the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
ín
the team?
Romania considers
¿hat
the allocation
of different Council
formations
within
the team
should be
lefc
ro
the
decision
of
the
Member
States
in
the team.
7.
Given the
need
for
increased
coordination under
a
Team
Presidency
system,
should
a
"chain of
command"
be
mnintained,
at
least
partially,
with
the Member State
chaíring
the
General
Affairs
Council also
chairing
COREPER
(I
and
II)?
Romania considers
that
a
"chain
of command"
should
be
maintained between
the
Presidency
of
the
General
Affairs
Council
and that
of
COREPER.
8.
Should
committees/working
parties
subordinated
to
a
particular
Council automatícally
be
chaired by
the Member
State
holding
the Presidency
of
the Council
in
question
(vertical
structure)?
Romania
considers
that
committees/working parties
subordinated
to
a
particular
Council
should
automatically
be
chaired by
the
Membe¡
State
holding
the Presidency
of
the Council
in
question.
crG28/03
ANNEX
J
Ef{
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0064.png
9.
By
the same
token,
if
the
Foreign Affairs
Minister
chnired
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council,
should the
PSC
and
other external relations
working
parties
be
chnired
by
a
representative
of
the
Foreign
Affairs Miníster?
Romania
believes that the
PSC
and other external
relations working
parries
should be
coo¡dinated
by
the Foreign
Affairs Minister,
and
the representatives
of
the European
External Action
Service
could
chair
these
structures.
10.
In
order to
achieve
greater
coherence
in
the
Council's proceedings,
should
there be
an
infornal
structure
for
coordination
between
the
representatives
of
the
Member
States
holding
the
Presidency,
in
which
the
President
of
the
European
Council,
the
President of
the
Commíssion
and
the
Minister
of Foreign
Affairs
could
participate?
Romania
considers
that
the
coherence
in
the Council's
proceedings
should
be
ensured
by
an
informal
coordination between
the
representatives
of
the Membe¡
States
in
the Team
Presidency,
and
the
European
Minister
of
Foreign Affai¡s. The way to
organize
this coordination
should be
left
to
the discretion
ofthe
concerned representatives.
Il.
Should the detailed arrangeÍnents
for
the
rotation
of
the Presidency
of
the
Council
be
the
subiect of
the decisíon
to
be taken
unanimously by
the
European
Council?
If
so:
should
it
be
adopted
at
the
same
time as
the Treaty establishing the
Constitution?
could
it
be adopted
later
if
the
essential
elements
of
the
future
arrangements
were
agreed
at
the same
tíme
as the
Treaty establíshing
the
Constitution?
o
-
'
Romania
considers
that the detailed
arrangements
for
the rotation
of
the Presidency
of
the
Council
should
be subject
of
a
European
decision
taken
by
the European Council.
()
c\G28/03
ANNEX
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0065.png
CONIERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRESETTITATIVES
OF
TTIE
GoVERI{MENTS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
STATES
Brussels,
15
October
2003
cte29t03
DELEG
20
the Slovenian delegation
Sabject:
-
IGC
2M3
Replyfrom
Slovenía
to tlæ
questíonnøí¡e
on the
I*gísla,tíve
Fanctíon,
the
Formatíons of the Councíland
the Presídency
of the Coancíl of Mínísterc
@oc.
CIG
9/0Ð
Delegations
will
ñnd
attached the
reply
from
the
Slovenian delegation
o
the questionnaire on
the
Iægislative
Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and
the Presidency
of
the
Council of
Minisærs
(see
doc.
CIc
9/03).
ctc29t03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0066.png
ANNEX
I. TIIE
LEGISLATIVE
FUNCTION
1.
g
In
Should exercise
of
the
legislative
function
be
conferred on
a
single
Council formation
should
a
legislative function (public)
and
a
part dedicated
to
other
activities
be
determined
for
each
Council
formation?
case
the solutíon
proposed
ín
the Constitutíonal
Treaty,
Artícle 23,
Títle
IV,
h
ínterpreted
as
the
establìshment
of
a
specíal,
exclusívely
legßløíve
councíL,
Slovenìa
would
not
agree.
2.
gT
Should
the
public
legislative
part
be
concerned
only
with
laws
and
framework laws
adopted
under
the
normal
legislative procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption by
the
European Parliament
and
the
Council)
with all laws
and
framework laws?
Publíc
legßlatíve
part
shoald
be
concerned with
all
laws
andframework
lnws.
TI.
TTM
FORMATIONS
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
Should
the
European
Council's decision on the
list of
Council formations
-
as
envisaged
by
the
Convention
-
be
taken
unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft
Convention?
by
a
qualÍfied
majority? or
by
a
simple
majority?
Should
the
list
be
confined
to
a
small
number
of
formations
in line with
the
decision taken
in
Seville?
3.
European
Council's
decísíon
on
the
líst
of
Council
formatíons shoald
be tøken
unaninously.
The
líst should.
be
confined
to
a srnaller
number
of
formatíons ín líne wìÍh
the decisíon
taken
ín
Sevílle.
(
)
III.
THE PRBSIDENCY
OF
THE
COUNCIL
OF
MINISTERS
4.
Should
other Council
formations
apa-rt
from
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
have
a
fixed
Presidency
(i.e. not applying
the
rotation
system
provided for in
Article
23(4))?
which formations?
of
what duration?
using
what procedure (election
by
the members
of
the
Council formation
concerned)?
The presídency
ol
Council
formatíons, other than
thal
of
Foreígn
Affaírs,
should
be
held
by
Member
State
representatives
wíthín the Councíl
on
the
basis
of
equal
rotation.
crG29/03
ANNEX
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0067.png
5.
Should
there
be
a
Team
Presidency
system
for
the
Council formations
that
continue to
use
the
rotation
system?
The
íssue
of
the
presídency
should
be
dealt wíthín the overall
ímperøtíve
of
maíntaíníng
the
ínstitutional
balnnce
and
further
enluncíng the
communíty
rnethod.
This also
means
cleører
delímítatíon
of
responsíbílítíes
of
ínstítutíons.
The
provísíons of
the Councíl of
Mínísters should
be
defined
ín
ø
manner thaf
makes
ít
completely clear thøt the
system
of
eqaal rotafíon
øpptied
to
the
presidency
of
the
dffirent
Councíl
formatíons
wíll
contínue
to
be based
on
ø
stríct
equalþ
between
Member
States.
Every Member
State
shoald
have
an
equal
access
to
the presìdency
of
every
Councíl
formatíon.
The Presídency
system
nast
be
written ínto
the
Constitutìonal
Treaty
ønd
not
be
left
up
to
the European
Coancíl
to
d.etermíne.
One
of
the
uucínl
iss¿es
of
Team
Presídency ís
the
questíon
of
co-ordìnaiíon,
If
the
Teøm
Presídency
slstern
were
to
be
adopted,
ít
shoald
be
made cleør
ín the Constítutíon,
thøt
ít
woald
be
the
General Af,føírs
Councíl
that
would
have
responsibílíty
to co-ordínøte
the
Teøtn Presídency.
6.
If
it
is decided to opt
for
a
Team
Presidency
sysrem
(a)
how
many Member
St¿tes
should there
be
in
the "team"?
three?
four? five?
opt
U
ít ß
decíded
to
represented
ín
a team
(northlsouth,
east/west,
rích/poor,
new/old,
big/snall).
for
a
teøm presídency,
all
the
møin
cafegoríes
of
dífferences
should
he
(b)
(c)
what
should
be the
duration
of
its rerm? ayear?
l8
months? longer?
should the
composition
of
the
teams
be
fixed
in
advance
or
left
open
on
the basis
of
criteria
to
be
determined,
with
due regard
for
the
principle
of
equal
rotation
(which
would
take
into
account
political
and
geographical balance
and
the
diversity
of
Member
States
as
defined
in
Arricle
23(4)
of
the
draft
Convention)?
It
seems
ahnost
ímpossìble
to
accomrnodafe
all
the
questíons connected
to
the ímplementatíon
of
the
princíple of
equal
rotation
wíthoat
somehow
fixíng
ìn
advance
the number of
Mernber
States
in
a
team.
(d)
7.
should the
allocation
of
the different
Council
formations
within
rhe team
be fixed
in
advance
q
left
to
the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the team?
Given the
need
for
increased
coordination
under
a
Team Presidency
system,
should
a "chain
of
command"
be
maintained,
at
least
partially,
with
the
Member
State
chairing
the
General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing
Coreper
[I
and
II?]?
definífely,
in
a
close
co-operatíon
wíth the
Commhsíon.
Yes,
8.
Should
committees/
working
parties subordinate
to
a
particular
Council
automarically
be
chaired
by
the
Member State
holding
the
Presidency
of
the Council
in
question
(vertÍcal
structure)?
Yes, except
Secretaríat.
for
the
cunent
practíce
of
committees/workíng
paníes chaired
by
the
Councíl
crG29/03
ANNEX
a
J
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0068.png
9.
By
the same
token,
if
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister
chaired
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council,
should
tl¡e PSC and other external relations
working
parties be chaired
by
a
representative
of
the
Foreign
Aftairs
Minister?
Yes.
10.
In
order
to
achieve greater
coherence
in
the
Council's
proceedings,
should there
be
an
informal structure
for
coordination
between
the
representatives
of
the
Member
States
holding the
Presidency,
in
which the
President
of
the
European
Council,
the President
of
the
Commission
and the
Minister
for Foreign
Affairs
could
participate?
Any
co-ordínatíon
ín
order to
achíeve
greater
coherence
ín
the
Councíl's proceedíngs should
be
the
responsihi@
of the
General,\ffaírs
CouncíL
1
1.
Should
the
detailed
arrangements
for
the
rotation
of
the
Presidency
of
the Council
be
the
subject
of
a
decision
to be taken
unanimously
*
by
the
European
Council?
If
so:
should
it
be adopted
at the
same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing the
Constitution?
could
it
be
adopted
later
if
the essential elements
of
the
future
arrangements
were
agreed at the same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing
the
Constitution?
Arrøngements
for
the
rotatíon of
the
Presídency
of the Councíl should
be
subject
of
a.
unønímous
decisíon by
the European
CouncíL.
It
should
be adopted and
defined
at
the
same
tíme
as the
Treaty
estahlis
híng the
C
onstítution.
()
'
At
present,
the
list
setting out
the
order
in
which
Member
States
assume the
Presidency
is
adopted
by the
Council
unanimously.
cIG29/03
ANNEX
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0069.png
CONtr|ERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRESENTATIVES
OF
TIIE
GOVERIYMENTS
OFTITE MEMBER
STATES
Bnrssels, 15
October 2003
cIG30/03
DELEG
21
the Slovak delegation
Subject:
IGC
2M3
-
ftom
Slovakíø ta the qaestíonnnbe on
the
l-egísløtíve
Futætíon, the
Formqtíons
of
tlæ Councíl
and the Presídpncy
ol
tltc
Councíl of Mínísters
Reply
(doc.
CIG 9/03)
Delegations
will
find
attached
the
reply from
the
Slovak delegation
to
the
questionnaire
on
the
Iægislative
Function, the Formations
of
the
Council
and the
Presidency
of
the
Council of Ministers
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
crG30t03
1
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0070.png
ANNEX
following
is a
working
position
of
Slovakín
on
some questions
put
by the Presidency. Slovakia
thus
reserves
the
right
to
alter
its
position
on
any
of
the
issues
below, depending
on
forthcoming
The
discussions of
Member
States.
I.
TTIE
LEGISLATIVE
FUNCTION
t.
Should exercise
of
the
legislative function
be
conferred on
a
single
Council formation
gI
should
a
legislative
function
(public)
and
each
Council
formation?
a
part dedicated to other activities
be
determined
for
Should
the
public
legislative part be
concerned
only
with
laws
and
framework
laws
adopted
under the
normal legislative procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption
by
the European
Parliarnenr
and
the
Council)
q
with all
laws
and
framework laws?
Slovakia
does
not
consider
creation
of
a single
Council
formation
with
legislative
functions
to
be a
step towards
increasing
legitimncy
and stengthening
democracy
in
decision making
of
the
EU.
We
are
concerned
that
such
a
step
could lead
to
less
effective
work
of
the Council.
We
do
not
recommend
changing actual arrangements,
when
every Council
formation
exercíse its
legislative
function.
II.
TIIE
FORMATIONS
OF
THE
COUNCIL
()
3.
Should
tle
European
Council's
decision
on
the
list of
Council
form¿tions
-
as
envisaged
by
the
Convention
-
be
taken
unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft
Convention?
by
a
qualified
majority?
or
by
a
simple
majority?
Should the
list
be
confined to
a
small number
of
formations
in
line with
the
decision taken
in
Seville?
Slovakia
is
of
the
opinion
that the
European Council should
decide by
unanimity.
We
consider
the
list
of
Council
formations
as approved
by
the
European Council
ín
Seville
in
June
2002
to
be
sfficient
for a
smooth
work
of
the
Council.
It
is
not
necessary
to
specify
thß
list
in
the
Constitutional treaty,
instead the
decision
should
be
left to
the European Council
and
be
adopted in
accordance
with
its
rules
of
procedure.
crc
30/03
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0071.png
IfI.
TTIE
PRESIDENCY
OF TTIE
COUNCIL
OF
MINISTERS
4.
No.
Should
other
Council
formations
apart
from
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
have
a
fixed
Presidency
(i.e. not applying
the
rotation
system
provided
for in
Article?3ri3))2
5.
Yes.
Should
there
be
a
Team Presidency
system
for
the
Council formations
that
continue
to
use
the
rotation
system?
6.
If
it
is
decided
to
opr
for
a
Team Presidency
sysrem
(a)
(b)
()
how many Member
States
should
there be
in
the "team"?
three?
four?
five?
what should
be the
duration
of its
term?
a year?
18
months? longer?
Slovakía would
prefer
a model of
a
team
presídency that
would
consist of
four
countries
and
lasted
two
years
orfivà
counties
for
two
and
a'hatf
year.'
(c)
should the
composition of
the teams
be
fixed
in
advance
left
open
on
the basis
of
criteria to
be
determined,
with
due
regard
for
the
principle of equal
rotation
(which
would
take
into
account
political
and
geographical balance
and
the
diversity of Member
States
as
defined in
Article
23(4) of
the
draft Convention)?
q
Composition
of
the
teams
should be
left
open
on
the
basis
of criteria
to
be
determined
with
due
regardfor
the
principle
of equal
rotation.
(d)
should the
allocation of
the
different Council formations
within
the team be
fixed in
advance
left
to
the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the
team?
q
Allocation of
the
dffirent
Councilformation
should
be
left
to the
discretion of
the
Member
states
in
the team,
7.
Given
the need
for
increased
coordinatÍon
under
a
Team Presidency
system,
should a
"chain
of command"
be
maintained,
at
least
partially,
with
the
Member
State
chairing
the
General
Affairs
Council
also
chai¡ing
Coreper
[I
and
tI?]?
Yes.
8.
Should committees/
working
parties subordinate
to
a
particular Council automatically
be
chaired by
the
Member
State
holding
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
in
question
(vertical
structure)?
Yes.
crc
30/03
3
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0072.png
9.
By
the
same
token,
if
the
Foreign
Affairs Minister
chaired
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council,
should
the
PSC and
other external relations
working
parties
be chaired
by
a
representåtive
of
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister?
PSC
and other external relations
working
parties should
be chaired by representatives
of Member
States
holdíng
the team Presidency.
10.
In
order to achieve
greater coherence
in
the
Council's
proceedings,
should
there be
an
infon¡ral
structure
for
coordination
between the representatives
of
the Member
States
holding
the
P¡esidency,
in
which
the
President
of
the European
Council,
the President
of
the
Commission
and the
Minister
for Foreign
Affairs
could
parricipate?
There
is
a
clear
need
for
coordínation
between
the Members
States
holding
Presidency.
Formal
meetings
of
Team Presidency
with
the
pennanent President
of
the European
Council
(other
representatives i.e. President
of
the
Commission,
Minister
of
Foreign
Affairs)
could
be
useful
at
the
beginníng
of
a
term
of
the
team
presidency
to
discuss the
presidency
program and
beþre
the
closing of a term to evaluate
it.
If
a
need
arises
a meeting
could
be
convened on
ad-hoc
basis.
1
L
Should
tle
detailed
¿urangements
for
the
rotation
of
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
be
the
subject
of
a
decision to
be
taken unanimously
by
the European
Council?
If
so:
should
it
be adopted at the
same
time
as
the
Treaty
establishing the Consrirution?
could
it
be adopted
later
if
the
essential
elements
of
the
future
arrangements
were
agreed at the same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing
the
Constitution?
Detailed
arrangements
for
the
rotation of
the
Presidency
of
the Council should
be adopted
by
the
European Councíl
acting
unanimously at
the
same
time as the
Constitutional
Treaty.
()
crc
30/03
4
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0073.png
CONIERENCE
OF
TIM
REPRESENTATI\1ES
OF
TIIE
GOVER¡IMEI.ITS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
STATES
Brussels,
15
October
2003
CIG
3UO3
Dß,LEG22
NOTE
from:
Subject:
the
Finnish delegation
IGC
2M3
-
from
Fínland
to the
questíonnaire
on
the
l*gíslatíve
Functíon, thc
Formatíans of the Councíl
and the Presídency of
tlu
Coancíl of
Mínßters
(doc.
CIG
9/03)
Reply
Delegations
will
find
attached the
reply from
the
Finnish
delegation to
the
questionnaire
on the
Legislative
Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and the Presidency
of
the
Council of.Ministers
(see
doc. CIG
9/03).
o
c\G3v03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0074.png
ANNEX
I.
TIIE
LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION
1.
Should exercise
of
the
legislative
function
be
conferred on
a
single
Council formation
gI
should
a
legislative
function
(public)
and
a
part dedicated
to other activiries
be
determined
for
each
Council formation?
2.
Should
ttre
public
legislative part
be concerned
only
with
laws
and
framework
laws adopted
under
the
normal
legislative procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption by
the
European Parliament
and the
Council)
gT
with
all
laws and framework
laws?
II.
TIM
FORMATIONS
OF
THE
COUNCIL
3.
Should
the
European Council's decision on
the
list of
Council
formations
-
as
envisaged
by
the Convention
-
be
taken
unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft
Convenrion?
by
a
qualÍfied
majority?
or
by
a
simple
majority?
Should
ttle
list
be
confined
to
a
small number
formations
in line with
the
decision
taken
in
Seville?
of
(
)
ctc3t/03
ANNEX
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0075.png
III.
4.
TTTE
PRESIDENCY
OF
TÍTE
COUNCIL
OF
NIINISTERS
Should
ottrer
Council formations
apart
from
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council have
a
fixed
Presidency
(i.e. not
applying
the
rotation
system
provided
for
in
Article
%$))?
which
formations?
of
what
duration?
using what
procedure
(elecrion
by
the members
of
the
Council formation
concerned)?
Should
ttrere be
a
Team
Presidency
system
for
the
Council
formations that continue to
use
the
rotation
system?
5.
6.
If
it
is
decided
to opt
for
a
Team Presidency
system
(a)
(b)
(c)
.)
(d)
7.
how
many
Member
States
should
there
be
in
the
"team"?
three?
four? five?
what
should
be
the
duration
of
its
term?
a
yeu?
18
months? longer?
should
the
composition
of
the
teams
be
fixed in
advance
or
left
open on
the basis
of
criteria
to
be
determined,
with
due
regard
for
the
principle
of
equal
rotation
(which
would
take
into
account
political
and
geographical balance
and
the
diversity of Member
States
as
defined
in
Article
23(4)
of
the
draft Convention)?
should
the
allocation of
the
different
Council
formations
within
the
team be
fixed
in
advance
or
left
to
the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the team?
Given
the
need
for
increased
coordination
under
a
Team Presidency system, should a
"chain
of command"
be
maintained,
at least
partially, with
the
Member
State
chairing
the
General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing
Coreper
[I
and
II?]?
Should committees/
working
parties
subordinate
to
a
particular Council automatically
be
chaired by
the
Member
State
holding
the Presidency
of
the
Council in
question
(vertical
structure)?
9.
By
the
same
token,
if
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister
chaired the Foreign
Affairs
Council,
should
the
PSC
and
other
external relations
working
parties
be
chaired
by
a
representative
of
the
Forei gn
Affairs Minister?
In
order to
achieve greater coherence
in
the
Council's proceedings, should
there
be
an
inforural
structure
for
coordination
between tlte
representatives of
the
Member
States
holding
the Presidency,
in
which
the
President
of
the
European
Council,
the
President
of
the
Commission
and
the
Minister
for
Foreign
Affairs
could participate?
Should
the detailed arrangements
for
the
rotation of
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
be
the
subject
of
a
decision
to
be
taken unanimously
'by
the
European
Council?
If
so:
should
it
be
adopted at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing the
Constitution?
could
it
be
adopted
later
if
the essential elements
of
the
future
arrangements
were
agreed at
the same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing the Constitution?
10.
11.
At
present, the
list
sening
out
the order
in which
Member
States
adopted by
the
Council
unanimously.
assume
the Presidency is
crc
31/03
3
ANNEX
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0076.png
support,.thaaomi¡ation,,,of'
,,fhe:Council,pr.siUeniv i*
à
fill*{'*
t*stfo¡mbl.Mffief.Satês;.*hési'ô*t¿lu¿,uutffim..*êy.':iä*fittoàxercju"uu
4,
di$qrentlevels
and
formations.
This
applies
to
ail ðouncir tor*äri¿os;
çå
ao
support'tliê:'pø"ppj,'al
io
lèt:theUnion
Miaiirerf
p.grç¡æ .Aff¿irs
chaiirhe
ExærnaÌ
Affai¡s'
æ
funüion
"*
''
,
'
-.
:-
,,
s,
eouncilno$iddùusr
alsu:in
t¡e
turor"
be based
on
u
.yræ*
ôi
stt¿d:.dJlüoutt
bêrwJn
the
lVfemb-eii$.tffi.
On
thiS,b'asìs,
we
are,also.,æády
io;consider
different rnodeli for
a
Teara
Presidency
as,,tglg
as
they p:ovide
real added
value
as
io
rhe
berter,
rnore cohàient
and
rransþarenr
maaagetnen$."0îi€ouneil
work.
$Ihàteïei
model we
choose,
it
snouffi
còveir
t..Couscil
formårions
ar
1
l '
.,,,,,
'
6,
a
--b)
A,mö
which.ls
consisænù
with
the
above-mentioaed:þrincipies-;
io¡¡rd
consist
oÊ,teâFrs
or
+l.Mçmþ=qI,ShçË
who
share
the,
kesidency
for
a
period
of
?:2,å ve+ç.
The
council multi-
annual workpgograrnmes
shouldbe
synchronized
with
the
du-ration
of
the Teaûl
Presidency.
:).1"
CompB-sitíon
of
the
Teams rnust be'based
an srrictly equal rorarion,
full
round.
assure
proper preparation,
{o'
and should change
every
the
new
set
of
Teams
would
need
to
be
dere¡mineà
lo-**
ni*
"u"tiå*uái
months.TheprecedingPresidencyineachfo'*M*'.oo[*årioo*ithrh.
incoming
one-.,
7. Yes.
Corgp
Land
II
should,be
ch¿iied,by
the
Mqm-ber
Stue chairiñg
the
Ceneral,Àffairs',
,
Council.
In
ourrnodel,
this is automatically
so
a$
all Council formations
and
are
in
furn
'
d)
The
aliocafion
of Council
fonnations silðUcf
be
fixed
is
principle
so,
that
rhe
Members
of
rhe
Team wóuld'û'e¡n
ãn equal
pgsU"",
In,o¡r motei,
of,ù;,feàm,*o;1
ali
Ç.ouncil
for,rnations où,.a'rninisterial
tevel.
as
weli
a{..Ç_oreÞet
I
and
II,
during
a
period
of
6
-Coreper
of
the
commiftees
and
working
parties shouid
be
decided by
the
Memþer
Stares
parry
to
the Team:arnong
thernselves,.-One
lvlernber
Srate
rpoüld
tioid
rlie
pleslA¿nôi:æ
ã
eérnmíbee
orwort.ingg¡oup;dudngthewlole.p¿r¡o¿,.tobecovered.bytheTeam
9.
In
our
modèl,
the
Foreign
Affairs
CounciÌ
is
châirø
by
rhe
same
Jvlember,st¿æ
ltra;¡rg:ati
ottrér
Council
fomalions,
not by
rhe
Union's
Minister for
Fnreign
Affairs.
The
Presidencies
of
the,
External
relations committæs-
and
working'eânieS-{CöpS érg-).s¡u¡id
be
decided:by
rhe
Member
States
party to
the
Team among
thetnselves
fo-r,the
whoie,rpetiöd,to.¡e coverç¿
Uy
t¡é:feam,(see'
o'f,,the
Councìt
by one single Member
State.
Coordination'can be
assu¡ed
by Coreper
anO
8.
The
Presidencies
)
10,
No
smcial'inf.þrmal
str-uccuré
is.qged¡d,
as
all¡meetiap
oi
¡¿i*ster,s:¿re:chaired
*e
Ceneral
Altairs
exampleasaSeparatep.rotocol'andnotbèIeftforthee".o"
Couacil,
who together
wlth
the
Commßsion
are
aÌso
responsiblê,for
the,Breparation,,of the
màãtings
of
the
European,CounciÌ,
at
msiadnt'of.*e,Èuiopean
CounillhoUro
noi
have any
rolã
'
in
the
daily
management
of
the
Union
and
iæ legislæive
11.
The
basic
syiæm for
the
êor¡ncít Presidency (evenrual
rnodetl¡o.r
teæ
Prä$ideniy,
system to be
applied
on
rninisærial/cornmitæe/.working group level
erc.) mUst be
included
jll
rhç Ç*o-nstirurion,
for
r¡e'èv
worÈ.
'
of
and
rotation
within
the Teams
should not, however,
be
wrinen in
the Consriturion uui
¿êcìoec
uy
the-Councii-by
thesameprocedure
as
rhe
list
of Council fornrations,i.e.
unanimousiy.
Afærevery
full round,
the new,set
of
Tearns
would
neèd,to
Ue
detoruined:
lhis
shoutd
be'Cone
in
good tirne,
ferably
at
least
2
terrns
in
advance,
to'ensure proper preparadon
and
planning.
crc
3rl03
ANNEX
4
Et{
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0077.png
CONIERENCD
OF
TIIE
REPRESDNTATIVES
OF
TIIE
GOVER¡IMENTS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
SÎATES
Bnrssels, 15
October
2003
crc32103
DELEG
23
from:
the Swedish
delegation
-
IGC
2M3
Repþ
tron
$weden
to the
questíottwìre
on
th¿
l*gíslafíve
Fanctìbn" the
FornoÍíotu
ol the Councíl
ønd the Presídency
ol
the Coancíl of Mínísters
(doc.
CIG 9/03)
Delegations
will
find
attached
the
reply from
the Swedish delegation
to
the questionnaire on the
Iægislative
Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and the Presidency
of
the
Council of Minisærs
(see
doc. CIG 9/03).
o
ctG 3ao3
1
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0078.png
ANNEX
The
Lesislative Function
The
second
alternative is
the
only
viable solution.
Legislative work
should continue
to be
the
task
of
each
Council formation
within
its
respective
area
of
competence.
There
is
no
need
for
a
Legislative Council.
1.
meet
in public
when
examining
and
adopting any legislarive
proposal, i.e.
all
laws
and
framework laws. Whether
the
European parliament is
involved in
the
legislative
process
or not is
a
question
of
the
overall
balance
of
power
within
the
Union
and
is,
in
our
mind,
not related to
the need
for
openness
in
the
Council.
2.T\e
Council
of
Ministers
should
The
Formations of
the
Council
3.
The European
Council's
decision on
the
list of Council
formations should be
taken
unanimously.
The
decision is
the
Council
difficult
to
separate
from
the
decision concerning
the
rotation of
the
presidency
of
of
Ministers
(see
below).
We
see, at
the
moment,
no
need
to
change the
decision
taken
in
Seville
concerning
the
number
of Council
formaúons.
The
Presidencv
of
the
Council
of
Ministers
4.
All
Council formations, including
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council,
should
be
chaired
by
a
representative
of
a
Member
State.
The proposal to
have
the Foreign
Minister
chair the Foreign
Affairs Council could
undermine
the
institutional
balance and
alter
the established
roles
of
the
Council
and the
Commission
in
the
decision-making
process.
5.
Yes.
A
Team Presidency system
would
increase the
efficiency, continuity
and
visibility
of
the
presidency
of
the
Council of Ministers.
All
Council formations
should
be
included
in
a
Team
Presidency system.
6.
We
are
open
to
various models
of
a
Team
Presidency.
The details
below
should be
seen as an
attempt
to
be
helpt'ul rather than
a
set
position:
a)
Three countries.
r)
b)
18
months.
c)
A
notion
of
'"Team
Presidency" could
be
included in
the
Constitutional
Treaty
(article 23.4). The European
Council
could determine
the
modalities
of
the system
of
rotation,
based
on
the
principle of
equal
rotation. This
could
be
done either
in
connection
to
the
IGC
or
at
a
later
stage.
d)
It
would
be easier
if
the allocation
of Council formations
were
made
within
the
group
sharing
the Team Presidency.
ctc32/03
ANNEX
2
BN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0079.png
7.
Given
the
need
for
increased
co-ordination,
a
"chain
of
command" should
be preserved.
The
Member
State
whose representative
is
chairing
the
General
Affairs Council
should
also be
chairing
Coreper.
A
representative
of
the
Member
State
holding
the presidency
of
the
relevant
Council formation
should chair Committees
and
Working
Parties.
8.
9.
See
4
and
8.
The Member
State
chairing
the
Foreign
Affairs Council
should
also
chair PSC
and
other
extemal relations working parties.
Affairs
Council should maintain
overall
co-ordination responsibilities
for
the
work
of
the
Council.
Within
the
Team
Presidency,
the
chair
of
the
General
Affairs
Council
could be
given coordinating
tasks.
In addition,
there
will
be
a
need
for
informal
co-ordination
between
the
presidency
of
the
Council
of
Ministers
and the
President
of
the
European
Council,
the
President
of
rhe
Commission
and the
Minister
for
Foreign
Affairs.
The modalities
of
this
informal co-ordination
should, however, not
be regulated
in
advance.
10.
The
General
I
1.
Also
see
6c.
As
the
rotation
of
the Presidency
of
the Council is
a
fundamental part
of
the
balance
of
power
between
Member
States
it
must be
decided
by unanimity.
There
are advantages
both
with
deciding on
the future
rotation in
connection
with
the
IGC or
at
a
later
stage.
Either
alternative is
acceptable
to
us.
crG32/03
ANNEX
J
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0080.png
CONIERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRESENTATIVES
OF
TIIE
GOVENNMEIITS
OF
TTIE
MEMBER
STATES
Bnrssels,
15
October
2003
crc33/03
Dß,LEG2A.
the
Turkish
delegation
Subject:
-
IGC
2M3
Replyfron
Turkey
to tho
qaestíonnabe
onthe
l*gisløtíve
Functíon, the
Fornalíons
of
the
Councíl and the Presídency
of
tlw
Councíl of MínÍsters
Delegations
will
find
auached the
reply
from
the
Turkish
delegation to
the
questionnaire
on rhe
Legislative Function,
the Formations
of
ttre
Council
and
the Presidency
of the Council
of
Ministers
(see
doc.
ClGgnÐ.
cÍG33t03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0081.png
ANNEX
I.
TIIE LEGISLATIVE
FUNCTION
and
a
part dedicated
to
other
activities should
be determined
1.
A
legislative function (public)
for
each
Council
formation.
2.
Public legislative part should be
concemed
only with
laws and
framework
laws
adopted
under the
normal legislative
procedure (i.e.
joint
adoption
by
the European Parliament
and
the
Council)
.)
u.
3.
TrrE FORMATTONS
OF
TrrE
COUNCTL
The
European
Council's
decision
on the
list
of
Council
formations as
envisaged
by
the
Convention should be taken unanimously
and
the
list
can
be confined
to
a
small
number
of
formations
in
line with
the
decision
taken
in
Seville.
However,
the
European
Council
should
be able to
decide on further formations.
UI.
4.
TIM
PRESIDENCY
OF TTIE
COUNCIL
OF
MINISTERS
Other
Council
formations apart
from the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
should have a
rorating
presidency determined
on the
basis
of
equal
rotarion
within
the Council
of
Ministers
for
ã
period
ofone
year.
number
of
Member
States and
considering the
fact that
every Member
State
in
an
EU of
28
members
would
hold
the
presidency
in
four
year
intervals,
the
Team
Presidency
structured on
the basis
ofequal rotation
can
be considered to
be
an
option.
5.
Given
the
increasing
6.
If
it
is
decided
to opr
for
a
Team
Presidency:
Four
Member
States
should
be
in
the
"team".
The durarion
of
the
term
should
be
18
months.
c)
The
Composition
of
the
teams
should
be
fixed
in
advance
by
a
unanimous decision
of
the
European
Council. The decision
should
be
taken
with
due
regard
for
the
principle
of
equal
rotation
and
should take
into
account
political
and
geographical
balance
and
the
diversity
of
the
Member
States
(as
currently
defined
in
Anicle
24(3)
of the
draft
Consrirurional Treaty).
d)
Allocation
of
the
different Council
formations
within
rhe team
could
be
left to
the
discretion
of
the
Member
States
in
the team.
a)
b)
cIG
33/03
ANNEX
2
EI\
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0082.png
7.
Given
the
need
for
increased
coordination
under
a
Team
Presidency
system,
"a
chain
of
command"
can
be
maintained,
at
least
partially,
with
the Member State
chairing
the General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing
Coreper
I
and
II.
Committees/working parties
subordinate
to
a particular Council should
automatically
be
chaired
by
the
Member
State
holding
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
in
question
so
as
ro
establish
a
proper coordination
among the
Member
States
in
the team.
9.
the Foreign
Afrairs Minister chairs the
Foreign
Affairs
Council,
the
PSC
and
other
exærnal
relations working
parties can be chaired
by
a
representative
of
the
Foreign
Minister.
to
achieve
greater coherence
in
the
Council's
proceedings,
it
would
be
advisable to
establish an
informal
structure
for
coordination benveen the representatives
of
ttre
Member
States
holding
the
Presidency,
in
which
the
hesident
of
the
European
Council,
the
Presidency
of
the
Commission
and
the
Minister
for
Foreign
Affairs
could
participate.
If
10.
In
order
ll.The
detailed
arrangements
for
the rotation
of
the
Presidency
of
the
Council should
be
subject
of
a
decision
taken
unanimously by
ttre
European Council.
-
It
could be
adopted
later
if
the essential elements
of
the future arrangements were
agreed at
the
same
time
as the
Treaty establishing
ttre
Constitution.
o
crc33/03
ANNEX
3
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0083.png
CONIERENCE
OF
TIIE
REPRESENTATIVES
OF
TIIE
GOVERNME}ITS
OF
TIIE
MEMBER
STATES
Brussels,
15
October
2003
crc34/03
DELEG
25
the
UKdelegation
Subject:
-
IGC
2M3
Replyfrom
the
UKto
the
qtestíomaíre
on the
l*gÍslúíve Functíoq
the
Formøtíons
of tftu
Cowcíl
ø¡td
the Presídency
of the Councíl
of Mìnßters
@oc.
CIG9/03)
Delegations
will
find
anached
the
reply from
the
UK
delegation to
tt¡e
questionnaire on the
Legislative
Function,
the
Formations
of
the
Council
and
the
Presidency
of
the
Council
of
Ministers
(see
doc.
CIG
9/03).
crG34t03
I
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0084.png
ANNEX
I.
TTM
LEGISLATIVE
FUNCTION
1.
Should exercise
of
the
legislative
function
be
conferred
on
a
single
Council formation
I
UK
view:
No
g
each
Council
formation?
should
a
legislative function (public)
and
a
part
dedicated
ro
other activiries
be
determined
for
I
tJr\
vrcw.
Içs
Should_the
public
legislative part
be
concemed
only
with
laws and
framework
laws
adopted
under the
normal
legislative procedure
(i.e.
joint
adoption by
the
European pa¡liament
and
the
Council)
I Ur\
VICW.
l\U
r-----
or
with all laws
and
framework laws?
I
Ut\
Vtew: Ies
I
II.
TIIE
FORMATIONS
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
3.
()
majority?
or
by
a
simple
majority?
Should the
list
be
confined ro
a
small
number
of
formarions
in
line
with
the
decision taken
in Seville?
Should the
European Council's decision on
the
list of
Council
formations
as
envisaged
by
-
the
Convention
-
be taken
unanimously
as
stipulated
in
the
draft Convention
?
by
aqualified
UK
view:
The
decision should continue,
as
now,
to U" taL
that
it
is
purely procedural.
The
treaty
text
should
maintain
the
flexibitiry
oi
*,.
European
Council
to
change
the
list of
formations to
meet
changing
needs.
The
list shouldindeed
be
confined
to
the
small
number
of
formations in line
with
Seville,
although after
the
IGC we
will
need
to
review
the
exact lisr
and
division of
responsibilities.
crG
34/03
ANNEX
2
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0085.png
III.
THE
PRESIDENCY
4.
OF
TIIE
COUNCIL
OF
MINISTERS
Should other
Council
formations
apaft
from
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council
have
a
fïxed
Presidency
(i.e. nor applying
the
roration
sysrem
provided
for in
Article
B(Ð)?
which
formations?
of
what
duration?
using what procedure (election
by
the
members
of
the
Council formarion
concerned)?
Tearn
Presidencies (see answer to
7).
UK
view:
Yes. The
General
Affairs
Council
should
be chaired
by the
Chair
of
rhe
Ertopeat
Council.
This
will
be important
to ensure
consistency
and proper
coordination
under
a
system
of
5.
)
Should
there
be
a
Team
Presidency
systern
for
the
Council formations
that continue
to
use
the
rotation
system?
seems
to
us
to
be
the
only
way to inuoduce
greater
continuity
and
burden-
UK
view:
Yes. This
sharing to
the
Council
of
Ministers,
while
retaining
the advantages
of equaliry
throush rotation.
6.
If
it
is decided
ro opr
for
a
Team Presidency
system
(a)
(b)
how many Member
States
should
there be
in
tle
"team"?
th¡ee?
four?
five?
what
should
be the
durarion
of
its term?
a
year?
l8
months? longer?
do
not
have
a
strong preference;
our
prioriÇìhoutd
beõ
achieve
a
balance
between
continuity
and
equality
in
the
allocation
of
portfolios.
Based on
this,
the
simplest solution
might
be
for four
Member
States
to
be
in
the team
for
two years.
Each
Member
St¿te
would
chair
two
formations
at
any
one
time
(rtle
FAC
and
GAC would
have
fixed
chairs.)
The
members
of
the Team would
rctate
through the
8
Councils during
their
2
year
term, changing
every 6
months.
uK
view:
The
two
are closely
linked.
we
(l
(c)
should
the composition
of
the teams be
fixed in
âdvance
or
left
open on
the
basis
of
criteria
to
be
determined,
with
due
regard
for
the
principle
of equal rotation
(which
would take
into
account
political
and
geographical
balance and
the
diversity of
Member
States as
defined in
A¡ricle
23(4)
of
rhe
draft
Convention)?
The
exact order of
rotation
should
be
fixed in
advance
by
a
decision
of
the
Council
(as
now)
with
due
regards
for
the
principle of
equal
rotarion
as
defined
inr.23(4).
But
there
is no
need
for this
to
be
decided
ar
the
IGC.
uK view:
crc34/03
ANNEX
3
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0086.png
(d)
should
the
allocation of
the
different Council formations
wirhin
rhe team
be
fixed
in
advance
or
left
to the discretion
of
ttre
Member states
in
the team?
UK
view:
The
allocarion should
be
fixed in
ud
Member
State equal
access
to
each
formation.
This model
has
the
merits
of
transparency,
visibility
and
equality,
although
we
are
happy to
conside¡ alternatives.
For
the
sake
of
consistency,
individual
Member
States
might
chair
two
complementary
formations
at the same
time
(e.g
ECOFIN
and
Competitiveness,
or
Environment
and
Agriculture
and
Fisheries.)
7.
Gjven
the
nqqd
for
inçrearsed
coordination
under
a
Team
Presidency
system, should ,,chain
a
of corrmand"
be
maintained,
at least
partially, with
the
Member Stäte-chairing
the
General
Affairs
Council
also
chairing
Coreper
tI
and
II?l?
should therefore chair
UK
view:
We
agree
on the
need
for
increased co
done
by
the
Chair of
the
European
Council,
whose
job
will
be
to
ensure
delivery
of
the
agenda
sát
by
the
European Council.
He
should therefore
chaii
rhe
General
Affairs Councii.
The Council
Secretariat should
also
play
a
greater
coordinaring
role:
the Secretary General
of
rhe
Council
U
Should
committees/
working
parties
subordinate
to
a
panicular
Council
automatically
be
chaired
by
the
Membe¡
State
holding
the Presidency
ôf
the
Council in
quesrion
f"urii.ur
structure)?
UK
view:
Yes,
as a
general
rule.
But
*e
shoot¿
m
elected
chairs
(which work
well
for
the
ECOFIN
prepararory
bodies
also
consider
greater
use
of chairing
by
the
counCil
Secretariat.
-
EpC
and
EFC);
we should
9.
By
the same
token,
if
the
Foreign
Affairs
Minister
chaired
the
Foreign
Affairs
Council,
should
the
PSC and other
external
relations working
pafties
be
chaired
by
a
representative
of
the
Forei
gn
Affairs
Minisrer?
()
UK
view:
This
will
be
difficulr
ro
finalise
brfo
Minister for
Foreign
Affairs".
Time
constraints
will
make
iiimpossibie
for the
..European
Minister
for
Foreign
Affairs"
himself to
chair
these.
crG34/03
ANNEX
4
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0087.png
10.
In
order
to
achieve greater coherence
in
the
Council's proceedings, should
there
be
an
informal
structure
for
coordination
between the
representativès
of
the
Member
States
holding
the Presidency,
in
which
the President
of
the
European
Council,
the
President
of
the
commission
and
the
Minister for
Foreign
Affairs
could
participate?
UK
view:
Yes.
Such
an
informal coordinating
structure
will
be
important
and
will
have
a
distinct
role
from
the
General
Affairs Council,
although
will
need
to work cìosely
with
it.
(The
General
Affairs Council
will
remain
a
formal
negotiating forum, where
all Member
States
are
represented,
and
will
among
other
things prepare
European
Councils.
The Team
coordination
structure
would
focus
on
delivery
of
the European
Council's
agenda
in
the separate
sectoral
Councils.)
The Chair
of
the
European
Council
should
chair
this
structure
in
order tò maximise
coordination
and
consistency across
the Council
of Ministers.
11.
Should
the
detailed
arrangements
for
the
rotation
of
the Presidency
of
the Council be the
subject
of
a decision
to
be
taken
unanimousty
'
by
the European
Council?
If
so:
should
it
be adopted
at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty
establishing
the Constitution?
could
it
be
adopted
later
if
the essential elements
of
the
future
arrangements
were
agreed
at
the
same
time
as
the
Treaty establishing
the
Constitution?
.J
UK
view:
Yes, although
we
would
be happy
for
rhe
decision to
Ue
rot
at
Uy
qualifîed
majority.
Our
prioriry
at
this
stage should be
to establish
the essential elements
of
the
fuure
arrangements
(e.g.
principle of
teams
of
x
members,
principle of
equal
rotation, duration,
chairrnanship of GAC, FAC
and
COREPER).
Some of this
will
require
us
to
insert
funher
detail
in
rhe
Constitutional treaty
irself (e.g.
Article
1.23.4).
If
this is the
case,
we would
be
happy
for
the
more
detailed
Íurangemenrs
to
be
agreed at
a
later
At
present,
the
list
setting
out the order
in
which Member
adopted
by the Council
unanimously.
States
assum
€
the Presidency
is
ctc34/03
ANNEX
5
EN
 EUU, Alm.del - 2003-04 - Bilag 58: Medlemlandenes besvarelse af formandskabets spørgeskema
1464912_0088.png
o
o