House under construction
The shape of the new Europe which Poland is joining is beginning to emerge from the fog of debate.
And the intriguing question is whether what is finally agreed as a result of the current convention discussions in Brussels will be what Poland and the other member states-in-waiting assumed they were getting when they first signed up. What the 10 candidate countries have done is a bit like buying a house from the plans: you can never be quite sure until you see the finished article in three dimensions whether you are going to like it or not.
At least with a house there is a real expectation that it will be finished. The thing about Europe is that it is never-ending, a rolling programme of expansion, integration, and adjustment.
It is this continual search for widening and deepening that makes the EU so consumer-unfriendly, never more tellingly expressed than in a recent survey inquiring why there was so much public apathy towards the EU and so much lack of understanding about what it is and what it does.
One respondent replied: "If the EU just stops moving for more than five minutes and gives the public the chance to see what exactly it is, then perhaps you can expect more understanding and acceptance of its role."
But it won't stand still. It can't. The boundaries of power, the divisions of competencies, the relationship between nation-states and super-state are constantly being questioned and challenged.
So let's look at what the EU thinks it will be sometime in the near future.
On the basis of the new draft Accession Treaty which emerged from the convention at the end of last week, it will have a constitution which "establishes a Union within which the policies of the member states shall be co-ordinated, and which shall administer certain common competencies on a federal basis."
On running the economy: "The Union shall co-ordinate the economic policies of the member states, in particular by establishing broad guidelines for these policies. The member states shall conduct their economic policies, taking account of the common interest, so as to contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the Union."
On foreign policy: "Member states shall actively and unreservedly support the Union's common foreign and security policy in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity. They shall refrain from action contrary to the Union's interests or likely to undermine its effectiveness."
Where this last point leaves the huge gap in European thinking on Iraq is anybody's guess, but let's move on.
The draft text gives the EU exclusive competence "to ensure the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital, and establish competition rules."
And where there is exclusive competence, "only the Union may legislate and adopt legally-binding acts, the member states being able to do so themselves only if so empowered by the Union."
For some central and eastern European states, some of the language may raise the spectre of the past, but help is at hand: on present showing, quite a few of the current EU member states are up in arms about the wording, including the UK, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Spain.
In the next few weeks there will be new drafts and counterdrafts and amendments and fresh conclusions. And then, of course, whatever finally emerges from the convention must go to an intergovernmental conference where EU leaders will have the last word.
But the last word will not be the final word: already there is talk of setting a date for the next intergovernmental conference, after the one which hasn't yet started, to keep up the momentum towards ... what?
Only one thing is certain: the future of the EU can be anything you want it to be.
Geoff Meade is the European Union editor of the Press Association.
And the intriguing question is whether what is finally agreed as a result of the current convention discussions in Brussels will be what Poland and the other member states-in-waiting assumed they were getting when they first signed up. What the 10 candidate countries have done is a bit like buying a house from the plans: you can never be quite sure until you see the finished article in three dimensions whether you are going to like it or not.
At least with a house there is a real expectation that it will be finished. The thing about Europe is that it is never-ending, a rolling programme of expansion, integration, and adjustment.
It is this continual search for widening and deepening that makes the EU so consumer-unfriendly, never more tellingly expressed than in a recent survey inquiring why there was so much public apathy towards the EU and so much lack of understanding about what it is and what it does.
One respondent replied: "If the EU just stops moving for more than five minutes and gives the public the chance to see what exactly it is, then perhaps you can expect more understanding and acceptance of its role."
But it won't stand still. It can't. The boundaries of power, the divisions of competencies, the relationship between nation-states and super-state are constantly being questioned and challenged.
So let's look at what the EU thinks it will be sometime in the near future.
On the basis of the new draft Accession Treaty which emerged from the convention at the end of last week, it will have a constitution which "establishes a Union within which the policies of the member states shall be co-ordinated, and which shall administer certain common competencies on a federal basis."
On running the economy: "The Union shall co-ordinate the economic policies of the member states, in particular by establishing broad guidelines for these policies. The member states shall conduct their economic policies, taking account of the common interest, so as to contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the Union."
On foreign policy: "Member states shall actively and unreservedly support the Union's common foreign and security policy in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity. They shall refrain from action contrary to the Union's interests or likely to undermine its effectiveness."
Where this last point leaves the huge gap in European thinking on Iraq is anybody's guess, but let's move on.
The draft text gives the EU exclusive competence "to ensure the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital, and establish competition rules."
And where there is exclusive competence, "only the Union may legislate and adopt legally-binding acts, the member states being able to do so themselves only if so empowered by the Union."
For some central and eastern European states, some of the language may raise the spectre of the past, but help is at hand: on present showing, quite a few of the current EU member states are up in arms about the wording, including the UK, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria and Spain.
In the next few weeks there will be new drafts and counterdrafts and amendments and fresh conclusions. And then, of course, whatever finally emerges from the convention must go to an intergovernmental conference where EU leaders will have the last word.
But the last word will not be the final word: already there is talk of setting a date for the next intergovernmental conference, after the one which hasn't yet started, to keep up the momentum towards ... what?
Only one thing is certain: the future of the EU can be anything you want it to be.
Geoff Meade is the European Union editor of the Press Association.
