LISBON EXPLAINED:ONE OF the most controversial changes proposed in the Lisbon Treaty is to reduce the size of the European Commission, which is the executive branch of the union that proposes legislation and manages the EU budget, writes JAMIE SMYTH
The treaty proposes that from November 1st, 2014, the commission shall consist of members “corresponding to two-thirds of the number of member states”.
Under this formula every EU state would only be able to nominate a commissioner twice out of every three commissions in equal rotation.
In other words, Ireland would have a commissioner for 10 of every 15 years.
The fear that small states would lose out if they did not have a nominee sitting at the commission table was an important factor in the first Irish No to Lisbon last June. This prompted the Government to ask its EU partners to invoke a clause in the Lisbon Treaty that enables a unanimous vote of EU leaders to reverse the proposed reduction in size of the commission.
In December, EU leaders pledged to invoke this clause if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified in all member states.
This would allow all 27 EU states to continue to nominate a commissioner to the EU executive in the future. It is likely that some EU states will raise the issue of creating a smaller commission in the future when the union enlarges further for the sake of “efficiency”.
But such a proposal could only be introduced through a unanimous vote of the European Council, which gives Ireland a veto over a smaller EU executive.
In the event of a No vote on October 2nd the existing rules under the Nice Treaty will have to be implemented.
This treaty simply states that the number of members sitting on the commission must be less than the number of member states.
Unlike the Lisbon Treaty, it does not stipulate a formula for reducing the size of the EU. Neither does the Nice Treaty include the clause in Lisbon that allows the proposed reduction in size of the commission to be overturned through a unanimous vote from the 27 EU heads of state. This could pose a major headache for EU leaders if Irish voters reject the treaty or the Czech Republic does not complete ratification of the treaty over the next month.
Few member states now want to lose their right to nominate a commissioner, in part because of last December’s political deal to accommodate Irish voters’ concerns.
But a failure to reduce the size of the commission as set out under the Nice Treaty could leave any decision made by the EU executive open to legal challenge, according to legal experts.
There is no final agreement on how to react to a No vote. But Sweden, the current holder of the EU presidency, has proposed a plan to retain 26 commissioners and allow the one country that doesn’t get to nominate a commissioner to appoint the new High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
This currently looks like the most obvious contingency plan.
Tomorrow: How the treaty affects Ireland’s voting strength