Speaking at a public event yesterday (20 October), Richard Corbett, a former MEP, now a member of Van Rompuy's cabinet, made the audience laugh by alluding to the difficulties leaders had in deciding when to meet.
"I'm assuming most of the meetings go ahead on Sunday, because we did find when we postponed it, it made the markets rise. So if we postpone it again the markets will rise even further and the problems will be solved," Corbett joked. He was addressing a conference organised by the European Policy Centre (EPC).
An EU summit was initially planned for 17-18 October but was postponed to the 23rd due to divergences between France and Germany over the recapitalisation of European banks in the face of the worsening Greek debt crisis.
The Sunday summit will consist of two successive meetings: A European Council meeting to be followed by a meeting of the 17 Eurozone heads of state and government.
At the time Corbett spoke, word was spreading that the summit could be postponed again, due to disagreement between France and Germany over the need to increase the funding for the EFSF, the eurozone recue fund [more].
Corbett said it could be expected that leaders would meet on Sunday and probably hold a second summit as soon as agreement is found, hopefully during next week.
Later in the day, Paris and Berlin issued a joint statement announcing just that: A second summit will be held, "at the latest Wednesday" to flesh out a "global and ambitious response" to the eurozone debt crisis.
Corbett foresaw a rather conservative decision-making process at the Sunday summits. In any case, he dismissed suggestions that EU leaders would decide to take the course of another EU treaty change, as recently proposed by Germany (see 'Background').
Implementing what has already been decided
Corbett said that in spite of the fact that over the last three months the focus had been on the immediate crisis, there has already been a debate on changing the EU governance and the Union's structures, which is in fact being implemented without changing the treaty.
"What we've put into place really is a triptych of stronger institutions and institutional pressure, stronger peer pressure, accompanied by stronger market pressure," he said.
In terms of institutional pressure, he mentioned the supervisory authorities on banking insurance and the overall European systemic risk board that had been put in place and the "six-pack" legislation which tightens up the Stability and Growth Pact.
On the peer pressure side, he mentioned the European Semester, according to which member countries would compare notes on their national budgets before they submit them to national parliaments, as well as on the Euro Plus Pact and the Europe 2020 strategy.
This would be accompanied by the pressure of markets, which he said had "slept" for the first ten years of the euro. They may now be overreacting, but in the future, they will not fall asleep again, he said.
All this together has been a "quite huge advance, done within the context of the existing treaties," he argued.
"Do we need to go down the hazardous route of treaty change?" he asked, adding that "without betraying secrets, many member states are very reluctant indeed to go down that road".
Corbett also said that it was unclear on what points the treaty should be changed – whether it would be on introducing wider qualified majority voting, or on allowing a central enforcer to instruct member countries to make changes in their state budgets. He added that it "was very difficult to reach the necessary degree of support for any such measures".
Peer pressure at twin summits
Regarding the future relations between the 27-member EU and the 17-member eurozone and alluding to what is called by many the construction of a "two-speed Europe", Corbett said that "what has been discussed" was to hold twice a year eurozone summits at the tail end of European Council meetings.
"Knowing the agenda and the draft conclusions of the 17, the remaining members, many of which would aspire to join the eurozone, could say: 'Wait a minute, this is really a matter of the 27'. Or they could say: 'OK, this is a matter for the 17 but please take account of that,'" he said, describing how decision-making could take place in this new setting.
Corbett added that it would be good if both summits were chaired "by the same person". It is no secret that Council President Herman Van Rompuy is widely expected to be given this new role.
Corbett also indicated that leaders would decide on the future Eurogroup chairman, a position currently held by Jean-Claude Juncker until June 2012. Four options were on the table, and none necessitated treaty change, he said. The first, he said, is the status quo, that is, electing a new chairman among the economy ministers.
The second option is to make it a full time job. The third option is to have Van Rompuy chair those meetings as well, but this could "distort the nature of his role" and be detrimental to his wider responsibilities, he explained.
The fourth option, Corbett said, is to have a Commissioner chair the Eurogroup, but at the moment the Commission itself was not proposing this option, he said. Economic and Monetary affairs Commissioner Olli Rehn is being pushed by the Commission to take this role, but some member countries object that in this event he would be both an arbitrator and a party.
