ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES 
DE LA COMMISSION 
 
 
 
COLLECTION RELIEE DES 
DOCUMENTS "COM" 
 
 
 
 
COM (84) 0 75 
 
 
 
Vol. 1984/0030 
  
 
Disclaimer  
Conformém ent au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983 
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique 
européenne et de la Communauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983, 
p. 1), tel que modifié par le règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septembre 2003 
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents 
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés conformément à l'article 5 dudit 
règlem ent. 
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983 
concerning the open ing to the public of the historical archives of the European Econom ic 
Communit y and the European Atom ic Energy Communit y (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as 
amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243, 
27.9.2003, p. 1), this file is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this 
file have been declassified in conformity with Article 5 of the aforementioned regulation.  
In Übereinstimmung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom  1. 
Februar 19 83 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen  
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgem einschaft (ABI. L 43 vom  15.2.1983,  
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. Septem ber 2003  
(ABI. L 243 vom 2 7.9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit  
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5  
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben.  
EMBARGO
Wednesday 15 February 1984 -  10.00 hours  
C O M  (84) 75 FIN A L
Address
by Mr Gaston Thom,  
president of the Commission  
of the European Communities,  
to the European Parliament
Strasbourg, 15 February 1984

C0M(84)75-EN final
Mr President,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Every year, at this time, the President of the Commission 
appears before this House to present the Commission's programme 
for the next twelve months.
I am doing so in rather special circumstances this year.
First of all, you in Parliament will be seeking re-election in 
a few months' time and we at the Commission are just beginning 
the last year of our term.
Secondly, we are only a few weeks away from the Brussels 
European Council, a gathering which may well prove decisive 
for the future of the Community. I can only hope the outcome 
will be positive.
This being so, you may feel that the Commission should be rendering 
an account of its stewardship rather than presenting a new 
programme. But for us, the day of reckoning is still some way 
off. A year is a long time in politics, and the Commission is 
determined to fight to the bitter end to implement its 
programme and put through the proposals that give it concrete 
expression.

-  2 -
The outline programme now before you tells you point by point 
how we propose to keep up the momentum in this, our last year 
in office. It is abundantly clear to us what our main tasks 
must be. In 1984, we must
.  get the Community machinery moving again;
.  embark on revitalization of the Community;
.  assert our presence in the world in relations with our
major trading partners and with the developing countries.
1984 will be a crucial year for Europe. We all know that the 
future of European integration hangs on the success or failure 
of our efforts.
We know that the Community is in the throes of a crisis, that 
it is in danger of becoming what Mr Mitterrand has called an 
abandoned building site. But the Commission is convinced that 
we have a responsibility and the resources to save it. The 
Commission is determined to do all in its power to rekindle 
the hopes that inspired the Europeans who launched the Community 
to unite the nations of Europe.
This House has always supported our efforts, sometimes with 
encouragement, sometimes with constructive criticism. We 
need you more than ever today.
You will have realized already that, when you go to the 
European hustings for the second time, you will have to do 
more than defend Parliament's track record.

- 3 -
You have achieved much and I, like the President of the 
Council, believe that your actions and the stances you have 
adopted, do honour to Europe.
But you will be expected to defend the Community's record too.
You will certainly be asked to say what the Community has done 
to sustain the hopes and allay the fears of the people of Europe. 
You will have to field all the questions that voters cannot 
direct to the proper quarter. I know it's not fair. You 
are not to blame for the Community's shortcomings. But that's 
politics!
And the people of Europe have many grounds for disquiet.
More than 12 million people in Europe are out of work today, 
twice as many as there were on the day you were first elected.
Four young people in ten have no job.
For more than ten years now the employment situation has been 
getting steadily worse and industrial structures have been 
deteriorating. We must have the courage to face up to the fact 
that recovery is still elusive, despite the first indications 
that business activity is picking up and the trend of unemployment 
levelling off.

-  A -
Is it surprising that the people of Europe should wonder 
whether the Community is capable of reviving growth and 
reducing unemployment, aware as they are of the scale of 
restructuring needed in our traditional industries - iron and 
steel, shipbuilding, chemicals, transport - to cope with pressure 
from new competitors? Is it surprising that the people of 
Europe should wonder whether they can master the new technologies 
and keep European industry in the forefront of international 
competition, aware as they are of the meagre results of 
uncoordinated efforts made by their governments?
And they have other worries. The threat to their security 
has intensified with mounting East-West tension and the 
drastic worsening of the situation in the Middle East. I  am 
forcibly reminded of Raymond Aron's bleak diagnosis of Europe's 
plight when he said that "this composite group of nations only 
recently grown to maturity, more aware of individual than 
shared destinies, is passing through a difficult phase after 
the 'glorious thirties', incapable of defending itself and 
dependent on energy and raw materials transported across seas 
whose waves it no longer rules".
This concern is legitimate. But, in a difficult period, the 
Community has at least preserved the achievements of the past 
and even made some progress.

5
Despite the world-wide crisis and despite its internal divisions, 
the Community has managed
to preserve the common market, resisting the temptation 
to resort to protectionism in the face of growing unemployment. 
In fact, real progress has been made towards enlarging the 
internal market since the Copenhagen European Council; 
to preserve the framework without which the inevitable 
restructuring of Europe's major traditional industries 
would have led to chaos;
to maintain a united front towards the outside world, 
particularly in defending its trading interests against 
its main competitors;
to preserve the common agricultural policy, protecting its 
own farmers far better from the repercussions of the crisis 
than have other OECD countries, including the United States; 
to preserve the zone of monetary stability created in 
1979 by the establishment of the EMS; and 
to agree on a common fisheries policy.
We must not denigrate the positive aspects of the Community s 
record. The fact that we have come through a difficult period 
with so much intact is a signal success, a good omen. It may 
well mean thousands, if not millions, of jobs saved, suffering 
spared, pledges of recovery honoured.
But I feel sure that the general public finds it hopelessly 
inadequate. And the fact of the matter is that even these 
modest achievements will come under threat if the Community 
persists in displaying an inability to adapt to change and face 
up to the new challenges posed by the march of time.

-  6 -
The common agricultural policy is, perhaps, the most striking 
example of this inability to adapt.
The Commission gave its diagnosis as far back as 1980. It 
warned the Council that the common agricultural policy would 
become unmanageable unless prices were radically realigned and 
some limitation placed on the guarantees given to producers of 
surpluses, which today cannot even be given away.
In 1981 the Commission presented a series of proposals which, 
had the Council accepted them, would have got things back onto an 
even keel and kept the inevitable sacrifices to a minimum.
But because of the illusory respite provided by the favourable 
trend of world prices in 1981/82, precious time was lost during 
which the imbalance on the agricultural markets grew even worse. 
Unresolved problems piled up, making the necessary decisions even 
more difficult.
The same inability to adapt is apparent in research and industrial 
cooperation.
Following discussions generated by numerous Commission proposals, 
governments do indeed now recognize the need to make better use 
of the potential offered by the European dimension to encourage 
cooperation between firms, to enlarge the internal market and 
to integrate financial markets. But years have been wasted by 
Member States promoting national champions and feeding 
intra-Community rivalry instead of exploiting their complementary 
qualities to meet outside competition.

- 7 -
The electronics industry is a prime example. Between 1976 and 
1979 Germany pumped some $ 800 million into its electronics 
industry, French electronics firms received between 
$ 500 million and $ 600 million, while the British Government 
invested over 800 million ECU in a broad programme to promote its 
information technology industry and support a national research 
and education effort.
In all, Community countries have invested more than 2 000 million ECU 
in recent years to boost their information technology industries, 
far more than Japan and the United States. But the results have 
been disappointing. Europe still lags behind - not because it 
lacks funds or ideas but because it lacks the ability to make a 
united effort. Yet whenever we have joined forces, we have been 
successful.
European industry has got the message and turned to the Community 
to devise a European strategy to master the new information 
technology. It is now almost four years since the Commission 
launched the Esprit programme, with the full and enthusiastic support 
of the industries concerned.
Despite agreement between the people who count on the research 
side, the Council is still humming and hawing, arguing the need 
for budgetary restraint. Meantime, in Japan and the United States 
government and industry have embarked on massive research 
programmes on fifth-generation computers.
I would like to think that it will not be long before agreement 
is reached. Otherwise, for no good reason, Europe will have 
missed a major opportunity and industry's confidence in the 
Community will have suffered a lasting blow.

-  8 -
Such progress as there has been has been cautious.
The European Monetary System is a jewel in the Community's 
crown. It has gradually come to play a major role in the 
alignment of economic policies.
But transition to the second phase of the EMS, originally scheduled 
for 1981, has been postponed indefinitely. There are continuing 
problems with consolidation of the system. The Council has 
not acted on the Commission's proposals, including a proposal 
to strengthen the public and private role of the ECU. We are 
still waiting for sterling to participate fully, thus completing 
much talked-of Community solidarity and strengthening the common 
exchange mechanism by extending the zone of internal stability 
and increasing its outside influence.
This slowness to act, this reluctance to adapt, this dispersal 
of national efforts add up to a crying need - the need for 
government. Europe is not governed at the moment. The Commission 
proposes, Parliament urges, and no-one decides.
This inability to take decisions, or at any rate to take them 
at the right time, is the Community's worst failing. A good 
decision is usually one taken when circumstances call for action. 
The Council's indecision has too often condemned the Community 
to doing too little, too late.
It is the unanimity rule within the Council which has upset 
the institutional balance enshrined in the Treaties, blocked 
the dynamism of the Community system and ultimately forced 
the European Council to play a very different role from that 
originally intended.

- 9 -
Over the Last three years the meetings of Heads of State and 
Government have spent more time on budget contributions - which 
merely undermined mutual confidence - than on the problems of 
relaunching Europe, reviving its industry and dealing with 
unemployment.
I must dwell - if you will allow me - on the most shocking 
aspect of the misuse of these summit meetings. Regular 
encounters between those holding supreme office in our countries 
should have given them an opportunity to create a climate of 
confidence and promote European integration. Instead of which, 
the inertia of the normal decision-making machinery, paralysed 
by the unanimity rule, has led to highly technical matters 
being placed on the European Council's agenda.
Why were our leaders unable to spend the short time taken 
out from national responsibilities defining guidelines for 
joint action? Because they were submerged on each occasion 
by petty financial squabbles and reduced to attempting to deal, 
unsuccessfully I may add, with details which should be beneath 
their notice.
This inertia and indecisiveness cannot go on. You will agree 
with me that failure at the Brussels European Council would be 
the beginning of a process of self-destruction which could sweep 
away the work of the last twenty-five years.

-  10  -
I do not wish to dramatize. I would prefer to convert you, 
calmly but firmly, to my profound conviction - which now seems 
to be shared by the European Council - that if the Brussels 
European Council fails, we cannot postpone a solution until the 
next time, as we have tended to do since the Summit of 
November 1981. Between March and June, the reality of the 
budget crisis will dawn, the European election campaign will 
be in full swing and governments will be bound by the public 
utterances of the parties that support them. Some governments 
will be tempted to abandon the reserve they have displayed since 
Athens and resort to dramatic gestures and mudslinging that 
pander to chauvinism.
The scene would be set for a political crisis which could 
lead to the break-up of the Community.
But all is not lost. It is essential, and in my view possible, 
to save the situation.
I believe that the Heads of State and Government are now aware 
of the extent to which their divisions are endangering the Community. 
The political parties and opinion leaders are aware of it too.
That is a first ray of hope for the Brussels European Council.
But there are others. There is the personal commitment of the 
President of France. He is putting his personal prestige and 
the full weight of his office at the service of the Community, 
giving unstintingly of his time and energy to reconcile 
points of view so that the Brussels European Council can cut the 
Gordian knot of the past, and lay ambitious plans for a 
revitalized Community of the future.

11
And something has been Learnt from the Athens debacle. The  
Council has responded to the Commission's pleas to return to  
the Treaty and Community procedures. I would like to think  
that this is not just lip-service, that the Council is at last  
shouldering its responsibilities; this should make the  
European Council's task easier.
Even reduced to essentials, that task is daunting. It may well  
prove too much unless progress is made by 15 March towards  
agreement on agricultural reform, which in turn is a prerequisite  
for agreement on the basic features of a new financing system,  
namely:
.  tighter budgetary discipline;
.  solutions to the budget contributions problem;
.  financing the Community of Twelve.
These three issues, inextricably linked as they are with reform 
of the common agricultural policy, form the Gordian knot which 
the European Council must cut if it is to do what really matters and 
revitalize Europe.
Several governments quite rightly regard the containment of 
farm spending as a prerequisite for raising the own resources 
ceiling.
Let me repeat what I have already said on a number of occasions.
The common agricultural policy would have had to be reformed, even 
if the ceiling had not been reached.
The production of surpluses must be contained at all costs, since 
their disposal jeopardizes the guarantees which the common 
agricultural policy can and must provide for other more marketable 
products.

-  1 2  -
The success of the common agricultural policy made some changes 
inevitable. But our failure to make any changes has put the 
Community in a financial straight jacket.
Against this background, the Commission's 1983 reform proposals 
and the associated price proposals were bound to be tough.
These proposals are not a catalogue from which one can pick and 
choose. They constitute an integrated policy designed to respond 
more flexibly to fluctuations of supply and demand, to integrate 
Community agriculture more effectively into the chain of economic 
activity upstream and downstream and to make the internal and 
external dimensions of the common agricultural policy more 
consi stent.
The decisions to be taken will not be easy, but they are urgent 
and necessary. They are imposed by circumstances but, more than 
this, they are essential if we are to create a sound basis for 
the long-term development of Europe's agricultural potential, 
ensure the well-being of our farmers, as the Treaty requires us 
to do, and breathe new life into the common agricultural policy.
Frankly, I am very worried about the lack of progress within 
the Council and the Agriculture Ministers' statements that they

- 13 -
will probably be forced to refer the dossier to the European 
Council. If the European Council is to Lay solid foundations 
for a new financing system Agriculture Ministers must reach a 
decision. The first element of this system is tighter budgetary 
discipline.
The Commission has just sent a communication to the Council 
restating its earlier proposals and adding some interesting 
elements which emerged in discussions.
The Commission's aim is threefold:
to make each year's budget an expression of policy 
priorities and an instrument for stringent management 
of the Community's finances, and, to this end, 
introduce new intei— institutional conciliation in 
advance of the budgetary procedure proper;
.  to defend Parliament's budgetary powers and its own right 
of initiative to the full;

- U  -
.  to streamline the budgetary procedure so as to obviate 
disputes between the two arms of the budgetary authority.
I am convinced that the Council can reach agreement on the 
basis of Commission's proposals.
If I am right, the problem of the future financing of the 
Community and the problem of budget contributions would finally 
be set in a context conducive to overall agreement.
The Commission will adopt its position on both issues before 
the General Affairs Council meets on 20 and 21 February.
I won't go into the details of the proposals we intend to 
put to the Counci l.
I will, however, spell out the principles which have guided 
us.

- 15 -
We feel that once the Member States are convinced that Community 
finances will be strictly managed, once they can be persuaded 
that the uncontrolled expansion of farm spending has been 
checked, they will be obliged to take steps to guarantee 
long-term, stable financing of the enlarged Community at a level 
which will allow of the development of the common policies.
I have no doubt that the current ceiling on own resources will 
be raised. I recognize that it is unlikely to be abolished - as 
we and you would like - since virtually all the Member States 
are opposed to the idea.
This being so, the Commission will insist on the new ceiling 
being set high enough to offer a genuine prospect of revitalizing 
the Community and offering a guarantee of budgetary peace for 
at least ten years.
The Commission is not prepared to accept the constant threat of 
own resources running out as an alternative to stringent 
budgetary management. Nor is it prepared to see the 
Community's credibility eroded by the need to run cap in hand, 
again and again, to national parliaments.
As to the budget contributions problem, the Commission wants 
the solutions found:
.  to be in keeping with Community principles - which rules 
out any idea of a "fair return";
.  to be equitable, in other words, to reflect Member States' 
ability to pay and their legitimate desire to know what their 
annual bill will be;

-  16  -
.  to be Lasting. The Commission considers that any solution 
to the budget contributions problem should run for the 
same period as new own resources.
The European Council can reach agreement on these three basic 
elements of the new financing system if the Agriculture Ministers 
do their homework, making it possible for the European Council to 
take a decision and, above all, if the Heads of State and 
Government come to Brussels determined to lay the foundations 
for a revitalized Community.
Agreement on agricultural reform and future financing would 
give the green light for enlargement and finally allow a date 
to be fixed for winding up negotiations with Spain and Portugal.
But the containment of farm spending, the restoration of budgetary 
peace, even enlargement, are merely preliminaries. They will not 
be enough. Reform has to be matched by a blueprint for 
revitalizing the Community to which the Brussels European 
Council must give its blessing. It cannot be expected to 
spell out all the details but it must chart the course. That's 
its job.
We must
.  provide European agriculture with new horizons, going beyond 
long-overdue reform;
.  organize joint action to restore Europe's status as an 
industrial and technological power;

17 -
.  provide the instruments for economic and social convergence 
so that we can join forces to fight the unemployment which is 
undermining our societies;
.  find better ways and means of working together to develop 
the less prosperous regions of the Community;
.  affirm Europe's role in the world and, if necessary, assume 
responsibility for directing international efforts to combat 
under-development and hunger. The negotiations for a new 
Lomé Convention have already begun and we must bear in mind 
that, if the Community founders, it will take with it the 
novel form of development cooperation we have devised to assist 
the countries of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific.
The Commission has already made proposals on all of these points 
and many of them could be implemented fairly quickly, for there 
is greater consensus within the Community on where we are going 
than on how we are to get there.
If the Brussels European Council can get the Community moving 
again - and I hope it can - it will have little difficulty in 
formulating guidelines for the future and launching a debate 
on its President's ideas on new activities for second-generation 
Europe.

-  18  -
If the Brussels European Council fails, it will be clearer 
than ever before that we have been treating the symptoms, 
not the disease. We will have to address the basic questions 
which nobody even dared to ask before the first enlargement:
What sort of Community do we want? How far are we prepared to 
follow the logic of the Treaties?
And we will have to answer them before any attempt is made to 
pick up the pieces yet again. Because failure in Brussels 
would bring us face to face with a yawning gulf between the 
goals of the European venture and the willingness of the 
Member States to work to attain them.
European integration has never been just a matter of economic 
necessity. Purely economic considerations could have led us to 
opt for dependence in foreign policy and a subordinate role on 
the world stage. The European venture does not stop with the 
creation of an economic area, with a single market, a common 
customs tariff and a common agricultural policy.
The Treaty of Rome had much more in mind. Its primary objective, 
from which the rest follows, is "to lay the foundations of an 
ever closer union among the peoples of Europe." Note that it 
says "peoples". Not trade, economic policies, exchange rates, 
or industrial strategies. No, it says peoples. And this means 
political union in the sense that a political entity is a concrete 
expression of the freedom and identity of a society or a group 
of societies; in the sense that a society or a group of 
societies accepts as one of its basic objectives the attainment 
of internal harmony through solidarity and external independence 
through a defence capability.

- 19 -
But why wait for the Brussels European Council. I would urge you 
here and now, on the Commission's behalf, to seize the opportunity 
offered by the European election campaign to remind opinion 
leaders in the Community of the political goals of the European 
venture.
There is a clear link between this and your campaign for European 
union and genuine reform of the Community's institutions and 
decision-making machinery.
It is fashionable in certain quarters to be sceptical about this 
issue, which is seen as the hobby-horse of those who are nostalgic 
for the early days, for those who have yet to understand that 
economic efficiency has nothing to do with the sterile 
institutional debates of yesteryear.
It is to Parliament's credit that it has resisted this fashion.
It is patently wrongheaded to believe that the Community can 
progress until such time as decision-making becomes more efficient 
and democratic. This has been demonstrated again and again.
And I have quoted numerous examples which show that, as things 
now stand, the institutions' inability to take decisions is 
disastrous and damaging.

-  20  -
We must face the fact that, unless something is done, the 
admission of new Member States can only make matters worse.
We cannot go on pretending to discover the institutional 
problem each time new members join and then concentrate on the 
arithmetic - the size of the new Commission for example.
As if that really mattered!
What is important is that the Community as such should be able 
to embark on the implementation of programmes and schemes in 
the common interest, selected and approved in an efficient, 
democratic manner. In a word, the Community needs to be 
governed. This is the crux of the matter, and a solution is 
clearly a long way off. Those of us who appreciate how much 
is at stake must unite to push through the necessary reforms as 
quickly as possible.
The Commission must recover the means to play the role and exercise 
the powers conferred on it by the Treaties to the full. Its 
right of initiative will remain devoid of substance as long as 
it takes only one Member State to veto a decision. And of 
course the Commission's management powers must also be widened.
Parliament's role in decision-making is not commensurate with 
the legitimacy the direct elections gave it. Parliament is an 
expression of the deep-rooted aspirations of the people of Europe. 
As such, it should have a much larger say in policy-making. I  
would like to see it sharing legislative and budgetary powers 
with the Counci l.

-  21  -
Unless a balance of power is restored, cooperation will go ahead 
outside the Community context - which is regarded as hidebound 
and inflexible. The European election campaign will provide 
us with a golden opportunity of bringing the debate out into 
the open. But it will be difficult to interest the general 
public in an extremely esoteric discussion unless the fundamental 
significance of the European idea is driven home.
While you are doing your utmost to motivate public opinion, 
the Commission will be involved in intensive negotiations. The 
Commission has done its duty which, in many cases, has meant 
proposing tough and hence unpopular measures. The year ahead 
may well bring further difficult choices in the area of budget 
management.
You know that this year we have our backs to the wall and little 
room for manoeuvre. The Commission will keep you abreast of 
developments and, at all events, I will be reporting to this 
House on the Brussels European Council. Clearly, if no decisions 
have been taken by then to ensure the financing of agricultural 
expenditure, the Commission will eventually be forced to propose 
appropriate action, however harsh, to the budgetary authority.

-  22  -
We must all do our duty and do it quickly. There is no time 
to lose. There has been enough procrastination.
It will be for you, during the European election campaign, to 
explain how a higher goal can be achieved by accepting immediate 
sacrifices. It will be for you to argue convincingly for "union 
among the peoples of Europe". It will be for you to demonstrate 
that where there's a will there's a way, that our shared destiny, 
rooted in the past, can help us overcome our present differences.
At a time when Europe's economic recovery is shaky, a revitalized 
Community could play a decisive part in restoring confidence.
Economic performance is one of the most reliable indicators of 
a nation's intrinsic vitality. But economic performance alone 
cannot explain or sustain that vitality. The people of Europe 
share the same culture. Their social, economic and political 
institutions - as Tocqueville noted more than a century ago - 
are very similar. It is from this that they must draw new 
vigour. With their history, culture, learning and institutions 
to support them, the people of Europe are still perfectly 
capable of meeting the challenges of the crisis, outside 
competition, and an uncertain world. But they need to tap 
their intrinsic vitality, pool their efforts, and create 
institutions that match their aspirations. Decline is not 
inevitable. We may have become inward-looking, we may be 
suffering from a lack of vision, but we can fight these ills 
together, each in our own way. That, after all, is what our 
institutions are for.