WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2601/97 by Bill MILLER to the Commission. Enlargement of the Union
Date: 1997-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, MILLER
Subjects: Central and Eastern Europe, EU financing, Treaty on European Union, accession to the European Union, aid system, enlargement of the Union, institutional reform

3. 4. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 102/69

(98/C 102/101)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2600/97

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Enlargement of the Union

Does the Commission think that the Amsterdam Treaty was a success?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 1997)

The Amsterdam Treaty marks the beginning of a new stage in the Community’s history. Important progress has
been made in laying the foundations for a more democratic, more humane Europe.

The  Treaty  meets  the  Commission’s  aspirations  on  a  number  of  very  important  issues:  employment,  social
affairs, justice and home affairs, the role of Parliament, and the Union and its citizens.

However it is disappointing with regard to the extension of majority voting in the Council and two other issues
which are dealt with in an institutional protocol annexed to the Treaty, namely the size of the Commission after
enlargement and the distribution of votes in the Council.

Lastly, the Amsterdam Treaty constitutes yet another step towards the unification of Europe and paves the way
for the next round of enlargement. However, action needs to be taken in good time to strengthen the institutions
and  improve  the  way  they  work,  as  the  protocol  referred  to  above  points  out.  In  (cid:145)Agenda  2000(cid:146) (1)  the
Commission  stated  that  certain  problems  required  rapid  solution  in  order  to  facilitate  decisions  about
enlargement.

(1)  Doc. COM(97) 2000 final.

(98/C 102/102)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2601/97

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Enlargement of the Union

As a result of the barriers to enlargement caused by the absence of institutional reform in the Amsterdam Treaty,
does the Commission agree that the monies earmarked to assist Central and Eastern European countries towards
accession to the European Union should be granted over a longer period of time?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(6 October 1997)

The Commission refers to its reply given to the Honourable Member(cid:146)s written question 2599/97 (1). In its Agenda
2000  report,  the  Commission  drew  attention  to  the  importance  of  strengthening  the  institutions  and  their
functioning in good time, as foreseen by the protocol on the future of the institutions annexed to the draft treaty.

The task to accomplishing the necessary institutional reforms complicates the enlargement process, but does not
necessarily delay it. The length of the pre-accession periods will depend primarily on the success of the efforts
that  each  candidate  country  is  willing  and  able  to  make  in  their  preparations  for  membership.  Through  its
proposals for a reinforced pre-accession strategy, including accession partnerships and a doubling of financial
assistance,  the  Commission  has  demonstrated  its  commitment  to  providing  all  candidates  with  necessary
assistance in this task.

(1)  See page 68.