SEA, EMU, EPU, Maastricht Treaty, Nice Treaty, Amsterdam Treaty

Question 1

Context of SEA

Answer 1

Stagnation in the 1980s
1. Mass unemployment, especially in the UK and France, led to political instability.
2. Snake did not work.
3. Commission proposals for harmonisation were blocked 4. British Budgetary Question.

Question 2

Why the SEA

Answer 2

Pressures to move towards single market:
1.. Judicial activism ECJ. ECJ has mutual recognition as principle which leads to race to the bottom  product quality in other markets decreases which creates pressure on politicians because mutual recognition undermines the idea of them being able to block low quality products coming into their country.
2. EEC losing competitiveness to US and Japan, foreign investors disappear so idea for need for single market so they don’t fall behind
3. Convergence of preferences of big 3
Economic problems in these countries. Leads in UK and Germany to shift to neoliberal governments. French socialist economic policy fails.
4. Elite alliance:
Increasing interest of transnational interest groups. European and American big exporters pushing for single market.
European parliament;
Kangaroo Club: trade to jump over borders
Altiero Spinelli: communist turned social democrat, former commissioner and MEP
Crocodile club (federalists) headed by Spinelli

Question 3

British Budgetary Question

Answer 3

Thatcher felt that UK was being treated unfairly in terms of funding European Communities. UK imported more goods from Commonwealth, EC was funded partly by tariffs on external goods so she felt that they mostly contributed to EC budget and only French colonies got preferential access. UK also has low wage taxes and high VAT, EC also funded by VAT. UK has small and efficient farming sector, so comparatively they got far less out of the CAP than other member states. This was solved in the Fountainebleau 1984 meeting.

Question 4

Fountainebleau summit

Answer 4

Turning point in European integration
1. Fixed the BBQ
2. Ad hoc committee Spinelli on institutional affairs
3. Introduction of QMV in EC

Question 5

How was the SEA set up

Answer 5

During IGC to see what was necessary to achieve single market. The intention of the SEA appeared relatively modest, seeking to complete the objective of a common market set out in the Treaty of Rome, with an important role for cohesion funds. The issue of monetary union as an accompaniment to the single market was not addressed at this stage of developments. New European Commission; President Jacques Delors: former banker turned socialist, former finance minister proposed SEA
Side payments in the form of cohesion funds to smaller member states

Question 6

Why was the EMU set up/context of the EMU

Answer 6

Momentum of the SEA, there was a desire to make more happen. There were two divergent camps on this; the monetarists vs the economists. The collapse of the USSR and Berlin Wall plus the unification of Germany caused political instability, so there was also a need to reaffirm Germany’s commitment towards European integration

Question 7

Monetarists vs economists

Answer 7

Monetaris (France and Italy) believed that once a single currency got implemented, economies would automatically converge and that central banks need political guidance.
Economists (Germany and The Netherlands) believed that economies needed to converge before a single currency could be implemented. Central banks needed to be fully independent.

Question 8

How would the EMU get set up

Answer 8

Delors report 1989 with three stages:
1. removal of remaining barriers to flow of capital and central bank independence
2. convergence
From snake (EMS) to ERM I to ERM II
Stability and Growth Pact to restrict government deficit and debt
3. Euro
Opt-outs for UK, Denmark and Sweden

Question 9

Positions on EMU Germany

Answer 9

Germany: Used to have fear of stronger currency disappearing and did not want to be linked to weaker economies in Europe. Because of changes in world politics such as collapse of USSR, Kohl understands as a chancellor of unified Germany and being from CDU to give up resistance and show commitment to European integration

Question 10

Position on EMU France

Answer 10

In favour in order to benefit from single currency due to weaker currency at that moment and getting linked to Germany

Question 11

Positon on EMU UK

Answer 11

Didn’t want it due to nationalism and didn’t want to give up their currency. Not in favour of political cooperation and just wanted the benefits of the SEA. A Treaty too far.

Question 12

Context of/why EPU

Answer 12

European Political Union on common foreign policy. Collapse of Berlin Wall, unification of Germany and collapse of USSR –> political instability. Question was of how to deal jointly with the USSR collapse. It was a volatile period because of countries attempting to set up democracies.

Question 13

Positions on EPU

Answer 13

Germany and France: in favour due to all the changes in political system
UK: change of PM from Thatcher to Major who saw a point in foreign policy coordination due to USSR collapse. Not in favour of a supranationalist organisation, but willing to cooperate.

Question 14

Maastricht Treaty

Answer 14

1992: Change from European Communities to European Union –> Maastricht temple with three pillars
Also EPU and EMU

Question 15

First pillar of Maastricht temple

Answer 15

1. European Communities:
   Supranational. Policy areas are common market, CAP, environmental policies, cohesion funds and legal basis steps for EMU. Voting through QMV. Falls under co-decision which is good for the powers of the Commission, EP and ECJ

Question 16

Second pillar of Maastricht temple

Answer 16

Common Foreign and Security Policy
Foreign, security and defence policy, subjected to NATO obligations.
Intergovernmental: Unanimity needed in the Council and a limited role for Commission, EP (only consultation) and ECJ.

Question 17

Third pillar Maastricht temple

Answer 17

Justice and Home Affairs
Judicial and police cooperation, EU citizenship, coordination migration and asylum policy.
Intergovernmental: Unanimity needed in the Council and a limited role for Commission, EP (only consultation) and ECJ

Question 18

Aftermath of Maastricht Treaty

Answer 18

Big convergence problems, especially for the Stability and Growth pact. Government debt of 60% of GDP was doable but government deficit of 3% was hard to get.
Austria, Sweden and Finland join EU.
Sufficient progress to move towards finalisation of EU.
Founding of European Central Bank
Greece joining EMU
Denmark referendum with low turnout and 52% no and second referendum with higher turnout and yes vote.
Mitterand, French President is in weak position, also does referendum. Very small yes, which weakens his position even more due to large amount of no’s.
British Euroscepticism

Question 19

Context/why Treaty of Amsterdam

Answer 19

Enlargement issues because a lot of countries wanted to join the EU which caused troubles with balance in QMV voting. Their economic output was way lower, lot of money going from west to east/south. No full on democracies and having all EU laws apply to them.
Decision-making capacity issues in pillar 2: the Kissinger/Xi Jinping problem (who do we call for Europe), moving to QMV if there’s so many member states
Decision-making capacity issues in pillar 3: no more border controls, QMV issue again
Ratification fears lead to modesty –> how much can we do without upsetting people (national)
Srebrenica massacre strained EU power legitimacy
Mobilisation before signing of Treaty - Integration by stealth (elitist project, below the radar of citizens/national politicians) + neoliberal agenda = protests
Trouble of presidents in big 3

Question 20

Positions on Treaty of Amsterdam (CFSP)

Answer 20

Germany and France in favour of cooperation to deal with struggles of collapse of USSR. They also don’t mind giving away power to a common European representative.
UK doesn’t want to give away powers.
Portugal and Finland neutral, fear of not being able to stay neutral with CFSP.

Question 21

Positions on Treaty of Amsterdam (JHA)

Answer 21

Germany sees benefits of it since they’re on the border. France not opposed but doesn’t want to move things to supranational pillar to retain veto. UK generally Eurosceptical. Other countries not a fan.

Question 22

Positions on Treaty of Amsterdam (social policy)

Answer 22

Germany/UK liberal and more competitive so not too keen, do realise some politicisation would be good. France and Nordic countries more in favour due to better welfare state.

Question 23

Positions on Treaty of Amsterdam (institutional reform)

Answer 23

All big countries against due to more power and otherwise power goes down
UK in favour because it wants to get enlargement done because it will slow integration

Question 24

Outcomes of the Treaty of Amsterdam (CFSP)

Answer 24

High representative. Not gonna give up QMV, if there’s a group of EU countries who wanna do something together they can do it under the EU with opt-in.

Question 25

Outcomes of the Treaty of Amsterdam (JHA)

Answer 25

JHA stuff moved to first pillar, but asylum/migration will remain veto and opt-outs

Question 26

Outcomes of the Treaty of Amsterdam (social policy)

Answer 26

Protocol in treaty, non-binding (OMC; naming and shaming but no enforcement)

Question 27

Outcomes of the Treaty of Amsterdam (institutional reform)

Answer 27

EP co-decision extended
No reform on QMV/Commission reform

Question 28

Context of/why Treaty of Nice

Answer 28

Treaty that happened because they couldn’t agree on things that happened in Amsterdam
1999 member states start negotiating about conditions for joining, which gives more pressure to find solutions for issues from Amsterdam Treaty. Is about:
1. Extend QMV (taxation, migration etc.)
2. Fix Commission size
3. Fix EP size
4. Fix QMV weighting
5. Differentiated integration (countries entering, not ready for some parts of EU, being able to let countries legally integrate at a different speed as the rest)

Question 29

Maintenance Treaty

Answer 29

1996 IGC on Maintenance Treaty:
1. More social benefits for citizens
2. Improve decision-making/capacity
3. Expand capacity for external action