EU:The new agreement is no longer to be a constitution but a "reform treaty", amending two existing treaties. Symbols such as the EU anthem, Beethoven's Ode to Joy, would be removed. The job of EU foreign minister would be renamed. There would be no article declaring that EU law has primacy. There would be stronger powers and more time for parliaments to scrutinise EU laws and a new article saying that EU competences could be reduced. States would be offered a mechanism to opt out of new justice laws.
The five major sticking points
The voting system: In most areas, new EU laws are approved when a "qualified majority" of states agree. Poland was threatening to come to the summit with the slogan "square root or die", but is now showing signs of compromise. Warsaw is concerned that the proposed "double majority" system, which is based principally on population size, would undermine its voting power vis-a-vis big states such as Germany. Instead it proposes a system based on the square root of populations, which it claims is fairer to medium-sized countries.
Foreign affairs: Britain raised last-minute objections to measures boosting the EU's role in foreign affairs at a meeting last Sunday. Under pressure from a Eurosceptic public and media, London worries that its distinctive role in foreign affairs, including its seat on the UN Security Council, could eventually be undermined
A German proposal would change the title of the proposed new "EU foreign affairs minister", giving it a title that does not impinge on national sovereignty. It would also issue a declaration to accompany the text clarifying the EU's role in an attempt to mollify London. This is a contentious point with other states.
Charter of Fundamental Rights: The charter, which sets out a range of EU citizens' rights, was incorporated into the constitution and made legally binding. It is based on the fundamental rights and freedoms already recognised by the European Convention on Human Rights. Britain fears that it could extend the right to strike and thinks it makes a new treaty look constitutional. The Germans have proposed removing it from the new treaty but including a cross-reference to the charter, which would make it legally binding.
London opposes this and wants to remove it completely. It may seek an opt-out from the legally binding nature of the charter during the negotiations. Enlargement criteria: Both France and the Netherlands blamed the failed referendums on the constitution in 2005 on enlargement fatigue among the public. The Dutch want to toughen up the rules - called the Copenhagen criteria - that candidates must meet before they join the union by enshrining them within the new treaty.
Legal experts warn that including the rules within the text would give the European Court of Justice, rather than EU leaders, the power to decide whether a state can join the union.
Many new member states vociferously oppose the Dutch proposal as they want membership extended to the Balkans and Ukraine. A reference to enlargement criteria is also seen as a possible snub to Turkey, and is therefore opposed by Britain.
Justice and police co-operation: Britain has said it will not support any provision within the treaty that could threaten its common law system. Under the constitution Britain and Ireland both obtained a safeguard in the form of an "emergency brake" procedure enabling them to delay particular EU justice proposals. But London argues this does not go far enough. Ireland may also support these moves because it does not want to lose its biggest common law ally in the EU.
A compromise is likely that would enable Britain and possibly Ireland to opt out on a case by case basis.