The European Council at Cardiff was short on dramatic innovation but nevertheless a good illustration of the reality that European integration is a perpetual work in progress. No less than five summit meetings will be held over the next year arising from its decisions, as the Austrians and then the Germans take over from the British EU presidency. The agenda is full of issues involving core national interests. It is also dedicated to stimulating the attention and commitment of citizens widely perceived by their leaders to be alienated from this emerging system of internationalised government.
Three major themes come through the Cardiff discussions. First of all it has reminded everyone concerned that the forthcoming negotiations on Agenda 2000 will be a bruising encounter. As the EU prepares to enlarge it must settle its financial framework for the next period, including expenditure on the Common Agricultural Policy, structural and cohesion funds and pre-accession aid for potential future member-states. Germany and other net contributors to the EU budget have laid down firm markers from this meeting that they want their payments diminished, while Ireland, Spain and other net beneficiaries argue for continuation of the commitment to cohesion and solidarity.
Ireland's rapid economic growth has not escaped attention and will be used to justify arguments that cuts in transfers must be made despite the undoubted remaining infrastructure deficit between this State and its most developed partners. The Cardiff outcome is a balanced compromise from the Irish point of view, but pregnant with sharp encounters to come.
The second major theme concerns the nature and legitimacy of the political process involved in European integration. As the summit conclusions put it, "a sustained effort is needed by the member-states and all the institutions to bring the Union closer to people by making it more open, more understandable and more relevant to daily life". Action on greater openness and progress on environment and justice and home affairs are identified as fulfilling some of these needs. But as has also been recognised there is a need to develop the Union in ways that should make it more democratically acceptable and closer to its citizens.
It is proposed to tackle the institutional questions not resolved in the Amsterdam Treaty, such as more majority voting, the balance between smaller and larger member-states and representation on the Commission, soon after it is ratified. And on a separate track a discussion has been opened up on how to bring the EU closer to citizens and to focus it on issues that matter most to them. This is a valuable and timely exercise, not marred at Cardiff by premature or dogmatic positions on such questions as the power and role of the Commission. As Mr Ahern pointed out, many reforms are possible without changing the treaty; this emerging discussion should allow suggestions to be considered in what must be recognised as an unprecedented international exercise in governing.
The third major theme from Cardiff concerns the United Kingdom's role in Europe. "Compare and contrast" the Blair government's approach to that of its Conservative predecessors, urged his spokesman at Cardiff. It is hard to resist this logic. The theme of economic and institutional reform has united the member-states in timely fashion under Mr Blair's tutelage, without the hubris that could so easily have undermined such a British initiative. Cardiff was also the occasion for an important affirmation by Mr Blair of how the euro can bring growth and stability to an international economy increasingly troubled by Asian turbulence - a welcome signal that the UK will be willing to join when conditions are right.