The future of the EURATOM Treaty

1. The EURATOM Treaty : past and present

The European Atomic Energy Community was originally established in 1957 for two reasons: firstly, the contracting states (F, I, D, Benelux) saw nuclear energy as the energy of the future, promising growth, prosperity and security of supply in Europe; secondly, it was regarded as an instrument, and the hinge, of further European integration.

The primary objective of the EURATOM Treaty is the promotion of nuclear energy. That includes:

• promotion of research;
• dissemination of information;
• support for investment;
• creation of a common market;
• supply of nuclear fuels to users.

The EURATOM Treaty includes further elements of the partial ‘communitarisation’ of nuclear energy policy:

• the assignment to the Community of the sole right of ownership and option with respect to all fissile materials used for civil purposes (the implementing body being the Supply Agency set up under the EURATOM Treaty);
• protection against misuse of fissile materials for military purposes;
• exclusive right of the Community to conclude supply contracts with third countries;
• laying down of ‘basic standards’ to protect workers and local citizens against the effects of ionising radiation.

In contrast to the EC treaty, the EURATOM Treaty has never been substantially amended. However, the framework within which the European Atomic Energy Community operates has changed significantly over the past five decades. Furthermore, a number of inherent shortcomings have to date not been eliminated.

• Fundamental changes have been made to the institutional structure. The European Parliament now enjoys similar powers in a European context to those asserted by national parliaments. However, the EURATOM Treaty does not grant any powers of codecision to the European Parliament, only an advisory role. The Treaty does not lay down any formal obligation for the Council to consult Parliament on relevant matters. Moreover, pursuant to Article 101 of the EURATOM Treaty, Parliament does not have a right to be consulted on international agreements.
• The EURATOM Treaty leaves many important issues open: for example, there are no provisions on issues as important as safety of installations or waste disposal and final storage.
• Crucial provisions of the Treaty have either not been implemented or have only been implemented in part (for example, Chapter VI and Chapter VIII on the right of ownership; furthermore, the Supply Agency has never assumed the role envisaged for it).

What has not changed is the need for a coordinated European policy on energy issues. The signing of the Kyoto Protocol by the European Union points for the way forward for policy. It is time for a new debate on energy at the European level, in the light of climate change, with a view to developing a sustainable energy policy strategy. This should culminate in Community efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

II. Options for reform of the EURATOM Treaty

The Convention offers an opportunity to adapt the structure and substance of the EURATOM Treaty to future conditions and requirements.

The following scenarios are possible:

1. Status quo: the Treaty to be retained in its current form

Based on the inertia principle: difficult to justify, but would involve accepting the shortcomings of the Treaty because of a failure to reach a consensus.

2. Introduction of the codecision procedure

It would seem generally more appropriate to introduce the right of codecision in principle, with the possibility of allowing exceptions in certain areas, rather than making only individual matters subject to the codecision procedure.

This would, of course, apply inter alia to specific programmes under the EU's research budget (for the period 2002-2006 the budget for the EURATOM framework programme amounts to EUR 1 230 million); the consultation procedure currently applies.

3. Extending the Treaty

Issues such as nuclear safety and waste disposal would be incorporated into the Treaty. There are currently no provisions on methods of construction and operation of installations and no uniform European safety standards; the Treaty only lays down rules regarding health and safety at work and the impact on local citizens. It is the responsibility of the Member States to lay down their safety requirements. In two resolutions on nuclear safety issues (722/75 and 618/92) and at the Laeken Summit the Council has recognised the need for coordination and cooperation. Standardisation achieved to date under international agreements and under the ‘best practices’ approach is insufficient. (The Commission has prepared a draft directive on the monitoring of highly active radiation sources, which was due to be submitted following the summer recess.) European regulations are also needed in the area of waste disposal and intermediate and final storage. The lack of provisions is becoming an important issue in the light of enlargement to the east.

4. Transforming the EURATOM Treaty into an Energy Treaty

An Energy Treaty would also include other forms of energy production such as renewable energy sources. Climate policy and meeting the Kyoto objectives should form the cornerstones of the Treaty. Climate change is one of the main dangers facing our society, given that it threatens our very existence.

The European Union has, rightly, been leading the way in pursuing an active climate policy and has undertaken to reduce its emissions by 8 % by 2010. Precise provisions on the issue of security of supply could also be laid down in an Energy Treaty.

A relevant Energy Chapter is a possible alternative to an Energy Treaty; the Treaty could be included in the annex.

5. Repeal

The EURATOM Treaty would be revoked.

This solution, which on the face of it would appear to be the simplest, would have consequences which need to be considered. It would inevitably lead to renationalisation of nuclear policy (for example, as regards ownership rights). Moreover, coordination in the area of waste disposal or safety between Member States would be prevented or made more difficult.

III. Conclusions

The Convention should concern itself with the revision of the EURATOM Treaty in the interests of consistency, transparency and democracy.

Following the expiry of the ECSC Treaty on 23 July 2002, the EURATOM Treaty is the only Treaty which does not come within the European Union Treaty framework.

The minimum aim must be to make the Treaty more democratic and, consequently, to lay down provisions on the participation of the European Parliament. There are also very strong grounds for extending the Treaty to include the areas of nuclear safety and disposal of nuclear waste.

A forward-looking approach, and one which would confront the challenges facing us today, would be to transform the Treaty into a European Energy or Climate Treaty, which must also include renewable energy sources. The dominant theme running through such an Energy Treaty, and at the same time its justification, would be climate policy under the Kyoto regime. This would give new relevance and purpose to the EURATOM Treaty, which currently appears in part anachronistic.

Irrespective of these options, it is necessary at all events to basically ‘clean up’ the Treaty.

It would be appropriate to initiate a new energy debate at European level. The setting up of a working group to assist the Convention in its preparatory work could represent an important contribution.