- For general changes to the treaty involving Part Three of the Treaty of Rome (covering the

internal workings of the union) that do not include new competencies, an Inter-governmental
conference is not reuired - this is the often descri!ed "self-amending" part of the treaty#
$mendments however do still have to !e approved !y all mem!er states# (The %passarrelle
clause&)# ($rticle '( in )aastricht I think)
The most crucial part here is the area of "competencies". These are basically the discrete areas in which the
state acts. Where a competence is 'exclusive', legislation can only be made in this area after the EU gives
permission. Where it is 'shared' it allows the member state to legislate at will albeit within already existing
legislation! until and unless the EU interferes. The idea of 'shared' competence sounds li"e it leaves a lot of
power to the member state. #t does not.
"$hared" competencies only exist in order to ensure that the EU does not have to micromanage. The de facto
power rests with %russels as it can, at any time, override the member state's intentions. The very word "shared"
is a misnomer. &nd it has a corollary in the principle of 'subsidarity', enshrined in the Treaty of 'ome.
( 'esearch
( Technological )evelopment
( $pace
( #nternational development * humanitarian aid explained in paragraph +!.
, That paltry list of four items are the -./0 areas where the member state can resist the EU1 even then it has
'standard' competence to act1 i.e. it can interfere up until the point the member state refuses to comply.
Ta"e the 2lobal 3ompetitiveness 'eport, published by the World Economic 4orum WE4!. There the U5 has
fallen from 6th to 78th in the ran"ings. We have been overta"en by developed nations such as $weden,
2ermany, 9apan and the .etherlands.
0es, the WE4 highlights some strengths in the U5 economy today: the efficiency of its labour mar"et ran"ed
;th!, the si<e of its mar"et =th!, and the adeptness of business in harnessing new technologies.
%ut these positives are undermined by a dreadful record in government macro(economic management: ran"ed
68nd of 7>? on wastefulness of government spending1 ;?th for the burden of government regulation1 ?@th for the
Aeffects and extentB of taxation1 7C;th for government debt1 and 776th for the government budget balance.
The second Dudge on our EpanelF is the World 3ompetitiveness 0earboo" published by the #nstitute for
Ganagement )evelopment. They say that the U5 has fallen from ?th to 88nd out of @?!, being overta"en by
Taiwan, Hatar, Galaysia and #srael.
This is in part due to our recent poor AEconomic IerformanceB, although the U5 is still 7+th overall on this criteria
down from 6th in 8CC6!.
Gore significantly, the U5 suffers from relatively poor E2overnment efficiencyF 8=th! and E%usiness efficiencyF
8;th! J a reflection of both the unproductive nature of the government sector, and the burden of regulation on
business.
The third member of the EtribunalF is the #ndex of World Economic 4reedom published by the Keritage
4oundation. #t says that the U5 moved from @th to 7=th between 7??6 and 8C77 overta"en by countries
including %ahrain, 3hile, Gauritius and Estonia!.
This index mar"s the U5 amongst the worldBs freest nations in terms of #nvestment 4reedom 8nd!, 4inancial
4reedom +th! and %usiness 4reedom ;th!. These high positions are undermined, however, by a lac" of 4iscal
7=?th!, 2overnment 7@=th! and Gonetary 4reedoms ?>th!, as a result of the high budget deficit, the burden of
taxes and high levels of government spending.
3ommon threads run through all these Dudgements. -n the plus side, the U5 is an established, mature mar"et,
which is easy to invest in, which is creative and which is open for business. %ut, far more worrying are the
negatives: over the past 7+ years the U5 has become hampered by excessive regulation, higher and higher
taxes and appalling management of the public finances.