The European and Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives yesterday debated and unanimously expressed itself in favour of the EU's Lisbon Treaty after a motion calling for the ratification of the treaty was moved by Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi.

Foreign Minister Michael Frendo described the treaty as a second attempt by the European Union to resolve the problem of how to regulate itself to be more effective and efficient to face current challenges and for Europe to become a stronger and more effective global player.

The Lisbon treaty, he said, reflected a lot of the points in the Constitutional Treaty. It was the fruit of the experiences which the EU had gone through and the result of the Dutch and French 'no' to the Constitutional Treaty.

Through this treaty, the EU had returned to its original method of amending existing treaties, in this case, the Nice treaty. The Lisbon treaty would give the EU a juridical personality, a more efficient decision-making process and more powers to the European Parliament.

This was an important treaty for Malta because it guaranteed the country its sixth seat in the European Parliament as from the next EP elections. This would enable it to be represented in at least another two committees of the Parliament.

The treaty would also be improving the people's participation in the EU, giving ordinary citizens the possibility to initiate legislation. There were also greater powers to National Parliaments and a system of double majority voting in the institutions. The minister said that the treaty was also merging the roles of the External Affairs Commissioner and the High Commissioner for Foreign Affairs.

Dr Frendo said that in this treaty Malta was retaining all the derogations it had been allowed during the talks on the Constitution.

He pointed out that all the articles in the Constitutional Treaty referring to symbols, the flag and the hymn were removed, thus steering the EU away from federalism. The proposed EU foreign minister was being replaced with a European High Representative.

This, Dr Frendo said, was a treaty which Europe needed so that it could become stronger, and the world needed a strong Europe.

The opposition's spokesman on the EU, George Vella, said that this was a rehash of the debate held by the Maltese Parliament to ratify the constitutional treaty. The past two to three years had been difficult for the EU, and at one point there had been fears that what had been built over the years would be destroyed.

A lot of work had been done by the German Presidency so that the EU could achieve what was now being debated.

He said that not much had changed in so far as Malta was concerned.

The Lisbon Treaty had removed everything which had a semblance of federalism in the draft constitution, such as the EU flag and hymn. The Lisbon Treaty was, however, also giving new impetus to important issues such as climate and energy.

He said if the treaty was ratified, it should take the EU to the next decade. However, certain possibilities - such as Turkish membership of the EU, were not provided for.

The treaty however moved towards greater democracy, giving the people a greater role, such as presenting petitions to the EU to take certain actions. It also gave member states the right to leave the EU. Dr Vella stressed that this was not the MLP's intention for Malta.

This, however was a very democratic article which emphasised each state's sovereignty. He said that the MLP was now committed to the EU and the fight between the political parties was on who could get the most out of membership for Malta.

Dr Vella said that the treaty simplified the decision-making process, reserving the need for unanimity solely to issues of taxation, foreign affairs, defence and social security.

Replying to a question by Labour MP Leo Brincat, the minister agreed that there was a general feeling in the EU that the time had come to close this chapter, which had taken eight years of continuous debate, and to concentrate on other issues.

Dr Frendo pointed out that the debate on the treaty had also stalled the enlargement debate. Mr Brincat pointed out that it should be explained to the people that the Lisbon Treat was an amending measure to an existing treaty.

Describing himself as a federal European, Nationalist MP Michael Asciak said the Lisbon Treaty was a step backwards from the Constitutional Treaty but it was striking a practical, albeit less ideal balance.

Nationalist MP Mario de Marco said the treaty being debated advanced the European project, aiming for a more democratic, transparent and efficient Europe. It also emphasised the values of democracy and solidarity.

The treaty, he said, was drawing the people closer to European institutions and reaffirming the power of national parliaments. He asked if the time had come for a serious debate on whether the next step should be to give Maltese MPs tools to help them become more efficient in their work as representatives of the people.

Committee chairman Jason Azzopardi agreed and said that if the treaty was ratified, the Maltese Parliament should be given the necessary tools, even to study the aspects of subsidiarity and proportionality in EU legislation.

There were other small Parliaments, such as those in Cyprus and Luxembourg, which had fewer MPs and yet had 19 parliamentary committees. Malta had only five.

The treaty, he said, was giving national parliaments the power to stop the European Commission from legislating on particular aspects.

The ratification motion will be debated in the whole House in the coming days.