The leaders of the 25 current and future members of the European Union are in Brussels this weekend to decide on a new EU constitution following an extended constitutional convention and months of laborious pre-negotiations. 

The crucial Brussels summit is designed to agree on a constitution for the European Union that will streamline its decision-making process when it expands to include 10 new members from Central and Eastern Europe next May.

Britain: Determined to keep national veto for all tax, foreign policy and decisions on the British budget rebate

Germany: Wants EU voting system changed to reflect its size, then Giscard's exact text adopted

France: Backs Germany in wanting more majority voting and stands by most of Giscard's constitutional draft

Spain: Wants to keep a voting system agreed three years ago under which it won disproportionate influence

Portugal : Worried about any threat to guaranteed representation for each member state in the Commission

Italy: Has to be honest broker in the talks since it is EU chairman and has called for settlement close to the draft

Finland: Main concern will be to safeguard neutrality if a new EU defence pact is in the constitution

Sweden: Anxious to preserve traditional neutrality. Opposed to majority voting on foreign policy

Denmark : Wants the text agreed by Giscard's convention. Hostile to majority voting on foreign policy

Austria: Objects to proposed mutual defense guarantee because of its neutrality

Ireland: A strong ally of Britain in wanting to retain the veto on tax. Worried about threat to neutrality

Luxembourg: Does not like majority voting on taxation because of country's banking industry

Belgium: Supports Convention text and as much majority voting as possible, and would back scrapping national veto

Netherlands: Wants euro rule-book tightened.

Greece: Strong supporter of mutual defense clause being enshrined in constitution

Poland: Allied to Spain in blocking change to voting weights. Wants one commissioner per member state

Lithuania: Pressing for each country to retain a commissioner. Supports Poland on voting rights

Latvia: Wants a commissioner and sees no reason to accept the notion that commissioners act apolitically

Estonia: Wants one seat per country in the commission. Supports Britain and Ireland on tax subject to national veto

Hungary: No real problems but would like minority and ethnic rights to be mentioned in final draft

Czech: Republic Vaclav Klaus, the President, opposes the constitution but the government is generally happy

Slovakia: Happy with draft, although believes national parliaments are offered too little power

Slovenia: Strong supporter of Poland. Believes mutual defence guarantee should not threaten Nato

Cyprus: Supports principle of one commissioner per member state, but will probably accept a compromise

Malta: Supports Britain on energy provisions because of its own offshore oil and gas supplies 

WHO HOLDS POWER?

Why it's important: Voting is key to who has how much power in the new, enlarged EU. The plan is to move to a "double majority" system that favours countries with bigger populations.

In favour: Germany and France.

Against: Spain and Poland.

Britain's view: Backs Spain and Poland

Likely outcome: A deal may involve an increase in the population threshold, a delay
in implementation, or another vote in 2008.

Problem factor: 9/10

NATIONAL VETO

Why it's important: Extension of majority voting to stop an EU of 25 countries grinding to a halt.

In favour: France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg among others.

Against: Britain is the main opponent, backed, on taxation, by Ireland, Estonia and Luxembourg, and over foreign policy by Poland, Sweden and Denmark.

Britain's view: Vehemently opposed.

Likely outcome: A deal after much wrangling.

Problem factor: 7/10

DEFENSE

Why it's important: To boost the EU's clout on the international stage by giving it the ability to undertake peace-keeping and crisis intervention.

In favour: France and Germany backed by Belgium, Luxembourg and several other smaller states.

Against: Ireland, Sweden, Austria and Finland.

Britain's view: Broadly in favor.

Likely outcome: Deal reached last night. There will be a European defense force

THE COMMISSION

Why it's important: Scaling down would speed decisions after enlargement.

In favour: France, Germany and most of the bigger states.

Against: All small and incoming states.

Britain's view: Prepared to cede one of its two commissioners for the sake of efficiency.

Likely outcome:At least one commissioner per country, possibly two for the bigger states with that perk phased out eventually.

Problem factor: 6/10

GOD

Why it's important: Some believe the first constitution should contain a reference to Christianity or at least to God in its preamble.

In favour: Italy, Spain, Poland, and Ireland.

Against: France implacably opposed, fears threat to church-state separation.

Britain's view: Wary about offending minorities, will back France and others. 

Likely outcome: Unclear. Possible reference to "Europe's religious and humanist heritage" offset by reference to EU's secular status.

Problem factor: 4/10

Europe House prediction: Final outcome of weekend meeting up in the air

Many fear the two days scheduled for the talks will not be enough. Given the wide differences that exist between member states, proceedings are likely to turn into another marathon round of horse-trading. There are also plenty opportunities for a deadlock.

"Nothing that requires sacrifice is easy, but whatever the outcome of these negotiations, our Europe is moving towards a closer unity among its people, without having to resort to war as it did in the past. That by itself is a major achievement for all of us.

We at Europe House, who for many years have always strongly supported a strong and independent European Union of Nation States, wish the leaders of Europe gathered together in Bruxelles this weekend the ability to look beyond today towards tomorrow."  Rick Morren, chairman Europe House