Tory MEP Charles Tannock made an astute point in his recent letter to the Telegraph about the problems continued enlargement (to include Croatia and other Balkan states) of the European Union will have.

It is of course to the benefit of the EU that enlargement continues but Tannock points out that the current Treaty of Nice ensures each new Member State is given a Commissioner, a minimum of six MEPs and a certain amount of votes in the Council of Ministers.

Barring detail, he is right. As the EU grows it will become politically weighted to the smaller countries, who will have a disproportionate amount of power in relation to the size of their populations and economies.

Unfortunately Mr Tannock’s solution – a population-based veto – is simply not workable. To bring it in would require each nation’s agreement and it is extremely unlikely the smaller Member States would agree to large ones having a veto but not them.

The “unlamented constitution” Mr Tannock wants abandoned, would attenuate this problem by changing the weighting of votes to make each country’s vote proportional to its population. With this fairer system, it would also increase the use of majority voting in general, limiting the veto to subjects that are really sensitive for Member States.

This is another example of an issue that will not simply disappear with the non-ratification of the constitutional treaty. Good that an opponent of the treaty is beginning to recognise one of the costs of not having it! constitutionwhere the constitution addresses issues