What should lawyers expect from Finland's presidency of the EU? Besides a pledge to protect its favourite tipple, June O'Keeffe says criminal law and security issues will be top of the agenda


And so the EU's system of rotating presidencies continues. Exit Austria, enter Finland. While Austria managed to get agreement on the draft Services Directive at the end of May, its legacy to the EU is not particularly noteworthy. Finland has already made one major contribution to European integration this year, however, with horn-faced rockers Lordi seizing the country's first-ever Eurovision victory.



But Finland's turn to manage the EU until the end of the year will be more about building trust and consensus than beating the opposition. They start slightly handicapped in that respect, however. 'One cannot trust people whose cuisine is so bad,' President Chirac reputedly said of the UK, adding that 'after Finland, it is the country with the worst food.'



In terms of the EU, Finland is a relative newcomer, having joined in 1995. It was roundly praised in 1999 when it held the presidency. It was largely thanks to the Finns and the Tampere summit that justice and home affairs rose in prominence. Finland also paved the way for membership discussions with Turkey last time around. Although discussions are still ongoing, Finnish enlargement commissioner Olli Rehn described them as a potential 'train crash', which does not bode well.



What then can Finland hope to bring to the EU mix during its second turn at the helm? Transparency, for a start. The UK caused a bit of a stir recently when it opposed greater transparency in the Council of Ministers. Newly-appointed foreign secretary Margaret Beckett argued against opening up such meetings to public scrutiny for fear that it would in fact lead to less transparency, with ministers playing to the camera and indulging in corridor diplomacy. The Finns, however, come with a history of Nordic transparency that they would like to see more of in Brussels and will therefore continue to push for more openness in the council.



Although the holders of the presidency are supposed to promote the overall European interest, rather than purely national interests, one issue that has a particular significance for the Finns is alcohol. Finland had to cut the excise duty on alcohol by around 30% to prevent a flood of cheap imports when neighbouring Estonia joined the EU in 2004. This led, however, to an increase in the number of Finns choosing not to make it through the long, dark Scandinavian winter. Finns would like to see us all paying more for our booze, but they are unlikely to get their way given that all matters relating to taxes have to be decided unanimously.



It is not just the excise duties on alcohol that is exercising the Finns but also the label on the bottle. The issue this time round is about the purity of vodka. Vodka, which can only be sold through state-owned retail outlets, is Finland's national drink despite the high taxes that are levied on it. Finland is keen to push for agreement on draft legislation that would outlaw vodka that is not made from the right ingredients.



This is reminiscent of the chocolate wars that were waged a few years ago, pitting continental chocolate with its high cocoa content against British and Irish chocolate, which contained vegetable fats. In the end, the purists lost that battle. The Finns are arguing that to use the term 'vodka', the drink must be distilled from cereals or potatoes. This would mean that some British brands which are made from grapes, molasses or sugar beet would have to be reclassified as the less than appetising sounding 'spirit drink' or 'white spirit drink'.



Blind tasting sessions have already taken place in the European Parliament between pure vodka and vodka made from other ingredients, with most participants, whose pallets are arguably familiar with the odd glass of fine wine, unable to distinguish the two.



For those interested in brushing up on their Latin, the good news is that the Finns will be producing a weekly news bulletin every Wednesday in Latin, reviving a tradition started under their previous presidency. It proved so popular back then that the Finns have decided to restore it. Although the EU itself is set to add another three languages - Irish, Bulgarian and Romanian - to the current 20 official languages as of next year, there is no prospect of Latin being added to the mix. The Finns' use of the language is a purely individual foray.



As for the big issues of the day, the European Constitution continues to loom large, although the EU's leaders have decided to continue with their 'period of reflection' in recognition of the fact that not much progress can take place until after the French and Dutch elections, which are expected to take place next year. It will therefore be down to Germany, the next presidency holder, to prepare a report on the way forward.



The Finns are also keen to 'reconnect with citizens'. Finnish prime minister Matti Vanhanen has spoken about the vicious cycle of disinterest, whereby voters cannot see the relevance of the EU to their lives, and their leaders in turn respond by not speaking out about the benefits. One area where he believes the EU can make a difference is in the area of security. However, criminal law and security issues are currently subject to unanimous voting in the Council of Ministers, making agreement elusive.



The Finns are hoping to streamline the procedures in this area to unblock some of the stalemate. Expectations are high all round. Will Finland be able to live up to them?



June O'Keeffe is head of the Law Society's Brussels office. To contact the office, e-mail: brussels@lawsociety.org.uk