Therefore, the number of issues decided by a qualified majority will increase.

So whatever happens, there will always be a qualified majority.

The second matter is the qualified majority in internal and legal policy.

The Council must take better decisions, based more often on a qualified majority.

The legal base should not be changed to allow a qualified majority decision in the Council.

Now, there are in fact two systems of qualified majority voting.

After all, what do we mean by a 'qualified majority'?

You said that 168 was the threshold for a qualified majority.

There is no reason to use a qualified majority for matters of culture.

There has already been talk here of increasing qualified majority decision making.

Then there is the problem of qualified majority voting on foreign policy issues.

Indeed, we should like to see more decisions with qualified majority voting in the social area.

A qualified majority will suffice to give the green light.

But which way Europe goes will ultimately be decided by its member states - through a qualified majority vote.

Anything short of qualified majority voting will not be a solution.

A common foreign policy following new rules on qualified majority would be a basket with nothing in it.

It is clear that a Rule change requires a qualified majority.

There are three matters that still particularly concern us: the first is the qualified majority.

The Commission should therefore table a proposal which will be decided upon by qualified majority.

If the Council wishes to act itself, then very well, but let it be by a qualified majority.

He did not completely rule out qualified majority voting on foreign policy issues.

In addition, qualified majority voting will be further extended to other areas.

Some people still see the reversed qualified majority system as something to be scared of.

Why is it, therefore, that we are still talking about the reversed qualified majority?

Reports that require a qualified majority are usually voted on first.