HELSINKI, Nov 13 (IPS) - Ville-Veikko Hirvela has a message for the leaders of the European Union (EU) gathering in the French city of Nice in December for the EU Intergovernmental Conference (IGC): if they do not want to turn Nice into a ''Seattle of Europe'', they should abandon plans to renegotiate the Amsterdam Treaty to give broader powers to the European Commission to negotiate and conclude trade agreements for members of the grouping.

Hirvela is a member of Friends of the Earth, one of a large coalition of Finnish NGOs which have launched a campaign here to stop what they say amounts to ''fast-track'' negotiating powers to the European Commission,the executive arm of the EU. Activists here say they are galvanising support from other groups in France and the Netherlands to mount a opposition front.

He warns that the EU runs the risk of generating widespread distrust of its institutions if leaders still press ahead to modify the Amsterdam ''Henceforth every EU gathering would be overshadowed by mass protests that have so far been seen only in Seattle, Washington and Prague,'' he said.

The bone of contention is Article 133 of the Amsterdam Treaty that covers the relations between the Commission and member countries with regards to international trade. Under the Treaty, trade in the fields of services, intellectual property rights and investment is an area of ''mixed competence'' between the Commission and the 15 member states.

Mixed competence issues means a unanimous decision in the Commission followed by ratification by national parliaments before agreements can be reached. But in areas pertaining to trade in goods, the Commission has a free hand to sign agreements on behalf of member states.

However, EU Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy would like to bring that procedure to an end. Instead of a unanimous decision procedure in the current framework he would like to replace it with a qualified majority vote regarding services, investment and intellectual property rights. Since July this year, Lamy has launched a campaign to drum up support among EU member states for a modification of Article 133.

Lamy told a gathering of the Confederation of British Industry in July: ''Let me get really controversial ... I am determined on this trip to put the case to the UK government for more majority voting in the forthcoming IGC. I am talking of course about updating the EU's common commercial policy as set out in Article 133 to permit qualified majority voting in the council to determine our position in international trade in services, intellectual property and investment.''

Trade experts say trade in services includes health, education, audio-visual, transport and all public services. Modifying Article 133, they suggest, may also contravene an EU Court of Justice ruling in 1994 that defined those issues including intellectual rights as areas of ''mixed competence'', which the EC cannot negotiate or reach decisions on behalf of EU members without parliamentary ratification.

''In effect what the EU is seeking is asking to the fast-track negotiation powers in the United States system that grants powers to the President to sign trade treaties without first seeking congressional approval,'' says Dr. Thomas Wallgren a leader of the Finnish NGO campaign. The US Congress refused to grant such powers to the President.

Wallgren, a lecturer in philosophy at the University of Helsinki pointed out that the proposed changes carry enormous implications for ordinary people in EU countries. Trade negotiations may sound technical, boring and obscure, but at stake is a serious attempt to undermine basic democratic rights of EU citizens, he said.

''It gives them massive power to undermine fundamental welfare state structures and cultural diversity in Europe. It also paves the way to open up basic health services to multinational bidding that could make generic and prescriptive drugs more expensive ... We shall not sign away our democratic rights to trade bureaucrats in Brussels.''

According to Wallgren, Lamy is seeking a qualified majority decision in the Commission that is no longer subject to ratification by national parliaments concerning the controversial subjects of services, intellectual property right and investment in international trade. That also means no single EU member can block a decision on these issues.

If the EC had such powers France could not have unilaterally caused the collapse of the recent Multilateral Agreements on Investments (MAI) by withdrawing from the negotiations, say the Finnish activists. ''But now the EU is trying to smuggle in MAI through the backdoor in Nice,'' he said.

Other critics, including Europe Corporate Observatory, a Brussels-based NGO that has been monitoring EU policies, say corporate lobbying groups have been involved in an intensive campaign to change the EU policy in international trade.

''For these groups, swift centralised EU decision-making on its international trade policy is ideal, it ensures that decisions do not get bogged down or watered-down by member states'intervention, even if based on legitimate national concerns,'' says the organisation.

Hirvela notes that if the EU succeeds in Nice to amend Article 133 of the Amsterdam Treaty, it is likely to draw wide public attention to EU activities that may result in the EU generating the for itself public hostility similar to that which the World Trade Organistion faces.

Lamy told his audience at the Confederation of British Industry that it is only Spain and France who are still left to be convinced of the needs to modify Article 133. Even though EU sources say France has recently dropped its sceptical position and now fully backs renegotiations of the Amsterdam Treaty, the issue is not resolved in Finland.

Tuija Brax, Green Party member of the Finnish Parliament said there is an acute tension between the government and parliament on the issue. She said there are substantial differences within the Social Democratic-led five-party-coalition government, which is not made any easier by the intensive lobbying and campaign by the Finnish NGOs.

Kimmo Kiljunen, social democratic chairman of the parliamentary subcommittee on WTO affairs told IPS that the Finnish government is rather sceptical of the proposal. According to him, the government is in favour of changes that will give the EC negotiating powers on the issues of services, investment and intellectual rights, but it has added a lot of reservations that exclude basic services and other forms of investment.

In Finland the proposal is now making the rounds in various parliamentary committees. A final decision will be taken by the Parliamentary Grand Committee just before the end of this month. A vote on the issue is expected shortly before the EU Summit.

Asked what would happen if the Finnish government gives a nod to the proposal, Hirvela, quickly said, ''we shall take to the street, we have less than one month to block this threatening scenario from becoming a reality''