likely to succeed in bilateral negotiations with the Commission than in the Coun cil where they face all the other member 
states.26 5. Negotiation tactics in the Council The negotiation tactics of small states in EU decision-making processes are influenced by the smallness of their administrations and their speci- al characteristics, as discussed above. Small states cannot expect to beco- me active participants in all EU policy sectors. Their limited resources, compared to those of their larger partners, restrict their scope of action in the policy-making process. The negotiation tactics of a small state can be flexible or inflexible27depending on whether it regards an issue to be of great or little importance. This is contrary to the negotiation strategy of the large member states, which tends to be inflexible on all occasions. They have a wider range of interests within the EU, among them, controlling the EU’s ex- penditure and securing their international position. They also have the administrative capacity to focus on all sectors of EU policy and tend to be proactive. The small states only become proactive in the policy-making pro- cess when issues of direct national interest are on the agenda. This is, for example, the case of Greece, Portugal and Ireland in relation to particu- lar aspects of Regional Policy and Luxembourg in negotiations on its tax privileges and banking sector. All the administrative capacity of small states is devoted to guaranteeing a positive outcome in sectors of direct national interest. As a result, small states are reactive within the EU po- licy-making process in areas of little national interest.28 Although the bargaining behaviour of the Union’s members is in- fluenced by national preferences, the personalities and negotiation skills 345 
Can small states influence policy in an EU of 25 members? 26Ibid. 27The flexibility of states in EU decision-making processes is defined according to whether they change their original policy position presented at the EU level. A state is regarded to have a flexible negotiation tactic if it alters its original policy stand du- ring the negotiation process. A state is regarded as inflexible if it adheres to it origi- nal policy stand to the very end of the process. 28Thorhallsson, 2000. ibid.