§ 13. Mr. WinnickTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the Government's latest proposals for the intergovernmental conference. [6850]
§ Mr. David DavisWe have set out our approach to the intergovernmental conference on a number of occasions, including during the debate at the Madrid European Council on 7 December. We want an IGC that improves the operation of the European Union, especially with a view to further enlargement, and one that makes the Union more relevant and acceptable to people.
§ Mr. WinnickMay I make a helpful suggestion to the Government? In order to accommodate both sides of the Tory parliamentary party—the rival factions on this issue—would it not be possible for both sides to be represented at the intergovernmental conference? One 200 side could be led by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the other by the Defence Secretary. Is that not a helpful suggestion?
§ Mr. JesselAt the intergovernmental conference, will the Government constantly bear it in mind that the British people want only a minimal share in governing continental countries and want continental countries to have only a minimal share in governing our country?
§ Mr. DavisI understand only too well what my hon. Friend is saying. Ironically, there is not too much difference between what he had to say and the comments on the opinion poll made earlier by the hon. Member for North Durham (Mr. Radice). British people want the nation state to be respected. They want proper co-operation in Europe, trading opportunities in Europe, peace and stability in Europe and a decentralised Europe. We shall support all those things.
§ Madam SpeakerMr. MacKay—I am sorry, Mr. Mackinlay.
§ Mr. MackinlayWhat opportunities are there for the Governments of countries applying for membership of the European Union to contribute to the intergovernmental conference—especially the Visegrad countries, of which Poland is the largest? Will there be an opportunity for them to make a meaningful contribution to deliberations? In that regard, will the Foreign Secretary or the Prime Minister be meeting the new President of Poland soon?
§ Mr. DavisI was surprised to see where the hon. Gentleman was sitting, given how he was addressed.
§ Mr. SkinnerWe are a broad church here.
§ Mr. DavisIt is a very broad church if it extends as far as the Conservative Whips Office.
With respect to the hon. Gentleman's quite serious question, which I shall treat seriously, the Government have certainly been in communication with all the countries to which he referred—certainly Visegrad 4, Visegrad 6 and the Baltic countries. We shall continue to be in communication with them about their proposals and ideas. Their representatives meet regularly; they have attended meetings of the European Foreign Affairs Council on a number of occasions. We shall certainly be continuing that process and ensuring that their fears and concerns are reflected. Britain will take a very forward role in doing so. As for the hon. Gentleman's comment about a meeting with my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary or my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, I shall have to look into that and let him know.
§ Mr. MansWhen my hon. Friend attends the IGC and discusses the prospects of future members of the European Union in eastern Europe, will he ensure that our colleagues in Europe appreciate that the security of those future members should be conducted through NATO and not through any future security structure in the EU?
§ Mr. DavisMy hon. Friend will be only too pleased to know that that point has already been made very forcibly by myself in the reflection group and by my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary in the Western European Union. Our stance on it is very 201 clear and was laid out in a memorandum written by my right hon. and learned Friend in March. We have stuck forcibly to that point throughout. Article 5 responsibilities—defence responsibilities—must be under NATO and not anything else.