HC Deb 10 July 1996 vol 281 cc389-90
8. Mrs. Helen Jackson

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what study his Department has conducted on the advantages and disadvantages of majority voting in the Council of Ministers of the European Union. [35168]

Mr. David Davis

We have considered the issue carefully in consultation with other Government Departments. Our conclusion is that majority voting already applies in those areas of the treaty where it is needed—for example, in the single market and in external trade policy. We do not see the case for extending qualified majority voting.

Mrs. Jackson

Is it the case that, in the fortnight that the Government played hard to get, they used their veto no fewer than 61 times on issues as diverse as cut flowers and the European Year Against Racism? Does the Minister agree that to achieve enlargement of the European Union, some reform of the structural funds is necessary and that agreement on that will not be possible without some change in voting in the Council of Ministers? Is it not plain silly for the Government not to agree to any change in this area? Does not that expose the hypocrisy of the Government's view that they are really in favour of enlargement of the European Union?

Mr. Davis

That argument is completely bogus. If there were a Labour Government—an improbable occurrence—and they pursued the idea that financing limits and financing matters should be conducted on qualified majority voting, they would be the only Government in Europe following that line.

Mr. Congdon

Does my hon. Friend agree that, whatever arguments were advanced in the past in favour of extending qualified majority voting, practice has shown that, whenever we take that step, this country's interests are inevitably overridden by our European partners? Therefore, will he assure the House that the Government will resist any attempt to extend QMV and will maintain our veto?

Mr. Davis

I can assure my hon. Friend that the Government will resist any attempt to extend QMV. However, I do not agree with one aspect of his remarks: qualified majority voting was an important component in the development of the single market. It has proved an important tool in that respect, but that is as far as it needs to go.

Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones

Does the Minister recognise that, in other areas of the Union's work—particularly with regard to the common agricultural policy—the Government would not have been able to reach agreement in discussions with their partners but for qualified majority voting and eventually a simple majority? Does he accept that the proposal means that, if the Government oppose qualified majority voting on a similar issue in future, they will be looking both ways?

Mr. Davis

The hon. Gentleman overlooks the fact that that problem arose in the first place because of qualified majority voting.