HC Deb 01 December 1998 vol 321 cc662-3
8. Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham)

If he will make a statement on the extension of qualified majority voting as a result of the treaty of Amsterdam. [61387]

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Ms Joyce Quin)

As the hon. Gentleman will be aware from the parliamentary ratification of the Amsterdam treaty, qualified majority voting was extended in several areas, including the fight against fraud and promoting transparency. The Government believe that those extensions are very much in Britain's interests.

Mr. Bercow

Now that the Foreign Secretary's German counterpart, Joschka Fischer, has admitted that the creation of a single European state is the decisive task of our time, how can the right hon. Lady guarantee that qualified majority voting will never be used to introduce measures that would force this country to be a mere province of a single European state?

Ms Quin

It is clear from what was agreed at Amsterdam and in previous treaties that unanimity remains the rule in important areas, including institutional and treaty changes, and we are in favour of that. I remind the hon. Gentleman that significant extensions of qualified majority voting took place under the Maastricht treaty and probably the most significant extension was introduced by the Single European Act passed by Lady Thatcher's Government.

Mr. Mike Gapes (Ilford, South)

Does my right hon. Friend agree that to make the European Union more democratic and functionally efficient, any EU enlargement will necessitate an extension of some forms of qualified majority voting? It is palpably absurd for the Conservative party, on the one hand, to call for enlargement seemingly without restrictions and, on the other hand, to oppose any extension of qualified majority voting.

Ms Quin

We are keen to make enlargement a success. As was made clear at Amsterdam, we shall have to consider the institutional arrangements foreseen in that treaty to prepare for enlargement. We believe that we can do that while safeguarding the important areas that can progress only if all countries are in agreement.

Mr. Michael Howard (Folkestone and Hythe)

First, I congratulate the right hon. Lady on her new, co-ordinating responsibilities, which the Foreign Secretary announced a few moments ago. I thank the Foreign Secretary for his astonishing admission that, for the past 18 months, the Government's European policies have not been properly co-ordinated.

In view of the apparent importance now attached by the Government to the veto, does the right hon. Lady now accept that the extension of majority voting at Amsterdam was a mistake? Is it not undeniable that she and her colleagues will now be utterly helpless in the face of measures that they claim to oppose, such as the extension of works councils?

Ms Quin

It is difficult to take seriously the right hon. and learned Gentleman's point about co-ordination because he was a member of a Government who were disunited on European issues. The purpose of the co-ordinating committee, which I shall chair, is simply to build on the success achieved by the Government during the British presidency, when Departments worked together effectively.

I am sorry that the right hon. and learned Gentleman insists on repeating completely unjustified scare stories which have been substantially aired during the past few days. The measures agreed under the Amsterdam treaty were very much in Britain's interests and do not affect the policy areas to which the right hon. and learned Gentleman referred.

Forward to