§ 9. Mr. Chris Bryant (Rhondda)If he will make a statement on recent developments in the Convention on the Future of Europe. [77169]
§ The Minister for Europe (Mr. Denis MacShane)The convention is making progress. The outline constitutional treaty unveiled last week provides a useful framework for the next stage in the discussions.
§ Mr. BryantI am delighted to welcome my hon. Friend to the Dispatch Box in his new post, not least because of his sane, sensible and sound views on Europe—although knowing his reputation for speaking so many foreign languages, I am not sure whether I should say wilkommen, bienvenue, or welcome.
Does the Minister believe that it is time that we finally had a legible and concise constitution for the European Union, which clearly delineates the role of member states, the European Council and the European Commission?
§ Mr. MacShaneMy hon. Friend is quite right. What we need is
to make clear to the citizens of Europe what the EU stands for, what it seeks to do for its citizens, and what it does not seek to do".Those excellent and wise words come from leaders of the United Kingdom Conservative party, including the Lords Howe, Heseltine and Hurd, the right hon. and learned Member for Rushcliffe (Mr. Clarke), and the right hon. Members for Skipton and Ripon (Mr. Curry) and for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer). That just shows that if the Conservative party unites on sensible policies in Europe, it need not die.
§ Mr. David Heathcoat-Amory (Wells)I welcome the Minister to his new brief. Does he agree that until recently the Government strongly opposed both a written constitution for Europe and a single legal personality for the European Union, they strongly supported the intergovernmental pillared structure of the European Union, and they promised that the EU charter of fundamental rights would not be made legally binding on British courts? Why, at the halfway stage of 140 the Convention on the Future of Europe, have the Government abandoned all four of those policy positions?
§ Mr. MacShaneIf the right hon. Gentleman refers to the excellent article in The Economist by the Foreign Secretary the other week on the need for a European constitution, he will find that that is fairly long-standing thinking on the part of the Government. The right hon. Gentleman had to resign from the group of Conservative parties on Europe because he is so far out to the right that he speaks for no one—not even, I suspect, himself. The task of the Government and all the parliamentary representatives to the convention is to defend the interests of the British people. I am content that they will continue to do so, and I wish that he were back with his colleagues arguing for Britain.
§ Mr. Wayne David (Caerphilly)Will the Government support proposals for the greater involvement of national Parliaments in the European decision-making process?
§ Mr. MacShaneYes, of course. It was the Prime Minister who set out the need for national Parliaments to be involved in the European decision-making process, and I ant very pleased that Mr. Giscard d'Estaing has included that proposal in the draft outline constitution that he published last week.
§ Angus Robertson (Moray)I, too, welcome the Minister to his new role. Does he acknowledge the disappointment of many in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland that the UK Government have never argued in the convention for the right of devolved legislatures or Executives to have direct access to the European Court of Justice? Does he not find it slightly inconsistent that the UK Government are arguing for greater transparency and democracy at EU level, which I am sure everyone supports, yet intergovernmental relations within the UK between the UK Government and the devolved Administrations are confidential and secret?
§ Mr. MacShaneThe EU is an association of sovereign states and it is right that one state speaks for the constituent elements within it. There is the same problem in Spain and France. I think that the hon. Gentleman should park his nationalism and start speaking for Europe.
§ Mr. Mark Hendrick (Preston)I welcome my hon. Friend to his new position. Given the absence of European government, is it not right and proper that the European Commission should continue to initiate legislation, given that we have a democratically elected European Parliament and democratic Heads of Government in the Council of Ministers?
§ Mr. MacShaneI am a democratically elected Member of this Parliament, and I want to see it playing a role in Europe. The convention and the discussions will continue, but I hope that at the end of this process the Prime Minister's vision of national Parliaments playing a strong role will he contained in whatever is the final outcome.
§ Mr. Michael Ancram (Devizes)I, too, congratulate the Minister on his promotion to the role that, given his 141 track record, we must regard as Minister for a fully integrated and politically united Europe. Can he clear up some confusion about the Government's position on the convention, the constitution and the charter of fundamental rights? Did not the Prime Minister state in the House last week that the charter
should not extend the legal competence or jurisdiction of Europe in any way at all."—[Official Report, 28 October 2002; Vol. 391, c. 546.]How does that statement square with the comments on the convention by the then Minister for Europe, the right hon. Member for Neath (Peter Hain), the week before that the charter's incorporation into the treaties would be acceptable, and that he was willing to work towards such incorporation? May I help the present Minister for Europe to avoid such confusion? Can he state categorically today that any constitution incorporating and giving legal force to the charter would be totally unacceptable to his Government and that they would veto it—yes or no?
§ Mr. MacShaneIt is always good to hear the word "united" from the Opposition Front Bench. I sincerely thank the right hon. Gentleman for his congratulations. The Prime Minister made the British Government's position clear last week. The discussions will continue. I am now the Minister for Europe and I will take a very great interest indeed in the matter.
§ Mr. Michael Connarty (Falkirk, East)Does my hon. Friend accept that there is still some disquiet about the workings of the convention? In particular, the European Scrutiny Committee expressed its disappointment at the weakness of the report from the working group on the role of national Parliaments. In line with the comments from my hon. Friend the Member for Clydesdale (Mr. Hood), does my hon. Friend agree that on questions of subsidiarity, when it looks as though Europe is going too far, we in Parliament, rather than just Ministers, should have the right not just to bark, but to bite?
§ Mr. MacShaneI have worked with my hon. Friend for many years, and believe me, he is a remarkable biter. My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Ms Stuart) sits for the House on the convention, as do some Members of the European Parliament and representatives from the other place. The general direction of incorporating a role for national Parliaments is the right way forward. My hon. Friend's point is well taken.