Budget Council, 22nd July: Attendance (Hansard, 22 November 1993)

HL Deb 22 November 1993 vol 550 cc19-20 19

§ Lord Bruce of Donington asked Her Majesty's Government:

§ Why, despite the provisions of Article 146 of the Treaty of Rome, which provides that the Council of Ministers "shall consist of a representative of each Member State at ministerial level authorised to commit the government of that Member State", the meeting of the Economic and Financial Council (ECOFIN) on 22nd July was attended by five Ministers and seven senior civil servants.

§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Chalker of Wallasey)
My Lords, at the Budget Council on 22nd July (not ECOFIN) only three member states were not represented by a Minister. Two Ministers were unable to attend at short notice for personal reasons.

Lord Bruce of Donington
My Lords, I am most grateful to the noble Baroness for having interpreted on slightly different lines from my own the press release that was issued immediately afterwards. She put the non-ministerial attendance at three, but is she aware that my Question asked why there were any non-ministerial people there at all as the treaty itself provides that these Councils should be attended by Ministers?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I can assure the noble Lord that this Government make every effort to ensure that they are represented at ministerial level at all Councils, but it simply is not possible always for that to happen. On 22nd July the Dutch Minister was prevented from attending by a last minute family bereavement; the Italian Minister was no doubt busy in Italy; and the French Minister was taken ill. The underlying rule is that six Ministers must be present for a vote. In this case there were nine. New rules have been agreed and we are awaiting a full package of new rules. They will explicitly say that there must be six Ministers for a vote.

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, I apologise to the Minister for missing the very first part of her Answer this afternoon. She will know that the Commission recently produced a document which is designed to cut unemployment in the Community by half by the year 2000. Can she give the House an assurance that when that is discussed in the Council of Ministers the Secretary of State will be present?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I cannot believe that any Secretary of State would wish a 20 document of that importance to be discussed without him being present, but I shall draw the noble Lord's remarks to his attention.

§ Baroness Elles
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that when we talk about the democratic deficit we are always assured that Ministers representing the Government at these meetings are responsible to Parliament for what is decided and what is voted on. Will my noble friend give an assurance that Ministers will be representing the United Kingdom at the meetings in order that they may reply to questions and demands in Parliament in this country?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I can assure my noble friend that Ministers always prefer to be present at these Councils, but the UK's negotiating objectives and the lines to take are decided at ministerial level before every Council meeting in case there should be some family reason why the actual Minister cannot attend and why perhaps a junior Minister has to attend in his or her place. But we always try to ensure that Ministers are representing us. If officials have to step into the breach, those officials must adhere to the decisions arrived at by Ministers prior to the Council meeting.

Lord Bruce of Donington
My Lords, the noble Baroness has allayed my fears so far as concerns the British Minister because the Paymaster General was there on that occasion. But further to her last reply to me, is she aware that her statement that revised rules are to brought into operation seems on the: face of it to conflict directly with the text of Article 146 of the treaty itself? Are we to infer that the Commission is entitled to amend the treaty without reference to anyone else?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I can assure the noble Lord that the Council's rules of procedure are not illegal under Article 146. If a member of the Council is represented by an official, that does not alter the composition of the Council, which is still deemed to consist of a representative of each member state at ministerial level. I can go further into this with the noble Lord in correspondence if he so wishes, but he has my assurance that it is not a question of the Commission writing the rules.

§ Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone
My Lords, I do not know whether my noble friend can confirm my belief that at numerous Cabinet committees civil servants represent their Ministers?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I do not believe that it is the convention to talk about the detail of Cabinet committees. I can remember the odd occasion when a Minister has been detained by another ministerial committee and for a time at least civil servants frequently step into the breach; but they follow the policy decided by their Minister.