Intergovernmental Conference: Reports to Parliament (Hansard, 15 April 1996)

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, we are committed to keeping Westminster informed about the Intergovernmental Conference. We shall report, by reply to Parliamentary Questions, the outcome of each ministerial meeting and shall continue regularly to give evidence to the European Communities Committee.

Lord Bruce of Donington
My Lords, I congratulate the noble Baroness on going a little further than she was able to go on 12th March last. Then she indicated to the House that it would be unwise to report on matters still under negotiation. Particularly in view of the meeting of the General Council on 25th March, will any endeavour be made to keep the standard and detail of the information given to the Westminster Parliament to the level and extent to that which will automatically be given to Members of the European Parliament?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, the noble Lord will realise that we have moved on since 12th March. That is why I am able to give the noble Lord a little more information. I can assure the noble Lord that at least all of the documents which are made available to other national parliaments and to the European Parliament will be made available to your Lordships and Members of another place. As for the standard and detail, if they are the same documents they will be of the same standard and detail. Therefore, 440 anything else that the noble Lord manages to elicit from me or one of my noble friends will be a bonus as a result of his persistent and ever-interesting questioning.

§ Lord Clark of Kempston
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that one of the important matters in the periodic reports to this House by the European Union is how it spends its money? Does my noble friend place any credence on the reports of the Court of Auditors of the European Parliament, many of whose members have no accountancy and audit qualification? Would it not be a good idea for Her Majesty's Government to press their partners in Europe to follow the pattern of the National Audit Commission in this country where qualified people look after public expenditure?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I am well aware of my noble friend's great interest in how money is spent in the European Union, as in the United Kingdom. Certainly, to have qualified auditors is far better than to have unqualified auditors. Many accountants, including my noble friend, who is an illustrious proponent of that profession, know that if we can improve those standards so we will improve monitoring standards. Our own National Audit Office has been influential in helping the Court of Auditors to improve, as have a number of other national governments.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, does the Minister recall that page 7 of the communiqué issued after the Turin Conference of 29th March refers to the association of the European Parliament and its work on the IGC? It details the way in which that Parliament is to be consulted. One of the arrangements is that once a month, and whenever Ministers' representatives deem it necessary by common accord, the Presidency will hold a working meeting on the occasion of meetings of Ministers' representatives for the purpose of holding a detailed exchange of views with the representatives of the European Parliament. Does the Minister agree that the arrangements for detailed consultations with the European Parliament will be far better, and far more effective, than those proposed for consultation and discussion with our Parliament at Westminster?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I want to examine what the noble Lord said, because I believe that he has interpreted what was written as a result of Turin much more broadly than is being utilised. I want to look at it with great care, and I shall try to respond to the point in the debate which your Lordships' House will be having in a few minutes.

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, perhaps I may ask the Minister to reconsider the Answer that she gave to my noble friend Lord Bruce of Donington. This is a set of negotiations which, it is envisaged, will go on for a very long time. Indeed, I believe that there will be weekly meetings, and that some unfortunate will have to attend every week for about 18 months, as far as one can see. I believe that my noble friend has a strong point on this. Surely in those circumstances it would be right that from time to time, when appropriate, Parliament be informed officially by the Government of the state of play in the 441 negotiations. Perhaps I may assure the Minister that no one is asking for disclosure of negotiating positions, but from time to time it would surely be better if Parliament were informed formally rather than that matters be winkled out by Parliamentary Question or individual Statement.

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I believe that the noble Lord, Lord Richard, also misunderstood me. My answers today must be opaque. Perhaps I may assure him that Parliament will be informed of the state of play—as he called it—after Ministers have met. But the meetings which will take place weekly will not be meetings of Ministers. When there has been a meeting of Foreign Ministers—the IGC will be on the Foreign Affairs Council agenda each month—there will be a response to Parliament—probably through a Written Question or perhaps through some Oral Questions—of the whole of the Foreign Affairs Council, which will include consideration of the IGC. When I teased the noble Lord, Lord Bruce of Donington, in a friendly way, it was just to say that one will obviously give clear information. However, as the noble Lord, Lord Richard, may have noted, the noble Lord, Lord Bruce of Donington, is extremely good at eliciting other little bits of information through his persistent questioning.

§ Lord Pearson of Rannoch
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that at the IGC the Commission should be discouraged from continuing its disdain for national parliaments, which it demonstrates by increasingly depositing documents for proposed European legislation too late for scrutiny in those parliaments?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I am well aware of, and sympathetic to, your Lordships' dilemma, that when documents come late to this House or to another place it makes it difficult to discuss them properly and thoroughly. That is why the British Government have made a particular effort with the Commission and the Secretariat of the Council of Ministers, by which the documents are issued, to get them to national parliaments. It is not the Commission's responsibility; it is the responsibility of the Secretariat of the Council of Ministers. We have been working away at that with, I might say, some success, because it is a good deal better now than it was some three years ago.

Lord Bruce of Donington
My Lords, on the last point raised by the Minister, is she aware that it now takes seven months for an English transcript of the proceedings of the European Parliament to reach this country and Parliament? I have the latest edition on my desk, which goes up to 16th June 1995, since when there has been a rather unfortunate gap. Will the Minister ensure, through the Foreign Office or the Ambassador, that we receive copies within a reasonable time so that we ourselves know what is happening in the European Parliament?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I am aware that the noble Lord wants to read absolutely 442 everything that is said in Strasbourg, but I am not sure that that is the major priority, although many MEPs will be horrified to hear me say so. Therefore, if there is an order of priorities for translation and for the spending of money on translation, it may be that all the words of wisdom, including the debate and 230 amendments in the European Parliament on 13th March last as to its view of what should go into the IGC, can wait a little longer than some of the other matters which are of much more importance to national parliaments, and, in particular, to governments.

§ Lord Monkswell
My Lords, the House will be grateful to the Minister for announcing that we shall receive periodic Written Answers to planted Questions, and her supplementary answer suggesting that we shall also obtain responses to Oral Questions. Will the Government give consideration to making regular ministerial Statements which can be responded to across the Floor of the House?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, we are as open to making Statements, when it is wished in this House, as we have ever been, particularly on this issue. But just as with the priorities for the spending of money, one has to have priorities for legislation. Unless your Lordships are of one accord that we should sit very long and late on many occasions, it is important to make a Statement when there is something valuable and factual to say. It is not a good use of your Lordships' time to talk about things which are purely speculative. I fear that what the noble Lord has in mind is a number of matters which would have been entirely speculative.