European Union and the IGC (Hansard, 4 June 1997)

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, it is already the case that the European Community has legal personality. However, the Government see no case for extending legal personality to the intergovernmental areas of common foreign and security policy, or to justice and home affairs.

§ Lord Ashbourne
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that reply. Is he aware that the main thrust of my question and his reply was described in the Sunday Telegraph of 27th April 1997 as, a single arcane sentence in the draft treaty". The single sentence to which specific reference is made is: the Union shall have legal personality". The significance is that it will mark the moment that the European Union assumes the power to act as a single entity on behalf of all countries that are members. This, more than anything else, will mark the subsuming of Great Britain Limited into a European superstate. What evidence do the Government have that that is the desire of the British people? If there is any evidence, will the Minister tell the House in the clearest possible terms what that evidence is?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, I listened carefully to the noble Lord but I do not think he listened carefully to me. I said that it is not the Government's view that we should extend legal personality to areas that are essentially intergovernmental. They must remain under the sovereignty of national member states. We therefore oppose what is currently proposed in that area and what was referred to in the newspaper article.

§ Lord Moynihan
My Lords, I welcome the Minister's Answer. To what extent will the Government oppose any possible recommendation that there should be such an extension? Does he agree that all the evidence shows that a lack of legal personality has never hampered the European Union's ability to act effectively on the international scene and would, if accepted by other nations at Amsterdam, represent an unacceptable transfer of competence that he will resolutely oppose?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, there have been minor difficulties in that the European Union has on occasion to negotiate agreements which cover areas where there is a legal personality in the Community area on trade agreements, while at the same time reaching agreements on areas where there is not a legal personality. That is the technical reason that the proposal was advanced. However, it has massively greater political implications and we therefore oppose the move. We are not alone among member states in doing so, and we will continue to do so. All these points are matters for negotiation. The noble Lord will forgive me if we do not disclose our final hand. However, we are strongly opposed to the concept in the current draft or anything like it.
I believe I am correct in saying that this is the noble Lord's first intervention from the Front Bench in his new role. I very much welcome him to it.

§ Lord Wallace of Saltaire
My Lords, does the Minister agree that under Pillar 3 there is now a great 648 deal of intergovernmental negotiation going on and, in effect, agreement about police and intelligence operations among European Union member governments, the United States and others which is not covered by any method of law, domestic or national, and has now escaped national scrutiny? Is he happy that the IGC will nevertheless come out with a means of providing some form of accountability short of legal personality?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, it is true that there has been considerable progress on police co-operation on an intergovernmental basis. We wish to build on that. There has been some concern, as the noble Lord indicates, about the degree of democratic accountability in relation to that. We shall examine ways in which that can be achieved without prejudicing the essentially intergovernmental nature of these agreements.

§ Lord McNally
My Lords, is the Minister aware that this is the first time since I came to this House that the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, has not used a Question on Europe to attack the European Community? Can we he assured that this is not the influence of Peter Mandelson at work in this place?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, I wish the noble Lord had waited another two minutes before asking that question! The Government are quite prepared to take questions from any side of this House on their European policy. We have a clear, positive and constructive European policy which we are prepared to defend here or anywhere else.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that I was just about to ask a supplementary question but in my usual courteous way I gave way to the noble Lord, Lord McNally? I simply ask my noble friend to confirm that the decision on a legal personality is one that must be taken by unanimity and therefore if the British Government oppose it, it will not come into operation.

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, I am very happy to confirm that position. That matter, as with every other treaty change that will be negotiated in Amsterdam, will be subject to unanimity and therefore will not happen unless the British Government agree it. I am very happy to be in agreement with the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, on this European issue.