Conservative European Reform Group (Hansard, 17 December 1980)

§ Sir Ian Gilmour

[pursuant to the reply, 9 December 1980, c. 543.]: The first announced aim of the European Reform Group is the ending of the common agricultural policy. This aim is incompatible with our membership of the European Community. The Treaty of Rome in articles 38 to 46 explicitly requires that there should be a common agricultural policy. Article 39, in particular, states what the objectives of the CAP shall be, to increase agricultural productivity…to ensure a fair standard of living for the Agricultural Community…to stabilise markets…to assure the availability of supplies… to ensure that the supplies reach consumers at reasonable prices".

The Government., like all British Governments since our membership, support the objectives of the CAP as set out in this Article. They are similar to the objectives of British agricultural policy before our membership of the Community. The Government are not, however, satisfied with the present workings of the policy. Our view of the need for far-reaching reforms in its operation is shared increasingly by other member States, some of which have already put forward ideas of their own. This is quite possible within the framework of the Treaty. Rather than abolition of the CAP, it is effective reform of the policy which is needed. The commitment to restructuring of the Community budget achieved in the 30 may agreement provides a unique opportunity to bring this about.

On the group's second aim, reform of the system of financing the budget, the Government agree that we must work for a better balance in European Community net budget contributions. We have already achieved a great deal in this area. We shall be seeking further progress 225W during the process of examination of the Community budget which will take place, in accordance with the agreement of 30 May, during 1981. In the agreement, our partners have accepted the need to prevent the recurrence of unacceptable situations for any individual member State and to review the whole structure of Community expenditure policies.

As regards the third aim, independent action by member States on dumping or other unfair trade practices by third countries would be incompatible with chapter 3 of the Treaty of Rome and in particular with article 113 which explicitly states that … the common commercial policy shall be based on uniform principles, particularly in regard to…measures to protect trade such as those to be taken in case of dumping …". Since the European Community is a full customs union within which goods circulate freely, anti-dumping action has to be on a Community basis if it is to be effective. So the restoration to member States of the right to take unilateral action on unfair trading practices including dumping is inconsistent with our obligations under the common commercial policy and would weaken the effectiveness of the Community's action as a whole.

The group's fourth aim is the reassertion of the power of national Parliaments over the European Community institutions. The powers of the European Community institutions are set out in the treaties to which the United Kingdom acceded under the Treaty of Accession. The reassertion of the power of national Parliaments over the institutions of the Community in such a way as to interfere with the powers conferred by the treaties on those institutions would be incompatible with the obligations we accepted when we ratified the Treaty of Accession. In practice, however, the vast majority of important decisions in the European Community are taken by the Council on the basis of consensus. Ministers are as accountable to Parliament for their Community activities as they are for any other activities. The scrutiny procedures of this House provide for examination of draft Community legislation before it is approved by the Council of Ministers. The Government have undertaken to the House not to give approval in the Council of Ministers to a proposal which has been recommended for a debate by the House before that debate has taken place, save in exceptional circumstances or where the Scrutiny Committee agrees that United Kingdom consent in Council need not be withheld.