§ Ms QuinTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will made a statement on the meeting of the reflections group held in Toledo on 1 and 2 July. [32886]
§ Mr. David DavisThe third meeting of the intergovernmental conference study group took place on 30 June and 1 July in Toledo, Spain. It was an informal meeting at which the head of the European secretariat at the Cabinet Office, Mr. Brian Bender, represented me.
The meeting discussed the EU and the citizen, and the justice and home affairs pillar of the Maastricht treaty. On the question of the EU and the citizen, Mr. Bender argued that the EU needed to be made more relevant to people's lives. This was best achieved by addressing issues of real concern to people, such as jobs, growth, less interference by the EU, and less EC fraud and waste. Further development of the concept of European citizenship which was proposed, for example, in the reports to the study group by the Commission and the European Parliament, raised difficulties. In the UK the concept of European citizenship was seen as coming into potential conflict with national identity. People were also concerned about possible future obligations of citizenship.
With regard to simplifying the treaty to make it less complex and more readable Mr. Bender applauded the objective but expressed some scepticism about whether it could be achieved without altering the substance of the treaty. A careful balance had been achieved in the Maastricht treaty which needed to be preserved.
326WOn the justice and home affairs pillar of the treaty, Mr. Bender took issue with the suggestion in the Commission and European Parliament reports to the study group that the third pillar was not working effectively. The positive outcome of the Cannes European Council at which three conventions were agreed—Europol, customs information system and fraud—demonstrated that the third pillar could deliver results. Problems with the pillar related more to the sensitivity of the subject matter than to the institutional procedures introduced at Maastricht. It might be possible to simplify committee procedures within the pillar, but it would be a grave mistake to try to develop EC techniques such as majority voting or enhanced rights of initiative for the Commission. This might produce more decisions, but it would generate resentment and could do long-term damage to member states' political will to co-operate in these areas.
Mr. Bender argued that democratic oversight of the third pillar should rest primarily with national Parliaments.