| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
European Union
15. Mr. Barnes: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the measures he is taking to improve openness and transparency within the European Union. [27207]
Mr. David Davis: We have supported a number of measures that have increased transparency in the EU--
for example, improved access to Council documents, more open Council debates and publication of Council votes. We shall consider any further ideas that may come forward at the intergovernmental conference.
Mr. Barnes: The Council of Ministers is the only secret legislature in Europe. Would it not be an advantage when, for example, the Foreign Secretary goes to his Council of Ministers meetings, for us to be able to hear his arguments--as when he bluffed it for Britain and tried to argue that corner? It would be of interest not only to hon. Members and the electorate--it might be of considerable interest to the Deputy Prime Minister to know whether the Foreign Secretary was keeping in line with his wishes.
Mr. Davis: There are a couple of things that the hon. Gentleman has wrong. First, the Council of Ministers is not, strictly, a legislature. Secondly, it is not as secretive as he makes it out to be. Since a number of reforms, which we supported, in the past decade, there has been reporting of our decisions, our positions and the votes in Council--and several Council meetings have been televised. I think that the hon. Gentleman hardly has the case right.
Mr. Anthony Coombs: In the interests of transparency and accountability of the European Union, and given its less than helpful attitude towards British farmers in the BSE crisis and the worldwide ban on the export of British beef, does my hon. Friend share the sense of outrage felt by many of my farmers that none other than Herr Fischler, the Agriculture Commissioner, should be opening the royal agriculture show at Stoneleigh this year? Will my hon. Friend make representations to his counterpart at the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to ensure that the invitation is cordially and regretfully, but firmly, withdrawn?
Mr. Davis: I commend my hon. Friend on his ingenuity in getting that matter into this question. I hardly think that I have responsibility for royal shows. Information arrived just before Question Time began--so I have not had a chance to check it--that the Commission is proposing to lift the ban on gelatine and tallow at the next agriculture meeting, early next week. I have not seen the details of the proposal, but at least it is one good sign.
Ms Quin: Will the Minister, in the interests of openness, tell us about the letter, which was reported in the press last week, which the Foreign Secretary apparently sent to his Cabinet colleagues, telling them to look at ways in which their Departments could disrupt the European Union? Will such retaliatory action be limited to the European Union, or will it perhaps be extended to countries, such as the United States, that have banned British beef for much longer, but which the Tory Euro-sceptics are strangely silent about? How does such retaliatory action risk affecting British businesses and British economic interests?
Mr. Davis: As a former Minister for open government, I would love to help the hon. Lady. I have seen no such letter, but I can tell her that the Government have to take every measure possible to protect the British beef industry, and we will do so.
Mr. James Hill: Is my hon. Friend aware that there is far too much fraud in the European Union? We have a
golden opportunity, next Wednesday, when we discuss in Committee directives on European fraud, for those who wish to record their opinions to do so. The House must tackle this problem because, after all, there is waste in local government and waste in national government, but it is far worse in the Commission.
Mr. Davis: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There is too much fraud in the policies of the Union. The Government have taken a major part in dealing with it and in putting in place institutions, such as a Court of Auditors, that are designed to do just that. The problem is that those instruments are not used properly. Most obviously, the European Parliament has only just put in place the first temporary committee of inquiry and the ombudsman. We will have to focus on that sphere very much more in the future.
British Council
16. Mr. David Marshall: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the timetable for the completion of discussions on the future of British Council posts abroad. [217208]
Mr. Rifkind: We hope to complete the discussions now under way with the British Council shortly.
Mr. Marshall: Do the Government appreciate the value of the British Council to the long-term economy of the United Kingdom? Does the Secretary of State realise that his penny-pinching proposals to reduce the number of countries in which the British Council has offices is counterproductive and will eventually cost us dearly? Will he therefore reconsider that penny wise, pound foolish policy?
Mr. Rifkind: The hon. Gentleman is totally misinformed; the Government have put forward no such proposals. Under the Government, the number of countries in which the British Council operates has increased from 79 to 109 and the number of its offices has increased from 108 to 229. The Government have a clear, firm policy of not wanting any overseas closures, and we are currently working with the British Council to ensure the success of that policy.
European Court of Human Rights
17. Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent representations he has received about the European Court of Human Rights; and if he will make a statement. [27209]
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Sir Nicholas Bonsor): My Department receives a steady stream of correspondence about the European Court of Human Rights.
Mr. Whittingdale: Does my hon. Friend agree that, if a court is to retain its authority and its support, it is important that its judgments should be in tune with the values and instincts of the people who are affected by its rulings? Will he accept that some of the recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights departed from
that principle? Does he agree that, if that practice continues, there must be a danger that it will call into question the value of our remaining members of it?
Sir Nicholas Bonsor: I certainly agree with my hon. Friend that some of the judgments of the court have been questionable, but the value of our membership goes much wider than the European Court, because the European
convention on human rights is the foundation on which the guarantee of human rights throughout Europe is founded. The accession of the new states that have got free of the Soviet Union's clutches make it all the more important that we continue to support the European convention. I hope, however, that we will have an opportunity to review the workings of the European Court of Justice and that the British proposals for changes will be adopted by colleagues.PRIVATE BUSINESS
University College London Bill
Bill read the Third time, and passed.
Considered; to be read the Third time.
3.31 pm
Mr. Mike Watson (Glasgow, Central): On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I apologise for the fact that, as you are aware, I was not present when my question was called earlier in Question Time. The reason for my absence was that I had not received notification that the Foreign Secretary had decided to link my question with others. I am aware that, under the new procedures introduced last year, a list is posted in the House to inform Members about which questions have been linked.
Given that those questions are submitted two weeks in advance, is it in order that hon. Members who have questions down on the Order Paper--in fact, all hon. Members--are informed of any linkage only on the day when those questions are to be answered? In future, can we not have notice of at least a week before the relevant Question Time?
Madam Speaker:
I will keep in mind what the hon. Gentleman said. It is to be regretted that he was not aware, perhaps until the last minute, that his question was to be linked. I tend to know about that by midday, and I should have thought that it would be fairly reasonable for hon. Members to be informed at that time. I plead with all Departments of State to give hon. Members as much notice as possible when questions are linked. That would be reasonable. I should add that I was very generous to the hon. Gentleman today; I realised his difficulty, and called him to ask a supplementary question.
Mr. Hugh Dykes (Harrow, East):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I am sure that the Minister of State made a mistake just now, probably unwittingly, when he referred to the European Court of Justice in his reply.
Madam Speaker:
The Minister no doubt stands corrected.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |