| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
European Court of Justice
14. Mr. Swayne: If he will make a statement about the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice regarding third pillar issues. [12125]
Mr. Doug Henderson: European Court of Justice jurisdiction in the third pillar is conferred on a case-by-case basis in respect of certain conventions. When the Amsterdam treaty comes into force, the ECJ's jurisdiction within the third pillar will be extended, but will remain limited. [Interruption.]
Madam Speaker: Order. What is happening on the Front Bench below the Gangway?
Madam Speaker: I did not recognise you, Dennis.
Mr. Canavan: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Swayne: May I refer the Minister to article F.2 of the European treaty on European Union and the decision
taken at Amsterdam to amend article L of the Maastricht treaty, which makes article F.2 fully justiciable by the European Court of Justice? Was it really Her Majesty's Government's intention that criminal law passed in this House would be subject to the jurisdiction of unelected judges in Brussels?
Mr. Henderson: I know that the hon. Gentleman has spent a lot of time reading the Amsterdam treaty, but he has failed to understand that there are only limited extensions of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Asylum and immigration, on which Britain has a distinct policy on asylum and immigration--items which have been moved into pillar 1--are justiciable in other European Union countries. Pillar 3 contains minor adjustments to the previous position. The hon. Gentleman will know that, under the Maastricht treaty which the Conservatives signed when they were in government, the European Court of Justice has the capacity to become involved in the arbitration of conventions agreed under pillar 3.
EU Budget
15. Mr. Evans: What discussions about the increase in the United Kingdom contribution to the EU budget took place at the Amsterdam summit. [12127]
Mr. Evans: Does the Minister think that we are getting value for money for the contribution that we make to the EU budget, which then finds its way into the salaries of Labour Members of the European Parliament? I say that because so many of them have shown themselves to be spineless and have turned themselves into political eunuchs by agreeing to be gagged and not to talk about any issue relating to the way in which they are elected to the European Parliament. Does the Minister agree that we should hold back some of the contribution to their salaries because they have agreed to be gagged?
Mr. Henderson: The House deserves a better question than that on an important issue. What I shall do for the hon. Gentleman is to answer the question that he should have asked, which was--
Madam Speaker: Order. That is rather too easy. The hon. Gentleman must answer the question asked.
Mr. Henderson: It would have been easy if the hon. Gentleman had addressed the issue that one of his hon. Friends addressed earlier on the budgetary issue, as he would have been given a sensible answer.
Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones: The Minister will know that the second largest component of the EU budget is that of structural funds. He will recognise that there are areas of the United Kingdom, particularly in Wales and Scotland, where that is an important issue. We are moving towards the reform of structural funds and we are setting up a Welsh Assembly and a Scottish Parliament. Will the Minister bear it in mind that those bodies will be directly involved in the way in which regional funds are distributed in the next century?
Mr. Henderson: The hon. Gentleman raises an important point. Major structural reforms are necessary in
the Union and will be tackled at the summit in Luxembourg; one such issue is that of the structural funds themselves. The rules that currently govern the dispersal of structural funds were drawn up seven or eight years ago when the shape of the European economy and the priorities for development were different from those that pertain today. An important issue that the summit must address is how we should consider what is happening in the European economy today and what change is necessary to the structural funds to ensure that those areas that need essential help receive it, regardless of the country in which they are located.
Mr. Nicholls: Does the Minister think that our ability to negotiate a fair contribution to the EU will be increased or decreased by our presence in the single currency?
Mr. Henderson: The United Kingdom's contribution has been decided in previous negotiations. I have already said in reply to a Conservative Member that such issues will be discussed at the summit in December, when a way forward will have to be decided on all such matters, including the future budget. One of the factors that I made clear at the weekend and which my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has made clear in countless negotiations with our European partners is that our abatement is not negotiable in the negotiations.
EU Common Foreign and Security Policy
17. Mr. Rammell: If he will make a statement on Britain's objectives in respect of common foreign and security policy matters during its presidency of the European Union. [12130]
Mr. Robin Cook: It will be our objective to demonstrate that, by working together, the countries of the European Union can carry greater influence to our mutual advantage. High priorities for the presidency will be maintaining robust pressure for fulfilment of the Dayton agreement on Bosnia and support for the resumption of progress in the middle east peace process. A major event in our presidency will be the Asia-Europe summit, which Britain will host and which will enable us to strengthen our trade links and our political dialogue with Asia.
Mr. Rammell: I thank the Secretary of State for that response. Will we seek to use the presidency to establish a European code of conduct on arms sales to ensure uniformity of policy across the European Union in line with our ethical foreign policy so that where we do not grant arms export licences, these are not taken up by other countries?
Mr. Cook: I am delighted to advise my hon. Friend that we have already begun such discussions. I was pleased that both the Prime Minister of France and the chair of its foreign relations committee have welcomed our new criteria on arms sales. We are in discussion with them on how we can turn those criteria into a common code of conduct, which would make sure that we compete against each other by raising commercial standards, not by lowering human rights standards.
Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting
3.30 pm
The Prime Minister (Mr. Tony Blair): With permission, Madam Speaker, I should like to make a statement.
The Commonwealth Heads of Government met in Edinburgh from 24 to 27 October--the first such meeting in Britain for 20 years. A Labour Government were in power the last time the meeting was held in this country and I am delighted that a Labour Government were able to welcome Commonwealth heads back to Britain. Fifty-one member states attended the meeting, 43 represented by heads of state or Prime Ministers--the largest ever gathering of Commonwealth heads. We also welcomed Fiji back to the Commonwealth.
I should like to thank the people of Scotland, and Edinburgh in particular, for the warm welcome that they gave my fellow Heads of Government and their delegations. I should also like to thank the police and everyone else involved in the organisation of the meeting for everything that they did to make the arrangements run so smoothly.
Her Majesty the Queen was able to address a Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting for the first time. The warmth of the welcome that she was given was a tribute to the regard in which she is held by Commonwealth Governments all over the world.
Also for the first time, a Commonwealth business forum was held immediately before the Heads of Government meeting. It reflected the clear focus of the meeting on economic issues, in particular trade, investment and development. After an excellent debate, we were able to agree the Edinburgh Commonwealth economic declaration on "Promoting Shared Prosperity". That demonstrates the unique role that the Commonwealth can play in bringing together developed and developing countries in this area. The declaration--the first of its kind--sets out economic principles shared by the Commonwealth to match the political principles on good government and human rights set out in the Harare declaration of 1991.
The declaration marks real progress in four areas: first, agreement that the Commonwealth should be a force for freer trade in the world. In particular, we supported the expansion of duty-free market access for exports from the least developed countries, the need for adequate successor arrangements for African, Caribbean and Pacific banana exporters and a study of steps to increase trade between Commonwealth countries.
Secondly, we recognised the important role that the private sector has to play. We strongly supported the conclusions of the business forum and in particular the decision to establish a business council to facilitate contact between businesses across the Commonwealth. We also agreed on the benefits that international investment can bring and decided to finalise a code of good practice for Commonwealth Governments to encourage private investment.
I attended the launch of the new south Asia regional fund in the margins of the meeting. The fund should provide some US$200 million from the Commonwealth Development Corporation, countries of the region and
others to promote investment in south Asia. The Government also intend that the Commonwealth Development Corporation should itself develop a new relationship with the private sector. That will give it increased funds for investment, and the proceeds from the sale of shares in the CDC will be ploughed straight back into the development programme.
Thirdly, we endorsed the target of halving the proportion of people living in extreme poverty by 2015, and emphasised the importance of substantial and swift debt relief in achieving that. That built on the valuable work of the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the Mauritius Commonwealth Finance Ministers' meeting and the target of ensuring that every highly indebted poor country is launched on the process of debt reduction by the year 2000. The UK is willing to cancel aid debts of lower-income Commonwealth countries totalling £132 million provided they follow sensible economic policies. We have already made formal offers to seven countries with debts of £18 million and discussions have started with others.
Fourthly, the meeting sent a strong message to the Kyoto climate change conference in December that all countries, developed and developing, will need to play a role in achieving reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
In that context, I was able to announce that the Government will provide an additional £3 million for the Commonwealth's Iwokrama rain forest project in Guyana.
On the political side, Commonwealth heads reaffirmed their commitment to the Harare principles on good governance and human rights and agreed that any future Commonwealth members must meet the Harare criteria. We agreed that the Commonwealth ministerial action group set up at Millbrook in 1995 should continue to deal with serious and persistent violations of the Harare principles.
The meeting spent some time discussing our approach to the Nigerian regime. We unanimously agreed to continue the suspension of Nigeria. That excludes Nigeria from all Commonwealth activity.
The Commonwealth ministerial action group now has delegated power to invoke a number of specified measures, if the group decides that those would further the process of transition and respect for human rights in Nigeria. They include visa restrictions, withdrawal of military attaches, the cessation of military training, an embargo on the export of arms, the downgrading of diplomatic missions and cultural links and a ban on sporting contacts.
In addition, after 1 October 1998, the action group will assess whether Nigeria has satisfactorily completed its transition programme. If that assessment is negative, Heads of Government will consider Nigeria's expulsion from the Commonwealth and the introduction of further measures, such as a mandatory oil embargo.
I believe that those measures, taken together, send a clear and strong message to the Nigerian Government from all the members of the Commonwealth: if they do not improve substantially their respect for human rights and move back to democracy, they face severe sanctions.
Heads of Government strongly condemned the military coup in Sierra Leone and decided to continue the suspension of the military regime from Commonwealth meetings. We also called for the immediate reinstatement of President Kabbah, the legitimate head of state, whom I welcomed to the meeting as my special guest.
A final communique reflecting our discussions was issued at the end of our meeting yesterday morning. Copies of that and the economic declaration are available in the Library of the House.
In conclusion, I am pleased to report to the House that there was a remarkable degree of agreement at Edinburgh on both economic and political questions. Many heads said that it was the most harmonious Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting for many years.
I believe that the Commonwealth is needed now more than ever. It bridges the gap between developed and developing and provides a forum for co-operation and joint endeavour, and it can provide a strong moral lead in a world where basic human rights are too often under threat.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |