Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1
- 19)
TUESDAY 28 MARCH 2000
MR KEITH
VAZ, MP AND
MR MARK
LYALL GRANT
Chairman
1. Mr Vaz, may I welcome you on your first appearance
before the Committee. Welcome also Mr Lyall Grant who is an old
stager, a veteran who has been before the Committee on a number
of occasions. We look forward to a number of productive sessions
over the years ahead, Mr Vaz. Can I begin in this way: you as
Minister for Europe will clearly be the person responsible over
the period both of the Portuguese Presidency and of the French
Presidency for the preparations for the ultimate Intergovernmental
Conference. Can you give us some idea of, one, what your personal
role is, how much time this takes, what meetings you would normally
attend, and also where we are now in terms of the timetable.
(Mr Vaz) Can I say I am delighted to
be here and to have with me Mr Lyall Grant, the Head of the European
Union Department (Internal) who, as you know, is a veteran of
these Committees. He has lasted longer than most Euro Ministers.
I am pleased to be here to talk about the IGC. Of course, as Minister
for Europe I will have responsibility for what is happening at
the IGC and the Foreign Secretary will take, as he has always
done, a very close interest in these matters. In the end it will
be the Foreign Secretary who will lead for us on all the important
negotiations and discussions. We agreed at a very early stage
that as far as the preparatory group is concerned—we have
had three meetings so far with another taking place today as we
speak—that our representative would be Sir Stephen Wall,
our permanent representative at UKREP, the reason being that there
are a number of meetings that are taking place and the preparatory
group, as one would imagine from its name, prepares the ground
and prepares the scope. As far as where we are at the moment—
2. Where personally would you come in in terms
of the volume of meetings and the likely timetable over the next
months?
(Mr Vaz) The Foreign Secretary and I will attend the
GAC meetings in Brussels on a monthly basis. It depends very much
on what the French Presidency proposes to do as far as Europe
Ministers are concerned. Informal discussions are going on as
to the next stage beyond the preparatory group meetings but there
will be a keen political input from both myself and the Foreign
Secretary.
3. Where are we now?
(Mr Vaz) We have had three meetings of the group.
The fourth one, as I have said, is taking place today. There was
a brief reference to the IGC in the conclusions at Lisbon. There
will be a much more substantial report on the scope and much more
substantial update at Feiro in Portugal. I am informed on a weekly
basis by Sir Stephen Wall as to what progress has been made. We
were very keen to ensure as a government that the focus, the agenda
of the IGC should be as tight and focused as possible because
we are very keen to ensure this finishes by the end of the year.
4. Are we on track?
(Mr Vaz) We are on track. We have made clear that
if a whole shopping list is added to the Amsterdam leftovers we
will not complete the work by the necessary time.
5. Is it your fear that some countries may wish
to increase this shopping list so as to overload the conference
and there may be delays?
(Mr Vaz) Not so much a fear. Clearly countries are
very ambitious in terms of what they would like to see discussed,
but we are confident that the agenda for the IGC and scope of
the IGC will remain focused on the three leftovers and we will
proceed on that basis. I think everyone is aware if we are not
completed by the end of this year then the whole enlargement process
will be held up and the purpose of the IGC is to prepare us for
enlargement.
Chairman: That is precisely the point Dr Godman
wishes to raise on enlargement.
Dr Godman
6. Thank you, Chairman. Minister, I put it to
you in the House the other day, as I have done to Robin Cook himself,
that the process of enlargement is bedeviled by problems. Without
the radical and comprehensive reform of the CAP we cannot have
enlargement otherwise we will finish up with a system of two classes
of membership. I also said there would be a problem with the free
movement of labour in the period when most Member States, if not
all, are tightening up on their immigration laws. I seem to think
you gave me a dusty answer on that one. Also in relation to enlargement,
can I ask just how many Directives and Regulations there are in
force at this moment. I know you will not be able to answer that
question right now but if your officials could write to the Clerk
that would be useful because I suspect they run to several thousands
of documents. Will all of these apply to these new Member States
or will they be given a period of some years before all of the
Directives and Regulations will apply to them?
(Mr Vaz) Dr Godman, I am sorry if you thought I gave
you a dusty answer. I hope I would never do that to someone as
distinguished as yourself.
7. It was an extremely courteous one.
(Mr Vaz) The issue of enlargement is important so
far as the IGC is concerned of course because the IGC would not
take place unless we were having enlargement, but they are two
processes. The negotiations with the applicant countries are going
on, in my view, extremely well. On a regular basis I see either
European Ministers from the applicant countries or the chief negotiators
on their behalf and they are all confident that the negotiations
and timetables they have set themselves are going to be achieved.
You mentioned in the House and indeed today the issue of agriculture.
Clearly that is going to be an important matter when that chapter
of the acquis communautaire is opened. I am under no illusions
and I am sure you are not that this is not going to be a tough
chapter, but I do not see that process as in any way preventing
us in the EU from doing the work which we need to do to prepare
the institutions for enlargement. That process is continuing under
Commissioner Verheugen. He has now been allocated additional staff
to deal with the new six that have been given the go ahead since
Helsinki. So I am confident that process will continue, but you
are right, these are going to be very tough negotiations and discussions.
As with any organisation you have to be quite clear what your
expectations and ambitions are and the discussions will be quite
detailed. On the question of the number of regulations, I will
certainly write to you with the information you require.
8. But these rules of membership, and there
are many, many hundreds of Directives and Regulations, are there
not, ranging from occupational safety of the crews of fishing
vessels to farming, to working hours, are they going to be slapped
across the doorstep of these new Member States, if they are successful
in applying, or will they be allowed time to absorb these rules
of membership?
(Mr Vaz) When you join the European Union you have
to join the Union as a full Member State and, therefore, you have
to be able to accept whatever the rules are, as one would for
any organisation. The issue of transition is, of course, important.
We are not keen on long transition periods, however no accession
has taken place so far as I can remember without some form of
transition for some issue or the other. Certainly we had it when
we joined in some areas. We are keen to make sure that we do not
have a situation where lots of exemptions and transitions are
granted simply because we do not believe in a two-tier Europe,
we believe if you join then you should join with all the rules
and regulations that apply to other Member States applying to
you. I am quite certain that countries will be negotiating on
these points.
9. Finally, you see no problems with the free
movement of labour in these days?
(Mr Vaz) I do not. I think that we have a robust policy
and it is a policy that is working.
Chairman
10. Minister, you mentioned the Agricultural
Dossier. It is so complex in respect of Poland that some applicant
countries fear that they will be ready at a point when Poland
will not be ready and they may be held back as a result. How do
you respond to that?
(Mr Vaz) Chairman, you are absolutely right, there
are fears about individual chapters of the acquis and other
countries have their fears. This is not a process which in any
way is exclusive. If a country is ready and has met the terms
and criteria they will be allowed to join.
11. On their own or in a cluster?
(Mr Vaz) I think we will have to look at the discussions,
the negotiations, as they go on. No single country will have a
veto over other countries joining, really it is very much up to
the speed at which they negotiate. I am confident, having spoken
to Commissioner Verheugen on a number of occasions, that he is
aware of the problems and is keen to make sure that any of the
applicants that have any difficulties come forward and discuss
them as soon as possible.
Sir David Madel
12. The Government's White Paper on the IGC
in relation to qualified majority voting ruled out six areas where
we would not accept QMV: treaty change, taxation, border controls,
social security, defence and own resources. The Commission keeps
going back to QMV on taxation. Are you having any progress in
saying to the Commission "please stop pursuing that"?
What is the state of play?
(Mr Vaz) I do not think it is our job to tell them
to stop doing something. You are quite right, the Commission,
Sir David, has come up with a number of proposals on this and
our position remains absolutely clear, it is set in stone, it
is as is described in the paper issued on 15 February, those areas
are not up for discussion. What we have said generally on QMV
is that we will look at QMV on a case by case basis but not in
those areas that I have defined. We are not afraid of QMV in other
areas, we are ready to look at the proposals. We think that we
would not have had the Single Market without QMV and certainly
previous Governments have allowed QMV as a result of the Single
European Act and the Maastricht Treaty. I think we need to be
clear that the Commission is entitled to put forward proposals
and we are equally entitled to reject them.
13. It will be better if we try to proceed on
a harmonious route. To that extent the Commission produced its
own document adapting the institutions to make sense of enlargement
and suggested various things which could be QMV. One has the measures
to combat discrimination on the grounds of sex, race, etc, the
article taking up the pursuit of activities of self-employed persons.
On that list for adapting the institutions does the Government
have any objection to QMV extended, there which of course would
please the Commission because it was their idea in the first place?
(Mr Vaz) I think we want to study all the proposals
that have been put forward. We have made it clear where our bottom
line is. We are happy to look at any proposals that have been
put forward and hear the arguments for them. Clearly we cannot
control, nor do we seek to control, what the Commission says.
There will be lots of discussions. That is the whole purpose of
having this very lengthy process, it is going to last a year and
it is going to result in a lot of discussions and negotiations.
We are happy that they should put their views forward. We will
be very tough in defending our national interest in dealing with
all these issues.
14. The big six, if I can call them, no change
on that, but as far as the ones I have mentioned, there were only
two but there are others, basically the Commission must wait patiently
until the Government has made up its mind?
(Mr Vaz) I think so. We have made certain points publicly
about the way in which the European Court of Justice operates,
for example the rules of procedure which everyone believes should
be subject to good and long and detailed discussion, and the appointments
to the court. I think that we will need to look at each particular
case very carefully and make a decision on that basis. It is early
days.
Mr Rowlands
15. I would like to pursue the point made by
Sir David. The new term that has recently crept in is "QMV
in the fields of tax and social security relating to the proper
functioning of the internal market". That is the phrase that
we see in the Presidency documents and indeed in the Commission's
supplementary document. Are there any tax or social security measures
which you would see, or the Government would see, are in fact
part and parcel of the proper functioning of the internal market
and, therefore, could be subject to QMV?
(Mr Vaz) No. We have made our position quite clear
on these issues, it is clearly set out in the White Paper on 15
February and we are not changing our position on that.
16. In that case, Minister, I was a bit puzzled
by the Prime Minister. If I can take you back to yesterday's statement
and his answer. He was pressed by the Leader of the Opposition
who asked why did he commit himself to the so-called tax package,
tax harmonisation in another name, to which the Prime Minister
responded in column 26, "On the tax package we are committed
to finding agreement, and I believe that we can do so on our terms.
We are not against everything in the tax package. Indeed, we are
strongly in favour of some parts of it. We want tax laws that
are used as a hidden state subsidy to be removed, and that is
a major part of the tax package." That implies there are
taxes, or part of the tax package, which we are willing to see
become part of the QMV arrangements.
(Mr Vaz) No, that is not what the Prime Minister said.
17. My interpretation.
(Mr Vaz) Your interpretation is not what the Prime
Minister said.
18. Tell me what the tax package is then.
(Mr Vaz) The tax package is something, as the Prime
Minister said yesterday, which is a matter that is being discussed
and we will respond as positively as we can to the proposals that
have been put forward. The Chancellor has made that position absolutely
clear. When we are in a position to put those views forward we
will. The context is clear and the context is we believe there
are certain areas that are not up for grabs and not to be subject
to QMV.
19. I understand that.
(Mr Vaz) Where there are proposals that have been
put forward and we have been asked to respond to them we will
do so, and the Chancellor will do so.
|
