Examination of witnesses (Questions 120
- 124)
TUESDAY 30 NOVEMBER 1999
THE RT
HON ROBIN
COOK, MR
EMYR JONES
PARRY, CMG and MR
NIGEL SHEINWALD
120. Yes, but that is my very point, Foreign
Secretary. The impression we got was that there were hundreds.
(Mr Cook) Nobody has hundreds.
121. Why could it not be? This is at minimal
cost. We are talking about the VAT inspector in a city in the
Czech Republic having a linkage with the VAT inspector in Portsmouth,
or something like that. That was the idea, was it not? That is
what we were advised back in Brussels. Perhaps I pitched it a
shade too low, but certainly the idea would be of growing one-to-one
relationships, and people could be learning. They would not have
to visit each other. They have invented the telefax and so on.
(Mr Cook) Yes, there is a lot of electronic communication,
but I think I am right in saying that in the great majority of
the cases of twinning you are expected actually to provide bodies
on the ground inthe country. When I say 23 cases of twinning,
that does not necessarily mean 23 people; in some cases it will
be a multiple. Let me say, I think that Britain was not well prepared
when we started out on this when the first round of twinning took
place. We have sought in this Government to try very hard to catch
up on that. If we take the last round—the second round,
not the first round where, as I say, we were behind the mark—and
if we take the number of cases of twinning allocated, we actually
had more than any other country, at 16 compared with 14 for France
and 11 for Germany.
Chairman
122. Foreign Secretary, could you give us a
note on the progress to date and the projections which have been
made, which I am certain will help the Committee?
(Mr Cook) I shall be very pleased to do so. One should
also note that most of these are competitive—in other words,
you are submitting a competitive bid with other countries, and
it is for those countries to decide—but I would not want
the Committee to think that what we are doing is undervalued.
I frequently meet with foreign ministers who do actually speak
very highly of what we are doing.
Mr Mackinlay
123. I have a final question. We have had four
ministers for Europe in 2.5 years.
(Mr Cook) I have too.
124. Yes. You are the custodian of our profile
and projection on European issues. What is the impact, what is
the collateral damage of our interests in relation to Europe,
of the fact that the Prime Minister has given us four ministers
in 2.5 years? It seems manifest that the poor devils just get
into their brief and they are moved to tramways and fine arts
or whatever. It is really irritating to Parliament to find that
this has happened. It might be very irritating for you, I do not
expect you to tell us, but you might throw some light on what
the damage is.
(Mr Cook) I am a man of immense philosophy, and I
am encouraged that the post of Minister for Europe is such a springboard
to higher things. I do not honestly think, Andrew, that there
has been any damage done. All the ministers we have had have been
enthusiastic and energetic ministers. Mr Vaz has also attended
the General Affairs Council meeting last week, and I know that
he made a very favourable impression on many of my colleagues.
Andrew, all I can assure you is that we are well regarded as a
Foreign Ministry throughout Europe, and I am very happy to accept
my role as it comes through to me.
Chairman: We would not expect any different.
Mr Mackinlay: Send it to the Prime Minister.
Sir Peter Emery: I think the Foreign Secretary
was meaning, speaking on behalf of the Government, that they are
very disappointed that none of them have come from this Committee.
Chairman: Finally, Foreign Secretary, can I
thank you and your colleagues on behalf of the Committee. If you
are not blown off course by withholding tax, let us hope that
the crowded agenda will be brought successfully to a conclusion.
Thank you very much.
|
