The
Committee consisted of the following
Members:
Chairman:
Mr.
Edward O'Hara
Bryant,
Chris
(Minister for
Europe)
Curtis-Thomas,
Mrs. Claire
(Crosby)
(Lab)
Davey,
Mr. Edward
(Kingston and Surbiton)
(LD)
Francois,
Mr. Mark
(Rayleigh)
(Con)
Howell,
John
(Henley)
(Con)
McGovern,
Mr. Jim
(Dundee, West)
(Lab)
Newmark,
Mr. Brooks
(Braintree)
(Con)
Ottaway,
Richard
(Croydon, South)
(Con)
Prosser,
Gwyn
(Dover) (Lab)
Scott,
Mr. Lee
(Ilford, North)
(Con)
Soulsby,
Sir Peter
(Leicester, South)
(Lab)
Spellar,
Mr. John
(Comptroller of Her Majesty's
Household)
Stringer,
Graham
(Manchester, Blackley)
(Lab)
Stuart,
Ms Gisela
(Birmingham, Edgbaston)
(Lab)
Swinson,
Jo
(East Dunbartonshire)
(LD)
Truswell,
Mr. Paul
(Pudsey)
(Lab)
Sarah Davies, Committee
Clerk
attended the
Committee
Fifth
Delegated Legislation
Committee
Tuesday
2 March
2010
[Mr.
Edward O'Hara in the
Chair]
Draft
European Union (Definition of Treaties) (Stabilisation and Association
Agreement) (Bosnia and Herzegovina) Order
2010
10.30
am
The
Minister for Europe (Chris Bryant): I beg to
move,
That
the Committee has considered the draft European Union (Definition of
Treaties) (Stabilisation and Association Agreement) (Bosnia and
Herzegovina) Order
2010.
It
is a delight to serve under your chairmanship, Mr.
OHara, which I seem to be doing fairly regularly at the moment.
As I am sure all hon. Members know, the United Kingdom has been a
strong supporter of enlargement of the European Union. Part of the
process of that enlargement is that countries that might become
candidate countries, but which need substantial reform to enable them
to comply with the acquis communautaire, often enter first into a
stabilisation and association agreement. It is a form of first step
towards potentially becoming a candidate country for membership of the
European Union and then eventually going through all the different
chapters and joining the
Union.
Members
of the Committee will also know that the UK has been keen to see
stabilisation across the whole of the Balkansin particular, the
western Balkansfor a series of reasons that matter to our
security, not least the fact that all too often the western Balkans has
been a source of people trafficking, drugs trafficking and
international criminality that has affected the whole of the European
Union, and has affected the UK directly. We have also been keen to see
the domino effect of greater enhanced governance throughout the Balkans
as different countries in the Balkans have sought European Union
membership, and stabilisation and association agreements. We want to
enhance that process so that we can see greater peace throughout the
region.
Specific
issues need to be addressed in each of the countries, but the order is
an important next step to ensure peace, stability and economic
prosperity in the region. We have many worries about the situation in
Bosnia and Herzegovina. Last year, remarkably little political progress
was made, which is why it is necessary to maintain the Office of the
High Representative and not to undermine the role because the use of
the Bonn powers is still important. We note that there will be
elections later this year, and I have deep anxiety that there might be
much greater nationalistic noise in Bosnia and Herzegovina. I call on
all political leaders in Bosnia to make sure that, in understandably
defending the political position of their ethnic grouping, they do not
undermine the real progress that needs to be made in Bosnia and
Herzegovina if it is genuinely to aspire to EU
membership.
Ms
Gisela Stuart (Birmingham, Edgbaston) (Lab): In the light
of what my hon. Friend saidI accept that such things happened
before he became Minister for Europedoes he regret that the
Foreign Office withdrew funding from the British Association for
Eastern and Central Europe? It is exactly that sort of work in the
Balkans that would have helped those countries to
stabilise.
Chris
Bryant: When there are limited resources, it is always a
difficult call how best to deploy them. We were right to decide that
British troops should no longer be in Bosnia, but at the same time I
have been arguing with my EU colleaguesso far,
successfullythat we need to maintain the present level of
force, at least through to the end of this year. There is a real danger
that, against the background of the elections and with more fiercely
nationalistic noises being made, we would return to a less stable
Bosnia. I worry about the referendum that has been called in Republika
Srpska and the thinking behind it, as it is not likely to lead to
greater peace, stability and security either in the area or the region.
I hope very much that neighbouring countries will also play a role,
particularly Serbia with its own aspirations for EU membership, in
making sure that Bosnia and Herzegovina takes forward the necessary
reforms to ensure that corruption is dealt with, that the federal
Government are not undermined and that everything does not return to
nationalistic or, indeed, ethnic nationalistic
tendencies.
The
principal effect of the draft order is to ensure that the powers under
section 2 of the European Communities Act 1972 would be available to
give effect to provisions in the agreement and to permit any
expenditure arising from the stabilisation and association agreement to
be from the Consolidated Fund. As I am sure members of the Committee
will know, the agreement was signed in 2008. What is now needed is for
all the member countries of the European Union to ratify, and that is
effectively the process that we are going through today. I hope that
all members of the Committee will support the
order.
10.35
am
Mr.
Mark Francois (Rayleigh) (Con): It is a pleasure to serve
under your chairmanship, Mr. OHara. I am sure you
will keep us in order as we discuss the EU stabilisation and
association agreement with Bosnia and Herzegovina.
As the
Minister indicated, the purpose of the order is to give parliamentary
approval to an EU agreementsigned in Luxembourg on 16 June
2008that will provide for closer co-operation between Bosnia
and Herzegovina and with the European Union. As the explanatory notes
state in paragraph 4 under Legislative
Context,
The
Agreement is concluded by the European Communities and all its Member
States, and must be ratified by each of those States as well as by the
European
Union.
The
agreement in itself is not especially controversial. Nevertheless, it
represents the approval of what is technically a treaty to which the UK
will be party if the order is passed this morning. I would therefore
like to make some general observations on the situation in Bosnia and
Herzegovina, as well as put a number of questions to the Minister on
the proposed operation of the agreement.
By way of
background, it is now some 15 years since the Dayton peace agreement.
Despite the expenditure of a lot of money and words, Bosnia and
Herzegovina is again in a precarious state. That assessment is shared
by Mr. Dennis C. Blair, the director of US national
intelligence. In his annual threat assessment on 2 February, he
said:
Events
in the Balkans will again pose the principal challenges to stability in
Europe in
2010.
In
those circumstances, the stabilisation and association agreement
between the EU and Bosnia and Herzegovina could provide a further means
to help bring progress, build up central state institutions and help
achieve a lasting political settlement.
The agreement
sets out a general framework under which the EU can work with Bosnia
and Herzegovina. It also sets out a number of general aims and specific
measures concerning trade and economic co-operation. This builds on an
interim agreement, also of June 2008, which is already in force. The
agreement aims to help Bosnia and Herzegovina develop both its
institutions and its economy and to help the country integrate into the
wider Euro-Atlantic world. To this end there are a number of sensible
proposals and aims contained in it. These include the need to support
democratic institutions, continued co-operation with the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, moves towards greater
freedom of the movement of goods and integration into the World Trade
Organisation. Those aims will be pushed forward by the Stabilisation
and Association Council, which is given its legal form by article
115.
Let me
discuss a few of the measures in turn. The agreement seeks to encourage
free trade between the EU and Bosnia and between Bosnia and its
neighbours. To that end, it seeks to move towards a free trade area
within five years. That is a positive proposal and one on which Bosnia
deserves the support of the international community in order to raise
its standards of WTO and EU
norms.
Another
positive aspect of the agreement is article 14 and the commitment to
neighbourly relations and regional co-operation. There have been
positive efforts by the Bosnia and Herzegovina Government to settle
bilateral disputes, but multi-party co-operation has proved more
difficult to foster. Article 80 is intended to strengthen co-operation
on border controls and article 81 contains measures designed to foster
co-operation on tackling illegal immigration. Those are also
welcome.
All
these measures are positive and could help Bosnia move forward.
However, the problemas always in Bosniais political.
Bosnia remains deeply divided on sectarian lines, with politicians
using sectarian language to galvanise support, something to which the
Minister referred in his opening remarks. Last month, we saw Republika
Srpska pass legislation to enable it to hold a referendum on secession.
It has also attacked the work of the impartial international judges and
prosecutors in Bosnia. Given the political background, the positive
measures contained in the agreement will unfortunately be in danger of
being held hostage in a fragile political environment. The difficulties
could also increase in the run-up to the elections, which are due this
October. To prevent the progress from unravelling, Bosnian politicians
must begin to co-operate on constitutional reform
and
governance. The international community can help, but ultimately it is
for the politicians to put the interests of their communities first and
negotiate a lasting
solution.
A
factor that will undoubtedly help the political stabilisation of Bosnia
and Herzegovina is the full co-operation of Serbia and Croatia. There
are encouraging signs that politicians in Belgrade and Zagreb see that
it is in their own interests to foster stability in Bosnia. They should
be encouraged to continue their support for the central Bosnian
institutions, although there is now a legal case that threatens that,
to which I will return briefly at the
end.
There
are also encouraging signs that the United States continues to take a
keen interest in Bosnia and understands the dangers that a failed
Bosnia could pose to the rest of Europe. On 24 February, the US
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave evidence to a US foreign
affairs committee about Bosnia and Herzegovina. She
said:
We
dont want to see any moves to break up Bosnia, and we worry
about that a lot. So there is a long list of concerns. But the NATO
piece of it, Im watching very closely because I share your
concerns that we want Bosnia-Herzegovina to feel like theyre
welcome. And they may not be there yet. But with a little more effort,
they could
be.
She
also made the point that she was encouraging EU members to work with
Bosnia on NATO membership conditions. US engagement of such a kind is
welcomeindeed crucialif the international community is
to use its influence in a co-ordinated fashion to maintain stability in
the troubled region.
Last
December, Montenegro received a membership action plan to join NATO. At
the same meeting, Bosnia was put on hold. Bosnia will undoubtedly need
much help before it is ready to embark on a MAP to join NATO. However,
with US support, there could be a new positive influence to bear out in
Bosnia. For instance, a MAP would help reform and build up the central
Bosnian army.
I have put
the agreement in context. I now want to come to some of the points
about the agreement itself. I have a number of questions to put to the
Minister about how it will operate. First, given that the agreement was
signed nearly two years ago, which other countries have not yet
ratified it? Why are we discussing it today, two years on? Secondly,
given that the agreement aimed to conclude a free trade area within
five years, what progress has been made since the agreement was signed?
Thirdly, will the Minister assure us that he will not support any
attempt to split the EU special representative from the Office of the
High Representative? I think he intimated that in his opening remarks.
However, he knows that Conservative Members regard that as important,
because it could weaken the two offices and allow those who do not wish
to see strong international engagement to seek to divide the United
States and the EU, which we believe would be
dangerous.
Fourthly,
chapter 1 of the agreement, which starts on page 28, is concerned with
the movement of workers. Will the Minister explain what practical
changes in the movement of workers between Bosnia and the EUand
the UK in particularare likely to result from the
agreements coming into operation? Fifthly, it was reported that
last month seven organisations, including the Bosnian branches of
Transparency International and the Helsinki
Committee for Human Rights, told a meeting in Sarajevo that in their
opinion, visa liberalisation before the election would be a mistake, as
it could benefit nationalist politicians. Does the Minister agree with
that sentiment? Does the UK have any proposals for visa liberalisation
resulting from the
agreement?
Sixthly,
will the Minister assure us that there are no plans to remove
EUFORcertainly not before the next Bosnian elections in
October? Lastly, as I intimated earlier, is there anything that the
Minister can say about the arrest of Mr. Ejup Ganic, an
ex-President of Bosnia and Herzegovina, at Heathrow airport yesterday?
He is now in custody, awaiting determination of an extradition request
by Serbia. What is the Foreign Office position on that
request?
To
conclude, the EU is a large contributor of aid to Bosnia and has, in
EUFOR, a military force. On top of that, the United States is strongly
committed to the viability of Bosnia and, as Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton demonstrated in a Senate hearing, is willing to give political
backing to efforts to ensure stability. EU member states should
continue to support the integrity of Bosnia-Herzegovina, as doing so is
in our interests as well as its own
interests.
On
that basis, we do not plan to oppose the order, but I shall listen with
interest to the Ministers answers to my specific
points.