House of Commons - European Scrutiny Committee

European Scrutiny Committee Contents

64 The European External Action Service

(a)

(31439) 8029/10

—

(b)

(31747)

11507/10

—

Draft Council Decision establishing the Organisation and Functioning of the European External Action Service

Legal base Article 27(3) TEU; unanimity, with the consent of the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament

Deposited in Parliament (b) 1 July 2010

Department Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Basis of consideration EM of 9 July 2010 and Minister's letter 13 July 2010

Previous Committee Report (a) (31439) 8029/10: HC 5-xvii (2009-10), chapter 1 (7 April 2010)
(b) None

To be discussed in Council 26 July 2010 Foreign Affairs Council

Committee's assessment Politically important

Committee's decision Both cleared (debated on the Floor of the House on 14 July 2010), further information requested

Background

64.1 Prior to the coming-into-force of the Lisbon Treaty, in 1999, the office of High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy was introduced by the Amsterdam Treaty. Javier Solana had occupied that position since then. Together with an increasing number of officials in the Council Secretariat, he assisted the Council in foreign policy matters, through contributing to the formulation, preparation and implementation of policy decisions. He acted on behalf of the Council in conducting political dialogue with third parties. The six-monthly rotating Presidency was in charge of chairing the External Relations Council, representing the Union in CFSP matters, implementing the decisions taken and for expressing the EU position internationally.

64.2 Under the Lisbon Treaty, new arrangements came into being. The European Council, acting by a qualified majority, with the agreement of the President of the Commission, appoints the High Representative. He or she is subject, together with the President of the Commission and the other members of the Commission, to a vote of consent by the European Parliament.

64.3 At their informal meeting in Brussels on 19 November 2009, ahead of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon (TEU) on 1 December 2009, EU Heads of State or Government agreed on the appointment of Baroness Catherine Ashton as the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR).

64.4 The High Representative now exercises, in foreign affairs, the functions which, so far, were exercised by the six-monthly rotating Presidency, the High Representative for CFSP and the Commissioner for External Relations. According to Articles 18 and 27 TEU, the High Representative:

conducts the Union's common foreign and security policy;
contributes by her proposals to the development of that policy, which she will carry out as mandated by the Council, and ensures implementation of the decisions adopted in this field;
presides over the Foreign Affairs Council;
as one of the Vice-Presidents of the Commission, ensures the consistency of the Union's external action and is responsible within the Commission for responsibilities incumbent on it in external relations and for coordinating other aspects of the Union's external action;
represents the Union for matters relating to the common foreign and security policy, conducts political dialogue with third parties on the Union's behalf and expresses the Union's position in international organisations and at international conferences; and
shall be assisted by a European External Action Service.

64.5 Article 27(3) TEU constitutes the legal basis for the Council decision on the organisation and functioning of the EEAS.

"In fulfilling his mandate, the High Representative shall be assisted by a European External Action Service. This service shall work in cooperation with the diplomatic services of the Member States and shall comprise officials from relevant departments of the General Secretariat of the Council and of the Commission as well as staff seconded from national diplomatic services of the member states. The organisation and functioning of the European External Action Service shall be established by a decision of the Council. The Council shall act on a proposal from the High Representative after consulting the European Parliament and after obtaining the consent of the Commission."

European Council Guidelines on the EEAS

64.6 On 30 October 2009, the European Council agreed on guidelines for the European External Action Service (EEAS).[270] The future HR was invited to present a proposal for the organisation and functioning of the EEAS as soon as possible after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, with a view to its adoption by the Council at the latest by the end of April 2010.[271] This was endorsed by the December 2009 European Council.

64.7 According to the guidelines, the EEAS will be a single service under the authority of the High Representative, with an organisational status reflecting and supporting the High Representative's unique role and functions in the EU system. The EEAS will help the High Representative ensure the consistency and coordination of the Union's external action as well as prepare policy proposals and implement them after their approval by Council. It will also assist the President of the European Council and the President as well as the Members of the Commission in their respective functions in the area of external relations and will ensure close cooperation with the Member States. The EEAS should be composed of single geographical (i.e., covering all regions and countries) and thematic desks, which will continue to perform, under the authority of the High Representative, the tasks currently executed by the relevant parts of the Commission and the Council Secretariat. Trade and development policy as defined by the Treaty should remain the responsibility of relevant Commissioners of the Commission.

64.8 With respect to its staffing:

— EEAS staff will be appointed by the High Representative and drawn from three sources: relevant departments of the General Secretariat of the Council, of the Commission and of national diplomatic services of the Member States. Recruitment will be based on merit, with the objective of securing the services of staff of the highest standard of ability, efficiency and integrity, while ensuring adequate geographical balance;

— In order to enable the High Representative to conduct the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), the EU's crisis management structures should be part of the EEAS, under the direct authority and responsibility of the High Representative.

64.9 The EEAS should be a service of a sui generis nature, separate from the Commission and the Council Secretariat, with administrative budget and staff management autonomy and its own section in the EU budget, to which the usual budgetary and control rules will apply, and which the High Representative will propose and implement. It is to be guided by cost efficiency and aim at budget neutrality.

64.10 Overseas, the Commission's delegations will become Union delegations under the authority of the High Representative and be part of the EEAS structure. They will contain both regular EEAS staff (including Heads of Delegation) and staff from relevant Commission services. All staff should work under the authority of the Head of Delegation. EU delegations should work in close cooperation with diplomatic services of the Member States and play a supporting role as regards diplomatic and consular protection of Union citizens in third countries.

The first Council Decision

64.11 In March 2010, the HR presented a draft Council Decision. The previous Government submitted this for scrutiny shortly before the dissolution. This included detailed views from the then Minister for Europe (Chris Bryant), which are set out in the previous Committee's report of on 7 April 2010.[272]

The previous Committee's assessment

64.12 When it considered this draft Council Decision on 7 April 2010, the previous Committee began by expressing its appreciation of the assiduousness of the then Minister for Europe in keeping it informed about the development of this proposal, and for having submitted his Explanatory Memorandum so soon after its publication, so that it could be considered before the dissolution of Parliament.

64.13 The previous Committee noted that, while the draft Council Decision had remained faithful to the guidelines and timeline endorsed by the European Council, it was somewhat short of the finished article — for example, the Annex, which lists the departments of the Commission and Council Secretariat to be transferred to the EEAS, was incomplete.

64.14 The previous Committee also noted that the then Minister did not refer to adoption of the Decision before the end of April, but said instead that that the Council would be "seeking political agreement" on it by then — a formulation normally used in the context of co-decision. This, the previous Committee felt, perhaps unconsciously acknowledged the elephant in the room, i.e., the European Parliament (EP). The HR had said that her proposals "shall take effect on the day of the adoption of the amending Budget of the European Union providing for the corresponding posts and appropriations in the EEAS" — put otherwise, could be implemented only as and when the European Parliament did so. And all the indications thus far were that it was endeavouring to make its agreement to this and the associated staff and financial regulations dependent on changes to this Council Decision, particularly with regard to the Deputy Secretary General positions. Powerful voices there, it seemed, wished to see three political Deputy Secretaries General, broadly reflecting the political balance of the EP, who would deputise for the HR when necessary —a bizarre notion, the previous Committee felt, but one that was nonetheless in play, in a situation in which the EP had demonstrable leverage.

64.15 The previous Committee also noted that the crucial proposals in Article 8 — about who was to do what, when and with whom concerning the plethora of EU external programmes and instruments — remained open to discussion. The complex arrangements set out therein seemed much more to reflect unresolved "turf wars" and the inherent difficulties of a position that had a large footprint in two institutions than a formula consistent with the "principle of cost-efficiency aiming towards budget neutrality". As a consequence, the previous Committee was unable to understand the division of responsibilities between the EEAS and the Commission in the programming of the EU's external cooperation programmes, particularly with respect to development and neighbourhood policies in Article 8(4) and (5).

64.16 On the plus side, the previous Committee found the previous Minister's position on the provision of consular services to UK citizens overseas "commendably clear and robust."[273] Even so, the previous Committee noted, he had nothing to say about what impact he thought the creation of a world-wide EU diplomatic service, delivering technical assistance and in charge of an expanding EU common foreign and security policy, would have on Britain's capacity to promote her own bilateral interests in the major centres of power and opportunity, which would remain crucial to our future as a global economic and political actor.

64.17 With a general election now imminent, the normal option of holding the Council Decision under scrutiny while the Minister provided further information between the date of the meeting and the end April was not available to the previous Committee. The option of a debate ahead of adoption was also not possible. But the previous Committee did not feel able, on the basis of the information presently available, to clear it. In all the circumstances — and recognising that this could not take place until there was a new Parliament — the previous Committee considered that a debate was the best option available to it, and so recommended.

64.18 Given the importance of this proposal, which — the Minister's assurances on consular protection notwithstanding — was nonetheless likely to be the most significant change in the conduct of British foreign policy for many years, the previous Committee recommended that this debate should be on the Floor of the House. When it took place, it said that it would expect the new Minister to provide a detailed outline of what had been transferred to the EEAS and of the arrangements that had been decided upon under Article 8 between the EEAS and the Commission in the programming of the EU's external cooperation programmes, and his or her views on:

— how they fulfilled the "principle of cost-efficiency aiming towards budget neutrality"; and

— the impact of this new global diplomatic service on Britain's ability to promote her bilateral interests.

64.19 In the meantime, the previous Committee retained the document under scrutiny.[274]

64.20 On 26 April, the EU Foreign Affairs Council reached political agreement on the proposal.

64.21 Three accompanying measures are required for the EEAS to take up its work:

Commission's draft proposal amending the staff regulations (published on 9 June 2010);[275]
Commission proposal amending the financial regulation (published 24 March 2010);[276] and
an amending budget (published 15 June 2010).[277]

64.22 The European Parliament has co-decision rights in the above measures. Though it is only entitled to be consulted on the Council decision on the establishment of the EEAS, the EP sought to take advantage of its co-decision rights on the accompanying measures in order to seek effective de facto co-decision rights on the Council Decision. Negotiations continued thus since the end of April.

64.23 On 21 June 2009 a further "quadrilogue" (the HR, the Presidency representing the Member States, the Commission and EP representatives) was held in Madrid where all parties reached a political agreement on the establishment of the EEAS.[278] This agreement was approved by the EP will vote on 8 July 2010 during its plenary session in Strasbourg. This allows the High Representative/Vice-President of the Commission to commence the recruitment process over the summer by advertising vacant posts. The EP would then vote on the amendments to the staff and financial regulations in September. The present timeline foresees the EEAS to be up and running by December 2010.

64.24 Key elements include:

— the EEAS will be sui generis;

— the EEAS will be headed by a Secretary General and two Deputy Secretaries-General. The political representatives of the High Representative/Vice-President of the Commission (HR/VP) will be the Commissioner for Enlargement or the Commissioner for Development when discussing Commission matters and matters that fall under the competence of the Commission and the Member States. If the matter is solely the responsibility of the Member States, a Member States representative (most likely to be the Foreign Minister of the Presidency country) will stand in for the High Representative;

— on development policy, the HR "shall ensure overall political coordination of the EU's external action, ensuring the unity, consistency and effectiveness of the EU's external action in particular through the external assistance instruments". The EP wanted development policy to remain as closely linked with the Commission as possible to ensure consistency in that policy. Any decision concerning the European Development Fund, the Development Cooperation Instrument and the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument will have to be proposed jointly by the HR/VP and the relevant Commissioner and endorsed by the Commission College;

— the EEAS will from the start include a department assisting the HR in her institutional relations with the EP (as laid down in the Treaties and in the Declaration on Political Accountability) and with national Parliaments;

— on Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), while the HR has committed herself to seek the views of the EP on the main aspects and basic choices of this policy prior to the adoption of mandates and strategies — a Treaty requirement — the EP would seem to regard the agreement as meaning that it will have a more significant influence on EU foreign policy in the future;

— the EEAS will draw the majority of its staff from the Commission (including Directorate General (DG) RELEX, DG Development, External Service) and the General Secretariat of the Council (Policy Unit, ESDP and crisis management structures, DG E, staff seconded to EUSRs and CSDP missions). Any existing geographic imbalances would translate to the EEAS. The agreement specifies that "recruitment will be based on merit whilst ensuring adequate geographic and gender balance. The staff of the EEAS should comprise a meaningful presence of nationals from all Member States" (it is not however defined what adequate or meaningful actually mean). To ensure this is acted upon, the agreement includes a review clause stating that "the High Representative should, by mid-2013, make a review of the functioning and organisation of the EEAS, accompanied, if necessary, by proposals for a revision of this Decision";

— when the EEAS has reached its full capacity, staff from the Member States should represent at least one third of all EEAS staff at AD level, while permanent EU officials, including staff coming from the diplomatic services of the Member States who have become permanent EU officials, should represent at least 60% of all EEAS staff at AD level;

— the EP was not successful in its demand for pre-appointment hearings of EU Special Representatives (EUSRs) and senior Heads of Delegation agreed; instead the HR will respond positively to requests from the EP for newly appointed Heads of Delegations and EUSRs to appear before the Foreign Affairs Committee for an informal exchange of views before taking up their posts;

— the proposal for the 2010 amending budget requests a budget of €9.5million and the creation of a hundred new posts —20 in the headquarters and 80 in delegations. Whilst the EEAS should create synergies, the EEAS will also take on new roles which the Commission and General Secretariat of the Council were not currently fulfilling (e.g. the additional task of the Presidency of Working Groups and Committees which prepare the Foreign Affairs Council and the need to establish the Corporate and Policy Boards). The 20 posts in Brussels will provide for the creation of new management posts, a small legal cell and the task of chairing working groups. In the delegations the 80 posts will take on the tasks which were previously covered by the embassy of the country holding the presidency, i.e., representation, co-ordination and negotiation on behalf of the EU.

The revised Council Decision

64.25 Against this background, the purpose of this Council Decision is to establish the organisation and functioning of the European External Action Service (EEAS) as provided in the Treaty of Lisbon.

64.26 The Decision explains that provisions should be adopted relating to the staff of the EEAS and their recruitment and the Financial Regulation should be adopted in order to ensure budgetary autonomy necessary for the smooth operation of the EEAS. In particular the High Representative will be the Appointing Authority, in relation both to officials subject to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities and agents subject to the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants, and will also have authority over the Seconded National Experts ("SNEs") in post in the EEAS. The number of officials in the EEAS will be decided each year as part of the budgetary procedure and be reflected in the establishment plan.

64.27 The Decision goes on to explain how the EEAS should function including in relation to the following:

Nature and Scope: the EEAS will be administratively autonomous, separate from the Commission and the Council Secretariat and with its central administration headquarters in Brussels and include EU delegations to third countries and international organisations;
Tasks: as well as supporting the High Representative the Decision states that the EEAS shall assist the President of the Commission, the Commission and the President of the European Council;
Co-operation: the Decision outlines the ways in which the EEAS will work with the Council Secretariat and Commission services in order to ensure that there is consistency between the different areas of the Union External action;
Central Administration: as well as being managed by a Secretary General under the authority of the High Representative and assisted by two Deputy Secretaries-General, there will be a number of Directorates General comprising geographic desks covering all countries and regions of the world as well as multilateral and thematic desks. It explains in broad terms what will be included in the central administration such as a legal department and who will chair the Council preparatory bodies and that the Council Secretariat and the Commission will, as expected, also support the High Representative and the EEAS in line with their own responsibilities;
Union Delegations: the High Representative is responsible for the EU Delegations; the Decision outlines how the delegations will work, including how the delegations will get their instructions and how the heads of Delegation will implement operational credits. Implementation of those, including development spending, remains the responsibility of the Commission;
Staff: the Decision explains who shall comprise the EEAS, how they will be recruited and that changes will need to be made to the staff regulations to take account of the EEAS and give a base for staff terms and conditions;
Budget: the Decision makes it clear that the High Representative shall act as authorising officer for the EEAS section of the General Budget;
Programming: the Decision sets out the way in which the EEAS and the Commission will work together on programming and implementation cycle for the key geographic and thematic financial instruments.

64.28 Other issues covered by the Decision include the range of issues that a new body would have to take account of when it is being set up.

The Government's view

64.29 The Minister for Europe (David Lidington) says that the purpose of his Explanatory Memorandum of 9 July 2010 is to highlight where there have been notable changes from the text submitted by his predecessor under cover of his Explanatory Memorandum of 30 March, which "described the key issues on which the previous Government was working to secure." Since then, the Minister says, the text of the draft Decision has undergone some changes as a result of discussion, then political agreement of the text at the 26 April General Affairs Council and subsequently in consultation with the EP.

64.30 Referring to the June 21 "quadrilogue", the Minister says that, upon adoption, the final text of the Decision will be accompanied by a number of additional documents namely:

— a Declaration on political accountability;

— elements for a Statement to be given by the High Representative in the plenary of the European Parliament on the basic organisation of the EEAS central administration;

— a Statement of the High Representative on CSDP structures; and

— a Declaration of the High Representative with regard to the appointment procedure she intends to apply in the EEAS.

64.31 The Minister says that the "purpose of these accompanying Declarations and statements, which form part of the overall political agreement, is to provide welcome clarity around some elements of the text of the Decision."

64.32 The Minister continues as follows:

"The Government is seeking a distinctive British Foreign policy that extends our global reach and influence. As part of that we have set out to be highly active and activist in our approach to the European Union and using Europe's collective weight in the world to tackle external challenges: from stability in our neighbourhood, the threats of the Middle East, to combating global poverty. An effective High Representative and EEAS can contribute to these — including through EU engagement with third countries. We are therefore positive about the text of the draft Decision to establish the EEAS which has emerged from the High Representative's discussion with the European Parliament, as it respects the essentials of the proposals which the Member States reached political agreement on in April. This Decision will lay the foundation for the kind of service we believe will support the High Representative to help bring about a more coherent and effective EU external effort.

"The Government welcomes in particular a number of drafting changes between this text of 29 June (11507/10 and 11507/10 Corr1) and the text submitted earlier to Parliament on 30 March. In the recitals the UK helped secure the insertion of references to respecting the objectives of EU development policy (recital 3a) and that the EEAS be guided by the principle of cost-efficiency aiming towards budget neutrality recital (8bis), including using all opportunities for rationalisation. We are not expecting this rationalisation to happen on day one of the establishment of the EEAS. But neither are we expecting the full complement of Member States representatives to arrive on day one.

"The language on consular protection in Article 5.10 now makes a specific reference to the Treaty Articles on consular protection. This makes clear that Member States lead in this area and the Service will only provide a supporting role in line with the existing provisions in the Treaty that allow a European National to access the consular support of a Member State in a country where their own Member State has no provision. The reference to 'providing consular protection to Union citizens in third countries on a resource-neutral basis' is also important at a time of tight financial pressure in all Member States.

"The changes to the text brought about by the EP help to give clarity on the EP's role on scrutiny of spending under the external spending instruments. The EP also made minor textual changes to Article 8 which are helpful in defining better the role of the Development Commissioner. He is now 'responsible' for the preparation of the aid programming, done by staff inside the EEAS. The High Representative is responsible for ensuring the consistency of the EU's external action, especially through development aid. How this set up will work in practice remains to be seen. In order to ensure appropriate development understanding in the EEAS, the Government believes it should have a senior development stakeholder and sufficient development policy capacity to support the strategic programming and lead on sector and country spending allocations. There is no change to the text that suggests the High Representative should have political deputies or that the EEAS should be a part of the Commission. Earlier in discussions, both of these points were important to the EP but red lines for the Council.

"The Government welcomes the accompanying Declarations from the High Representative on the basic organisation of the EEAS and CSDP structures respectively. Having a Secretary General and two Deputy Secretaries General to support the High Representative should allow them to be able to provide high level corporate leadership, easing the burden of representational work on the High Representative, and ensuring policy coherence within the Service. We would expect the High Representative to seek to recruit her top team as soon as the EEAS is established. The Declaration on CSDP confirms that bringing the CSDP structures (CMPD, CPCC, SITCEN, EUMS)[279] into the EEAS, which should help in terms of ensuring the overall coherence of EU crisis management operations, will not affect their status, staffing or how they interact with the High Representative, to whom they will continue to report directly. The Government supports this approach.

"This Decision sets out a good framework for the EEAS. However, even once adopted, there will be a myriad of implementation issues to be worked through over the next six months and beyond, including around appointing the senior management team, the detail of the day to day handling of crisis management the reporting lines to the Development Commissioner and ensuring sufficient development expertise in the EEAS to carry out programming of the financial instruments. It will take time for the High Representative to match fully the structures inherited from the Commission and the Council Secretariat to EU foreign policy priorities as set by the Council. We shall support the High Rep in establishing the EEAS as a body which enables the EU to pursue agreed common positions in a cohesive and effective way. We shall be both vigilant and determined to ensure that the EEAS respects the competences of Member States for Foreign and Security Policy as set out in the Treaty and that it provides value for money. We will keep Parliament updated regularly on progress."

64.33 The Minister goes on to say that the proposal "does not have any direct financial implications for the UK". He explains that a Commission proposal outlining the implications for the EU budget relating to the establishment of the EEAS is expected to be adopted once the Council has adopted the Decision establishing the organisation and functioning of the EEAS; and confirms that, although not yet agreed, the Commission has estimated that the cost of the new Service for 2010 will be €9.5 million; on which basis, the Minister says, "the pre-abatement cost to the UK of this proposal in 2010 would be roughly £1million (€1,313,948 or £1,115,016)." The Minister also notes that the Decision states that "the establishment of the EEAS should be guided by the principle of cost-efficiency aiming towards budget neutrality".

64.34 Finally, the Minister confirms that: the EP has now been formally consulted and given a favourable Opinion; the High Representative is currently seeking the Commission's consent; the draft will then come back to the Council for formal adoption by unanimity; and that he expects the text to be taken at the 26 July General Affairs Council.

The Minister's letter of 13 July 2010

64.35 The Minister amplifies his Explanatory Memorandum as follows:

"As you are aware, the Lisbon Treaty brings together both the former external work conducted by the European Community and the classic foreign and security policy tools under the CFSP. Responsibility for the conduct of the EU's external action will fall to the High Representative, Baroness Ashton, who fulfils the dual roles of High Representative and vice-President of the Commission and who will be supported by the EEAS. She is ultimately responsible to the Council. EU Delegations, staffed by members of the EEAS — including secondees from the Member States — replace the former Commission and Council delegations around the world and will support the High Representative in both her roles. EU Delegations will represent agreed EU positions on ex-Community matters on which the Commission formerly represented the EU, as well as taking over the rotating Presidency's former responsibility for representing the EU on CFSP matters."

64.36 The Minister goes on to say:

"Some Member States and the European Parliament wanted to go further, for example to see the EU Delegations take on a wider role in the provision of consular services, or to make the EEAS part of the Commission. We argued successfully against such proposals."

64.37 The Minister then says that, in his view:

"through negotiation we have secured a draft EEAS Decision which respects the UK Government's aims. Those aims are clear: where we have agreed a position with our EU partners, the EEAS should allow the EU to use its collective weight more effectively to make that voice heard. It should support, supplement and strengthen our role. However, in doing so we firmly believe that the existing division of competences between the EU and Member States must be respected.

"Member States remain free to determine how they are represented when they decide to coordinate on matters falling within their competence."

64.38 In relation to consular services, the Minister says:

"the EEAS role is limited to coordination work in support of Member States' consular assistance. The provision of frontline consular services remains strictly a Member State responsibility. There is no role for EU Delegations in this regard."

64.39 Once the EAS Decision is agreed, the Minister says:

"we are likely to see some administrative restructuring of EU Delegations by the High Representative to fulfil the tasks assigned to the EU Delegations by the Treaty. We want to ensure that such changes fit with the cost-neutral objective in the text of the draft EEAS Decision.

"The establishment of the EEAS should be guided by the principle of cost-efficiency aiming towards budget neutrality. To this end, transitional arrangements and gradual build-up of capacity will have to be used. Unnecessary duplication of tasks, functions and resources with other structures should be avoided. All opportunities for rationalisation should be used."

64.40 The Minister then says:

"I have also made a Written Ministerial Statement on the additional rights for the EU as an observer in the UN General Assembly (UNGA), which will enable the EU Delegation to fill the role previously played by the rotating Presidency in the UNGA.[280] As is currently the case, the EU will not have the right to vote, it will not be a full member of the UNGA, nor will it be seated among the UN Member States. The granting of such rights to the EU will not affect the UK's position as a member of the UNGA or of the UN Security Council."

64.41 The Minister expresses his desire to ensure that the Committee and Parliament as a whole is kept fully informed of the progress of this implementation work, and says that he will ensure that the Committee is kept fully informed and consulted "as we pursue our goals for the EU to use its collective weight more effectively on the external stage."

64.42 In the first instance, the Minister notes that he will debate the EEAS on the floor of the House on 14 July 2010.

64.43 At the end of that debate, the House resolved:

"That this House takes note of European Document Nos. 8029/10 and 11507/10, draft Council Decisions establishing the organisation and functioning of the European External Action Service; European Document No. 8134/10, draft Regulation on the Financial Regulations for the European External Action Service; and an unnumbered draft Regulation amending Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities and the conditions of employment of other servants of those Communities; and supports the Government's policy to agree to the Decision establishing the External Action Service at the Foreign Affairs Council in July 2010."[281]

Conclusion

64.44 Had the Committee been in existence at the time, we would both have confirmed our predecessors' recommendation regarding the first draft of the Council Decision and also recommended that the revised version be debated on the floor of the House. Had we been able to do so, we would have noted that the arrangements set out in Article 8 — which are central to the main rationale of the EEAS, i.e., the greater effectiveness of the EU's external action and the billions of Euros involved — are still no more reassuring than in the original text, especially given the Minister's statement that: "How this set up will work in practice remains to be seen."

64.45 We would also have asked the Minister to explain what he means by "a senior development stakeholder and sufficient development policy capacity to support the strategic programming and lead on sector and country spending allocations", and to outline what he plans to do with regard to the effective implementation of "the myriad of implementation issues to be worked through over the next six months and beyond, including around appointing the senior management team, the detail of the day to day handling of crisis management the reporting lines to the Development Commissioner and ensuring sufficient development expertise in the EEAS to carry out programming of the financial instruments."

64.46 We would also have noted that something else that remains to be seen too is the extent to which the establishment and operation of the EEAS is able to conform to "the principle of cost-efficiency aiming towards budget neutrality."

64.47 The debate notwithstanding, we hope that, between now and the review in 2013, the Minister will take every opportunity to see to it that (as he puts it) "unnecessary duplication of tasks, functions and resources with other structures [are] avoided {and} all opportunities for rationalisation [are] used", and to ensure that mechanisms are devised that are able properly to assess the effectiveness of the arrangements that will now be put in place governing the planning and implementation of the EU's external action.

64.48 We would also have highlighted the Declaration on Political Accountability (which we reproduce at the Annex to this chapter of our Report), upon which the Minister is silent in both his Explanatory Memorandum and his letter. During the debate, the Minister was asked to clarify the legal status of those documents and the degree to which they are relied on, and to provide the House with reassurance that the agreement does not give the Commission or the European Parliament any greater power over the budget for the Common Foreign and Security Policy. He replied that:

"Declarations are not legally binding. They are statements that provide a political context for a Council decision and how it will operate as it is taken forward."[282]

64.49 The first sentence is self-evident; the second is ambiguous. The EP has made it plain its belief that, under these arrangements, it will have greater oversight of EU external action: otherwise, what would be the point of its negotiating such a Declaration? Reading the text itself, a number of questions arise. Point 1 talks of "exchanges of views prior to the adoption of mandates and strategies in the area of relevant EP Committees" and "enhanced" briefings that "relate in particular to CFSP missions financed out of the EU budget, both to those being implemented and those under preparation". Then, in Point 10 at the end, the Declaration says:

"The HR will play an active role in the upcoming deliberations on the updating of existing arrangements regarding the financing of CFSP contained in the 2006 IIA on budgetary discipline and sound financial management, based on the engagement with regard to the issues set out in point 1. The new budgetary procedure introduced by the Lisbon Treaty will apply fully to the CFSP budget. The High Representative will also work for greater transparency on the CFSP budget, including, inter alia, the possibility to identify major CSDP missions in the budget (like the present missions in Afghanistan, Kosovo and Georgia), while preserving flexibility in the budget and the need to ensure continuity of action for missions already engaged."

64.50 We ask the Minister to set out his views on the significance of this Declaration in greater detail. In the final analysis, CFSP activity depends upon the level of funding and who controls it. We therefore ask in particular that he clarifies:

— the full import of the first sentence of Point 10;

— what the new budgetary procedure is and how it might "apply fully to the CFSP budget";

— what he understands by "greater transparency on the CFSP budget";

— what the import is of the words "the possibility to identify major CSDP missions in the budget (like the present missions in Afghanistan, Kosovo and Georgia), while preserving flexibility in the budget and the need to ensure continuity of action for missions already engaged."

64.51 We should also like to know under what authority the HR negotiated this Declaration, and the extent to which Member States were involved in its drafting.

Annex: Declaration by the High Representative[283] on Political Accountability

"In her relationship with the European Parliament, the High Representative (HR) will build on the consultation, information and reporting engagements undertaken during the last legislature by the former Commissioner for external relations, the former High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, as well as by the rotating Council Presidency. Where necessary, these engagements will be adjusted in light of Parliament's role of political control and the redefinition of the role of the High Representative as set out by the Treaties and in accordance with Article 36 TEU.

"In this regard:

"1. On CFSP, the HR will seek the views of the European Parliament on the main aspects and basic choices of this policy in conformity with Article 36 TEU. Any exchanges of views prior to the adoption of mandates and strategies in the area of CFSP will take place in the appropriate format, corresponding to the sensitivity and confidentiality of the topics discussed. In this context, also the practice of Joint Consultation Meetings with the Bureaux of AFET and COBU will be enhanced. Briefings given at these meetings will relate in particular to CFSP missions financed out of the EU budget, both to those being implemented and those under preparation. If necessary, additional Joint Consultation Meetings may be arranged, on top of regular meetings. The EEAS presence (at all the meetings) will include in addition to the permanent Chair of the Political and Security Committee, senior officials responsible for the policy.

"2. The results of the ongoing negotiations on the Framework Agreement between the European Parliament and the Commission on negotiations of international agreements will be applied mutatis mutandis by the HR for agreements falling under her area of responsibility, where the consent of the Parliament is required. The European Parliament will be, in accordance with Article 218 (10) TFEU, immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedure, including for agreements concluded in the area of CFSP.

"3. The HR will continue the practice of holding in-depth dialogue on and of communicating all documents for the strategic planning phases of the financial instruments (except European Development Fund). The same will apply to all consultative documents submitted to Member States during the preparatory phase. This practice is without prejudice to the outcome of negotiations on the scope and application of Article 290 of the TFEU on delegated acts.

"4. The present system of providing confidential information on CSDP missions and operations (through the IIA 2002 ESDP EP Special Committee) will be continued. The HR can also provide access to other documents in the CFSP area on a need to know basis to other MEPs, who, for classified documents, are duly security cleared in accordance with applicable rules, where such access is required for the exercise of their institutional function on the request of the AFET Chair, and, if needed, the EP President. The HR will, in this context, review and where necessary propose to adjust the existing provisions on access for Members of European Parliament to classified documents and information in the field of security and defence policy (2002 IIA ESDP). Pending this adjustment, the HR will decide on transitional measures that she deems necessary to grant duly designated and notified MEPs exercising an institutional function easier access to the above information.

"5. The HR will respond positively to requests from the European Parliament for newly appointed Heads of Delegations to countries and organisations which the Parliament considers as strategically important to appear before AFET for an exchange of views (differing from hearings) before taking up their posts. The same will apply to EUSRs. These exchanges of views will take place in a format agreed with the HR, corresponding to the sensitivity and confidentiality of the topics discussed.

"6. In cases where the High Representative cannot participate in a debate in the plenary of the European Parliament, she will decide on her replacement by a Member of an EU institution, that is either by a Commissioner for issues falling exclusively or prevailingly into Commission competence or a Member of the Foreign Affairs Council for issues falling exclusively or principally into the area of CFSP. In the latter case, that replacement will either come from the rotating Presidency or from the trio Presidencies, in conformity with Article 26 if the Council's Rules of Procedure. The European Parliament will be informed of the High Representative's decision on replacement.

"7. The HR will facilitate the appearance of Heads of Delegations, EUSRs, Heads of CSDP missions and senior EEAS officials in relevant parliamentary committees and subcommittees in order to provide regular briefings.

"8. For military CSDP operations, financed by the Member States, information will continue to be provided through the IIA 2002 ESDP EP Special Committee subject to any revision of the IIA, in accordance with point 4 above.

"9. The European Parliament will be consulted on the identification and planning of Election Observation Missions and their follow-up — in keeping with Parliament's budgetary scrutiny rights over the relevant funding instrument, i.e. the EIDHR. The appointment of EU Chief Observers will be done in consultation with the Election Coordination Group, in due time before the start of the Election Observation Mission.

"10. The HR will play an active role in the upcoming deliberations on the updating of existing arrangements regarding the financing of CFSP contained in the 2006 IIA on budgetary discipline and sound financial management, based on the engagement with regard to the issues set out in point 1. The new budgetary procedure introduced by the Lisbon Treaty will apply fully to the CFSP budget. The High Representative will also work for greater transparency on the CFSP budget, including, inter alia, the possibility to identify major CSDP-missions in the budget (like the present missions in Afghanistan, Kosovo and Georgia), while preserving flexibility in the budget and the need to ensure continuity of action for missions already engaged."

270 A paper presented by the then EU Presidency, available at http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st14/st14930.en09.pdf Back

271 The extract from the European Council conclusions reads thus:

"The European Council takes note of the preparatory work in view of the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty (doc. 14928/09). It endorses the Presidency's report on guidelines for the European External Action Service (doc. 14930/09) and invites the future High Representative to present a proposal for the organisation and functioning of the EEAS as soon as possible after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty with a view to its adoption by the Council at the latest by the end of April 2010. In this context, it also recognises the need, as underlined in the European Security Strategy, for the European Union to become more capable, more coherent and more strategic as a global actor, including in its relations with strategic partners, in its neighbourhood and in conflict-affected areas." Back

272 See headnote: (31439) 8029/10: HC 5-xvii (2009-10), chapter 1 (7 April 2010). Back

273 For the Committee's consideration of this matter, see (29353) 5947/07: HC 16-xvii (2007-08), chapter 1 (26 March 2008) and the subsequent debate in the European Committee on 23 June 2008, the record of which is available at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmgeneral/euro/080623/80623s01.htm. Back

274 See headnote: (31439) 8029/10: HC 5-xvii (2009-10), chapter 1 (7 April 2010). Back

275 The proposal can be found at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0309:FIN:EN:PDF. Back

276 The proposal can be found at: http://ec.europa.eu/budget/library/documents/sound_fin_management/financial_regulation/

comm_2010_0085_en.pdf. Back

277 The proposal can be found at: http://www.ipex.eu/ipex/webdav/site/myjahiasite/groups/CentralSupport/public/2010/COM_2010_0315/COM_COM(2010)0315_EN.doc Back

278 The text of the agreement can be found at: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/10/st11/st11507.en10.pdf. Back

279 Civilian Planning Conduct and Capability (CPCC), Crisis Management and Planning Directorate (CMPD), EU Military Staff (EUMS). Back