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
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
280
The text of that statement is available at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm100714/wmstext/100714m0001.htm#10071412000005.
Back
281
The text of the debate is available at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm100714/debtext/100714-0003.htm#10071434000003.
Back
282
HC Deb, 14 July 2010, col
1056. Back
283
Footnote: The term HR in this declaration covers all functions
of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and
Security Policy, who is also a Vice-President of the European
Commission, and the President of the Foreign Affairs Council without
prejudice to the specific responsibilities under the specific
functions she exercises. Back
|