Draft European Union (Definition of Treaties) (Republic of Korea Framework Agreement) Order 2012
The Committee consisted of the following Members:
† Ainsworth, Mr Bob (Coventry North East) (Lab)
Corbyn, Jeremy (Islington North) (Lab)
† Dunne, Mr Philip (Ludlow) (Con)
† Ellis, Michael (Northampton North) (Con)
† Freer, Mike (Finchley and Golders Green) (Con)
† Gapes, Mike (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)
† Goodwill, Mr Robert (Scarborough and Whitby) (Con)
† Graham, Richard (Gloucester) (Con)
† Hendrick, Mark (Preston) (Lab/Co-op)
† Horwood, Martin (Cheltenham) (LD)
† Lidington, Mr David (Minister for Europe)
† Mann, John (Bassetlaw) (Lab)
Paisley, Ian (North Antrim) (DUP)
† Reynolds, Emma (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)
Sharma, Mr Virendra (Ealing, Southall) (Lab)
† Wharton, James (Stockton South) (Con)
† Williams, Roger (Brecon and Radnorshire) (LD)
Mark Oxborough, Committee Clerk
† attended the Committee
The following also attended ( Standing Order No. 118(2) ) :
Ellwood, Mr Tobias (Bournemouth East) (Con)
Sixth Delegated Legislation Committee
Thursday 26 January 2012
[Mr Mike Weir in the Chair]
Draft European Union (Definition of Treaties) (Republic of Korea Framework Agreement) Order 2012
8.55 am
The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington): I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft European Union (Definition of Treaties) (Republic of Korea Framework Agreement) Order 2012.
As always, Mr Weir, it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. The framework agreement was negotiated in parallel with the EU-Republic of Korea free trade agreement, signed on 6 October 2010. As I am sure hon. Members here realise, the EU, with the support of the United Kingdom, agreed several years ago that all free trade agreements between the EU and third countries should be accompanied by a broader framework agreement setting out wider areas for mutual co-operation between the EU, its member states and the country concerned.
The framework agreement provides a structure aimed at strengthening the EU’s and member states’ co-operation with the Republic of Korea in a number of fields, including justice, freedom and security, good governance and taxation. It will allow for further engagement with the Koreans on global issues, such as climate change, security of energy supply and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. It also gives us a further tool through which to discuss and work on important issues with a key ally in the region.
Korea matters to the UK. It is already the fourth largest economy in Asia, and it continues to grow fast. Over the next five years, it is likely to become the 10th largest driver of world economic growth. The free trade agreement helps us to harness that to our mutual advantage. It is worth reiterating that the EU’s FTA with Korea remains the most significant single such agreement ever negotiated by the EU, and the Prime Minister was personally and enthusiastically engaged in its completion.
The Republic of Korea is also a like-minded global partner and important international actor. Korean troops are serving in Afghanistan, and Korea’s ships are on duty in the Indian ocean, helping to tackle piracy. With the UK, Korea is a world leader on green issues, which is a keystone policy for President Lee. Any hon. Member here who has visited Korea will have been made very aware of the Korean Government’s commitment to policies to reduce the impact of climate change, and their fervent belief that such policies are not only in the environmental interests of the international community, but provide Korean business with great economic opportunities for the future.
Korea’s partner of choice has been the United States, but we hope that the framework agreement will give EU countries an opportunity to increase their engagement in many of the relevant policy areas, and that the
agreement will therefore contribute to the better implementation of UK objectives in the Republic of Korea. The EU delegation in Seoul is in negotiations with the Korean Government on what areas of co-operation to prioritise and how to take matters forward. In a world where power is shifting away from the traditional centres, such action is becoming ever more important. Her Majesty’s Government fully support the agreement. We firmly believe that it will help to enhance and strengthen the relationship between the EU, its member states and the Republic of Korea, and I commend the order to the Committee.8.59 am
Emma Reynolds (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab): It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship for the first time, Mr Weir. I wish to draw the attention of members of the Committee to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests in respect of my visit in June last year to the annual meeting of the UK-Korea Forum for the Future. I welcome this opportunity to discuss the framework agreement; the free trade agreement was discussed by the Third Delegated Legislation Committee last week.
As with the free trade agreement with Korea, we support the aims of the framework agreement, and welcome the new era of co-operation between the European Union and South Korea that it heralds. The strategic partnership on the agreement will ensure that the EU’s relationship with South Korea in the future will be based not only on economic considerations, important though they are, but on mutual co-operation on a broader range of matters—co-operation based on shared ideas, values and goals. The commitment to human rights, democratic principles, fairness and unity against those who threaten such values is particularly welcome, as is the regular political dialogue that is included in the framework agreement.
As the Minister has set out, the framework agreement covers numerous other areas, but I wish to refer to one that is of particular importance. South Korea is world-leading in many technologies, and has been at the forefront of scientific and technological innovation in recent years. Sections of the agreement call for greater co-operation on science and technology, energy and environmental matters; that will be of great benefit to the United Kingdom and the rest of the European Union, not only in the development of new technology, but because of the job creation that it will bring.
The overall benefits of the free trade agreement and the framework agreement, which sits alongside it, for British business, jobs and employees are impressive. According to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, the free trade agreement is set to boost the UK economy by £500 million a year. In 2010, the EU as a whole exported €28 billion-worth of goods and €6 billion-worth of services to South Korea, making the country the EU’s ninth biggest trade partner. Put simply, South Korea is a valued trading partner, and one with which we are pleased to be deepening our relations.
In a recent Opposition day debate, the Minister reminded us all that
“without the size of the EU behind us, the United Kingdom on its own is unlikely to be able to secure the same deep and ambitious free trade deals with other regions or trading countries around the world.”—[Official Report, 13 December 2011; Vol. 537, c. 724.]
I could not agree more with him, and as he said, we are far stronger as a full and active member of the European Union, as the framework agreement and the free trade agreement demonstrate. The Opposition fully support the framework agreement and the ratification of the free trade agreement, and look forward to the substantial benefits that they will bring.
9.2 am
Martin Horwood (Cheltenham) (LD): It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Weir. I, too, agree with the Minister and the hon. Member for Wolverhampton North East that the order represents an excellent example of the European Union diplomatic and trade initiative, which offers the opportunity for member states to play an increasingly important role in the world through the European Union—something that it would be absolutely impractical and probably impossible for us to do as effectively as 27 different nations. We are clearly stronger and more influential together than we are separately.
I wish to ask two questions. Lord Alton, when considering the framework agreement in another place, highlighted some issues that perhaps surprisingly were not in the overall framework agreement, specifically the relationship with North Korea, and human rights. Will the Minister tell us a little more about why such matters do not seem to be developed fully in the framework agreement, and whether other bilateral or European Union relationships have been developed on those issues?
Will the Minister enlarge on the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction? That is a live issue. North Korea is the only example so far of a non-proliferation treaty signatory that has gone on to develop nuclear weapons that, in some sense, pose an existential threat to its near neighbour. We perhaps face a parallel or comparable situation in Iran, and it is important to understand: how we are responding, in the overall context, to the development of weapons of mass destruction in the Korean peninsula; the European Union’s and the British Government’s attitudes to that development; and what the framework agreement puts in place to try to tackle that issue in the region. Overall, I welcome the framework agreement and the order.
9.5 am
Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op): May I declare an interest? I am the vice-chair of the all-party Britain-Republic of Korea parliamentary group, and like my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton North East, I was at the UK-Korea Forum for the Future in June last year. I have attended forums on previous occasions in this country, as well as in the Republic of Korea. I also went to South Korea with the all-party group four years ago to learn extensively about the political and economic developments there.
I am pleased that the order is being debated today. It is a symbol of a further strengthening of relations between the European Union and the Republic of Korea. The Republic of Korea is a vibrant democracy, coming out of a period under an authoritarian military regime, and it is an important symbol of progress. It has transformed its economy over the past 50 years, having gone from a period when living standards were higher in North Korea than in the South, to today, when living standards are 40 times greater, per capita, in South Korea than in North Korea.
We should do all we can. We should welcome the fact that the EU has built this relationship. There were difficulties with the free trade agreement with the United States; that ran into some problems in the American Congress, which is not unusual, I guess. It is important that we in Europe, who do not yet have the level of relationship with the Republic of Korea that we should, capitalise on that fact. That is why the proposal today and the associated free trade agreement are so important.
Finally, I should like to ask the Minister whether the Government will intensify bilateral contact with the Republic of Korea over the coming years.
9.7 am
John Mann (Bassetlaw) (Lab): It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Weir. I admit that I know absolutely nothing about Korea, and have never looked into matters Korean at any stage as an MP; I have never had any requests from my constituents to do so. However, I am sure that it is an important country, and it is good that we trade with it. Will the Minister add a bit of context? I have noted the volume of legislation emanating from the European Union—of which this order is yet another bit—that has been introduced by the Government. Will the Minister confirm that, under this Government, the number of pieces of legislation that Parliament is being asked, and is choosing, to agree to annually is higher than at any other time in our history?
Martin Horwood: Does the hon. Gentleman not accept that the conclusion of a free trade agreement, and perhaps a framework agreement covering other aspects of relations with the Republic of Korea, is the sort of work that we ought to be developing anyway, even if we were not in the EU? We would be discussing it in any case.
The Chair: Order. Before the hon. Gentleman continues, I point out that we are discussing a specific instrument, not general European legislation. I ask him to bring his remarks back to the instrument before the Committee.
John Mann: I appreciate that, Mr Weir, and I thank you for your guidance. I merely wanted to ask about context. My other question is whether, over the next year, the Minister foresees the introduction of any additional legislation relating to the Republic of Korea or North Korea to complement this order.
9.9 am
Mr Lidington: I am grateful to the Members who have contributed to the debate, and to the hon. Members for Wolverhampton North East, and for Ilford South, and to my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham, for their firm support for the measure. It is worth paying tribute to the work of the all-party Britain-Republic of Korea parliamentary group over many years to promote good bilateral relations, and also to the work of the UK-Korea Forum for the Future. I had the privilege of attending one of its gatherings a few years ago, when my party was in opposition. It added greatly to my understanding of the importance of a country about
which until then I had known relatively little, so I applaud the work that those two organisations have done.First, I will respond to the hon. Member for Bassetlaw. I do not have an analysis in front of me of exactly how many items of legislation stemming from the European Union we have had before Parliament since the 2010 general election, and how many in the equivalent period before. Each measure is brought forward on its own merits. I suspect that if one looked over a period of a few years, one would find not much difference in the pattern. Free trade and framework agreements are often the subject of negotiation for years rather than months, whichever Government are in office. There is usually a fair amount of cross-party consensus on such measures, and when the agreements are concluded by the United Kingdom, it falls to the Government to bring them before the House.
On legislation affecting Korea, to the best of my knowledge I am not expecting any other Foreign Office legislation to do with either North Korea or South Korea, although I clearly cannot rule it out. Circumstances may change. Events might mean that a specific measure, perhaps with another Government Department in the lead, is brought before a Committee or the House in future. I hope that if such a measure were brought forward, it too would enjoy the consensus that we have seen in Committee this morning.
I welcome the Opposition’s support for the framework agreement, which the hon. Member for Wolverhampton North East expressed. I agree with her about the importance of developing co-operation in science and technology between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Korea. I also agree that the successful negotiation of this very ambitious free trade agreement has been assisted by our membership of the European Union. There is no doubt that for Korea—or any other third-party country—access to a single market of 500 million consumers is a larger incentive than would be offered by one European Union member state seeking to negotiate a comparable bilateral agreement on its own. I hope that she will accept that the United Kingdom has played an active role in the negotiation, as it does in other such European Union negotiations.
In my introductory remarks I mentioned that the Prime Minister had personally been involved in the latter stages of the negotiation with Korea. Indeed, he intervened with other Heads of Government to ensure that resistance to a final deal with the Koreans was overcome. That is an illustration of the way in which the United Kingdom’s influence helped to keep the European Union focused on measures to liberalise markets and keep Europe open to the wider world, and helped it not to give way to the souring voices of some other member states that too often seem to judge the degree of European unity by the height of the barriers that Europe can erect against the world outside.
John Mann: I thank the Minister for clarifying that the measure is about allowing Korea to flood our markets with its consumer goods, while giving no protection to British manufacturing industry, despite the attempt of one or two other countries to protect their manufacturing industry. Are we in a trade surplus now with Korea?
Mr Lidington: The balance of trade between the European Union and Korea has been moving in different ways, depending on the time at which one examines the current account. The point that I ask the hon. Gentleman to take on board is that the agreement provides enormous opportunities for companies in the UK and other EU countries to move with greater ease into an Asian market that is one of the fastest growing in the world. That is why the assessment from BIS states that the free trade agreement is worth £500 million annually to UK businesses.
Mike Gapes: As the Minister is aware, I visited a Tesco-Samsung joint venture, and I also met people who are running a major department store complex selling furniture in Korea. That British company comes out of Tesco’s investment in Korea over several years.
Mr Lidington: The hon. Gentleman makes the point well. Other British companies are investing in Korea, and Korean companies are investing and employing people here in the UK. I do not believe that the way to prosperity and the creation and sharing of wealth in this country is helped by putting up barriers against the rest of the world, least of all against world markets that are generating very rapid economic growth, and are set to do so in the future.
I have a further political point: when I visited Seoul, I was struck—and, to be honest, surprised—by the extent of the good will that still exists towards the UK among the political and business leadership in Korea on account of this country’s contribution to the Korean war. I remember our then ambassador saying to me that he could point to the cityscape in Seoul, or the freedoms enjoyed by the Korean people, and say to British veterans of the Korean war, who often felt that they had been overlooked by history and the British public, “This is what you have achieved. You helped to ensure that these people could enjoy greater freedom, the right to change their rulers, and a higher standard of prosperity than they could possibly have enjoyed, had it not been for your sacrifice.” There is, therefore, already a good relationship, which we seek to strengthen further.
My hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham asked two questions. In respect of North Korea, I studied the Hansard report of the debate in the House of Lords, and in particular the speech by the noble Lord Alton. As the Government spokeperson, my noble Friend Lord Wallace of Saltaire, said in that debate, the agreement that we are discussing refers to the Republic of Korea—to South Korea. It does not touch on either bilateral or EU relations with North Korea. I dearly hope that at some stage in the not-too-distant future we see the change in North Korea for which I am confident its own people are desperately yearning. Perhaps one day it will be possible for a Foreign Office Minister to come to this House and debate a new agreement with North Korea, but sadly we are not in such a situation today.
My hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham also asked about clauses relating to human rights and weapons of mass destruction. As I said earlier, in 2008, the EU agreed that any future free trade agreement would be accompanied by a broader framework agreement. Part of that deal among EU member states was that there should be, as a matter of course, human rights clauses and clauses dealing with weapons of mass destruction
in any such framework agreement, whether or not we had particular concerns about human rights or WMD in the third country with which we were negotiating. That is now simply part of the EU’s way of doing things in any such third-country negotiation.If my hon. Friend looks again at the text of the framework agreement, he will find that it includes references to human rights—for example, in article 3.2 in the context of political dialogue, and in article 30, which refers to co-operation and the importance of working together on the rule of law. Human rights are embedded in the framework agreement, as are references to weapons of mass destruction. We do not have any worries about the attitude of the Government of the Republic of Korea on either count. The articles are standard ones that provide safeguards; in the most improbable event that a future South Korean Government decided to pursue a completely contrary course on either issue, they could be held to account under the terms of the agreement.
The hon. Member for Ilford South asked for the assurance that we would not neglect bilateral relations and leave everything to the European Union. I give him that assurance. The agreement was concluded on behalf of the European Union and its member states. It is a mixed agreement, which means that both the EU as an institution and member states acting independently will each act within their respective areas of competence, as laid down in the treaty. Nothing in the agreement
constrains the United Kingdom from developing and strengthening its bilateral relationship with the Republic of Korea.In the statement that he made last summer about the Foreign Office’s network shift, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary announced that the Government intended to increase their diplomatic presence in several emerging economies. The Republic of Korea is one of the countries in which we will strengthen our diplomatic footprint, and it is also one of the emerging economies that the Government have identified as collectively providing some exciting opportunities for the development of a closer trading and investment relationship. Since the formation of this Government, a committee of the National Security Council has focused entirely on the United Kingdom’s relationship with such emerging economies. Several Departments are represented on that committee, which is chaired by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary. It will consider our relations with South Korea, alongside those with other emerging economic and political powers. We will certainly not neglect bilateral relations.
I am grateful to all hon. Members who have spoken for their support and for their constructive comments. I hope that the Committee will agree to the motion.