38 The European External Action Service
(EEAS)
| Committee's assessment
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision | Cleared from scrutiny
|
| Document details | European Court of Auditors Special Report No. 11/2014: The establishment of the European External Action Service (36176), —.
|
| Legal base | —
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
Summary and Committee's conclusions
38.1 This European Court of Auditors Special Report
examined three questions:
— was the establishment of the EEAS adequately
prepared?
— were the resources of the EEAS prioritised,
organised and allocated efficiently?
— has the EEAS coordinated effectively
with the Commission and the Member States?
38.2 The report notes that the Member States and
EU institutions did little preparatory work: that and the absence
of any overarching EU foreign policy strategy led to the need
to consult Member States on ad-hoc strategies to tackle each new
crisis faced and establish a rapid response to fast moving developments
— particularly the Arab Spring. The ECA report does, however,
recognise the important role that the EEAS nevertheless played
as a facilitator on the Kosovo-Serbia dialogue and the Iran nuclear
talks.
38.3 The report also highlights that the EEAS has
an unusual structure having adopted many of its departments from
the Commission or the Council Secretariat. The requirement to
have as a minimum one third of its workforce seconded from Member
States means that the EEAS now has twice the number of senior
staff as under the previous arrangements and yet has skills shortages
in thematic areas such as climate change and energy security.
38.4 With regard to effective coordination with the
Commission and the Member States, the Report notes that Baroness
Ashton was unable to attend two-thirds of Commission meetings
in 2012 despite her role as Vice President of the Commission.
Overall the Court notes that coordination with the Commission
and Member States is improving but is still insufficient for the
EEAS to fulfil its potential.
38.5 In conclusion, the Court's report argues that
the EEAS should: propose to the Council a review of the existing
framework applicable to the EU Special Representatives to integrate
them into the EEAS; review its recruitment procedures; agree with
the Commission a new administrative and financial framework for
the management of EU delegations; continue its efforts to promote
information sharing and co-location with Member States; and prepare
a feasibility study for initiating consular services including
consular protection of EU citizens.
38.6 The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)
agrees that: the Arab Spring did divert the EEAS away from setting
itself clear long-term goals; the lack of long-term goals has
contributed to challenges in the relationship between the EEAS
and the Commission; there is still a long way to go on effective
coordination of EU external policy with the Commission, including
for delivering the EU's international development objectives;
and says that addressing its top heavy structure and ensuring
that its senior staff have the relevant skills to address the
major external action challenges should over time deliver savings
and help the EEAS focus more on delivering effective policy.
38.7 However, the Minister:
— believes there are savings that can be
found within the EEAS budget and an improved service can be provided
by reprioritising and streamlining its operations;
— disagrees on the need for integration
of EU Special Representatives (EUSRs) into the EEAS, and has accordingly
opposed attempts by the EEAS and European Parliament to transfer
the EUSR budget from Heading IV, the EU's budget for external
spend, to the EEAS's own administrative budget;
— agrees with the EEAS response that "consular
protection remains a national competence" and that any "progress
in this area is dependent on Member States agreement", and;
— says he will continue to make the point
that the 2010 Council Decision that established the EEAS affords
the EEAS only a supporting role in consular assistance.
38.8 Overall, the Minister undertakes to "continue
to ensure that the EEAS respects the role of Member States and
the Foreign Affairs Council on foreign policy, that it achieves
its goals more efficiently and improves its coordination with
Member States and the Commission".
38.9 He also notes that, although the EEAS's 2014
budget, of approximately €518.6 million, constitutes less
than 1% of the overall EU budget, the Government is opposed to
any increase — the EEAS having requested a 2.4% increase
to its budget for 2015, which the Minister says is unacceptable
in the current fiscal climate. In the ongoing discussions on the
overall 2015 EU budget, within which the EEAS's 2015 budget will
be considered, he will continue to stress that the Council Decision
establishing the EEAS committed it to the principle of "cost
efficiency aiming towards budget neutrality".
38.10 The next milestone will be an additional EEAS
review in 2015, which the Minister says will be basis of the next
substantive discussion of EEAS reform in Council.
38.11 As noted in the main body of our Report,
this ECA report has been preceded by two earlier, in-house reviews
— after one year, and after two years, of operation —
each of which was debated in European Committee. As such, it raises
no issues that have not been discussed already.
38.12 That said, we again endorse the Minister's
positions on the role of the EUSR, as the special envoy of the
Council, not the EEAS; on the primacy of Member States in the
provision of consular services; and on the need to sustain budgetary
discipline, especially given the present top-heavy structure.
38.13 With regard to the role of the EU in the
provision of consular services, the ongoing negotiations on a
Council Directive on consular protection for citizens of the Union
abroad will be of the utmost importance.[156]
38.14 With regard to the other major issues, who
becomes the next EU High Representative will be likewise —
one of his or her immediate tasks being to continue the currently-suspended
discussions with the Council on the future role of the EUSRs.
38.15 In the meantime, we clear this Court of
Auditors' Special Report.
Full
details of the documents:
European Court of Auditors Special Report No. 11/2014: The
establishment of the European External Action Service: (36176),
—.
Background
38.16 Under Article 287(4) TFEU, the European Court
of Auditors (ECA), via its Special Reports, carries out audits
designed to assess how well EU funds have been managed so as to
ensure economy, efficiency and effectiveness.[157]
38.17 The Lisbon Treaty created the position of the
High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy with
the aim of enhancing foreign policy coordination and promoting
basic values of the European Union all over the world. The High
Representative is also Vice President of the Commission and is
supported by an EU diplomatic corps, the EEAS. The EEAS was established
in January 2011 via the adoption of Council Decision 2010/427/EU
of 26 July 2010.
38.18 The Decision determined that the High Representative
should submit a report to the European Parliament, the Council
and the Commission on the functioning of the EEAS by the end of
2011. This report was circulated on 22 December 2011. It was debated
in European Committee B on 18 June 2012, at the conclusion of
which the Committee adopted a motion in which it said that it:
"supports the Government's policy of engaging
actively with the European External Action Service to encourage
the EU to make the best use of its collective weight in the world
where the Member States of the EU agree to act together, and thus
to complement our national diplomatic efforts to promote British
and European prosperity, security and values."[158]
38.19 The High Representative was also to provide,
by mid-2013, a further review of the organisation and functioning
of the EEAS. This was circulated on 26 July 2013. The full background
is set out in our report under reference.[159]
The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington) had many positive
things to say (see our report under reference). But there were
some proposals that the Government could not accept or about which
it was uncertain, e.g.:
· the EEAS should not have a role in providing
consular assistance, this being a Member State competence;
· defence engagement should remain primarily
the responsibility of individual Member States; he was therefore
cautious about attempts to establish a formal network of military
and civilian security experts in EU delegations;
· any threat of competence creep
on the part of the EEAS: it should continue to complement
and support — and not replace — national diplomatic
services; and
· any recommendations formally adopted must
be taken forward on a resource neutral basis, in line with the
2010 EEAS Council Decision.
38.20 Given the "read across" between this
HR's review and the forthcoming December European Council discussion
on CSDP Effectiveness and Impact, Capabilities and the European
Defence Industry, the Committee recommended on 20 November that
it be debated before that European Council.[160]
In the event, that debate did not take place until 13 January
2014, at the conclusion of which the Committee endorsed the following
resolution:
"That the Committee takes note of Unnumbered
Explanatory Memorandum dated 27 August 2013, submitted by the
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, on the European External Action
Service; and supports the Government's approach of working to
ensure the EEAS supports and complements UK international objectives."[161]
The European Court of Auditors Special Report
No. 11/2014
38.21 This ECA Special Report was published on 30
June 2014. It notes that, with the establishment of the EEAS,
the EU now has "an operational foreign policy service equipped
with policy desks and crisis management structures, a wide network
of diplomatic posts and a balanced presence of different sources
of staff". The Court notes that it is headquartered in Brussels
and has a global network of 140 delegations to represent the interests
of the whole EU. For 2014, the EEAS has a budget of €519
million which is split between headquarters (41%) and delegations
(59%). The Commission tops up the delegations' budget with approximately
€270 million annually as they host a significant number of
Commission staff, most working on the implementation of EU development
and humanitarian aid, enlargement, and external dimensions of
the internal policies for which the Commission is responsible.
38.22 The ECA's audit took place at the same time
as the preparation of the EEAS mid-term review. It assessed whether:
— the establishment of the EEAS was adequately
prepared;
— the resources of the EEAS were prioritised,
organised and allocated efficiently; and
— the EEAS has coordinated effectively
with the Commission and the Member State.
38.23 The Court of Auditors found that coordination
between the EEAS and the Commission was only partly effective,
which they says was "mainly due to ineffective cooperation
mechanisms at top level and a rigid financial and administrative
framework at the delegations, which takes resources away from
political tasks". It notes that coordination with Member
States improved, but says that it "can be further developed
to exploit synergies such as information sharing or co-location,
and consular services, including protection of EU citizens".
The Court says that the auditors' findings and recommendations
are generally in line with the EEAS self-assessment, which reinforces
the need to address the weaknesses identified.
38.24 The ECA also found the establishment of the
EEAS was "rushed and inadequately prepared", taking
place as it did during a time of financial constraints and of
increasing turmoil in the Southern Mediterranean. At the same
time, the Court says, the set-up of the service was "beset
by too many constraints and vaguely defined tasks", and that
all these factors "contributed towards a difficult start-up
environment".
38.25 The Court then summarises the rest of the Report
thus:
"Weaknesses in the prioritisation, organisation
and allocation of resources have reduced the EEAS's efficiency.
The integration of the EU special representatives within the work
of the EEAS is not sufficient. As regards recruitment, the auditors
found that significant gender and geographical imbalances have
not yet been fully corrected and that the recruitment procedures
are costly and lengthy.
"Finally, the ECA concluded that coordination
with the Commission and Member States has improved, but is still
insufficient for the EEAS to fulfil its potential. Coordination
with the Commission was affected by the EEAS being a separate
body, the absence of effective cooperation at top level and a
rigid financial and administrative framework at delegations, which
takes resources away from political tasks. Coordination with Member
States does not fully exploit synergies, such as information sharing
or co-location, and does not cover consular services, including
the protection of EU citizens abroad. Having the EEAS as permanent
chair of some Council preparatory bodies has facilitated coordination
but the potential benefits of the new arrangements have not been
fully realised."
38.26 The report sets out a number of recommendations
"to enhance the EEAS's added value and efficiency",
such as:
— clarifying its tasks and objectives,
streamlining its organisational design, simplifying its administrative
framework, strengthening its strategic role and developing its
planning;
— reviewing the appointment process and
functioning of EU special representatives and EEAS recruitment
procedures;
— working with the Commission to mitigate
the impact of the rigidity of its financial and staff regulations
on the efficiency of EU delegations;
— continuing its efforts to promote information
sharing and co-location with Member States; and
— assessing the opportunity to offer consular
services, including the protection of EU citizens.[162]
The Minister's Explanatory Memorandum of 17 July
2014
38.27 The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)
produces his own assessment, as follows:
a) "Was the establishment of the EEAS
adequately prepared?
"The report notes that 'due to uncertainties
concerning the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty (late approval
by Ireland in October 2009), the Member States and EU institutions
did little preparatory work prior to setting up the EEAS'. It
states that notably absent in the discussions preparing for the
establishment of the EEAS was an overarching EU foreign policy
strategy. The report also highlights that the new EEAS lacked
departments and the expertise to deal with global issues such
as climate change or energy security; these were transferred to
the Commission. In addition it notes that the structure of the
EEAS is too top heavy.
b) "Were the
resources of the EEAS prioritised, organised and allocated efficiently?
"The report highlights the challenges faced
by the EEAS in establishing itself on a budget neutral basis and
in responding to foreign policy challenges where it needs to consult
Member States on ad-hoc strategies to tackle each new crisis faced
and the challenge this creates in establishing a rapid response
to fast moving developments. The EEAS was established as the Arab
Spring began which diverted the organisation to responding to
this crisis rather than to setting its own priorities and strategic
direction.
"Despite the challenges highlighted, the report
recognises the important role that the EEAS nevertheless played
in acting in a facilitator role on the Kosovo-Serbia dialogue
and the Iran nuclear talks.
"The report also highlights that the EEAS has
an unusual structure having adopted many of its departments from
the Commission or the Council Secretariat. In part caused by the
requirement of the EEAS to have as a minimum one third of its
workforce seconded from Member States, the EEAS now has twice
the number of senior staff as its predecessor and yet it has skills
shortages in thematic areas such as climate change and energy
security.
"The Court of Auditors also argues that EU Special
Representatives are not sufficiently integrated in the EEAS, citing
the risk that their actions could be inconsistent with other EU
actions due to their independence.
c) "Has the
EEAS coordinated effectively with the Commission and the Member
States?
"The Court of Auditors highlights the challenges
that the EEAS has had coordinating with the Commission. The report
notes that Baroness Ashton was unable to attend two-thirds of
Commission meetings in 2012 despite her role as Vice President
of the Commission.
"The report also states that the EEAS and Commission
have struggled with the formal procedures for coordination that
are less flexible and more demanding than the ones that existed
when DG RELEX was in charge of external relations. Overall the
Court notes that coordination with the Commission and Member States
is improving but is still insufficient for the EEAS to fulfil
its potential.
"On the EEAS's coordination with EU Member States,
the report outlines more progress. The EEAS has established regular
meetings with the diplomatic services of the Member States to
discuss issues of common interest and these meetings are taking
place at every level. However the Court argues that there are
synergies that are not yet being exploited such as co-location,
common political reporting or a provision of consular services
by the EEAS.
"Conclusions
"In conclusion, the Court's report argues that
the EEAS should: propose to the Council a review of the existing
framework applicable to the EU Special Representatives to integrate
them into the EEAS; review its recruitment procedures; agree with
the Commission a new administrative and financial framework for
the management of EU delegations; continue its efforts to promote
information sharing and co-location with Member States; and prepare
a feasibility study for initiating consular services including
consular protection of EU citizens."
The Government's view
38.28 The Minister says that the Government agrees
with some of the findings of the report, viz:
"The Arab Spring did divert the EEAS away
from setting itself clear long-term goals. The lack of long-term
goals has contributed to challenges in the relationship between
the EEAS and the Commission. Effective coordination of EU external
policy with the Commission is vital, including for delivering
the EU's international development objectives. We agree with
the report that there is still some way to go on this. The Government
also agrees that the EEAS still has a structure which is too top
heavy and lacks expertise in key areas. Addressing this balance
and ensuring its senior staff have the relevant skills to address
the major external action challenges should over time deliver
savings and will help the EEAS focus more on delivering effective
policy."
38.29 However, there are assertions made in the report
with which the Government disagrees:
"We believe there are savings that can be
found within the EEAS budget and an improved service can be provided
by reprioritising and streamlining its operations. The Government
also does not agree with all of the conclusions of the report.
We disagree on the need for integration of EU Special Representatives
(EUSRs) into the EEAS and have opposed attempts by the EEAS and
European Parliament to transfer the EUSR budget from Heading IV,
the EU's budget for external spend, to the EEAS's own administrative
budget. On consular assistance we agree with the EEAS response
that 'consular protection remains a national competence' and any
'progress in this area is dependent on Member States agreement'.
The 2010 Council Decision that established the EEAS affords the
EEAS only a supporting role in consular assistance and we will
continue to make this point."
38.30 Overall, the Minister says:
"we will continue to ensure that the EEAS
respects the role of Member States and the Foreign Affairs Council
on foreign policy, that it achieves its goals more efficiently
and improves its coordination with Member States and the Commission."
38.31 With regard to the Financial Implications,
the Minister explains that the EEAS is funded from Heading Five,
the EU's budget for institutional and administration costs; and
that, at approximately €518.6 million, the EEAS's 2014 budget
constitutes less than 1% of the overall EU budget. He then says:
"The EEAS has requested a 2.4% increase
to its budget for 2015. The Government is opposed to increases
in the EEAS budget, which it considers unacceptable in the current
fiscal climate. The EEAS's 2015 budget will be considered as part
of wider, ongoing, discussions on the overall 2015 EU budget.
We will continue to stress that the Council Decision establishing
the EEAS committed it to the principle of 'cost efficiency aiming
towards budget neutrality'."
38.32 Looking ahead, the Minister says that:
— though there are no specific discussions
currently planned in Council on the Court of Auditors report,
it may be considered by the Budget Committee as part of wider
discussions of the EEAS budget; and
— the EEAS will produce an additional review
in 2015 which will be basis of the next substantive discussion
of EEAS reform in Council.
Previous Committee Reports
None; but see (35271) —: Twenty-third Report
HC 83-xxi (2013-14), chapter 4 (20 November 2013) and the
Reports cited therein.
156 For the present state of play, see our Fifth Report
HC 219-v (2014-15), chapter 6 (2 July 2014). Back
157
See http://eca.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/eca_main_pages/home
for full details of the ECA's work. Back
158
The record of the debate is available at (Gen Co Deb, European
Committee B, 18 June 2012, cols 3-26). Back
159
See Thirteenth Report HC 83-xiii (2013-14), chapter 17 (4 September
2013). Back
160
See (35271) -: Twenty-third Report HC 83-xxi (2013-14), chapter 4
(20 November 2013). Back
161
The record of the European Committee debate is available at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmgeneral/euro/140113/140113s01.htm
(Gen Co Deb, European Committee B, 13 January 2014, cols
3-24). Back
162
See http://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/INSR14_11/INSR14_11_EN.pdf.
Back
| 
