Ninth Report - European Scrutiny Committee Contents


38 The European External Action Service (EEAS)

Committee's assessment Politically important
Committee's decisionCleared from scrutiny

Document detailsEuropean Court of Auditors Special Report No. 11/2014: The establishment of the European External Action Service (36176), —.
Legal base
DepartmentForeign 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


 
previous page contents next page


© Parliamentary copyright 2014
Prepared 19 September 2014