Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

Baroness Amos: My Lords, I wondered whether the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, was some sort of swansong, and whether he knew a lot more about the outcome of the local and council elections on 5 May than I did.

I listened with a degree of incredulity to the noble Lord use words such as "humiliating" and "failure", on the basis that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister is absolutely at the centre of the debate in the European Union and at this European Council. We have a European Union and a Council outcome that focus on jobs and growth, and a European Union in which it is absolutely clear that the countries will have to reform their economies, particularly if we look at what is happening in them demographically. We all recognise that that will not be an easy process, and we in the United Kingdom have made more progress than some of our EU partners. The Statement fully reflects our view that the progress has been partial, but it is ongoing.
 
24 Mar 2005 : Column 406
 

The noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, commented on the UN and its development programme. Yes, I have been nominated for a job at the UN and am going through a process. However, I am a great believer in Europe and the European project. I have greatly enjoyed our debates in this House; they have given me an opportunity to watch with some pleasure the noble Lord's party dig itself into a deeper and deeper hole on the issue, totally marginalising itself in discussions in the context of the European Union, and looking backwards—not forwards—with continuing regularity.

The noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, spoke about the services directive and was right in quoting the outcome of the Council negotiations. I want to say two things; I say them also to the noble Lord, Lord McNally. Negotiations on the text of the directive are still at a very early stage. That was made clear earlier this month by Commission officials, and again at the Council meeting. We all knew that the process was one of negotiation. We are confident that member states' concerns can be met without compromising the proposals' liberalising objectives, a point raised by the noble Lord, Lord McNally. A fully functioning internal market in services can be achieved without undermining high standards with respect to workers and consumers. That is the tension that some countries see. As a Union, we want those two aspects balanced, and do not see the two objectives as mutually exclusive.

I can tell the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, that the UK rebate was not even discussed at the Council meeting. The President of France may have made personal comments in relation to it, but I assure him that it was not discussed there.

I said to my officials, "You know of course that the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, will ask me about Zimbabwe", and I am delighted that he did not disappoint me. I would take his remarks a lot more seriously if his party had made any attempt to tackle any of the issues in relation to Zimbabwe and the gross inequality there when Ian Smith was in power. Being lectured from the other side on these issues, when those inequalities were ignored consistently by the party opposite when it was in Government, is something that I have listened to across this Dispatch Box on many, many occasions and I take this opportunity to say that I find it difficult to take them seriously.

Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I cannot possibly let the noble Baroness get away with that. She has only to remember the Lancaster House agreement, which was led by my noble friend Lord Carrington. It built on the work done by the noble Lord, Lord Owen, when he was Foreign Secretary. I cannot imagine what on earth the noble Baroness has been talking about. That was a great success for the Conservative Party, building on the work of the Labour Party when it was in government.

Baroness Amos: My Lords, the noble Lord may wish to recall precisely what happened in relation to land reform in Zimbabwe. The points that were being made by black Zimbabweans about the gross inequality in
 
24 Mar 2005 : Column 407
 
that country at the time were not remotely taken on board by the party opposite. I am in no way detracting from what happened at Lancaster House.

The noble Lord, Lord McNally, raised important points related to reform of the CAP, the Barcelona agenda and trade, with all of which I totally agree. I also agree with the noble Lord that taking forward that agenda requires leadership, vision and direction and that is precisely what my right honourable friend the Prime Minister is giving. I also agree with the noble Lord that the expansion of the Union to 25 is a massive achievement. As a result of that expansion, we need to move forward on agreeing the constitution and I give the noble Lord the assurance that he seeks that after the local and council elections, not only my right honourable friend the Prime Minister, but the entire Cabinet and Government will work positively for a "yes" response on that constitution.

Regarding the abatement and the noble Lord's description of the economy as an "economic miracle", given that we have had the longest period of economic stability since 1701, when records began, my right honourable friend the Chancellor has every right to be proud of his record.

I have answered the questions on services. I entirely agree about the importance of giving added impetus to the Lisbon agenda.

Regarding Africa, I say "yes" to the noble Lord on CAP reform and "yes" on the trade negotiations in Hong Kong in December. We must also look at aid volume, debt and the need to provide greater resources for health and education—but we must also look at governance.

In response to the noble Lord, Lord Wedderburn, I understand that there is a copy of the Statement on Iraq in the Printed Paper Office. I apologise to the noble Lord if it was not there earlier.

2.23 p.m.

Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords—

Lord Tomlinson: My Lords—

Baroness Crawley: My Lords, there will be plenty of time for all noble Lords to make their comments known.

Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, first, I wish my noble friend all the best in whatever she does—I speak, I think, for all the Labour Members and all the Members of this House. We have benefited enormously from her leadership and I thank her profoundly for that.

Does she agree that the contribution of the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, was as ill-advised as it was intemperate? Was she able to discern anything constructive from his remarks? I certainly could not. Is it not true that our full and positive participation in the affairs of the EU, particularly due to its new and enlarged
 
24 Mar 2005 : Column 408
 
membership, is vital now and in the future? I was unable to discern anything about the future in the remarks that the noble Lord made.

Baroness Amos: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his opening comments and I entirely agree with him that the next phases with respect to the European Union need to happen on the basis of full and positive participation by the United Kingdom and there has to be a commitment to a strong relationship between the EU and the United States. My noble friend is right about the importance of our full participation being important now and in the future. I have already addressed the comments made by the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde.

Lord Tomlinson: My Lords, first, I disagree with my noble friend Lord Clinton-Davies in the remarks that he made about the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde. The noble Lord approached his speech with all the characteristics of a stand-up comic, which leaves him well-qualified to remain a long time as the Leader of Her Majesty's Opposition.

Regarding the Statement, I wish to raise two issues with my noble friend, one that is in the Statement and one that is not, but both involve President Chirac. Will my noble friend confirm that President Chirac has no veto over the services directive? That directive is clearly, as the Statement said and as we know, of fundamental importance to this country, to the European economy and to the growth within Europe and its international competitiveness. While President Chirac may have a veto on the wording of presidency conclusions from a European Council meeting on the legislative process of the services directive, this is one of the areas where, thank goodness, we have no vetos but have qualified majority voting. I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, will be the first to welcome that, so that we can make progress on this important directive.

On the other hand, will she comment on President Chirac's ill-advised words at his press conference regarding the British rebate? Is it not true that this is one of the areas where my right honourable friend the Prime Minister has properly safeguarded the British veto, where there is no qualified majority voting and where we have all the cards in our hand? Did not my right honourable friend Mr Jack Straw make that clear at the summit? Perhaps she can confirm that there is one simple way of getting rid of the British rebate, and that is to reform the common agricultural policy in such a way as to achieve greater equilibrium of payments into it and receipts from it. Mathematically, the British rebate would then disappear. That was the point of view supported at the Convention on the Future of Europe.


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page