Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20
- 27)
MONDAY 18 JUNE 2007
Lord Williamson of Horton, GCMG, CB
Q20 Baroness Eccles of Moulton:
Within the framework of research, that could be something that
did not exist without the EU.
Lord Williamson of Horton: It could be useful.
Q21 Baroness Eccles of Moulton:
What about something that is highly politically sensitive to many
people, an extremely valuable alternative to fossil fuels, which
is obviously nuclear? Do you think it could assist in that direction?
Lord Williamson of Horton: That is a tricky
point because the extent of the nuclear power production in the
Member States varies hugely. Belgium and France have a very high
level of power from nuclear energy and they are very interested
in maintaining that. We are not going to be able to bring together
on an EU basis either the volume or the approach to power from
nuclear sources. It is going to stick within national hands for
a good time.
Q22 Lord St John of Bletso:
If I could go back to the question on the accession countries,
I declare an interest as I spend a lot of time in Romania and
Bulgaria. The concern I suppose is that many of the convergence
criteria have been somewhat fudged. The question of compliance
with all the chapters of the Acquis Communautaire is a
bit on a never never basis. What do you believe are the realistic
expectations of these accession countries complying with the outstanding
aspects of the Acquis Communautaire to bring them more
in line with the level playing field of the single market which
you mentioned?
Lord Williamson of Horton: To take Bulgaria
and Romania as you mentioned those, I think it is inevitably going
to be slow. If you have been there recently, you will know what
the economy looks like in those countries. It does not look exactly
like the Ruhr, for example. Therefore, it is going to be slow.
On the other hand, these are countries where, although they are
trading outside their boundaries, a lot of the economic activity
is at a relatively low level and is within their own boundaries.
Therefore, the impact of what happens in parts of Bulgaria for
example on the rest of the European Union, even if the level playing
field does not entirely exist, is probably not going to be very
great. I do not quite see how you get round the problem. If you
are aiming to move to a single market of the classic kind, which
I think we should, you are forced to a situation where, if a country
comes in which has a completely different economic structure and
a different level of GDP and so on, you cannot really get round
the problem except by the passage of time.
Q23 Lord Haskel: Coming back
to Baroness Eccles's question about the single market being an
effective mechanism, in the debate on Thursday you waxed very
lyrical about the effectiveness of the EU's budget on research
and all that which is being done. As you know, most of the research
projects are multilateral. They involve several countries. Do
you think that an effective mechanism for helping newly developed
countries to raise their game is to involve them in these research
projects on a multilateral basis, or do you think that the decisions
on these should be left to who are the most competent scientists
and technologists to deal with the projects?
Lord Williamson of Horton: I fully understand
your question, except the word "lyrical" applied to
my intervention last week in the debate in the House. Otherwise,
I fully comprehend the point. It has been a basic principle in
the operation of the very substantial research and development
programmes of the European Union that they should be on a fully
competitive basis, peer review and so on. That is the way it operates.
I think it would be reasonable to stick with that as the basic
principle but at the margins you could have some programmes in
areas where we know, for example, one or two of the new Member
States do have particular competences to try to bring them a little
more fully into the programme. After all, we do have some of these
projects which require cross-frontier cooperation and we could,
if we felt like it, have a subclause which says that if it concerns
some of the new Member States they would get some slight advantage
or slight preference in some fields.
Q24 Lord Whitty: Could I pursue
the question relating to the single market in relation to climate
change, because it would seem to me the strongest area there would
be a setting of standards and possible consumer information like
vehicle emissions standards, like information on consumer electrical
goods and eco-claims and green labels and so on. Whilst there
has been a bit of progress on that, has it been the case that
because those propositions have come up through the environment
end rather than the internal market they have received less attention
than ought to have been the case from a single market point of
view?
Lord Williamson of Horton: I do have some sympathy
with that point. Of course some of the elements, such as sticking
a sticker on the front of our washing machines and so on when
you buy these various things which I think they are going to do,
are a single market point because if it is not done by the single
market then there is going to be a bit of a muddle in the washing
machine market. I think it is true that incorporating them into
the overview of the single market and possibly making it easier
for some of these types of proposals to run through, would probably
be advantageous for the Union as a whole.
Q25 Lord St John of Bletso:
If I could just go back to an answer you gave some time ago on
those aspects of the single market which are not complete when
you drew reference to the financial services market. We have had
several inquiries into the financial services action plan. I would
like to know from your side whether you feel we are needing more
clarity on financial services but, more to the point, on a point
which Lord Haskel has made on SMEs, to what degree do you believe
there is assistance being given to small and medium sized enterprises
as to the barriers and opportunities of doing business in the
single market because there is a perception, right or wrong, it
is still a very protectionist market?
Lord Williamson of Horton: First of all, to
take your second point first, I think there is such a perception
from time to time and it is correct that it is sometimes more
difficult for small and medium sized enterprises to handle such
a big market, they are crossing frontiers, they have not got the
same agents and so on and so forth. So they do have quite considerable
difficulties but I do not think that is a direct result of the
single market itself. The single market itself is an open market
subject to a number of problems we have just discussed and I think
it should be possible for small and medium sized enterprises to
benefit from it. That is basically my approach. I am not sure
whether I have covered your first point properly, perhaps I have
not?
Q26 Lord St John of Bletso:
It is really the outstanding aspects of the financial services
market.
Lord Williamson of Horton: Yes. As I say, we
are congratulating ourselves now but the Commission itself in
the documents which are distributed to you, let us say Single
Market Citizens, which is a sort of basic document I think
for your Sub-Committee, does specifically say that there are weaknesses
in some of the areas of the single market for financial and other
services. I think it would be certainly wise to follow that up.
I am sure you will, I am not sure I can give you every detail
on that, I am perhaps a bit too far away from it, but I am sure
that is the case and it seems to have been one of the points which
they have identified, together with others, in this area.
Q27 Chairman: Lord Williamson,
thank you very much indeed for coming to draw upon your earlier
evidence and thank you for choosing to come and give evidence
to this Committee. I am sure if there are matters to follow up
we can do so and perhaps you would check the transcript.
Lord Williamson of Horton: Thank you very much.
I have to go to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee
this week, and I shall be able to tell you afterwards which is
the nicer! Thank you very much indeed.
| 
