APPENDIX 3: CALL FOR EVIDENCE
The EU Sub-Committee on External Affairs of the House
of Lords, chaired by Lord Teverson, is conducting an inquiry into
the European External Action Service (EEAS). The Sub-Committee
seeks evidence from anyone with an interest.
Written evidence is sought by 12 December 2012. Public
hearings will be held over the period November 2012-February 2013.
The Committee aims to report to the House, with recommendations,
in April 2013. The report will receive a response from the Government
and may be debated in the House.
The European External Action Service (EEAS), formally
launched on 1 January 2011, is one of the most important institutional
innovations of the Lisbon Treaty. The launch marked the culmination
of a year-long negotiation between the EU institutions following
the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. The function of the
EEAS is to assist the High Representative/Vice-President of the
Commission (HRVP), currently Baroness Ashton, in performing her
duties which include representing the Union for matters relating
to the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), conducting political
dialogue with third parties on the Union's behalf and expressing
the Union's position in international organisations and international
conferences.
In 2013 the High Representative will review the organisation
and functioning of the European External Action Service. This
inquiry aims to influence the debate on the EEAS.
The Sub-Committee seeks evidence on any aspect of
this topic, and particularly on the following questions:
(1) What are the main achievements of the EEAS
since its establishment? Where has it been less successful?
(2) How well does the EEAS meet the objectives
set out for it in the Lisbon Treaty and the Council Decision?
Has the High Representative/Vice President fulfilled her mandate
and the Council Decision for setting up the EEAS? What remains
to be done?
(3) How effective has the EEAS been in communicating
and promoting the EU's policies and values? Has it implemented
Council CSFP and CSDP Decisions effectively?
(4) Has the creation of the EEAS led to a more
coherent and integrated EU foreign policy?
(5) Has the EEAS been effective in its response
to crises?
(6) How does the balance of responsibilities
between the EEAS and the Commission work out in the development
area? Has the creation of the EEAS improved the implementation
of the EU's development policy?
(7) How well does the relationship between the
EEAS and the Commission work in the trade area? Does the EEAS
have a role to play in EU trade policy and its implementation?
(8) How well does the EEAS work as an institution?
(9) How well has the objective of a geographically
and gender balanced staff been met? How well has the objective
been met of one third of staff from the diplomatic services of
the Member States by mid 2013, a third from the Council Secretariat
and a third from the Commission? Have staff been adequately trained
to perform the diplomatic role? If not, what are the omissions?
(10) Is the EEAS budget sufficient to meet its
objectives? Are there any areas where the EEAS could make savings?
(11) In what ways has the financial and economic
crisis within Member States affected organisation and activity
of the EEAS?
(12) Has the EU created the right number and
distribution of Delegations around the world?
(13) How well do the relationships with the Foreign
Ministries of the EU Member States work and how well do EU Delegations
cooperate with the diplomatic missions of the EU Member States?
(14) Has the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
responded effectively to the establishment of the EEAS? Has the
UK been able to second high level candidates to important positions
within the EEAS? Has it also seconded a representative number
to more junior positions?
(15) Have the Foreign Services of other Member
States all responded with their best candidates for EEAS posts?
(16) What should the EEAS need to do over the
next three years and what should it prioritise? How can it maximise
the influence of Member States and the EU in the future? On which
areas should the 2013 review focus?
| 
