---

European Union (Accessions) Bill

I strongly support the Bill, because I strongly support the principle—and, I hope, the practice—that Romania and Bulgaria should be given the opportunity to join the European Union. It will not be an automatic process, as earlier exchanges between the occupants of the Front Benches showed. It is not easy to meet the acquis, and it will be difficult for Romania and Bulgaria, just as it was for the other countries of eastern Europe. It is not only the politicians and the bureaucrats of the countries, but the people who need to be inspired to meet the acquis. The challenge now is even more difficult than it was five, six or seven years ago, because at that time it was conclusive that joining the EU was the right thing to do. In 1995, 1996 and 1997, the EU was a forward-looking organisation that played an important role in the world, with strong economies—especially in Britain after 1997—and a sense of social responsibility and common purpose. So it was easier to inspire the people of the countries seeking to accede to the European Union with the conviction that it was the right thing to do. In today’s climate, the people of Romania and Bulgaria will ask the same questions, and will have to weigh up whether the gains will be greater than the doubts. I have no doubt that the gains will outweigh the doubts, but before the people of those countries reach that conclusion they will ask several questions about accession and the EU. Those questions will be similar to those that are being asked in Britain and the other member states. I recall visiting Bucharest in 1997 and talking to people on the streets. They were very conscious of their country’s history over the past 40 years. They supposedly lived under communism, although I think that they lived in a state that was nearer fascism—it is a matter of political definition. They had no freedoms, there was little collective social responsibility and the state was isolated. That was not just political theory, because it felt very real when walking the streets of Bucharest. I was there on a wet November day—it bore some resemblance to parts of Newcastle or Glasgow on a bad day—and noticed all the Soviet-style buildings that had been imposed on Romania, which is Francophile, if anything. Public services were poor and there were many beggars and other obvious signs of poverty on the streets. There was also a clear sense of corruption and a fear of being caught out, because if that happened, those exercising the corruption could impose their will on the individual concerned. I remain convinced that the people of Romania—I suspect that the same is true of the people of Bulgaria—wanted to put that behind them and look forward to a better way. That was what people were looking for then, but judging the specifics today—this is my main point—is not so straightforward. Things have improved in Romania and Bulgaria as they move towards the acquis and become more involved with the rest of Europe and the world, but there are, of course, still gaps that must be filled in meeting the acquis.