---

European Council: June 2006

My Lords, I begin with the statement made by the noble Lord, Lord McNally, about his surprise at the negative and sour response of the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde. The noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, is generally negative in our debates about the European Union, but his jokes are usually a little better than they were today. The noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, raised a number of issues, including regulation, the purpose of the European Union and the constitutional treaty. I will deal with each of them in turn. The Statement said that there are proposals for the withdrawal of 70 pieces of legislation, and there will be further work on the regulation issue in the coming years. On the European Union more generally, part of the importance of our being part of the European Union is clearly to get added value in areas where we can work together. I think that the examples given in the documents coming out of the Council are important indeed. Migration is one example, and the noble Lord asked about criminal justice and the use of the veto in the criminal justice area. Migration and criminal justice are issues in which we need to get the added value that comes from working with our European Union partners. We have made it clear that we are able to opt in or opt out of specific proposals on criminal justice. The noble Lord knows well that we need partnerships in the areas of terrorism and drugs. Those are global problems with global reach. The noble Lord, Lord McNally, spoke about the global context in which Europe exists and the fact that the context is changing rapidly. These are not issues we can tackle alone. The issue of energy security remains important. I welcome the commitment that the noble Lord made to enlargement, particularly with respect to Turkey. As he will recall, we began accession negotiations with Turkey under our presidency. As for a flexible Europe, that is precisely what the Lisbon agenda and the Hampton Court agenda are designed to deliver. The noble Lord, Lord McNally, asked about the possibility of a Green Paper. That is not a matter that I have heard discussed but I will take it back to my colleagues. However, I recognise that we will need institutional change to manage a Europe of 25 or 27. The institutions that we have in place were put in place for a much smaller organisation. The Government’s position on the constitutional treaty has not change. We have consistently said that we will hold a referendum on the constitutional treaty if there is a constitution to vote on. There is not one at the moment. The noble Lord, Lord McNally, raised the issue of transparency. My understanding is that we, the United Kingdom Government, raised concerns about moving too quickly on the transparency issue. It is not that we are against transparency, and indeed the Council agreed an overall policy on it—the main effect of which will be to open to the public all deliberations on co-decided legislation and in other areas. The Council also agreed to assess the impact on the effectiveness of the Council’s work after a six-month period. I think we are all agreed that we need a proper system of managed migration. This is not just a bilateral issue, or an area in which the United Kingdom can discuss with our partners on a one-to-one basis. What we are doing at the European Union level is extremely important. I entirely agree with the noble Lord, Lord McNally, that the positives need to be stressed. What we have managed to achieve from the European Union in the spread of democracy and the rule of law would not have been deliverable without the European Union. The peace and security which we see in Europe today is very much a result of that.