Proceeding contribution from Michael Connarty (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 12 June 2008. It occurred during Adjournment debate on European Commission.
European Commission
As the Minister knows, the European Scrutiny Committee examined last year's annual policy strategy in detail, not just as a document but as a process. Given that it comes from the European Commission and gives a heads-up of what might be developed into the work programme, we thought, in the spirit in which we have always tried to work, that the earlier that we engaged with the Commission's thoughts, the more likely we were to be able to influence them before they became directives. After that point, it is a struggle to negotiate improvements at a European Council meeting, as the Minister knows. To do so, we sometimes have to surrender some of our bigger ideas or block something because a directive has been structured so badly that it is not acceptable to the UK. We carried out an inquiry last year into the 2008 annual policy strategy document. We took oral and written evidence, which I hope Members who are interested in European procedures will have taken the trouble to read. We considered that a useful exercise, providing an examination of the Commission's planning process and giving the departmental Select Committees the opportunity to engage in the process at the earliest stages. We often found that, when something became a directive, that was the first time that departmental Select Committees or those with responsibility engaged with it. As the Minister knows, one of the improvements that we suggested was based on the fact that, although Green Papers and White Papers from the Commission were widely consulted on by the Government, they were not sent to Select Committees. Everyone outside the House was consulted, but not the responsible Select Committees. Through the process, we saw errors and made positive recommendations. As the Minister said, the document is not the Commission's budget, and I am sure that he knows that at our last meeting—not this Wednesday, but the Wednesday before—we discussed the draft budget. We have recommended it for debate, and perhaps those who are interested in the process of audit and accountability will engage with the process in such a debate. The Committee has considered the 2009 annual policy strategy document, as is reported in our 18th report of Session 2007-08. We examined what was in it and laid out a simple framework for people to look at, hoping that departmental Select Committee members in particular would raise matters with their Departments and engage in the process early on. The document sets out priorities; it does not contain detailed proposals. That is not necessarily a criticism of the Commission, but we assessed that its aspiration that the strategy would be a fundamental tool for debate would not be realised, because of its general nature and because it may have come too early. It is worth noting that holding such debates on an Adjournment motion on a Thursday, when there is no pressing business in the House, means that we do not necessarily engage all those hon. Members who would normally want to be engaged in the process, because constituency priorities take many of them out of the House. This will obviously be an important year for the EU. It will have to face up to not only a ratified Lisbon treaty, we hope, and all the new arrangements contained therein, but a new Parliament. There will have been parliamentary elections by the time the annual policy strategy becomes a work programme. That will change the environment in which the debate will continue. Then a new Commission will be appointed, which may set new priorities that disrupt the aspirations in the document. On behalf of the Committee, I should like to outline what we saw as the key proposals in the annual policy strategy document that people might want to take on board. The Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs will continue to be at the heart of the Commission's political agenda; I hope that that will be applauded by everyone, because it is fundamental to where we are going as a European partnership. The Commission says:"““The impact of the global financial turbulence on the real economy and the hike in raw material prices will require the EU to deepen its structural reforms at both EU and national level.””" That is something that we should welcome; just as we are not isolated from the world, the EU is not isolated from the world, and just as we can defend our own position financially, so the EU can help us to defend the position of the 500 million people in the EU.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 477 c138-9WH
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Administration of justice Conservation Climate change Competition Immigration Energy EU enlargement European Union EU internal trade Labelling Financial markets EU institutions Standards Bosnia and Herzegovina North Macedonia Reform Regulation Kosovo European Commission Renewable energy Croatia Serbia Turkey Galileo system EU trade Treaty of Lisbon
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-02-04 14:42:04 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481604
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481604
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481604