27 Oct 2004 : Column 1279
House of Lords
Wednesday, 27 October 2004.
The House met at half-past two of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Peterborough.
European Union Commission
Lord Dykes asked Her Majesty's Government:
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean): My Lords, yes. However, your Lordships will be aware that the European Parliament vote on the new European Commission has been postponed, following Mr Barroso's decision not to ask Parliament to approve his team today. We support the way that Mr Barroso is seeking to resolve the situation and believe that he is an excellent choice as Commission President. We expect that, for now, the current Commission will be asked to stay on in a caretaker capacity and I thank Vice-President Kinnock and Commissioner Patten for their work, which has brought such credit to the United Kingdom and to Europe.
Lord Dykes: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Presumably, the Government did not want the Commission to be voted down, for self-evident reasons, and perhaps had a similar view on Mr Buttiglione himself. But does she agree that there is now ample time for reflection on the matter and that it has actually strengthened the institutional functioning of both institutions working together and the expression of opinions by Members of the European Parliament? Does she agree that, either by a reshuffle or by an alternative nomination from Rome, Senhor Barroso will be able to command an enthusiastic new Commission?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, it is the right thing in the circumstances to postpone the vote. It is sensible to try to find a resolution of the issue and to allow time for sensible reflection and discussion between the parties. We shall be giving Mr Barroso the support that he wants to negotiate a solution. We agree with the way that he is trying to resolve the situation. He has said that he needs more time; he should be given more time.
Lord Waddington: My Lords, should we not be very careful to avoid discriminating against a person on the grounds of his religious beliefs? Is there not a world of difference between believing that homosexual acts are wrong and being determined to discriminate against a person on the grounds of his sexual orientation? Is it not slightly odd that Members of the European Parliament should be getting so hot and bothered about the Italian
27 Oct 2004 : Column 1280
Commissioner, when they are perfectly prepared to swallow the prospect of ex-communists and discredited ex-government ministers being members of the Commission?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, the original Question of the noble Lord, Lord Dykes, was about the broad composition of the new European Commission, and I answered it in the affirmative. There are some excellent proposed Commissioners, including of course our own Peter Mandelson and Mr Barroso himself. Other individuals may indeed cause some controversy by their views, but all are the nominees of their government—to put together a Commission to represent Europe as a whole. The sensible position now is to allow that time for reflection, negotiation and discussion, and to hope to come to a reasonable conclusion.
Lord Williamson of Horton: My Lords, while recognising the interest of the broad composition of the Commission, does not the Minister agree that it is equally important to keep in mind that all the important decisions of the Commission are taken by the college as a whole, not by individual commissioners?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: Indeed, my Lords, that is a timely reminder and I thank the noble Lord for drawing it to your Lordships' attention again.
Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, bearing in mind that the European Parliament is not the only source of democratic legitimacy in Europe—indeed, not even the main source—and now that Mr Barroso has withdrawn his proposals under pressure from the Socialists and Liberal Democrats, for various reasons, what say will national parliaments have in the formation of a balanced and unbiased Commission and what say will national parliaments have on the question of whether Mr Buttiglione is given a position in the new Commission?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, national parliaments have the right through their governments—the elected government of the day, which represents the country as a whole. The noble Lord is well aware of that. The fact is that the European Parliament has been doing its job. The democratically elected European Parliament has the right to scrutinise people nominated by the elected heads of the European governments. We have discussed that in this House on a number of occasions.
Lord Tomlinson: My Lords, does my noble friend agree with me, following the question of the noble Lord, Lord Howell, that if we are concerned about the powers of national parliaments, those powers have been greatly enhanced by the proposed draft constitution that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister will be signing on Friday? Therefore, there is no logic to the position of constant opposition to it.
27 Oct 2004 : Column 1281
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, I agree with that wholeheartedly. I also agree with the House of Lords Select Committee on the European Union, which concluded that,
"it is clear that the balance of power in the European Union is going to shift from the Commission in favour of the Member States".
We have discussed that point over and over again. The noble Lord, Lord Howell, takes issue with it but, as he will recall, on a number of occasions he has excited the noble Lord, Lord Grenfell, to make it absolutely clear that he meant what he said when writing those words.
Lord Garden: My Lords, I share the Minister's pleasure that it looks as though we have a way forward from a difficult situation that should end up strengthening the European Union in all its elements. Does she expect that the Prime Minister will contribute to that in the initiative that it appears the Dutch presidency will take in order to get a settlement that all EU member nations can agree to?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: Yes, my Lords, as an important member of the European Union, I would hope that, if asked, this country will contribute as much wisdom as we can to that debate. The fact is that, as my noble friend Lord Tomlinson pointed out, the heads of state and government meet in Rome to sign the constitutional treaty this Friday. It is just possible that the matter may be mentioned between them at that time. The next EP plenary session in Strasbourg will take place on 15 to 18 November. I do not know whether that issue will be resolved by that date, but I am sure that a great deal of work will go into trying to make that the case.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that there is a duty on the future president to ensure that no Commissioner should run the risk of prejudice impairing sound decisions? Is it not important, therefore, that the president should have second thoughts on this vital issue?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, it is certainly the duty of the president-designate to try to resolve the situation. Mr Barroso has made that very clear this morning. There are no risk-free options in political life, neither in this country nor in Europe, but I am sure that the president-designate will do his best to resolve this.
Network Rail
Lord Bradshaw asked Her Majesty's Government:
What plans they have to improve the governance of Network Rail so that the interests of passengers and train operators are taken fully into account.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, Network Rail's corporate governance is a matter for Network Rail to determine. However, the company has already announced a number of proposals. These include adding to the skills base at board level by the appointment of two additional non-executive directors. Network Rail is currently discussing these appointments with train operators and the Rail Passengers Council.
Lord Bradshaw: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply, which is partially encouraging, because I am most concerned that the interests of users of the railway and the train operating companies should be forcefully represented on the board of that company. Does he not agree with me that otherwise it is likely that the Government's objective of Network Rail spending less and running trains more punctually will be met by the simple methods of timetabling fewer trains and allowing themselves even longer engineering occupations, thereby making the railway less attractive to the users?
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |