Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 27 Jun 1995

Vol. 455 No. 1

Written Answers. - EU Voting Procedures.

Noel Davern

Ceist:

13 Mr. Davern asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the recent call by Germany's ruling Christian Democrats that the EU should introduce majority voting for all joint foreign policy decisions which do not involve military action. [11705/95]

Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Spring)

The Maastricht Treaty provides for a review of the operation of the institutional and procedural provisions of the Common Foreign and Security Policy at the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference.

The Government will play a constructive role in the review and will be working for practicable and sustainable ways of improving the functioning of the CFSP. It believes that it is important that the European Union should have the capacity through the CFSP to make the most effective contribution possible to the preservation of international peace and stability and to the promotion of democracy and respect for human rights. The review should be based on a careful appraisal of the functioning of the present arrangements, which have been in operation for less than two years, and the aspects which may require strengthening should be correctly identified.

The recent CDU/CSU paper to which the Deputy refers, prepared by the majority party in the German coalition Government, is an important contribution to the developing discussion, both within Germany and the European Union as a whole. However, it does not at this stage constitute German Government policy.

An important issue in the context of the review will be the decision-making arrangements of the CFSP, including the voting procedure. For our part, the Government is not convinced that the use of qualified majority voting would resolve the problems in relation to the effectiveness of the CFSP or that it would result in a more satisfactory decision-making system. The European Union's foreign policy needs to be underpinned by broad support in the member states if it is to be sustainable and effective on sensitive international issues.

The Government believes, on the basis of the experience to date, that the key to more effective decision-making in the CFSP lies in improving the structures for the preparation of proposals. In this regard, we would agree with the view expressed in the CDU/CSU paper that the lack of a mechanism for joint analysis and planning in the CFSP framework needs to be addressed. At present there is no counterpart in this area to the role the Commission plays in policy planning in Community matters. More effective means are needed at European Union level to undertake the research and analysis which underpins policy initiation and development on international political questions. This would facilitate identification of the common European Union interest and the formulation of effective responses on such issues. Accordingly, the Government considers that priority should be given in the review of the CFSP to developing a planning and research capacity at the EU level. We think that the best way of doing this is to develop the role of existing bodies, in particular the Council Secretariat of the European Union, instead of establishing new institutions.