Euro MPs bitter at exclusion from conference

Date: 12/12/1996

UNION governments have come in for fierce criticism from MEPs for refusing to allow a parliamentary delegation to attend the recent pan-European security conference in Lisbon.

The European Parliament's foreign affairs committee has condemned the decision and accused member states of breaking with the practice set at earlier summits of the 55-member Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

In a strongly worded statement which won all-party support, the committee described the refusal as “a new step towards the development of the anti-democratic policy of the governments of the member states which wish to block any democratic progress in the EU”.

One member of the three-person parliamentary delegation selected to attend the summit meeting was French Euro MP and leader of the European Radical Alliance Catherine Lalumière.

“I very much regret what happened, but I am not surprised. I regret it as Europe needs a real foreign policy and to achieve that the three main institutions - the Council, Parliament and Commission - should be involved. I am not surprised, as it is very well known that governments want to keep foreign policy at an intergovernmental level,” she said this week.

Drawing on earlier precedents, parliamentary sources point to other OSCE summits: Helsinki in 1992 and Budapest in 1994. MEPs participated in the first as part of the EU presidency delegation. They were also invited to the second, although they did not attend because of the European elections that year.

In addition, they cite the example of MEPs' involvement at the recent international conference in Ottawa on the banning of anti-personnel mines.

Euro MPs argue that their presence at such events is important since it enables them to follow the proceedings and be kept informed of the latest developments in foreign and security policy, as provided for in the Maastricht Treaty. They also stress that they have no involvement in the final texts negotiated by governments.

But the request to send a delegation to the Lisbon summit fell on deaf ears when it was examined by EU ambassadors. Several member states successfully insisted that the Parliament should not be present at an intergovernmental conference and warned that if the concession was extended to MEPs, demands for similar treatment would inevitably come from national parliamentarians.

“Previously, things were somewhat ad hoc. But the Maastricht Treaty has clarified the respective roles. The established practice is that the Parliament is part of the Union delegation headed by the Commission on first pillar issues. But it is the presidency which speaks on behalf of the Union at international conferences dealing with the second and third pillars. It is clear that it will keep the Parliament informed,” explained one senior EU diplomat.