European Union (Amendment) Bill

Like many others, I want to discuss amendments Nos. 258 and 1. I do not know whether those who tabled amendment No. 258 intended it to be a probing amendment or whether they wish to press it to a Division, but they have overblown the consolidated text resulting from the treaty. Article 15(6) states:"““The President of the European Council shall, at his or her level and in that capacity, ensure the external representation of the Union on issues concerning its common foreign and security policy, without prejudice to the powers of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.””" Those in the Chamber could hear the inflexion of my voice, so for the benefit of Hansard, I point out that I stressed the word ““common””. The president of the European Council will be involved in the common foreign and security policy and"““ensure the external representation of the Union””." Other hon. Members may interpret that wording differently, but to me, ensuring the external representation does not mean being the external representative. That interpretation is confirmed when the article goes on to refer specifically to the high representative of the Union for foreign affairs and security policy. The president of the European Council will be elected by the European Council, which can finish the term of office before the end of the two and a half years in"““the event of an impediment or serious misconduct””." I am not sure what ““impediment”” means, but in lay terms, I think it means that someone who is naughty or falls out with their mates is voted out. The Heads of State and Heads of Government of the 27 member states will vote the president out in those circumstances. The president of the European Council is therefore on some sort of leash, albeit that it depends on the interpretation of ““impediment or serious misconduct””. The president will not make foreign and security policy for the European Union; the European Council will do that, and it will be a common foreign and security policy. I stand to be corrected, but I understand that that would be done by unanimity; that is where the word ““common”” comes in. If the United Kingdom took a fundamentally different position on an issue of interest to the European Union, such as on Zimbabwe, which my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, North (Mr. Henderson) mentioned, there would be no common foreign policy and the UK could properly pursue its own path.