European Union (Amendment) Bill

My Lords, I will do nothing of the sort. For the first time, the European Parliament will have a role in foreign policy. That is why it is discussing what that role will be and how it will be reported to. I will not cut down my quotation from this interesting report. I thought that Members would be interested to hear about the report, bearing in mind that, as well as ourselves, the European Parliament is discussing its role in foreign policy on this very day. I am sorry if certain people are bored by what the European Parliament says; frankly I am always very interested, because it is always seeking to get greater powers. The report goes on about ““democratic oversight”” of EU foreign policy: "““The report also calls for parliament to be given greater democratic oversight over the area, which to date has remained firmly the domain of member states””." I think that many people in this place want it to remain the domain of member states. It goes on: "““It suggests that the foreign minister ‘regularly’ appear before MEPs and that the parliament be ‘fully consulted’ on who the foreign minister should be, as well as what the diplomatic service should look like””." There we are. Finally, it says on the EU army: "““Mr Saryusz-Wolski, who believes the union will gradually develop its own army, says it is no longer enough that the bloc exercises its traditional role as a soft power””." If the European Parliament is demanding that it should be reported to, why on earth is it wrong that an amendment should be moved in this Parliament to ensure that the House of Commons and this House should have a report on events for the past year? After all, we are partly paying for the foreign policy. This is not only a good amendment but an essential amendment to ensure that this Parliament and not the European Parliament—or perhaps as well as the European Parliament—should be fully informed of matters and developments in European foreign policy.