Global Europe

As the EU moves towards finalising details of the External Action Service (EAS), it should consider a more active role for the European Parliament (EP) and national parliaments.

The EP is currently seeking increased influence over the EAS and is threatening to use its budgetary powers to achieve its aims. It may over-reach itself but the basic principle of democratic oversight over external affairs is sound. If the EU wants to have an effective foreign policy then it must rest on strong public support. Polls consistently show that most Europeans want 'more Europe' in foreign and security policy. Too often, however, politicians and officials engage in a conspiracy to keep foreign policy out of the public eye. Foreign policy played little role in the UK election campaign and it was a similar story in most recent elections in other member states. Another worrying trend is that there are fewer and fewer national politicians specialising in foreign and security policy.

There are two areas where improvements are needed. First, there should be greater foreign policy expertise available to MEPs and national MPs to help them in holding the executive to account. If one compares the huge staff available to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (or even to an individual congressman) in the US to that in the EP it is quite simply another planet. Given financial stringency a massive increase in staff is unlikely, hence the EP should draw more on external expertise to help improve its knowledge basis. 

Second, there should be a six monthly debate in the EP and national parliaments on Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)/Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) on the basis of a report prepared by Cathy Ashton. This would mean that national foreign ministers (the key stakeholders in the EAS) would have to defend the report before their national parliaments at the same time as the HR/VP was speaking in the EP. She and her fellow ministers would then speak with the media and engage with civil society to ensure that there were regular pan-European debates on the progress -- or lack of -- in the EU's external affairs. Cathy Ashton should also invite the chairs of the foreign affairs committee of national parliaments to Brussels every six months for an exchange of views.

Information is power. The tradition of witholding foreign policy details from parliament and citizens must be changed if the CFSP is to be credible and effective in future. Parliamentarians should thus worry less about bureaucratic details and concentrate more on securing adequate resources so that they can make a greater impact on much-needed public debates on CFSP.