Review of the Balance of Competences

The Government today announced the publication of the first six reports of the Balance of Competences Review. They cover an overview of the single market, health, development co-operation and humanitarian aid, foreign policy, animal health and welfare and food safety, and taxation. They will be followed by another 26 reports between now and the end of 2014.

This is the first time any Member State has attempted such an extensive assessment of what EU membership actually means. Over the last six months we have been consulting widely with businesses, think tanks, civil society groups and others who have direct experience of how EU membership impacts on the UK in practice.

These reports bring together all this evidence in one place to provide an objective and thorough analysis. In doing so, they provide a detailed and accurate picture of the impact of EU action on the UK that will allow people to judge for themselves what works and what could be improved. In some cases, the reports confirm and illustrate things that we believed already. In others, they highlight new evidence and new perspectives on our relationship with the EU.

I have been following all the reports closely, but particularly the one on foreign policy, as you might expect.  Along with the single market overview, it is one of the review’s cornerstones, describing the range of EU action around the world: from tackling piracy off the coast of Somalia; to negotiating a trade agreement with the US; to brokering talks with Iran and applying tough sanctions on its nuclear programme; to fostering democratic and economic development after the Arab Spring.

Later reports will flesh out more detail, on how the EU acts in global climate change discussions for example, or how it helps countries at its borders prepare to become members.  But the Foreign Policy report sets the stage by explaining the complex machinery for all this activity, including the European External Action Service.

It also explains how, in much of modern foreign policy, all the various tools need to be combined coherently: diplomatic, development, trade, sanctions, security and defence, and so on. In Somalia, for example, countering piracy is one strand of action, but equally important is the work to foster the new democracy, build capacity in its institutions, support the African Union force in its fight against insurgents, and help the Somali people develop sustainable livelihoods.

Much EU activity overseas depends on unanimity among the member states, with the Commission having only a minimal role.  This is perhaps most crucial in the area of defence, which cuts to the core of national sovereignty.  Just as in any international organisation, the Government has a power of veto: no EU military or civilian mission can be deployed without our agreement, and no British personnel unless we decide to offer them.  And the EU treaty is absolutely explicit that NATO remains the foundation of our collective defence and the forum for its implementation.

The report analyses all of this through the evidence we gathered from you – the British public, as well as partners and commentators across Europe and worldwide.  In general, the evidence judges that it’s strongly in the British interest to work through the EU in foreign policy – as one of the options in our global network of alliances, which includes NATO, the UN, the Commonwealth, the G8, and so on.

Working with the 27 other EU members, we can deliver greater international impact, benefit from the global weight of the single market, and harness the unique range and versatility of the EU’s tools.  But the evidence also had plenty of suggestions for improvement: the EU needs clearer strategy, sharper focus, better delivery; and for that, it needs to improve its internal relationships, and make its institutional procedures more effective.

You can find all of the first six reports on the GOV.UK website.