Government Response to House of Lords EU Committee Report: The future of EU enlargement, published 6 March 2013 Chapter 1: Introduction 1. The Government welcomes this report and its conclusions. It provides a timely consideration of the future of EU enlargement in the context of the economic crisis and debates about the future structure of the euro area and the Union, and the lessons of previous enlargements. Chapter 2: The enlargement agenda 2. The Government welcomes the Committee s support for its - and previous Governments -commitment to promoting the enlargement agenda, and agrees that the transformative power of enlargement has been proven through successive enlargements. The Government agrees that the rigorous application of the Copenhagen criteria is fundamental to the process (215). 3. The Government shares the Committee s view on the importance of a strategically targeted Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) funding, and has therefore pressed strongly for a more results-focused instrument closely linked to enlargement objectives for the period 2014-2020 (IPA II) (219). 4. The Government welcomes the Committee s support for the new approach to Chapters 23 and 24 (217, 218). The Government pressed for this change to provide the maximum time for aspirants to implement sustained reforms in the crucial area of the EU s political criteria, notably the rule of law. Frontloading this significant task supports and encourages difficult transformation over the full period of accession, thereby both reinforcing robust conditionality at each step in the process and reducing the risk of imposing an insurmountable burden of work upon candidate countries (220, 221).The new approach also includes a disequilibrium clause, allowing the enlargement process to be slowed or halted in the absence of sufficient progress in core areas (224). More focus on embedding reforms before accession, when the EU s leverage is greater, reduces the potential need for postaccession monitoring (222). 5. We take note of Committee s recommendation on the use of incentives to counteract negative perceptions of the credibility of, and the EU s commitment to, the enlargement process (227). With regard to visa liberalisation, the Government view is that the road to visa liberalisation for aspirant EU countries is linked to the extensive security and migration reforms that are fundamental to the enlargement process. Visa liberalisation should not be offered as a detached incentive or a measure of progress towards EU membership; this risks miscalculating the unique circumstances in each aspirant country and hindering dialogue on wider rule of law matters. 6. The years leading up to Cyprus accession saw major efforts made by the United Nations, the UK and other countries to encourage Cypriot leaders to find a solution to reunify the island. This would have seen a unified Cyprus join the EU, and it is
unfortunate that a solution could not be found at the time. The Government agrees that the continued division of Cyprus has complicated the EU s relationship with Turkey, as well as contributing to a complex situation for the Turkish Cypriot community, with the EU acquis suspended in the north of the island pending a solution (229). 7. We value our relationship with the Republic of Cyprus, and welcome the success of their EU Presidency. We remain committed to supporting the UN s efforts to achieve a settlement based on a bizonal, bicommunal federation with political equality. The Government also supports efforts to prepare the north of Cyprus for accession, as well as the 2004 Council Conclusions committing the EU to ending the isolation of the Turkish Cypriot community. 8. The Government shares the Committee s view that it is important to seek ways to avoid the importation of bilateral disputes into the enlargement process. The Government will continue to work with the Commission and other Member States to encourage an open and transparent approach to resolving disputes, and to explore mechanisms to protect the momentum of the enlargement process (230 235). Chapter 3: Impact on candidate countries and new member states 9. As reflected in the previous chapter, the enlargement process is transformative, often acting as a motivator for substantial political and economic change. The Government agrees that a clear focus on economic as well as political governance during the accession process is important, particularly given the current requirement for new Member States to join the euro area. IPA II provides further opportunities to support this (238, 240, 241). Chapter 4: Impact on member states and the union 10. The Government strongly agrees that enlargement increases the EU s influence on the global stage (242), spreads lasting peace and stability across Europe (243), and has brought economic benefits to the existing Union (244). In this context, the Government agrees that potential policy outcomes should form part of the enlargement debate, but should not deter future enlargement (246). The Government is committed to engaging with new and potential Member States to share policy thinking with them at an early stage, with a view to working closely with them on specific policy areas once they have joined the EU. 11. In this regard, the Government notes the Committee s observations on the impact of enlargement on energy and climate change (246), and agrees that early engagement with candidate countries is important in mitigating the risk of new Member States impacting negatively on the development of key EU policies. Future Member States also offer the potential to increase the EU s level of ambition, for example drawing on Iceland s experience with geothermal energy or Turkey s potential to provide increased energy security for the EU. The EU is a powerful voice in tackling climate change and one of the major players in international climate change negotiations. As in other policy areas, consensus on
long-term policy and targets on energy and climate change should be used during the accession process to provide clarity on EU obligations and levels of ambition for new member states. 12. The Government agrees with the Committee that the free movement of workers is an important element of the EU s internal market (248). As the Committee notes, there is public concern about the potential abuse of free movement, particularly non-workers travelling to claim social security benefits rather than engage in employment (249, 250). The Government believes it is right to make sure that everyone who comes to the UK makes a proper contribution. The Government is taking steps domestically as the Committee suggests (250) to ensure that we have an immigration system that works in the national interest. We are working with European partners to explore changes to the current EU social security legislation. Chapter 5: Enlargement in the medium term 13. The Government welcomes the Committee s support for enlargement being conducted under the own merits principle, encouraging sustained progress protected from delay by issues outside the accession process such as bilateral disputes, and allowing sufficient time to ensure reforms are embedded before accession, thereby avoiding the potential requirement for post-accession monitoring (251, 252). 14. The Government remains committed to the principle that eventual membership of the EU is open to all European countries, so long as they meet the criteria. In support if this, beyond Iceland, Turkey and the Western Balkans, we work closely with all six Eastern Partnership countries, and support the development of their closer political and economic integration with the EU through Association Agreements and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements, which require irreversible political and economic reform (253, 254). 15. With regard to what the Committee has termed enlargement reticence among EU Member States and their populations, the Government agrees that it is in the UK s interests to keep the enlargement project going notwithstanding the economic and financial crisis: an artificial pause would damage not only the confidence of the aspirants in the EU s credibility, but impact on the long term security and prosperity benefits of enlargement to the EU. In this context, the Government shares the Committee s view on the importance of communicating better the benefits of enlargement and the costs of non-enlargement to the general public in both the Union and aspirant countries (259 261). The Government agrees that the Union benefits from the diversity of its members, and will benefit from further enlargement. While it will remain important to ensure that the institutional framework of the EU continues to allow effective decision-making, and noting that enlargement necessarily impacts upon voting weights in the Council, and the distribution of MEPs among Member States, the Government agrees that this does not constitute a barrier to enlargement (262 264).
16. The Government welcomes the Committee s consideration of the impact of enlargement on the EU budget, and also its reflections on the importance of placing this in the context of the broader economic benefits that enlargement can offer (265 268). It agrees in particular that the application of transitional arrangements can minimise the economic impact of enlargement on EU citizens while also supporting new members. 17. The Government shares the Committee s assessment that there is a risk of accession fatigue in aspirant countries, if the credibility and effectiveness of the enlargement process are not sustained (269). Enlargement offers the EU a soft power lever to promote reform in its neighbourhood which would be lost if candidates disengaged from the process (272). The UK has therefore been active in promoting and supporting innovations in the enlargement process, such as the new approach to rule of law issues and - to provide shorter term incentives too the Positive Agenda with Turkey and the High Level Accession Dialogue with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (274). However, such short-term innovations cannot replace the benefits of the accession negotiations themselves, and the Government is actively supporting the reinvigoration of Turkey s negotiations (273). 18. The Government agrees that civil societies in aspirant countries have an important role to play in promoting reform bottom-up. The Government supports civil society engagement in key areas of reform through the UK s bilateral programme funding in enlargement countries. The UK will also continue to encourage the Commission to engage civil society and encourage non-state actors participation in IPA II, both as direct recipients of EU assistance and in monitoring programmes run by the beneficiary governments (270, 271). 19. The Government recognises the Committee s view that a permanent EU-wide monitoring system resembling the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism, to ensure Member States also meet the standards demanded of candidates, is not politically feasible, and will take this into consideration if any such proposal be brought forward (275). The Government notes that a robust accession process is the key to delivering embedded and irreversible reforms before a country joins the EU. Chapter 6: Possible alternatives 20. The Government believes that all European countries that meet the standards and wish to join should be able eventually to become members of the EU. The enlargement process needs to remain rigorous and credible, including by responding to backsliding in standards during the process (277). The Government does not support permanent alternatives to membership. Removing the incentive of full membership would impact significantly on the EU s ability to encourage reforms in its neighbourhood that are equally of benefit to the EU as to the aspirant countries. The Eastern Partnership and European Economic Area are valuable in themselves and also as potential stepping stones to full EU membership. The UK is clear in its communication with the Eastern Partnership countries that they are
eligible to apply for EU membership provided they meet the relevant criteria, and that the Association Agreements and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements are not alternatives to EU membership. The necessary reforms needed are important for their own sake not just for EU membership.