The European Parliament in December 2004
Dear Reader,
The main event with us this month was our debate and vote on the possible accession of Turkey to the EU. At this stage MEPs cannot veto what happens but if we had voted not to open negotiations it would have been a very unhelpful back-drop to the meeting of the heads of government of the EU. This decided on the following day that negotiations will open next year.
The debate and vote brought out everybody’s misgivings and prejudices. I walked to the Parliament on the morning of the vote and found myself in amongst a large group of French members of the National Front (Mr Le Pen’s party) all prepared to wave their banners outside the Parliament (“NON a la Turquie”) This was the unrespectable, racist, element of the “No” case since Le Pen’s lot want to say “Non” to the EU too. The other side of the “No” case was led by those who are argued that absorbing such a large member state as Turkey would destroy the original close knit European ethos of a United Europe, united as above all a Christian Community.
The Germans centre right is having a very difficult time on Turkey. My German (and Austrian) colleagues in the EPP-DE group are not afraid to say that there are simply too many Turks, and that open frontiers with Turkey is an impossible idea. Half a million Turks already live in Germany and future population figures look grim for Germany: today its population is about 82 million. This will drop to 75 million by 2050, when 16% of the population will be under 20, and 37% will be over 60. In Turkey all the figures are going in the opposite direction. The population currently is 70 million, and this is projected to rise to 85 million in 2025, and 100 million by 2050. 30% of the population is now under 14.
The German Socialists faithfully followed the support for Turkish membership outlined by their leader, Chancellor Schroeder. The German Christian Democrats took the opposite view, in support of a “privileged partnership” (not full membership) for Turkey. The Socialists could argue that tough negotiations, over several years, with Turkey could lead to big improvements in human rights, acknowledgement of past Turkish misdeeds in Armenia, the opening up of new economic and social possibilities etc. With nothing to offer but a vague partnership, it looked as though the Christian Democrat offer would bring no such benefits, but was simply a badly disguised way of saying No.
Tactically German opposition to Turkish membership was defeated all along the line. We Conservatives voted with the majority of the Parliament, and with our Spanish Italian and Eastern European EPP colleagues, for the opening of accession negotiations and we won the vote by 407 to 262. The Germans successfully demanded that the final vote be secret with no list then available of how people had voted. This was greatly resented and in any case negated by the fact that those voting Yes held up Yes signs. Explicit heavy-handed German amendments in favour of the “privileged partnership idea” and simply rejecting Turkish membership were heavily defeated too. I suspect we are now in for a very long haul, and that it will not be this Parliament, or the one after it, that will hold the final vote on Turkey.
Another issue that came up this month was the shift of EU manufacturing to China and the consequences not for us, but for the Chinese themselves. I went to a very interesting presentation by a Swedish group who had filmed an investigation into working conditions in Chinese toy factories. 90% of toys sold in Europe are now made in China, where there are 9, 000 toy companies. (Remember Bluebird toys of Swindon? – the last toy company I can remember in the South West although there may be a few soldiering on). Although the workers are glad to have jobs, however low paid, the price they pay in terms of working conditions is very high. All work is piece work; wages are very low so overtime is high – 130-140 hour working weeks are common; because wages are low there is a big demand for cheap hostel accommodation near the factories, conditions are hot and noisy, trade unions are run by the stooges of the factory owners, who proudly reported no grievances at all.
The filmmakers interviewed various Danish and Swedish executives of the companies that import toys from such factories, all of whom said that they made inspections and were keen to introduce at least health and safety training. This may improve conditions when the EU toy industry applies new rules to its suppliers from 2006. Environmental issues are also important: Chinese rates of growth are wrecking their environment. New EU rules on dangerous chemicals will probably not apply to imported finished goods like the Chinese toys – a problem that worries many MEPs.
One issue that often comes up in meetings is that of how much of our law now originates in the EU. Questioners often claim that “Half of all British law comes from Brussels”. Interestingly, answers to parliamentary questions asked by John Redwood MP and others now give the true picture – which is much less Europe-dominated.
The following table shows the proportion of EU-related legislation from the total of all legislation sponsored by government departments 2002-3
Ministry or Dept Primary law (%) Secondary law (%)
Defence 0 0
Transport 0 1
Trade and Industry 25 26
Environment, Food and
Rural affairs 50 57
Education and Skills 0 1.2
Work and Pensions 0 9.2
Culture media and sport 0 12
Home office 226 pages from 868 74 pages from 438
Taking all the figures together, the best estimate of the proportion of our laws originating in Europe is 8.5% not 50%. I hope this cheers you up.
Best wishes for Christmas and the New Year
Caroline Jackson MEP