On 30 July 2024, the House of Commons decided not to re-establish the European Scrutiny Committee after the general election. This was confirmed by the British Parliament: “While the United Kingdom was a member of the European Union, the Committee examined new and proposed EU laws that would automatically become UK law. However, the number of documents submitted to the Committee for scrutiny decreased following Brexit,” the House reports.
“EU plans, laws and proposals that may have an impact on the UK will now fall under the remit of the relevant departmental or other committees,” the parliament said.
This is a parliamentary body that, during its last session, was particularly critical of the negotiation of the Treaty on Gibraltar. In particular, its then president, Sir Bill Cash – now retired from the political front line – raised doubts about the loss of British sovereignty that could be entailed by the incorporation of the Rock into the Schengen area, both because of its border protocols and the community rules that could be applied.
The abolition of this select committee, established in 1973 to oversee British relations with the continent, has sparked mixed reactions from Brexiteers and opponents alike.
Far-right MP Suella Braverman, the Conservative Party chair and Home Secretary until her dismissal in November last year for an article in which she encouraged neo-Nazis to counter a pro-Palestinian demonstration after accusing the police of being complacent towards left-wing groups, has described the Labour Party’s decision as the “beginning of the end” of Brexit. In her opinion, the abolition of the select committee is “undemocratic, lacking in transparency and a disservice to the millions of Britons who voted for Brexit in 2016 and 2019”.
Sir Bill Cash (pictured) himself told GB News that the demise of the select committee was a “violation of parliamentary sovereignty”.
However, Mike Galsworthy, chairman of the pro-EU European Movement, was also dismayed by the committee’s abolition: “Pro-Europeans strongly agree with Brexiteers on this point – scrapping the European Scrutiny Committee is a huge disservice to our parliament and the public,” he told The Independent. “Given that there are new ministers with portfolio responsibilities in Europe, who is going to hold them to account in Parliament? Think about how this committee could have focused on new EU legislation and whether we are aligning or drifting, or what new areas of cooperation are emerging that we are missing out on and should be taking advantage of.”
Vox leaders in front of Gibraltar
Vox insists again on sovereignty
While all this is happening in London, Madrid and in its usual line, the VOX Parliamentary Group has presented a non-legislative proposal regarding the recovery of Spanish sovereignty over the Rock of Gibraltar, for discussion in the Foreign Affairs Committee. The initiative will presumably fail due to lack of support from other groups, given that the negotiation process on Gibraltar’s sovereignty has been settled before the Committee of 27 and in the United Nations General Assembly since the 1960s.
In this initiative, VOX recalls that after the United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union, no agreement between the EU and London can be applied to the territory of Gibraltar without an agreement between Spain and the United Kingdom, as the Spanish Government itself recognises. This is confirmed by clause number 24 of the European Council Guidelines for the negotiation of Brexit. This protocol includes for the first time in the basic law of the European Union provisions relating to Gibraltar negotiated by Spain.
On the other hand, Article 50 of the Declaration of the European Council and the European Commission highlights that “once the United Kingdom has left the Union, Gibraltar will not be included in the territorial scope of the agreements to be concluded between the Union and the United Kingdom. This does not, however, exclude the possibility of separate agreements being concluded between the Union and the United Kingdom with respect to Gibraltar. Without prejudice to the competences of the Union and in full respect of the territorial integrity of its Member States guaranteed by Article 4, paragraph 2, of the Treaty on European Union, such separate agreements will require the prior agreement of the Kingdom of Spain.”
Also worth noting is the Brussels Declaration of 27 November 1984, in which Spain and the United Kingdom agreed to establish a negotiating process “in order to resolve all their differences over Gibraltar” within the framework of which “questions of sovereignty will be dealt with”.
Even more important is the fact that Gibraltar has been included in the United Nations list of “non-autonomous territories pending decolonization” since the 1960s. In this regard, Spain has repeatedly asked the United Kingdom to enter into negotiations, in compliance with the provisions of the United Nations, to reach a definitive solution to the dispute over Gibraltar, the only colony in Europe.
The United Nations has stated on several occasions that “in the process of decolonisation of Gibraltar, the applicable principle is not that of the free determination of peoples but that of the restoration of Spanish territorial integrity”. For its part, Resolution 1514 (XV), Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, establishes in point 6 that “any attempt aimed at totally or partially undermining the national unity and territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations”. Therefore, the return of Gibraltar to Spanish sovereignty must be one of the “highest priorities” for the Government of Spain.
The conflict between Spain and the United Kingdom over the sovereignty of the Rock has its origins in the Treaty of Utrecht, signed by both nations in 1713, as a solution to the War of Succession. By signing this treaty, Spain ceded to Great Britain “the city and castle of Gibraltar together with its port, defences and fortresses that belong to it”.
However, the isthmus (like the adjacent waters or the airspace above it) was not ceded by Spain, and it always remained under Spanish sovereignty. Furthermore, Article X of the aforementioned treaty includes three conditions under which the cession is framed, which are the following:
1) The ceded territory is defined as the city and castle of Gibraltar, together with its port, defences and fortresses belonging to it, without a time limit, but without any territorial jurisdiction.
2) Open communication with the neighbouring country by land is not permitted, except for supplies in case of need.
3) Spain has a right to redeem the city of Gibraltar, that is, to recover its sovereignty, in case Great Britain wants to give, sell or otherwise alienate its property.
In view of the above, VOX denounces that “the mere continued de facto occupation by the British of the isthmus and the adjacent waters contravenes the conditions agreed in the Treaty of Utrecht for the acquisition of sovereignty over that territory, -by limiting the transfer of sovereignty only to the city and castle of Gibraltar, together with its port, defenses and fortresses-, in addition to being illegitimate under International Law.”
As if this were not enough, VOX warns that “the United Kingdom’s intention to give a new legal status to Gibraltar outside the decolonising framework constitutes an action provided for in the Treaty of Utrecht that would enable Spain to redeem the city of Gibraltar.” Thus, the insistence on the United Kingdom’s unilateral promise to comply with the will of the Gibraltarians to acquire their own autonomy would tacitly imply the “alienation” of British property. Although this alienation would not be carried out with respect to another power or State, but with respect to the population of Gibraltar itself – VOX maintains – “the return to Spain does not depend according to International Law on this local will but on the decision of Great Britain to change the property regime in any way.”
In this regard, it is worth mentioning that the British colony has become the headquarters of a multitude of Spanish companies and corporations thanks to the unfair tax competition promoted by the Gibraltarian authorities. Proof of this is that the Spanish Government includes the colony in its list of countries and territories considered to have “harmful tax regimes”.
In recent years, the municipal authorities of the colony have considerably aggravated their failure to comply with the agreements reached in Utrecht, as they have launched an expansionist policy of constant growth of the territory of the Rock, as well as constant harassment of the Spanish State Security Forces and Corps.
Given this growing lack of cooperation with our country and the persecution of political representatives of national sovereignty and the Spanish people, the question of the return of Gibraltar by the United Kingdom to its legitimate owner, which is Spain, becomes more urgent.
In this context, VOX regrets the opacity with which the Spanish Government is acting. The most obvious example is that the Minister of Foreign Affairs, José Manuel Albares, has not yet appeared in Congress to explain the state of negotiations with the United Kingdom and the future of Gibraltar. And that is despite the fact that on April 12, Albares met with his British counterpart, David Cameron, in order to conclude the EU-UK Agreement. The Chief Minister of the British colony of Gibraltar, Fabián Picardo, also participated in this meeting. “It is striking that the representative of a non-autonomous territory pending decolonization participates in this meeting,” denounces VOX.
In this non-legislative proposal, VOX concludes that the Government of Pedro Sánchez “must abandon the thesis of shared prosperity”, which, to date, has only produced the dependence of a large part of the Campo de Gibraltar region on the British colony. Thus, it is also urgent to create a comprehensive plan for this Cadiz region, which includes a package of economic measures to alleviate the delicate situation suffered by its inhabitants.
For all the above reasons, VOX believes that “it is pertinent for the Government of Spain to demand that the British government begin the negotiation process on the recovery of Spanish sovereignty over the Rock of Gibraltar.”
