Members of the European Parliament will vote on the plan for a European External Action Service (EAS) on 8 July, the Conference of Group Presidents confirmed, on 1 July. Despite a last-minute effort from some quarters to flex Parliament’s muscles by prolonging the process, enough political group leaders supported the motion to present the draft by rapporteurs Elmar Brok (EPP), Guy Verhofstadt (ALDE) and Roberto Gualtieri (S&D) to MEPs for their approval in Strasbourg.

The draft report, which will be debated on 7 July, covers the general blueprint for the EAS but not the staff and financial regulations, which have yet to be dealt with by Parliament. The plan has already received the informal approval of the three parliamentary rapporteurs in Madrid, on 21June, as well as the agreement of member states and the European Commission, in April.

After lengthy, and sometimes heated, negotiations with High Representative Catherine Ashton, the Commission and the Spanish EU Presidency, German EPP deputy Brok said “things have improved considerably for Parliament,” noting, for example, increased reassurances on political accountability, particularly in terms of the deputies Ashton could send to Parliament to represent her during absences. They were also celebrating the fact that their negotiations produced a guarantee that 60% of the service’s staff would be made up of permanent EU officials, which they say would foster more loyalty to the EU’s diplomacy than if it were dominated by staff on rotation from their member states. This also constitutes a victory for MEPs, who were keen that the service should not be, in parliamentary speak, “intergovernmental” in nature but “communautaire,” which decodes as a desire for more power in Parliament than at the Council. The MEPs were also pleased the operational budget would be located at the Commission, though Ashton’s cabinet celebrated the independence of their administrative budget.

Some objections inevitably remain at Parliament, including over a lack of concrete measures to ensure geographic balance within the new diplomatic service, and GUE-NGL’s stance that the EAS is too “militarised”. Many were also disappointed that Parliament’s hearings of foreign policy special representatives would remain “informal,” though it was always ambitious to aim for US Senate-style hearings in Parliament with an effective veto on the hiring of top staff, such as heads of delegation and special representatives. But the group leaders are now sufficiently confident of the support for the rapporteurs’ report on the EAS to put it to a formal vote.

The separate legal procedures for the staff and financial regulations, on which the Parliament has co-decision powers, will be put to votes after the vote on this, more general, draft report on the Council’s decision. The staff and budget votes are expected to take place in the autumn.