Geoffrey VAN ORDEN : 8th parliamentary term 

Political groups 

  • 01-07-2014 / 12-12-2016 : European Conservatives and Reformists Group - Vice-Chair
  • 13-12-2016 / 04-07-2017 : European Conservatives and Reformists Group - Vice-Chair
  • 05-07-2017 / 24-10-2017 : European Conservatives and Reformists Group - Vice-Chair
  • 25-10-2017 / 01-07-2019 : European Conservatives and Reformists Group - Vice-Chair

National parties 

  • 01-07-2014 / 01-07-2019 : Conservative Party (United Kingdom)

Chair 

  • 16-10-2014 / 01-07-2019 : Delegation for relations with India

Vice-Chair 

  • 14-09-2017 / 14-11-2018 : Special Committee on Terrorism

Member 

  • 01-07-2014 / 18-01-2017 : Committee on Foreign Affairs
  • 01-07-2014 / 18-01-2017 : Subcommittee on Security and Defence
  • 14-07-2014 / 15-10-2014 : Delegation for relations with India
  • 16-10-2014 / 01-07-2019 : Conference of Delegation Chairs
  • 19-01-2017 / 01-07-2019 : Committee on Foreign Affairs
  • 19-01-2017 / 01-07-2019 : Subcommittee on Security and Defence
  • 12-09-2017 / 13-09-2017 : Special Committee on Terrorism

Substitute 

  • 01-07-2014 / 14-12-2015 : Committee on Employment and Social Affairs
  • 14-07-2014 / 01-07-2019 : Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly
  • 21-10-2014 / 01-07-2019 : Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee
  • 15-12-2015 / 18-01-2017 : Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs
  • 19-01-2017 / 01-07-2019 : Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

Main parliamentary activities 

Contributions to plenary debates 
Speeches made during the plenary session and written declarations relating to plenary debates. Rules Rule 204 and 171(11)

Reports - as rapporteur 
A rapporteur is appointed in the responsible parliamentary committee to draft a report on proposals of a legislative or budgetary nature, or other issues. In drafting their report, rapporteurs may consult with relevant experts and stakeholders. They are also responsible for the drafting of compromise amendments and negotiations with shadow rapporteurs. Reports adopted at committee level are then examined and voted on in plenary. Rule 55

Reports - as shadow rapporteur 
Political groups designate a shadow rapporteur for each report in the responsible committee to follow progress and negotiate compromise texts with the rapporteur. Rule 215

Opinions - as rapporteur 
Committees may draft an opinion to a report of the responsible committee covering the elements linked to their committee remit. Rapporteurs of such opinions are also responsible for the drafting of compromise amendments and negotiations with shadow rapporteurs of the opinion. Rule 56, Rule 57, Annex VI

OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for screening of foreign direct investments into the European Union  
- AFET_AD(2018)616888 -  
-
AFET 

Opinions - as shadow rapporteur 
Political groups designate a shadow rapporteur for an opinion to follow progress and negotiate compromise texts with the rapporteur. Rule 215

OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Defence Fund  
- AFET_AD(2018)627021 -  
-
AFET 
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Connecting Europe Facility and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1316/2013 and (EU) No 283/2014  
- AFET_AD(2018)627015 -  
-
AFET 
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Defence Industrial Development Programme aiming at supporting the competitiveness and innovative capacity of the EU defence industry  
- AFET_AD(2018)612300 -  
-
AFET 

Motions for resolutions 
Motions for resolutions are tabled on topical issues, at the request of a committee, a political group or at least 5% of the Members, and voted on in plenary. Rule 132, Rule 136, Rule 139, Rule 144.

Oral questions 
Questions for oral answer with debate, addressed to the European Commission, the Council or the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union can be tabled by a committee, a political group or at least 5% of Parliament’s members. Rule 136

Other parliamentary activities 

Written explanations of vote 
Members can submit a written explanation of their vote in plenary. Rule 194

European Defence Fund (A8-0412/2018 - Zdzisław Krasnodębski)  
 

. – It is appropriate that I finish my term in the European Parliament on a defence note as I have led the opposition to EU defence policy throughout my time here. I believe very strongly in NATO. I see the EU’s divisive defence ambitions as dangerous both to the transatlantic alliance and to European security. Furthermore, we can see the European Defence Fund as a further device to transfer competences and actions from the nations to the EU and to advance the idea of EU strategic, technological and industrial autonomy . As matters currently stand, the United Kingdom, Europe’s most capable military and defence industrial power, would be deliberately excluded from the European defence market and from effective participation in collaborative defence projects. While the relevant trilogue agreement does not, at this stage, include these aspects, there is concern nevertheless that the Report still contains strongly protectionist elements. The UK Conservative Delegation has therefore voted against it.

Annual report on the implementation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (A8-0392/2018 - David McAllister)  
 

. – Among the 10 founding principles of the ECR Group is: ‘the overriding value of the transatlantic security relationship in a revitalised NATO’, as well as ‘the sovereign integrity of the nation state’ and ‘opposition to EU federalism.’ Therefore, in spite of a number of sensible points included in this report, the ECR Group cannot support its overall thrust.
While the report makes reference to NATO and the need for more investment in defence, it advocates EU ‘strategic autonomy’ and, by implication, the creation of an ‘EU army’, separate from national or NATO structures. This concept would undermine national responsibility for our armed forces and the lives of our citizens, it would weaken the cohesion of NATO, driving a wedge between the USA and Europe, discriminate against major European allies that are not EU members, and waste vital resources on duplicative structures.
The report supports the new EU defence projects of PESCO and the EDF, which are designed to progress EU strategic autonomy and EU defence industrial protectionism, rather than improve the defence of Europe through increased defence expenditure and improved military capability. Indeed, the report even promotes the belief that ‘it is possible to increase the scope and efficiency of defence spending without increasing defence spending itself.’
Instead of being merely an echo chamber for the European Commission, the European Parliament should challenge false doctrine, particularly when the defence and security of our citizens is at stake.

Autonomous weapon systems (RC-B8-0308/2018, B8-0308/2018, B8-0309/2018, B8-0355/2018, B8-0359/2018, B8-0360/2018, B8-0361/2018, B8-0362/2018)  
 

. – While I can agree with a number of statements in the resolution on autonomous weapon systems, the resolution as a whole betrays a certain naiveté and is overly prescriptive. There are international precedents for banning categories of weapons, including the Chemical Weapons Convention, and the Ottawa Convention on banning anti-personnel landmines in which I was much involved. The difficulty is that rogue states and others, including terrorists and insurgents, will continue to develop and even use banned weapons. It is vital therefore that the Western democracies and their allies should have the necessary defensive capabilities and this requires a deep understanding of otherwise banned weapons. In the case of autonomous weapons, there is currently no agreed definition and many countries, including China and Russia, are already very actively developing capabilities in this field – some for defensive purposes but also offensive capabilities. It is right that an agreed international approach be negotiated and the forum for this is meeting of the states party to the Convention on Certain Conventional weapons in Geneva. But we should be aware of the limitations of any such agreement.

Written questions 
Members can submit a specific number of questions to the President of the European Council, the Council, the Commission and the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union, for written answer. Rule 138, Annex III

Written declarations (up to 16 January 2017) 
**This instrument no longer exists since 16 January 2017**. A written declaration was an initiative on a matter falling within the EU’s competence. It could be co-signed by Members within a 3 month period.

Written declaration on the conservation and welfare of Asian elephants  
- P8_DCL(2015)0062 - Lapsed  
Jacqueline FOSTER , Geoffrey VAN ORDEN , Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI , Ian DUNCAN , Renate SOMMER , Marlene MIZZI , Jeppe KOFOD , Jean LAMBERT , Keith TAYLOR , Anja HAZEKAMP , Stefan ECK  
Date opened : 14-10-2015
Lapse date : 14-01-2016
Number of signatories : 87 - 15-01-2016
Written declaration on the funnelling of EU aid to terrorist organisations  
- P8_DCL(2015)0005 - Lapsed  
Michael THEURER , Antanas GUOGA , Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS , Johannes Cornelis van BAALEN , Tunne KELAM , Lars ADAKTUSSON , Indrek TARAND , Geoffrey VAN ORDEN , Ryszard CZARNECKI , Bas BELDER , Monika BEŇOVÁ  
Date opened : 09-02-2015
Lapse date : 09-05-2015
Number of signatories : 65 - 11-05-2015

Declarations 

Contact