Still no clarity

This blog has already pointed out that HMG is not very forthcoming or transparent about its intentions about the European Public Prosecutor.

On March 1 Lord Pearson's Written Question on the subject was published:

To ask Her Majesty's Government ... what stage any proposal for a European Public Prosecutor has reached; and whether they will refuse to opt into or veto it in due course

.The last part of the question did not really get a response. Lord West said on behalf of HMG:

There is no proposal at present to create a European Public Prosecutor (EPP). The Government has consistently opposed the creation of an EPP.

Yes, but will they veto it? After all, it is not entirely true that they have consistently opposed the creation of an EPP. They have signed up to the Lisbon Treaty, which states in Article 86 of The Consolidated Version on the Functioning of the European Union

In order to combat crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union, the Council, by means of regulations adopted in accordance with a special legislative procedure, may establish a European Public Prosecutor's Office from Eurojust. The Council shall act unanimously after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

The rest of the Article elaborates on procedure and purpose. So, it is not entirely true, as Marta Andreasen pointed out to David Cameron, that there have been no proposals. There is a general proposal in the Consolidated Treaties and once something is in the treaties, that something is intended to become part of EU legislation. However, Britain can veto the proposal. Will HMG do so when it comes up more definitely?