FOR years, Parliament did not meet during the months of August and September. There were reasons for this -- not least to give MPs more time in their constituencies.

But in recent years, what was unfairly characterised as an extended holiday has now rightly been scrapped.

So, this week, MPs returned after the summer for two weeks before we break up again for the party conference season.

Of course, it has not exactly been quiet in the Foreign Office over the last few weeks.

But the pace has quickened. On Monday, I delivered an oral statement and took questions from MPs on the serious situation in Iraq and grave state of the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians.

On Tuesday, I gave another oral statement, this time about the Government's position on the future reforms of the European Union.

Then on Wednesday I spent an hour and a half being questioned by a Committee of MPs -- again about Europe -- before speaking for the Government in a debate on how we can enhance the role of the United Nations in Iraq.

Apart from the period running up to the war in Iraq last March, I don't think I have been so busy in Parliament since my Home Office days.

While I don't pretend that dealing with forensic and sometimes critical questions from my Parliamentary colleagues on such serious issues is always easy, I genuinely enjoy these experiences.

More importantly, however, this system is a vital feature of how government ministers like me are held to account for what we do -- and it works.

Tuesday's statement was accompanied by a White Paper on the proposed constitution of Europe, an issue which has aroused contrived fury both from the Conservative Party and the right-wing press.

For many, the real aim is for Britain to leave the European Union but they are too afraid to say so. I don't claim that the European Union is perfect, far from it.

But I do know that withdrawing from what is the largest trading bloc in the world would be a disaster for jobs in East Lancashire and elsewhere in Britain. That's not something that I am prepared to countenance.

The truth about the proposed constitution for Europe is somewhat less dramatic. Far from being the beginning of a superstate, the future treaty should give a greater say for national governments and national parliaments in the running of the European Union.

Crucially, it will also allow the union to function effectively with a further 10 members, including eight countries of the former Soviet bloc, and two, Cyprus and Malta, which are members of the Commonwealth.

Last week I told of the perils of travelling as Foreign Secretary with tales of malfunctioning aeroplanes and venomous mosquitoes in Paris. Well, I have to confess that last Friday and Saturday's meeting of foreign ministers was an altogether more pleasurable experience.

Host countries will often use meetings of this sort to show off their best assets. Italy didn't disappoint.

Don't get me wrong, we were doing some very serious EU business there, not least on this issue of the European constitution. But meeting up on the banks of Lake Garda was a real pleasure.