I refer to documents Nos. 1.1 to 1.6. No. 1.1 is Commission document 692 on fishing within the Kiribati fishing zone. The Council mandated the Commission in June 2001 to negotiate bilateral fishery agreements in the Pacific region. This proposal is a consequence of the outcome of negotiations held in 2002 with the Republic of Kiribati, an independent state in the Pacific that gained its independence from Britain in 1979. Spain, France and Portugal have a particular interest in the tuna fish opportunities in the region around Kiribati. The proposal reflects the agreement with Kiribati and allocates fishing rights to a limited number of vessels from the EU. These rights will be divided among the three states mentioned. The agreement also includes provision of financial assistance to Kiribati of approximately €500,000 for each of the next three years. It also stipulates that the EU vessels fishing in Kiribati's waters as a result of this agreement will be required to embark with two Kiribati seamen per vessel. Given that the proposal relates to obtaining approval for the conclusion of a new EU-Kirabati fishery agreement and the Department has indicated the Irish fishing industry has minimum involvement in the area, I recommend that the proposal does not require further scrutiny by the sectoral committee. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Document 1.2 is Commission document 706 on the importation of agricultural products originating in Poland. The aim of the proposed regulation is to adopt an autonomous and interim measure in respect of the importation into the European Union of processed agricultural products from Poland. It is envisaged that all tariffs will be abolished on 1 May 2004. Consequently, there is a need to progressively move towards this position to avoid major changes in the tariff regime overnight. Since finalisation of a broader bilateral EU-Poland agreement, a number of related issues remain to be concluded. This is an autonomous measure on the part of the Community which is being introduced on the understanding Poland will reciprocate.
Given that there have been mixed signals coming from Poland on the question of reciprocity and on the possibility of wider agreement, the information note from the Department of Agriculture and Food has been delayed while clarification of these issues is sought. Poland is now in a position to reciprocate the measures which will be backdated to 1 February 2002. Given that the measures proposed are technical and part of efforts to ensure a smooth transition to membership of the European Union, it is proposed that this document does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Document 1.3 is Commission document 750 regarding the limitation of emissions of volatile compounds due to the use of solvents in paints and varnishes. This proposed directive aims to limit the amount of volatile organic compounds, VOCs, air pollutants detrimental to human health. Major sources of VOCs are organic solvents used industrially, commercially and domestically. The proposal requires the limitation of the amount of VOCs in certain paints and varnishes used both professionally and as part of DIY activities. These reductions would assist Ireland in reaching its national emission targets for VOCs as set out in Directive 201/81/EC.
As the measure and the proposal are product-specific rather than targeted at the end user, the effects of the proposals will not fall disproportionately on small enterprises such as painting contractors. The proposals could, however, result in some firms having to invest in new equipment but it is estimated that these costs would add no more than between 1% and 1.5% to the costs of a manufacturer. Furthermore, they can be spread over a number of years as the timetable for compliance extends to 2010. Since these minimal extra costs would be uniform across the European Union, the competitiveness of Irish contractors should not be affected.
The proposed measures would oblige member states to ensure products falling within the scope of the directive - for the most part decorative paints - can be marketed only if they comply with the technical specifications of the proposal. A labelling requirement has been included to ensure potential consumers are fully informed about the contents of a product. It is recommended that this proposal does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed?