JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS (Sub-Committee on European Scrutiny) debate -
Thursday, 4 Dec 2003

Vol. 1 No. 54

Scrutiny of EU Proposals.

Chairman

It is proposed that the first set of proposals for consideration today, documents 1.1 to 1.10, do not warrant further scrutiny.

COM (2003) 604 is a proposed regulation concerning the establishment of a guarantee fund for external actions. It is estimated that by 1 May 2004 the outstanding community loans due from the ten countries expected to join the EU on that date will be €3.808 billion. As soon as these ten join the EU, they will cease to be third countries and the loans will not, therefore, relate to external actions. This proposal, therefore, puts forward that the provision made for these loans in the guarantee fund, €343 million, be transferred to the EU's budget. It is from the EU budget that loans within the Union are effectively guaranteed. It is proposed that this document does not warrant further scrutiny but that it should be sent to the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service for its information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

COM (2003) 612 is a proposed regulation concerning transitional measures for the reform of staff regulations, particularly in respect of pay and pensions. Members will recall that at the previous meeting of the sub-committee we considered COM (2003) 580 correcting, with effect from 1 July 2002, the remuneration and pensions of officials and other servants of the European Communities to take account of adjustments in the salaries of French national officials. The proposal sets out proposed transitional measures in advance of the reform of the staff regulations for EU officials. I understand that the new staff regulations are due to come into effect on 1 May 2004. The proposal also provides for an increase in the staff contribution to the pension scheme from 8.25% to 9.25%. There is also a special levy which will rise to 5.5% over the following eight years. The Commission estimates that the net consequence of this proposal will be a saving of approximately €23 million to the EU budget. It is proposed that this does not warrant further scrutiny but that the Department be requested to provide a global note on the staff regulation changes to take effect next year. Is that agreed? Agreed.

COM (2003) 627 is a proposed regulation on development co-operation with South Africa. It is proposed that this largely technical proposal does not warrant further scrutiny but that it be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs for the particular information of its sub-committee on development co-operation. The essential proposal will allow for the possibility of greater job creation in South Africa with EU assistance. Is that agreed? Agreed.

COM (2003) 640 is a proposed regulation to establish common rules for direct support schemes under the Common Agricultural Policy for accession countries. This technical proposal proposes to adapt the new regulations governing the operation of the CAP to take account of the access of new members next year. The information notes from the Department clarifies that the proposal has no implications for Ireland's or the EU's budget in 2004. It is proposed this does not warrant further scrutiny but should be forwarded to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food for information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

COM (2003) 682 is a proposed regulation adjusting, with effect from 1 January 2004, the remuneration and pensions and the weighting applied thereto of EU officials. This proposal would give legal effect to the methods whereby the adjustment in salaries and pensions outlined in COM (2003) 612 would take place. The legal basis for the adjustment to EU officials' salaries and pensions expired on 1 July 2003.

This proposal allows for the calculation of the increase in officials' remuneration for the period 1 January 2004-30 June 2004 to take place on the basis of reference to a weighted average in the changes in the salaries of national officials and the purchasing power of these salaries for the year 1 July 2002 to 1 July 2003. It is proposed that this technical proposal does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.

COM (2003) 611 is a proposed regulation establishing a European Community observer scheme applicable to Community fishing vessels operating in the regulatory area of the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organisation, NAFO. This is a technical proposal to place the obligation on member states to control national vessels operating in the regulatory area of the NAFO. This follows from Regulation (EC) No. 2371/2002, which, inter alia, provides that member states, rather than the Commission, control the activities carried out by vessels flying their flag outside of Community waters.

The main practical consequence of this proposal is that from 1 January 2004 member states will be obliged to have observers assigned to all their fishing vessels engaged in or about to engage in fishing activities in the NAFO regulatory area and to bear the related financial cost. It is estimated that the total annual costs of the observation programme for member states in 2004 will be €3 million. This is based on the Commission's current provision for this operation. The Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources has indicated this proposal is of minor significance for Ireland, as Irish vessels do not fish in this area. It is proposed that the proposal does not warrant further scrutiny but should be forwarded to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources for information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

COM (2003) 691 is a proposed regulation derogating from regulation as regards the set-aside requirement for the 2004/2005 marketing year. Following a drought in many member states this year, it is expected that the cereal harvest for this year across the EU will be down 26 million tonnes on the previous year. This proposal, therefore, proposes the rate of compulsory set-aside on arable land should be reduced from 10% to 5% for the year 2004-05. The Department of Agriculture and Food has indicated this reduction will not have significant implications for Ireland, as it anticipates that the percentage of arable land that may be set-aside on a voluntary basis for the given year will increase from 15% to 20%. The percentage of the arable land that could be set-aside in Ireland under the scheme, therefore, will remain at 25%. It is proposed that the proposal does not warrant further scrutiny but should be forwarded to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food for information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

COM (2003) 624 is a proposed directive on access to justice in environmental matters. This proposal has serious implications but it is at an early stage and needs to be examined carefully. This proposed directive would establish a general framework for access to justice in environmental matters and would oblige member states to develop the details of that framework. It has been the subject of much debate at working group level and a number of member states have questioned whether it respects the principle of subsidiarity. The lead Department is seeking legal advice on this matter.

The proposal would form the third part of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters.Earlier this year two directives were adopted on the other two elements of the convention - Directive No. 2003/4/EC on public access to environmental information and Directive No. 2003/35/EC providing for public participation in respect of the drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating to the environment. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has been asked to provide a background information note on these two aspects of the convention.

This proposal would introduce a facility on justice regarding acts and omissions contravening environmental law. The member state would be obliged to establish appropriate criteria to meet this obligation. Acts and omission by a public authority would also be subject to a procedural and substantive review. These acts would be submitted to review where they have a legally binding and external effect, excluding acts that have been adopted as a legislative instrument.

This significant proposal is currently the subject of legal consideration and consultation between Departments. It is, therefore, proposed that the Department should keep the committee informed of developments. It is also proposed that the proposal should be forwarded to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Environment and Local Government for information at this stage. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy O’Keeffe

Is this the correct approach, taking into account that the proposal could have significance in Ireland and elsewhere? The proposed implementation date is January 12 months and, therefore, it is a live proposal. It may introduce a facility whereby the public will be able to request an administrative review to challenge acts or omissions by public authorities. Given previous attempts to get public authorities to agree and implement proposals, I am not sure adding another layer of review will be of benefit. Would it be possible for the sub-committee to examine the status of the proposal in three months, for example, because a careful eye must be kept on it?

Deputy Carey

I agree with the Deputy because the proposal has significant implications. Planning legislation and environment impact statements could be challenged. Could it be referred also to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, given that it involves mutual recognition and harmonisation issues? The Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Environment and Local Government may well seek to consult the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. The proposal could have major implications for Ireland.

Chairman

I am a little nervous that the sub-committee is referring most proposals to joint committees for information. This makes other committees nervous. Many committee chairmen have said the sub-committee is sending them a significant number of proposals even though we are only meant to send proposals for scrutiny. We should send proposals for information where it is of interest but we should not routinely forward proposals for information. However, this proposal has important implications. A similar planning framework to ours, which involves applications to local authorities, an Bord Pleanála and the High Court on points of law, may not be in use in other member states or accession states. However, an application for a major housing project or a road development could be appealed to the European courts, if the regulation is not drafted properly. It has serious implications. I propose that the sub-committee should forward the document to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Environment and Local Government for information but also seek an updated report from the Department within three months. If something happens sooner, the sub-committee should also be informed as it happens.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

The sub-committeeshould retain the file and keep an eye on theproposal.

Chairman

The sub-committee is not referring the document for scrutiny. We will inform the joint committee for information but will also ask the Department to report back to the sub-committee on progress within three months.

Deputy Carey

A presentation might be appropriate.

Chairman

Perhaps I could advise the Department that officials will be invited to appear before the sub-committee.

Senator Coghlan

Why is the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment listed as a relevant Department? Does it have an interest in the proposal?

Chairman

The proposal could affect business, for example, if planning applications or road development became impossible.

Senator Coghlan

The proposal could, therefore, be referred to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business.

Chairman

Yes, if we so decide. We sometimes do that.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

The problem is another facility could be introduced whereby individuals could block new projects. They have enough devices to do so currently.

Senator Coghlan

Could it be forwarded to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business?

Chairman

No, it should not be forwarded to too many committees.

Senator Coghlan

I accept that.

Chairman

We will remain seized of the proposal and seek a progress report within three months and sooner if there are developments. It will be forwarded to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Environment and Local Government and the sub-committee will seek a presentation on this subject by departmental officials early in the new year.

Deputy Carey

I agree. Could members obtain a note on the Aarhus convention?

Chairman

That will be circulated. Is that agreed? Agreed.

COM (2003) 622 also refers to the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to EC institutions and bodies. This proposal is a parallel proposal to COM (2003) 624 and relates to the implementation of the Aarhus convention for the institutions and bodies of the EC. It would introduce a framework of requirements for access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters at the Community level by qualified entities. The public authorities referred to in the context of this proposal would be "any public institution, body, office or agency established by, or on the basis of, the Treaty establishing the European Community. . . except when and to the extent to which they act in a judicial or legislative capacity."

Initially, a qualified entity would seek an internal review of administrative acts taken and only following this would other options such as proceedings before the European Court of Justice, be followed. Significantly, the qualified entities that would have access to this facility must, according to Article 12, "cover at least three member states". This article may have implications for organisations with a particular focus in Ireland and without links with organisations in other member states.

The proposal does not give a detailed definition of environmental law in the context of this proposal, but refers to acts sharing the objectives of Article 174 of the treaty, which are, inter alia, preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment. However, it outlines examples of areas that would be covered, for example, water protection, atmospheric pollution, and environmental impact assessment. It is proposed that the proposal should be forwarded along with COM 2003/624 to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Environment and Local Government for information and that it should be considered together with COM 2003/624 when the legal and administrative issues surrounding that proposal become clearer. Is that agreed? Agreed.

COM (2003) 605 is a proposed regulation on the organisation of Community surveys on the structure of agricultural holdings after enlargement. Under existing European regulations member states are required to carry out surveys of agricultural holdings in 2005 and 2007. These provide for the reimbursement of current member states for each holding surveyed up to a set maximum. This proposal sets a range of limits for the accession countries between €25,000 in the case of Malta to €2 million for Hungary and Poland. It is proposed this does not warrant further scrutiny but should be forwarded to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food for information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

It is proposed that all these proposals do not warrant further scrutiny, with the exception of COM (2003) 624, on which a presentation may be made to the sub-committee within three months.

The next set of proposals are documents which it is proposed to refer to sectoral committees for further scrutiny. COM (2003) 613 is a proposed directive on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different member states. This proposal follows from a number of reports by the Commission on the operation of the company tax regime in the internal market and is in anticipation of the entry into force of Regulation No. 2157/2001 permitting the creation of a European company.

The proposal proposes to extend the current list of economic entities benefiting from the current directive, whereby, in certain circumstances, tax neutrality applies for cross-border mergers and divisions. The Department of Finance's information note welcomes the widening of the scope of the proposed amendment of the directive to include Irish unlimited companies, but outlines that the proposal will require detailed examination to assess the full implications for Ireland.

The amended directive proposes that savings banks and mutual companies, the conversion of branches into companies, and partial divisions or "split-offs" also benefit from the measure. The proposal would, in addition, widen the scope of the directive to include European companies.

The registration of a European company in one member state would allow that company to operate across the EU, but would be substantially subject to the national law of the member state in which it is registered. The European company is, however, subject to special provisions regarding employee participation and consultation within the company. Additional proposals relating to the tax regime to govern these companies is anticipated from the Commission. It is proposed that the proposal should be referred to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service for further scrutiny and to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business for information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

COM (2003) 609 is a proposed regulation on the Fisheries Agreement between the EU and the Government of Denmark and the Local Government of Greenland. There has been a EU framework agreement on fisheries with Greenland since 1985 and this compensated Greenland for the loss of European financial assistance. The fourth protocol to the Fisheries Agreement between the European Communities and the Government of Denmark and the Local Government of Greenland expires on 31 December 2006. This proposal results from a mid-term review of the protocol.

The review also followed criticism in the European Parliament and by the Court of Auditors of the value for money and lack of transparency of the current agreement. The criticism in particular focused on issues of so-called "paper-fish", whereby the collapse in the levels of stocks of certain species meant that the rights to fish for these species were devalued.

The fisheries committee of the European Parliament earlier this year suggested in a report that aid to Greenland should be paid from the development fund rather than the fisheries budget. The proposed amendment to the fourth protocol would, inter alia, result in the introduction of licence fees for fishing vessels accessing the fishing rights; the introduction of quotas for additional species, and the redirection of €11 million of the €42 million financial contribution towards support for the structural reform of the Greenland fisheries policy. The Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources has indicated that the Irish fishing industry may be interested in accessing the quotas for the additional species included in the amendment. These would be primarily squid and snowcrab.

It is proposed that the proposal should be forwarded to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources for further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The final proposal is a measure related to the Common Foreign and Security Policy, about which I received a confidential brief in advance. CFSP (2003) 805 refers to a common position on the universalisation and reinforcement of multilateral agreements in the field of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and means of delivery. This measure follows from a declaration adopted at the European Council at Thessaloniki on weapons of mass destruction. This common position is seen as a political restatement of the EU position on non-proliferation and as a means of setting a yardstick for its position in international fora. It obliges member states to promote the universalisation of key disarmament and non-proliferation treaties. It is proposed to note the measure. Is that agreed? Agreed. That concludes the scrutiny of proposals for this meeting.

The sub-committee adjourned at 10.05 a.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 18 December 2003.