The first matter concerns proposals warranting further scrutiny, namely, Nos. 1.1 to 1.12 on today's agenda. No. 1.1 is COM (2006) 399, a proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No. 2201/2003 as regards jurisdiction and introducing rules concerning applicable law in matrimonial matters. The lead Department is the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Office of the Attorney General also has an interest in this matter.
The Commission's memorandum to this proposal states that it views the harmonisation of conflict of law rules as facilitating the mutual recognition of judgments. In this regard, the Commission presented a Green Paper regarding the applicable law and jurisdiction in divorce matters. That paper was considered by the Sub-Committee on European Scrutiny in April 2005 and was forwarded to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights for information and consideration. The Commission had sought views before September 2005.
The Department's note underlines that the harmonisation of the laws of the member states in respect of divorce and legal separation is not at issue in this proposal. However, the proposal which sets out the procedures to be followed in determining jurisdiction warrants further scrutiny in respect of the potential of the adopted proposal to undermine existing national measures for member states with significant non-national populations. I understand the particular arrangements in place in respect of judicial co-operation for Denmark, Ireland and Great Britain appear to greatly reduce any subsidiarity concerns. Ireland and Great Britain have the option to take part in the proposed process. The Department had been asked to outline its views on both of these principles. I understand the additional note provided by it has been circulated. However, it appears to add little of its own perspective on the proposal in respect of subsidiarity and proportionality. It is, therefore, proposed that the proposal be referred to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights for further scrutiny. It is additionally proposed that it be forwarded for information to the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs. Is that agreed? Agreed.
The next item is COM (2006) 288, a Council decision authorising member states to ratify, in the interests of the European Community, the 2006 consolidated maritime labour convention of the International Labour Organisation, ILO. The consolidated maritime labour convention of the ILO was adopted in February. The Commission's memorandum sets out that the process of consolidation had been fully under way since 2001 and aimed to set simple and clear minimum standards in the maritime industry. The importance of this action is underlined by the importance of the sector for world trade. The ultimate aim of the 2006 convention is to achieve and maintain a level playing field in the shipping industry by fostering the promotion of decent living and working conditions for seafarers and fairer competition. The Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources indicates that the convention will apply to all sea-going vessels, with the exception of fishing vessels, vessels of traditional build and naval service vessels. It is possible for the convention to apply only to vessels over 200 gross tonnes, after social consultation. If this were the case, the convention would apply to approximately 40 Irish vessels. It is proposed that the proposal be referred for further scrutiny to the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs, given the highlighted likelihood that the Department of Social and Family Affairs would be required to advance related legislation before Ireland could ratify the convention. It is also proposed that the proposed measure be forwarded for information to the Joint Committee on Transport, the Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business and the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. Is that agreed? Agreed.
The next item is COM (2006) 364, an amended proposal for a Council decision concerning the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Atomic Energy Community, EURATOM, for nuclear research and training activities from 2007 to 2011. The committee has considered the nuclear research and training elements of the proposed framework programme on a number of occasions since June 2005, which on each occasion have been referred for further scrutiny by the Joint Committee on Environment and Local Government. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has outlined that Ireland does not support or engage in nuclear energy generation, as it is not considered that this form of energy provides a safe, sustainable or viable energy source. It indicates that its main task in respect of such EU research activities is to maximise expenditure in the area of safety and controls. The amended proposal takes account of textual changes proposed by various institutions and accepted by the Commission. The Department indicates that it views these changes as not changing the aim of the proposal. One addition advocates "a multi-annual campaign ... to inform politicians and the general public about nuclear energy in order both to promote a fact-based debate and to facilitate informed decision-making". It is proposed that the amended proposal be referred for further scrutiny to the Joint Committee on Environment and Local Government in the context of its consideration of earlier proposals referred by the scrutiny committee, namely, COM (2005) 119, COM (2005) 444 and COM (2005) 445. Is that agreed? Agreed.
The next item is COM (2006) 382, a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on roaming on public mobile networks within the Community, amending Directive 2002/21/EC on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services. The Commission contends that the ability of customers of electronic communications services to use their mobile handsets to make and receive calls while travelling abroad is an important component of the service which contributes to the social and economic welfare of the Community as a whole. The aim of the proposal is to provide the necessary legal basis for effective and timely action to bring about substantial reductions in the price of mobile roaming services when travelling in the Community. This would be achieved through setting maximum price limits for the provision of such services. The current draft sets the maximum retail cost at 130% of the wholesale cost. Is this not high? Whether it is excessively generous appears to require further scrutiny. It also fails to take account of the tariff set at the wholesale cost level. The Department is of the view that the proposed measure, as drafted, would have a limited impact for Irish users, owing to market moves to address the more extreme examples of the roaming charges regime in Britain and Ireland. It is proposed that this significant proposal be referred to the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources for further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.