No. 2 is the review of the work programme for 2008. Is it agreed that we proceed as indicated? We had referred to the Middle East and our associations with African countries. We should include the fact that we may have to schedule some discussions in pursuit of our responsibilities as the European Affairs committee. We should keep that in mind. There are other issues outside the European Union that will have an impact on trade in the future, including defence and security matters, and we must keep that in mind and include them. Is it agreed to approve the work programme? Agreed.
The next item is consideration of the European Commission's annual policy strategy 2009 and the proposed contribution of the Joint Committee on European Affairs. We have discussed this previously and it covers almost everything we have referred to in this regard, including the Doha Round of talks, CAP reform and so on. It is stated that the committee believes there is a need for serious and careful reflection within the EU following the rejection of the Lisbon reform treaty by referendum. The committee, which strongly endorsed the treaty, is disappointed by the result but believes the decision of the electorate must be respected. I do not want to go over the matter again because of the nature of the discussions we had just now. An element that will have to dawn on all European member states is that this treaty was not negotiated by bureaucrats in Brussels but by member states on behalf of the people. The decisions taken were put to the people to be ratified, as appropriate, in each member state. In the French and Dutch cases, it was rejected before being somewhat revised. It was not greatly altered. It was then rejected in Ireland.
The big problem is whether individual member states will cherry-pick and ignore what was negotiated, perhaps for some very good reason. We must be careful we do not go down a negative, cynical and eurosceptic road. It has been adopted by some of our more powerful neighbours, who can afford to proceed down that route because of their size, weight and economic clout. It is very difficult for other member states to do that. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Are the minutes of the last meeting agreed? The next item is correspondence. No. 163 is a letter from the European Anti-Poverty Network Ireland enclosing a copy of its review of the Lisbon treaty, entitled Social Aspects of the Lisbon Treaty. Is it agreed to note it? Agreed.
No. 164 is a list of proposed measures considered and decisions adopted by the European scrutiny committee at its meeting of 17 June, which has been forwarded to the committee for information. Is it agreed to note it? Agreed. There are no matters arising from it.
No. 165 is from the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions of Europe. Is it agreed to note it? Agreed.
No. 166 is a letter from Commissioner Wallström, enclosing the Commission's response to a committee opinion. Is it agreed to note it? Agreed.
No. 167 is EU News Bulletin No. 50 from June 2008. Is it agreed to note it? Agreed.
No. 168 is correspondence received from Ms Emily Logan, Ombudsman for Children, enclosing a report regarding the international work of the office. It is proposed to note it unless the committee wishes to invite Ms Logan to meet the committee to make a presentation following the meeting of the European network of ombudsmen for children.
We should meet the Ombudsman for Children because of the implications in the recent treaty regarding children in particular, and the threat to young women that children would be taken from them. Is it agreed to arrange the meeting? Agreed. I ask the secretariat to make the necessary arrangements.
