JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN SCRUTINY debate -
Tuesday, 8 Apr 2008

Scrutiny of EU Legislative Proposals.

Chairman

No. 1, adopted measures, comprises COM (2007) 570, COM (2007) 714, COM (2007) 662, COM (2007) 720, COM (2007) 729, and COM (2008) 148. It is proposed to note these adopted measures. Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. 2, proposals proposed for no further scrutiny, comprises COM (2007) 709, COM (2007) 731, COM (2008) 41, COM (2007) 760, COM (2007) 762, COM (2007) 763, COM (2007) 848, COM (2007) 861, COM (2008) 26, COM (2008) 47, COM (2008) 48, COM (2008) 49, COM (2008) 53, COM (2008) 57, COM (2008) 58, COM (2008) 59, COM (2008) 73, COM (2008) 79, COM (2008) 82, COM (2008) 86, COM (2008) 87, COM (2008) 89, COM (2008) 91, COM (2008) 96, COM (2008) 99, COM (2008) 114, COM (2008) 120. It is recommended that these proposals do not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed. It is proposed that JHA 15437/06 does not warrant further scrutiny by this committee as it is likely to come before the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights for detailed consideration before ratification by both Houses of the Oireachtas. Is that agreed? Agreed. It is proposed that No. 3 be sent to sectoral committees for information. It is further proposed that given the advanced stage of the negotiations, COM (2006) 569 does not warrant further scrutiny. It is also proposed, however, given the concerns that existed and the importance of improving road safety, that this proposal be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Transport for information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Paddy Burke

Will that proposal come back to this committee?

Chairman

It will return for information purposes.

Senator Paddy Burke

This proposal will have implications for local authorities. Does this mean this directive only pertains to national routes, for national primary routes or national secondary routes or does it also pertain to all county roads? If they are all to be taken up with auditing every bad corner in the country, this will be a mess of a bureaucracy.

Chairman

We will speak on that matter in private session.

The joint committee went into private session at 1.07 p.m. and resumed in public session at 1.08 p.m.

Chairman

We will resume on COM (2006) 569. It is proposed that the committee seek written observations and that the proposal will return to this committee. Is that agreed? Agreed.

It is proposed that COM (2008) 94 does not warrant further scrutiny. However, given that this is a newly established fund and that there have been two parliamentary questions querying its potential application to situations in Ireland, it is recommended the proposal be forwarded for information to the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment. Is that agreed? Agreed.

It is proposed that DS 49/2/08 REV 2 does not warrant further scrutiny but that it be forwarded for information to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. Is that agreed? Agreed.

It is proposed to note the following measures: CFSP (2008) 104, CFSP (2008) 106, CFSP (2008) 107, CFSP (2008) 108, CFSP (2008) 109, CFSP (2008) 110, CFSP( 2008) 112, CFSP (2008) 113, CFSP (2008) 123, CFSP (2008) 124, CFSP (2008) 129, CFSP (2008) 130, CFSP (2008) 131, CFSP (2008) 132, CFSP (2008) 133, CFSP (2008) 135, CFSP (2008) 160, CFSP (2008) 179, and CFSP (2008) 187. Is that agreed? Agreed.

There are no Title IV measures.

It is proposed that EWN 2008, C17-10 does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed. There are no proposals for further scrutiny.

Item No. 8 is a proposal for forwarding to sectoral committees for observations to be returned to this committee preferably within four weeks but within six weeks at the latest. COM (2008) 78 is a proposal for a Council directive concerning the general arrangements for excise duty. In view of the potential impact for Ireland of any changes in the treatment of the movement of duty-paid products, it is proposed that this part of the proposal be scrutinised further. It is proposed to forward it to the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service for written observations, to be returned to this committee preferably within four weeks of this meeting or within six weeks at the latest. Is that agreed? Agreed.

There are no proposals for forwarding to sectoral committees for detailed scrutiny. An important meeting of the committee will take place this coming Thursday at 11 a.m.

Deputy Damien English

I will be unable to attend but one of my colleagues will take my place.

Chairman

We will keep the meeting as tight as possible. The proposals in question relate to telecommunications systems.

Deputy Damien English

Deputy Coveney hopes to attend in my place.

Chairman

That is good.

The joint committee adjourned at 1.10 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Thursday, 10 April 2008.