No. 1 relates to the following adoptive measures — any member who has a concern relating to them may interject and we will address the issue: COM (2008) 624, COM (2008) 631, COM (2008) 784, COM (2008) 808, COM (2008) 833 and COM (2008) 851. It is proposed to note these measures, is that agreed? Agreed.
No. 2 is proposals which it is proposed require no further scrutiny, including COM (2008) 229, COM (2008) 691, COM (2008) 694, COM (2008) 697, COM (2008) 715, COM (2008) 801, COM (2008) 806, COM (2008) 814, COM (2008) 842 and COM (2008) 901. It is recommended that these proposals do not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.
No. 3 is proposals which it is proposed require no further scrutiny but which are proposed to be sent to sectoral committees for their information. It is recommended that COM (2007) 765 does not warrant further scrutiny and that it be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights for their information in view of the potential legislative and policy implications. Is that agreed? Agreed.
The next item is COM (2007) 766, a proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and the Council on the co-ordination of procedures for the award of certain public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts in the fields of defence and security. It is recommended that this proposal does not warrant further scrutiny but that it be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service and the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs for their information in view of the potential legislative and policy implications. Is that agreed? Agreed.
It is recommended that COM (2008) 615 requires no further scrutiny but that it be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Transport for its information. Is that agreed? Agreed.
It is recommended that COM (2008) 818 requires no further scrutiny but that it be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Health and Children for its information. Is that agreed? Agreed.
There are no CFSP, Title VI, TEU, Title IV and TEC measures or early warning notes.
The next item is proposals which it is proposed require further scrutiny. COM (2008) 151 was initially discussed at the committee meeting on 3 December 2008 when it was agreed to defer making a decision as to whether to scrutinise until after the EU Transport Council meeting on 9 December. The proposal is for a directive of the European Parliament and the Council facilitating cross-border enforcement in the field of road safety. This would put in place a procedure, whereby details of registered owners of non-national vehicles involved in specified road traffic offences would be exchanged by member states and, on receipt of that information, a non-resident driver would have to be notified of the offence, the financial penalty and the timeframe within which it would have to be paid. The four offences are drink driving, failure to wear a seatbelt, failure to stop at a red light and speeding. However, a recent Council legal service opinion is that there are no common rules in place or proposed by the Community in respect of the four offences covered by the proposed directive. It would be contrary to the treaty to establish Community rules in the field of criminal procedures for the enforcement of purely national rules.
The Department indicates that this proposal is of major significance. On receipt of these details there would be an automatic application of an administrative financial penalty on the person concerned. This, however, causes major problems for Ireland and other member states where such matters are criminal offences. In Ireland, where certain road traffic offences fall within a system of fixed charges and penalty points, a person has the right to and must be given the option to appear before a court and the fixed charges or any equivalent administrative penalty cannot be automatically applied.
The proposal was discussed by COREPER and at a meeting of the EU Transport Council of 9 December 2008 when the Council invited its preparatory bodies to continue the proceedings with a view to reaching agreement as soon as possible. It is a significant proposal with which, in its current form, Ireland would have difficulties. It is recommended that the proposal should be further scrutinised by this committee and a draft report prepared for forwarding to the Minister. It is proposed to invite oral presentations from representatives of the Department of Transport and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform at a future meeting of the committee. Is that agreed? Agreed.
There are no proposals proposed for forwarding to sectoral committees for their observations or detailed scrutiny. The next item is scrutiny of COM (2008) 721, a draft regulation to reform the control systems underpinning the Common Fisheries Policy.