Joint Committee on European Union Affairs debate -
Wednesday, 25 Oct 2023

European Union and the Commission Work Programme: Discussion

The joint committee went into private session at 10.04 a.m. and resumed in public session at 10.11 a.m.

An Cathaoirleach

On behalf of the committee, I would like to take the opportunity to welcome the European Commission representation in Ireland, Ms Barbara Nolan, who is head of the representation. She is joined by her colleague, the deputy head, Mr. Jonathan Claridge. They are very welcome and I thank them for coming in. At today's meeting we are going to discuss the state of the EU and the Commission's work programme. We very much look forward to that engagement on it.

Before we begin, we have some housekeeping matters to deal with. All witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks and it is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. There are a number of people joining us remotely. I remind members that there is a constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of Leinster House complex to participate in public meetings. I cannot permit members to participate where they are not adhering to this requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside will be asked to leave the meeting. In this regard, I ask members participating via MS Teams to confirm they are within the Leinster House complex prior to making their contribution. With those official announcements done, I invite Ms Nolan to make her opening statement.

Ms Barbara Nolan

I am here to talk about the state of the EU, the speech that was delivered by President von der Leyen in September and the Commission's work programme that was adopted last week. With the European elections coming up in June next year, this was the last state of the union address of the current Commission's mandate, and an opportunity to review what has been delivered and what remains to be done. In a wide-ranging speech, the President outlined how the European Commission has delivered on the commitments that she made back in 2019 when she took office in her political guidelines, and she highlighted the emerging challenges, priorities and flagship initiatives for the years to come.

As I mentioned, last week the Commission adopted its work programme for 2024, which follows on from the state of the union address. The programme was developed against a backdrop of growing geopolitical tensions, not least Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and now the unfolding crisis in the Middle East. Despite the results achieved so far, key proposals are still pending agreement, so an important priority for the 2024 work programme will be supporting the European Parliament and Council to step up efforts to find agreement on outstanding proposals and ensuring that Europe's citizens and businesses can take full advantage of EU policy actions.

I want to fast track through some of the key achievements of the current Commission's mandate, which has delivered a number of milestones for European climate policy, most notably the European green deal that set out Europe’s ambition to become the first climate-neutral continent. All of the Fit for 55 proposals, which many people think are part of some kind of programme for middle-aged people to get fit, aim to reach 55% emissions reductions by 2030 and have now been agreed by the co-legislators. The focus is now on implementation.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent energy crisis has given new impetus to the shift away from dependence on fossil fuels. There has also been a strong emphasis on ensuring industrial competitiveness. The recently introduced EU Critical Raw Minerals Act seeks to reduce Europe’s reliance on critical minerals imported from outside its borders, and the Net Zero Industry Act aims to bolster the manufacturing of green technologies. This Commission has also accelerated the digital transition. With the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act, it is laying down strong foundations for making the EU Single Market fair, competitive, consumer-friendly and safe, especially for children.

The EU is now setting a standard for the rest of the world when it comes to the digital sphere. NextGenerationEU, the EU’s €800 billion instrument to support the economic recovery from the coronavirus pandemic, will make EU economies greener, digital and more resilient through a mixture of investments and reforms in the national recovery and resilience plans. The European Commission has also enhanced the EU’s role as global leader, building on the EU-US relationship and strengthening ties to Africa, Latin America and parts of Asia by combining tools from across the EU’s trade policy, development assistance, infrastructure investment and more in the EU Global Gateway investment programme. Indeed, today there is a summit going on in Brussels of the countries involved in the Global Gateway and EU member states.

Turning to the 2024 work programme, this work programme puts a strong emphasis on reducing administrative burdens. The Commission aims to reduce EU reporting requirements by 25%, which is crucial to maintaining the competitiveness of European business and providing some relief to SMEs. With over 90% of the commitments made back in 2019 having been delivered and only seven months left until the European elections, the Commission has proposed a limited number of focused new initiatives for 2024, aiming to complete delivery of the commitments made but also to prepare for emerging challenges. In fact, we are running out of time in the mandate, in a way, and therefore we have to be quite focused on what we want to achieve in the coming seven months that are left to do that before the European Parliament elections.

I will highlight what is new in terms of the Commission's work programme. Under the European Green Deal, which as members know is Europe’s growth agenda, we will work towards setting climate targets for 2040 to keep the EU on course towards climate neutrality by 2050. I know that all these dates can become a bit hazy, but essentially, the key target is to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. We want to take a further step by setting targets for 2040. Yesterday, the Commission presented yesterday a wind power package, which I think will be of great interest here in Ireland, to accelerate the deployment of wind turbines, improve access to finance and support the international competitiveness of European industry.

The Commission will also present an initiative on water resilience to ensure access to water for citizens, nature and the economy, while also tackling things like catastrophic flooding, like we saw in east Cork last week, and water shortages.

The Commission will continue to ensure that the green transition is fair and inclusive. For example, it will initiate a series of green dialogues in order to fully and directly engage with citizens, as well as clean transition dialogues with industry and social partners. The first clean transition dialogue on hydrogen has already taken place. We are also setting up a strategic dialogue on the future of agriculture in the EU, which will be of great interest here in Ireland.

Turning to a Europe fit for the digital age, the Digital Services Act is now in force for very large online platforms and will apply across Europe from 17 February 2024. To continue making Europe fit for the digital age, the Commission will open our high-performance computers to start-ups working on artificial intelligence. Many of our partners around the world want to work together and develop local industries for processing and refining to strengthen global supply chains of raw materials. That is why the Commission will convene the first meeting of the new critical raw materials club later this year. It will also work on a European defence industrial strategy to support development of member states’ defence capabilities.

The EU economy has shown great resilience in the face of an unprecedented series of crises including the Covid pandemic, the Russian war on Ukraine and the subsequent energy and cost-of-living crises. In 2024, the Commission will focus on challenges related to skills and labour shortages. As many members know, we are currently in the European Year of Skills. We are trying to put the focus on improving skills in the European economy. We are also focusing on education, social dialogue, inflation and ease of doing business. The Commission will convene a social summit in the first half of 2024, to discuss with social partners the challenges facing EU labour markets, workers and businesses including those stemming from artificial intelligence. Next month, we are bringing a group of leading Irish trade unionists to Brussels to meet with the people involved in all the areas of social dialogue and workers’ rights in the Commission and in the European Parliament.

With regard to promoting our European way of life, the Commission will present a proposal to update the framework to fight the smuggling of migrants. As many will know, much of what is happening now is big business in terms of the smuggling of migrants. This is part of our effort to strengthen our response on asylum and migration. The Commission will also organise an international conference on fighting people-smuggling, considering the need for international co-operation and a strong global alliance to fight people-smuggling and prevent irregular migration. The new pact on migration and asylum remains the structural response the EU needs to tackle migration challenges in the future. The Commission will continue to work closely with the European Parliament and Council to finalise agreement by the end of this legislative mandate, as work needs to start already. It is still not agreed and we are still working. We are getting closer to the finish line but we are not there yet.

In higher education, the Commission will propose a blueprint for the future joint European degree, to be delivered jointly by higher education institutions from different European countries and automatically recognised across the EU. This will be supported by recommendations on quality assurance in higher education and on attractive academic careers.

On a stronger Europe in the world, the Commission will push forward our trade agenda and will drive global efforts to reform the World Trade Organization. The reviewed trade strategy of the EU promotes an open, sustainable and assertive policy, which supports the green and digital transformations. It will act to ensure global competition remains fair. Recently, the Commission launched an anti-subsidy investigation into electric vehicles coming from China.

The Commission will continue to stand with Ukraine and provide support in 2024. So far, the Union and its member states have provided around €82 billion in support to Ukraine. This includes humanitarian aid, military equipment and training, material goods for civilian use, including generators, school buses, medical items and evacuations, rebuilding cities, rehabilitating damaged schools, and economic support to ensure the continued functioning of the most critical functions of the Ukrainian state. To underscore the EU’s commitment to stand by Ukraine as long as is necessary, the Commission proposes to create a facility to provide support of up to €50 billion in the period of 2024 to 2027. This funding is needed to cater for Ukraine's immediate needs, to help its recovery and support its modernisation on the path towards EU membership.

The EU’s mutually beneficial partnership with Africa will remain high on the Commission agenda. We will present a joint communication on a strengthened partnership with Africa early next year.

Regarding a new push for European democracy, the European Union must prepare for its successful enlargement in order to foster long-term peace and stability in Europe. We will work closely with our partners as they prepare for this momentous step, including opening the Commission’s rule of law reports to those accession countries that get up to speed even faster. We want to bring them into this review, which is currently only carried out for EU member states. As they get up to speed, we want to be able to have them part of the rule of law reports. The EU also needs to be ready. The Commission will put forward a communication on pre-enlargement reforms and policy reviews to see how each policy would be affected by a larger Union; for example, how the Common Agricultural Policy will be affected by a larger EU and how the European institutions would work. We will also adopt a Commission recommendation on the development and strengthening of child protection systems in the member states. These are just the things we want to achieve before this Commission ends its current mandate.

I will make a very important point about money and the mid-term review of the multi-annual financial framework for the period 2020-27, the EU budget we are currently in. The challenges of the past years have underlined the strengths and capabilities of our Union, but they have also pushed the EU budget to the point of exhaustion despite all the in-built flexibilities and the way in which we can reprogramme funds to use in other areas if they are not being spent. To deal with this, the Commission tabled a proposal to address the most urgent budgetary needs. These include: a deepening of our support for Ukraine; financing our action on migration; bolstering the Union’s capacity to respond to heightened economic and geopolitical instability, humanitarian crises and natural disasters; and boosting investments in strategic technologies to foster long-term competitiveness. That is part one of what we need on the budget. Looking at the longer term, the Commission has also put forward an adjusted proposal for new own resources to help finance the repayment of NextGenerationEU borrowing so it does not lead to an undue reduction in programme expenditure or investment under the multi-annual financial framework. That is a separate proposal looking at how we can bolster own resources for the future in terms of financing all the things we need to finance at EU level.

Against a backdrop of unprecedented geopolitical, economic, societal and technological challenges, ensuring the EU’s competitiveness and economic security is of utmost priority. This is the aim of the EU’s new policy initiatives for 2024. This Commission intends to work until the last day of its mandate to address common challenges.

It will provide strong support to the European Parliament and the Council to facilitate agreements on remaining key proposals, while tabling the few new initiatives still needed to deliver on our promises and preparing the Union for tomorrow. Gabhaim buíochas leis an gcoiste.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms Nolan for that comprehensive opening statement.

Deputy Marian Harkin

I wish everyone a good morning. I thank Deputy Haughey for facilitating me; I have to go to the Chamber for a debate on my group's Private Member's motion this morning. I thank Ms Nolan for the presentation. It gives quite a detailed explanation of the work programme for the remainder of this Commission's tenure. I have just a few questions.

At the end, Ms Nolan spoke about the mid-term review of the multi-annual financial framework. Ursula von der Leyen included the newer areas that require European funding, including support for Ukraine and bolstering the Union's capacity to respond to economic and geopolitical instability, humanitarian crises, natural disasters and so on. The next section talks about an "adjusted proposal for new own resources". Does Ms Nolan have any details on that? Is it a draft proposal? Obviously, it is. What are the essential elements of it? If Ms Nolan has them, will she please share them with us?

Also in the context of financing, when I was looking at the part of the opening statement that deals with the European Green Deal, it struck me that there is a lot of talk about what needs to be done but there is no mention at all of the funding required to achieve this green deal and to fight climate change. One specific issue that caused a lot of debate and discussion nationally was the nature restoration law. That is an example of highly significant legislation for which there is no committed funding whatsoever. That law would signal the most extensive land-use change we could envisage but there is no word on funding for it. Is Ursula von der Leyen really looking at funding in respect of the issues she has highlighted under the mid-term review? Is there any appetite within the Commission for looking at funding aspects of the European Green Deal?

My next question is on the new pact on migration and asylum. Ms Nolan said that discussions are ongoing. Insofar as she can, will she very briefly let us know how close we are to an agreement and what issues remain outstanding?

The joint European degree is an interesting proposal. I had not heard about it before. The last thing I remember in this area is the legislation on recognition of qualifications. If I am correct, that only applied to certain areas. Does this proposal expand it to other areas? Is that what is being looked at here?

While I do not really expect Ms Nolan to comment on this and while I need to look at it a bit more closely myself, I will also mention the critical raw materials club the Commission is speaking about. I know legislation on critical raw materials was recently passed in the European Parliament. I expect that has now gone to trilogue. Where I come from, one of our concerns relates to the use of cyanide in gold mining. As far as I know, that is on the list of critical raw materials. However, I am only raising the issue and do not expect a comment because it is quite a detailed issue and, to be honest, I need to do a little bit more research into it myself. I thank the witnesses and I apologise that I will have to leave after their comments.

Ms Barbara Nolan

On the new own resources issue, which has regard to the long-term view and is separate from our urgent needs under the current multi-annual financial framework, MFF, it should be recalled that the EU is funded by member states' contributions, which are based on gross national income, custom duties and VAT. With NextGenerationEU, the EU's economic recovery plan, the Commission basically took on debt to support all member states in dealing with the economic crisis caused by the pandemic. To repay this borrowing, the EU agreed to introduce new own resources as this would allow for a more diversified and resilient revenue stream. Basically, three sources have been proposed. One is based on revenues from emissions trading, another is based on the EU carbon border adjustment mechanism, CBAM, and the third is based on the share of residual profits from multinationals, with this being reallocated to the EU under the OECD pillar 1 proposal. It is horribly technical, if I may say so. We have just started discussions on this and it will probably take a very long time because the whole area of new own resources is a very sensitive issue for member states. There is quite a way to go. The proposal is out there and it is now up to the member states to look at it in the context of our need to find new sources of funding so that we can do all of the things we are asked to do while also servicing the borrowing taken on to get the EU out of the crisis following the Covid pandemic. It is out there and that is what it is. The discussion is only starting.

To address funding for the green deal, it is important to remember that the Common Agricultural Policy takes up about a third of the EU's budget. It has consistently taken the biggest slice of any sector we fund through the EU budget. The target is to allocate at least 10% of the current multi-annual financial framework to the EU's biodiversity strategy. The funds given out through the Common Agricultural Policy already represent a big source of funding for farmers adjusting to the biodiversity standards we are trying to promote. This includes, for example, support for organic farming. We have worked with the national authorities on the CAP strategic plans of each member state to ensure that they integrate biodiversity. However, it is important to say that this huge chunk of money that goes towards the CAP is not the only funding source that goes towards supporting the green deal and the move to more sustainable practices. Other sources, such as the Cohesion Fund, the European Regional Development Fund, the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund, Horizon Europe and the LIFE programme, all also do. We already have various funding streams going into the area. Not all funding should necessarily come from the EU. In addition to national funding, other sources of private and public funding can be mobilised to support this green transition.

I mentioned that there was going to be a dialogue with the farming community. This was announced in the state of the Union address. The issues about which the Deputy is concerned should be raised in that context when that dialogue is launched. I know it is a concern but, if you take all of the different funding streams going into this area, you will see there is quite a lot out there. There has been a greening of the EU budget in terms of where the money is going.

That is where we are at. I mentioned that we are under very significant pressure at the moment with the current budget because of all the crises we have had trying to handle them. We have to see where we can go any further on that. I have no answer today for Deputy Harkin and cannot make any promises in that regard.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms Nolan very much. We are a little caught on time, as I know both Deputies Harkin and Haughey also are, so I am going to allow those Deputies in straight away with their questions.

Deputy Seán Haughey

I will change my plans and I thank the Cathaoirleach for letting me in here. I thank Ms Nolan for that comprehensive presentation. The EU generally and the Commission in particular has done well over the past four years with regard to the ongoing fallout from Brexit, the Covid-19 pandemic, the distribution of the vaccines, the war in Ukraine, climate change which we have just discussed, and also the energy and cost-of-living crisis. By and large, the EU gets there in the end. Sometimes the decision-making process is not pretty between all of the institutions but by and large we have dealt with these issues quite well and continue to do so.

I am not going to dwell on this but on the Israel-Hamas breakout of violence on 7 October, it has to be said that the EU response at best was initially disjointed to that, in particular, the tweet or post on X from the Hungarian Commissioner; then Josep Borrell, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, came out with a more comprehensive statement following the initial comments of the Commission President. I do not intend to dwell on this but I want to know if lessons have been learned from that whole episode and, in particular, the position of the Hungarian Commissioner. Has there been any follow-up action in that regard because it did make the EU look a little - what is the word - disjointed in the eyes of the world? I ask Ms Nolan to answer however she wishes or if she does not want to answer the question at all, that is fine.

On the pact on migration and asylum, I may have missed Ms Nolan's answer to Deputy Harkin but on the outstanding issues there, I know that the European Council failed to agree on that recently, or on some proposals, at any rate. Are there any outstanding issues which need to be addressed in that regard, where, I presume, it is hoped that by April final agreement will be reached on the whole issue?

On the policy on China, again, Ursula von der Leyen dealt with this in great deal in her 2023 state of the Union address, together with the position on electric vehicles. On the general position of the Commission to China, I have heard the word "de-risk" used. I assume that is the kind of general approach, where the EU needs to "de-risk" in respect of China. Can I ask Mr Nolan to give our committee some general comments on the EU approach to China generally at this point in time and where it is at?

I also ask that Ms Nolan might comment on the rule of law. We have seen the recent elections in Poland, and hopefully Poland will not be giving the EU any more trouble in that regard if and when a new government is formed. Ms Nolan does not have to comment on that matter either.

I have another question on enlargement. Ms Nolan mentioned a communication on pre-enlargement, reforms and policy review which the Commission will put forward. That is something I believe we will all be taking an interest in. Does Ms Nolan believe that that the paper will deal with the decision-making processes and the need for institutional reform, the future of the Multiannual Financial Framework, MFF, the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, reform and all of those sorts of issues? Can Ms Nolan say a little bit more about that communication which will be brought forward? We discussed that with the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs a week or two ago where this issue of enlargement came up at the General Affairs Council in a paper by a Franco-German expert group on institutional reform and decision-making. We were all a little alarmed by that. I would be interested to know a little bit more about that and what the likely issues to be addressed in that communication are.

Ms Barbara Nolan

I thank Deputy Haughey very much for those questions. On the whole Middle East situation, I believe there has been a great deal of noise and voices on this issue, not only in Europe but also here, and this is reflecting the different nuances, in my case, in the 27 EU member states. There are very different views about this issue. However, what is important is to recall that on 15 October, EU leaders in the European Council adopted a statement setting out the EU's Common Position on this matter. That statement basically strongly condemned Hamas terrorist attacks; emphasised Israel's right to defend itself in line with humanitarian and international law; reiterated the importance of ensuring the protection of all civilians at all times in line with international humanitarian law; called on Hamas to immediately release all hostages without any precondition; reiterated the importance of the provision of urgent humanitarian aid and support for civilians in need in Gaza; stressed the importance of preventing regional escalation; and expressed commitment to a lasting sustainable peace based upon a two-state solution. It also underlined the need to engage broadly with the legitimate Palestinian authorities as well as regional and international partners who could have a positive role to play in preventing further escalation. That is the EU position.

I remind everybody that tomorrow another European Council is starting and we are expecting to see a new statement coming out from the Heads of State and Government. We will wait to see, as the situation has evolved, what comes out there. Just to recall, this is the EU position, regardless of all of the other voices out there.

On the migration pact, as the committee members will know, there are very different attitudes and there are front-line states which are probably the most exposed to arrivals from North Africa and from other parts of the world. There are other member states that have a completely different experience, shall we say. We are making progress on it but there are obviously still some issues where we have to reach a situation where everyone agrees that if a country is not going to take a fair share of migrants, for example, that it then pays towards helping to support them. Not everyone agrees with that. In September of this year, the European Parliament and the five rotating Presidencies of the Council signed a Joint Declaration, a roadmap, with a timeline for the adoption of the proposals with a view to concluding negotiations by February 2024. We are at the inter-institutional stage and the aim is to conclude before this Commission finishes its mandate. It is moving, very slowly, but it is moving forward and it is critical to get a deal on this because we cannot continue with the current situation where we have a vacuum with regard to what happens.

I did not answer Deputy Harkin's question so I will answer it now. On electric vehicles and China, the whole approach now is to de-risk our relationship with China but not to disengage. We need China and China needs us. It is a big trading partner and we are big trading partners. It is a case of proceeding with caution.

We have launched an anti-subsidy investigation to determine how Chinese vehicles can be sold much more cheaply in the European market than the ones made here. We are looking into these matters. Where we find risks of unfair trade, we will pursue them. The idea is to continue engaging with China, but perhaps with more open eyes than was the case before.

Turning to enlargement, as the committee knows, countries are queuing up to join the EU. We are in a situation now where we must look at how well prepared we are to take in new countries, especially in the case of a big enlargement, without reforming ourselves and making our own machine leaner. This is where we are at. There will be an attempt to look at this context. Looking at the calendar, EU leaders at the December meeting of the European Council will discuss the recommendations of the European Commission on the enlargement package presented in November. This will probably deal primarily with Ukraine, Moldova and, possibly, Georgia. Let us recall that there are eight candidate countries now. Georgia and Kosovo are potential candidates.

I mentioned the rule-of-law scrutiny for the most advanced candidates. A major screening process is required of the candidate countries to get to the stage where we put forward a proposal for enlargement. They must meet many different chapters in terms of how they are adapting to EU policy and legislation. It is a major process, with many milestones to be achieved. In 2024, we are promising to forward a communication on pre-enlargement reforms and policy reviews to examine the challenges we expect to have in an enlarged Union, including in different policy areas. I already mentioned agriculture as one such area.

On treaty change, the Commission is not in the lead on this matter. It gives its opinion on a consultation by the European Council. The Heads of State and Government are the ones who take the lead on this issue, and then we give an opinion. The Commission, though, is not the driver of this treaty change process, just to recall the formal process.

An Cathaoirleach

Is Deputy Haughey happy with that answer?

Deputy Seán Haughey

Yes.

An Cathaoirleach

I will follow up with certain aspects of what has been said. This is my first time chairing this type of session. I know the witnesses come in regularly. I am very much pro-European. President von der Leyen has done an excellent job with her Commission during her term of office in so many ways. However, there are certain things that need to be noted. Deputy Haughey already alluded to this aspect as well.

I refer to the appalling murders and atrocities committed by Hamas and the aftermath thereof. There was a complete misstep by President von der Leyen in this regard - for the first time in my opinion - and important lessons are to be derived from this from the perspective of the Commission. We are not a federal country. She is the President of the Commission. There are defined roles. It would have been much better for the President of the Commission to have been operating off the back of the statement that was read out, which was the leaders' statement of the agreed agenda in terms of the position in this regard. This would have been preferable to what was, to be honest, in many ways, a fairly ham-fisted intervention, which did much damage to our collective standing as the European Union. This was very regrettable. Europe has now repositioned itself correctly, and we are on the correct path in this context. There were other missteps, to which Deputy Haughey alluded as well. There is a clearer path forward now, but this is a very fundamental thing for the current President the European Commission and her successors to be aware of in such a sensitive area.

Ms Nolan mentioned the Global Gateway that is taking place at present. This is an extremely important EU initiative, which in many ways is not getting the type of attention it deserves. I say this because, effectively, it is Europe's attempt to answer China's New Silk Road initiative and also American activity globally. We need to work on this Global Gateway initiative. Certain aspects of it are very good, but while it talks in terms of a multibillion euro approach, when we look at where the finances are to undertake this work, we see there are some major questions in this regard. This is something we really need to be conscious of. The European Bank of Reconstruction and Development slots into this strategy on one side, while a lot of private money is being considered on the other side of things. From what I am hearing, there is a worry that there might not actually be that much hard money available. There is much talk, but where is this going?

In a narrower context, I will pick up on a point concerning electric vehicles, EVs, and this is one I think the Commission sometimes misses. Let us call a spade a spade. The automotive industry in Europe is applying a great deal of pressure on the Commission to launch this investigation regarding EVs. There is a question to be asked regarding member state governments pushing an agenda to ask their citizens to drive a particular type of vehicle, and then, when that type of vehicle comes on the market at a reduced price in Europe from a source we do not like, acting via the Commission to investigate on the grounds of anti-competitiveness. There have been severe price falls in the North American market for EVs that were not caused by China but by market conditions.

The committee members and the witnesses spoke earlier about the importance for Europe's future of communication and of building a common language with the people of Europe. Tiny things have very successful, including changes made in regard to roaming charges and what was done by the Commission in respect of its abolition charges programme. Citizens can see the results of these initiatives. I worry, however, when I see things like this investigation into EVs that I referred to. No one was investigating when Volkswagen had 60% of the Chinese automotive market at one point, but we are now investigating because China is selling EVs at a price the European industry does not like. The EU needs to be very careful that we are not there just for our industry but also for our people in this context. I am interested in hearing Ms Nolan's thoughts on this subject.

Ms Barbara Nolan

I thank the Cathaoirleach. On this issue, we are only carrying out an investigation. We have not stopped importing Chinese cars. We want to have a fair and level playing field in terms of our trading position. This has always been our outlook. We are calling it open and strategic autonomy. We must look at situations where it does seem like things are being marketed in Europe at dramatically different prices and how this can be the case. This instance of EVs is a particular issue.

I know there are voices that ask why we should care about this situation if the European consumer can have cheaper cars and it is China subsidising our green transition in a way. It can be looked at in this way. On the other hand, however, it is not fair to our producers in Europe if huge subsidies are being given in China to allow these cars to be produced very cheaply and then sold on the European market. This is really what we are exploring. No decision has been made about this issue yet. We do not know the outcome.

An Cathaoirleach

We might look at the margins being made by European auto manufacturers on EVs as well. That is all I will say. We will not get caught up on this. It is probably not fair to ask the witnesses to respond on the situation of the Commission President. We have covered that sufficiently.

Deputy Robert Troy

I apologise for being late this morning. I will ask about non-financial reporting, which was adopted at a meeting of consumer ministers when I was attending such meetings more than 18 months ago. There was a requirement that meant large companies had to report annually on what they were doing to reduce their carbon emissions and achieve sectoral targets. To my knowledge, that has yet to be fully implemented. The witnesses might be able to update the committee as to where that currently stands.

One of the biggest issues facing all of Europe, but I will in particular speak to Ireland, is the number of people who are seeking refuge and asylum seekers coming to Ireland. The Dublin Convention permits for the return of refugees who have presented in another European country but have found their way to Ireland. The convention does not seem to be implemented to any great extent. That is having a negative effect on people's attitude towards, and support for, asylum seekers. The Irish are a very good race who want to help people in genuine difficulty but there is - how shall I put it? - fatigue when people see refugees who may have presented in France or other safe countries arriving in Ireland. There is fatigue when people seeking asylum are coming from countries such as Georgia, which is seeking to become a member state, and saying they are fleeing persecution of some sort or another. I am talking about people who are essentially economic migrants. Unless we get our act together in this regard, we are going to have grave societal problems. The EU has a pivotal role to play in that regard.

Ms Barbara Nolan

I thank the Deputy. Perhaps I will respond to the second question first. We know the system is not working. We know it is broken. That is why we proposed in 2020 a new pact on migration and asylum that proposes a set of regulations and policies to create a fairer, efficient and more sustainable migration and asylum process in the EU. It is designed to manage migration for the long term. It has been a very slow process. I spoke about that in response to Deputy Haughey. It has made slow progress through the negotiating machinery in the member states and the European Parliament, etc. We are now hoping to conclude the pact next year, and early next year, if possible. The process has advanced lately. If we get that through, we will be looking at a better, more managed situation throughout the EU. Ireland is one country but other countries are really on the front line and where hundreds of people are arriving every day. Where a country is in the European Union defines how exposed it is to the situation.

the Deputy mentioned his experience with the new financial reporting. I do not have to hand where we are at now. However, one of the objectives of the recent period in the Commission has been to try to reduce reporting requirements in some areas, especially for SMEs, and to try to have a leaner and more efficient way of doing business and not overburdening them with reporting requirements. We are looking at that. I can come back to the Deputy after the meeting on what stage this file is at.

Deputy Robert Troy

Lest anyone think I am looking to bring in more regulation for SMEs, I am not. SMEs were exempt from this. We were initially looking to bring it in for companies with more than 500 employees, followed by those with more than 250 the following year and then companies with more than 50 employees thereafter. People in rural parts of this country have experienced upheaval with the prohibition on cutting turf because of the impact it has on the environment. yet large multinational corporations have yet to be required to annual report what they are doing to reduce carbon emissions and to ensure their sectors are meeting their targets. The reporting requirement was pushed out by 12 months, which was regrettable. I would like to receive confirmation of the status of the requirement. I fully appreciate why Ms Nolan would not have that information to hand today. She could come back to me to update the committee on where that is. I believe that large corporations have a much bigger role to play in this area. This is the mechanism to measure the role they are playing.

An Cathaoirleach

We have seven or eight minutes left in this session. I do not know if Deputy Ó Murchú wants to come in on this session or wants to wait until the next session. I appreciate he has been bilocating between the Dáil Chamber and the committee room.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I also had a radio interview earlier; I apologise.

An Cathaoirleach

I will give the Deputy an opportunity to come in and perhaps we can get a quick response to keep us on time.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

There are a million questions when we are talking about the Commission. We could talk about competition law or the conversations that are happening on unanimity versus qualified majority voting, QMV, and other issues. We could discuss the cross-border taxation issues that exist for remote workers. I am going to keep it simple and speak about the Gaza crisis we are dealing with at the moment. Two particular issues are highlighted above all. The European Commission, individual Commissioners and the Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, have overstepped the mark. People, including myself, have described them as green-lighting the Israeli regime. It is a particular Israeli regime. While we all condemn the absolute barbarism of Hamas, I do not hear a huge amount of condemnation from the EU of the slaughter of kids in Gaza. I accept that European states and individuals are coming from a different place considering the history of how badly the Jews were treated in pogroms. They faced everything from expulsion and ghettoisation right through to extermination. However, I do not see any reason we are not, first and foremost, all about international law and condemning those who breach those international laws. Beyond that, we must ensure that we are party to a roadmap for peace in the long term. At the moment, we must look at ceasefires and humanitarian aid. What interactions are happening at the Commission level? I imagine there is a high level of disquiet. Some of these issues need to be highlighted. From an Irish point of view, we may not get absolute agreement on positive moves that are beneficial to the Palestinian and Israeli people, whom this Israeli regime has not protected. We will sometimes have to make some moves on our own or, if we are lucky enough, with others. We cannot allow what has been going on and the slaughter in Gaza.

An Cathaoirleach

I say the following because of time reasons and for Deputy Ó Murchú's benefit. I appreciate that Ms Nolan read the full statement of the European leaders to the committee in response to me and Deputy Haughey, who also raised the issue. We will take that statement as read and I will not ask Ms Nolan to repeat it. They might contribute one or two thoughts on the specifics of what Deputy Ó Murchú has said.

Ms Barbara Nolan

I will just make a few comments.

We have tripled the amount of humanitarian aid we provide to Gaza to €75 million since this latest conflict began. The EU is the biggest donor of aid to the Palestinian people. We agree that humanitarian aid must urgently reach the people in Gaza. We have encouraged the creation of humanitarian corridors to allow for the delivery of humanitarian aid. We have also launched an EU humanitarian air bridge, bringing flights to Egypt with aid to enable the humanitarian organisations on the ground to bring supplies across the border. The EU has deployed staff to Egypt and is working closely with the UN and the Egyptian authorities to enable our aid to enter Gaza from Egypt and to ensure it reaches those in need. A lot is happening in the area of support. There may have been one or two things tweeted or said but they were not representative of the Commission's full support for humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people, which will continue.

A European summit will take place tomorrow. We will see further developments in the position of EU Heads of State and Government. The European Council speaks for the EU on foreign policy. President von der Leyen is part of the European Council, as is Charles Michel, the President of the Council. Heads of State and Government, the President of the European Commission and the President of the European Council make it up. The position is what was issued on 15 October. I will not read it out. Hopefully, we will see some new elements coming in now in light of tragic developments on the ground in Gaza. We will see what happens.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Hopefully.

An Cathaoirleach

With that, I will bring this session to a close. I thank Ms Nolan and Mr. Claridge for attending, for a very comprehensive opening statement and for covering such a wide area and dealing with so many questions.

Sitting suspended at 11.13 a.m. until 11.17 a.m.