I have correspondence from the sub-committee on European scrutiny. The sub-committee has examined one proposal falling within the remit of the Department of Foreign Affairs, that is COM (2003) 639 and amending regulation on the implementation of development co-operation operations, which contribute to the general objective of developing and consolidating democracy and the rule of law and that of respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms. This proposal seeks to extend the operation and legal basis of the EU co-operation programme that aims to contribute to the developing and consolidating of democracy and the rule of law for a further two years, that is 2005 to 2006. It consolidates two existing regulations governing its operation. The proposal also incorporates other elements that are currently required by EU multi-annual programmes, that is that it contain a financial framework for its entire duration. There are also provisions made to increase the role of the human rights and democracy committee in the programming phase in relation to policy and strategy. The sub-committee has proposed that this proposal does not warrant further scrutiny. Do we agree with the recommendation of the committee? Agreed.
The sub-committee has asked us to take note also of several other proposals and CSSP measures relevant to the Department of Foreign Affairs COM (2003) 790, a Council decision concerning the conclusion of the Memorandum of Understanding between the European Community and the National Tourism Administration of China on visa and related issues concerning tourist groups from China. We just have to take note of these, but I wish to comment on that proposal. This arrangement for the clearance of visas for people visiting for 30 days is extended to all the countries that are a party to the Schengen Agreement, which will have a major effect on tourism from China to those countries but it does not apply to us because we are not a party to the Schengen Agreement. I think it is very important that we pursue independently and as a matter of urgency our position in regard to that. I suggest with the assistance of the adviser that the secretariat should send a letter to the Department of Foreign Affairs highlighting the matter and requesting to be informed on the progress of it. Is that agreed? Agreed.
The CFSP (2003) 852 is the Council joint action of 5 December 2003 extending the mandate of the European Union Monitoring Mission, (EUMM). CFSP (2003) 869 is the Council joint action of 8 December 2003 amending and extending the mandate of the special representative of the European Union for the African Great Lakes Region. CFSP (2003) 870 is the Council joint action of 8 December 2003 amending and extending the mandate of the Special Representative of the European Union in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. CFSP (2003) 871 is the Council joint action of 8 December 2003 extending and amending the mandate of the Special Representative of the European Union in Afghanistan. CFSP (2003) 872 is the Council joint action of 8 December 2003 extending the mandate of the Special Representative of the European Union for the South Caucasus region. CFSP (2003) 873 is the Council joint action of 8 December 2003 extending and amending the mandate of the Special Representative of the European Union for the Middle East Peace Process. CFSP (2003) 906 is the Council common position of 22 December on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism - this common position, inter alia, adds the Great Islamic Eastern Warriors Front to the list. CLD (2003) 902 is the Council decision of 22 December 2003 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism. Is it agreed to note these measures? Agreed.