There are three items for consideration by the Economic and Social Sub-Committee in the immediate future. One is the draft regulations on the European Monetary Co-operation Fund. The other is a draft directive on Credit Institutions and the third relates to the Free Movement of Self-Employed persons.
OIREACHTAS SUB-COMMITTEE
Programme, May 1975
1.Directives:
Implementation and direct applicability of, in domestic law.
2.Statutory Instruments:
Consideration of the following regulations which have been made under the European Communities Act, 1972 since 1st June, 1974 and which accordingly are still subject to annulment by both Houses on the recommendation of the Joint Committee:—
(a) European Communities (Proprietary Medicinal Products) Regulations, 1974 [S.I. No. 187 of 1974].
(b) European Communities (Wine) Regulations, 1974 [S.I. No. 195 of 1974].
(c) European Communities (Seeds) Regulations, 1974 [S.I. No. 200 of 1974].
(d) European Communities (Feeding Stuffs) (Additives) Regulations, 1974 [S.I. No. 302 of 1974].
(e) European Communities (Minimum Stocks of Petroleum Oils) Regulations, 1974 [S.I. No. 325 of 1974].
(f) European Communities (Ancillary Equipment for Liquid Meters) Regulations, 1975 [S.I. No. 32 of 1975].
(g) European Communities (Low-Voltage Electrical Equipment) Regulations, 1975 [S.I. No. 62 of 1975].
What are Itinerant Activities?
Hawkers and pedlars.
Not excluding professional people.
Of course, any member can add to that list and make suggestions. It is merely a tentative work programme.
Under Item 2 of the Economic and Social Sub-Committee work programme—credit institutions—does that impinge at all in relation to company affairs?
Not specifically. They are credit institutions.
I presume when the revised proposals become available we can insert them into our programme and take it as a matter of some priority because it is being considered urgently.
I think we should get to grips with it as quickly as possible.
Is it relevant to the control of powers with which these credit institutions may be involved?
Only indirectly. This draft directive relates to credit institutions operating as credit institutions.
The proposal for the company statute is by regulation under Article 235. The text has been revised recently. It would allow the establishment of European companies with worker participation.
Would this deal with monopoly situations and that kind of thing?
It creates the possibility of companies adopting the European company as a format so that they can locate anywhere in the community and use this form instead of complying with the local national law on companies.
I am talking about credit institutions. Does this impinge upon monopolies?
I think it deals mainly with the co-ordination of laws and regulations governing the activities of credit institutions as credit institutions. We return then to the General Policy Sub-Committee and there is quite a list of important matters there coming up for consideration. The first one we have already dealt with: equal treatment for men and women workers. The next item is the draft directive on pollution of sea water and fresh water used for bathing. There are then very important and practical matters under road traffic laws: 10 draft directives dealing with lights, reflectors, indicators and safety belts, et cetera, on motor vehicles; draft directive dealing with vehicle driving licences; and draft directive on roadworthiness of vehicles.
I think Deputy Herbert had a report for the Parliament on some, at any rate, of these matters and it might be useful if copies of that could be got. He did a very good report on that last year for the Parliament.
We must try to have Deputy Herbert here. It is a very good suggestion.
On the draft directive on equal treatment for men and women workers, have we got the debates of the European Parliament on that? They recommended a monitoring device, which was a new proposal coming from the Parliament.
That came up at the sub-committee meeting and the position is we have the report of Lady Ellis because it is in English but, so far, we have only the polyglot report of the debates which is in all the different languages. We will get as much as we can from the Parliament on that.
Item No. 4 is the social action programme. There are three items under that, all of which are important and significant. Item No. 5 is very important—nuclear power: draft decision relating to Euratom loans for nuclear power stations. We should have the nuclear lobby in.
From Wex-ford?
We come now to the Agriculture Sub-Committee and there is a list of 11 items there. I do not propose to go through them unless any Member wishes to comment on any of them or add to them. I should mention that the list is rather hastily put together by the secretariat and it may transpire, when we look at these items in sub-committee, that some of them may not be of any great importance or significance.
It seems we will have to determine our priorities with some care because it would not be possible to take all of these subjects and so we will have to select some of them, and deal with them in detail.
Particularly when our agricultural experts get going.
The disadvantaged areas scheme is under examination at the present time. Item No. 2—plant health—has particular connotations for this country because we are in a peculiarly good position from the point of view of various plant diseases and we would need to be able to maintain our position in that regard. At what stage the regulation on the movement of seeds and plants within the Community is I cannot say but we would need to watch it fairly carefully.
At the moment it is really only a question of outlining our programme of work in sub-committee and I think we have plenty there to be getting on with. You just want to draw attention to the fact that plant health is not academic in our context.
Not in our context. It is a twin of the veterinary status we have got in regard to veterinary diseases.
Perhaps we might be able to dispose of the proposed directive concerning animal feeding stuffs. Generally are we agreed with that outline of work?
Since our sub-committees have been meeting by and large in private and have done a good deal of work, would it be useful if we expanded the work programme, which may be modified somewhat following this meeting, in the joint report we will make to the Oireachtas? An appendix, or something like that, could be incorporated.
It will be incorporated in the report of today's proceedings.
We should, I think, extend an invitation to the Members of the Oireachtas, many of whom have very specialised interests in various areas. We should seek the advice of Members of both Houses on this particular programme. There is nothing inhibiting them coming forward and giving us the benefit of their views. In regard to fisheries, for example, individual Members might have specialist views which would be very valuable to us.
We will see what we can arrange. We will include the programme in the report of this meeting. We come now to the Oireachtas Sub-Committee, which is the final one. I want to direct your attention to Item No. 1: it is a matter of some significance and we are bringing it forward in the first instance for a very general type of discussion because what we are concerned with here is the whole position of directives in regard to our internal domestic situation. As you know, some directives are of their nature self-applicable and others require domestic legislation or regulation in order to give effect to them. We want to have a look at that whole situation to see what the position is and try to sort it out for ourselves at least. Whether or not we make any recommendations about it is another matter. One thing which directed our attention to it was this matter of the directive on the disadvantaged areas scheme. The question arises as to whether or not an Irish ministerial regulation should be brought in to give effect to the disadvantaged areas scheme or whether it can become operative more or less as a normal routine measure within the ambit of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. That is a matter we want to look at. It is the type of matter we want to examine under this particular heading.
It is a very important area and it is up to the Oireachtas Sub-Committee to get guidelines so that the method of the implementation of directives may be coordinated in the various Departments. This is very necessary because this is a new departure. As members of the Community we are participating in various schemes which the Oireachtas Sub-Committee must examine in regard to their implementation in Irish law. I would be very much in favour of the committee recommending the necessity of Irish implementing regulations for all of these schemes. They should not be allowed to operate through some administrative implementation without Irish regulations setting out the guidelines and standards.
We can look at it in some depth in the sub-committee.
This is essentially what is happening.
The sub-committee should examine it.
Deputy Esmonde, have you something to say on this?
I have a rather contrary view.
We can go into it in the sub-committee. On the second work load for the sub-committee is consideration of seven regulations which have been made. Of course, we have a very important parliamentary function in regard to the domestic ministerial regulations. Can I take it I have your approval of that as a tentative programme of work for the immediate future by the sub-committee?
Programme of work agreed to.
I am sure the most pressing question at the moment is whether the British will stay in the Community. We passed a resolution at an earlier meeting that we would get in touch with the parliamentary committee on the secondary legislation in the House of Commons offering assistance. Did anything happen about that?
No. In fact, I was more or less leaving that question lie pending the outcome of the referendum in Great Britain. I thought, perhaps, it might not be an appropriate time but I am open to persuasion about that.
A recent proposal was made.
I will make informal contact with the chairman.
We had a proposal adopted by the committee that we would get in touch with them to offer them any assistance we could. The Irish Council of the European Movement are very concerned about this but it does not seem to be as important now as it was a few months ago. It is not likely that we can influence them.
It might be counterproductive.
It might.
We might exercise self-restraint in the matter.
In relation to the work for the sub-committee there are directives and regulations. I always get concerned when I see regulations coming out, particularly one setting up standards, which is a long-term regulation as distinct from a short-term one. I notice there are some proposed regulations referring to the agricultural sub-committee. What is the time schedule? Perhaps Deputy Gibbons could tell us something about this? There is a proposed directive in relation to pigmeat. That might be important but it would become an absolute matter of law as soon as it was passed.
The secretariat information is that from No. 6 down they are regarded as rather long term.
Does that include fisheries?
Yes.
The one in relation to pigmeat might be urgent.
I do not know about that.
We will get that for the Deputy. We will have a quick look at that and see what is involved in it.
In view of what happened in relation to the soya beans it might be no harm to have a look at the pigmeat one.
The Committee adjourned at 5.45 p.m.