Nos. 1.1 to 1.12, inclusive, do not warrant further scrutiny. No. 1.1 is COM (2004) 155, a proposed regulation regarding the conditions for the re-export and re-dispatch of products covered by the specific supply arrangement. It relates to the Azores and Madeira. It is proposed that this does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.
No. 1.2, COM (2004) 159, is a codification exercise relating to a proposed decision on consultation and information procedures in matters of credit insurance, credit guarantees and financial credits. Is it agreed that the proposal does not warrant further scrutiny? Agreed.
No. 1.3, COM (2004) 179, is a proposed regulation on the statistics relating to the trading of goods between member states. This proposal is an amended text of COM (2003) 364 and takes on board a number of amendments tabled by the European Parliament. These provide, inter alia, that any list of goods drawn up by the Commission for inclusion in the survey will be designed to ensure that the trade statistics are comparable at world level and that the question of the confidentiality of data supplied will rest with the national authorities. It is proposed that this does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.
No. 1.4, COM (2004) 183, is a proposed regulation on the conclusion of an agreement in the form of an exchange of letters concerning the extension of the protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Cape Verde and fishing off the coast of Cape Verde for the period 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2005. The vessels concerned are from France, Spain and Portugal and if licence applications from these countries do not cover all the fishing opportunities outlined in the agreement, the Commission may consider applications from any other member state. It is proposed that this does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Nos. 1.4 to 1.7, inclusive, are similar measures and No. 1.6 has already been adopted. It is proposed to note these measures, which relate to fishing agreements and do not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.
No. 1.8 is a proposed decision granting Cyprus, Malta and Poland certain temporary derogations from Directive 2002/96/EC on waste electrical and electronic equipment. The directive on electrical waste, known as the WEEE directive, provides for minimum targets for the collection of electrical waste. The proposal to adopt that directive was considered by the sub-committee at its meeting on 26 June last year. The sub-committee also considered, at its meeting on 11 March 2004, a proposal, COM (2004) 81, to give temporary derogations from aspects of the proposal of between 12 and 24 months to a number of the accession states. This proposal seeks similar derogations for Cyprus, Malta and Poland. The derogations will be granted on the basis of low population density or low level of infrastructural development. It is proposed to note this matter. It was adopted in the past couple of days. Is that agreed? Agreed.
The following proposals were received yesterday by the secretariat: No. 1.9, COM (2004) 203, No. 1.10, COM (2004) 204, No. 1.11, COM (2004) 205, and No. 1.12, COM (2004) 206. They are a set of proposals inspired by the accession partnerships for the candidate countries Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey. They relate to European partnerships being drawn up for the countries participating in the stabilisation and association process. These are Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia and Serbia and Montenegro, including Kosovo. The European partnerships identify priorities for action in supporting the efforts of these countries to move closer to eventual membership of the European Union and serve as a checklist against which to measure progress. They reflect the stage of development of each country, are tailored to specific needs and drawn up by the Commission following contacts with the countries concerned. The proposed measures are for consideration at the next meeting of the General Affairs and External Relations Council. It is proposed that the proposals do not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.
To sum up, it is proposed that Nos. 1.1 to 1.12, inclusive, do not warrant further scrutiny, except for Nos. 1.5, 1.6 and 1.8, which were adopted prior to scrutiny. The next set of proposals are the documents which it is proposed to refer to the sectoral committees for further scrutiny - Nos. 2.1 to 2.3, inclusive.
No. 2.1, COM (2004) 166, is a proposed regulation fixing the maximum annual fishing effort for certain fishing areas and fisheries. In October 2003, the establishment of the biologically sensitive area that covers much of the area known as the Irish Box was agreed. That was Council regulation 1954/2003. This recognises the biological sensitivity and commercial importance of waters around Ireland. A map has been supplied to members. It is believed that these waters contain important spawning and nursery areas for commercial Irish fish stocks in the Atlantic.
Regulation 1954/2003 envisages the presentation of this proposal by the Commission on the fixing of maximum annual fishing efforts in the waters. The proposal is based on information provided by the member states on the previous fishing effort in the waters concerned. The later than expected presentation of this proposal arose from the longer than anticipated time it took for the compilation of the data requested. The proposal is classified as of major significance. The Department has also indicated that the adoption of the measure would undoubtedly be positive for the protection of nursery and spawning grounds in the area. It has, however, clarified that the proposal seeks to reduce fishing effort and this would impact on the Irish fishing fleet. It is proposed that this requires detailed scrutiny and that it be referred to the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources for such scrutiny.