JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS (Sub-Committee on European Scrutiny) díospóireacht

Scrutiny of EU Proposals.

Chairman

Item 1 is the consideration of the draft second annual report on the operation of the European Union Scrutiny Act, 2002. Copies of the draft report were circulated among members prior to the meeting and it is proposed to refer it to the Joint Committee on European Affairs for consideration and discussion at its next full meeting. It is then proposed the joint committee will lay the report before the Houses of the Oireachtas in accordance with its Orders of Reference. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Item 2 is scrutiny of European Union legislative proposals. No. 2.1 relates to proposals warranting further scrutiny. Proposals 1.1 to 1.5 are proposed for further scrutiny. I propose to take proposals 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 together.

Proposal 1.1, COM (2005) 340, is for a Council decision authorising the placing on the market of rye bread with added phytosterols or phytostanols as novel foods or novel food ingredients under regulation (EC) No. 258/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council. Proposal 1.2, COM (2005) 341, is for a Council decision authorising the placing on the market of sausages with added phytosterols or phytostanols as novel foods or novel food ingredients under regulation (EC) No. 258/97. Proposal 1.3, COM (2005) 344, is for a Council decision authorising the placing on the market of rye bread with added phytosterols or phytostanols as novel foods or novel food ingredients under regulation (EC) No. 258/97. The lead Department in this case is the Department of Health and Children, with the other body involved being the Food Safety Authority of Ireland.

I understand that products containing these additives are targeted at people who wish to lower their blood pressure. A Finnish company, Pharmaconsult Oy Limited, applied under Regulation (EC) No. 258/97 for the placing on the market of phytosterols under COM (2005) 340. Another Finnish company, Karl Frazer Limited, also applied under the same regulation to place on the market phytosterols under COM (2005) 344. These proposals related to rye bread. In addition, Finnish company Pouttu applied for approval for the inclusion of phytosterols in sausages and for their placement on the market under COM (2005) 341.

The initial assessment of the Finnish authorities was that the product was safe, but a number of other national authorities raised reasoned objections and the Commission requested the views of the European Scientific Committee on Food on the matter. As members will have seen from the documents circulated, that committee concluded that the product was safe when daily consumption does not exceed three grammes per day.

The Commission subsequently presented proposals to the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health to authorise the placing on the market of rye bread with added phytosterols. The standing committee did not deliver opinions in April 2004 on the Commission proposals concerning rye bread, with six member states voting against and three abstaining, including Ireland. The standing committee also voted against approving the inclusion of phytosterols in sausages, and in this case, Ireland voted against the measure.

The Department's note indicates that Ireland abstained or voted against the proposals as Ireland has been party to the previous agreement that the range of products that would be permitted to contain phytosterols should be restricted to vegetable oil, yellow fat spreads, salad dressing and spicy sauces presented in individual portions, and milk-based products. In a follow-up to a number of questions raised with the Department following presentation of the note, inter alia, the Department also indicated that it had concerns with regard to products that do not lend themselves to homogenisation. In addition, there is a concern that a proliferation of products containing phytosterols could result in its over-consumption by vulnerable groups of consumers.

It is proposed that the measures that concern important product health issues be referred for further scrutiny by the Joint Committee on Health and Children.

Deputy Sexton

Given that too much of this additive could have an impact on vulnerable people, these proposals should be circulated to the Joint Committee on Health and Children. It should be ensured that the labelling of this product, should it come on the market, is done in a manner that enables the consumer to know the implications of over-consumption. The additive almost sounds like a medicine, and I am worried about such additives being put into foods that have a medical function. Sometimes a person may eat too much of a food but it would not have a negative effect, but something with a medicinal purpose such as lowering blood pressure should be monitored.

Senator Dardis

I am fascinated by the thought that an additive would be put in a sausage to reduce blood pressure. That seems paradoxical.

The point has been made to me that children eating bread or sausages would not read the label in any case.

Deputy Connolly

The responsibility lies with the parent as he or she would mostly do the shopping.

Chairman

I hope the Joint Committee on Health and Children will take this issue seriously and call in any required experts.

Proposal 1.4, COM (2005) 362, is for a Council directive on animal health requirements for aquaculture animals and products thereof, and on the prevention and control of certain diseases in aquatic animals. The lead Department is the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and there are no other bodies with an interest.

The Commission contends that European legislation on aquaculture, much of which dates back to the Community of 12 members, requires updating and consolidation. It argues that due to a number of factors, not least to reflect the broader range of aquaculture practices and species that are found in the expanded EU, action is now required in this regard.

The main changes contained in the proposal relate to the provision of EU financial assistance in situations where there is a requirement to slaughter certain species and the widening of the requirement for registering of aquaculture production businesses. The Department's note also indicates that the industry is supportive of the proposal. I understand that the Department has also now clarified that it consulted interested parties through the Irish Fish and Shellfish Health Advisory Committee.

The proposal is presented in the framework of previous proposals concerning the European Fisheries Fund post-2007. These proposals, COM (2004) 497 and COM (2005) 117, were referred by the scrutiny committee for further scrutiny by the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. Members will have seen that point 14 of the Department's note indicates that it is seeking clarification from the Commission with regard to a number of points and the Department has been requested to outline its areas of concern. I understand that the Department has now outlined that, inter alia, these relate to Article 39, containment measures, and Article 14, traceability and certification.

It is proposed that the proposal be referred for further scrutiny to the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources in the context of that committee's consideration of COM (2004) 497. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Proposal 1.5, COM (2005) 396, is for a Council decision concerning the provisional prohibition in Greece of the marketing of seeds of maize hybrids with genetic modification MON 81. The lead Department is the Department of Agriculture and Food. This proposal from the Commission seeks to overturn a national ban on the marketing of certain seeds that have been genetically modified. The relevant committee, that is, the standing committee of seeds and plant propagating material for agriculture, horticulture and forestry, voted to approve a Commission initiative outlining that the Greek ban was unauthorised. The Department's note indicates that Ireland abstained on the vote.

The proposal is related to a number of proposals that have been considered by the committee in regard to genetically modified products in recent months which have been forwarded for further scrutiny to the sectoral committees. The Department has outlined that this proposal may be considered shortly by the Council. It is proposed that the proposal be referred for further scrutiny by the Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food and forwarded for information to the Joint Committee on Environment and Local Government in the context of that committee's consideration of related issues and for information to the Joint Committee on European Affairs. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Dardis

Is this related to the issue we discussed previously? If the Greeks want to ban them, they should be able to do so. That is another subsidiarity issue. I am concerned about the way in which the multinational companies seem to institute European-wide procedures. I would almost regard that as a matter of conscience. I do not agree with the Greeks banning it but if they want to do it they should be able to do so. They should have that control.

Chairman

The next item is Title IV measures but no such measures were received for this meeting. The following CFSP measure, 3.1, CFSP/2005/643, is a Council joint action on the European Union monitoring mission in Aceh, Indonesia. The lead Department is the Department of Foreign Affairs. The other Department involved is the Department of Defence.

This measure follows from an agreement between the Government of Indonesia and the Free Aceh Movement and provides a legal base for the provision of an EU monitoring mission to assist in the implementation of that agreement. Members will have seen that the Department's note indicates that Ireland is participating in this mission. It is proposed to note the measure. Is that agreed? Agreed.

On the matter of deferred documents there is one proposal for deferral. Proposal 4.1, COM (2005) 276, is for a Council framework decision to strengthen the criminal law framework to combat intellectual property offences. The lead Department is the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the other Department with an interest is the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. There are two parts to this proposal and the secretariat has, to date, received a note that concerns only the proposed framework decision. The Department has indicated that an additional note would be provided in regard to the proposed directive concerning criminal measures aimed at ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights. It is proposed to defer consideration of this proposal until the additional information note is received by the Department. Is that agreed? Agreed.

With regard to No. 5, proposals proposed for no further scrutiny, these are items 5.1 to 5.4. Proposal 5.1, COM (2005) 328, is for a Council decision amending Decision 2004/465/EC on a Community financial contribution towards member states' fisheries controlling programmes. The lead Department is the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and the other Department with an interest is the Department of Defence.

In common with a number of proposals considered by the sub-committee in recent months, this proposal seeks approval for the extension of an EU programme until the end of 2006. The proposal concerns the Community's support for the fisheries control programmes of the member states. This extension would ensure that a programme of financial support would be in place up to the point when programmes funded under the next financial perspective are expected to become operational, in the period 2007-13. The Commission in its memorandum to the proposal outlines that particular attention in the final year of the current fisheries programme would be focused on the needs of those member states that joined in 2004. The amount scheduled for 2006 under the proposal is €35 million.

The Department's note indicates that extension of the programme would permit the provision of assistance to Ireland in this area for a further year. As members will have seen from the materials already circulated, the Department has been requested to outline the assistance that has been received from the programme to date and this information will be circulated when received. It is proposed that the proposal does not warrant further scrutiny, but that the proposed measure be forwarded for information to the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. Is that agreed? Agreed.

It is proposed that the proposals concerning air service agreements with third countries be taken together, that is, proposals numbered 5.2 to 5.8 relating to Albania, Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Ukraine, Romania and Moldova. The joint committee has considered in recent months a number of proposals that follow from decisions of the European Court of Justice on national restrictions in bilateral air-service agreements between individual member states and third countries. These proposals concern the agreements between the European Union and a number of third countries that would supplement the national agreements in place. The agreements underline the principle of non-discrimination between operators based across the EU.

The Department has indicated in its note that the adoption of the proposed measures would have little or no implication for Ireland. It is proposed that the proposals, outlined earlier, do not warrant further scrutiny. One question that comes to mind is whether this relates to standards applied or implemented. I had a concern that it related to standards applied by airlines in these countries but it does not.

Proposal 5.9, COM (2005) 361, is for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council repealing Council Directive 90/544/EEC on the frequency bands designated for the co-ordinated introduction of pan-European land-based public radio paging in the Community. The lead Department is the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources.

Directive 90/544/EEC requires the reservation of certain radio frequencies for radio paging. The memorandum to the proposal sets out that the advancing of newer technologies has meant that the reserved frequencies are used very little across Europe. The Department's note highlights that there are no licences issued on these reserved frequencies in Ireland. Therefore, it is suggested that the adoption of the proposal would free-up the frequencies for other uses.

The Commission is proposing that reserved radio band 169.4-169.8 be used for other purposes, following consultations with interested parties. I understand the Department had been requested to clarify if licences have been issued in Ireland for paging services on other frequencies and if there are plans in place for licensing the services that would be provided through the bands in question. The Department has indicated that it is consulting with ComReg on this matter and any additional information received in this regard will be forwarded to members.

The adoption of this measure would appear to open up frequency bands for some very useful purposes such as social alarms, allowing elderly persons to send alarm messages, and tracking devices on stolen goods. It is proposed that the proposal be forwarded for information to the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Proposal 5.10, COM (2005) 377, is a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financing of European standardisation. The lead Department is the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. No other Department is involved. The setting of European standards is seen as facilitating the free movement of products in the Internal Market. The Commission in its memorandum sets out that it is for this reason it has financially supported the development of European standards. The European Union's financial regulation requires that EU-funded actions are grounded on a legal basis. These proposals seek approval for the adoption of an Act that would provide a clear and explicit legal basis for the continued provision of assistance in relation to standardisation and for the setting of procedures in this regard. It is proposed that the proposals do not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Proposal 5.11 — COM (2005) 413 has been adopted since circulation and will now be taken as item 6.7 — an adopted measure. Proposal 5.12, COM (2005) 424, is a proposal for a Council regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain magnesia bricks originating in the People's Republic of China. The lead Department is the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. It is proposed that the measure does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Proposal 5.13, COM (2005) 417, is a proposal for a Council regulation amending regulation (EC) No. 2007/2000 introducing exceptional trade measures for countries and territories participating in or linked to the European Union's stabilisation and association process. The lead Department is the Department of Foreign Affairs and the other Departments involved are the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Department of Agriculture and Food.

: Yes, okay. Proposal 5.14, COM (2005) 383, is a proposal for a Council decision amending the preferential arrangements with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, FYROM, in relation to sugar. The lead Department here is the Department of Agriculture and Food. Following negotiations with FYROM the Commission is proposing that the current system of preferential trade arrangements on sugar be amended and replaced by tariff quotas.

The Department's note underlines that the adoption of the proposed measure would have no implications for Ireland as no sugar is imported here from the Balkans. However, the amendment would be welcomed as the use of tariff quotas reduces the possibility of the EU market being flooded by sugar imports from the region. It is proposed that the proposal does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Proposal 6, adopted measures: the following adopted measures were received from this meeting, items 6.1 to 6.6. Proposal 6.1, COM (2005) 316, is a proposal for Council regulation amending Council Regulation 428/2005 imposing definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of polyester staple fibres originating in the People's Republic of China and Saudi Arabia. The lead Department is the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and it is proposed to note the measure. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Proposal 6.2, COM (2005) 332, is a proposal for a Council decision on a Community position within the Association Council regarding the definition of the concept of "originating products" for a limited number of textile products from the Kingdom of Morocco. The lead Department is the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and other Departments are the Department of Foreign affairs and the Revenue Commissioners.

In June 2005, the committee considered a proposal concerning Tunisia, which was COM (2005) 142, similar to the measure here concerning Morocco. The committee decided in June that COM (2005) 142 did not warrant further scrutiny but that the related documentation be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business in the context of any consideration of the textile sector in Ireland.

The proposal concerning Morocco sought approval for a period of not more than 12 months for a derogation from the rules of origin in respect of a number of textile products. This would permit certain products exported from Morocco to the EU to be designated as manufactured there, despite the fabrics originating in Turkey. These measures follow from the trade agreements between a number of states in the context of the Euro-Med agreement. The Department's note indicates that "there are no known negative implications arising for Ireland from this approach".

It is proposed to note the measure and that the related documented be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business in the context of any consideration of the textile sector in Ireland.

Deputy Sexton

By allowing other countries to use what is effectively a flag of convenience for importing into the EU, are we not setting a serious precedent? This is the second such proposal that has come before us, but perhaps we thought the first one was an exception. It worries me that they are basically trying to use the agreement reached with one country on a certain quota from that country into the EU. It may not affect Ireland but it might affect accession countries whose textile industries may form an important part of their economies. I wonder if this proposal impacts upon them.

Chairman

I am advised that this is a measure to encourage trade, business and co-operation in the Euro-Med region. As that question could be addressed to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, perhaps we should do that.

Deputy Sexton

Yes.

Chairman

Okay. Proposal 6.3, COM (2005) 337, is a proposal for a Council regulation terminating anti-dumping proceedings concerning imports of SBS rubber originating in the Republic of Korea and Russia, and the interim review of SBS rubber originating in Taiwan, and repealing this measure.

The lead Department is the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. It is proposed to note the measure. Is that agreed? Agreed. I am informed that SBS stands for styrene-butadene-styrene.

Senator Dardis

Well done, Chairman.

Chairman

Proposal 6.5, COM (2005) 374, is a proposal for a Council regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitely the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain finished polyester filament fabrics originating in the People's Republic of China. It is proposed to note the measure, which is a matter for the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the lead Department. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Proposal 6.6, COM (2005) 335, is a proposal for a Council regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain steel sheets originating in Russia and the USA. The lead Department is the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and it is proposed to note the measure. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Proposal 6.7, COM (2005) 413, is a proposal for a Council regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping on imports of TCCA from the People's Republic of China and the USA. This proposal, which seeks approval for the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain steel products from Russia and the USA, follows a Commission investigation into the TCCA market. It is outlined in the note that TCCA is used as a bleacher and disinfectant. The Department's note indicates that its consultation process has resulted in no difficulties being reported to it on the proposed measure. It is proposed to note the measure and that the measure be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business. I cannot remember what TCCA is.

Senator Dardis

Trichloroisocyanuric acid.

Chairman

I am not sure what is its chemical.

The following two early warning notes were received. Item 7.1 relates to Commission Regulation (EC) No. 862/2005 concerning a duty on Teflon type products originating in the People's Republic of China and Russia. The lead Department is the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. The note highlights that a provisional anti-dumping duty has been placed on the product best known under the trade name Teflon originating in Russia and the People's Republic of China. I am tempted to make a comment, but I will not. The Department's note indicates that its consultation process has so far resulted in no difficulties being reported to it. It is proposed that the early warning note does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Item 7.2 relates to Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1259/2005 concerning a duty on tartaric acid originating in the People's Republic of China. It is proposed that the early warning note does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I am told that I failed to read out one adopted measure for the record, which is COM (2005) 365, which is a proposal for a Council regulation amending the annex to Regulation (EC) No. 2042/2000 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of television camera systems originating in Japan. The lead Department is the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and it is proposed to note the measure. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The minutes of the meeting of 21 September have been circulated. Are they agreed? Agreed.

The draft 55th report of the sub-committee has been circulated. I propose that the report be forwarded to the Joint Committee on European Affairs for agreement to lay before both Houses along with the appendices. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Dardis

Could we thank the secretariat for its work on the report?

Chairman

Yes. The work being done by the secretariat is amazing. I note from our annual report that the workload has doubled in the past 12 months without any corresponding increase in staff. I do not know how they do it. That should be noted.

A letter dated 10 August 2005 has been received from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform concerning document 10215/ 04. Consideration of this letter was deferred from the previous meeting of the sub-committee as additional information on sharing certain information between member states would be available following a further meeting of the relevant working group. The committee had earlier sought clarification on certain aspects of the proposal. I understand the Department has now indicated it is likely that the concerns raised at the working group meeting relating to the sharing of information obtained by national police authorities by what are described as "coercive means" are likely to be addressed and that the wording of the proposal, document 10215/04, would be amended with the word "shall" being replaced by the word "may" regarding sharing information. The letter from the Department indicates that the proposal would also be amended to ensure that the measure was covered by existing data protection legislation. It is proposed that a copy of the letter and related documentation be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights for information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The next item is the EU scrutiny report No. 7 by the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights on COM (2005) 6. This is a proposal for a Council framework decision on the fight against organised crime. It is proposed to note the report. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Dardis

Before we conclude, I wish to inform the sub-committee that Myles Geiran, Siobhan Malone and I met the British Government Chief Whip, the Right Honourable Hilary Armstrong, yesterday. As she was interested in the work of the sub-committee, we gave her a briefing on the matter.

Chairman

I thank the Senator, Myles Geiran and Siobhan Malone for meeting the British Government Chief Whip. I was also asked to meet her, but was unable to attend as the meeting coincided with the tributes being paid in the House to my late colleague Liam Burke. I spoke to some of the British delegation last night and they were very happy with the meeting.

The sub-committee adjourned at 10.15 a.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 27 October 2005.

JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS (Sub-Committee on European Scrutiny) díospóireacht - Thursday, 6 Oct 2005

Scrutiny of EU Proposals.

JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS (Sub-Committee on European Scrutiny) díospóireacht -
Thursday, 6 Oct 2005