JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 27 Jan 2009

Business of Joint Committee.

Chairman

The first item on the agenda is the European Commission's legislative work programme. The policy adviser has prepared a steering note for members which will be circulated along with a copy of the work programme, initially prepared by the Commission. There are specific areas the joint committee may wish to consider including in its work programme, such as initiatives in the following areas. The financial markets is one area. In the current economic situation it is an issue on which we do not need any inspiration to get involved and it is an area from which we can learn from past experiences.

One of the things we need to bear in mind in regard to the financial markets is that it has been suggested by some commentators recently that we could do nothing in recent years because the European Central Bank controls interest rates and that controls everything. That is not true. There is nothing to stop individual states from introducing their own financial controls as we now see. This was always possible. The suggestion that everything was controlled from the ECB is wrong.

The next item is economic and social development which the joint committee has discussed several times recently. Energy security and climate change is a significant and topical issue. Other issues are the fisheries policy, agricultural policy and external relations policy. There is also the area of freedom, security and justice, which includes Schengen and whether we need to be in or out in future. This brings into focus the whole question of the application of justice, the pursuit of criminality across borders and the need for accommodation. That issue arose in the course of the recent referendum. Some people viewed it rather suspiciously and I considered it to be unnecessary.

With that in mind a paper has been circulated. The Commission's priorities for 2009 are structured around four pillars: growth and jobs, climate change and sustainable Europe, a Europe closer to its citizens, Europe as a world partner and better regulation and so on. We have learned some lessons in the meantime on those areas that may be of benefit. It is time for members to make an input into issues that are likely to arise before they arise. I am in their hands.

On growth and jobs, the Commission has focused on economic reform and specific measures aimed at rebuilding confidence to help Europe deal with the economic and financial crisis, through the work of the renewed Lisbon strategy and the framework for recovery presented recently and considered at the European Council on 11 to 12 December. Proposals will be made in the area of financial markets and financial supervision. Other priority initiatives include communications on monitoring the retail sector, the future of transport and ICT, research and development and innovation.

On climate change and sustainable Europe, the Commission will publish a communication on the EU position in preparation for the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen. Interestingly enough, other key initiatives will include a communication on agricultural products quality policy, a Green Paper on the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy and a communication on financing low carbon technologies. Specific reference is made to the food producing sector. That is an area this committee among others has had occasion to consider.

On the issue of a Europe close to citizens, the Commission will table measures which impact directly on citizens. This will include specific action to help citizens as consumers, and several initiatives in the area of freedom, security and justice, addressing the fight against terrorism and organised crime. Other initiatives will include a communication on university-business dialogue and measures aimed at reducing health inequalities in Europe. The fight against terrorism and organised crime is brought into focus on almost a daily basis at home and internationally. In recent days there have been indications on the extent to which organised crime is a threat not only to security, life and limb in this country but in other member states also.

On Europe as a world partner, the Commission will publish concrete initiatives on enlargement strategy and take measures to accelerate the stabilisation and association process in the western Balkans. The Commission will also report on the effectiveness of EU financing for development aid. Those are two issues that have engaged the committee in the past. It should be noted that the western Balkans is an area that is evolving currently. Active preparation is under way for enlargement in that area. What follows will be of interest to members and this country.

Better regulation is a rolling priority of the Commission. I smile when I hear about “rolling priorities”. The intention is to promote a simpler and better regulatory environment without unnecessary administrative burdens. The programme contains specific measures on simplification, covering areas from agriculture to environment and from accounting to transport, as well as the withdrawal of some pending proposals. That is very good. It is a promising sign. Members will be anxious to ascertain the full extent of the proposals. Interestingly enough, in more recent times it would appear that the application of regulation in some areas was non-existent or ineffective, whereas in other areas it seems to be especially and unnecessarily burdensome.

Senator Feargal Quinn

Regulation is now much more important than we thought it was previously. The phrase "better regulation" means different things to different people. To some it means far more regulation in order to avoid some of the problems we have encountered and in other cases it means far less regulation to make us more competitive. We need to give a great deal of attention to the area of better regulation.

One of the criticisms of a centralised Europe that may have influenced the "No" vote is that too much power is vested there. The notion of subsidiarity is that decisions would be made closer to citizens. There is a real worry that too many decisions are being made in Brussels rather than in individual states. We must pay attention to that issue. On the other hand, part of the criticism of the banking crisis in Ireland and in Europe is that there has not been enough regulation. Balance is needed and that must be discussed.

Chairman

The golden rule is effective regulation. It does not have to be voluminous to be effective. One of the things I have seen — I am sure members have also — is a classic example that relates to the HSE and local authorities. Where a one or two page document was sufficient 25 years ago, forms of 25 or 30 pages now require to be filled in. What everybody fails to recognise is that it takes administrative time to assess all those forms and that is where time, energy and cost are invested to a great extent. I recall everybody saying in the 1980s that the Revenue Commissioners should produce a simple document instead of having 35 or 40 pages for a simple tax claim. In fairness to them, they came up with a simplified document, form 11 or 12. It is a simple document that gets all the information and is easy to assess, access and adjudicate on. We should learn from that.

The Commission's 2009 work programme contains a number of proposed measures in the form of Green Papers, White Papers and communications which are of direct relevance to the committee's orders of reference. These types of measures are a comprehensive statement of aims and principles in a particular policy area, which may be followed up by detailed legislative proposals. Consideration of such measures would allow the committee to examine key Commission policy initiatives at an early stage with a view to shaping the final proposal to the Council and-or European Parliament. That is of particular significance also. It is the old story of influencing an issue before it escalates.

The Commission's legislative and work programme for 2009 includes a number of proposals which the committee may wish to consider as part of its own work programme for 2009. These include measures to which I already referred, namely, financial markets and financial supervision, economic and social development, energy security and climate change, fisheries policy, external relations policy, area of freedom, justice and security and horizontal issues. I do not know what the horizontal issues are. Details of these specific measures are set out here.

Senator Paschal Donohoe

One point I wish to refer to is the discussion and document on financial regulation. A great deal of information will emerge from groups such as the high level expert group on EU financial supervision on which Ireland will not have a representative. When that group completes its work it would be important to consider what it has to say and to make an input into it.

Regarding Communicating Europe, I am struck by the fact that there is reference to the communication priority being "inter-institutional". That is stunning given what the EU went through last year. An additional communication priority is to explain the added value of the EU in areas in which citizens have increasingly shown their concern. I would have thought that would be the first priority of the EU and the Commission rather than it being an additional priority.

What we are discussing is the tail end of the Commission's work programme. What opportunity will we have when the new Commission comes into place later in the year to provide an input into what we believe its work programme should be?

Deputy Noel Treacy

The Commission has published its priorities and we have four pillars. There was never a greater opportunity for the Commission to assert its position to give sustainability to all of the citizens of the Union. Many agendas have been proposed, analysed and often not concluded over the years within the European Union. One of them is the Lisbon Agenda, in respect of which there is a serious demand to ensure adequate mobility of goods, people and services within the Union, as well as the sustainability of the Union, whereby it can become self-sufficient in meeting its requirements for all products and services, whether in the food or technology sector. It is important for the Union to examine its strengths to see what it can do to ensure there are adequate opportunities to sustain traditional industries and support innovative industries to ensure we can protect the interests of the Union and all of its member states and peoples at this seriously challenging time.

With regard to climate change and a sustainable Europe Union, Senator Quinn made a point on the Common Fisheries Policy taking into account the evolving situation in Iceland and elsewhere. The change in the United States and the new vision and leadership of President Obama present an opportunity for the European Union to partner the United States in matters such as climate change which should assist it in other areas of activity to provide confidence in order that we can help to ease as quickly as possible the global crisis.

In the past the European Union has given a great deal of thought to the issue of research. This country and others have great intellectual capacity. The recession means that many people with high qualifications find themselves unemployed for the first time. Taking into account the Lisbon Agenda, the European research area proposals and the European framework programmes, it is important that the Union focuses on ensuring we do not lose the talents, skills and abilities these people possess and that an innovative way is found to at least provide them with gainful and meaningful employment in the process contributing to their families, communities, member states and, ultimately, the Union.

The closeness of the European Union to its citizens has always presented a serious challenge, one which we must all face as politicians. We must play our part. I hope the Commission, in particular, can change its mindset and ensure the human and physical resources and assets in each member state are used to impart knowledge in order that citizens understand the key role which the Union plays and the democratic structures in place to enable each member state to benefit from its investment and other programmes. This is something we might be able to use as we move towards a second referendum on the Lisbon treaty.

Chairman

Is it agreed that we incorporate within our work programme the points raised by our policy adviser and members of the committee as being suitable and appropriate for discussion? Agreed. In due course we will receive documentation in advance to ensure we will have an input prior to issues becoming serious.

We should be reminded that in the year prior to the recent pork controversy there was clear evidence of a shortage of animal feed. For some unknown reason, the European Union had insufficient feed. Hence, a move was made to import it from the United States and other countries, which was not well received. There was no reason in the wide earthly world the European Union could not have grown sufficient feed to ensure the food chain was adequately protected. We know the result — people were forced to draw some of their feed from other sources. I do not suggest for one moment that this could not happen.

No. 2 is the European Commission Green Paper: Towards a Secure, Sustainable and Competitive European Energy Network, the purpose of which is to align EU network policy with wider EU energy policy as outlined. This would ensure an integrated European energy network, through which the EU internal energy market could function. The renewable energy and climate change package commits member states to ambitious renewable energy and emissions reduction targets. However, the European Union will not achieve its ambitions unless its energy networks change considerably and quickly. This issue has also been discussed by other committees. It is of critical importance because industry or business cannot move and nothing can be transacted without energy and a reliable energy source. It is imperative that we in this country, this committee in particular, play our role in ensuring our views, interests and concerns are borne in mind in the formulation of policy or thinking which might ultimately result in policy.

Europe's energy networks and infrastructure to transport electricity, gas, oil and other fuels from producers to consumers are aging. They are based on traditional fossil fuel supplies and large centralised production. The lack of suitable network links is a barrier to investment in renewable energy projects and decentralised generation. The enlarged European Union has inherited poor east-west and south-north connections. This makes it more difficult for energy to more freely around the Union and some regions more vulnerable to supply disruption. We experienced this with the Ukrainian-Russian debate in recent weeks and note the impact it can have. It was suggested that theoretically this was the cause of the inexplicable rise in fuel prices at petrol pumps because nothing else had happened when world oil prices were one third of what they were at their peak. Suddenly, we saw them creeping up to two thirds of what they were at their peak.

In the Green Paper the Commission argues that the European Union needs to reinforce its policy on energy network development. It should, for example, be able to intervene or mediate where public and private parties are unable to move forward on key projects with a European impact. It should also review its funding framework, notably the trans-European energy networks to direct better towards policy goals. Planning and authorisation difficulties must also be addressed. The Green Paper, therefore, seeks views on how the Union can better promote the new energy networks which Europe needs, using all the instruments at its disposal, notably but not only the trans-European energy networks. It also suggests a number of major strategic projects which the Union could promote to strengthen solidarity and security of supply in a truly European energy network. One matter which is likely to arise and has arisen previously in this country concerns transmission and the way electricity is transmitted throughout the country, whether underground or overground. This will generate considerable debate.

If members wish to make submissions, they may do so now. If they do not wish to do so, it is understood that we intend to pursue vigorously the issues raised in the course of our work programme. Is it agreed that the committee examine the Green Paper in detail with a view to preparing a response to the Commission? Agreed. Is it agreed to invite representatives from the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, EirGrid and Bord Gáis Networks to meet the committee to discuss the Green Paper and seek submissions in advance of the meeting? Agreed. Is it also agreed that we might bring on board some of the stakeholders involved in the alternative energy generation with a view to identification of methodology and policy in the future? Agreed.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

On that point, while I do not wish to be parochial, I understand Shannon Development began a process of examining alternative energy resources off the west coast. It is collaborating with a university in the region and they have interesting ideas on how Ireland might be at the forefront. In the context of our debate, it might be useful to seek a presentation from the chief executive or chairperson with a view to feeding it into our thinking. The mechanics are an issue for another committee but in the development of policy it could be useful for this committee to seek a presentation from them.

Chairman

I agree. With regard to the committee's consideration of the issues before it, it is important that we have some practical knowledge based on the kind of submission the Vice Chairman has suggested. While we recognise that the relevant sectoral committee will deal with the issue in the context of how it relates to the European Union, this committee must also deal with it. It is a good idea. Is that agreed? Agreed. We will call on those with expertise to give us their views as early as possible.

I propose that we forward the Green Paper to the Joint Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and the Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security for their information and inform them of this committee's plans with regard to consideration of the Green Paper. It would be useful for us to seek the observations of these committees. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Paschal Donohoe

On that point, will there be an opportunity when preparing our submission to seek a response from the committees on what we propose to do? I am conscious of the fact that the Joint Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources has much information and expertise on the subject we will study among its secretariat and members. This is a technical area. When preparing our submission we could make the process quicker and avoid a reinvention of the wheel by seeking the input of the committees and use the information provided in our submission.

Chairman

We will do so; such an approach is incorporated in the proposal. It will be mutually beneficial, as they say. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Paschal Donohoe

I thank the Chairman.

Chairman

We will move to the European Commission Green Paper on the European Workforce for Health, COM (2008) 725. Members have been given a copy of the Green Paper. The information was supplied by the Department of Health and Children and an advice note was prepared by the committee's policy adviser. The purpose of the Green Paper is to respond adequately to the challenges facing health systems across Europe. It requires that health systems have efficient and effective workforces of the highest quality, as health services are labour intensive. Health care constitutes one of the most significant sectors of the EU economy and provides employment for one in ten of the EU workforce, an interesting statistic. The Green Paper aims to increase the visibility of the issues facing the EU health workforce, to generate a clearer picture of the extent to which local and-or national health managers face the same challenges and to provide a better basis for considering what could be done at EU level to address these problems effectively and in a manner which would not have a negative impact on health systems outside the European Union.

The Green Paper describes the challenges faced by the EU health workforce which are common to all member states. They include demography issues which relate to aging populations and workforces and mean that there are insufficient numbers of young people coming through the system to replace those who leave. They also include the diversity of the health workforce, the lack of appeal of a wide variety of health care and public health related jobs to new generations, the migration of health care professionals into and out of the European Union, unequal mobility within the Union and, in particular, the movement of some health professionals from poorer to richer countries in the Union, as well as the brain drain from third countries. The Green Paper also identifies where the Commission believes further action can be taken in order to encourage debate on it. The summary of the main body of the Green Paper is divided into four sections dealing with factors influencing the workforce, new technologies, the role of health professional entrepreneurs and the contribution of the European Union's cohesion policy. Each section highlights possible areas for action. There are six factors, including demography, to which I referred regarding the promotion of sustainable health, public health capacity, training, managing the mobility of health workers in the European Union, the global migration of health workers, and data supporting decision making. As I mentioned, other issues include the impact of new technologies, the role of health professional entrepreneurs and the contribution of the Union's cohesion policy.

Regarding proposed further action, the Commission has invited all interested organisations to submit responses on the issues raised in the Green Paper. The Department of Health and Children acknowledges that improved workforce planning is critical to the successful delivery of the strategic objectives for the health service. It has informed the committee that a joint working group on workforce planning was established in 2006 and has reported to the Cabinet committee on health on a number of occasions. The group is co-ordinating the preparation of a workforce planning strategy and a labour market analysis by FÁS and the expert group on future skills needs for a number of health care occupations. Some of the issues identified in the Green Paper have been raised in these two projects. Action by the European Union, as well as co-operation with other member states, as envisaged in the Green Paper, may be useful in supporting and reinforcing the policies and actions which may emerge from Ireland's own work in health workforce planning. In addition, the consideration of the Green Paper would be useful in the context of examining Ireland's position on the proposed EU directive on cross-border health care. The actions proposed in the Green Paper appear to be also aimed at complementing and supporting the possible implementation of the directive in encouraging the harmonisation of health care standards within the Union's health care workforce.

For these two reasons, it is proposed that the Green Paper be examined further. To this end, given that it may already be examining the issues identified in the Green Paper under its orders of reference, it is proposed to forward the Green Paper to the Joint Committee on Health and Children for its consideration. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Feargal Quinn

I certainly agree. Two weeks ago in America I attended a session at which a number of companies got together to attempt to reduce the cost of health care. They have been very successful because they have sought to reward certain behaviour. In other words, if a person agrees to exercise, watch his or her weight, avoid smoking and excessive alcohol consumption and so on, he or she will see a reduction in health care costs. It almost works as a reward for certain behaviour. It may not have developed far enough yet because only a couple of dozen companies are involved but they employ around 500,000 people. The initial figures are dramatic and I believe it will be a worthwhile project. I will try to get detailed information for the Joint Committee on Health and Children. The first signs of action and response seem to be very significant because it is not just a question of curing sick people but also of preventing illness. If the project succeeds by rewarding certain behaviour, it will herald the first sign of a breakthrough not only in health care but also in preventing illness. This is worthwhile and I will do my best to lay my hands on the information. It is very exciting.

Senator Paschal Donohoe

While I completely support the idea of forwarding the Green Paper to the other committee, I have some questions. Why are we forwarding the Green Paper to the Joint Committee on Health and Children while we maintain a lead role in seeking to co-ordinate responses to the Green Paper on energy networks?

On an associated matter, a guest at the Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the European Union spoke to me about the Lisbon treaty before the meeting began. He said the only benefit of the treaty was that it would prepare Europe to deal with a pandemic. He was an eminent and respectable guest who appeared before the sub-committee. His point was that one of the main threats perceived by the European leadership was the quick spread of communicable diseases throughout Europe. One of the health care issues mentioned here concerns new and re-emerging threats to health such as communicable diseases. This is almost so serious as to be laughable. When I mentioned this people laughed and that was also my reaction. The notion of a pandemic threatening Europe was seen like a joke but the delegate stressed the importance of the matter and the gravity of the possible threat to Europe. The Lisbon treaty has a facility to trigger a degree of co-operation that might otherwise be lacking in such an event. I would be interested to know what work, if any, has been done at European level to identify a real threat to health from pandemic diseases and to prepare for such a pandemic. I realise this issue is tangential to this afternoon's business but it has been on my mind since the matter was raised with me. I would like to have more information on the matter.

Chairman

It is my intention to refer the Green Paper to the sectoral committee for its comments. Because it has a European dimension, we should make our own comments on it when it is returned to us. In the current climate the delivery of health and associated services is hugely important to the population at large. Sometimes it works and sometimes it does not. There are countless instances where regulations and procedures are in place but, for some reason, do not work. In such cases, we turn inward, look at ourselves and ask what went wrong. If a system and framework are in place, nothing should go wrong. Nevertheless, I am sure every member has dealt with constituency cases in which he or she considers a particular action is warranted but professionals do not agree. This, unfortunately, is a regular occurrence. I have come across several such cases, as I am sure other members have. Legislation cannot decide who makes a judgment, when it should be made and how well placed a judgment will be. One cannot intervene unnecessarily in family cases. However, it is important to recognise that in certain circumstances it may be better to intervene than to face the consequences of failing to do so. I have been dealing with a case for two or three years in which no one wants to take action. For some unknown reason, the institutions are reluctant to become involved.

Is it agreed that we review the work of the sectoral committee when it comes back to us, because of its relevance in the European sphere and because this committee has responsibilities in that area? Agreed. That will cover the points raised by Senator Donohoe.

Senator Paschal Donohoe

It might be separate but I would be interested in having that information at some point during the year. Obviously, reference to a pandemic is something that sticks in one's mind.

Chairman

We heard about pandemics 25 years ago. I remember being advised by a professional about a particular issue which was expected to cripple the whole world, Europe in particular, but it did not happen.

The joint committee went into private session at 3.45 p.m. and adjourned at 3.55 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Thursday, 5 February 2009.