JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN SCRUTINY díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 29 Apr 2008

Scrutiny of EU Proposals.

Chairman

The joint committee has a number of proposals before it for consideration. On item No. 1, there are no adopted measures.

Next on the agenda is item No. 2, proposals proposed for further scrutiny. It is recommended that COM (2007) 69 and COM (2007) 329 do not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed. It is also recommended that COM (2008) 80 does not warrant further scrutiny, although it is recommended that we write to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment indicating the committee's concern that a consultation process should take place with industrial and professional users of products containing this chemical. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Next on the agenda are COM (2008) 88, COM (2008) 107, COM (2008) 168, COM (2008) 92, COM (2008) 98, COM (2008) 101, COM (2008) 106, COM (2008) 116, COM (2008) 119, COM (2008) 121, COM (2008) 123, COM (2008) 124 and COM (2008) 166.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

The note on COM (2008) 116 states conclusion of the convention may require secondary legislation and rules of court in Ireland. Does that come from the document, or will it transpire at a future date? The other document indicates a need for a combination of secondary legislation and rules of court may arise in the context of the conclusion by the Community of the convention. Should we await its conclusion before reviewing the matter, or will we ask the Department why secondary legislation and rules of court will be required?

Chairman

If the Deputy so wishes, we can pursue his concerns. This proposal will lead to the conclusion by the European Community of the revised Uganda Convention.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

I am more concerned about the following paragraph, the implications of which I do not understand.

Chairman

It is stated in the paragraph that conclusion of the convention may require secondary legislation and rules of court in Ireland. There are no implications for the EU budget.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

In terms of the——

Chairman

We will go into private session for a moment to obtain advice on this issue.

The joint committee went into private session at 11.45 a.m. and resumed in public session at 11.46 a.m.

Chairman

On COM (2008) 166, it is recommended that these proposals do not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Item No. 3 deals with those for no further scrutiny but which are proposed to be sent to sectoral committees for information. On COM (2007) 645, it is proposed that the proposal does not warrant further scrutiny but that it be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Transport for information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

On COM (2008) 150 and COM (2008) 152, it is proposed that these proposals do not warrant further scrutiny but that they be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service for information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The next item deals with CFSP measures — CFSP (2008) 223 and CFSP (2008) 228.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

On CFSP (2008) 228, the Department notes that joint action is of some significance as it extends the role of the EU planning team with an aim of ensuring transition from the UN mission out there. Clearly, we are contributing Garda Síochána members to the UN team there at the moment. It is already adopted.

Chairman

The purpose of this joint action is to amend the existing joint action which established the planning team tasked with putting in place the arrangements for an EU rule of law mission in Kosovo. This amendment will allow non-EU countries which have been invited to participate in the EULEX Kosovo to second staff on to the planning team of the EUPT and be recruited on a contractual basis. The joint action also extends the mandate of the EUPT mission until 4 June 2008.

The final point is that the EU planning team was established in 2006 to prepare the ground for the development of the EU rule of law mission in Kosovo, following the declaration of independence in Kosovo, which has been recognised by a majority of EU member states. The Council agreed in February 2008 to formally establish the EU rule of law mission, or EULEX Kosovo. At this time the Council also decided that EUPT Kosovo will act as the main planning and preparation element for EULEX.

That might sound like double Dutch.

Deputy Joe Costello

Our mandate still remains in Kosovo.

Chairman

It does.

Deputy Joe Costello

That is the important element.

Chairman

It is important. That deals with CFSP (2008) 228, CFSP (2008) 229 and CFSP (2008) 230. It is proposed to note these measures. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The next item deals with Title V measures. The first is JHA 6002/07. As the committee has already considered implementing the proposal, it is recommended that it does not warrant further scrutiny and that it be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights in advance of consideration of the opt-in motion by the Oireachtas. In addition, it is recommended that a copy of the committee's report on implementing the proposal be forwarded to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights at the same time for its information. Is that agreed? Agreed.

On early warning notice EWN C74-16, it is proposed that the measure does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.

COM (2008) 40 is a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the provision of food information for consumers. The draft proposal consolidates and updates two areas of labelling legislation — general food and nutrition — covered by Directives 2000/13/EC and 90/496/EEC. Directive 2000/13/EC deals with general labelling requirements for all foodstuffs, for example, list of ingredients and use by date. In addition to the general legislation, there are certain labelling rules for certain food groups, for example, meat. Directive 90/496/EEC deals with nutrition labelling on food. Currently nutrition labelling is optional, although it becomes mandatory when a nutrition or health claim is made or when vitamins and minerals are voluntarily added to foods. In addition, a number of other directives related to the labelling of alcoholic beverages, foodstuffs containing quinine, caffeine and other ingredients, derogations from labelling and the compulsory indication on labelling are also included. The Commission conducted an open consultation process in 2006. The Food Safety Authority of Ireland, at the request of the Department of Health and Children, conducted a public consultation exercise at the time, to which a large number of responses were received.

Food labelling is an issue that generates great debate. While initially the main thrust of food labelling directives was to provide labelling as a tool for the free circulation of food, over time consumer rights have risen in importance. Some of the issues that arise as part of this recasting of legislation include the labelling of allergenic ingredients, nutrition labelling of alcoholic products, whether legislation should be prescriptive on the format of labelling, whether voluntary codes should be used, the issue of how much information should be provided, how much information is too much, how origin labelling should be dealt with and how welfare and genetically modified organisms, GMO, labelling should be dealt with. Other issues include subsidiarity — that is, whether member states should decide at a national level on the detailed arrangements when there are no implications for the Single Market — the labelling of non-prepackaged, prepared foods in restaurants and take-away food outlets and the possible additional burden on small producers.

In view of the interest in and importance of the issues outlined, both to industry and consumers, it is recommended that this proposal warrants further scrutiny and that it be included in the agenda for an upcoming meeting. Is that agreed?

Senator Paddy Burke

If this is operated as outlined, does it mean that if one has a sandwich in a restaurant, the proprietor must list the ingredients on the packaging? It could go that far. Some weeks ago we scrutinised a regulation to remove red tape affecting small businesses. Where does the legislation stand with regard to this directive? I agree that this matter requires further scrutiny.

Chairman

Traceability is a big issue, especially of beef.

Senator Paddy Burke

I know that traceability is a big issue but if we go down the road that the European Union always takes, we will reach a point where the ingredients of sandwiches will have to be listed on the wrapping.

Chairman

These matters need to be discussed to ensure the right decision is reached in the interests of consumers. The Commission is seeking less regulation. The last report we examined was related to food hygiene. The word was that the Commission would impose less hazard analysis and critical control points, HACCP, for small companies. The point that Senator Burke makes about food labelling and traceability concerns a significant issue.

Deputy Joe Costello

Perhaps we might have proper scrutiny of this issue.

Chairman

A full hearing on it.

Senator Paddy Burke

Where are we sending it?

Chairman

It is also recommended that, to assist the committee in its detailed examination of the proposals, the following will be invited to attend a committee session to offer their views: officials from the Departments of Health and Children, and Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, the National Consumer Agency, representatives of Taste Council who have been before the committee representing the traditional artisan and speciality foods sector and representatives of the restaurant sector. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Joe Costello

That is the way to go.

Senator Paddy Burke

We should also bring in somebody from the sandwich sector. There is a range of companies——

Chairman

Private ones.

Senator Paddy Burke

They are people who specialise in making sandwiches.

Chairman

They sell them wholesale.

Senator Paddy Burke

I believe they should be brought in.

Chairman

Does the Senator mean the manufacturing companies?

Deputy Damien English

Not necessarily. Many of the retailers do not wrap their sandwiches, the convenience stores and the deli counters. I believe that aspect is covered by the Taste Council.

Chairman

It would be. It is covered by HACCP.

Deputy Joe Costello

What about sandwiches to schools which are made in bulk?

Chairman

That work is done for the most part by commercial companies which would be under HACCP regulations. We will note the Senator's concerns and if we can find somebody who specialises in the sandwich business we will proceed accordingly.

Item 149 22/07 is COM (2007) 645 — a proposal for a Council framework decision on the use of passenger name record, PNR, for law enforcement purposes. This proposal will require Ireland to establish a national unit to receive and analyse passenger name record data, PNR, from air carriers and will require the adoption of a common standard of transmission of this data. PNR data refers to data collected from travel documents, usually flights. It includes passport data, name, address, telephone numbers, travel agent, credit number, history of changes in flight schedule, seat preferences and other information. Air carriers already capture such data for their own commercial purposes and are usually obliged to communicate advance passenger, AP, data to the competent authorities of the member states under the Council Directive 2004/82/ EC, which is used in the prevention of illegal immigration.

Current arrangements are in place for the transmission of PNR data between the EU and the United States and Canada. This requires air carriers to transmit such data to the competent authorities in the USA and Canada. The proposed framework decision provides for the exchange of PNR regarding those passengers who are identified as persons who may be involved in terrorism or organised crime but only to the extent that it is necessary to prevent and fight terrorism and organised crime. A consultation of interested parties was carried out by the Commission on the transfer of PNR data to the US, and AP information and PNR data to Canada. Among the issues raised during that consultation was whether the EU legislative response to this issue was appropriate. Modes of transport should be included, the geographical scope of the proposal, and the use and purpose of collecting PNR data, its retention period, the body receiving the data, the method of data transmission and the onward transfer of data. Initially it was hoped there would be agreement on the framework decision at the Council meeting on Justice and Home Affairs in June. It now appears unlikely that it will be agreed before the end of the year.

To determine the full implications of the proposal for Ireland it is recommended that this be scrutinised in further detail. Is that agreed?

Deputy Damien English

Is it necessary to scrutinise it further? I do not think so.

Deputy Joe Costello

I propose that we scrutinise it further. We were talking about personal and private data that belongs to people and there have been many scares in recent times concerning the loss of confidential data. It seems, therefore, that many commercial operations have a role to play. We had the case in which the Irish Blood Transfusion Service was careless in the manner in which it handled such data. This refers to how the United States of America deals with terrorism. It is possible that such data could get into the wrong hands and be misused. It is important, therefore, that we know exactly how this will operate.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

We should examine this proposal further, given the different data retention methods of various countries and the data protection requirements of different jurisdictions. I remember when this issue was first debated, either last year or the year before, that there was concern among the airlines about the burden of having to keep so much extra information with which they did not normally have to deal, especially for short flights, for example. It may be worth asking someone from the airline industry if this proposal represents an additional burden or if they have adapted and are happy with it.

Chairman

I take on board Deputy Ó Snodaigh's recommendation that we request the views of someone involved in the airline industry. It is also recommended that, to assist the committee in its detailed examination of the proposal, officials from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner be invited to appear before us to offer their views. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Item No. 8 is a proposal for forwarding to sectoral committees for their observations, to be returned to the committee preferably within four weeks, but within eight at the latest, COM (2007) 844, a proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and the Council on industrial emissions and integrated pollution prevention. The overall objective of the proposed directive is to prevent and control pollution and its impacts arising from industrial activities so as to achieve a high level of protection of human health and the environment and to achieve this in the most cost-effective and efficient way, while ensuring a reduction of unnecessary administrative burdens. The Commission is proposing a single directive which combines, by means of a recast, the 1996 integrated pollution prevention and control, IPPC, directive and six sectoral directives related to industrial emissions. The note from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government confirms that the proposal is of major significance and will require amendments to the Environmental Protection Agency Acts, 1992 to 2003, the Waste Management Acts and relevant regulations made thereunder.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Are we giving the sectoral committees enough time to consider this directive, or is our timeframe appropriate? Given the vast implications of the directive, I do not know if four to six weeks is enough time for the committees to consider it. The Council document is dated 8 January; it is a pity, therefore, that we did not receive it earlier.

Chairman

I appreciate what the Deputy says. Allowing four weeks is preferable and will allow the committees to express their views to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in advance of his meetings. It is important that we receive observations in time. We will express this in the note forwarded to the sectoral committees.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Is it the case that we are constrained by the Minister's schedule?

Chairman

Yes. Obviously, the issue is important and if we could have allowed more time for consideration, we would have. Allowing four to six weeks is preferable. It would be better to allow more, but unfortunately we cannot do so on this occasion.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

We received this proposal in April, two months after the date listed on the Council document — 8 January. The delay is regrettable.

Chairman

It is.

Deputy Joe Costello

The position will improve once the Lisbon treaty goes through.

Chairman

I thank Deputy Costello.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Pigs might fly.

Deputy Joe Costello

The Commission has to——

Chairman

There is a mandate for eight weeks.

Deputy Joe Costello

Perhaps there will be a positive outcome.

Chairman

The Minister of State, Deputy Roche, will deal with this matter when he appears before the committee. In view of the importance of the overall package of measures included in the directive, it is proposed that the proposal warrants further scrutiny and that it be forwarded to the Joint Committee on the Environment, Heritage and Local Government for written observations to be returned to this committee, preferably within four weeks of the date of this meeting and within six weeks at the latest. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Item No. 9 is proposals for forwarding to sectoral committees for detailed scrutiny. There are no such proposals. We will suspend the sitting until the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, arrives.

Sitting suspended at 12.06 p.m. and resumed at 12.08 p.m.