EU Scrutiny Work Programme 2013: Motion

Senator Maurice Cummins

I move:

That Seanad Éireann adopts the EU Scrutiny Work Programme 2013, Joint Committees' Priorities, which was laid before Seanad Éireann on 2 May 2013 by the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs.

I already mentioned part of this programme on the Order of Business. In its annual report on the operation of the European Union (Scrutiny) Act 2002, which was laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas on 20 July 2012, the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs recommended that sectoral committees should identify on an annual basis those legislative and non-legislative proposals from the European Commission's annual work programme, which it would subject to detailed scrutiny and that these would be forwarded to the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs for inclusion in an agreed list of priorities. The joint committee would then report to the Houses on an agreed list of priorities, which should be adopted by motion of both Houses as the Oireachtas EU scrutiny work programme.

This is the first such Oireachtas EU scrutiny work programme prepared following that recommendation. Each of the sectoral committees discussed and identified their own priorities from the European Commission's annual work programme 2013.

This work programme, which the Seanad as well as the Dáil has been asked to adopt, represents all the priorities already identified by the relevant joint committees into which Senators have had input as members of the relevant sectoral committees.

The Commission's work programme is aspirational and most of the proposals have not yet been published but will be during the year and they will be considered by the joint Oireachtas committee at that point. The idea behind a prioritised work programme is that it helps to differentiate major policy issues and legislative proposals from less important or technical ones, as there can be up to 500 legislative proposals in any one year. It also assists committees in considering issues earlier in the legislative cycle, thereby improving the capacity of the Parliament and committees to shape and influence the formal legislative measure when it is first published.

The reason for putting the work programme before both Houses is that it is then an Oireachtas work programme rather than individual committees' work programmes, thus giving it a greater status. It also informs Members in good time of the range of important EU proposals which are coming down the track.

As I informed the House last year, the Seanad sought extra resources to deal with an EU work programme but they were not granted. The Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Union Affairs is bringing this motion forward to allow it to scrutinise EU legislation in a far greater way and at an earlier stage than was the case previously. The motion will allow the EU work programme to be dealt with by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Union Affairs and I commend it to the House.

However, there are other areas in which the Seanad should be involved outside the parameters of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Union Affairs. We certainly do not want duplication, that is, this committee doing something which the House intends to do. However, this committee is charged with this task at this point.

As many of the MEPs who spoke to us over the past number of weeks suggested, we could have a significant input into European affairs outside the remit of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Union Affairs. Perhaps sooner rather than later, we should appoint a sub-committee to bring a proposal to the Seanad to examine the types of proposals necessary in EU legislation that it can deal with outside the remit of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs.

As I said, I do not want duplication but I commend the motion. Greater scrutiny of EU legislation by the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs is to be welcomed but the Seanad should have a greater role in European affairs.

Senator Terry Leyden

I commend the Leader for allowing a short debate on this motion, which we support. There was no question of us not supporting this good motion that Seanad Éireann adopts the EU scrutiny work programme 2013, joint committees' priorities, which was laid before Seanad Éireann on 2 May 2013 by the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs, of which I am a member. I commend the work on putting this together.

In regard to the Lisbon treaty, I am not sure whether it really envisaged that joint committees would replace the work of either House of the Oireachtas. This states that they would take on the remit in regard to subsidiarity. I presume that is the case and that authority must have been designated to the committees.

There has not yet been an occasion in which legislation was referred to other parliaments or opposed by the Dáil, Seanad or a joint committee thereof. That is surprising, because although the legislative proposals concerned were possibly not contentious, it is unlikely that legislation is never controversial. Some of the proposals deal with important matters. For example, the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine is considering the framework for organic production. The production and sale of organic products certainly requires European scrutiny and support, although standards are generally maintained through self-regulation by an organisation that sets standards for organic farms. In the event of the Taoiseach successfully introducing an amendment to the Constitution to abolish this House, the committees will be much reduced in size. The current structure of joint committees comprising Members drawn from both Houses allows a wide range of knowledge and views to be shared. It would be regrettable if that level of knowledge was no longer available. It will be up to the electorate to decide whether the Seanad, reformed or otherwise, will continue in existence.

The Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform has an extensive workload but I hope it is able to do more than simply nod through these European proposals. The Commission and the Council prepare an enormous number of legislative proposals, and the European Parliament is becoming increasingly important in this regard. I acknowledge that the Leader has done his utmost to ensure legislation is referred to the Seanad as well as to sectoral committees. The broader remit of this House would allow us to consider the wider ramifications of legislation on, for example, eel fishing, which affects many counties. A Green Party Minister in the previous Government, Eamon Ryan, abolished eel fishing for a period of 99 years. The other 26 member states introduced conservation measures but not outright bans on the catching of eels. Eel fishing was an important industry for this country and we have now been deprived of its benefits because there was not proper scrutiny of the proposal at European Union level or in this Parliament. The same applies to a proposal on the below cost sale of cigarette products, which should have received closer parliamentary scrutiny than that permitted in a joint committee.

The Leader is correct to establish some sort of modus operandi on broader issues, such as combating cigarette smuggling, which could be appropriately considered by this House. The Seanad comprises representatives of practically every county in Ireland, including Border counties. For example, County Louth is well represented but the Senators from that county may not be members of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality and Defence. While they are permitted to attend meetings of the committee, they may not always be aware of its agenda. There is a big difference between attending a committee as a non-member and participating in a debate as a Member of this House.

It would affect people's attendance at those meetings because they would not be invited as such and they would have to find out for themselves that such legislation is being considered by the joint committee. When she was on the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny with me, the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, Deputy Lucinda Creighton, was very supportive and has been very supportive in her attendance in the Seanad and in her support for the idea of scrutiny.

I do not believe that we need many additional resources to debate issues in the House. We can debate these issues in the House and refer to them because the knowledge that is in this House is the equal of any committee adviser. There are certain areas that we can debate in the House. If we believe it is worthwhile then we could refer an issue on to other parliaments under a provision of the Lisbon treaty. Certain advisers to committees could be seconded on a temporary basis as items arise. This need not be on a full-time, permanent basis but each month when there is an item on the agenda, even if we then refer it to the committee for final scrutiny. It would be worthwhile to have the observations of the Oireachtas.

I thank the Leader for allowing a short debate. It is good to air this issue given that it is Europe week. It is appropriate that we are having this debate and it was appropriate that the Leader accepted the proposal by Senator Thomas Byrne to have this short debate. We are not opposing it, we are supporting it. The views put forward by the Leader are welcome. Perhaps as a result of this short debate the Leader might consider bringing one or two items onto the legislative framework of the House for a brief debate without any advisers. Then we could refer our observations to the joint committee or, if we believe it is worthwhile, we could refer them on to Europe.

Senator Colm Burke

I am in favour of this proposal as put forward by the Leader of the House. We have the proposal from the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs on this matter. It is important that any proposals coming from Europe are highlighted at an early stage here in order that we know what is coming down the road, not only today but what may be coming in the next two or three years. While joint committees are effective in many ways, some of them have a considerable schedule of work. This approach is working effectively on European matters in the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine. The whole focus in agriculture is on what is coming down the road under the Common Agricultural Policy proposals and the amendment to and reforms of that policy.

I sit on the Joint Committee on Health and Children. We have a considerable agenda relating to what is happening in the health care area. We already sat three full days here in January dealing with one tranche of legislation and we are now facing into another three days. I imagine there are issues relating to health which are being dealt with at European level that the health committee does not have the time to deal with.

I made a point at the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs today relating to medical devices. We were to give the stamp of approval to what was being proposed. I raised a simple question about whether there had been any consultation with the industry involved in manufacturing medical devices. In fact there had been no consultation and when it was referred to people involved in the industry, they had concerns about what was being proposed at European level. This is where the Seanad, as one of the Houses of the Oireachtas, could highlight issues and make people aware of them. People may wish to get involved in their organisations in putting forward their views before they get to the final stages at European level. This House could be used as an effective mechanism for airing the views of Members and for focusing on and making information available to the public. I believe the House can be used effectively in this way. The medical area is vast, in particular the area of how drugs and medications work across 27 member states, as is the area of the development of new drugs to ensure that we have a cost-effective mechanism.

I have often referred to the huge variation in the price of drugs in Ireland compared with other European countries. Why should we not focus more on how we can lower prices to what other European countries pay for medication? It is something on which we need to work.

Another medical issue is research, in terms of a joint approach between member states and the need to work together on certain areas. It is interesting to note that in the past six weeks, UCC received €6 million from Europe for a research project on health care. It is not just UCC which is involved. A number of other countries are also involved in research. There is a sharing of information in order that research can develop much faster, which is also very important. The House and the Oireachtas should highlight what is happening in Europe and allow a window of opportunity to be given to people to become aware of what is happening. It is something for which the House should be used far more effectively. I agree with Senator Leyden on that matter.

The committee has set out its programme. I welcome the fact it has highlighted what is on it and that we are all familiar with it. It is important we support the proposal.

Senator Feargal Quinn

I add my voice of support to the motion. On occasion, the House finds it does not have enough work to do, but this is work that needs to be done. Senator Leyden and others who have spoken have referred to the importance of the motion. It is worthy of support and something to which we can add our voice.

Question put and agreed to.

Acting Chairman (Senator Cáit Keane)

When is it proposed to sit again?

Senator Maurice Cummins

At 12.30 p.m. tomorrow.

The Seanad adjourned at 4.45 p.m. until 12.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 8 May 2013.

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht - Tuesday, 7 May 2013