This occasional publication contains correspondence, including ministerial replies, relating to the work of the House of Lords European Select Committee and its sub-Committees, as part of its scrutiny of policy matters. It covers the period from July 2002 to March 2003, and includes the text of letters sent and received together with any supporting material. For the first time, it gives a list of documents by Council document number where available, as well an an index of contents.
In recent years it has been the Committee's practice to take evidence regularly from the Ambassador of each incoming Presidency country and from the Minister for Europe after each European Council. Accordingly, this report makes available the oral evidence given by Mr Jim Murphy, Minister for Europe, on 15 January 2008, and by His Excellency Mr Iztok Mirosic, Ambassador of Slovenia, on 29 January 2008. It also contains supplementary memoranda by both witnesses.
This document contains the Government's responses to the following reports made by the European Union Committee: the 47th report of session 2002-03 (HLP 194, ISBN 0104003294), and the following for the 2003-04 session: 5th report (HLP 29, ISBN 0104004061), 6th report (HLP 47, ISBN 0104004215), 8th report (HLP 66, ISBN 0104004339), 9th report (HLP 67, ISBN 0104004355), 11th report (HLP 74, ISBN 0104004436) and 12th report (HLP 75, ISBN 010400441X).
This report seeks to describe how draft European Union legislation comes into being. The Committee examines the sources of ideas for legislation and the processes by which ideas are developed to the point when they are submitted, as formal proposals for legislation, to the legislating institutions of the Union. The Committee considers the 'right of intitiative' - the poewr to make formal proposals - and who has it. They look at how, in practice, the principal institution with a right of intitiative - the European Commission - develops draft legislation. They examine influences on the intiatiation and development of the EC's proposals.
As the Committee highlighted in its report The Fight Against Fraud on the EU's Finances it is difficult to estimate the extent of fraud committed against the EU budget. That report suggested that the figure could be 5 billion euro per year or more. For the purposes of its Impact Assessment the Commission has conservatively assumed that about 3 billion euro per year could be at risk through fraud. These are significant amounts, and both Member States and the EU as a whole have a strong interest in reducing the level EU fraud. In broad terms, the Commission's proposed response to this level of fraud is to establish the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) as an EU body with exclusive power to investigate and prosecute a broad range of criminal offences affecting the financial interests of the Union and inextricably linked offences, able to call upon the resources of national authorities. This would create a very significant and disruptive incursion into the sensitive criminal law systems of the Member States. The House of Lords considers that such action at EU level would breach the principle of subsidiarity in that it is unnecessary, excessive and insufficiently justified by the Commission. It considers that the objective of countering fraud affecting the financial interests of the Union can best be achieved by action by the Member States within the existing framework for co-ordination and cooperation. This framework is capable, if necessary, of being strengthened to meet this objective effectively
This report concludes that the Government should seek to rejoin the 35 measures that have already been identified, but that it should also seek to rejoin an additional set of measures: implementing measures related to Europol's continued operation; the Framework Decision on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law; the European Judicial Network; the European Probation Order; and the Convention of Driving Disqualifications. The Government has still not dealt with earlier reports' conclusions about the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and its jurisdiction. What is more, the Government's general approach to the CJEU is not consistent with its decision to opt back into many other post-Lisbon police and criminal justice measures. The Government also needs to work flexibly with the European Commission in order to avoid any gaps in the application of the measures the UK will seek to rejoin. For example, we must ensure that rejoining the European Arrest Warrant is water-tight well in advance of the opt-out taking effect, to prevent problems for our criminal justice system. The report also recommends that the Government conduct a review of the impact of the opt-out decision three years after it has taken effect, and report its conclusions to Parliament
This report is a follow up to the March 2012 report on the European Commission's proposals for a Financial Transaction Tax (HL paper 287, session 2010-12, ISBN 9780108475771). Now the Commission has given the green light to a sub-group of 11 Member States to move forward with a significantly revised tax proposal, under a process known as enhanced cooperation - a move which the European Union Committee condemns as being divisive, significantly detrimental to the UK's interest and deliberately contentious in such a controversial area. The report finds serious flaws with the Commission's use of enhanced cooperation, namely: the tax would have an adverse impact on institutions in the non-participating Member States, such as the UK; the legislation could see the UK unfairly being required to collect the tax on behalf of other Member States, such as Germany and France; this use of enhanced cooperation fails to meet the requirements of EU law, including in respect of the Single Market; the flawed process by which the Commission has allowed enhanced cooperation to be used risks undermining its use in the future. The Committee criticises the UK Government for their slowness to appreciate the potential damage to the UK that such a tax could present. However they welcome the Government's belated decision to launch a legal challenge in a bid to annul the decision.
Each year the Government deposits 1200 European policy documents for scrutiny, some of which are cleared straight away, whilst others are reserved for further scrutiny. These are normally considered by one of seven policy-based sub-committees and this report summarises the work undertaken by the Committee through its sub-committees. also reports on UK's Presidency of the EU and looks ahead to likely developments in 2006.
This report describes the work of the House of Lords EU Select Committee and its seven Sub-Committees over the past year, and considers the Committee's work in the coming year. It analyses scrutiny overrides (occasions when Ministers act before the Committee's scrutiny is complete), and urges the Government to ensure that Committees are kept fully informed about the progress of negotiations. It also makes recommendations regarding General Approaches, delays in Ministerial correspondence with the Committee, the contents of Government Explanatory Memoranda, and Commission responses to Committee reports.
Priorities of the European Union : Evidence from the Ambassador of the Czech republic and the Minister for Europe, 8th report of session 2008-09, Report
The Committee's report examines what is meant by the terms 'services of general interest' and 'services of general economic interest', and goes on to consider the implications of the European Commission's White Paper on this topic, published in May 2004. Conclusions reached include concern that the Government has not seen fit to identify those services it provides to UK citizens which might fall under the designation of services of general interest, so that Parliament might assess the potential significance of the Commission's approach in this area.
In its Green Paper about the need for labour market reform, the European Commission argued that the increasing diversity of 21st century working relationships means that existing labour law is no longer adequate. This report brings together the evidence from a wide range f experts and representative bodies about these issues as they affect the UK labour market. It finds that the evidence does not support the Commission. The consensus is that the relatively light regulation of the UK labour market is advantageous and that problems of social disadvantage and structural unemployment are better addressed by measures aimed at tackling poor skills and social inequality rather than changing labour law. The report therefore recommends that efforts at EU level should focus on the promotion and sharing of good practice, rather than the introduction of new legislation.
This report contains evidence from the Nature Conservation and Fisheries Minister, Ben Bradshaw following a number of scrutiny overrides resulting from the late deposit of items before Council meetings. The Committee want the Government to address shortcomings in the EU's fisheries policy decision-making process during the time of its presidency of the European Union.
This report finds that the funding of the EU is complex and lacks transparency and that there is a need for a simpler system that would reduce the administrative burden. It concludes that a Gross National Income based revenue source is the best way of providing the bulk of the budget's funding. Apart from other considerations, the Committee has seen no evidence that any other new form of taxation would provide the same level of clarity and certainty.
This report contains the Government responses to the Committee's recommendations and conclusions that were set out in (HLP 270-I, session 2006-07 - Financial management and fraud in the European Union, ISBN 9780104009598). The Government finds that it agrees with many of the Committee's conclusions and observations on the presence of fraud and corruption in the European Union, and that a lack of a Statement of Assurance (DAS) from the European Court of Auditors, is not an indication of widespread fraud and corruption in the EU itself. The Government welcomes a number of the Committee's recommendations, including that the European Court of Auditors should produce a list of those Member States demonstrating poor management of European funds
Negotiations are underway to agree the details of the European Union budget for the period of 2007 to 2013 (known as the Financial Perspective), covering the newly enlarged EU of 25 member states. Further enlargement is likely, with Bulgaria and Romania due to join in 2007 and the possible accession of Croatia and Turkey being considered. The Committee's report considers a range of issues in relation to the current budget debate, including the merits of the Commission's proposals within the framework of recent and future EU enlargement; the Common Agricultural Policy; Structural and Cohesion Funds; the Lisbon Agenda; other spending categories; the functioning of the 'Own Resources' and a EU tax; UK abatement and the Commission's proposal for a Generalised Corrective Mechanism. Conclusions reached include support for the UK Government's insistence that the UK rebate is non-negotiable, given the inadequate reforms of the CAP; however, if real reform of the budget was offered, then the UK Government should be prepared to negotiate. Structural funds should be focused on the 10 new member states, as well as the two applicant countries of Romania and Bulgaria, with the phasing out of EU regional development funds for all 'old' member states with the exception of Greece and Portugal.
Potential of sport is under-exploited at both EU and national level despite its ability to deliver on core policy objectives in the health, education, employment and social spheres. This report considers how the EU can maximise the potential of sport in its own policy making and delivery and how it can help Member States do likewise. It looks at how EU legislation should be applied to sport in order to ensure the sustainability of grassroots sport, particularly its revenue streams from the broadcasting of professional sport. The reports main recommendations include: there is value in a dedicated sport fund but there is greater potential value in main-streaming it into other EU funding streams, including the structural funds and through ensuring redistribution from professional sport. The EU should include sport in its work on digital piracy and should look further at whether the gambling industry should be required to pay a 'fair return' to sport; different Member States are more advanced in certain areas than others, for example Finland on levels of participation among older people, offering potential for the sharing of best practice. The Commission should create a web portal which allows grassroots organisations to make links with each other; the voice of grassroots as well as professional sport need to be heard in Brussels. Dialogue between the Commission and sports organisations needs to be made more representative
The report Workload Of The Court Of Justice Of The European Union: Follow-Up Report (HL 163) examines the progress towards adopting the recommendations set out in the paper The Workload Of The Court Of Justice Of The European Union. These recommendations were aimed at managing the heavy workload of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Since the original report was published, the CJEU has undertaken some reforms to try to reduce the backlog of cases of the Court of Justice (CJ). However, the number of cases pending before the CJ continues to rise year on year. It is imperative that the right balance is struck between the length of time it takes for the Court to dispense with a case, and the quality of its judgments in order to preserve its credibility. The Court and Member States need to keep the workload of the Court under review in order to react before the workload has an adverse effect on the efficiency of the Court. The C
This report and evidence contains responses from the Financial Secretary on the Stability and Growth Pact Developments and the European Central Bank before the European Union Committee. Among the Committee's recommendations are that: the Commission and the European Council should resolve the uncertainty surrounding the Stability and Growth Pact, and that the Government should take an active role in the proposals for reform of both the Pact and the European Central Bank.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.