Official Report 217KB pdf
The next agenda item concerns two European documents: 972, on protection against fraudulent or unfair anti-competitive conduct in relation to the award of public contracts; and 1190, on the standing of victims in criminal procedure.
We could write to the Germans, suggesting that they change their law to match Scots law. The matters that are dealt with under the documents are for the United Kingdom and Scottish Parliaments. Document 1190 certainly covers a reserved matter. I therefore cannot see the point of our being asked to consider it.
The relevance is that while, under current arrangements, the UK Government has a vote on this matter in the Council of Ministers, the result of the initiatives might require changes in our domestic criminal law—which is a matter for this committee.
I should have thought that it was up to the Scottish Parliament to determine whether any changes were required in this area. We should not have to consider the matter at the instigation of external bodies.
Whether we like it or not, Phil, the UK is a member of the European Union. Decisions will be made in Europe that could have an impact on the Scottish legal system.
I would hate to think that we have already gone so far down the line that that would be the case on an issue such as this.
I am not too sure of the point that you are making, Phil.
The point that I am making is that this is a matter of Scottish law. I am not aware that we are obliged to comply with European law to the extent that this paper suggests. If we wish to determine the way we treat our victims of crime, that is our wish. I am not aware that there is any European influence in this area.
Let us deal with document 972 first. Are there any comments on that document, which concerns the award of contracts?
I do not understand what is meant by
An initiative is a way of putting a proposal for new community legislation before the Council of Ministers and the Parliament. If we think that that initiative would be detrimental to Scotland in some way, we have a duty to make representations either to the European Committee or to ministers, so that they can put forward those views in any negotiations that take place in Brussels.
Although it may seem a minor matter on the face of it, I think it might be quite a major matter. I feel that it goes somewhat beyond the scope of what we might want to get into in terms of making the law on competition uniform across Europe. I would not want to go that far, but I certainly think that we need to take evidence to find out how our laws compare with those of other countries.
I was looking at the information about the European documents that have been put before the European Committee. Some parts of those documents have a direct effect on our criminal justice system. I must admit that I have not looked at the documents themselves, but the committee paper refers to:
We have two of those documents in front of us at the moment and there are another six or seven on the supplementary list. I would hate to have to examine all of them in detail or to take evidence on each one. It has been suggested that the implications for Scots law of document 972 are pretty much non-existent.
Given the concerns that Pauline McNeill has raised, I wonder whether, rather than simply accepting the documents, we could ask the Executive to write to us outlining its position. After that, we could decide whether we need to take further evidence.
We already have the Executive's view. The Scottish covering note, document SP972E, is attached to the European document. Each of these European documents has an attached document from the Scottish Executive called the Scottish covering note and a memorandum from the Home Office.
Yes.
Some members are obviously reading the detail of the documents for the first time. Would it be sensible to carry over these two documents to the next meeting?
The concern about the German proposal is that rather than say to member states where the criminal law is perhaps inadequate, "Bring yours up to standard," the Germans are saying that we should have a European standard. I am not sure that that approach is sensible as member states must continue to have control over their own criminal law.
That is a general principle. You are not referring to a specific document. All of these documents potentially have that effect.
Yes.
This has serious ramifications. It depends on your view of the European Community. I support the European Community, but I do not support making criminal law uniform across Europe. The competition rules in the European Union should be sufficient to enable prosecutions to take place, as they regularly do, in member states that do not abide by competition rules. We must take a political view on this issue.
I am aware that this discussion is about document 972 on competition in relation to contracts, but looking at the brief descriptions of the other European documents, which are listed in the European documents section of the papers that have been circulated for information, it seems that we are touching on an issue that the committee must take time to consider.
I suggest that we postpone further consideration of the two documents that we have in front of us today until the next meeting. I will ask for a briefing note on the ones that are listed under papers that have been circulated for information. I will also have a word with Jim Wallace, or his officials, about the general approach on those documents. We will discuss this further at our next meeting.