European and External Relations Committee, 26 Jan 2010

Meeting date: Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Official Report 167KB pdf

---

“Brussels Bulletin”

We come to item 4. We have Ian Duncan with us today. Thank you for your comprehensive bulletin. Do you want to make any opening remarks on it?

I have just a couple of remarks to make. As you will be aware, the loss of the Bulgarian commissioner-designate has pushed back the timetable, which will have implications for the publication of the Commission's work programme. The earliest that we can now expect it is towards the end of February, and it might be pushed into March, depending on what happens in the next few weeks.

The other thing that is worth noting is that the troika of presidencies—Spain, Belgium and Hungary—have published their joint work programme, which is a little unusual, because it has been published in advance of the Commission's legislative work programme. As you can imagine, much of what will be in the Commission's programme has already been made more public by the remarks of the troika.

As you would expect, the key things are economic recovery and the successor to the Lisbon treaty. Those are the common themes that run throughout. Other common themes include climate change, energy and energy security and the issues that relate to those. Each of the countries wants to explore specific areas—I will touch on that if members want more information—but the important thing is that the detail of how things will be taken forward will not emerge until the legislative work programme emerges, which could be a few weeks away yet.

Thank you for that. I noticed that on page 6 of the bulletin, you give us an update on the European Institute of Innovation and Technology, which the committee has followed for quite some time. It looks as though we were not able to become involved in any of the knowledge and information centres. Is that right?

Yes—you are right. As you might be aware, a bid went in with the University of Edinburgh as one of the lead partners, but it was unsuccessful, although it was considered to have lots of merit. There will be others to come in the future, so there might be another opportunity for Edinburgh to revise, collectively with its partners, its proposal. There will be a stocktake to ensure that things are working. There is a slight tension within the EU. As members might be aware, the institute is not as yet fully fleshed out and it is not exactly clear how it will deliver. There is some concern that there might be tension between it and the European research area through overlap or duplication or consumption of the same funds. There is still some consideration around that.

I guess that we will keep a watching brief on that.

I am glad that you raised that, because I wanted to ask about it. We have now missed out twice: we missed out on the carbon capture at Longannet and now we are missing out in the technology institute. Other places—London, Zurich, Berlin and Paris—have not missed out. On page 6, the bulletin refers to energy efficiency and renewables. Has any bid gone in from Scotland on that? I know that you said that we might not know for a couple of weeks.

A bid has not gone in yet. The process is just opening up, so I imagine that there will be scope for Scottish partners and players to explore that possibility. It is early days.

Would there be a bid for a loan? Would it be up to local authorities to identify a project with which they would seek assistance? I guess that we are in the hands of local authorities in terms of using that fund to promote projects.

We should highlight the fact that there will be another opportunity. I would hate to think that it will be third time unlucky.

You might hope that local authorities become aware of the fund and are able to draw down some money from it. They should be aware of it—the funding is certainly available.

There are no further points to raise. Do we agree to note the contents of the bulletin?

Thanks very much, Ian. We appreciate the helpful and comprehensive update on the commissioner hearings—it must have been very interesting keeping a close eye on that.

"Interesting" is certainly one word to describe it.

We applaud your commitment.

The bulletin is a huge big report—it is a great report. There were actually quite a lot of things that I wanted to raise about it. May I write to Ian Duncan on certain issues?

If you wish to raise an issue with me, do so by all means, through whatever medium you wish to use.

It is a huge report, and I know we have a lot of stuff going forward.

It is a page-turner.

I will raise the matters with the committee first, and we can perhaps write to Ian Duncan on particular points.

If you could keep the clerks and me informed, that would be helpful.

I will do that.