European Committee, 04 Mar 2003

Meeting date: Tuesday, March 4, 2003

Official Report 203KB pdf

---

Convener's Report

With the committee's agreement, I would like to move to item 5 on the agenda. I have to go to the Rural Development Committee shortly, at which point John Home Robertson will take over in the chair. Item 5 is the convener's report and there is an oral update. I thought that it would be helpful if we could take that just now. Is that acceptable?

Members indicated agreement.

The first thing that I want to report on is the fact that we were contacted by the Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Denis MacShane. I had a lunch meeting with him a couple of weeks ago and was pleased to be able to update him on what the committee has been doing over the past few years. We had a useful and constructive meeting and he was incredibly interested in the committee's work. He is keen to speak to the committee and he informed me that he is coming to Scotland in early May. I said that that was probably not a good time to meet us and asked whether he would be willing to return at a later date. He said that he would and I told him that I would convey that message to committee members.

Dr MacShane had been briefed on the reports and work that we were doing and he is pleased with the liaison that is developing. The future of Europe convention is not in fact part of his remit. Peter Hain has continued with the remit, even though he is now Secretary of State for Wales. The reason for that was that the UK Government felt that it would provide the necessary continuity in the praesidium. On the future of Europe, we will continue to work with Peter Hain; on other matters, we will liaise with Denis MacShane. As I said, Dr MacShane hopes to visit the committee early in the new session.

That brings me to the next item, which concerns the meeting that a number of us had with Peter Hain in his capacity as the UK's representative on the convention. I know that, due to parliamentary business, the very short notice that was given and the fact that there was a three-line whip that day, not everyone could attend. However, those of us who did welcomed the opportunity to have such a constructive exchange of views, even though the meeting was very short. Ben Wallace and Colin Campbell may want to comment.

It is fair to say that we had a constructive meeting. In particular, we made the point about where powers should lie over fisheries. Ross Finnie had already made that point, so it is clearly something that Peter Hain will take away from both the Executive and the Parliament.

I was grateful that the minister came and was willing to discuss the future of Europe convention with us. Some of the issues that were raised were a surprise to me, including the point about, "It was as if I was not at the same convention as the people who drafted the paper." However, the draft text is there and I think that we should support Peter Hain's office because, as he said, the issue is now urgent. Having plodded along since last June, matters are now all going to come in a oner.

I know that I will not be here—perhaps none of us will—in the next session, but perhaps the post-election committee should consider making a response to the convention articles. That would not be difficult, as the document is not long. The committee should submit its response to the Executive and the UK Government as quickly as possible. That will be important. I understand that the Government is trying to rush the report to the IGC in June, so I think that the report will have to be completed by May.

The IGC meeting is not until next year, so there is still time. However, Ben Wallace is right to say that the convention is trying to conclude as much of its work as it can this year, so it will be important for our successor committee to continue to liaise and work with the Executive to ensure that what we have said measures up with the convention articles that are produced. That would be a useful tracking exercise and it would enable the Parliament to influence matters until the last moment.

The next item that I want to mention is a letter from the Deputy First Minister inviting us to comment on proposals for a Scottish human rights commission. I suggest that members respond individually, because I do not think that there is enough time left in the session for us to respond as a committee. I hope that members will write back with comments to the Deputy First Minister.

I attended the first consultation conference on the issue. I think that all committee members would support the proposal for a human rights commission in Scotland based on the Paris principles. Surely the European Committee can express its agreement to something that is based on the Paris principles, if that is what Jim Wallace is proposing. I do not understand why we cannot simply say that we agree with the proposal to have a human rights commission in Scotland.

The matter is not an agenda item and members might not all be familiar with the details. I think that we will just have to agree to respond as individuals.

I draw to members' attention a note from the clerks that says that we can have a meeting in Cannonball House on 18 March. However, the meeting would have to be in private, because the official report and broadcasting would not be able to be present. We will probably still need to have a meeting on 25 March to conclude any outstanding public business. I am in the committee's hands on the matter. Do we want to leave the next meeting until 25 March?

I am happy with that, in relation to the report.

I hope that we can agree the report at that meeting and still get it published.

Are we agreeing to have a private meeting to deal with the report?

No. We are agreeing that our next meeting will be in public on 25 March, when we will discuss the employment report.

Okay.

We would have to have a meeting on 25 March anyway.

I support the convener's suggestion. I have just come from the Audit Committee and it seems that three committees are meeting at the same time today. We are getting to the point where we must focus our energies. The clash of three meetings makes it impossible for members to crack on with things.

On that note, I am afraid that I must leave to attend the Rural Development Committee. John Home Robertson will now convene the meeting.