European and External Relations Committee, 06 Jun 2006
Meeting date: Tuesday, June 6, 2006
Official Report
330KB pdf
Sift
We now jump to item 6, which is our regular sift of EC/EU documents and draft legislation. As usual, I turn to documents of special of importance, the first document of which might be referred to all the Parliament's subject committees. It relates to the establishment of a citizen's agenda, which is an attempt by the European Commission to take an institutional step forward following the votes on the constitution and the subsequent period of reflection.
The second document might be referred to our colleagues on the Education Committee and the Enterprise and Culture Committee. It relates to the modernisation agenda for universities, education, research and innovation. It is based on dialogue that the Commission initiated between member states and the academic and scientific communities. The document also acknowledges the central role that that plays in the Lisbon strategy.
The third document is relevant to this committee. It is a green paper on the European transparency initiative. Members who have been on the committee for a long time may recall that we examined the issue when we considered good governance in the EU agenda. On this occasion, we do not need formally to respond to all the areas that are covered in the green paper.
In the past, we have noted that consultation deadlines on some documents seem to be very tight. It would therefore be worth our while to write to the Commission to say that, although we are not responding to the green paper, the deadlines on some EU consultation papers are unreasonable and often prevent responses. The Commission may detect the irony of the statement, given the new dialogue that we are supposed to be having. Do members agree?
Members indicated agreement.
The fourth and final document of special importance can be referred to the Justice 1 and Justice 2 Committees. It is a green paper on the presumption of innocence. Again, I note that the deadline for responses is 9 June. The point is relevant to the action that we have agreed on the previous document.
Do members agree to refer the first, second and fourth documents of special importance to the committees that are suggested?
Members indicated agreement.
Are there any other comments?
We recently had in Parliament to defend decisions on sex offenders and the retention of data. That cuts across the subject of the last paper. I simply make that observation; I leave it to Parliament's justice committees to sort out the matter.
We can direct them to your comments.
My other comment relates to paper EU 9390/06. Once again, we have a declaration, but I would like to know what it is all about. All committee members should be furnished with a copy of the explanatory memorandum. I note that it is available on request from the clerks. The sift document states that the communication
"seeks to build on the steps taken in the period of reflection".
Elsewhere in the papers, we read about the response to plan D for democracy, dialogue and debate, but we find that, in fact, there is nothing to build on. There has been no period of reflection with anything worthwhile in it. Once again, we have a bit of European gobbledegook. We should have a look at the explanatory memorandum and see what that has to say.
Mr Gallie is tempting me to speak, convener.
I was trying to jump in before you, Irene, but I did not quite make it.
Given the late hour, and in deference to my colleagues who want to get on to the substance of the reports that we have to discuss today, I will resist the temptation on this occasion.
That is a pity.
Would you like a copy of the memorandum, Phil?
Yes. I would have thought that other members would want to read it, too.
Okay.