“Brussels Bulletin”
We now come to the “Brussels Bulletin”, which has been compiled by Scotland Europa. I am happy to hear of any issues that members want to raise on that. We take on board the new process of getting answers to those questions.
I have a question that nobody here will be able to answer. The bulletin states:
“The Special Committee on Agriculture has formally confirmed the Council’s negotiating position on the four draft Common Agricultural Policy ... reform regulations.”
However, it also states:
“The European Commission has requested a further €11.2 billion for the EU Budget”
and that the MEPs say that they will not finalise the multi-annual financial framework until that has been worked out. How on earth can a budget be set for the CAP without a budget being set for the whole MAFF? It was meant to be done in 2014, but it is now going to be done in 2015. Farmers in Scotland are worried about that.
From my experience on the committee, I believe that the previous year’s budget would stand. If a budget for the following years cannot be agreed, whatever budget there is now will carry on. My question would be: why does the Commission want an additional €11.2 billion when there is extreme stress on the budget in the first place?
That is a good question.
I was interested in the item about banking sector reform and the proposals from Arlene McCarthy in a draft non-legally binding report on reforms to the EU banking sector. The bit that really interested me was the report’s advocacy of a
“mandatory separation of banks’ retail and investment activities.”
I wonder whether we can find out, through the new process and from whoever is going to advise us, the likelihood of that becoming EU law. I would welcome it as a step in the right direction, but I wonder about the political reality of its becoming a reality.
On the issue of the new process, is someone taking note of our questions so that we can get them to Scotland Europa?
Yes.
Incidentally, I think that the new word is not “gangsters”, but “banksters”.
I see the connotation in that, but it is probably best not to comment.
Is it possible to push a few questions in the hope that we can get some answers at a later stage?
We can ask the questions and the clerks can put them to Scotland Europa.
I do not expect answers today. The first issue is on the subject of broadband, which the committee has covered a few times. On page 12, we are told of
“the aim of cutting by 30% the cost of rolling out high speed internet.”
I do not know what to take from that. Does that mean a budget cut or is the intention to try to reduce the charges for providing high-speed internet across the European Union? I am not quite sure what that means, although it sounds encouraging. We know from a previous “Brussels Bulletin” that a substantial cut in one of the budgets was going to help to establish that kind of infrastructure throughout the European Union. That was worrying to some members of the committee. Any follow-up information on that would be welcome.
The Serbia and Kosovo situation that is mentioned on page 13 must be one of the most depressing stories to continue to read. The EU deadline for encouraging Serbia and Kosovo to reach some kind of accommodation and agreement about the way forward passed a couple of days ago. Kosovo has now been recognised by nearly 100 members of the United Nations, 22 of the 27 EU members and a high number of NATO members, but it still faces difficulty with its neighbour Serbia in trying to reach a resolution. It is easy and glib for me to suggest that they should get on with it, but I feel bitterly disappointed and worried about the future.
We know that Serbia’s accession process is ahead of Kosovo’s. Minds in the European Union must be wondering what to do about that and whether they should proceed with the process for Serbia in the absence of an agreement with Kosovo. That is unlikely to happen, given that the European Union policy chief, Catherine Ashton, has already said that the EU is unwilling to do that and import another frozen difficulty, in the way that we did with Cyprus, which is still a divided community. I do not think that there is any appetite in the European Union to do that while the dispute continues between Serbia and Kosovo. Scotland has a good and warm relationship with both countries and we have had visitors from each. My heart goes out to both countries. I hope that they can achieve a solution and that, ultimately, Kosovo can achieve the worldwide recognition that it deserves.
I want to make a comment rather than ask a question. In the light of the Conservative Party’s seeming hostility towards the European convention on human rights and of possible withdrawal from it, I am interested in the comment on page 11 of the “Brussels Bulletin” about the possibility of the EU joining the ECHR in its own right, which would require the unanimous approval of EU member states. I wonder what the UK Government’s position is likely to be on that issue.
I support what Willie Coffey said about broadband. I am absolutely at one with him on that. Up to the end of March, we had approximately £28 billion at our disposal across the EU for developing broadband. I would be interested to know from European Commission officials exactly how much of that was spent. Perhaps our people in Brussels could give us the answer.
I had the good fortune to visit Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, Croatia and Hungary during the Easter break. When I spoke to locals in Serbia they were, by and large, very keen to join the European Union. As Willie Coffey said, Serbia visited the Scottish Parliament and it, too, was very keen to join the EU. As long as the dispute between Kosovo and Serbia continues, it could be some time before there is any development on the issue. It would be good to hear whether any of our Brussels officials have intelligence about the position since 16 April. It is in the interests of all of us to find out what is happening in such countries.
That part of eastern Europe has the most amazing architecture and is well worth a visit. My favourite place is Budapest, although there are worrying political concerns with Hungary. I wonder whether colleagues round the table share those concerns—perhaps we could have a briefing on that situation in due course. Democracy in Hungary seems to be breaking down seriously.
Helen Eadie’s comments are important. We have seen democracy break down in Greece and Italy and in other countries where non-elected presidents and Governments have been in place in mature democracies. There is a serious shortfall of democracy across Europe just now. Historically, Serbia has not had a good rapport with its neighbours, so it is important that agreement is reached before Serbia can be considered to be part of the European Union. A country cannot bully its way to the table or into nationhood. That needs to be done with consensus and through peaceful means and it must be democratically approved.
I am disappointed that the two countries have not been able to come to an agreement. Although we in the Scottish Parliament do not have jurisdiction over how that happens, we can certainly share our concerns. Perhaps we should seek to make some sort of representation to the UK Government to encourage it to help to broker peace across Europe. The European Union is going to be a dangerous place to live in if we cannot achieve peace in this day and age. A huge number of human lives have been lost in the heart of Europe, and we cannot allow that to happen again. Given the importance of the issue, we need to encourage our Government to take some serious steps and support a peaceful resolution in that part of the world.
11:00
A breakdown in democracy is dangerous for us all.
I am interested in the recent European Court of Justice ruling on environmental impact assessments, as a result of which the threshold that member states put in place for deciding which projects are to be assessed must be based on the potential environmental impact rather than on quantitative size. I simply wonder what the Scottish Government will be doing in light of that ruling; I suppose that I could raise the issue in a written question, but it would be helpful if other information was forthcoming to amplify this little paragraph in the bulletin.
With reference to Portugal, page 2 of the bulletin states:
“A court ruling has deleted €1.3 billion of austerity measures”.
I am not sure whether the court ruling is internal to Portugal or whether the European Union has taken that interesting decision. I am in complete sympathy with Portugal, which is struggling with austerity, and I find it worrying that there will be further health, education and social security spending cuts in a country that is already suffering from crippling levels of youth unemployment.
I believe that internal Portuguese courts have declared some of the cuts to be unconstitutional. Perhaps someone should have thought of that before the cuts were proposed, but that is another story.
On the Serbia and Kosovo issue, the progress towards any reconciliation will inevitably be painful, but not half as painful as the alternatives, given where both countries have come from. I would welcome some kind of briefing about what has happened and is happening there. I know that we all have MEPs in the European Parliament and I am not quite sure who would be the most appropriate person to give or send us a briefing, but I would really appreciate such information before we make any submission or offer our help and support.
I support that suggestion, convener—it sounds like a good move. We should also look at anything that we can do to forge closer links; after all, although we might not be able to offer direct help, we might be able to influence things indirectly.
I certainly think that we should pick up the structural funds issue and the fact that we managed to negotiate a better settlement for Scotland than had been expected. Things were a bit scary for a while.
I note that the Commission has proposed new rules to make it easier for international students and researchers to live and work in the EU, but I believe that they will apply to everywhere in the EU apart from the UK. Given the pressures on our colleges, universities and businesses, we should raise the issue directly with Scotland Europa as well as with the UK Government. If the EU is proposing new rules to make the process easier while, in contrast, the UK Government is tightening the rules and making things much more difficult, it will have an impact on us all.
It might also be worth while to have a briefing on the European Commission’s most recent employment and social situation quarterly review to find out where that is going and its impact on other countries, specifically those in the EU. When, at the end of this meeting, we recommend the bulletin to other committees, we should also agree to make the Education and Culture Committee aware of not only the situation with international students and researchers but how we are dealing with horizon 2020 in Scotland.
Finally, before I let Helen Eadie in, I simply want to back up all the comments that have been made about Kosovo. As well as highlighting a human rights issue in that respect, I note that, as with the situation with international students and researchers, the EU is taking a step forward while the UK Government is taking a step back.
Venture capital and social entrepreneurship funds are mentioned on page 9 of the bulletin. I wonder whether we could have a wee bit more of a briefing on that matter, given that social enterprise is a big issue for all parties in the Scottish Parliament. The information in the bulletin is very technical and I wonder what the implications will be for our social enterprises in Scotland. I attend Council of Europe meetings, but I have not seen the issue on any of the agendas. It would be helpful if someone could provide us with more information on what this will actually mean for people.
Are members content to send the “Brussels Bulletin” to other committees and to highlight the points that have been raised?
Members indicated agreement.
I commend Scotland Europa and thank it for doing a great job in putting together a really detailed and well-drafted bulletin.
Jim Johnston will update the committee on where we will go next and how we will get answers to our questions. I think that the conversation that we have just had clearly demonstrates the committee’s need for a European officer who can answer some of our questions directly. At present, the Scottish Parliament information centre and the clerks are doing a lot of running about to find information and briefings for questions that we could have had answered immediately.
It might be helpful if I clarify the process. The clerks have taken a note of members’ questions, which will be forwarded to Scotland Europa in Brussels along with a copy of the Official Report. We will ask it to provide as many of the briefings that have been requested as it can. I hope that we will be able to get that information to you for the next meeting. If that is not possible, we will get it to you as soon as we can thereafter.
Are members content with that?
Members indicated agreement.
As agreed at the beginning of the meeting, we will now move into private for agenda item 6.
11:06
Meeting continued in private until 11:22.