European Committee, 18 Jun 2002

Meeting date: Tuesday, June 18, 2002

Official Report 199KB pdf

---

Convener's Report

I have a few items to report on today under agenda item 6.

First, we have received a letter from Ross Finnie, the Minister for Environment and Rural Development, on the implementation of EC regulation 2037/2000, on substances that deplete the ozone layer. The minister's letter responds to a letter from the committee, which sought clarification on a number of issues. I think that the minister has answered most of the points that we raised. I would be happy to bring the matter to a close. Do other members agree?

Members indicated agreement.

Aileen McLeod of the Scottish Parliament information centre has produced two papers, one on Europe day and the other on the priorities of the Danish presidency of the EU. I recommend that we note the papers and thank Aileen for the work that she has put into them. The paper on the Danish presidency will be helpful to members for our meeting with the Danish ambassador on 26 June. I suggest that we send out the Europe day paper, as was previously discussed. Do members agree?

Members indicated agreement.

From the details that I have in front of me, I understand that our meeting with the Danish ambassador will be held in private. Will it still be minuted?

I suggest that we take advice from the clerk on that.

I had intended to discuss with the committee the plans for the Danish ambassador after today's meeting. The provisional programme comprises two elements, one of which is a public session with the ambassador. That will be open to the public, the media and other MSPs. The other part of the programme is a private discussion with the ambassador, which will precede the public session. Notes and minutes of what is discussed during the private chat will be taken.

Sorry—I was a little bit distracted just now: I have been passed a note saying that South Korea has beaten Italy in extra time with a golden goal.

Good old Korea!

I am sure that committee members and the public will be pleased to note that. I suppose that it is because this is the European Committee that we get notes like that.

And the Europeans got beaten by the Asians.

It just goes to show that we have no favourites.

The next paper before us fleshes out some of the detail of the planned pan-European network of European affairs committees. Members will recall our discussion of this matter on a number of occasions. It was the subject of our videoconference with members of the Catalan and Flemish Parliaments. The paper provides detailed suggestions of how we might progress the matter.

I ask the committee to note the paper and to task the clerks with making the necessary preparations for that network. As members will recall, we were hoping that members of the Catalan and Flemish European affairs committees would join us at a meeting in the autumn, which is intended to assist us in preparing for the setting up of that network. Do members agree to that?

Members indicated agreement.

The final point under the convener's report relates to a letter from Maureen Macmillan MSP on the subject of a proposed EC regulation on the welfare of animals while in transit at sea. Neil MacCormick MEP raised that subject when some of us met him at the opening of the European Parliament office in Edinburgh. We also have a copy of a briefing from Shetland Islands Council on the matter.

There is a series of options, from doing nothing to further analysis. I am drawn to the idea of asking the clerk and the legal adviser to work up a case study for us to draw on as we continue to engage on how the European Commission deals with such matters and to engage with the Scottish Executive. How do members feel about that? It would also be useful for us to hear from the Executive on where it stands on the matter.

I would be happy for anyone to take on the matter as a reporter. Otherwise, I suggest that we stick to options C and D for the moment. Is no one desperately keen to take it on?

What did the Rural Development Committee say? Has it considered the issue?

I am not certain that it has.

My understanding is that the Rural Development Committee has not addressed the issue yet. I do not know whether Maureen Macmillan, Professor Sir Neil MacCormick MEP or Shetland Islands Council have contacted that committee. My reading of the Rural Development Committee's agendas and my understanding of its indicative work programmes is that that committee has not yet picked up the matter. I could be corrected on that point.

There is a clear European dimension to the matter. I would be happy for the committee to deal with it in the way in which the paper suggests.

The local members in the Scottish Parliament and Westminster have been involved heavily in making representations at European level. The local branch of the National Farmers Union of Scotland and Shetlands Islands Council have also been involved. They have made the case forcibly at European level and have had indications that what they have to say is being listened to.

Those organisations have produced evidence from the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals about its inspection of animals in transit. In some written material that I have seen—I do not think that it is in the papers—an RSPCA inspector talked about how cattle that were being shipped in a force 9 gale were lying down sleeping and were obviously quite calm and happy. Those who ferry livestock to and from the northern isles are well used to coping with the weather conditions that they encounter and taking cognisance of animal welfare.

Has the directive been adopted or is it a draft?

It is still a draft directive. We therefore still have time to influence it. I am attracted to a case study. That would allow us to work out the logistics. We could learn from it as well as taking on board a member's concern.

Can we get a timetable of when the directive is due to come into force?

We will ask the clerk to look into that.

I support the convener's view. We all know that Maureen Macmillan always raises cases on which she has already done a lot of background work. She would not go to the extent of bringing the matter to our attention unless she wanted us to favour the route that the convener proposes. I agree that we should have a case study.

In that case, we will agree to the case study and thank Shetland Islands Council and Maureen Macmillan for drawing the matter to our attention. Are we agreed?

Members indicated agreement.