European and External Relations Committee, 28 Sep 2004

Meeting date: Tuesday, September 28, 2004

Official Report 248KB pdf

---

Pre and Post-council Scrutiny

Agenda item 8 is the paper on pre and post-council scrutiny, which was circulated last week. We have two additional documents. One relates to the employment, social policy, health and consumer affairs council on 4 October and the other concerns the agriculture and fisheries council on 18 and 19 October. Do members have any comments?

I have not had time to read in detail the paper on the employment, social policy, health and consumer affairs council, but I note that item 1 is a proposal for a directive of the Parliament and the Council to amend the directive on the organisation of working time. Am I correct in thinking that that could have a significant impact on junior doctors in this country? I note that the Department of Trade and Industry is leading and that the Executive is fully engaged in the issue, but if the proposal is likely to affect the situation in our hospitals, we should at least refer it to the Health Committee or examine it more closely.

I support that. We have covered before—perhaps elsewhere in the Parliament—the two recent European Court of Justice judgments concerning SIMAP and Jaeger, which will have consequences for junior hospital doctors' working hours. More consultant overtime will be necessary, which will probably have large cost implications. It is important to consider the subject further and we should certainly draw it to the Health Committee's attention.

On junior hospital doctors' hours, the horse has already bolted to a degree. However, it is worth re-examining the matter.

A proposal in the transport paper also gives me considerable concern. It will have a major impact on our transport industry, because we are on the periphery of Europe and we have drivers going all over Europe from the UK. The implications for our transport industry could be costly.

I query the point in the paper on the agriculture and fisheries council about significant cuts in deep-sea total allowable catches. I would like to know what species we are talking about and which fishing fleets are affected. It seems to me that the issue could be pretty significant.

On Phil Gallie's last point about deep-sea total allowable catches, I presume that the issue relates to north-east Atlantic fisheries.

This will be the start of the build-up to the annual fishery talks in December, I presume.

No. If it is deep water off the west coast, we might be talking about an area outside European waters. Although it is possible to enforce TACs on European Union fishing vessels, including our own, the big problem in deep-sea waters is non-EU fishing fleets from Russia, Poland and other countries, where it might not be possible to enforce the TACs. That is important, because deep-sea species can be fished out rapidly and have a slow recovery time. We are seeking to control the fisheries effort by our own fishermen and by other EU fishermen, but the big question concerns what is being done about other fishermen. If we do not address that question, those deep-water species will be fished out very quickly.

Thank you, John. That was really what concerned me, but I am more concerned about what specifically is being referred to. The information that we have is not clear, and it has to be specific.

We can certainly take up the two points that have been raised. I will ask the clerks to investigate the detail of the issue relating to the agriculture and fisheries council, so that we can see more information on that and find out whether it is part of the annual round of discussions about fisheries management that have historically caused so much distress.

On the working time directive, we will ask the Executive for further information on the issues that are to be raised and we will ask it for information on the outcome of the discussions into the bargain.

The paper that was issued contains a table of recommendations relating to the documents. I ask members to agree to take the steps that have been requested. Is that agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

I would like to ask about the transport paper. I do not fully understand it and it frightens me. Would it be possible to pass that to the Local Government and Transport Committee?

We can certainly do so, if that is the desire of the committee. Are there specific points that concern you? Is it the heavy goods vehicle section that you are worried about?

It concerns road tolling and a whole range of aspects. That is why I wanted to ask about it.

That is the first part, is it not?

Yes.

Okay. We shall pass that to the Local Government and Transport Committee and ask whether there are issues of concern that it wants to consider in further detail.