Select Committee on European Legislation Sixteenth Report


PARENTAL LEAVE

12. We have given further consideration to the following, which we are informed has been adopted by the Council, on the basis of further information from the Government. We maintain our opinion[33] that it raises questions of political importance, but now make no recommendation for its further consideration:-

DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY

(17095) 4824/96 COM(96)26	Draft Directive on the framework agreement on parental leave concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC.
Legal base:	Article 4(2) of the Agreement on Social Policy annexed to Protocol (No 14) on Social Policy; qualified majority voting.

Introduction

12.1  This Directive was agreed on 29 March 1996, and published in the Official Journal on 19 June 1996[34]. However, it was not then forwarded to us by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Corporate and Consumer Affairs at the Department of Trade and Industry (Mr John Taylor) until 30 January this year.

12.2  When we considered the final text on 5 February[35], we recalled that we had asked for it as long ago as May 1996[36]. We deplored the length of time it had taken the Minister to provide it, and asked for an explanation of the delay. We also asked him to comment on the changes made to the original draft Directive, which he had simply noted in his covering letter.

Further information from the Government

12.3  In a letter (dated 18 February) which is printed below, the Minister explains the delay and makes a general comment on the Government's continuing fundamental opposition to legislation on parental leave. He also repeats the statement in his letter of 30 January that the text of the Directive was sent to us

"without prejudice to any future arrangements for the handling of proposals brought forward under the Agreement on Social Policy which may be agreed between the Government and the House Authorities."

Conclusion

12.4  We find the Minister's response a little surprising. The Directive does not apply in the United Kingdom, but as we have pointed out several times, most recently in our 5 February Report,[37] British companies operating in other Member States are affected by it. It is a little strange that the sponsoring Department for British industry is unaware of the final form of legislation of this sort (on 18 February the Minister says "it only recently came to the attention of officials that the Directive had already been published").

12.5  In successive Reports[38] we have made it clear that

  --   decisions on the scope of the definition of "European Community documents" in Standing Order No. 127 are matters for us;[39]

  --   our decision on measures under the Agreement on Social Policy is that they fall within that definition;

  --   they must therefore be treated in exactly the same way for the purposes of Scrutiny as any other European Community document.

12.6  We made these points yet again in our Report of 5 February, and we are somewhat surprised that the Minister's letter appears to have been written without reference to that Report. We repeat them once again for the sake of clarity. However, we see little point in pursuing the issue further on this occasion. We are now clearing the document.

  Letter from the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for
  Corporate and Consumer Affairs to the Chairman of the Committee

Thank you for the letter of 5 February written on your behalf by Sir Robert Hicks.

I apologise for the delay in sending the Committee the adopted text of the Directive. As the Committee is aware, the Parental Leave Directive was adopted under the Agreement on Social Policy and does not therefore apply to the UK. Since the UK was not involved in the adoption procedure for this Directive there was no provision for us to be notified of publication in the OJ of the formal text and unfortunately due to an oversight in this instance, it only recently came to the attention of officials that the Directive had already been published.

The Government's fundamental opposition to legislation on parental leave is unchanged. We welcome voluntary arrangements which help employees reconcile their working and family life, but firmly believe that they should be negotiated as part of the overall package of terms and conditions. Imposing costly burdens on employers, without regard to their ability to pay or cope with the resulting absences, would harm their competitiveness and cost jobs. Thanks to the UK 'opt-out' from the Agreement on Social Policy, UK employers remain free to make their own arrangements according to their needs and those of their employees.

As stated in my letter of 30 January, the text of the Parental Leave Directive was sent to the Committee without prejudice to any future arrangements for the handling of proposals brought forward under the Agreement on Social Policy which may be agreed between the Government and the House Authorities.

18 February 1997

---

33  (17095) 4824/96; see HC 36-xii (1996-97), paragraph 4 (5 February 1997). Back

34  No. L 145, pp 4-9. The Directive is the subject of a challenge in the Court of First Instance. See Case T-135/96, European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises v The Council. Back

35  (17095) 4824/96; see HC 36-xii (1996-97), paragraph 4 (5 February 1997). Back

36  (17095) 4824/96; see HC 51-xix (1995-96), paragraph 9 (15 May 1996). Back

37   HC 36-xii, paragraph 4.3. Back

38   See, for example, HC 48-xx (1993-94), paragraph 1 (25 May 1994), HC 51-xix (1995-96), paragraph 9.7 (15 May 1996), HC 36-xii (1996-97), paragraph 4.4 (5 February 1997), and the examination of the point in the context of our Orders of Reference in The Scrutiny of European Business, HC 51-xxvii (1995-96), paragraphs 114 to 119 (18 July 1996).  Back

39   See Erskine May's Parliamentary Practice, 21st edition, p.635.  Back

---

Prepared 18 March 1997