13. We consider that the following raises questions of political importance,
but make no recommendation for its further consideration:--
H M Treasury
(17870)
5430/97
COM(96)717 |
Proposal for a Council Regulation replacing Council Regulation (EEC,
EURATOM, ECSC) No 165/74 determining the powers and obligations of officials authorised by the
European Commission pursuant to Articles 18(2) and 18(3) of Council Regulation 1552/89 on own
resources. |
| Legal base: |
Article 209; unanimity.
Article 78h ECSC; unanimity.
Article 183 Euratom; unanimity. |
Background
13.1 In his Explanatory Memorandum dated 14 March 1997, the Exchequer Secretary to
the Treasury (Mr Oppenheim) explains that, originally, inspections relating to own resources could
be organised only by Member States, though the Commission could then be associated with them.
Later, Council Regulation No 1552/89 empowered the Commission itself to carry out on-the-spot
inspections relating to own resources, but did not provide explicitly for the powers and obligations
of the officers carrying out these inspections.
Draft Council Regulation
13.2 The purpose of the proposed Regulation is to lay down such arrangements. The
Minister tells us that it deals in particular with:
"-- the arrangements required when organising and actually carrying out
on-the-spot inspections (the proposed new Regulation lays down that although the inspections carried
out by the Commission are themselves under the direction of its authorised agents, contacts with
the national departments and, if necessary, with taxable persons must be handled through officers
of the Member State in which the inspection is being carried out); and
-- the provisions applicable to Commission officials or its agents in carrying
out VAT and GNP-based own resources inspections; and
-- the use of agents, in place of or in addition to Commission officials, to
undertake inspections (the Commission proposes to use officials and other categories of staff, eg
temporary staff, to undertake associated and on-the-spot inspections). Furthermore, it also
proposes that seconded national experts may be present at such inspections. It also envisages that,
with the agreement of the Member State being inspected, it could request the assistance of officials
from other Member States to act as observers and call in outside agencies, essentially private
sector consulting firms, to provide technical assistance".
The Government's view
13.3 The Minister explains that the proposals do not extend the Commission's powers:
they merely extend its ability to act to ensure that Member States are operating own resources
legislation properly, and are applying the rules consistently. He welcomes this in principle, and
supports the Commission's proposed amendments -- subject to one concern. He points out that:
".... the Commission's powers to carry out on-the-spot inspections under Regulation
1552/89 are not subject to the same degree of limitation as the UK and other Member States managed
to achieve in negotiation of Council Regulation 2185/96 concerning 'on-the-spot checks and
inspections carried out by the Commission in order to protect the European Communities' financial
interests against fraud and other irregularities'[27]. In
negotiations on the current Commission proposal the UK proposes therefore to seek to secure
appropriate limitation on the exercise of the Commission's powers under Regulation 1552/89 to ensure
that unnecessary burdens are not placed on traders or national authorities (who will have to
accompany Commission officials carrying out inspections) and that investigations by national
authorities are not undermined by Commission action".
Conclusion
13.4 Although the subject matter appears technical, the document raises the same
issue that we considered when we looked at the detection of frauds and irregularities (which was debated in European Standing Committee B on 15 May 1996): the need to ensure that the rights and liberties of the individual are properly protected. We are glad to note that the Minister is taking
pains to ensure that this is the case. We now clear this document.
27.(16938) 4512/96; see HC 51-xv (1995-96), paragraph 1 (2 April 1996) and HC
51-xviii (1995-96), paragraph 1 (8 May 1996); debated in European Standing Committee B on 15 May
1996. Back
|
