16 The status of Euratom at the International
Atomic Energy Agency
| (27379)
7609/06
+ ADD1
COM(06) 121
| Commission Communication on enhancing the status of the European Atomic Energy Community at the International Atomic Energy Agency
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 16 March 2006
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 23 March 2006
|
| Department | Trade and Industry
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 11 April 2006
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
16.1 Membership of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
is at present restricted to states, and hence the European Atomic
Energy Community (Euratom) is simply an observer. According to
the Commission, this limits Euratom's influence and visibility
within the IAEA in a way which is not commensurate with the Community's
competence in the Agency's field of activities,[40]
and its legitimate right to exercise them on the international
scene, which it says has been recognised repeatedly by the European
Court of Justice. Consequently, without determining at this stage
exactly what this might entail, it has concluded that the status
of Euratom at the IAEA should be enhanced, and it has sought in
this Communication to examine the various possibilities, including
Euratom membership of the Agency.
The current document
16.2 In its Communication, the Commission points out that Euratom
was established in 1957, with Member States transferring to it
sovereign rights principally in the areas of research, health
and safety, the supply of raw materials, nuclear safeguards, and
external relations, resulting in the development and implementation
of an important body of laws. It adds that the Community has clear
external competences in these areas, requiring it to establish
relations with third countries and international organisations,
and that IAEA activities largely concern areas in which the Community
has competence. However, it notes that there is an obvious disparity
between those competences and the status which the Community is
accorded in the IAEA, which impedes their exercise, and it suggests
that enhancing that status would benefit Euratom Member States
since their voice, harmonised at Community level, would have even
greater influence within the Agency. Also, third countries would
be able to negotiate with a single body.
16.3 The Commission recognises that changing the
status of Euratom at the IAEA could be complex process, which
would not only affect Member States, but also require an amendment
of the IAEA statute, entailing lengthy procedural and substantive
discussions, which would be complicated by having to be viewed
in the wider context of the European Communities status in various
other such bodies. However, it suggests that upgrading Community
status in various organisations has been a long-standing Commission
objective, which has been successful in certain other areas, such
as the Food and Agricultural Organisation, and that its aim regarding
the IAEA is only to seek enhanced status in those areas where
the Community has competence.
16.4 Against this background, it is proposing a two-step
approach, involving in the first instance discussions with EU
Member States within the Council as well as with the IAEA and
its members, which would be followed by the submission to the
Council of a proposal for negotiating directives aimed at negotiating
an enhanced status for Euratom at the IAEA, and requesting an
appropriate amendment of the IAEA statute.
The Government's view
16.5 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 11 April 2006,
the Minister of State for Energy at the Department of Trade and
Industry (Malcolm Wicks) says that at first sight it is difficult
to understand what might be gained by an enhancement of Euratom's
status, but that the benefits would depend very much on the directions
of any future negotiations between the Commission and the IAEA.
16.6 He adds that the proposal nevertheless raises
a number of difficulties which have been raised informally with
the Commission following discussion at the Atomic Questions Group
on 3 April. These include:
- how the role of Euratom would
reflect the fact that the IAEA has competences which go beyond
those of Euratom;
- how Euratom can expect to have a greater say
in the running of the IAEA as a member when they are also responsible
for safeguards within the Community;
- how Euratom would represent the interests of
all Member States, particularly in view of the added complication
of two Nuclear Weapons States being members of the Community;
- the likelihood that, if Euratom had the same
status as its Member States at the IAEA, other members of the
Agency could well argue that it should have a seat on the Board,
rather than individual Member States;
- the likelihood that, as a member of the IAEA,
Euratom would need to make a financial contribution, which could
result in the Member States paying twice;
- the likelihood that Euratom membership would
prompt similar requests from other regional organisations; and
- the extent to which a precedent would be set
for other UN-affiliated bodies.
16.7 The Minister adds that the Commission recognises
these difficulties; that there may be significant opposition from
the Member States; and that, even if it proved possible to overcome
this, the IAEA may have other ideas. A further consideration is
that individual members of IAEA, such as the USA and Japan, may
not view the proposal positively, and might be concerned that
a greater role for the Community would reduce the voice of individual
Member States, and so potentially reduce the chances in future
of seeing through political resolutions, for example on Iran.
Conclusion
16.8 Although we think it right to draw this document
to the attention of the House, any substantive action to enhance
the status of Euratom within the IAEA would require a legislative
proposal, and, for that reason, we see no need to withhold clearance.
However, we would be grateful if the Government could keep us
informed of the reactions of other Member States to the ideas
put forward by the Commission.
40 The promotion of the safe, secure and peaceful use
of nuclear technologies. Back
|
