Meeting Summary
This week the Committee considered the following
documents:
Financial services: benchmarks (Reasoned Opinion)
The Committee returned to a draft Regulation on indices
used as benchmarks in financial instrument and financial contracts,
having now had a response from the Government about its efforts
to secure a better impact assessment from the Commission and its
analysis of the subsidiarity concerns that the Government touched
on in its EM. We report that, while being a strong proponent
of benchmark reform and believing that there is scope for action
at EU level, the Government expresses a view that this proposal
is too broad in scope, imposes too great a burden and inappropriately
requires authorisation and supervision of benchmarks produced
by national statistics authorities by the European Securities
and Markets Authority. We agree that there are grounds for subsidiarity
concerns and so recommend that a Reasoned Opinion be debated in
European Committee B. We continue to hold the document under
scrutiny while awaiting the Minister's further response to substantive
points.
Aviation and the EU Emissions Trading System
In 2008, the EU sought to extend its Emissions Trading
System (ETS) to include aviation by requiring aircraft operators
to monitor and report each calendar year on their emissions, and
to surrender the corresponding number of carbon allowances and
project credits. With significant progress having been made in
the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) towards the
global regulation of aviation emissions, a Decision was adopted
in April 2013 to suspend, for one year, these obligations on flights
between the European Economic Area (EEA) and third countries,
in order to encourage further negotiations. The ICAO has now
agreed that global measures should come into force in 2020, and
the current proposal would further amend the EU ETS between 2014
and 2020 so as to re-impose monitoring and reporting obligations
on international flights departing or arriving at EEA airports,
but to confine these to that proportion of the flight which occurs
within EEA airspace. As the proposal is both technically complex
and has potentially tricky political implications, the Committee
has decided to recommend it for debate in European Committee A.
Safety of Nuclear Installations
We are recommending a debate in European Committee
A on a draft Council Directive dealing with the safety of nuclear
installations. This is formal proposal, which follows a draft
which the Committee considered in July of this year, the ostensible
aim of which was to increase regulatory effectiveness and transparency
and to improve safety in the wake of the Fukushima accident.
We report the Government's concerns over what appear to be the
unacceptable constraints this would place on Members States in
an area of considerable political and environmental importance,
and note that the Commission impact assessment fails to demonstrate
the alleged benefits of the proposed changes. We therefore feel
this would be an appropriate time for the House to consider the
issues raised.
EU support to governance in the DRC
The Court of Auditors' Report concludes that, while
EU support is set in a generally sound cooperation strategy and
addresses the main needs, and has achieved some results, progress
has been slow, uneven and limited. Continuing uncertainty about
the EU's capacity to undertake this sort of work in one of the
most fragile states in the world; continuing differences in view
between the Commission and the Court, and the Commission and the
Minister; and uncertainty as to the Government's view about the
value of applying "conditionality" in such work, give
rise to questions. We feel a debate in European Committee would
enable Members to address these issues with the Government.
European External Action Service
The Minister's positions on aspects of the EU High
Representative's review of the EEAS are clear. But it is far
from clear to what extent they are shared by other Member States.
The Conclusions that will be adopted by the 17 December General
Affairs Council will thus be crucial. So, in advance of that
Council, we recommend that the HR's review be debated on the floor
of the House, so the Minister can outline for the House what elements
he will be seeking to have included in, and excluded from, the
Conclusions to be adopted then.
| 
