Meeting Summary
This week the Committee considered the following
documents:
Climate and energy policy and fracking: for debate
in European Committee
We consider a series of documents this week relating
to climate and energy policy. We refer for debate in European
Committee a wide-ranging Commission Communication which aims to
set out the basis for an EU climate and energy policy between
2020 and 2030. We also recommend that a Commission Communication
and Recommendation on high volume hydraulic fracturing (fracking)
in the EU is debated with it. We report on and clear a Commission
Communication on Energy prices and costs in Europe, and request
further information on a Draft Decision on the Emissions Trading
System, which we keep under scrutiny.
EU industrial policy: for debate in European
Committee
This Commission Communication and Staff Working Documents
mark a further stage in the development of the EU's industrial
policy. The Communication sets out the key priorities as being:
mainstreaming to ensure EU reindustrialisation; stimulating investment
in innovation; a more business friendly framework; easier access
to critical production inputs; maximising the potential of the
internal market; internationalisation of EU firms; and improving
education and training and facilitating mobility. Initiatives
in each area are set out. The Government broadly welcomes the
Communication. We recommend it for debate in European Committee
as an important example of 'upstream' scrutiny.
EU Special Representatives
We report on the Council Decision to end the mandate
of the EU Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process.
The way that the decision has been made, along with uncertainty
about the future of other EUSR roles, causes us concern. There
have been press reports that there may be a wholesale integration
of EUSR posts into the European External Action Service, which
would mean that Member States would no longer be able to approve
their mandates. We ask the Minister to respond urgently to a
number of detailed questions about these wider issues. We also
report separately (and clear) the proposed one-year mandate extension
of the EU Special Representative (EUSR) for the Sahel.
The EU and the Central African Republic
This Council Decision and Council Regulation support
the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 2134 (2014),
reflecting changes made by the UN Security Council to the existing
arms embargo. We clear the Council Decision but do not clear
the Council Regulation as we do not yet know which individuals
are to be targeted for sanctions, and believe that this should
be subject to scrutiny.
Financial Services: bank accounts
This Draft Directive has been under scrutiny for
some time and was last considered in July 2013. The aim of the
Commission is to improve consumers' experience of bank accounts
in the EU and to enhance the integration of the EU bank account
market, through provisions to improve the comparability of fees
on bank accounts, the ease with which consumers switch accounts
and access to basic bank accounts. The Minister has now informed
the Committee that there is significant pressure from the European
Parliament to conclude negotiation of this proposal ahead of the
elections in May; and that Council negotiations have picked up
pace and were pushed to general agreement just before Christmas.
Because the proposal is still under scrutiny, the UK Government
abstained. The Minister also reports that the Government had
achieved five out of six of its negotiating objectives, and on
the sixth priority (relating to comparison websites) the impact
was limited. We do not clear the proposal from scrutiny, asking
the Government to report back on progress in trilogue.
Conditional access services
These two draft Council Decisions would authorise
the EU to sign and accede to a Council of Europe Convention on
the legal protection of conditional access services (such as pay-TV
or other on-demand services offered by broadcasting or internet
service providers in return for payment). The Decisions were
cleared from scrutiny in December 2011, but the Commission bought
an action in the Court of Justice to challenge their validity.
The Government now reports on the Court's judgement by means
of a Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum. In its judgement the
Court rules, among other things, that the UK's Title V opt-in
cannot be engaged as no Title V legal base is cited; a long standing
area of contention between the Committee and the Government.
We ask the Government to comment on the implications of this ruling.
| 
