Meeting Summary
The Committee considered the following documents:
Restrictive measures against Iran: nuclear issues
We consider a Council Decision, agreed on 12 February,
which relists, as subject to restrictive measures, one individual
(Gholam Hossein Golparvar) and an entity (National Iranian Tanker
Company). The original listings were annulled by the General Court,
and solicitors acting for both have expressed objections to the
relisting of their clients directly to us. When we last considered
this (then draft) Decision we declined to substitute ourselves
for a Court in considering the detailed evidence in support of
the relistings, but we did ask the Minister why he could not provide
us with open source information used to justify them. We also
sought assurances that the relistings were robust and that they
could withstand legal challenge. We have received a response from
the Minister, which we report this week. The Minister says that
the relistings are "proportionate, adequately supported by
open-source evidence, and consistent with Government policy towards
Iran". This falls short of the confirmation he was invited
to give. We also strongly doubt that the Council or Government
will be able to enforce the confidentiality of open source material
or sustain it if challenged.
In supporting the adoption of the relistings at Council,
the Minister overrode scrutiny. We do not accept that the override
was unavoidable or justifiable. In fact we consider that scrutiny
of this matter has been characterised by mistakes and omissions,
and we ask for the handling of this matter to be reviewed. The
outcome of this review, and particularly steps taken to improve
engagement with Parliament, should be reported to our successor
Committee. In the meantime, we retain the Decision under scrutiny.
Broad guidelines for economic policies
EU "integrated guidelines", for economic
and employment policies, underpin the Europe 2020 Strategy and
are relevant to the annual European Semester. The Commission has
proposed four broad guidelines for economic policies, as part
of new "integrated guidelines", for consideration by
the June European Council. The Government tells us that it is
broadly supportive of the Commission's proposed text, but is critical
of some of the detail, concerning third country labour migration
and taxation. The broad guidelines for economic policies are important
in the context of both the Europe 2020 Strategy and the European
Semester. We therefore recommend that they are debated in European
Committee B and we urge the Government to ensure that the debate
takes place before the June European Council.
National Emissions Ceilings
We return to the draft Directive on the reduction
of national emissions of certain atmospheric pollutants. We retained
this draft Directive under scrutiny in January 2014 pending further
information, as the Commission had not provided an assessment
of the impact of the proposal, and the Government said it would
be undertaking its own analysis. During the course of 2014, we
received updates from the Government on the predictions of the
costs and benefits of the draft Directive. The Government then
wrote on 14 January 2015 to say that the proposal would be modified
as part of the legislative follow-up to the 2030 Climate and Energy
Agreement. The Government now writes to say that the Commission
has suggested some changes to the ceilings previously proposed
for 2030, and has also given an updated impact analysis for both
the EU as a whole and for the UK (although, in the latter case,
UK officials are continuing their own analysis). The Government
says that the European Parliament is progressing with its consideration,
and that its lead committee is expected to vote on a draft report
before the summer. In view of this, the Minister asks whether,
given the limited time before the dissolution of Parliament, we
would be prepared to release the document from scrutiny. There
are still a number of uncertainties, and we are yet to see the
UK's own analysis of the proposal. Given the general importance
of the proposal, it does not seem right to clear the document
at this stage. However we do not wish to unduly fetter the Government's
negotiating freedom in the period before our successor Committee
is appointed. We therefore grant a scrutiny waiver allowing the
Government to support a General Approach in the Council, but we
expect the Government to provide further updates as the negotiations
progress.
|
