Meeting Summary
The Committee considered the following documents:
UK Government's renegotiation of EU Membership
At our evidence session on 10 February, the Foreign
Secretary suggested that the Committee should share its own legal
advice. The Committee has received further advice from legal experts
which it publishes today together with the note it has received
from its own Legal Adviser on the actual outcome of the renegotiation.
In the interests of transparency it does so without any gloss
or spin.
Proposed Directive on procedural safeguards for
child suspects and defendants
This proposed Directive aims to establish common
minimum standards on the treatment of child suspects and defendants,
defined as under 18, in criminal and European Arrest Warrant (EAW)
proceedings. It comprises one of three draft Directives in the
2013 Procedural Rights Package: the other two Directives being
on the presumption of innocence (which we also report on this
week) and the draft Directive on provisional legal aid. The UK
Government has not opted into any of those proposals and now reports
that although this particular proposal has been agreed, subject
to final adoption at a future Council meeting, it will not be
considering a post adoption opt-in as problematic issues remain
in the text (in particular, but not limited to its application
to the under 18s). We ask that the Government update us when the
text is finally adopted.
Cleared. Drawn to the attention of the Justice
Committee.
Proposed Directive on the presumption of innocence
and EU law
This proposed Directive would establish minimum rules
on the presumption of innocence for those suspected or accused
of criminal offences and the right of those accused to be present
at their trial. The UK did not participate in negotiation of the
Directive and we previously issued a reasoned opinion complaining
that it breached the principle of subsidiarity. A text has now
been informally agreed by the European Parliament and the Council
and is waiting formal adoption.
The Minister (Mr Dominic Raab) has indicated that
the Government will not opt into this Directive once it has been
adopted. In doing so he outlines the various aspects where the
Directive would, if it applied to the UK, require a change in
the law — including inferences that can be drawn from an
accused silence in the UK, instances where the burden of proof
does not fall on the prosecutor in the UK and the requirement
for the accused to be present even in minor summary cases.
It is drawn to the attention of the Justice Committee
because of its inherent importance and to inform that Committee
of the reasons why the Government have decided that this Directive
should not apply to the UK.
Cleared. Drawn to the attention of the Justice
Committee.
Exchanging information on criminal convictions
Since April 2012, Member States have been able to
use the European Criminal Records Information System (ECRIS) to
exchange information on the previous convictions of EU nationals
so that they can be taken into account in criminal proceedings
throughout the EU. ECRIS operates on the principle that a single
Member State — the offender's Member State of nationality
— is the repository for all criminal record information
relating to any of its nationals convicted in another Member State.
A complete record of previous convictions can provide important
background information on criminal suspects, their suitability
for bail, and the appropriate sentence if convicted. ECRIS can
also be used to run criminal record checks against individuals
where required under national law, for example to screen individuals
seeking a firearms licence or applying for a job involving vulnerable
groups, such as children.
One of the weaknesses of ECRIS is that there is no
single repository for criminal record information concerning third
country nationals involved in criminal proceedings in the EU.
The Commission proposes to address this weakness by requiring
each Member State to establish a national index filter containing
anonymised information on third country national offenders (including
fingerprints) which would be shared with all other Member States.
These index filters could be searched to identify Member States
holding criminal record information on a particular third country
national — there would be no exchange of personal data at
this stage. Following a "hit" or match, ECRIS would
be used to request further details. The UK participates fully
in ECRIS and the Government supports its extension to third country
nationals, but some Member States have raised "constitutional
concerns" and identified practical obstacles. The Committee
asks the Government to provide further details and to explain
how much the changes are likely to cost in the UK. As the proposal
is subject to the UK's Title V (justice and home affairs) opt-in,
the Committee also asks the Government to notify it promptly of
the Government's opt-in decision.
Commission report cleared from scrutiny. Proposed
Directive not cleared, further information requested, and drawn
to the attention of the Home Affairs Committee.
A voluntary humanitarian admission scheme for
Syrian refugees in Turkey
Turkey hosts more than 2.5 million Syrian refugees
and is an important transit route for those seeking entry to the
EU. This non-binding Commission Recommendation invites Member
States to participate in a voluntary humanitarian admission scheme
with Turkey. The scheme has a dual purpose: to encourage a sustainable
reduction in the number of irregular border crossings from Turkey
to the EU by offering "an orderly, managed, safe and dignified"
passage to the EU for up to 80,000 displaced Syrians in Turkey
each year. Syrians entering the EU under the humanitarian admission
scheme would be entitled to remain in their host Member State
for at least one year. Although Member States are under no obligation
to participate in the scheme, the Commission envisages that there
should be an equitable distribution which takes into account each
Member State's capacity to receive and integrate individuals in
need of protection, as well as population size, GDP, unemployment
rate and past asylum efforts. The Government pours cold water
on the initiative and says that the EU has no competence to act.
The Committee asks the Government to expand on its disappointingly
thin legal and political analysis of the Recommendation and to
provide further information on the viability of the scheme and
the likely participation by other Member States.
Not cleared. Further information requested. Drawn
to the attention of the Home Affairs Committee.
The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund
The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF)
is designed to provide support for workers made redundant as a
result of major structural changes in world trade patterns due
to globalisation. We have had before us an application, from Belgium,
for EGF assistance. The Government has reminded us of its continued
opposition to the existence and use of the EGF. On the understanding
that the Government is continuing to oppose EGF applications (albeit
unsuccessfully), whilst ensuring that the eligibility criteria
are strictly enforced, we have cleared this document from scrutiny.
However, we recalled that we have drawn to the attention
of the Work and Pensions Committee the Commission's own disturbing
review of the efficacy of the EGF, as relevant to any monitoring
of the Government's approach to the EGF Mid-Term Review that it
might undertake. We have also drawn a number of EGF applications,
most recently from Finland and Ireland, to the attention of the
Work and Pensions Committee as examples of the use made by other
Member States of an EU financial instrument of apparently little
efficacy, and for which the Government finds UK redundancy cases
to be ineligible. We now draw this further example to the attention
of the Work and Pensions Committee.
Cleared. Drawn to the attention of the Work and
Pensions Committee.
EU-Afghanistan Cooperation Agreement on Partnership
and Development
One of many outstanding debate recommendations is
one, in European Committee, on a Joint Communication: Elements
for an EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-16, which dates from
February 2015 (and which was endorsed by the Committee at its
first meeting last July). At that time, i.e., a year ago, the
EU Cooperation Agreement on Partnership and Development (CAPD)
had been held in the sidings since spring 2014 while the Afghans
agreed a constitution, had elections and chose a new President,
and the latest major donors' conference had taken place in London
in November 2014.
These events having taken place, the Committee was
presented last month with the CAPD. The Committee accordingly
recommended that it should be debated together with the EU Afghanistan
Strategy; and asked the Minister to provide additional information
about the CAPD, prior to the debate being held. From the further
information now provided, it would seem that, both politically
and legally, the CAPD is far from the finished article, particularly
with respect to how much and in what ways the Member States will
participate in its operation. The Committee maintains its recommendation
that both the Strategy and the CAPD be debated.
Not cleared. Previously recommended for debate
in European Committee.
Single Market Strategy
The Commission's Single Market Strategy (SMS) of
October 2015 is a non-legislative document that sets out a strategy
for 'upgrading' the Single Market. It proposes a mix of legislative
and non-legislative initiatives to be tabled in 2016 and 2017,
which are based on three main areas: 'creating additional opportunities
for consumers, professionals and businesses'; 'encouraging modernisation
and innovation'; and 'ensuring practical benefits for people in
their daily lives'.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (Baroness Neville-Rolfe)
supports the SMS and considers that the Commission's priorities
(including on services and better implementation and enforcement)
broadly reflect UK priorities.
At its meeting on 9 December 2015, the Committee
considered that the Minister's Explanatory Memorandum lacked sufficient
detail on the extent to which the Commission's ambitious programme
may represent challenges and what the Government is doing to address
these, including on: potential duplication with other strategies
(notably the Digital Single Market Strategy); whether enough is
being done to ensure transparency of the policy formulation process
and that all stakeholders' (and not just businesses') interests
were being reflected in forthcoming proposals; and whether the
proposed compliance and enforcement tools (including the proposed
'services passport') are likely to get the necessary buy-in from
Member States and not impose disproportionate burdens on businesses.
The Minister has provided comprehensive responses to each of the
Committee's information requests.
The Committee is now content to clear the Communication
— one of policy intent — from scrutiny, in order to
focus attention on forthcoming individual legislative proposals
that implement the SMS. Given the importance of successful implementation
of this Strategy for EU competitiveness (and noting the recent
European Council declaration on competitiveness), the Committee
urges the Minister to provide the Committee with detailed updates
on forthcoming proposals early on in, and throughout, the legislative
process and set out how progress on implementation of individual
SMS initiatives sit within the broader strategy and work alongside
Digital Single Market Strategy actions.
Cleared. Drawn to the attention of the Business,
Innovation and Skills Committee and the Culture, Media and Sport
Committee.
| 
