Examination of Witnesses (Questions 320-329)
Mr Kim Darroch, Mr Vijay Rangarajan, Ms Sally Langrish,
Mr Paul Heardman, Ms Clelia Uhart and Mr Gian Marco Currado
8 MAY 2008
Q320 Baroness O'Cathain: Is that
seriously so when we are always told we are semi-detached, not
involved and all the rest of it? That seems an extraordinary statement.
Nobody does as much as we do, I think that is great!
Mr Darroch: You can be both semi-detached—not
my words—in a special position in terms of Schengen, the
euro and all sorts of other things, and still care more or try
and influence more about shaping emerging legislation than others
do.
Q321 Lord Bowness: Before we leave
this, presumably you are able to say to us whatever one's view
about the process, the process is effectively the same for everybody,
is it not?
Mr Darroch: In the Member State, in the Permanent
Representation, I would expect to be able to get in to see whoever
is writing a piece of paper and a piece of legislation in the
Commission. Anyone can speak up in Coreper or the Working Group
or the Council to set their views. Yes, there is a level playing
field, it just depends how much you are prepared to run around
on it.
Q322 Lord Rosser: Do we put in more
effort because we have a harder job trying to get what we want?
It is not about how much effort you put in, it is how much success
you have that counts.
Mr Darroch: In some areas, like Vijay's area
with the common law system, there are particular issues that we
have. In some areas we are much more likely to think a non-legislative
route than others for reasons I have touched on. I am not sure
that across the board our life is harder though. In some areas,
like the whole liberalisation agenda, energy liberalisation, telecoms
liberalisation, climate change, we have a much less hard time
than the French and Germans do. It is different in different areas.
Ms Uhart: Can I give an example on that of the
Single Market Review, where the Commission had similar views to
our own. We and the French were very much on the same track and
the most influential in that process and, despite the fact that
the Commission was on board, we continued to stay close.
Chairman: I am conscious that time is passing
and we have an invitation which we do not want to miss. Perhaps
we should wind this up.
Q323 Baroness O'Cathain: The only
thing I was going to ask is how effective is the Inter-Institutional
Agreement on Better Law Making?
Ms Langrish: I think the overall picture is
that the institutions are trying hard and things are generally
improving. The Inter-Institutional Agreement is part of a long
process which I think you could date back to the Edinburgh European
Council in 1992, when ideas of subsidiarity and proportionality,
which include Better Law Making and choosing the right legislative
instruments and so on, began to be discussed seriously. That has
been an ongoing process with the Amsterdam Treaty and more recently
there have been three or four Inter-Institutional Agreements on
this sort of subject, including codification, recasting of legislation
and quality of drafting. One of the best documents that I have
seen on this is the Annual Report on Better Law Making which is
freely available on the Commission's website. In fact, the 2006
Report has a very good Commission staff paper which details a
whole range of initiatives and internal arrangements that they
have put in place on this subject, including the way they organise
their Legal Service.
Q324 Baroness O'Cathain: Thank you
for pointing us in that direction.
Ms Langrish: It is an extremely good guide.
They are trying hard and progress in terms of results is—
Q325 Baroness O'Cathain: Mixed?
Ms Langrish: --- mixed, but it is getting better.
Lord Wright of Richmond: My Lord Chairman, it
would be very interesting to see that paper.
Q326 Chairman: One of the curious
features we discovered at some earlier stage was that, in fact,
the drafting of proposals is not necessarily done by a specialist
draftsman's department within the Commission.
Ms Langrish: Not at all.
Q327 Chairman: It is done by the
particular DG, and I suspect that has certainly led to some of
the difficulties we have identified in our reports. It has occurred
to me that Europe ought to have something in the nature of a parliamentary
draftsman's department or a Law Commission.
Mr Darroch: Staffed by British lawyers!
Q328 Chairman: Has that idea been
floated?
Mr Darroch: We will work on it.
Lord Jay of Ewelme: Staffed by common lawyers.
Baroness O'Cathain: Uncommon common lawyers.
Q329 Chairman: Has the idea been
floated?
Mr Darroch: I do not think it has.
Ms Langrish: Not formally. I am sure we have
mentioned this in UK papers on things like the quality of legislation
over the years. I seem to recall it was an idea that was trawled
in 1997 or before that, before the Treaty of Amsterdam. It has
not made much traction; it is not part of the legal culture here.
Maybe we can expand more informally over lunch.
Chairman: I think that is a very good idea.
Thank you very much indeed for your attendance.
| 
