House of Lords - European Union - Twenty-Third Report

Select Committee on European Union Twenty-Third Report

CHAPTER 9: Conclusions

87. We welcome the Commission's agenda of consolidation for 2009 as pragmatic. (para 7)

88. We think that the legislative lull in 2009 provides an excellent opportunity for the Commission to focus on the even-handed implementation of EU legislation across the Member States. That some of the 850 Commission posts to be newly created or redeployed in 2009 will be allocated to supporting the implementation of the acquis also reflects a welcome degree of commitment to this agenda. (para 8)

The Commission's priorities

89. We agree with the Commission's objective of delivering results on issues that concern citizens, and to communicate those results. The Commission's priorities should be based on the question of what makes the European Union relevant to the people of Europe. (para 10)

90. We welcome the priority on "Putting the Citizen First", but regret the lack of coherence among the disparate sub-priorities gathered underneath this heading. The Commission should do more to stress the weight it places on putting the citizen first throughout its work, thereby giving more coherence to this list of sub-priorities. Particular attention should be paid to issues impacting on communities and local projects. (para 11)

91. We welcome the Commission's focus on climate change, as crucial both to Europe's future and to connecting the EU with its citizens. Once the EU has agreed its package of energy and climate change measures, which it has agreed to do by early 2009 at the latest, the EU must strive for an environmentally and economically sustainable deal at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December 2009. (para 12)

92. The emphasis on "Europe as a World Partner" is also welcome, as the European Union must be in a position to address the challenges of a changing world in which China, India, Russia and other major powers and regions are rapidly playing a more important role. (para 13)

93. Delivering growth and jobs will also be fundamental to the role of the European Union in 2009, so we are glad to see it prioritised. (para 14)

94. The Commission's prioritisation of immigration reflects the importance most Member States attach to this issue and the priorities set by the Council. We welcome the collective efforts to tackle what is currently one of the major challenges facing the EU as a whole. We note, however, that the issue of immigration is far from uncontroversial for some Member States (particularly the United Kingdom, which has the right to choose whether to participate (the opt-in) in this area) and the Commission will need to handle this priority carefully, giving due regard to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and thereby showing that specific measures in this field add value. (para 15)

95. Given the critical importance of trade, the hazardous condition of World Trade Organisation negotiations and the rising protectionist threat in various parts of the world, the Commission should make sure that trade is a priority for 2009. (para 16)

The details of the Annual Policy Strategy priorities

96. We encourage the Commission to keep up the momentum on the Lisbon Strategy. (para 17)

97. There will need to be careful consideration and case-by-case justification of any enhanced Commission role in international financial institutions. (para 20)

98. We look forward to seeing detail in the Annual Legislative and Work Programme about the ways in which the Commission will assist the European Institute for Innovation and Technology (EIT). We stress to the Government and the Commission the importance of ensuring the involvement of the private sector, most notably at the local level. (para 21)

99. We urge the Government to seek to ensure that the purpose of the EIT as a hub of innovation, without sucking up existing capacity and expertise, is followed in the development of the EIT. (para 22)

100. We are grateful for the Commission's clarification of the background to the proposed Communication on sectoral social dialogue and welcome it on that basis. (para 23)

101. We agree with the Government that the EU must not attempt to tackle the climate change challenge by applying protectionist measures. (para 24)

102. We note the Commission's efforts in the area of food and fuel prices, and urge the Commission, in their forthcoming work, to take into account changing views regarding the use of biofuels. (para 25)

103. The connected problems of high energy prices, energy security and climate change is exactly the sort of issue that the Commission needs to prioritise: where Member States are stronger together, and where it really matters to citizens. We encourage the Commission's efforts in this area and note the legislative initiatives it has undertaken to tackle climate change, and to reduce CO₂ emissions and dependence on oil by promoting the use of renewable sources of energy. (para 26)

104. We support the Government in its long-term ambition for fundamental CAP reform, and we urge the Commission to ensure that the Health Check agreement is implemented promptly and effectively in the course of 2009. (para 28)

105. We consider that the Commission's work on agricultural product quality must assist, rather than impede, progress towards improving the market orientation of the Common Agricultural Policy. (para 29)

106. A European Marine Observation and Data Network could be crucial in delivering an integrated marine policy and the Commission should concentrate on its careful design in order to ensure efficacy and avoid duplication of Member States' efforts. (para 30)

107. We support and encourage Commission initiatives to ensure that fisheries policy reflects the potential contribution that consumers can make in determining the sustainability or otherwise of EU fisheries, predominantly through clear, accurate and intelligible information provision. (para 32)

108. The implications of the Commission's initiatives on immigration need to be analysed and published for consultation before any legislative proposal is brought forward, along with the Commission's other impact assessment work focussing on the technical feasibility of these initiatives. Consideration is also needed as to whether any legislative proposals will meet the subsidiarity test and respect the proportionality principle. (para 33)

109. We endorse the shift of focus in the fight against terrorism to specific threats. (para 34)

110. Fundamental rights should have a more evident role in shaping policy. We would expect the Annual Policy Strategy, in discussing policies in areas affecting security and fundamental rights - such as immigration and criminal justice - to flag up human rights concerns and engage in a preliminary discussion of issues raised. (para 35)

111. While multiannual frameworks are important in the area of justice and home affairs, we would in future expect to see discussion in the Annual Policy Strategy, drawing on the multiannual framework, of the intended focus of the Commission's efforts in this field during the following year. We look forward to seeing more detail in the Annual Legislative and Work Programme on the Commission's proposals for improving access to justice. (para 37)

112. We encourage the Commission to press on in 2009 with initiatives envisaged under the Hague Programme and to work with the Council and the European Parliament to conclude measures currently under negotiation, such as the proposal on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to supervision orders in pre-trial procedures in the Member States. (para 39)

113. We have some doubts about whether the "full implementation of the twelve [European Neighbourhood Policy] action plans" in 2009 is a realistic ambition, but we encourage the Commission to make all possible progress. (para 41)

114. We welcome the Commission's continuing commitment to accession negotiations and the Copenhagen criteria. (para 42)

115. We hope that the improved European Security Strategy becomes a priority for the Commission after its adoption at the end of 2008. (para 43)

Delivery on promises: Better Regulation

116. The fact that "Better Regulation—Delivery on Promises and Change of Regulatory Culture" is one of the Commission's priorities for 2009, and features prominently in the APS, is welcome. (para 44)

117. It is encouraging that the Commission seems to be integrating better regulation more thoroughly into its work, and we look forward to seeing the detail of the Commission's proposals for reducing administrative burdens in the Annual Legislative and Work Programme. (para 45)

118. We urge the new Commission which will begin its term in 2009 to build on the work of the Barroso Commission by mainstreaming better regulation principles in all its work and by resisting the "something must be done" tendency. (para 46)

119. The Commission intends to propose that its successor undertakes the exercise of testing proposals for legislation against better regulation principles and withdrawing many of them: this would be welcome, and we consider that all of the European institutions have a role to play in ensuring that the EU improves its regulatory performance consistently. (para 46)

120. We urge the Commission to work towards drafting better EU legislation in its priority areas through improving its consultation of citizens and small businesses. (para 48)

121. We congratulate the Commission on the increasing level of impact assessment of proposed legislation. (para 49)

122. Impact assessment should become standard practice for all proposals. In particular, the level of impact assessment of European Parliament and Council amendments should be increased. (para 49)

123. An evaluation of the accuracy of the impact assessment should be undertaken two to five years after each piece of legislation is adopted. (para 50)

124. We agree with the Minister's suggestion of including financial implications in the Commission's impact assessments, and we urge the Commission to work on this suggestion. (para 51)

"Communicating Europe"

125. We emphatically agree that 2009 will be a particularly important year for communicating Europe. (para 52)

126. We welcome the Commission's intention of prioritising just four communication themes. The Commission will need to give serious consideration to how it approaches this communication, and we look forward to seeing more detail on the Commission's plans in the Annual Legislative and Work Programme. (para 53)

127. The best way to interest citizens in Europe is by achieving and publicising results that are relevant to their lives and delivered locally, so we welcome the Commission's decision to concentrate communication on areas of direct interest to EU citizens. (para 54)

128. We hope that, whatever institutional debates take place in 2009, the focus on substance and on meaningful engagement will be maintained. (para 55)

Human and financial resources

129. We welcome the Commission's underpinning of Annual Policy Strategy priorities with human resources. We also welcome the Commission's work on inter-institutional cooperation to make the most efficient use of resources. (para 57)

130. While the Lisbon Strategy, GALILEO, and the EIT are all mentioned in the Commission's priorities, and Global Monitoring for Environment and Security services in the Commission's key actions, the Electronic Communications Market Authority and the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators are not discussed beyond the financial allocation section. We are not persuaded that the proposals for the Electronic Communications Market Authority are necessary. We believe that the new agency is likely to increase regulatory complexity and bring insufficient benefits for the costs involved. (para 60)

131. The relationship between the financial allocation for "Preservation and management of natural resources" and the Commission's priority of climate change and a sustainable Europe, focussing on energy, sustainable consumption, biodiversity, environmental law, maritime policy and the Common Agricultural Policy is not obvious. (para 61)

132. The financial allocation for "Freedom, security and justice" matches the Commission's focus on immigration. However, although the Commission and the Government support measures to improve access to justice for citizens, it would appear that no specific financial support has been allocated to future projects in this area, which is disappointing. We hope that, notwithstanding the lack of earmarked funding, the Commission will propose specific projects including financial support to improve access to justice in cross-border cases, such as funding for video-conferencing, translators and action related to e-justice. (para 62)

133. The Commission gives little detail on the financial allocation for "Citizenship", but this allocation appears to be congruent with the Commission's priorities under "Putting the Citizen First". We would welcome more detail in the Annual Legislative and Work Programme on the ways in which the Commission's commitment to "Putting the Citizen First" will be translated into practical action backed by adequate funding. (para 64)

134. It is not easy to see a close connection between the Commission's priorities for "Europe as a World Partner" and the financial allocation for external affairs, although this may be explained by the fact that part of the funding for external affairs is not distributed through the budget. (para 65)

The Annual Policy Strategy as a consultation document

135. The Annual Policy Strategy for 2009 is more strategic, better organised, and looks less like a shopping-list than the Annual Policy Strategy for 2008. (para 68)

136. We would encourage the Commission to go further in its improvement of the Annual Policy Strategy as a consultation document. The Commission should include more explanation and justification of its priorities. The Commission should clearly describe which priorities or proposals are new and which are not, and what is moving up (or down) the Commission's agenda. The Commission needs to be clear about limitations as regards Union competence on some of its priorities (such as immigration). (para 70)

137. The Commission's description of "Changes in the Allocation of Financial Resources", while a crucial part of the Annual Policy Strategy, is not readily comprehensible. The Commission's language is too specialised. (para 71)

138. It is all but impossible, without reference to budget tables, to relate changes in financial allocations to the Commission's priorities. It is difficult to decipher whether the Commission's financial allocations closely match their policy priorities, as well as to see where such a comparison is not relevant. We would like to see greater correlation between the Annual Policy Strategy headings and the Preliminary Draft Budget, or more explanation of how they relate. (para 72)

139. Future Annual Policy Strategies need to be clearer about the purpose of the document. (para 75)

140. If the Commission wants the Annual Policy Strategy to provide citizens with a clear statement of the Commission's top priorities for the coming year, it will have to keep working on making the Annual Policy Strategy as focussed as possible and understandable to those without a detailed knowledge of the Union and its various programmes and policy dossiers. This would include the Commission further concentrating its priorities on a few issues that would be at the top of the public agenda, and easily understood by and communicated to the citizens. (para 76)

141. However, it is important that the Annual Policy Strategy can perform its core function of sparking a useful dialogue between the institutions, Member States and national parliaments to shape the Annual Legislative and Work Programme. If the Annual Policy Strategy cannot include enough detail to spark a useful dialogue between the institutions while remaining readable for the public, we suggest that the Commission focus the Annual Policy Strategy on this dialogue, and accompany it with a question-and-answer document or "citizens' summary" describing the Commission's top priorities. This might be more profitable than focussing the Annual Policy Strategy on communication to citizens; as the Commissioner said, concrete actions are "what citizens will see, and very few … will remember that as part of a five-point agenda". (para 77)

142. The Government should be making the most of the opportunity the Annual Policy Strategy provides to influence the Commission's plans. (para 79)

143. The Government's Explanatory Memorandum (EM) on the Annual Policy Strategy gives us the impression that the Annual Policy Strategy is not taken very seriously in Whitehall. (para 80)

144. As we stated in our report on the 2008 Annual Policy Strategy, "our scrutiny and analysis of the APS needs to be assisted by a comprehensive Explanatory Memorandum from the Government." (para 81)

145. We recommend that the Government should ensure that the Annual Policy Strategy's financial allocations are seen and scrutinised by the Treasury, to inform both the EM and the Government's response to the Commission. (para 82)

146. The EM should present the Government's initial thoughts on the Annual Policy Strategy's proposals and priorities, and provide a preliminary assessment of the policy implications. (para 84)

147. We consider that the Government should include in its EM its preliminary comments on proposals which may raise fundamental rights issues, which touch areas where subsidiarity may be a concern, and where significant financial implications will clearly arise. (para 85)

148. In our view, there is a tension in the Government's attitude to the Annual Policy Strategy. Either the Annual Policy Strategy is an important statement of intent and provides a real opportunity for the European institutions, governments and parliaments to influence the Union's plans, or it is too vague for the Government to comment upon properly and is therefore not very useful or significant. If the former, the Government should be engaging fully with the Annual Policy Strategy and seeking to influence the Commission's priorities. It should be able to provide us with a detailed Explanatory Memorandum allowing us to scrutinise its positions, and in due course with its full response to the Commission. If the latter, the Government should be putting pressure on the Commission to make consultation on the Annual Policy Strategy a worthwhile exercise. Either way, the Annual Policy Strategy is the precursor to the Preliminary Draft Budget, and it would be extraordinary if the Government did not take a view on the allocation of financial resources the Commission proposes. (para 86)