MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS (5198/06, 5199/06)
Letter from Rt Hon Baroness Ashton of
Upholland, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Department
for Constitutional Affairs to the Chairman
I am writing to update the Committee on developments
in the negotiation of the proposed EU Regulation on maintenance.
Since I last wrote to you the UK has submitted
written comments to the Council. I attach a copy of my official's
letter to the Council Secretariat for your information (not printed).
Since these comments were submitted, the Presidency has come forward
with a new text and Second Reading has begun on the basis of the
new draft, a copy of which is also enclosed (not printed).
Noteworthy within the new Presidency text is
the suggestion that the applicable law chapter in the draft EU
proposal should be set aside and this aspect instead considered
in the context of negotiations on the same topic due to take place
in the forthcoming Hague Conference. The EU Working Group has
agreed to this proposal. This is potentially a positive step since
the inclusion of the rules in the EU proposal was a source of
many of our most significant issues. We remain engaged in the
negotiations of this proposal and I will write to you again when
there are further developments to report.
Undated, February 2007
Letter from the Chairman to Rt Hon Baroness
Ashton of Upholland
Thank you for your letter of February which
was considered by Sub-Committee E at its meeting on 7 March. We
are grateful for your providing a copy of the latest text of the
proposal and for setting out the latest position in, and expected
progress of, the negotiations.
We were particularly interested to learn that
there seems to be some support for removing the provisions relating
to applicable law and leaving them to be discussed in the context
of the forthcoming discussions in the Hague Conference. This,
we agree, would be a welcome step.
We were also interested to see the letter written
by your official to the Council Secretariat. We are most pleased
to see that the UK has taken a firm line on the issue of Treaty
base, an issue which we raised when we first looked at this proposal
early last year.
Finally, as I mentioned in my letter of 8 June
2006,[100]
we would be grateful if you could let us know what is the position
regarding the Commission's Communication of 15 December 2005 (Doc
5198/06). You will recall that we asked whether they had been
any discussion of the Communication in the Council and if so what
conclusions have been reached.
The Committee decided to retain the proposal
under scrutiny.
8 March 2007
Letter from Rt Hon Baroness Ashton of
Upholland to the Chairman
Thank you for your letter of 8 March. I am pleased
that you agree with the line the UK is taking on this issue.
You ask, again, about the position regarding
the Commission's Communication of 15 December 2005, a question
first raised in your letter of 8 June 2006.
The Communication suggested that the proposed
measure concerning maintenance was best considered as the collection
of a civil debt and should be viewed as a financial matter. Therefore,
they invited the Council to use the passerelle in Article
67(2) to allow matters concerning family maintenance to be taken
forward under qualified majority voting in the Council and co-decision
with the European Parliament. Such a decision would require unanimity
in the Council.
The Communication was debated in the Civil Law
Committee under the Austrian Presidency where it did not achieve
sufficient support.
The matter has not been pursued further.
My letter to you of 26 June 2006 sent under
reference: doc. 5198/06 explains the situation more fully and
I confirm that the position remains the same. On the basis of
that letter, your Committee cleared doc. 5198/06 from scrutiny
on 6 July 2006.
20 March 2007
Letter from the Chairman to Rt Hon Baroness
Ashton of Upholland
Thank you for your letter of 20 March which
has been considered by Sub-Committee E. We are grateful for your
confirmation that there have been no further developments relating
to the Commission Communication relating to the use of the passerelle
in Article 67(2) TEC.
As regards the proposed Regulation relating
to maintenance obligations, we would be grateful if you would
keep us informed of developments.
The Committee decided to retain the proposal
under scrutiny.
29 March 2007
100 Correspondence with Ministers, 40th Report of Session
2006-07, HL Paper 187, pp 379-380. Back
| 
