Committee Reports::Report - Review of EU Legislation::01 March, 2000::Appendix

On 27 May, 1999 the Belgian authorities informed the EU Commission, following an incident in January, 1999, of a case of contamination of compound feedingstuff with dioxin. The source of the contamination is still under investigation, but it is thought to originate from adulterated fat used in the production of compound feedingstuff. Initially it was thought that the contamination was confined to Belgian animal feed, poultry, poultrymeat and egg products, but food alerts were subsequently isssued on cattle and pigs and on all products derived from these animals.

Following discussions in the Standing Committee on Feedingstuffs and the Standing Veterinary Committee, urgent safeguard measures were adopted to protect consumer health.

The measures prohibit the placing on the market, or the export to third countries, of products intended for human or animal consumption derived from domestic fowl, pigs and bovine animals which were reared in Belgium from 15 January, 1999. This does not apply to products derived from animals in holdings which were not put under restriction by the Belgian authorities, or where the analytical results demonstrate that the products are contaminated with dioxin, and for which the Belgian authorities provide appropriate certification.

The Belgian authorities are continuing the tracing of animals that may have been fed contaminated feed and derived products from such animals and the source of the contamination. Over 1,488 farm holdings were restricted. The restrictions on certain holdings have been lifted where there is evidence of non-contamination. The situation is being closely monitored by the Food and Veterinary Office of the EU which is assigned responsibility for control and inspection services in the food, veterinary and plant health sectors. In addition the EU is being advised by various scientific and advisory committees to assist in the analysis of the situation and advise.

ACTION IN IRELAND

Protective Measures with regard to Contamination of Product by Dioxins

COMMISSION DECISIONS 1999/363/EC, 1999/389/EC, 1999/390/EC

1. Legal provisions

The following legal measures have been taken in the context of the dioxin contamination episode:-

S.I.175 - European Communities (Animals and Animal Products from Belgium) Regulations, 1999 - prohibits the import into Ireland from Belgium of any agricultural product referred to in Article 1(1) of Commission Decision 99/363/EC as amended or Article 1(1) of Commission Decision 99/389/EC as amended.

S.I.185 - European Communities (Protective Measures with regard to Contamination by Dioxins in Belgian Foodstuffs) Regulations, 1999 - provide for a ban on the sale of products which fall within the scope of the relevant EU Decisions.

S.I. 186 - European Communities (Prevention of Danger to Public Health) Regulations, 1999 - provide for a ban on the import of food produced from products which are subject to restriction under the EU Decisions.

General Authorisations to Import have been withdrawn for agricultural products from Belgium.

Agricultual imports are now subject to specific import licences obtained in advance. Licences are issued subject to goods being accompanied by the regulatory Health Certificate/Declaration endorsed by the Belgian authorities certifying that the product is not derived from animals reared in holdings under restriction by the Belgian authorities or that the result of analysis demonstrates that the product is not contaminated by dioxins.

The requirement for a Health Certificate/Declaration endorsement by the Belgian authorities is constantly reviewed by the Standing Veterinary Committee of the European Commission. At its meeting of 6-7 July, 1999 it was decided to exclude milk and milk based products from such certification based on the examination of results of extensive sampling and analysis of Belgian milk and milk products. Other products are being similarly reviewed.

2. Tracing and Detention of Product

No pigs, live poultry or hatching eggs have been imported from Belgium during the period 15 January to 1 June 1999. Ireland had imported 121 cattle from Belgium during the same period. Of these, 115 were bulls, two were breeding females and four were calves.

A list of the animals, including their tag numbers, was sent to the Belgian authorities on 21 June, requesting confirmation that the animals had not come from farms which are currently under restriction. Since then confirmation has been received from the Belgian authorities that none of these cattle come from holdings put under restriction.

Animal products imported from Belgium have been traced and detained under Department of Agriculture control at importers premises, approved plants and cold stores commencing 1 June. Detentions were served under S.I. 289 - European Communities (Trade in Animals and Animal Products) Regulations, 1994, which permit detention of imported product likely to present a threat to animal or human health. A total of 43 consignments (112 tonnes) are involved. Products include poultrymeat and poultrymeat products, egg products, pork and pork products, beef products and milk based products. Where sufficient information is available, the Belgian authorities are being requested in writing for clearance.

No eggs, rendered fat, processed animal protein or compound feedstuffs have been imported from Belgium during the relevant period.

The major proportion of oils and fats used in the manufacture of compound feeds in Ireland are animal fats of native origin. However Ireland imports vegetable oils and by-products from the refining of vegetable oils from other Member States. All traders in such products were visited and their records of imports over the period 1 January, 1999 to the date of inspection checked for imports of Belgian products. These checks showed that no oils or fats of Belgian origin were imported into Ireland during that period.

Because of their bulky nature, compound feeds for food producing animals are not traditionally imported from Belgium. Nevertheless, checks were carried out on suppliers of specialised high-density feeds (e.g. milk replacers) which confirmed that no compound feeds of Belgian origin were imported from 1 January, 1999.

The Department of Health and Children banned the sale of suspect produce and issued an alert through the Food Alert System to retailers and health boards to withdraw and detain possible contaminated products on retail shelves.

A small amount of product (around 11 tonnes) has been destroyed by rendering and will be incinerated.

3. PCB/Dioxin Monitoring

(a)There has never been any known problem with dioxin levels in agricultural products produced in Ireland. In this regard, the Environmental Protection Agency undertook a survey into dioxin levels in June, 1995 by taking a series of milk samples from representative regional dairies. The outcome of the investigation was that the dioxin levels in the milk samples were uniformly low by international standards.

(b)In addition, the Pesticides Control Laboratory of the Irish Department of Agriculture and Food has monitored samples of beef and pork for PCB residues since 1982 and such residues have never been detected in any of the samples analysed.

(c)As indicted above, exhaustive investigations have established that no imports of contaminated animal feed or animal feed ingredients have been imported from Belgium since January, 1999.

(d)The results of dioxin tests on samples of a range of products being undertaken in a UK laboratory are awaited.

(e)A programme of monitoring for dioxins on an on-going basis is being developed and will be implemented as soon as possible.

4. Exports from Ireland

The Department of Agriculture and Food has issued an Official Assurance Regarding the Safety of Food Produced in Ireland for use by Irish exporters.

As per your request I enclose the Food Safety Authority’s response to the Joint Committees request for a position with regard to investigating and dealing with emergencies such as that occurred in relation to Belgian food products.

Food Contamination Emergencies

Background

The Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) was established in January 1999 by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland Act, 1998. The remit of the FSAI is to protect the health of the consumer by ensuring that food produced, distributed or marketed in the State meets the highest standards of food hygiene and safety. One of the functions of the FSAI is to develop and co-ordinate an efficient food safety inspection service across the entire food chain to ensure that the law is complied with and consumers’ health is protected. Many agencies in Ireland are involved in food safety control and to co-ordinate the inspection services the FSAI has agreed service contracts with them for a level and standard of activity. The agencies include: -

The food legislation for which the FSAI has responsibility is detailed in the First Schedule to the FSAI Act. However, the FSAI did not have official responsibility for the legislation until 5^th July 1999, in order to allow time for the service contracts to be developed and put in place.

Powers

The FSAI Act provides powers of entry, inspection and inquiry for officers of the FSAI or its agencies. The act also makes provision for the service of improvement notices and orders and closure orders on the proprietors of food businesses. In addition, there is provision to order the withdrawal from the market of food products where they pose a serious risk to public health. (Note this provision was not in force at the time the dioxin contamination in Belgium products arose.)

Emergencies

Food hazard warnings occur on a regular basis and are currently dealt with by the Department of Health and Children, as they are the competent Authority. The hazards usually relate to foodstuffs of a particular identifiable brand and batch or lot number. The European Commission has a system for the rapid exchange of information on food alerts. Member States regularly transmit and receive information via this system. Currently the Department of Health and Children acts as the contact point for Ireland. Hazard warnings received are relayed rapidly by the Department to the FSAI and to a wide list of persons in the regulatory, production, retail and consumer organisations.

Producers and retailers are quickly informed and can take action to detain product or recall it from sale. Regulatory officials can check on action taken. If necessary, public announcements can be made to warn consumers.

Dioxin Contamination in products from Belgium

The dioxin contamination incident in Belgium was different from most “routine” hazard warning in that the contamination was widespread in many primary products and in many other processed products derived from the primary products. Dioxin containing oil contaminated animal feed which was fed to poultry, pigs and cattle. Identifying which farms received contaminated meal, where the produce of these farms went to, into which foods the produce was incorporated and tracing all potential contaminated food proved extremely difficult.

The Irish authorities responded quickly to the problem. The Department of Health and Children (DHC), the Department of Agriculture and Food (DAF) and the FSAI met on a number of occasions to co-ordinate activities and were in regular contact throughout the whole emergency. Importers of live animals and raw materials from Belgium were identified by DAF and product or animals detained. DAF also verified that compound animal feedstuff or oil for animal feed had not been imported from Belgium. DHC, through the Health Boards, traced processed foods on sale and provided regular information to the processing and retail trades. Both DAF and DHC introduced and implemented new legal provisions, including certification procedures. The FSAI liased with the Department of Agriculture and Food and the Department of Health and Children and carried out a risk assessment, made its staff and free phone help line available to deal with concerns of consumers, retailers and the catering sector and also provided regular updates to the media.

Adequacy of Response in Ireland

As the information was made available from Brussels, immediate action was taken in Ireland. The advice from Brussels on what products to withdraw changed daily as more information became available to them. Initially it was poultry and egg products, then pork products and then dairy products leading to sequential recalls, which was very unsatisfactory from a retailer’s point of view. The entire episode highlighted the risks associated with the mass production and global distribution of food and weaknesses in food safety control across Europe. The single market facilitates trade but also enables contaminated food products and ingredients to be rapidly dispersed. For protection of both consumers and the food industry efficient monitoring programmes for both chemical and microbial contamination combined with effective traceability systems are essential if problems are to be identified rapidly and effective recalls are to be executed in a timely fashion. This dioxin episode highlights several questions for Ireland:-

V.Can we be confident on the safety of imported ingredients included in foods processed in Ireland?

VI.Can we be confident that we can rapidly trace imported ingredients and identify all products into which they have been incorporated should we need to isolate them if the publics’ health is at risk?

Future Role of the FSAI

This incident emphasises the importance of co-ordinated action by the various agencies involved in food control. In the event of another such incident the FSAI will assume a co-ordinating role, given that since 5^th July it has official responsibility for food legislation enforcement. It will establish an incident team that will evaluate the risk, oversee the investigation, co-ordinate control actions and arrange for the dissemination of information to the trade and the public. The incident team will be composed of representatives of such agencies and organisations as are necessary and appropriate. The first priority of the FSAI is to protect the consumer.

The dioxin incident however brought to light the necessity for the introduction of special legal measures to give effect to the various binding decisions of the European Commission. Similar measures may be required in future incidents, depending on their nature.

Lessons for the future

The widespread nature of the dioxin contaruination and the extensive trade in and distribution of raw food materials demonstrate the potential threat that exists to the whole of a nation’s food supply. Action in Ireland was swift in minimising the exposure of consumers to dioxin in this case. Nevertheless lessons can be learned for the future. Following the incident, the FSAI held debriefing sessions with all interested parties. Amongst the priorityissues that need to be addressed are the following: -

•There is an urgent need to establish a national database to track the importation and distribution of raw materials for the food industry. The FSAI is examining how to design such a database and plans to develop a food import tracking system by the end of this year;

•Traceability of produce is vital. Importers and distributors of raw food or ingredients should keep accurate records as part of their food safety management system;

•Currently there is no laboratory in Ireland with the facility to analyse food for the presence of dioxins. For consumer protection and safeguarding the Irish food industry it is important that Ireland has such a facility. An effective dioxin-monitoring programme is required if we are to identify and deal with problems early. In addition, it is necessary if we are to reassure consumers at home and purchasers of Irish food abroad that Irish food is safe and that we have appropriate safeguards in place. The FSAI is working with the Department of Health and Children, the Department of Agriculture & Food and the State Laboratory to resolve this issue and put a national analytical capability for dioxins in place.

I refer to your recent letter and attach briefing notes for the Committee regarding the Framework Directive on Water Policy and the amendment of Directive 90/220/EEC on the Deliberate Release of Genetically Modified Organisms to the Environment.

Joint Committee on European Affairs

Note on draft EU Framework Directive on Water Policy

General Terms of Proposal

The proposed EU Framework Directive on Water Policy sets a framework for comprehensive management of water resources within the European Community, within a common approach and with common objectives, principles and basic measures. The proposed water management framework will be based on the river basin, as the natural unit for management, and will require the development of River Basin Management Plans. Member States will have to ensure that a co-ordinated approach is adopted for the achievement of the objectives of the proposed Directive and for the implementation of programmes of measures for this purpose. The proposed Directive addresses surface waters, estuarine and coastal waters and groundwater and will repeal and replace several existing EU Directives in relation to individual aspects of water management.

•to achieve “good quality status” in surface waters and groundwaters within a 16-year timeframe generally

•to protect ecosystems and achieve compliance with any standards and objectives for “Protected Areas” (e.g. areas designated for protection of habitats or species) within a 16-year timeframe generally

The proposal requires that measures be taken within each river basin for matters such as:-

*the drawing up and implementation of a programme of measures to achieve the established environmental objectives, and

Discussion to Date and Possible Future Action

The original proposal was presented by the European Commission to the European Council and the European Parliament in February 1997. Following consideration of the (first) Opinion of the European Parliament, the Council adopted a Common Position on 12 October 1999. The Common Position will now be transmitted to the European Parliament for its (second) Opinion. The European Parliament may adopt or reject the proposal or may propose amendments. The proposal will be considered again by the Council when the (second) Opinion of the European Parliament becomes available,. The “co-decision procedures” apply and, accordingly, the final proposal must be approved by both the European Parliament and the European Council.

Implications of Proposals for Ireland

Ireland supports the proposed Directive and is generally in a good position to implement it. Water quality in Ireland is generally good (although slight to moderate pollution has been increasing) and compares very favourably with other Member States. The water quality standards applied in Ireland are among the most stringent in the EU. Irish legislation provides (since 1977) for water quality planning on an integrated basis (i.e. to include surface and ground waters, including estuarine and tidal waters). Since 1997 Ireland has promoted a national strategy to promote water quality management in river and lakes on the basis of river catchments. The primary focus is to combat eutrophication arising from excess inputs of phosphorous. Major programmes of investment in water infrastructure are linked to catchment-based monitoring and management systems.

The implementation of the proposed Directive in Ireland will require the identification of the River Basin Districts (RBD) which are to form the basis for integrated water management planning. The development of a Water Management Plan for each RBD will require the participation and co-operation of the various agencies which have relevant statutory functions e.g. local authorities, regional fisheries boards, the Environmental Protection Agency. There will be significant resource implications arising from the proposal in view of its wide scope and ambitious targets.

The proposal requires that river basins which cross national frontiers must be assigned to an international RBD. This will require joint action with relevant authorities in Northern Ireland in relation to cross-border catchments. [Much valuable work has already been done in relation to the Erne and the Foyle catchments.]

The main challenge for water quality in Ireland is to deal with eutrophication arising from excess inputs of phosphorous from all sources. The national, catchment-based strategy is underpinned by the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977 (Water Quality Standards for Phosphorus) Regulations, 1998, which were made in July 1998. The Regulations set clear targets for reducing phosphorus levels in rivers and lakes within a 10-year timeframe. Major catchment-based initiatives have been launched in respect of Loughs Derg, Ree and Leane and the Rivers Suir, Boyne and Liffey linked to a major programme of investment in sewage infrastructure in the catchments. The combined cost of the investment in these 6 catchments is £123 million which is supported by Cohesion Funding. Important initiatives are also underway in respect of Loughs Conn, Mask and Corrib.

The strategy is being supported a major £1.5 billion programme of investment in sewage infrastructure facilities throughout the country in the ten year period to 2005. This programme lays particular emphasis on the provision of phosphorus reduction facilities where a need is indicated. Substantial initiatives are underway to tackle phosphorus inputs from agriculture, including the Rural Environment Protection Scheme and the new Control of Farm Pollution Scheme. Following recent initiatives by the detergent industry, it is estimated that the phosphorous load from detergents will be reduced by some 50% by mid-2000 with further reductions to follow thereafter.

Outstanding Issues of Relevance to Ireland

Ireland has participated fully in discussions to develop the proposal and supports the comprehensive and ambitious approach proposed.

Timetable: Ireland could support a tightening of the timescale for implementation. The proposal currently establishes a general timescale of 16 years for the achievement by Member States of the objectives in relation to water quality with the possibility of up to three extensions of 6 years each, giving a maximum possible implementation timescale of 34 years.

Charging: The proposal includes provisions requiring Member States to have regard for the need to recover the cost of water supply and sewage services in accordance with the polluter pays principle. Ireland’s position is that charges can appropriately be applied to commercial, industrial and agricultural users but charging policy should continue to exempt domestic water services from water charges.

BRIEFING NOTE FOR JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS

Amendment of Council Directive 90/220/EEC on the deliberate release of genetically modified organisms to the environment

Background

As preparation for a strategy to address unemployment in the Community, the European Commission published a White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness, Employment, in 1994. In the White Paper, biotechnology is identified “as one of the most promising and crucial technologies for sustainable development in the next century”. As well as identifying potential environmental benefits in areas such as pollution control, the White Paper underlined the economic importance of biotechnology in enabling “the creation of new products and highly competitive processes in a large number of industrial and agricultural activities, and in the health sector”. In its recommendations, the White Paper identified the importance for the Community of:

•avoiding the possibility of becoming simply a market rather than a producer of biotechnology derived products,

In response to the White Paper, the European Commission undertook to review its regulatory framework on modern biotechnology, including the deliberate release directive, i.e. Directive 90/220/EEC on the deliberate release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to the environment. The Commission report¹ on the review of the Directive concluded that implementation had revealed a number of problem areas such as insufficient clarification concerning the objectives of risk assessment and cumbersome administrative procedures. Accordingly, a proposal² for an amending directive was presented to the Council by the Commission on 23 February 1998³.

The Directive has an internal market basis under Article 100a of the Treaty. Its fundamental objective is to ensure a high level of environmental protection, including related human health considerations, when deliberately releasing products containing or consisting of GMOs. It is transposed into Irish law under the Genetically Modified Organisms Regulations, 1994⁴ and the Environmental Protection Agency is the national competent authority for the purposes of both the Regulations and the Directive.

Examples of the type of activity covered under this legislation includes research releases (i.e. field trials of new crops containing GMOs) and marketing releases (e.g. general cultivation and harvesting of new genetically modified crops, and the importation and handling of bulk genetically modified agricultural commodities such as maize). It does not cover the marketing of finished food products which contain GMOs or which were produced using genetic modification techniques; within the EU the marketing of such products is subject to the requirements of EU Regulation 258/97 on novel foods and novel food ingredients.

Amendment proposal

•latest scientific data on the assessment of deliberate releases of GMOs to the environment,

•discussion in the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee on the Commission’s December 1996 report on the review of the Directive, and

•developments in the field of biotechnology since the adoption by the Commission of its review report in December 1996.

Objectives

•extending and clarifying the scope of the Directive so that the procedures to be followed were commensurate with risks,

•developing greater uniformity in decision-taking between Member States, based on common principles for risk assessment,

•extending the flexibility of the Directive without compromising health and environmental protection

Political agreement on a common position

At the meeting of the European Council of Environment Ministers in Luxembourg on 24/25 June 1999, political agreement with a view to a common position (political agreement in principle) was reached on the proposal to amend the Directive. The overall objective of the Council decision was to update the provisions of the Directive in the light of advances in science and technology, as well as practical operational experience since it came into effect in October 1991. The main feature of the common position adopted by the Council was an overall strengthening of safety and transparency through a range of specific amendments including -

i.new common principles to ensure consistency in undertaking environmental risk assessment of product notifications;

ii.a new provision imposing a ten-year time-limit on first-time consents to market genetically modified products in the EU, plus specific new requirements for post-release monitoring;

iii.improved labelling requirements linked to a provision to ensure full traceability of genetically modified products through all stages of the production process,

iv.new provisions for public participation in the regulatory procedures for the placing of genetically modified products on the EU market; and

v.a recognition of ethical considerations and provision for them to be addressed.

On the basis of the common position adopted, the Commission will refer the proposal to the European Parliament for a second reading.

National consultation on “GMOs & the Environment”

In the course of the negotiations on the amendment proposal, Ireland worked towards securing major improvements in the regulatory requirements for the deliberate release of GMOs to the environment. However, in order to allow full consideration to be given to the conclusions of its national consultation process on “GMOs & the Environment” (which the Minister for the Environment and Local Government) had initiated in August 1998, Ireland abstained on the vote in which Council adopted the common position on the amendment proposal. A declaration by the Council and the Commission, recorded in the Council minutes, acknowledged the reason underlying Ireland’s position and confirmed that the Commission and the Council would be sensitive to points which Ireland might raise as a result of the consultation process during the proposal’s second reading.

A two part debate on 25 May and 3 June 1999, managed by an independent panel, brought the national consultation to a conclusion. The main conclusion of the panel was that -

“The focus of national environmental policy in the area of deliberate release of products containing or consisting of GMOs should, in our view, be positive. It should reflect the potential economic benefits of genetic engineering and the importance of a strong, proactive biotechnology sector if Ireland is to maximise these benefits in terms of competitiveness, growth and employment. It should also reflect a fundamental national commitment to safety and environmental sustainability, based on scientific risk assessment and management.”

The debate report, together with a policy statement on the deliberate release of GMOs to the environment, was issued by the Minister on 9 October 1999.

GMO and Agriculture

General Comment

GMO’s released into the environment for seed, food or feed production uses must not pose a risk to the health and safety of humans and animals. Neither must GMO’s cause biological damage by upsetting the balance in nature. Genetically modified products undergo rigorous research and assessment procedures before they are approved for use.

Advisory Committees

All Member States of the EU have established scientific committees to carry out a rigorous assessment on GMO’s. Ireland has a GMO Advisory Committee which advises the Environmental Protection Agency on environmental issues relating to GMO’s. A GMO and Novel Foods Sub-Committee under the Food Safety Authority of Ireland provides advice to the EPA on the animal feed aspects of GMO dossiers received. Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development has a nominee on both of these committees.

At EU level Scientific Committees have been set up to deal with consumer health and food safety. The work of these Scientific Committees is co-ordinated by a Scientific Steering Committee.

These Committees are within DG24, which is the Directorate responsible for Consumer Affairs. Recently the Division dealing with animal feed legislation was moved from DGVI to this Directorate. Committees of relevance to GMO’s consist of Scientific Committees for Food, for Animal Nutrition, for Plants including pesticides and a Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment. Their advice on matters relating to human health is based on the principles of excellence, independence and transparency.

G.M. Feedingstuffs

At present feedingstuffs derived from GM crops produced within the EU are regulated to someextent. If the seed has been assessed under the terms of the Deliberate Release Directive (90/220/EEC), the use of the seed in animal feed is taken into account. The EPA, who is responsible for this assessment, is assisted in this area by the GMO and Novel Foods Sub-Committee of the Scientific Committee advising the FSAI. However, since the Directive does not apply to processed feedingstuffs imported into the EU, such materials are not yet regulated at EU level.

The Commission will shortly propose comprehensive legislation governing all feedingstuffs derived from GM crops and a draft regulation is expected to be submitted to the Council of Ministers early in the New Year.

DAFRD supports the introduction of specific controls on animal feed derived from GM crops and when this draft comes up for discussion will, in particular, be seeking:

•An assessment procedure for individual feedingstuffs, based on a dossier drawn up in accordance with established guidelines, demonstrating efficacy, safety and the monitoring procedures enabling identification throughout the supply chain;

•Specific labelling requirements to be applied throughout the supply chain to ensure transparency and facilitate consumer choice.

I refer to your letter requesting information on Directive 99/70/EC concerning the Framework Agreement on Fixed-Term Work and enclose a note on the Directive for the information of the Committee.

Council Directive concerning the Framework Agreement on Fixed-term Work concluded by UNICE, ETUC and CEEP.

Framework Agreement

The Framework Agreement on Fixed-term Work was concluded on 18 March, 1999 by the social partners at European level, (UNICE, ETUC and CEEP). To enable implementation of the Agreement at European level, a Directive containing the Agreement (99/70/EC) was adopted by the EU Council in July, 1999. Member States are required to comply with the Council Directive by July, 2001, which may be extended by up to a maximum of one additional year in certain circumstances.

The purpose of the proposed Directive is to improve the quality of fixed-term work by ensuring the application of the principle of non-discrimination. It also aims to establish a framework to prevent abuse arising from the use of successive fixed term employment contracts or relationships.

The agreement applies to fixed-term workers who have an employment contract or employment relationship as defined in law, collective agreements or practice. It does not apply to temporary agency work.

Directive Provisions

Under the terms of the Directive, fixed-term workers must not be treated less favourably than comparable full-time workers solely because they have a fixed-term contract unless different treatment is justified on objective grounds. To prevent abuse arising from the use of successive fixed-term employment contracts, Member States (after consultation with social partners) or the social partners themselves shall, where there are no equivalent legal measures to prevent abuse, introduce measures on the objective reasons justifying the renewal of such contracts, the maximum total duration of successive fixed-term contracts and the number of renewals of such contracts. The conditions under which fixed-term employment shall be regarded as “successive” and shall be deemed to be contracts of an indefinite duration must also be determined.

I attach a briefing note on the Commission Proposal for Closer Dialogue with the Fishing Industry. Please let me know if you require additional information.

Briefing for Joint Committee on European Affairs

Proposal for a Council Regulation on closer dialogue with the fishing industry

The proposal is part of an overall action plan for closer dialogue with the fisheries sector which has as a first objective, the reform of the structural and operational procedures of the Advisory Committee on Fisheries (ACF). On the 14 July the Advisory Committee was restructured by way of Commission Regulation. Organisations in environmental and development fields including those of a voluntary or non-profit making status, may have a role to play in he operations of the Advisoury Committee.

The Commission proposal on closer dialogue has two main objectives: to strengther the European organisations and trade associations in the fisheries sector and to improve communication with all groups affected by the Common Fisheries Policy, not just the fisheries sector but also groups in the environment and development fields.

A recent survey has shown that the resources of the European trade organisations at all levels are lacking and organisation at European level is weak. It is considered that these organisations need to be heard and to participate actively in the development of the CFP, specifically in the working of the Advisory Committee. The Commission is proposing to make 400,000 euros available annually in order for the organisations to organise a number of meetings within the overall framework of that Committee. As regards the communication aspect of the proposal, the purpose is to strengthen the dialogue with the groups concerned.

The proposal will be presented to the Fisheries Council on 26 October. Some discussions have taken place on the proposal at Working Group.

The Directive calls on employers to inform fixed-term workers about vacancies becoming available in the undertaking to ensure they have the same opportunity to secure permanent positions as other workers and, as far as possible, employers should facilitate access by fixed-term workers to appropriate training opportunities.

Present position in Ireland

The legislative position in Ireland is that, subject to certain thresholds, workers on fixed-term contracts have broadly equivalent entitlements to those enjoyed by employees with open-ended contracts.

Implementation

A Tripartite Working Group, representative of the social partners and Government, has been set up to discuss the measures necessary for the transposition of the Directive on Part-Time Work (97/81/EC) and the Directive on Fixed-term Work. Discussions are ongoing.

I refer to your letter of 12 November 1999 regarding the European Communities (Television Broadcasting) Regulations, 1999.

I attach some background information and a summary of the provision as requested. I hope it is of assistance to the Committee. We are available to provide any further assistance or clarification is required by the Committee.

Background:

1. Directive 89/552/EEC on broadcasting activities, known as the “Television without Frontiers” Directive was adopted on 3 October 1989. The primary objective of the Directive is to promote the free flow of broadcasting services across national boundaries by means of cable and other retransmission systems. It was prompted by the increasing internationalisation of broadcasting services arising from the development of satellite broadcasting and the rapid development of cable and other retransmission systems throughout Europe.

2. To achieve the free flow objective, it was considered necessary to establish a common European set of standards in a number of critical broadcasting areas, mainly advertising, sponsorship and programme responsibilities.

3. The 1989 Directive was transposed into Irish law through a number of measures including certain provisions of the Broadcasting Act, 1990, Statutory Instruments 251 and 252 of 1991 and the Codes of Standards, Practices and Prohibitions in advertising, sponsorship and other forms of commercial promotion in Broadcasting Services.

4. S.I. 251 of 1991 transposed number of mandatory provisions of the Directive related to the following:

•the definition of broadcasters (in 1991 the only television in operation or envisaged in this country were RTÉ and TV3),

•the prohibition on the broadcasting of programmes which would or could impair the moral, physical or mental development of minors and the prohibition of the broadcasting of material which contained incitement to hatred.

Directive 97/36/EC

5. The 1989 Directive was amended and updated through Directive 97/36/EC of June 1997. Statutory Instrument Number 313 of 1999, entitled the European Communities (Television Broadcasting) Regulations 1999, is essentially designed to update the provisions S.I. 251 of 1991 to bring them into line with the amending Directive.

6. Attached is a summary the individual regulations contained in S.I. 313 of 1999.

European Communities (Television Broadcasting) Regulations, 1999

Regulation 1

Regulation 2

This regulation contains definitions. It updates the definition of “broadcaster” and “television broadcasting” to bring them into line with the provisions of the Directive as amended by the 1997 Directive. It includes a definition of “teleshopping”. It also clarifies the criteria for deciding under which Member State’s jurisdiction a broadcasters falls. The Directive provides that this is determined mainly by where their head office is located and where management decisions concerning programming are taken.

Regulation 3

This regulation states that Regulations 4,5 and 6, which deal with European programme quota provisions, shall not apply to a television broadcast-

(a) that is intended for local audiences and does not form part of a national network, or

Regulations 4, 5 and 6

These regulations deal with the requirement in the Directive that television broadcasters must reserve a majority proportion of their transmission time, excluding time devoted to news, sporting events, games, advertising, teletext services and teleshopping for European works. These regulations, apart from the reference to teleshopping, are unchanged from the 1991 regulations.

Regulation 7

This regulation updates the requirement in the Directive that broadcasters shall not broadcast cinematographic work outside the periods agreed with the rights holders.

Regulation 8

This regulation takes into account changes to Article 22 provisions of the 1989 Directive. Under Article 22 broadcasters are prohibited from broadcasting programmes that might seriously impair the physical, mental or moral development of minors, in particular those which involve pornography or gratuitous violence. Regulation 8(1) and (2) deal with this provision. The only change to the 1991 provisions is that where a programme that might impair the physical, mental or moral development of minors is being shown in unencoded form, the broadcaster, in addition to selecting a time when a minor would not normally be expected to watch such a programme (as is required at present), must ensure that such programmes are preceded by an acoustic warning or are identified by the presence of a visual symbol throughout their duration.

The corresponding provision in SI 251 of 1991 also contained a prohibition on broadcasts that contain any incitement to hatred on the grounds of race, sex, religion or nationality (Regulation 7(3) of the 1991 Regulations). Our advice is that the provisions of the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act, 1989 are sufficient to enable us to claim that this provision of the Directive is adequately transposed without including a specific provision in these Regulations.

Regulation 9

This regulation provides an express right to Court action for persons directly affected by a broadcaster operating in breach of these regulations. Article 4 of the 1997 Directive includes a requirement that Member States include appropriate procedures for persons directly affected to apply to the competent judicial or other authorities for effective compliance according to national provisions.

Regulation 10

In reply to your letter of 12 November 1999 in connection with S.I.303 and S.I.304 of 1999, I enclose a copy of an explanatory note giving all of the details required.

New EU Requirements on Access to the Occupation of Road Transport Operator come into effect on 1 October, 1999

Council Directive 96/26/EC of 29 April, 1996 sets out the requirements on admission to the occupation of road haulage operator and road passenger transport operator and mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications intended to facilitate for these operators the right to freedom of establishment in national and international operations. This Directive was amended by Council Directive 98/76/EC of 1 October, 1998, which revises the requirements relating to financial standing, good repute and the educational standards for professional competence. The revised requirements come into effect from 1 October, 1999.

- An increase in the amount of capital and reserves an undertaking must have from EUR 3,000 per vehicle to EUR 9,000 for the first vehicle and EUR 5,000 for each additional vehicle. This requirement will apply in respect of applications for operator licences, and to vehicles added to existing licences, after 1 October, 1999. It will apply to all vehicles operated under licences issued before 1 October, 1999, with effect from 1 October, 2001.

- A tightening of the good repute provisions by the inclusion of offences relating to environmental protection and professional liability.

- A raising of the educational standard of the examination for professional competence and the introduction of a more detailed description of the organisation and marking of the examinations. (The Chartered Institute of Transport, the examining body appointed by the Minister, has put in place arrangements for the revised examination requirements).

The EU requirements on access to the occupation of road transport operator and mutual recognition of qualifications are given effect in this State by the European Communities (Road Passenger Transport) Regulations; 1991 (S.I. No. 59 of 1991) and the European Communities (Merchandise Road Transport) Regulations, 1991 (S.I. No. 60 of 1991).

The Minister for Public Enterprise has made new regulations entitled “European Communities (Road Passenger Transport) (Amendment) Regulations, 1999” and “European Communities (Merchandise Road Transport) (Amendment) Regulations, 1999”. These regulations give effect to the new EU requirements and come into operation with effect from 1 October, 1999.

General Affairs Council

13 September 1999

EAST TIMOR - Conclusions

The Council warmly welcomed the result of the popular consultation of the East Timorese people on 30 August 1999. The Council considers imperative Indonesia’s commitment to the full implementation of the 5 May 1999 Agreement between Portugal and Indonesia. The EU is committed to seeing the people of East Timor enjoy the independence which they have freely chosen. The Council paid tribute to the United Nations for the organisation of the popular consultation and to the courage and extraordinary work of the personnel of the United Nations Mission in East Timor (UNAMET) in the most challenging of circumstances.

The Council condemned in the strongest terms the atrocious acts of terror in East Timor which have followed the announcement of the result of the popular consultation and which have been perpetrated with the complicity of the Indonesian armed forces and police. The Government of Indonesia remains responsible for law and order in the territory.

The Council took note of President Habibie’s announcement yesterday that Indonesia would be ready to accept an international force to help create peace in East Timor, protect the population of the territory and implement the outcome of the popular consultation. It underlined the need for the earliest possible deployment of an international force. Order, security and the rule of law must be restored immediately. The EU supports rapid action by the Security Council to decide the mandate of an international presence. The attitude of the EU towards Indonesia will depend on the implementation, without delay and without conditions, of the undertakings given by the President of Indonesia.

The Council has agreed, for a period of four months, on an embargo on the export of arms, munitions and military equipment, a ban on the supply of equipment which might be used for internal repression or terrorism, and a suspension of bilateral military cooperation. The Council will decide, in the light of the situation after that period, on a possible further suspension, of a period to be determined. It invited its competent bodies and the Commission urgently to complete the necessary legal acts.

The Council stressed that an urgent priority is to remedy the grave humanitarian situation. It expressed its deepest indignation at the attacks which have been mounted on humanitarian personnel, church members and human rights defenders. It urges the Indonesian Government to allow the safe return of international humanitarian organisations and agencies to East Timor without delay. They must have secure access to displaced people to allow them safe return to their homes. It welcomed the Commissions’s intention to pursue urgently the implementation of humanitarian aid and to provide, in coordination with international organisations and notably the UNDP, further humanitarian assistance to those in need. The Council also supports the call of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights for the convening of a Special Session of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR). The Council called for an investigative mission by the CHR to gather the facts and ascertain responsibilities for the campaign of terror which followed the holding of the referendum.

After the resounding vote in the popular consultation, East Timor’s independence must proceed without delay, as provided for in the Agreement of 5 May. The Member States of the European Union look forward to recognising East Timor once the process towards independence is complete.

The Council emphasised its desire to see a strong, democratic and united Indonesia.

COUNCIL COMMON POSITION

of 16 September 1999

concerning restrictive measures against the Republic of Indonesia

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 15 thereof,

Taking into account the conclusions adopted by the Council on 13 September 1999,

(1)In view of the current appalling situation in East Timor, where serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law are taking place, the European Union considers it appropriate to take restrictive measures against the Republic of Indonesia;

(2)Action by the Community is needed in order to implement the measures to prevent the supply of equipment which might be used for internal repression or terrorism,

An embargo on the export of arms, munitions and military equipment shall be imposed on the Republic of Indonesia.

The embargo referred to in the first subparagraph shall cover weapons designed to kill and their ammunition, weapon platforms, non-weapon platforms and ancillary equipment. It shall also cover spare parts, repairs, maintenance and transfer of military technology.

The embargo shall also cover contracts entered into prior to the onset of the embargo.

A ban on the supply of equipment which might be used for internal repression or terrorism will be imposed on the Republic of Indonesia.

Bilateral military cooperation between the Republic of Indonesia and Member States shall be suspended.

In order to maximise the impact of the above measures, the European Union shall deploy efforts to encourage other countries to adopt restrictive measures similar to those contained in this Common Position.

For the Council

The President

T. HALONEN

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2158/1999

of 11 October 1999

concerning a ban on the supply to Indonesia of equipment which might be used for internal repression or terrorism

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 301 thereof,

Having regard to Council Common Position 1999/624/CFSP of 16 September 1999, concerning restrictive measures against the Republic of Indonesia ⁽¹⁾,

(1)Common Position 1999/624/CFSP, in view of the current situation in East Timor where serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law are taking place, provides for a ban on the supply to Indonesia of equipment which might be used for internal repression or terrorism;

(2)That measure falls within the scope of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

(3)Therefore, and with a view to avoiding distortion of competition, Community legislation is necessary for the implementation of that measure as far as the territory of the Community is concerned; such territory is deemed to encompass, for the purposes of this Regulation, all the territories of the Member States to which the Treaty establishing the European Community is applicable, under the conditions laid down in that Treaty;

(4)A procedure should be provided to amend, if necessary, the list of equipment which might be used for internal repression or terrorism;

(5)There is a need for the Commission and the Member States to inform each other of the measures taken under this Regulation and of other relevant information at their disposal in connection with this Regulation, without prejudice to existing obligations with regard to certain items concerned;

(6)In view of the possibly limited duration of the Regulation, it should be provided that sanctions can be imposed immediately where the provisions of the Regulation are infringed,

(a)sell, supply, export or ship, directly or indirectly, equipment listed in Annex I, parts A and B, whether or not originating in the Community, to any person or body in the Republic of Indonesia or to any person or body for the purpose of any business carried on in, or operated from, the territory of the Republic of Indonesia;

(b)participate in related activities the object or effect of which is, directly or indirectly, to promote the transactions or activities referred to in subparagraph (a).

2. The competent authorities of the Member States, listed in Annex II, may authorise the transactions or activities referred to in paragraph 1, in respect of the items listed in part B of Annex 1, when they have obtained conclusive evidence that the end-use of these items is not for internal repression or terrorism.

The Council shall adopt by qualified majority amendments to the list set out in Annex I on the basis of a proposal from the Commission.

The Annex shall not include items specially designed or modified for military use already subject to the arms embargo established on the basis of Article 1 of Common Position 1999/624/CFSP.

Each Member State shall determine the sanctions to be imposed where the provisions of this Regulation are infringed.

Pending the adoption, where necessary, of any legislation to this end, the sanctions to be imposed where the provisions of this Regulation are infringed shall be those determined by the Member States in accordance with Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 926/98 of 27 April 1998 concerning the reduction of certain economic relations with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia ⁽¹⁾.

The Commission and the Member States shall, insofar as they are not otherwise already obliged to do so, inform each other of the measures taken under this Regulation and supply each other with other relevant information at their disposal, such as breaches and enforcement problems, judgments handed down by national courts or decisions of international fora and authorisations granted under Article 1(2).

—to any body which is incorporated or constituted under t law of a Member State.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publicill tion in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Luxembourg, 11 October 1999.

For the Council

The President

T. HALONEN

ANNEX I

EQUIPMENT FOR INTERNAL REPRESSION OR TERRORISM, ENVISAGED BY ARTICLE 1

(The following list does not include items which have been specially designed or modified for military use and are covered by the arms embargo established on the basis of Common Position 1999/624/CFSP)

PART A

Helmets providing ballistic protection, anti-riot helmets, anti-riot shields and ballistic shields and specially designed components therefor.

Smooth bore weapons and related ammunition, other than those specially designed for military use, and specially designed components therefor;

2. air or cartridge powered guns designed as industrial tools or humane animal stunners.

Simulators for training in the use of firearms and specially designed or modified components and accessories therefor.

Bombs and grenades, other than those specially designed for military use, and specially designed components therefor.

Body armour, other than those manufactured to military standards or specifications, and specially designed components therefor.

All-wheel-drive utility vehicles capable of off road use that have been manufactured or fitted with ballistic protection, and profiled armour for such vehicles.

Vehicles specially designed or modified to be electrified to repel boarders and components therefor specially designed or modified for that purpose.

Acoustic devices represented by the manufacturer or supplier as suitable for riot-control purposes, and specially designed components therefor.

Leg-irons, gangchains, shackles and electric-shock belts, specially designed for restraining human beings;

handcuffs for which the maximum overall dimension including chain does not exceed 240 mm when locked.

Portable devices designed or modified for the purpose of riot control or self-protection by the administration of an incapacitating substance (such as tear gas or pepper sprays), and specially designed components therefor.

Portable devices designed or modified for the purpose of riot control or self-protection by the administration of an electric shock (including electric-shock batons, electric shock shields, stun guns and electric shock dart guns (tasers)) and components therefor specially designed or modified for that purpose.

Electronic equipment capable of detecting concealed explosives and specially designed components therefor;

Electronic jamming equipment specially designed to prevent the detonation by radio remote control of improvised devices and specially designed components therefor.

Equipment and devices specially designed to initiate explosions by electrical or non-electrical means, including firing sets, detonators, igniters, boosters and detonating cord, and specially designed components therefor;

those specially designed for a specific commercial use consisting of the actuation or operation by explosive means of other equipment or devices the function of which is not the creation of explosions (e.g., car air bag inflaters, electric-surge arresters of fire sprinkler actuators).

2. containers designed for holding objects known to be, or suspected of being improvised explosive devices.

Night vision and thermal imaging equipment and image intensifier tubes or solid state sensors therefor. Software specially designed and technology required for all listed items.

PART B

ANNEX II

Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Handel en Ontwikkelingssamenwerking

Ministère des affaires étrangères, du commerce extérieur et de la coopération au développement

Please find enclosed herewith, for your information and appropriate action, a copy of S.I. No. 357 of 1999, European Communities (Ban on the Supply to Indonesia of Equipment which might be used for Internal Repression or Terrorism) Regulations, 1999, which the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Ms. Mary Harney, TD, has signed in exercise of the powers conferred on her by Section 3 of the European Communities Act, 1972. These Regulations, give full effect to EU Council Regulation (EC) No. 2158/1999 of 11 October, 1999.

Notice of this S.I. is being published in the three main national newspapers and An Iris Oifigiúil. Copies of the Regulations are available from the Government Publications Sales Office, Sun Alliance House, Molesworth Street, Dublin 2, or by mail order from Government Fax: (01) 4752760 (Price 60p, postage 36p)

S.I. No. 357 of 1999

European Communities (Ban on the Supply to Indonesia of Equipment which might be used for Internal Repression or Terrorism) Regulations, 1999

I, Mary Harney, Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, in exercise of the powers conferred on me by section 3 of the European Communities Act, 1972 (No. 27 of 1972), and for the purposes of giving effect to Council Regulation (EC) No. 2158/1999 of 11 October, 1999¹, hereby make the following Regulations:

1. (1) These Regulations may be cited as the European Communities (Ban on the Supply to Indonesia of Equipment which might be used for Internal Repression and Terrorism) Regulations, 1999.

2. A person who contravenes Article 1.1 of the Council Regulation (EC) No. 2158/1999 of 11 October, 1999¹, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1,500 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both.

3. Where an offence under these Regulations is committed by a body corporate and is proved to have been so committed with the consent, connivance or approval of or to have been attributable to any neglect on the part of any person, being a director, manager, secretary or other officer of the body corporate who was purporting to act in any such capacity, that person as well as the body corporate, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished as if he were guilty of the first-mentioned offence.

EXPLANATORY NOTE

(This note is not part of the instrument and does not purport to be a legal interpretation).

The effect of this Order is to provide for penalties for infringements of Council Regulation (EC) No. 2158/1999 which introduced a ban on the supply to Indonesia of equipment which might be used for internal repression or terrorism.

General Affairs Council

15 November 1999

INDONESIA - CONCLUSIONS

The Council reviewed recent events in Indonesia and noted the significant steps that had been taken in its democratic development. The Council especially welcomed the appointment of an inclusive and broadly based Government of national unity. The EU looks forward to working closely with the new Government on a wide range of issues.

The Council welcomed the determination of the new Indonesian Government to revive the economy and to restore confidence by such means as carrying through bank restructuring, dealing with the corporate debt problem and combating corruption. The Council also stressed the vital importance of continued support from and close co-operation with the international financial institutions (IFIs). The Council expressed its confidence that co-operation between the IFIs and the Indonesian Government would prove successful.

The Council affirmed the readiness of the EU to support the efforts of the new Indonesian Government towards economic recovery through an enhanced economic dialogue designed to promote sustained expansion of trade and investment between the EU and Indonesia.

Human rights and fundamental freedoms, the rule of law and a well-functioning judiciary as well as good governance are cornerstones in Indonesia’s further development. It is also important that reforms in the military and police will continue and their roles in society be adjusted accordingly. The EU stands ready to support Indonesia in its endeavours. In this context, the Council suggested a second joint seminar on human rights and good governance be organised next year.

The Council also expressed its concern at the dire social and environmental consequences of the financial crisis in Indonesia. It suggested that EU-Indonesia co-operation in social and environmental matters be intensified. The Council welcomed indications that the Indonesian Government was considering to bring forward reforms aimed at improving the functioning of the free market and the judicial system. The Council expressed the EU’s willingness to organise a beneficial exchange of experiences in these fields.

The Council further stressed the need for the new Government of Indonesia to fully comply with Security Council Resolution 1272, in particular to work with the UNHCR, to take immediate and effective measures to ensure unimpeded access of the UN agencies to East Timorese displaced persons in West Timor and other parts of Indonesia and to cooperate in their safe return to East Timor.

The Council welcomed the Commission’s intention to present a Communication on EU-Indonesia relations very soon. The prospective communication would offer the opportunity to define a strategy for the development of closer relations between the EU and Indonesia into the new millennium. It should also review the possibility of refocusing technical assistance and other forms of support as Indonesia proceeds towards further political, social and economic reforms.

The Council agreed to revert to the question of Indonesia at its meeting on 6 December and invited the appropriate bodies of the Council and the Commission to prepare that discussion.

To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the reason the EU ban on the supply of equipment to Indonesia which might be used for internal repression will expire in January 2000.

Following the unleashing of violence and destruction in East Timor after the announcement of the result of the referendum on independence, the General Affairs Council, at its meeting on 13 September, adopted a number of measures against Indonesia. It agreed for a period of four months on an embargo on the export of arms, munitions and military equipment, a ban on the supply of equipment which might be used for internal repression or terrorism, and a suspension of bilateral military cooperation.

I made clear at that time that I had sought to have these measures adopted for an indefinite period, but I also indicated that it was not possible to get agreement for an initial period longer than four months. The Council in January will decide, in the light of the situation then prevailing, on a possible further suspension, for a period to be determined.

The Council has monitored developments in Indonesia closely since September, and has noted the many challenges facing the new, democratic administration of President Wahid, as well as the new opportunities that exist. In that context the Council agreed on 15 November that human rights and fundamental freedoms, the rule of law and a well-functioning judiciary as well as good governance are cornerstones in Indonesia’s further development. It further stressed that reforms in the military and police should continue and that their roles in society be adjusted accordingly.

When the embargo is reviewed by the Council in January, I shall expect EU partners to take account of these principles as well as developments on the ground, including in relation to East Timor.

I enclose for your information reply I received from the Minister for the Environment in response to my representations concerning the proposal for a Directive on National Emission Ceilings for Certain Atmospheric Pollutants and a Directive relating to ozone in ambient air.

I refer further to your recent letter in connection with the proposal for a Directive on National Emission Ceilings (NECs) for Certain Atmospheric Pollutants and a Directive relating to ozone in ambient air.

Both these proposals are under discussion at EU level and the Council of Environment Ministers discussed them in open debate on 12 October, 1999. The explanation of the background to the Directive by the consultant to the European Affairs Committee is basically factually correct. However, I would not agree with all of his assessment and conclusions concerning Ireland. In tandem, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) has drafted a Protocol to abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-Level Ozone requiring national emission ceilings for the same four pollutants as covered by the Commission proposals. I expect to sign this in Gothenberg at the end of the month.

Ireland is committed to contributing to the most environmentally ambitious ceilings for the four pollutants involved, given their adverse effects on the environment and human health. In the UNECE context, Ireland has committed to national emission ceilings, which are broadly equivalent, in environmental terms, to those proposed by the European Commission.

The ceilings for the majority of the pollutants will be achieved by current and proposed EU and national legislation, inter alia, stiffer fuel standards, emission standards for stationary pollution sources, integrated pollution, prevention and control licensing of industrial activities by the EPA, traffic management policies, reductions in the power generation sector, changes in fertilizer composition and slurry spreading practices. The lead in time for implementing the necessary changes is to 2010 and the owners of potentially affected plants including Moneypoint, will have adequate time to implement least cost solutions. You will note that the benefits (in health terms, quality of life for our citizens, ecosystem protection etc.) will exceed costs; indeed it has not been possible to include all the benefits in the modelling process.

With regard to the proposed EU directive on ozone in ambient air, this is closely linked with the NECs proposal. Ireland does not have the same level of domestic ozone problems as many neighbouring Member States. Nonetheless we are committed to reducing ozone precursor pollutants such as oxides of nitrogen and volatile organic compounds to reduce domestic and transboundary air pollution.

BRIEFING NOTE FOR JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS

Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No. 54/1999, allocating, for 1999, catch quotas in Greenland waters

PURPOSE OF REGULATION

To revise the 1999 catch quota for Community vessels fishing capelin in Greenland waters.

BACKGROUND

The EU/Greenland Fisheries Agreement of 1989 to 1994 was extended in 1994 for an additional 6 years to 31 December, 2000. The parties to that agreement subsequently agreed on a Third Fisheries Protocol (Agreed record of conclusions of June/July, 1994 negotiations) covering the period 1/1/1995-31/12/2000 which sets down the terms and conditions for fishing by EU vessels in Greenland waters, including catch quotas for the EU in Greenland waters for each year of the Protocol.

Under the Agreement the EU is allocated catch quotas in Greenland waters for cod, redfish, halibut, deep-water prawns, catfish, blue whiting, capelin, roundnose grenadier and polar cod (over 140,000 tonnes in all). Only the capelin quota is available to all EU Member States. Additional catch possibilities for cod (“cod bank”), temporary joint ventures and joint enterprises are also provided for under the Agreement. Compensation of € 37.7 million per annum is paid to Greenland.

The current agreement will be tacitly renewed for an additional 6 years unless terminated by 31/3/2000.

COMMISSION PROPOSAL

The capelin stock in the waters off Eastern Greenland is managed jointly by Greenland, Iceland and Norway. The Community is entitled to 70% of the Greenland share of the capelin Total Allowable Catch (TAC) less quantities granted to the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Norway.

Council Regulation No. 54/1999 established, for 1999, a Community catch quota for capelin in Greenland waters of 109,340 tonnes on the basis of a TAC of 1,420,000 tonnes. However, under the 1999 tripartite agreement between Greenland, Iceland and Norway the TAC for capelin for 1999 in ICES Area XIV/V was revised to 1,285,000 tons. The purpose of the Commission proposal, therefore, is to revise the Community catch quota for 1999 to take account of the tripartite agreement.

The quota accruing to Greenland under the 1999 tripartite agreement is 141,350 tons. As the Community is entitled under the Third Protocol to 70% of the Greenland quota less quantities granted to the Faroe Islands (10,000), Iceland (30,000) and Norway (10,000) its net quota for 1999 in Greenland waters is 48,945 tons. While the latter quota is available to all EU Member States Denmark takes almost 80% of the EU catch. Germany and Sweden take the balance.

PARTICIPATION BY THE IRISH FLEET

Capelin is the only stock available to Ireland under the existing EU-Greenland Fisheries Agreement. The Department has actively encouraged the Irish fleet to take up this opportunity and facilitated the grant by the Greenland authorities of licences to five Irish vessels for the 1999 season. While the opportunity was not taken up by the vessels involved (for technical and timing reasons) there is now a growing interest in the capelin fishery from the Donegal pelagic fleet and it is likely that the vessels will exploit the fishery next year.

The Department has also been involved in the first round of exploratory talks with Greenland on a possible Fourth Protocol agreement. Any opening up or extension of the existing agreement to other species may provide opportunities for the Irish deep-sea fleet. We must also ensure that the opportunity to fish capelin remains under any new Protocol.

Briefing Note for Joint Committee on European Affairs January, 2000

Topic: Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 64/432/EEC on animal health problems affecting intra-Community trade in bovine animals and swine

Background

Directive 64/432/EEC lays down conditions for intra Community trade in bovine animals and swine. It was substantially amended by the provisions of Council Directive 97/12 which came into effect on 1st July, 1999.

1. Proposal for the implementation of Databases for Bovine and Porcine Animals

This draft proposal was discussed at Council on 24/01/00. It arises from existing provisions under Council Directive 64/432 (as amended) to create computer databases for the storage of information on bovine animals and swine, and their movements.

A common position was adopted at Council on the establishment of databases for cattle and pigs, along the following timetable:

•a database on the movement of animals from their holding of birth by the end of 2001 and from all holdings by the end of 2002.

•Deut, NL & Aus voted against the proposal, while Gre lifted its reserve following commitments form the Commission to look more closely at the Greek situation.

1.2 Irish Position on the Proposal

Ireland has no difficulty with the requirement for a database on bovines, as such a system is already operational. An application has been made to the EU Commission for the recognition of this system as fully operational from 1/1/2000.

In relation to current proposal in relation to pigs, Ireland needs such a facility for the control of Aujesky’s disease and can accept the Commission proposal to record movement from birth holdings from 31/12/2001 and from other holdings from 31/12/2002.

1.3 Other Member States

In relation to the porcines database, most MS’s appeared to be satisfied with the proposal although Germany and Austria expressed the view that the time being proposed for recording the movement of porcines was neither sufficiently long for their industry nor for a new computer database to operate satisfactorily. Belgium and the Netherlands indicated that in general their industry was already meeting these movement control requirements and from a food safety viewpoint were of the opinion that the recording dates should be brought forward rather than being further postponed. Greece has a problem due to the scattered nature of its holdings over its territory and had a national reserve in place up to Council. Commission has since undertaken to send a mission to look more closely at the Greek situation. (see voting at Council of 24/01/00 - above).

2. Proposal arising from various difficulties experienced by Member States in implementing the provisions of Directive 97/12

This proposal arises from implementation problems which have been encountered in a number of Member States arising from the changes introduced by 97/12. The proposal is currently being considered by the European Parliament.

In light of the experiences in Member States transitional measures were required to avoid disturbances in trade in live bovine and porcine animals. animals At the Working Party of Chief Veterinary Officers - 1 October, 1999, the Commission agreed to address the main problems identified, including:

-A derogation required by France and Belgium to allow fattening animals to move on a bilateral agreement basis to countries of similar status without TB and Brucellosis testing

-A request by Ireland to permit pre-export TB testing to take place at assembly centres rather than only at holdings of origin

-An amendment required to take account of Commission Legal Service concern on Comitology

-An extension from 31 December 1999 to 31 December 2000 of transitional measures concerning the export from Spain of bovines for slaughter.

This draft proposal is now designed to give effect to the commitments outlined above. It includes (at Art. 3) a provision whereby the Commission may adopt transitional measures applicable for a period of not more than three years. It is under this provision that the Commission intends to meet the Irish request to permit pre-export TB testing to take place at assembly centres rather than only at holdings of origin.

2.1 Irish Position on proposal

Ireland is satisfied with the proposal, and the Council Declaration on the proposal which establishes the framework to meet our request to permit pre-export TB testing to take place at assembly centres rather than only at holdings of origin.

2.2 Position of Other Member States on Proposal

With reference to your letter of 27 January, I attach briefing notes on a number of EU proposals for legislation, as requested by the Joint Committee at its meeting on 26 January 2000.

Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation 1255/1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products

(COM(1999) 608 final / Council reference 14114/99)

Background

Aid for school milk was governed by Council Regulation (EEC) No. 1847/83, which is now incorporated into Regulation 1255/99. All school pupils, including those attending pre-schools, are eligible to receive subsidised milk under the scheme. Each pupil is entitled to a quarter litre of milk per day at a cost of 12p. The level of Community aid paid under this scheme is 95% of the target price for milk. Approximately 2,600 Irish schools are participating in the scheme, covering over 91,000 pupils or 20% of the school-going population. The EU current figure is 12%.

Total expenditure under the School Milk Scheme in Ireland since 1996 is as follows:

In February 1999 an evaluation of the School Milk Scheme within the EU was presented to the Commission. The report concluded that the measure did not represent value for money and that resources should be channelled into measures that could be more effective, e.g. a promotional campaign to encourage milk consumption/national measures aimed at educating school children on the positive health and nutritional benefits of milk.

When the School Milk Scheme was discussed at the Agriculture Council in June 1999, the Ministers stressed the importance of milk consumption for young people and suggested that the Commission come forward with proposals for operating the scheme in a more cost effective way.

Proposal in COM(1999) 608 final

The Commission originally considered abolishing the Scheme but it has now proposed a co-financing approach - 50% by the Commission and 50% by Member States. The proposal also provides the legal basis for Member States to get a contribution from processors/farmers to part finance the national contribution. The proposal would reduce the Commission’s contribution to 48m euro annually, a saving of 43.2m euro in a full year.

Present position

The proposal was discussed at Working Group on 19 January 2000 and at the Special Committee on Agriculture on 14 February 2000. In general, Member States welcomed the continuation of the scheme but a broad majority of Member States, including Ireland, strongly opposed the proposal for co-financing. The Commission position is that co-financing is justified in this case because one of the purposes of the regulation, the health benefits for children, is not related to the common organisation of the market for milk products. Other points raised included the provision of low-fat milk products and the possibility of national funding being provided at local authority level.

Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No. 1255/99 on the Common Organisation of the Market in Milk and Milk Products (COM(1999)631 final / Council reference 13617/99)

Background

Under Article 38 of the Treaty of Rome, the products to be covered by the provisions of the Common Agricultural Policy were set out in Annex II of the Treaty. These included base agricultural commodities and also some products derived from these base commodities after what is often referred to as a ‘first stage of processing’. However, it was recognised in the mid 1960s that there are numerous other processed products not included in Annex II of the Treaty which use agricultural raw materials and which have been subject to further processing beyond a first stage. In recognition that these products are affected by the operation of the CAP, specific measures were introduced in 1966 to regulate trade in these processed products. The processed products subject to these regulations, and which were not listed in Annex II of the Treaty, became commonly known as non-Annex II products. With the adoption of the Treaty of Amsterdam in May 1999, and the resultant changes to some of the Union’s legal texts, these products are now officially known as non-Annex I products.

Proposal in COM(1999) 631 final

The proposal would extend the Commission’s competency to modify the list of Non-Annex 1 milk products qualifying for export refunds. The Commission already has competency in respect of cereals, sugar, rice and egg products but in order to target milk products, the Commission at present requires Council approval.

Present position

The proposal was discussed at Working Group on 18 January 2000 and at the Special Committee on Agriculture on 31 January 2000. At these meetings, all Member States except Germany, Italy, France and the UK indicated support or had no objection to the proposal. These four Member States have made their agreement to the proposal conditional on it being examined within the framework of the general discussion of the measures envisaged in the Commission’s Communication to the Council on Goods not covered by Annex I of the Treaty - Specific measures and inward processing (COM(1999) 625 final).

Proposals for Council Regulations

- amending Regulation (EC) No. 1251/1999 establishing a support system for producers of certain arable crops to include flax and hemp grown for fibre

- on the common organisation of the market in flax and hemp grown for fibre. (COM(1999) 576 final)

Background

The Commission proposal is to reform the textile fibre sector to enable it to compete in a global market in 6/7 years time with minimum reliance on Community support. The EU is expected to hold its market share in long fibres, i.e. the most valuable product, in which certain Member States (France, Belgium, Netherlands) have a recognised industry and a reputation for quality. Short fibres and associated products, in which the Community cannot compete (e.g. with jute or knaif from Iran) will have associated support withdrawn in 6 years. Current aid levels for short flax and hemp fibres are extremely high in relation to production costs and the value of the product itself. In many cases, these products have been grown mainly to benefit from the production aid. In 1998, the Council agreed that action should be taken to reduce the levels of aid.

Proposals in COM(1999) 576 final

The Commission proposals aim to effect a substantial reduction in the areas producing flax and hemp and to restrict eligibility to producers with real and economically viable production of these crops.

The first proposal is to include flax and hemp in the support regime for producers of certain arable crops governed by Council Regulation (EC) No. 1251/1999. The existing aid levels for flax and hemp are extremely high in relation to production costs and the value of the product itself. It is therefore proposed to bring the per-hectare rates of aid down to the rates for other arable crops by the 2002/2003 marketing year.

The second proposal is in respect of aid for processing the straw of flax and hemp grown for fibre. In order to ensure the survival of long-fibre textile flax production, the overall level of aid would have to be maintained close to its present level. The level of processing aid granted per tonne of long fibre will therefore be increased proportionately as the area aid received by the grower is reduced under the first proposal above. The market for short flax fibre and hemp fibre is much more fragmented and these products are most likely to be used in the paper pulp industry. The regime in force at present provides high levels of aid for all the crops concerned. The future regime for short fibres would be based on industrial market prices and, over and above the area aid, would provide a supplementary processing aid which would remain the same for five years despite the reduction in the area payment and be abolished thereafter.

The area payments will be subject to the rules on base areas laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1251/1999. To keep expenditure on the processing aid also within bounds, it is proposed to introduce a system of stabilisers for that aid. It is proposed to set a Maximum Guaranteed Quantity for long fibre flax and another for both short fibre flax and hemp fibre. These two Maximum Guaranteed Quantities are to be allocated among the Member States as National Guaranteed Quantities. The proposed National Guaranteed Quantities to be allotted to Ireland are 50 tonnes for long fibre flax and 50 tonnes for short fibre flax and hemp fibre.

The new regime would apply from the 2000/2001 marketing year, starting from 1 July 2000.

Ireland’s position

Irish production in this sector is very small. The tradition of growing flax for fibre has died out and there is now no processing or manufacturing activity here (there is still one processing plant in Northern Ireland). Since the introduction of a processing requirement for flax some years ago, there have been no applications for flax production aid. Hemp was grown by 4 people in 1999/2000 and the total area grown was 22 hectares. The national guaranteed quantities proposed for Ireland are adequate to cover anticipated production. The existing aid regime has not encouraged production of either flax or hemp in Ireland, or investment in processing capacity. The proposed reduced aid rates will not therefore encourage interest in the sector.

Present position

The proposals were discussed at four Working Group meetings in November/December 1999 and January 2000 and at the Special Committee on Agriculture on 31 January and 7 February 2000. There is broad agreement on the need for reform in the flax and hemp sector, in order (a) to trim down the budgetary cost and (b) to tighten control measures limiting the possibilities for premium hunting and the risk of the hemp crop being grown for illicit purposes. The proposals will be discussed at Council in the near future.

Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation 3508/92 establishing an integrated administration and control system for certain community aid schemes

Background

The amendment of Council Regulation 3508/92 on IACS (Integrated Administration and Control System) is necessary to cater for changes which were introduced in direct payments under Agenda 2000.

In addition to the essential changes being proposed, there are two additional proposals to which objections have been raised by Member States. These are

a)the proposal to allow the Commission to extend the integrated system to other community aid schemes (proposed new Article 1.2) and

b)the proposal to make the use of Geographical Information Systems and aerial or spatial orthimagery compulsory (proposed new Article 4).

Irish position

Ireland has no difficulty in accepting the changes which are proposed arising directly out of the changes in direct payments under Agenda 2000.

In common with most other Member States, Ireland objects to the transfer to the Commission of the power to extend the scope of the IACS to other Community aid schemes on the grounds that this competence had been reserved to the Council and this should remain the case. In practical terms the proposal may not cause us much difficulty but we would have concerns about the principle of allowing powers which are traditionally reserved for the Council to be transferred to the Commission and consider that it should be possible to name in the Council Regulation the particular schemes to which IACS might be applied if the Commission thought it fit to do so.

Ireland has no problem with the proposal to make the use of Geographical Information Systems and aerial or spatial orthoimagery compulsory as we already have a Geographical Information System and are using digital orthophotography. Some Member States have put alternative systems in place and are now reluctant to change.

Present position

The proposal was discussed by Working Group on 1 December 1999 and by the Special Committee on Agriculture on 17 January 2000 and it has been referred back to the Working Party for examination of further technical issues on 23 February.

Re: Proposal for a Regulation (EC) of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the institutions and bodies of the European Community and on the free movement of such data.

Your letter of 12 November, 1999 to the Secretary General, refers. I enclose some background information and a summary of the above proposal as requested.

Data Protection seeks to ensure that information about the individual is handled properly and responsibly, recognising that there are privacy issues arising from the vast amount of information kept on computer about individuals. It gives rights to individuals to protect them against the misuse of personal information and places obligations of care on those who keep personal information about individuals. The Council of Europe Convention on Data Protection of 28 January 1981 for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data (ETS 108) is the basic framework document within which the rights and obligations of persons in the sphere of data protection are set out. Ireland’s existing data protection law, for example, the Data Protection Act, 1988, gives effect to that Council of Europe Convention.

Countries who have ratified this Convention operate a data protection regime to an internationally recognised standard of behaviour, based on a set of guiding principles and by providing rules for the flow of personal data across borders. The Office of the Data Protection Commissioner was established to ensure compliance with the Act.

The EC Data Protection Directive (95/46/EC) was adopted on 24 October 1995. The Directive provides for the harmonisation of data protection laws across the EU. EU Member States were required to put in place by 24 October 1998 national provisions giving effect to the Directive. The objective is to ensure a data protection regime, in common with our EU partners, that will provide for common standards, so that information about individuals is properly protected while allowing the effective discharge of business and other activities. The transposition of the Directive into Irish law will be accomplished by amending the Data Protection Act, 1988. It must be pointed out, however, that Irish law, as contained in the Data Protection Act, 1988, is already consistent with many aspects of Directive 95/46/EC. The necessary legislation to amend the Data Protection Act, 1988 by providing for the inclusion of those elements of the Directive which are not already provided for, is currently being drafted in the Office of the Parliamentary Draftsman and it is hoped to have a Bill published early in the year 2000. To date, only six other Member States (Portugal, Sweden, Finland, Italy, Greece and Belgium) have implemented the Directive.

Article 286 of the Treaty of Amsterdam provides that Community Acts on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and the free movement of such data shall apply to the institutions and bodies set up by, or on the basis of the Treaty. The Treaty also provides that the Council shall establish an independent supervisory body responsible for monitoring the application of such Community acts to institutions and bodies.

The present proposal for a Regulation, which is presented by the Commission, is intended to provide for the application of Community rules on data protection, for the most part contained in Directive 95/46/EC, to the Community institutions and bodies and for the monitoring of the application of such rules by an independent supervisory body.

Article 286 provides furthermore that Community institutions and bodies should apply the Regulation from 1 January, 1999. Hence, there is a certain amount of urgency attaching to the settlement of the Regulation. However, it is not expected that the text of a Regulation will be ready for submission to the Council for adoption until late in the first quarter of 2000.

The first reading of the proposed regulation by the Working Group on Economic Questions - Data Protection began on 20th September, 1999 and to date Articles 1 to 39 have been examined. Examination of the remaining Articles (40 to 49) will commence in January 2000 under the Portuguese Presidency. The proposed Regulation will then be given a second reading by the Working Group.

The Proposal provides for regulation in the areas of principles relating to data quality, criteria for making data processing legitimate, processing of special categories of data, information to be given to the data subject, the data subject’s right of access, the data subject’s right to object, confidentiality and security of processing, the appointment of a Data Protection Officer, remedies and sanctions, the creation of a European Data Protection Supervisor and the protection of data and privacy in the context of internal telecommunications networks.

Ireland attends meetings of the Working Group on Economic Questions - Data Protection which is currently concerned with an examination of the proposed Regulation. The Regulation as it is evolving is adequate, in that it closely mirrors the provisions on data protection that are contained in Directive 95/46/EC. By its nature the text of the Regulation must be more precise and detailed than the general principles outlined in the Directive, so that there can be clarity as to the responsibilities of the institutions in the handling of personal data. In examining the Regulation the emphasis has been on ensuring that due care will be taken to ensure that an individual’s rights regarding the processing of personal data are respected, and that the concept of free movement of data - the other side of the coin - is not unduly circumscribed. The Regulation also applies to the telecommunications sector. An associated Directive intra EU States is Directive 97/66/EC. That Directive and the corresponding provisions in the Regulation are the responsibility of the Department of Public Enterprise.

Appendix I

Copies of Correspondence on EU Legislation with Government Departments and Agencies

Correspondence on EU Legislation with Government Departments and Agencies

BRIEFING MATERIAL FOR MEETING OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS ON 14 JULY, 1999.

BACKGROUND

ACTION IN IRELAND

Protective Measures with regard to Contamination of Product by Dioxins

COMMISSION DECISIONS 1999/363/EC, 1999/389/EC, 1999/390/EC

1. Legal provisions

2. Tracing and Detention of Product

3. PCB/Dioxin Monitoring

4. Exports from Ireland

Food Contamination Emergencies

Background

Powers

Emergencies

Dioxin Contamination in products from Belgium

Adequacy of Response in Ireland

Future Role of the FSAI

Lessons for the future

Joint Committee on European Affairs

Note on draft EU Framework Directive on Water Policy

General Terms of Proposal

Discussion to Date and Possible Future Action

Implications of Proposals for Ireland

Outstanding Issues of Relevance to Ireland

BRIEFING NOTE FOR JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS

Amendment of Council Directive 90/220/EEC on the deliberate release of genetically modified organisms to the environment

Background

Amendment proposal

Objectives

Political agreement on a common position

National consultation on “GMOs & the Environment”

GMO and Agriculture

General Comment

Advisory Committees

G.M. Feedingstuffs

Council Directive concerning the Framework Agreement on Fixed-term Work concluded by UNICE, ETUC and CEEP.

Framework Agreement

Directive Provisions

Briefing for Joint Committee on European Affairs

Proposal for a Council Regulation on closer dialogue with the fishing industry

Present position in Ireland

Implementation

Background:

Directive 97/36/EC

European Communities (Television Broadcasting) Regulations, 1999

Regulation 1

Regulation 2

Regulation 3

Regulations 4, 5 and 6

Regulation 7

Regulation 8

Regulation 9

Regulation 10

New EU Requirements on Access to the Occupation of Road Transport Operator come into effect on 1 October, 1999

General Affairs Council

13 September 1999

EAST TIMOR - Conclusions

COUNCIL COMMON POSITION

of 16 September 1999

concerning restrictive measures against the Republic of Indonesia

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2158/1999

of 11 October 1999

concerning a ban on the supply to Indonesia of equipment which might be used for internal repression or terrorism

ANNEX I

EQUIPMENT FOR INTERNAL REPRESSION OR TERRORISM, ENVISAGED BY ARTICLE 1

PART A

PART B

ANNEX II

S.I. No. 357 of 1999

European Communities (Ban on the Supply to Indonesia of Equipment which might be used for Internal Repression or Terrorism) Regulations, 1999

EXPLANATORY NOTE

General Affairs Council

15 November 1999

INDONESIA - CONCLUSIONS

BRIEFING NOTE FOR JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS

PURPOSE OF REGULATION