Witnesses:

Mrs I Oldfather )

341

The Chairperson: I welcome Mrs Irene Oldfather, recently appointed Convener of the Scottish Parliament's European Committee, Stephen Imrie, the Clerk, and David Simpson, the Assistant Clerk.

342

Mrs Oldfather, from her membership of the Committee, has a good understanding of past events, but obviously she cannot fully account for the previous Convener's actions. Please make your presentation, Mrs Oldfather, after which members may wish to ask questions.

343

Mrs Oldfather: Thank you. I welcome the Committee of the Centre on behalf of the Scottish Parliament and its European Committee. It is a pleasure and a privilege to have the Committee here and to have the opportunity to share experiences. Thank you for inviting me to give evidence.

344

The European Committee is one of 17 Committees in the Scottish Parliament and it has been in operation for two and a half years. It is a mandatory Committee, which means that after an election the Parliament has 42 days to set it up; there is no choice about the matter. The Committee began with a larger membership than it has at present. It currently has nine members: four Labour; one Liberal Democrat; two SNP; one Conservative, and one Independent. It is fair to say that the Committee works very well on a cross-party basis. We have seldom had to take votes, and that has been a good thing.

345

It is opportune that you have come to speak to us, since for two reasons the Committee is at a crossroads. The first is that I took over as Convener from Hugh Henry last December. The second is that we are beginning a new year and a new work programme.

346

We will be assessing how we have done things over the last two and a half years and examining such issues as our scrutiny role. We are attempting to refine that and identify ways in which we might do things a little better. The Committee has had a very heavy workload, and we feel that there might be ways in which we can streamline and improve our processes. We are to discuss the matter on 15 January and I should certainly not like to pre-empt any decision the Committee might take, but I thought I should point out that there are areas that we feel we could refine.

347

I know that you spoke to Tom Sullivan from CoSLA. While I do not expect any decision to be taken on 15 January, we have discussed the possibility of opening an office in Brussels or having a parliamentary representative in the Scotland Europa office. It would be a valuable resource for the Committee, but we have to prioritise when it is difficult to find resources. We are always rather strapped for cash, and I am sure you are acquainted with the same problem. The Committee tries to engage with Brussels by having an annual visit, and this is due next month.

348

The Committee has produced 19 reports since its inception. It has undertaken 10 large inquiries and published smaller reports during that time. We are about to produce a fairly major piece of work on enlargement, which we look forward to publishing in the next month or so. We produce reports in several ways. The Committee has undertaken very large inquiries, and it has used the system of Committee rapporteurships, whereby individual members have been able to investigate policy areas that interest them. The Committee has taken some time to find its niche in Scotland. Before devolution CoSLA had a very active European team, and I am sure Tom Sullivan spoke to you about that. The Scotland Office - now the Scottish Executive - was also very active in European matters.

349

It was difficult for the Committee to find its niche at first without duplicating the efforts of others and reinventing the wheel. Over the period of its inquiries the Committee has begun to find that there are areas where Parliament has a very valid role to play in trying to influence the Scottish Executive in their discussions with UK Ministers, et cetera. Perhaps the Committee should also look at implementation and areas there that it could report on more frequently.

350

One of the difficulties faced by the Committee is changing membership. Only three people have served on the Committee for the whole period since its establishment two and a half years ago, yet we are covering a very complex area. That has been difficult. Our former Convener was promoted to a ministerial post, and obviously we would not want to have prevented that or taken that away from him. The next few months will be important for the Committee, and today's deliberations should help us formulate some of our ideas.

351

Mr Beggs: Thank you for your presentation. I am curious about the amount of time that your Committee devotes to matters. I gather from reading the background information that the Committee meets once a fortnight. How much members' time does that require? We already have 11 Committees, and the question is whether to have another Committee or a subcommittee. Is sufficient time devoted to your work in scrutinizing European affairs?

352

Mrs Oldfather: We normally meet fortnightly, but during inquiries we often find that we have to meet more frequently. For example, during our recent inquiry into governance we wanted to meet with MEPs and MPs to take their views into account. As a result, we changed the day on which we met, and we had more frequent meetings. We allow the subject matter to dictate our schedule to some extent, but the Committee generally meets fortnightly, and we are reasonably satisfied with that.

353

Large numbers of documents come from Brussels, and the Committee has to be selective about what it can do. It could probably meet every day, seven hours a day, but that might not be very productive. We must select one or two areas where we believe we can influence decisions. We can then develop arguments and lobby the Scottish Executive and others once we have formulated our opinions.

354

I have served on three Committees in the Scottish Parliament - the Health Committee, the Rural Development Committee and the European Committee - and in all of them there is the temptation to try to do too much. It is important to be realistic about expectations and what can be achieved.

355

Mr Beggs: Westminster Committees normally have six weeks to consult on a subject. If your Committee has to provide input to a Westminster report, would that mean that it would have a shorter time frame and would be reporting within four or five weeks? How much time do you have for consultations that feed into the Westminster system?

356

Mrs Oldfather: We have picked certain inquiries ourselves - for example, we looked at the common fisheries policy. We knew that the European Commission was going to be looking at that policy and that the timetable was going to be six or seven months. For our major inquiries we have tried to choose issues that we knew we would have time to develop and take evidence on.

357

The Committee has to work to a very short timescale on documents coming from Westminster. In a sense this does, to a degree, determine what we can or cannot look at. Timing is crucial. There is no point in closing the stable door after the horse has bolted - there is no point in devoting Committee time to an issue if it is already too late to influence the decision-making process.

358

The Committee has been on a learning curve. We must continually look forward in order to obtain intelligence early, but sometimes by the time we receive information from Westminster it is already too late. That is why we have looked at developing e-mail systems, networks and contacts in Brussels. We have examined the possibility of placing a parliamentary official in Brussels, but no decisions have been taken because of resource difficulties.

359

We are looking at the Commission's work programme, which will be produced early in 2002. We can use that to attempt to determine our larger longer-term inquiries, and this has been helpful. It is about being proactive as well as reactive. We realise that there is only so much that we can do. However, it is helpful to have information early.

360

Mr Beggs: Has there been a problem in obtaining information from the Scottish Executive's representatives in Brussels? Why do you need to have an additional parliamentary representative there?

361

Mrs Oldfather: At a formal level, Scotland Europa and the Scottish Executive offices at Scotland House work to Ministers. The Committee visits Brussels once a year and, as I have said, we have established good contacts with officials at Scotland House, whom we found, at an informal level, to be as helpful to us as they can be.

362

Dr Birnie: What you say is fascinating, and relevant to what we will decide to do. I read that the previous Convener said that the European Committee should seek to influence EU policy directly. How have you gone about doing that, or to what extent have you managed to do that?

363

Your counterpart in Westminster, the House of Commons Select Committee on European Legislation, has the so-called European Scrutiny Reserve Resolution, whereby Ministers will normally resist making decisions until matters have gone through the Committee's accountability/scrutiny mechanism. As I understand it, there is no similar resolution in Edinburgh. Should that be changed, and can it be changed in the foreseeable future?

364

Mrs Oldfather: Those are important questions. I shall answer the second one first. We recently produced a report on governance. In the course of our deliberations we considered the possibility of a Scottish scrutiny reserve. That forms part of reviewing the whole process of how the Committee can bring a Scottish dimension to bear upon UK representation and the European Commission.

365

We are not seeking to set up a scrutiny reserve in the same sense that it restricts a UK Minister in a Council meeting. That would not be appropriate for us, nor would it be what we want. On the few occasions when we would undertake an in-depth analysis of a problem with a particular Scottish dimension, we would like to be able to ask the Scottish Executive to consider holding back until the Committee has had the opportunity to put its viewpoint to the Minister. Hopefully such action would inform the discussions that the Minister would have with his UK colleagues. It was proposed in our governance inquiry to look at improving the links between the Committee, the Scottish Executive and our colleagues in Westminster.

366

As for your point about direct influence, Mr Henry, the previous Convener, was referring to reports and inquiries that are taken to the European Commission on our visits to Brussels. This ensures that the Commission is made aware of the Committee's work on particular Scottish problems. The Scottish Executive have been very willing to respond to the Committee's inquiries. There is a mechanism whereby the Executive reports back to the Committee with their views on suggestions and recommendations in Committee reports. We feel it is also appropriate to lodge copies of reports with the European Commission.

367

We work as closely as possible with our colleagues in the European Parliament. A group called European Elected Members Information Liaison and Exchange (EMILE) is used as a networking forum to which we bring Committee views and reports. All Committee reports are sent to Scottish MEPs. We also try to work closely with our representatives on the Committee of the Regions. In that sense the Committee hopes to have a direct influence.

368

There has been a little bit of a vacuum in the Committee of the Regions because until now all Scottish appointees have been from local authorities. The Committee of the Regions is about to enter a new mandate. The Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Executive now share appointees with local authorities, so Parliament appointees will be able to sit directly on the Committee of the Regions. That will be a first for the Scottish Parliament and it will be a very useful and welcome development. The Committee must look at how that can be tied back into the Parliament and Committee system in Scotland.

369

Mr C Murphy: What has your relationship been with other Scottish Parliament Committees? For example, if your Committee is scrutinising an EU Directive that impacts on agriculture, how would that relate to your Agriculture Committee? You mentioned the use of individual rapporteurs in the Committee to follow particular inquiries into areas of interest. What support is given to individuals to conduct such work?

370

Mrs Oldfather: Those are very important questions. The lack of resources is an issue that is very close to heart. One reason that the Committee developed the rapporteur system was because it was very difficult for the entire Committee to undertake the level of investigation required. For example, a Committee member using his own staff, backed by our two Committee Clerks, has undertaken the report on EU enlargement that will be produced next month.

371

It is a difficult issue for us. The Committee has worked very hard. A report on the euro was essentially completed by a Committee member using his own staff backed by the Committee Clerks. It is a real problem because we have a huge area to cover. Frankly, we do not have enough resources. We have nothing like the resources that the European Scrutiny Committee at Westminster has.

372

Your earlier point about relationships with other Committees is also important. The Consultative Steering Group, which established the principals of the Scottish Parliament, envisaged that representatives from each Committee would be on the European Committee. However, the European Committee has not worked quite like that. We have developed a system whereby our Committee refers documents to the appropriate subject committee. We anticipated that the subject committees would take the documents, analyse them and report back to us. However, we will review that system next week, as we have not had feedback from the subject committees because they are very overworked and overloaded with primary legislation.

373

The Committee undertook a major inquiry into the common fisheries policy reform. While there are Committees on rural development, and on transport and the environment, which could have dealt with that issue, they were so overloaded with work that we took the decision to undertake the inquiry ourselves. We felt that that was appropriate as it had a European dimension, and it fed into the European Commission's White Paper and review. The Rural Development Committee has looked at the report, and we foresee that any follow-up will come via that Committee. There is a good working partnership between the Committees, but it does not always work as well as we had initially envisaged given workloads. This is probably the time for a review.

374

Mr Ervine: I came here thinking that the Scots had undoubtedly got their knees below the European table and that they were much further along the line than us. I listened to the evidence and it sounded reasonable. When I asked a previous witness about a single Scottish view of Europe, I thought that the act was together - I am beginning to find out that it is not.

375

Is it CoSLA, the Scottish Parliament or the Executive who co-ordinates what Scotland does in Europe and also its response to Europe? One presumes that it would be the Executive. In earlier evidence I learned that co-ordination works better on an informal basis. How do you relate with your Ministers? The Sinn Féin member made the point about Departments. Are you taken seriously by the Scottish Executive Ministers who have a specific responsibility on an issue that would come before your Committee? I am aware that you can call them for evidence if you have an inquiry, but in an informal context how seriously do they take the Committee's view? As regards co-ordination - and if resources are an issue for CoSLA, the Parliament, and the Executive - there is a potential difficulty as regards duplication. Is co-ordination, as was suggested, best done informally?

376

Mrs Oldfather: It is not done informally all the time. The Parliament, and particularly the European Committee, is responsible for scrutinising the work of the Executive. The Committee's remit charges it with holding the Executive to account. All Parliament subject committees are responsible for holding Ministers to account. Therefore, the Committee has a very responsible power, and Ministers take it very seriously. I cannot recall any time when the Committee has requested a Minister to come before it to explain something when they have not made every effort to do so.

377

As regards the recommendations of the major reports that we have put to the Executive; as I mentioned earlier the Executive are duty bound to respond to the Committee's recommendations. It would be hard to put a figure on it, but in the vast majority of cases the Executive have been willing to agree with our recommendations.

378

Therefore we do not always operate on an informal basis. However, there are informal parts to the system, for example the EMILE working group, which brings together Executive Ministers, members of the European Committee, and Scottish members of the Committee of the Regions and the European Parliament. In that sense we have a Scottish forum for bringing together everyone who is working in different ways to co-ordinate Scotland's position on Europe. That forum is chaired by the Scottish Executive.

379

That apart, there is a clear role for the Scottish Parliament, and the European Committee in particular, to play in holding Ministers to account. Parliament does that effectively. I have worked on three Committees now, and Ministers take the Parliament and its Committees seriously in that regard.

380

Mr Ervine: I want to clarify that. We do the same in the Northern Ireland Assembly, and I do not doubt for a moment that Ministers take this aspect seriously. However, it seems that in the European context, your Ministers do not make decisions in Europe. They are supposed to get the best for Scotland in Europe even though they cannot make a decision. You say that your dealings with people who staff the European office are reasonably private, however the responsibility for looking for the best for Scotland lies with the Ministers. Should your Committee, and CoSLA not be looking for the same level of co-ordination with them?

381

How do you formulate any type of proper co-ordination if you operate on an informal basis or on a protection system - that a Minister will take all of the knowledge, retain the knowledge, and you will only get that knowledge if you ask questions? You are supposed to be acting in the best interests of Scotland. I ask this question because we have not made any decisions yet. We want to know the best way to proceed. Your point that you scrutinise the workings of the Executive is fair, but your remit states that you are to consider and report on any European issue - which your Executive might have no authority over or effect on. However, if the Committee and Scottish Executive got together you might make arguments in Europe with the best interests of Scotland at heart.

382

Mrs Oldfather: There are a few points that I want to make. I am representing the European Committee today. However, there is a formal system between the Scottish Executive, Scottish Ministers and Westminster Ministers through joint ministerial committees and our set of concordats.

383

We commissioned some independent research for our governance inquiry. The researcher undertook a review of about four or five policy areas, and the conclusion reached was that where we had sought hard to lobby the Executive and the Executive had taken those views to Westminster, we had a possibility of a far better outcome than where that had not taken place. So there is sort of independent evidence to support that. The Executive are responsible for implementation of European legislation in Scotland, so this is not all airy-fairy. The Executive have an important role to play in implementation. So I do not agree with you

384

Mrs E Bell: I also want to talk about co-ordination but perhaps from a different point of view. I have raised this point with everyone that we have talked to because it is as important as the political aspect. I agree with you - you have done much work in trying to set up a type of integrated approach from the point of view of parliamentary and political workings.

385

I am worried about whether, in the two and half years that you have been here, you have looked at your relationships with the people, the non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the voluntary community sector - or do you envisage looking at this in your review?

386

We will definitely be looking at that aspect, because it is a very sophisticated and influential part of our set up. We have a Civic Forum, which, undoubtedly, must examine ways to work with us to promote what is best for Northern Ireland, as Mr Ervine said. What is your attitude to that? It is a complicated approach. Europe puts people off, because of the structures. Would something like a civic forum be another unnecessary complication in your set up, or do you think it would be useful to deal with that side of society also?

387

Mrs Oldfather: It is vital that we try to engage with civic Scotland, the voluntary sector and others. We undertook an inquiry into structural funding, and we invited representatives from the voluntary sector in particular to speak to us. We tried to ensure that we took account of their views.

388

This is not easy. It is easy to make some good comments, but it is difficult to put ideas into practice. We have tried hard. We produce an electronic newspaper; however, I am aware that if you are poor, for example, and living in a housing estate in Castlemilk, you probably will not access our electronic newsletter. We also have an e-mail distribution system. When we undertake inquiries, we write to voluntary organisations and others to invite them to come in. Engagement with civic society has been much better since devolution, but we have a long way to go.

389

The Committee is trying not to rest on its laurels in Edinburgh. We have had meetings outside Edinburgh, and we have also tried to send individual members to schools, for example, to ask how people see Europe; what they are doing, and how they are making young children aware of European citizenship. That has been very effective. Teachers and head teachers have been very responsive to that aspect of the Committee's work.

390

Although I was not part of it, a delegation went to the island of Islay recently - it had nothing to do with the whisky distilleries there, I hasten to add - but it was important to the islanders to have a visit from members of the Parliament's European Committee. It showed that the Committee was interested in what was happening in their communities. We have tried to engage with people, but there is a long way to go. If you have any ideas, we would be happy to take them on board.

391

Mrs E Bell: Do you still think that it is useful to do that?

392

Mrs Oldfather: Yes.

393

Mr Imrie: I want to make a practical point, which may help the members of the Committee. In relation to the sift scrutiny of European documents, the Clerks send the list of documents that are being considered by the Committee to an external network of trade unions, industrial bodies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and others. To be brutally honest, it saves me an awful lot of work, and their views are much more knowledgeable and professional than mine.

394

Mrs E Bell: That is what I was thinking of, from the point of view of resources.

395

Mr Imrie: We try to contact other people and get their views.

396

Mr K Robinson: I was speaking to one of your Colleagues earlier - not about hypothetical questions, per se, but about something that might tease out what my Colleague has said. We are here to learn what we need to do to get this right. As you are two or three years further along, we are relying on your experience to a large extent. The answers given by different witnesses this morning have raised one or two concerns.

397

I will ask a hypothetical question. Let us say that a nuclear power station is to be sited on the west coast of Scotland. Let us say that there are European Directives, which govern the safety levels of such an installation. Let us say that the UK Government in Westminster are interpreting the Directives differently from other member states' Governments. How would your Committee react to such a situation?

398

Given that you are now represented on the Committee of the Regions in Europe, how would you relate to the relevant Committees in, for example, the National Assembly for Wales or the Northern Ireland Assembly, so that we gain a common purpose in response to the concerns that might emerge in such situations?

399

Mrs Oldfather: Energy policy is a reserved matter. I come from the west of Scotland, and I live about ten miles south of a nuclear power station, therefore I might be unable to comment objectively. Planning is not a reserved matter, therefore, this is a difficult, grey area.

400

Mr K Robinson: That is why I asked you about planning. Mr Ervine tried to tease out such detailed points on the subject earlier. We need to get a grip on such matters.

401

Mrs Oldfather: If we had concrete answers we could resolve the problems easily, but we do not. The aim is to use partnership to develop good relations between parliamentary Committees, the Scottish Executive, our colleagues in Westminster and the local authorities, which have a big role and a large planning remit. We need to work together to resolve the problems, because we cannot do so individually.

402

Mr K Robinson: Would that not highlight tensions between all the levels of government: local government, regional legislatures, the UK Government and the European institutions.

403

Mrs Oldfather: It would not raise tensions; the aim would be to find mechanisms to resolve problems.

404

Mr K Robinson: You mentioned the hearts-and-minds exercise in Islay, during which you tried to convince children and their parents that they should be European citizens. However, hypothetically, this issue might relate to those children and parents as European citizens. They would want the Scottish Parliament, as their safeguarding body, to protect their interests, in a practical way rather than by means of a grand European challenge of a hypothetical nature. They would want nitty-gritty answers at local level.

405

Mrs Oldfather: Given that a power station is located just 10 miles north of where I live, my gut reaction, as a constituency representative, would be to discuss the issue in detail with UK Ministers. By chance, Brian Wilson, the Energy Minister, is responsible for the area 10 miles north of me. There would be a need for formal and informal mechanisms, including meetings between local authorities, representatives of the Parliament, and the Petitions Committee, which gives access to those who want to make their views know. Ultimately, each of us needs to get round the table and work together to resolve the matters.

406

Mr Gibson: During your short existence, you have produced many reports on the role of Scotland, which contained important recommendations. Which recommendations have been implemented?

407

Mrs Oldfather: It would be difficult to summarise over 10 major and 19 general reports. One example is a piece of work on the Postal Services Directive through which we have been trying to express our views to the European Parliament and the European Commission. We have corresponded with European Commissioners on the matter. Decisions remain to be taken about it. The European Parliament has supported our view, but that was our way of making sure that the views of rural Scotland were heard. I cannot say that on every occasion that we made recommendations we changed European legislation, but realistically that was not going to happen. We are one player on a very large field with fifteen member states.

408

Mr Gibson: How many times did your recommendations change the views of the Scottish Executive?

409

Mrs Oldfather: It is very difficult to put a figure on that. However, as regards responses to official reports, the Executive has accepted the vast majority of our recommendations. There has been one main report where the Executive did not agree with the major recommendations of the Committee, but that is the only one I can think of. The Executive has been very willing to listen to our views in the vast majority of cases. They recognise that the Committee is looking at the particular Scottish dimension, and takes a great deal of evidence from all elements of civic society. The Executive has been very responsive.

410

The Chairperson: How have you had contact with the Westminster European Scrutiny Committee?

411

Mrs Oldfather: I am at a slight disadvantage because I only took over this post in December. My predecessor, Hugh Henry, did much of the liaison. I have not yet had the opportunity to meet with Jimmy Hood in a formal capacity, but I look forward to developing those links further.

412

The Chairperson: They scrutinised about 1,100 documents. Do you feel that you replicate any of that work?

413

Mrs Oldfather: No. We try to be very careful in selecting items for scrutiny so that we look at areas that have a particular Scottish dimension.

414

The Chairperson: Would you avoid reserved matters?

415

Mrs Oldfather: We do try to avoid reserved matters, but if there were a major impact on something in Scotland, we may wish to make a comment on it. We have more than enough work, and we try to concentrate on areas for which we have responsibility.

416

The Chairperson: Thank you very much. We appreciate you giving us your time. We wish you well in your new post and we will be seeing more of you in the future.

Friday 11 January 2002

Members present:

Mr Poots (Chairperson)
Mr Gibson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Beggs
Mrs E Bell
Dr Birnie
Mr Ervine
Mr C Murphy
Mr K Robinson

Witness:
Mr G Baird

417

The Chairperson: I should like to welcome Grant Baird, who is a former chief executive of Scotland Europa and former chief economist of the Royal Bank of Scotland. The Committee appreciates your giving us your time, and we know that you have extensive experience in the area under discussion. You may make a short presentation, after which members will ask questions.

418

Mr Baird: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for the invitation. I should like to describe the practicalities of Scotland Europa, how it was set up, and what it does. If permitted, I should afterwards like to submit a written paper which I hope will reflect the tone of your interests.

419

Scotland Europa was started in 1989 after a long gestation period. The former Scottish Development Agency, now Scottish Enterprise - the Government's economic development agency for the economy - began to discuss the project in the mid 1970s. The proposal for what became Scotland Europa came onto my desk when I was at the Royal Bank of Scotland, and I remember voting in favour.

420

By the time the organisation was finally set up it had changed its shape somewhat, not least to reflect the sensitivities and realities of Scottish domestic politics. Initially it was set up as a subsidiary of Scottish Enterprise. At the beginning the emphasis was very much on influencing the Commission's regulatory powers and economic development and finance.

421

It was difficult at first because of those sensitivities. Essentially the organisation was set up by the Conservative Government of the day. They were not keen on the idea of promoting new free-standing Scottish institutions. The main opposition at the time was Labour. They were not too keen either. They wanted something which largely reflected local authority bodies rather than private industry. Coming from the private sector, my appointment did not help very much.

422

It was put together as a kind of technical subsidiary of Scottish Enterprise with heavy emphasis on finance and economic development. However, I found that once we got out to Brussels we were by and large lumped together with all the other regions, such as Bavaria, Flanders and Catalonia. For all practical purposes, if someone from the Commission asked if I were representing Scotland, the best I could do was to answer in the affirmative and leave the matter at that. I did not attempt to enter into the detail of how it came about.

423

Although Scotland Europa started simply as an economic development body, it rapidly acquired a more mixed nature as people compromised back in Scotland. The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (CoSLA) took its own office in Scotland Europa, as did the Highlands and Islands Development Board (HIDB), which was something of a rival to Scottish Enterprise. Universities and even commercial people -one or two firms of lawyers and accountants - followed them so that we constituted a kind of collective. Our work still tended - in the nature of the Commission's powers - towards the financial, industrial and commercial areas, lobbying for rules and regulations that would be favourable to, or at least not disadvantage, Scottish industry and commerce.

424

We also sought to get money, once again at least so as not to disadvantage the Scottish regions compared with other similar regions in the EC. Most of Scotland was designated as an Objective 2 area by the Commission, which meant that various desirable aids were forthcoming. Parts of the Highlands and Islands were an Objective 1 area, which meant they were heavily favoured. The idea was to keep those particular interests at least not disadvantaged and, if possible, help them do somewhat better.

425

While I was preparing my notes I asked myself what we actually did. On a routine basis we provided weekly reports. We alerted people back home when we told them what was happening or proposed and asked them what they wanted to do about it. Things came from all over the place. I remember wrangling for a few days with Commission officials about the status of Scottish bank notes and their role in Europe and also about the detail of financial regulation, deposit regulation and capital regulation. Some of our bigger members were involved in oil, gas and power, and we had endless paperwork about the oil and gas industry and the status of power companies. The issue of transport arose frequently in the shape of rail travel, and in 1989 we started having serious discussions about a ro-ro ferry from the east coast of Scotland to Rotterdam. That ferry came into operation as recently as this year, in fact to Zeebrugge.

426

There was also the question of discriminatory taxation on key industries, especially whisky, and securing money under Objective 1 and Objective 2 rules and so on. There were a great many little things involving lobbying, presenting and persuading. I remember quite shamelessly making a case for continuation of Objective 1 status in the Highlands and Islands by showing bemused Commission officials photographs of turf-covered black houses in the islands, largely to illustrate the region's poverty.

427

With regard to securing money, there is a huge range of other schemes, not just Objective 1, 2, 3 and 4 but detailed and specific schemes with wonderful names such as ERASMUS and ARCHIMEDES. In our case the main beneficiaries seemed to be universities and further-education institutions. We advised them on how to put bids together.

428

The other main issue was work done at home, proselytising to Scottish companies, Scottish industry and universities to make use of what opportunities existed for getting money or exerting influence and helping the regular routine visits by lobbyists for interest groups such as fishermen, farmers, power companies, transport or local government. We were normally the locus for anything happening in that respect.

429

That was more or less how I spent my time. Now it is a much more official and larger operation. There were seven people, including CoSLA and the Highlands and Islands Development Board and, latterly, a secondee from the Scottish Office operating the whole thing. I have not visited the new offices, but I know they are much larger. It is official in that the Scottish Executive have control. Scotland Europa is no longer the modest little thing intended to pay its own way by persuading people back home that it was worth their while paying subscriptions to use our facilities. We were nearly there when I left, but I doubt if that is a major consideration now. Essentially it consists of the Executive Office's people with what was Scotland Europa looking after "commercial" interests. There is still a representative from CoSLA over there and from other official quangos, but I do not have an up-to-date list of people. In a sense, it seems to have justified some of the hopes pinned on it, for it has expanded its official ambitions and personnel well.

430

Mr Gibson: It is good to hear a different perspective. What key elements would help us realise our ambitions for Northern Ireland?

431

Mr Baird: The most helpful thing to have is a degree of unanimity for any European project among your supporters at home. Once or twice in Scotland we found that ideas were negated because people at home could not agree. It was therefore necessary to have everyone pull in the same direction.

432

It is a parallel arrangement. We lobbied heavily on behalf of the Scotch Whisky Association, whose tax rates were discriminatory, and the European Commission eventually agreed with that argument. However, it went on to advise the Scotch Whisky Association that it must get its own Government to reduce the tax, since without that the Commission could do nothing. That is why one does not want two views back home representing different perspectives.

433

Otherwise it is mainly an economic case of where the money can be found, and that is what the Commission is there for. The focus on something "commercial" such as grants or loans and the opportunity to participate in EU schemes is still of key importance and should be targeted.

434

Mr K Robinson: Thank you for your information. You said that one of the agency's roles was to present the case and persuade those in Europe of its merits. From your independent perspective, how do we present a case, and whom do we persuade?

435

Mr Baird: Do you mean back home?

436

Mr K Robinson: Back home and in the layers of administration which bring a case to Brussels.

437

Mr Baird: A multi-tiered approach is probably required. We found that some people, who were indifferent or hostile to the European concept, rapidly changed their minds when they realised that they could get money. That applies not only to local authorities but to companies and other associations.

438

The second tier is that one must be effective with or, at least, friendly towards reporters. For example, I found there was little use in spending much time with Mr Boris Johnston, now editor of 'The Spectator', who was then European correspondent for 'The Daily Telegraph'. He was so hopelessly adrift that there was no point in trying to persuade him. I left him out of my loop, and he left me out of his. The Scottish press was by and large, with some difference or emphasis, at least persuadable, and I should think that, apart from 'The Daily Telegraph', most of the Northern Ireland press would be the same. Mr Johnston would happily turn up at Commission press conferences, decide there was nothing interesting that day, then go away and make up an article on anything. The press is important.

439

Thirdly, the use of other opinion formers - the use of cultivation over a long period - can create a wider outlook. Academics were very helpful in this country towards proselytising, persuading, and producing a decision-making generation amongst our students. That seems to be very important. So too are schools using the educational institutes.

440

Finally, the purely commercial end and companies - for example, the Royal Bank of Scotland or the Bank of Scotland - should not necessarily be involved alone but rather as a collective body insofar as we have one at home. In our case it was essential that that body was the Committee of Scottish Clearing Bankers. However, there is a string of committees or collective sources, such as the Confederation of British Industry, the Federation of Small Businesses and the Scottish Fishermen's Federation. Those associations are still important.

441

Mrs E Bell: Good afternoon. It was nice to speak to you and pleasant to have your company at lunch. I have always been very much a European. I am very much in favour of Great Britain joining the euro. However, I have not been terrifically successful in getting that across to my constituents. I have been asking people what they think is the best way, since it is essential if we are to develop. From your experience, what do you think is the best way to educate people about opportunities in Europe?

442

You talked about ERASMUS, which I know is a very good programme and one that the South of Ireland has taken up very well. However, there are few such opportunities in Northern Ireland. What steps do you think Northern Ireland could take? I shall not enter into the idea of a co-ordinated approach, for it seems difficult and complicated. Everyone must arrive at their own approach. From your experience of working with Scotland Europa, what do you feel would get through to people? Is getting through to people necessary?

443

Mr Baird: Yes. Perhaps the only real answer is a great deal of money and time. You depend for persuasion on such things as the European Movement and the Commission's own offices. Here and in Northern Ireland the offices' time and cash are limited, and I cannot see any way round that. I always used to try and get a representative body for some association of companies to do the work for me rather than approach the people themselves. I was reasonably adept at that; I was sneaky.

444

Mrs E Bell: We have started that process. I am glad to know that you think it useful.

445

Mr Ervine: We shall have to be as sneaky as you were then. In fact, if we are to do better, we shall have to be even more so.

446

It seems to me that most of my worries about Europe involve the capacity for a region to co-ordinate people moving in one direction. You mentioned cultivation, but how do you quantify the costs? How do you quantify the importance of cultivation to people who have, at best, an ambivalence towards the concept of Europe?

447

In the United Kingdom our reticence - or perceived reticence - and ambivalence towards Europe may have denied us a great opportunity. The Scottish Parliament has created ways to have direct influence. If we are to do the same, I should like to know how to encourage those who are reticent. We must tell them that it is a little like advertising - we cannot afford not to do it, and we must therefore pay for it. There are a great many questions about that matter.

448

Mr Baird: You must do that, for it cannot be avoided. It must be resourced with people and money; that is the only way it can be done. In some ways, it is a little like how you win a war. When General Forrest of the Confederate Army was asked why he was uniquely successful in the apparently simple process of constantly winning battles, he was said to have stated that one just had to be there the fastest with the mostest. I still believe that.

449

Mr Ervine: Everything flows from the ability to make friends and influence people. That is what you mean by "cultivation". It is not a question of saying that you will have a chat with someone because it is in your best interest; it is because you have a continuing relationship with those people.

450

We are inclined to form relationships by what were earlier described as old-fashioned lobbying methods. We have an issue and arrive at the door to be heard only to find that someone else is more effective at doing what we are doing, meaning we lose out.

451

You have gone through the process from its inception with insufficient resources, and, although you mentioned that, there seems to be greater appreciation of the necessity to make that arrangement more formal and, indeed, fund it better if the capacity of Europa has increased.

452

Mr Baird: Yes. I shall find the past costs and compare those to the present situation. I found that the best thing to do was to use resources as effectively as others and try to make friends who were not necessarily in Scotland. If universities were engaged in a joint effort, for example, you could strike up a reasonably warm relationship with someone elsewhere in Europe who was bloody good at cultivating those associations and get them to help your own universities or power companies. Even the drinks trade could be affected, for nothing was as badly hit by taxation as Scotch whisky.

453

Mr Ervine: We had a problem with Irish whiskey too, but we are probably not as reliant on that trade as you.

454

Mr Baird: One associate in our efforts for Scotch whisky was from Northern Ireland.

455

Mr Ervine: You may agree or disagree with this idea: in a process of change, the majority in the United Kingdom must be dragged screaming to where they need to go.

456

Mr Baird: That is exactly right, and I have no idea why. I have lived long enough to see pro-European and anti-European sentiments in the majority of the population. I remember vividly the 1975 referendum on the EEC. It is amazing how strange things can touch volatile opinion in this country or in the entire United Kingdom. One meets people who say how much they enjoyed their holiday in France, and in the next breath they say that they do not want to have anything to do with the place, even though French railways work well and French taxes are low and so on.

457

That is somehow wrong. I do not understand why the bulk of opinion occasionally swings so much. When my own children were at university, their opinions swung from side to side often depending on one ill-reported or misreported event. Public opinion on the subject of Europe swings. If one's knowledge of what is going on in Europe is limited to today's headline in 'The Sun', 'The Scotsman' or 'The Telegraph', then that knowledge will not be very profound. I have no solution to that problem, however; I do not know how it can be tackled. I do not know how we can persuade those who are anti-European, or who wish to become less involved with Europe, to think otherwise. I imagine that, if I were anti-European, I should be quite pleased at the moment, but I am sure that I do not know why or how people intend to vote.

458

Mr Ervine: Or where that will take us when the votes are counted.

459

Mr C Murphy: One of the Committee's functions is to scrutinise the workings of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, the Executive and their office in Brussels. The Scottish Executive have an office in Scotland House in Brussels, and the Convener of the European Committee told us that the Committee were also keen to open an office there if they could identify the resources. It appears that, although the Committee and the Executive are housed under the same roof, they do not necessarily act in a co-ordinated fashion, and the evidence of Mr Sullivan backs that up from CoSLA. The fact that the Committee wishes to open an office in Brussels even though the Executive already have an office there shows that the Scottish Office is not pulling together. As scrutineers of our office in Brussels, how do we ensure that people do so?

460

Mr Baird: It is probably true that the Scottish Office is not pulling together. We were a small group officially representing other bodies, such as Scottish Enterprise, Highlands and Islands Enterprise and CoSLA. At the start we simply folded that policy over morning coffee. For example, someone would say, "I cannot see CoSLA wearing that one", and I would say, "I cannot see Scottish Enterprise wearing that one". We would try to reach a compromise and then go back to persuade our masters.

461

At the time it was easy to work that way, since we were very tight-knit, and there was almost informal daily contact. However, the operation is a good deal larger now. Some sort of internal organisation may be necessary, for example, regular meetings of the representatives of the various bodies involved.

462

Mr C Murphy: I sensed from the evidence of previous witnesses that, although people are housed in the same office, they may be pursuing individual interests.

463

Mr Baird: Yes. However, although we pursued individual interests, we remained a cosy little group. It may be necessary to have some kind of weekly formal liaison between members of the Scottish Office and Scotland Europa so that they can inform one another of the work they will pursue each week. In my experience, the neatest, quietest and most effective approach to the problem was to get a really good-calibre secondee from the Scottish Office who would go back and presumably make his career there. Of course, that would depend partly on the kind of report he got from me, or someone else, in Scotland Europa, which was a great motivator.

464

Dr Birnie: Everything you have said is interesting, and we shall obviously pay careful attention to the precedent set.

465

My first question concerns the role of Scotland Europa. Having listened to the questions so far, particularly those of Mrs Bell and Mr Ervine, it appears that two roles are being put together, and I wondered how far Scotland Europa deals with those matters. Clearly there is the projection of a Scottish voice, as it were, into the European institutions. That is unproblematic and should be attempted. We may wish to see something like that for our own case.

466

However, the second part suggested by Mr Ervine and Mrs Bell is the backward projection from the European Institutions to Northern Ireland and Scotland respectively. I find that problematic, since it introduces the body into political debate. People do not necessarily have some perverse tendency to be bad Europeans which has to be beaten out of them. There may be legitimate concerns about aspects of European Commission policy, although I concede that there is a need for people to be well-informed about it. However, there is a grey area between information and propaganda. In Northern Ireland we must be careful about straying into that grey area.

467

You were highly successful in getting the private sector mobilised; do you have any suggestions about how that can best be done? We have special weaknesses in the private sector in Northern Ireland; even relative to Scotland, its proportion of the economy is small. We do not have many large companies, and it has traditionally been hard to get them to sponsor anything that does not make an immediate up-front profit for them. How did that work in Scotland?

468

Mr Baird: I shall answer the part about the "back-playing" of European institutions to the public first. It may be more difficult now, but even then it was a basic fact of life that you will not get the best deal from European institutions if you are standing on the sidelines saying, "We think you are all rubbish". The same is true if you try talking to them and putting a friendly face on their policies and what they say in reply while stating behind the scenes that it is terrible and will not work. It is not possible to work usefully with any of the European institutions that way, since they are by definition - at least the Commission are - pro-European in the wider sense. They may have different ideas about how far things go, but they are broadly in favour of the institution of the European Union. Essentially, the people that they pay attention to, take advice from, and give special interest to, are the people who generally support objectives X, Y and Z. For example, we secured good deals from the Commission on information, early warnings and so forth regarding the financial sector. It is not just the banks, but also insurers, funds managers and the rest, for they knew that we supported the general thrust of what they were attempting with the single market, breaking down official barriers for banking and right across Europe. That was the policy, and we were, for self-interested reasons, very keen. We tend to get a more friendly reaction than the average French bank.

469

Your second question concerned getting the private sector on board, a matter partly of its self-interest. However, I had it much easier in Brussels than anyone representing Northern Ireland because of the point you made. There is a solid and fairly large body of indigenously owned and controlled structures in Scotland, of which I have mentioned two. In addition, the biggest oil- and gas-related companies have clear interests which are vulnerable to European decisions.

470

Operationally, we did not try to persuade any individual company to put forward a subsidy, be it the Royal Bank of Scotland or the Bank of Scotland. Instead we got them to join collectively through persuading the Committee of Scottish Clearing Bankers to do so. Likewise, we approached the UK Offshore Operators Association, which represents the country's offshore oil and gas companies. That meant that we did not have to tailor the approach to any particular company, which would have been difficult.

471

Mr Beggs: I was interested in your description of the role of Scotland Europa in keeping companies, federations, reporters, academics and schools informed of available grants and so on. That struck me as perhaps moving into a European public-relations and education role. To what extent is that replicating the European Commission Office's duties? It surprised me to hear that, since I was expecting to hear more of Scotland Europa influencing the United Kingdom Permanent Representation and Ministers, lobbying with the Commission and influencing House of Commons Committees on reports going back into the system. Did the description you gave us reflect the course of action you had to undertake to get sponsors? If that is occurring centrally now, has the role changed somewhat?

472

Finally, what should Scotland Europa's focus be today - lobbying primarily in Brussels, Whitehall or in the regions?

473

Mr Baird: First, you are right in saying that one of Scotland Europa's motivating forces from its very beginnings was its endeavour to finance itself and keep costs down for the Scottish public sector. Scottish Enterprise, or the Scottish Development Agency as it was then, is financed 100% by the Scottish Executive, previously the Scottish Office.

474

Secondly, the educational cum information cum public-relations role should strictly speaking be the province of the Commission Office in Edinburgh. The reality is that it is quite small and has a huge public-relations function to cover. It does not so much cover an information role as disseminate what the Commission generates in Brussels. It performs that task well but does not have the time to specialise in research for a particular company or interest. Its remit covers the whole of Scotland, so that course of action would not be appropriate. Scotland Europa's public relations duties may diminish if it no longer needs constantly to chase and raise money and fulfil the role of consultant. It could devote more time to lobbying at that end and begin to understand the role of key Commission officials. It will be able to press the Executive's case, as it will be the biggest influence as paymaster. If there is any difference between its emphasis and that of the United Kingdom Government, it will be interesting to see the outcome.

475

Finally, we had it very easy in Scotland Europa with the United Kingdom Government. It is an open secret that the ambassador of the day to the EC, Sir John Kerr, who is soon to retire as head of HM Diplomatic Service in the Foreign Office, was himself a keen European. It also helped that he happened to be a Scotsman, and we got a very good ear all the time, as, incidentally, did Gerry McAlinden and our opposite number from Wales. That was relatively easy. If, for example, our current ambassador were known to be anti-European or Eurosceptic, it might render matters more difficult.

476

Mr Beggs: Should the primary lobbying role of Scotland Europa be in Brussels, directly targeting the Commission, or are you more likely to effect change in a European Directive by lobbying the United Kingdom representative?

477

Mr Baird: We learned that, unless you have the support of the United Kingdom Government - not your Executive or region - you are dead in the water before you start on matters such as taxation and regulation. That makes the United Kingdom representative a key figure. On many occasions United Kingdom representatives were quite thin on the ground. They were not unhappy if we had a problem which was exclusively Scottish rather than concerning the United Kingdom as a whole. On the whole they were quite happy to let us run with it, feed us and be helpful through the various intergovernmental bodies. If you do not have at the very least benign neglect, you will not get far. The same was true of Bavaria, the Saarland and others. They had to enjoy the support or at least the benign neglect of their home Government.

478

The Chairperson: You spent a substantial part of your career out in Brussels. In your experience, which country has the most effective lobbying organisation there?

479

Mr Baird: I should put my money on the French. They have often had to come from a difficult position, since what they want is not what the Commission wants, although there are a great many Frenchmen in the place. Compared to the United Kingdom, they seem to win more than they lose.

480

The Chairperson: If we were to empty French lorries of their wine at Dover and throw it on the road, would that enhance the United Kingdom's influence in Brussels?

481

Mr Baird: Perhaps. I never understand why, as a domestic fiscal policy, wine is not taxed much more heavily than whisky!

482

The Chairperson: I am not sure that persuading people at home of the benefits of Europe is really the role of the office. It is for our Committee as a whole to come to an opinion on that. Would you recognise that a country with a rural background would be more difficult to persuade if you were looking at handing over your fiscal policy to Europe? You have the experience of pumping 30 billion euro into agriculture every year while seeing your profits decline. You have possibly also experienced the problem of not being allowed to sell your product for five or six years, despite the fact that at least three other European countries had worse problems in relation to beef than you. You would have great difficulty persuading people closely linked to that particular industry to get involved.

483

Mr Baird: That is probably true. Rural industry includes everything from farming to food manufacturing, processing and more. In this case it also includes fishing. Uniquely, those two interests were greatly influenced by Europe from the beginning. Any industry will blame the Government if things go wrong, and most industries tend to blame the UK Government. However, those industries have direct links with Europe, so it is natural that they blame Europe.

484

People tend to react a wee bit like that now. Even in finance, I find I have to deal with more and more European regulations and that I have an increasing number of forms to fill in. It was not until the early 1990s that European legislation began to impinge heavily on the kind of legislation hitherto controlled by the Bank of England.

485

The UK Government and its institutions are not above shifting the blame. They say "Don't blame me old boy - it will be all right with me". However, the European institutions are directly telling us how to deal with some matters, so the situation is difficult.

486

The Chairperson: Were regional groups or countries more effective at lobbying?

487

Mr Baird: The regional groups were probably best at lobbying. My opinion may be based on personalities, and relationships may have changed since I was there. Sometimes the oddest people were the most effective. The Saarlanders in Germany were good at extracting money for their area. The Catalonians probably had the biggest direct influence on the EU of any individual region not actually a nation state. That may have had something to do with the fact that Señor Pujol, who was the Prime Minister of Catalonia, was in the most powerful of Spain's various tiers of government. I do not know if he is still around. People used to joke that he practically lived in Brussels. He was there very regularly, but I suppose that it was his choice. He had a very well-funded programme of Euro-friendly projects, including great cultural events. Pujol himself spent a great deal of money. However, I was impressed by the Saarlanders' ability to obtain money and other things. Some parts of the success of the French were negative, since they would stonewall anything which might hurt them.

488

The Chairperson: I shall draw the meeting a close. Thank you, Mr Baird, for coming and giving us your time - we appreciate your contribution.

489

Mr Baird: If I may, I shall produce a proper memorandum.

490

The Chairperson: Yes. We look forward to seeing that shortly. We shall now move into private session. We thank the Scottish Parliament for its assistance in recording today's discussions.

Wednesday 23 January 2002

Members present:
Mr Poots (Chairperson)
Mr Gibson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Dr McDonnell
Mr K Robinson

Witness:
Mr D MacInnes ) Scotland Europa

491

The Chairperson: We appreciate your coming to the Committee of the Centre and you are welcome. The Committee has looked at the Scottish model of how a region operates in Europe, and has been impressed by much of the work, particularly that of Scotland House. We have heard something of Scotland Europa and want to hear more. The Committee members will ask questions after your submission, perhaps in 10 or 15 minutes' time.

492

Mr MacInnes: Scotland Europa has been in Brussels for 10 years, and I have been chief executive for four years. I am the third chief executive. When Scotland Europa started in 1992 there were 40 regional offices rather than member states. There are now approximately 170 regional offices. I suspect that that shows the onward march of devolution and regionalisation across the European Union (EU). In 1985, when the first Scottish office, Strathclyde Regional Council, arrived there were only eight regional offices here, and the others were for German Laender.

493

Scotland Europa was set up as a subsidiary of Scottish Enterprise, the economic development agency for Lowland Scotland, and as a member organisation. The reason was that a wide range of Scottish organisations wanted some form of representation in Brussels, and Scotland Europa was an appropriate vehicle. Scottish Enterprise looks after the interests of all small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and of the Scottish business community. Scotland Europa members are from organisations such as Scottish Financial Enterprise and the Scotch Whisky Association; other members are from the public sector - for example, local government and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (CoSLA) - and from a range of interests such as the Scottish universities, utilities, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Scottish Natural Heritage and the then Scottish Tourist Board.

494

From the outset the funding for Scotland Europa has been 50% from Scottish Enterprise and 50% from all other members. Its two objectives are, first, to network Scotland to EU institutions and, secondly, to build alliances with other regions across Europe. The second objective has come about as a result of the increasing trend for the European Commission to ask for transnational partners if funding is wanted for projects. The Commission likes that idea.

495

The first objective was achieved by setting up what was then a Scotland Europa centre in Brussels. That has since become Scotland House, which our members consider to be very successful. Membership has grown from 10 to 70, and that steady increase shows that members are broadly satisfied with the direction that Scotland Europa is taking and the service it provides. Members have a wide range of interests and want to promote themselves in different ways. We have a staff of six or seven in Brussels, and over the past few years it has become increasingly difficult for that small team to provide a comprehensive service.

496

What we have done is to group our membership into three interest groups. One group deals with environment and energy matters, because some 20 of our members have a direct interest in environmental legislation. With so much environmental legislation that emanates from Brussels coming into Scotland, it is important for members to keep a watching brief on how it might affect them. The environment and energy group focuses on legislative issues.

497

The second group specialises in research, education and training. That group focuses on the framework programme for research and development and funding for new research projects. It tends to be led by the universities, and 10 Scottish universities are members of that group. Its funding focus is different from the environment and energy group, and someone with specific skills is needed to look after that group.

498

The third group was formerly called the innovation group, but is now known as the e-commerce group because of the onward march of e-business. The group focuses on demonstrating the contributions that Scotland makes to Europe's competitiveness. At the Lisbon summit a couple of years ago member states made a commitment that Europe should become the world's most competitive knowledge-based economy by 2010. Scotland Europa works closely with that group to demonstrate what contributions Scotland makes to that agenda.

499

From time to time other groups are set up on a time-limited basis if a specific piece of legislation is due. For example, if the legislation were on financial services and our financial services industry wanted to be represented, Scotland Europa would set up a group specifically for that.

500

Until two years ago Scotland Europa did not have a specific presence in Scotland. It is represented in Brussels, and for the past two years it has had a small team in Scottish Enterprise in Glasgow. That team is responsible for structural funds, specifically for Scottish Enterprise. That presence in Glasgow has given the organisation a new focus, which has been helpful. Around £200 million of executive funds come into Scotland, and about one third comes through Scottish Enterprise. That is also an important part of our job.

501

Members are provided with a monthly report on all the relevant activities- updates on legislation, Directives and so forth. Members meet twice a year, once in Scotland and once in Brussels, and that style of representation suits the members. At the meeting in Scotland a relevant theme is adopted: last year the theme was employment. In Brussels the meeting is held near to St Andrew's Day. A big name speaker is brought in and we arrange for some commissioners and senior personnel in the Commission to talk to the members. That is the level of communication - a monthly report and two meetings per year - and it seems to satisfy our members.

502

There are some 12 Scottish representatives in Scotland House. The building is approximately 2,000 square metres, and there are currently three partner regions - the East Finland EU Office, the Czech Republic EU Office, and the West of Ireland and Dublin Regional Authorities.

503

Scottish interests can range from a firm of solicitors to economic development consultants to youth development agencies. The Scottish Executive EU Office is in Scotland House, and there is a facility for small conferences and seminars, which works well for us. We want to continue to promote the building in that way.

504

The Chairperson: Since devolution, how does Scotland Europa fit in with the Scottish Executive now that it operates out of the same office? How closely do you work with each other? What changes has devolution made to your relationship with those who administer Government in Scotland?

505

Mr MacInnes: Since the establishment of the Scottish Parliament, the Scottish Executive EU Office has focused on the politics and policy issues. The focus of Scotland Europa is more clearly on economic development. During the 1990s the overall responsibility of Scotland Europa was to promote Scotland. However, now that there is a Scottish Executive EU Office, my colleague George Calder and his team look after all Executive interests for Scotland.

506

The Scottish Executive EU Office has one client, which comprises the different branches of Government in Scotland - justice, home affairs, fisheries, agriculture, the environment and so forth. We have 70 members as our clients, so the focus has shifted to promoting their interests from a more generic focus than we had before. We work closely with the Scottish Executive both here and in Scotland.

507

Mrs E Bell: I am interested in your idea of networking. The Committee recently had meetings at the Scottish Parliament and at Westminster, and members were given the impression that cohesion was not all that it could be. Given that the Northern Ireland Executive EU Office is due to open at the end of the month, what advice do you have about networking? Is the grouping together of interested parties, such as CoSLA, the way to go?

508

Mr MacInnes: It works for us. Networking has changed over the years, and the focus of Scotland Europa has also changed as the institutions in Europe change and modernise. I expect that process to continue, because the way in which we relate to other partners is relevant for the present, but it is something that we should keep under review.

509

Mrs E Bell: Do you think that it is worth considering for us as a new start?

510

Mr MacInnes: Yes, I would think so.

511

Mrs E Bell: Throughout this inquiry I have voiced my concerns for the people on the ground and their perceptions and attitudes towards Europe and its development. It is essential that people are geared up to it. Has the Scottish Executive EU Office played a part in that and, specifically, should work with civil society be examined?

512

Mr MacInnes: That is a broad question. Our role is to focus on economic development and promote the interests of our members, which change over time. Our review of Scotland Europa and how it goes about its business suggests that that is the right approach at the moment. We do not have a high profile either here or in Scotland, and we tend to promote Scotland House rather than Scotland Europa or the Scottish Executive. That works also, because people can relate to it.

513

It is difficult to promote anything at a lower level. A good example is the way in which we have related to the Highlands and Islands Councils and Highlands and Islands Enterprise over the years, which have achieved Objective 1 funding. They have had an individual focus and they have wanted to represent themselves in a specific way. They are now with us in Scotland House and that works well. Overall, Scotland House promotes Scotland, but within that context different members might want to promote themselves in a specific way, and we find that that works well.

514

Dr McDonnell: Many things are taxing us as we probe this matter. One of the main issues is the balance between the Executive, the public and commerce. You mentioned the Scottish Executive EU Office, and you appear to have reached a good arrangement in that your Executive Office is a constituent of Scotland House. How does your work synergise with that of the Executive? How close are you to them, and how much information is shared? How much commercial and Government information is confidential? Do you take notes and do you compare notes? Are there any shared objectives or agendas, or do you depend on personal relationships?

515

Mr MacInnes: Personal relationships play a large part in our work. The relationship is more loose than formal. There is such a large political agenda now, which is increasing as more and more legislation comes from Europe. The Scottish Executive have a specific focus on that and they allow Scotland Europa to promote Scotland's commercial interests. Any information subject to commercial or Government confidentiality would be treated carefully. However, by and large we find that we share a lot of information and work together effectively. In the past two and a half years since Scotland House was set up, we have not come across any areas where there is specific conflict. Whether a more formal relationship would help is a matter of conjecture.

516

Dr McDonnell: What are the tangible benefits of your operation here? What would Scotland lose if you were not here?

517

Mr MacInnes: The main benefit is funding, and that is what the Scottish press concentrate on. How much funding would be lost if we were not here is open to speculation. Another benefit is that we promote Scotland's commercial interests here. Surveys of our members show that they feel that this is the most tangible benefit - either finding partners to do projects with or to work jointly with on legislative issues, or to share best practice with. Being here enables us to make them aware of the current issues. As to what would be lost if we were not here - there are many ways that nations and regions could be represented, but I suggest that most of our members in Scotland would feel that they would lose quite a lot of contact and influence if we were not here.

518

The Chairperson: As a region, like Scotland, the relevant UK Ministers represent our key areas when it comes to negotiations. Is there a greater role for informal contacts? For example, is there a greater role for informal contacts in influencing working papers at an early stage, or influencing people about what is beneficial to Scotland?

519

Mr MacInnes: Yes, I would agree with that, because I work on that side of the business. Commission officials are very informal, and it is easy to get information early. They want to consult, they want to share, and they have an open approach to upcoming legislation. We find that that approach is beneficial to us if we want to influence proposals before they become legislation. In the public mind, however, Brussels has a reputation for being bureaucratic and inaccessible, which is not the case at all. Informal contact is extremely helpful.

520

Mr Gibson: You have had 10 years' experience, four of those as chief executive. Northern Ireland is just about to open an EU office. However, there is the sovereign Government's interest, 170 regional offices, and that number could quickly double within the next three or four years. Are there too many regional offices? There are so many of them that they are almost in competition with one another and could become ineffective. If you were in our position, looking at the situation from our perspective, where should we target and redirect our energies over the next four years? Our Southern Irish counterparts have embraced Europe as long as money was coming, funding was available, and it was financially interesting to be involved. However, European legislation is costing us much more financially.

521

Mr MacInnes: The number of regional offices is constantly changing. Although there has always been quite a rapid increase - certainly in the past 10 years - some areas merge with one another and then new ones come along. So the changes are quite evident, and they are based on a particular interest at a particular time. For instance, Scotland House hosted the Storstrøm Office in southern Denmark, because it was promoting a specific project and wanted a bridge across to Hamburg. The reason for that was to complete the Øresund Bridge and tunnel route from Sweden through Denmark. They felt that the project would have great economic benefits for them.

522

The Storstrøm Office promoted that particular project here and then moved on and merged with another region in southern Denmark. There are always specific interests that regions want to promote, and then they move on, and that is relevant. The Scottish presence is regarded as more permanent than that because of the wide range of interests that must be promoted here. That probably applies to Northern Ireland also.

523

In Scotland there is an increasing emphasis on the enlargement process. People ask what will happen to funds and the amount of influence that Scotland can exert as the number of new nations and regions continues to increase. Our view on competitiveness is that we must be here in order to compete. That is the only way to do it.

524

Over the next four years I see two big items on the agenda: enlargement and Europe becoming the most competitive knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010, the progress towards that, and the contribution that nations and regions can make. The Commission welcomes contacts with nations and regions, because it gives them a perspective of what is happening in Europe, which it might not have if it dealt only with the member states.

525

Mr Gibson: Approximately 10 years ago the Government of Southern Ireland produced a popular booklet called 'A Federal Ireland in a Federal Europe'. How would you react- and this is a 10-year old idea, which might have passed its sell-by date - to a federal Great Britain in Europe?

526

Mr MacInnes: I stay out of politics, because I am politically incorrect when I get involved. It seems to be an interesting idea, and I suspect it will always be on the agenda for discussion, but I do not know whether it will go any further. I am really not knowledgeable enough to answer that question.

527

Mr Gibson: What you are saying is that the invested interest of your 70 members is your priority. Is there any conflict between those interests and the Scottish Executive?

528

Mr MacInnes: That is a good question. We say to existing members and to any new people who come on board that we can only promote Scottish interests where there is a single Scottish interest. We find it difficult to promote one interest against another. For example, one of our members is British Energy, while another is Scottish Natural Heritage; one could argue that their interests might not always coincide. However, we have found that we can lobby for both by saying that we cannot promote one interest; we can lobby only where there is Scotland-wide agreement on what the Scottish interest is. Narrower interests are a little like politics in that we try to keep out of them.

529

Mr Gibson: You try to harmonise the music on the hymn sheet rather than have one tune.

530

Mr MacInnes: That is right.

531

Mr K Robinson: Your answers have been fascinating up to now. You did not take the bait which my Colleague laid down for you, so I shall not lay down the bait I had ready for you. In Northern Ireland we have a particular approach to Europe. Since we are on the periphery of both the continent and the Atlantic, there is a dichotomy, whereby it is easier to go to the United States - if I might use the argument of kith and kin and common language - than it is to break through the psychological barrier of coming to Brussels and having to speak foreign languages, eat funny food and so forth.

532

There are great similarities between Scotland and Northern Ireland. You have a distinct national identity, and you have built upon it; you have St Andrew's Day, Scotland House, and Scotland Europa. You are very up front. How can we build on Northern Ireland's distinctiveness?

533

Our distinctive profile is our troubled history. For a time during the peace process Northern Ireland was flavour of the month in Brussels. On the last occasion that Assembly MLAs visited the city, we were fed up going to receptions. Every commissioner wanted to shove food and wine into our hands and slap us on the back. We want to emerge from that benevolent "Big Brother" era into one in which we decide what Northern Ireland needs to do in Europe to become more European. How do we slot into the various formal and informal agencies so that we can do that? We have a distinct profile and are coming with a little bonhomie behind us in search of a focus. Perhaps in Northern Ireland we have not yet decided what our focus should be. As an objective outsider, what strengths and weaknesses do you identify? In a nutshell, what are the tasks before us, and how are we to achieve them?

534

Mr MacInnes: Believe me, that is a debate which goes on in Scotland all the time. We tend to have some strong visual images, and that helps. The analogy with Bavaria is strong; they call their strategy "laptops and Lederhosen". They marry culture and tradition with the modern image. Those two words sum it up quite well. In our case it would be kilts and -

535

The Chairperson: - morris dancers.

536

Mr MacInnes: PCs perhaps. Combining tradition with the modern agenda is important. One should not ditch one in favour of another. The retention of the two is important. My personal view is that, as globalisation marches on, the idea of small communities and regionalisation will also gain in strength, because people like to have a community of which they can feel part. In the case of Northern Ireland, the strategy would have to be based around something of that sort - marrying the traditional with the modern. From a Scottish perspective, some things that happen in Brussels to promote Scotland are things that we have nothing at all to do with, but they are helpful in providing that visual image. One example is the "tartan army".

537

Each September there is a Scottish weekend in east Belgium, organised by a group of enthusiasts. There is a pipe band championship on Saturday and Highland Games on Sunday. Approximately 30,000 people turn up over the weekend. That is free publicity for Scotland. I am not sure what Northern Ireland could do to replicate that. We find it helpful. It opens doors, and people respond to strong visual images.

538

Mr K Robinson: That is an example of informality. How do you link in the formal structures that Scotland has developed? How could we link in the formal structures we are seeking so that we can maximise our impact in Brussels and not be seen to be a beneficiary of the system?

539

Mr MacInnes: My predecessor as chief executive of Scotland Europa, Charlie Woods, started a series of what are now called "Scotland House papers". That has worked well; we have completed about 20 papers so far, positioning Scotland on particular subjects. Mr Woods got academics to prepare papers on topics such as EU enlargement, employment law, Scotland's view of European monetary union or innovation. We used the publication and launch of those papers as an opportunity to position Scotland on a range of subjects that were close to Scotland's interests and to the interests of the institutions in Brussels. We have found that approach to be extremely helpful; it provides a clear Scottish view on particular subjects and it is helpful in promoting Scotland's modern image and modern interests.

540

Mr K Robinson: I will give you a hypothetical situation. The EU wants to cut down on the number of emissions. To achieve that there is a movement in some quarters towards nuclear power. That is an emotive subject in places such as Scotland, Cumbria and Northern Ireland. How would a regional Government influence such a policy at a very early stage?

541

Mr MacInnes: The starting point is to have one view on the matter so that there is a clear focus and so that people at home can support and promote it when they are going about their work. I would suggest preparing a paper, statement or proposal, which could then be promoted in a clear and coherent way. We have found that the Scotland Europa papers are helpful in providing such a platform.

542

Mr K Robinson: You have an interest in the common fisheries policy. How did you influence the debate on that topic and where did you plug into the system to influence the debate at the earliest possible moment?

543

Mr MacInnes: On that issue, because of the specific fishing interests in places such as the Shetlands, the Western Isles and north-east Scotland, interests have been promoted by organisations within those communities. For instance, the Shetland fishermen's association is influential in the fishing industry. The industry is worth some £150 million per year to the Shetlands. It is important to that community. Scotland Europa encourages the fishermen to engage directly in the debate; we act simply as broker and facilitator.

544

Mr K Robinson: Who engages with the Commission here? Is it civil servants, the informal contacts, the formal contacts, or are all of them involved?

545

Mr MacInnes: The Shetland representatives often come to Brussels.

546

Mr K Robinson: Do you guide them to the people they wish to lobby?

547

Mr MacInnes: Yes, we do. They have become experienced so we do not have to lead them by the hand so much, so to speak.

548

Mr K Robinson: A colleague of yours in Edinburgh told us, off the record, almost to be "brash". Do you recommend that we be brash on occasions? Is that the correct approach?

549

Mr MacInnes: I am from Harris: we are very understated in the Islands.

550

Mrs E Bell: I am concerned that we should engage people so that it is more relevant all the way through. We had an interesting and enthusiastic address from Tom Sullivan. We should like to take him to Northern Ireland to convince everybody, because I think he could. The equivalent of the Local Authorities Association is now being set up again in a new guise in Northern Ireland. It would be useful to work with it as one of the agencies in our office. Do you find it useful working with CoSLA?

551

Mr MacInnes: CoSLA is a good example of an informal relationship and of the importance of developing good personal relationships with those involved. Tom Sullivan's style is open and participative. That has been very helpful to us and to CoSLA. It is important to promote the role of local authorities and local government. Although I have no direct personal involvement with it, I do see many benefits in that approach.

552

Mr K Robinson: Some people are very enthusiastic about Europe, and they want to get involved. Is this meddling self-destructive at times? Are too many cooks spoiling the broth?

553

Mr MacInnes: Like Northern Ireland, Scotland has traditionally - certainly from an economic point of view - looked across the Atlantic, and we have done a great deal of work with American colleagues and American companies. Even so, two thirds of Scotland's exports still go to the European Union, and Europe's importance as a market is growing for Scotland. Therefore, it is good to have many people involved in promoting their own industries.

554

The sheer volume of trade means that legal ground rules must be set. I suspect that one person's meddling is another person's protection, but fair, equitable ground rules must be set across the EU. It can, however, be difficult to decide whether to go for a light touch or a heavier one.

555

Mr K Robinson: We are emerging from 30 years of direct rule under which civil servants were allowed to develop policies and to develop bailiwicks; it was almost a feudal system. As politicians we are attempting to move them into the twenty-first century, to move ourselves into a structure that would allow us, if not to dictate polices, to indicate the areas of policy where we think Northern Ireland should be going forward.

556

In your experience of the UK Civil Service, the Scottish devolved Civil Service and the Brussels Commission Civil Service, have you come across a similar scenario? If you have, have you any quick fixes that might allow us to move everyone forward positively?

557

Mr MacInnes: From my experience over the past four years there has been a sea change in Scotland in the approach to representation here. From the Scottish Executive's point of view, that has been driven largely by devolution and by Parliament. More civil servants, Ministers, MSPs and so forth are coming out here. The Scottish Parliament has a European Committee - I think you have spoken to some of its members.

558

The sheer volume is now much greater than it had been, and the same would apply in Northern Ireland. As the Assembly gets up and running there will be more interaction and, inevitably, that interaction has a modernising effect. My thoughts would be to just get on with it.

559

Dr McDonnell: We are all jealous of the success that you have had. Albeit you have only been in the position for four years and there were other chief executives before you, but some recent successes have been down to you, your personality and your leadership. However, have you anything left to do? Is the job done? Is it time to pack up and head home?

560

Mr MacInnes: I often reflect on that, and it is a personal thing. When I came out here four years ago, I had the specific agenda of wanting to establish Scotland House on the basis on which it is now established. I told myself I would be here for a maximum of three years, and people told me that if I stayed more than three years I would start going native in Brussels. I have now been here for four years, and I can see that starting to happen to me. I have even enjoyed the food and the drink here. It is an engaging city, and people enjoy the place from that point of view.

561

Dr McDonnell: Have you started to speak Flemish yet?

562

Mr MacInnes: I am working on my Flemish, but it is difficult because you are always answered in English. I often reply in Gaelic - that confuses everybody.

563

The Chairperson: I am fascinated by the role of the universities in Scotland Europa. Europe is not so much about education; it is more about environmental and agriculture issues. What do the universities get out of this that is of real tangible benefit to them?

564

Mr MacInnes: There are three ways in which the universities benefit. First, the framework programme for research and development currently has 15 billion euros in it, and that is a substantial chunk of funding. Traditionally, Scottish universities have been good at both research and accessing funding for research. They continue to do that and that is important for them.

565

Secondly, the universities find it beneficial and useful to benchmark themselves against universities in other regions across Europe.

566

Thirdly, the Scottish universities share best practice and contribute to joint projects with other universities. For instance, the University of Strathclyde is in a European-wide association of innovative universities, and they often meet here and use the place as a hub for business with other institutions.

567

Dr McDonnell: Can further and higher education institutions - the sub-university level - make connections in Europe? For years we made sporadic connections with universities in the United States, but now the former Belfast College of Technology and the former College of Business Studies have amalgamated with some other institutions to become the Belfast Institute for Further and Higher Education (BIFHE). Those are effectively our community colleges - call them what you like. The same has happened with the East Antrim Institute of Further and Higher Education - it is happening all over Northern Ireland.

568

Mrs E Bell: It also happened with the North Down and Ards Institute of Further and Higher Education.

569

Dr McDonnell: We have clustered several sub-university third-level institutions and consolidated them geographically. Those organisations are now stronger than they were as individual technical or business studies colleges. One or two of them have been enterprising and have crossed the Atlantic, and there is a useful synergy taking place between the Belfast Institute of Further and Higher Education and the community colleges of north Virginia just outside Washington, DC.

570

Although I value university education, the people who provide the engine house for our future economy are those in the middle ranks, that is, those who in many cases are the technicians who have not had a university education. Is there an opportunity for European institutions to make connections with our sub-university further and higher education colleges? Our university people tend to get a tour of Europe in one shape or another. Our students spend time on vacation, or on placement or on one scheme or another, but the guy doing an HNC or an HND, who could perhaps benefit from some European insight, does not get that experience. How do we connect that middle level of our education system with Europe?

571

Mrs E Bell: Before you answer, for your information and with due respect to the Chairperson's remarks about education in Europe - I could not let that go, I am sorry - a number of further and higher education colleges, such as the North Down and Ards Institute of Further and Higher Education in my own constituency and the East Antrim Institute of Further and Higher Education, have started the process. Dr McDonnell is quite right, and I am keen that the Northern Ireland centres connect with Europe because that is an area of great interest. Further and higher education colleges give accreditation for some courses, which means that they are almost at degree level, and their syllabuses are almost the same as those in universities, and are more practical in some ways. Third-level education in Northern Ireland should be more practical.

572

Dr McDonnell: To be fair to the Chairperson, and far be it from me to jump in because he is capable of defending himself, the implication of what he said was that Europe is perceived as being about the environment and agriculture rather than what is actually happening there. That was my interpretation, but he can speak for himself.

573

Mrs E Bell: All I heard was the Chairperson talking about the educational environment. I understand that.

574

Dr McDonnell: That was Hillsborough shorthand.

575

Mrs E Bell: I do not understand that - ní thuigim.

576

Mr K Robinson: There is a sporadic approach to higher and further education in Northern Ireland, and we would like to make it more cohesive and coherent.

577

Mr MacInnes: The Association of Scottish Colleges has been helpful in putting across the views of the colleges rather than those of the mainstream universities.

578

Until recently we had Edinburgh's Telford College in Scotland House representing how they wanted a project promoted. Without any disrespect to the traditional universities, we see a great deal of innovation, particularly at technician level, coming through colleges, since they have to work harder to make their names known. Co-ordinating themselves under the umbrella of the Association of Scottish Colleges has given them a helpful voice and vehicle. In the future much of the technician-level training will come from that sector.

579

Dr McDonnell: I should focus on technicians, since my interests tend to lie in employability and employment. However, most of those colleges have language sections. They are pursuing German, French, Spanish and Italian, even if it is only a matter of repeat A levels in French. Secondary schools tend to have good language connectivity, as do universities. However, those in between probably lack the time, energy or resources. This might be a channel for future education.

580

Mr MacInnes: I agree. We have seen that happening in Scotland over the past few years, where the whole educational establishment is changing, and opportunities through colleges are increasing. We see that as a big growth area.

581

When you come to Scotland House tomorrow I shall introduce you to one of our residents, a group which promotes youth development, connecting young people right across Europe. You will find that a fascinating approach; it was started off by Community Learning Scotland, but it now stands on its own and provides that service across member states.

582

Mr K Robinson: It is particularly timely now, since Eileen Bell, Oliver Gibson and myself are on the Education Committee, and we are examining second-level education and how it might proceed in future. There is a debate taking place on post-primary education at the moment, and it has been suggested that the vocational element in second-level education is currently much underplayed. It is an area which may develop. People have not yet teased out the role of the further and higher education institutes in that argument.

583

Mrs E Bell: There are A levels and academic achievement, but it is difficult to find a plumber or electrician.

584

The Chairperson: We shall have to draw our remarks to a close. We appreciate your coming before us. It has been very useful, and we look forward to meeting you again tomorrow and seeing Scotland House at first hand.

Witness:
Mr G Calder ) Scottish EU Office

585

The Chairperson: Mr George Calder from the Scottish EU Office is going to give us his presentation on the work of that office in Brussels and then Members can ask their questions. We appreciate the help we have been given by officials in that office so far.

586

Mr Calder: The Scottish Executive EU Office opened for business on 1 July 1999 - the day the Scottish Parliament was formally opened. We occupied the building then, although there were some holes in the walls. Before setting up our presence in Brussels, pre-devolution, we carried out an extensive study and decided to go for the model of a building which housed both Scotland Europa and the Scottish Executive. This would pull together Scottish interests and give them a natural focal point in Brussels. You have spoken to Donald MacInnes of Scotland Europa about this matter. The Scottish Executive EU Office also liaises closely with UKRep. We opened formally in October 1999, and we now have five staff who deal with policy matters and four administrative support staff. Our general aim is to increase Scottish influence in the EU working within the framework of overall UK interests.

587

We have four main functions. We offer operational support to the Executive, ranging from advice on hotel locations to how to try to influence a Second Reading debate in the European Parliament. In our building, we offer hot-desking facilities to allow officials who are out of the country to work and keep up to date, download and send reports. These facilities are connected to our computer system. We spend a lot of time organising visits from Ministers or officials from the Executive. We welcome that aspect of our work, as we firmly believe that to be effective in EU negotiations, it is best to have a feel for the culture in Brussels, which is different from the British Government culture. It is important to talk to people in Brussels to demystify the process of the EU. It is possible to read learned treatises about the EU that are difficult to follow, but once you talk to people and engage with the very open bureaucracies here, it is much easier. It is helpful for people with general EU responsibilities to work here for a period; they then find it easier to influence the machine working. Tony Canavan and other colleagues have worked in the Commission before, and so have I.

588

The second function of the office is to supply information. Brussels is very information-rich, and we need to be selective. If you browse the Internet, you can find thousands upon thousands of pages of information about the EU. Our function is to make sense of that information for colleagues, where necessary, and to put it into context. For example, if a topic is coming to an important stage, we will encourage officials to take a particular interest in it. We aim to put the right person in touch with the right information, at the right time. It is necessary to be selective as people are very busy. We also have informal sources of information, whether it is through talking to our MEPs, UKRep colleagues, or people in the Commission. These form an information grapevine - it would be unkind to call it rumour.

589

Our third function is to help influence EU policy-making, which is vulgarly known as lobbying, and more politely known as advocacy. That is at the heart of what we do in the Scottish EU Office. I am sure that you are in a similar position, in that although both the Westminster and the Scottish Parliaments have powers in some of the same broad policy areas, there is generally a clear legal division between which Parliament has competence to do what. In almost all cases their respective competences are clear. However, there is a vast area of shared competence between the Scottish Parliament and the European Union. On a crude arithmetical measure, around 80% of the powers of the Scottlish Parliament are also covered to a greater or lesser degree by powers of the European Union. That power can vary from small funding programmes to almost exclusive powers in relation to the environment, agriculture and fisheries.

590

The fourth function of the Scottish EU Office, which we share with Donald MacInnes and his team in Scotland Europa, is to promote the profile of Scotland within the EU. That can include holding informative policy seminars and working with other regions at an upstream stage - when something is not yet a Commission proposal but when what we are doing might be of interest to others, whether they be institutions or other regions. It can include talking to other regional officers in Brussels about areas in which we may be able to co-operate to our mutual benefit. A number of groups in Belgium and in Holland are interested in Scotland, and they hold Scottish weekends and fairs. We offer support and sometimes get involved. To take a different example, I recently went to Helsinki at the request of the British ambassador there to give a talk about Scottish devolution.

591

Those are our four main functions.

592

The Chairperson: UKRep is Northern Ireland's front door into EU policy. How has devolution settled in for Scotland regarding your relationship and co-operation with UK representation, and with regard to influencing its policy decisions from a Scottish perspective?

593

Mr Calder: UKRep could not have been more supportive and more helpful from day one, and I must pay tribute to the job that it has done. Regional officers from some other countries in Europe say that when they set up there was quite a lot of tension between them, their permanent representation and their Member State. UKRep has been very supportive; we work closely with it, and we do not seek to duplicate what it does.

594

Although I am fortunate in having more staff than Mr Canavan, there are still relatively few of us considering the amount that is going on. UKRep has many more staff than we do. We work as a team with UKRep regarding how we handle particular issues with a distinctive Scottish dimension. The exchange of information is mutually beneficial. We get a large amount of high quality information through UKRep. Occasionally we can feed information back in, and that works well.

595

The constitutional position is that the Scottish Executive are fully consulted about the formulation of the UK line on any particular European Commission proposals. We have the chance to make our input and to appeal if we are not content. Once the single UK negotiating line is resolved, we then work within that UK line. We would never consider going outside the UK line. That would be a real breach of faith.

596

However, many people think that that means the United Kingdom line is X when Scotland wanted it to be Y. That would be a very unusual situation, and I cannot even think of an example. It is much more common for there to be a distinctive Scottish interest. Much of our focus is obviously on such areas because of different institutions, geography and a different structure to the economy. In that sort of situation the United Kingdom line would typically be X+Y, where X might reflect the concerns of the rest of the UK and Y reflected a distinctive Scottish concern. Or if there is a particular Northern Ireland dimension, X+Y+Z. That is much more common.

597

In such cases we work out with UKRep how best to pursue matters. The Executive may pursue some issues at first hand because what is very important to us might be relatively minor in an overall UK context. We have the knowledge of what something means on the ground, so it is easier for us or for colleagues from Scotland to explain that. A great deal of it is to do with explaining distinctive Scottish circumstances and why something is not quite right or might be different, be it to the Commission or with MEPs or attending a Council working group as part of the United Kingdom delegation. As I say, UKRep work very closely with us. We are able to go to their internal meetings, and information is exchanged freely via computer. I have really been very pleased with the way that that has worked.

598

The Chairperson: For many years before devolution, MEPs were in the frontline for Scotland. Now that Scotland is devolved, how do you co-operate with MEPs, using their experience and the networks they have established over the years to benefit Scotland?

599

Mr Calder: And their power to make legislation. We have a very good group of eight Scottish MEPs, who are willing to work on cross-party lines where there is an important issue in Scotland. There will clearly be issues over which they have political differences, but on issues important to Scotland they are willing to work on cross-party lines. From a Scottish viewpoint that is very helpful.

600

I visit every month the MEPs designated to link with us. Four different political parties are involved. I try to go down every month, often accompanied by colleagues from other parts of Scotland House to review what is coming up on the plenary agenda. We use that as a peg on which to talk about what is coming up, although the most important debates tend to be those in Committees. We also discuss what else is going on, any other issues on which they want information from us - or vice-versa - and whether we can work jointly on various issues.

601

There is a great deal of separate contact. We might talk to an MEP about an issue concerning a Committee on which they sit bilaterally, with the relevant desk officer, official or Minister talking to them. One member of my staff has the job of covering the Parliament, and she will sit in on parliamentary Committees and report back on what is happening. There are all sorts of other ad hoc contacts. Although we have designated links with four of the Scottish MEPs, we also have good links with the other four.

602

Mr Gibson: So far we have found what you have to say extremely useful and informative. Perhaps I might ask you about some of the more practical bolts of the operation. What had Scotland been doing before devolution to bring Civil Service staff into a European way of thinking? Can you make any relevant recommendations?

603

You mentioned how you got along with the UK representatives. You represent the Executive, but do you have any contact with MSPs, to whom you might refer back? Do you depend solely on the other members of Scotland Europa to maintain contact with Scotland? In other words, what is your profile in Brussels, and how does it relate to Scotland?

604

Mr Calder: During the Scottish Office days in 1990 or 1991, I was involved in an internal review of how the then Scottish Office linked with the EU. I was subsequently head of personnel, so it is something that I spent time on. We decided then that, although we did have a number of EU secondees, characteristically going into UKRep or the Commission, the approach was too unstructured. We tended to be reactive rather than proactive in identifying where we wished to second people.

605

With regard to the thesis of the review, I said at the outset that it is my belief that you are most effective in dealing with the EU if you have had hands-on experience of working in that culture. I can think of one or two exceptions, but it is a very important criterion. It is not sufficient criterion, but it is important. So we moved to a system of having a higher volume of attachments to Europe. That can be a stagiaire scheme, which is an excellent scheme that involves a five-month traineeship in the EU institutions. It can be a detached national expert going into the Commission where there is cost sharing between the Commission and the Government who send the official. It can be a secondment to the UK representation. That is an excellent developmental experience for people. We seconded someone to Scotland Europa when it was established. Our secondments programme became better funded and more proactive at trying to identify areas of particular interest to us.

606

I am not sure that we have got it perfectly right, but we have moved in the right direction. I should also clarify that we do not send people in to fisheries or state aids with a view to influencing the Commission in favour of a particular Scottish case. That would be entirely inappropriate. People have to work for their employer and bat for their employer's interests, but they return with a range of contacts, an understanding of the culture and detailed knowledge of the subject area. Moreover, that cultural understanding is transferable. That has been the general approach, and we have stepped that up a bit since devolution.

607

Mr Gibson: How have you stepped that up?

608

Mr Calder: I must be careful because I was not working on Europe for the three years before I came to Brussels. I do not have the exact facts at my fingertips, but we do now have a substantial budget that is allocated to support EU secondments. Some secondments are to one or two other EU countries, but primarily they go to the EU institutions. We currently have 12 Scottish Executive officials in the EU institutions plus five in my office, which is a substantial volume of people. We are doing our best, and we are still working on the spirit of continuous improvement to try to put them into areas of importance.

609

Mr Gibson: Does that secondment practice reach down as far down as chief executive of councils?

610

Mr Calder: I am only talking about Scottish Executive officials. Similarly, we have done a bit of work on the training side. I know that my colleagues in Northern Ireland, such as Will Haire who was out in UKRep, have done similar things. This is not rocket science, but in my judgement it is important. In that way you are building institutional capacity to deal with issues in the future.

611

On the links between the Executive and the Scottish Parliament, the position is that we represent the Executive rather than the Parliament. We have always made it clear to the European Committee of the Parliament that we want to work in partnership with them, and if we can help, we will try to do so. Someone in the Parliament said recently that more information from us about what is going on would be helpful. We already supply some information, and will discuss the situation with them. We do, however, receive some of our information in confidence and we must not abuse that trust. We may find ways of further developing these links in the future.

612

The Committee of the Regions is about to be reconstituted, and its membership will include representatives of the Scottish Executive, the Scottish Parliament and of Scottish local government. We are discussing how best to provide an integrated support service to them, which will involve a closer working relationship with our parliamentary Colleagues.

613

Mr K Robinson: Thank you, Mr Calder, for giving us the benefit of your time and expertise this morning. You mentioned the term "information-rich Brussels", and you said that in disseminating the information you had to focus on the right person with the right information at the right time. We have been endeavouring to get a handle on how we, as an emerging devolved institution, can best target our limited resources to influence legislation in its early stages. How do we lobby effectively when things that alarm us appear in White or Green Papers? How can we co-ordinate the work of our Committee? I will explain that the Committee of the Centre is tasked with overseeing the work of the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, which is part of our Executive. European affairs is a small, but important area of our brief, and is one which we suspect may lead us to form another Committee. How do we apply influence and lobby at that early stage?

614

Mr Calder: Are you talking about the Committee or the Northern Ireland Executive?

615

Mr K Robinson: I am referring to the Northern Ireland Executive, but remember that the Committee is scrutinising what is going on in the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister.

616

Mr Gibson: We are currently preparing a report that will include recommendations.

617

Mr Calder: We are all learning. The Scottish EU Office in Brussels has only been in operation for two and a half years. Every day we are learning better ways of identifying and influencing issues early on. A degree of patience is required, and I certainly ask for patience from people in Scotland. The post-devolution position is new territory for us all, so it is a question of building up systems, expertise, and confidence. With other partner organisations it does take time to evolve.

618

We have tried various systems to identify which issues we should examine. We have looked at the Commission's work programme, which used to be published with about 1,000 potential communications. Two years ago, over 200 were dealing with legislation - more akin to primary than secondary legislation. We used to go through these communications in an endeavour to prioritise them. We consulted colleagues and tended to end up with a list of about 120 priorities, which is too many to operate on. Often the titles gave nothing away about the content, which might be very relevant, but you do not know until you see the content of the proposal. So that was one system. Now we mainly focus our business plan on the basis of Council presidencies. Currently we are completing a report on what will be done under the Spanish presidency, which includes drawing on information from UKRep.

619

One of the many advantages of going to Council working groups is that, at the beginning of a presidency, the chairman explains what the Council's priorities will be. Presidential priorities determine what gets driven through the Council and the Parliament with a view to reaching a conclusion.

620

You must also look at what proposals the Commission will produce in that period, which relates to the question of whether you can influence a proposal in advance. We share that information about presidency plans with our European Committee and other elected Scottish representatives in Europe. At your meeting in Scotland, you were probably told that there is a group of elected representatives that meets to discuss EU business. That is how we try to identify what we should be focusing on.

621

You must be careful. Initially, a proposal can be quite innocent or beneficial in its impact on Scotland, but as the proposal goes through the Council and the Parliament, which is a complex and interactive legislative process, it can twist and turn. A proposal might have been fine six months or three years ago and yet, while it is not a conspiracy, something might suddenly emerge that might affect us in a different way. You must be vigilant.

622

The level of influence depends on the case. There are many different ways of influencing. The best cases where we exercised influence is when we have worked as a team - "Team Scotland", if you like - and also liaised with the UKRep and our MEPs. If it relates to legislation, the MEPs will normally be involved. Occasionally, MSPs might lobby directly if they feel sufficiently strongly about it. That is quite rare, but it is a real signal that it is important to us.

623

The different facets of the legislative process must be looked at. There is a preparatory phase, and also the Council working groups. Scotland and Northern Ireland are in the privileged position of being able to have a member of staff there as part of the UK delegation who, if necessary, can speak about a specific point in a UK context. The legislative process also involves talking to the European Commission and keeping a close eye on what is going on in the Parliament.

624

The most common mistake is when people ignore the importance of the European Parliament or when to influence it. Parliamentary discussions are essentially decided at Committee, rather than plenary, level. Decisions can change at plenary level, but not often. The Committee Stage is the point where you want to have influence. It certainly works best if there is a team approach that also involves UKRep. I have learned that it is important for staff to have hands-on experience and that you must work as a team to have any influence.

625

Mr K Robinson: Our particular difficulty is that we are moving out of 30 years of direct rule, when the Civil Service was either directed along processes or was left to its own devices, whereupon it began to acquire powers or other interesting things along the way. How can that mindset be changed most advantageously to the new devolved Government without creating tensions?

626

We were aware of tensions between Edinburgh and London and between the House of Commons and the House of Lords. Obviously, tensions will arise between Belfast and other parts of the system. How can the mindset of Northern Irish civil servants be moved from that historical position to a position that allows us to maximise their presence, either here in Brussels or working in Belfast on European affairs?

627

Have you any thoughts on that without getting into our local politics?

628

Mr Calder: I am certainly not going to comment on your politics. I am not qualified to do so. I am speaking generally as a civil servant. I make no comment whatsoever about my colleagues in the Northern Ireland Civil Service with whom I have excellent relationships and for whom I have high regard. Culture change in any organisation - and it has been a big change for us post devolution, and there is also a culture change to some extent in the way that we deal with Europe -takes patience. It does not happen overnight. You need to adopt a patient approach and to build things up. You must be comfortable with small successes and then build on those.

629

There is a variety of things that you can do. I have already talked about the importance of getting as many civil servants as is feasible out to gain hands-on experience, whether it is with UKRep, in this office - I am sure that when Tony Canavan and William Dukelow return they will take a vast wealth of skill back to Northern Ireland - the Commission, Parliament or even the Council Secretariat. There are many options.

630

Secondly, when they come back, good use should be made of them. Do not bring them back with all that European experience and send them to work on, for example, prisons. It is important to make use of the experience. I am sure that Tony Canavan is already finding, and will find increasingly over time, that the mere presence of a base here makes it easier for people to come over. It makes it less daunting for someone who has not had much experience of Europe, and that is helpful. There are all sorts of things that you can do. We sometimes bring out groups of civil servants dealing with one particular subject area and arrange to brief them over a couple of days. All our top management is coming over at the beginning of March for two days, and the relevant permanent secretary from the Northern Ireland Office has also been out here a couple of times.

631

Mrs E Bell: Thank you for your answers. You have more or less outlined the absolute necessity of having our office here for several reasons. I was interested in what you said about institutional capacity. We could do with a few lessons on that and on working together as a team. We are still in a mould where we try to work together in consensus - and this is not just in relation to Europe - but are not always successful.

632

The other thing that you said that you have been able to do since being out here is to demystify Europe because of the bureaucracy et cetera. I am very interested in that because I come from the community voluntary area. To people in that field, Europe means money and Directives; it is "all about bananas". Do you think that your office - as well as the office that was here before - is valuable in trying to tap into that voluntary area? Is one of the reasons for having an office here so that some of them can come over and see Europe demystified?

633

Mr Calder: Absolutely. You read about the institutions and wonder what it all means, but if you come out and talk to a few people - certainly in the experience of the people that I have been dealing with - it is a completely different thing. Suddenly it makes sense, and people go from being very suspicious to realising that it is not all a great plot.

634

Mrs E Bell: One of the first things we did as an Assembly was to come out here. As Ken Robinson said, our feeling afterwards was that we never wanted to attend another reception. We were completely gobsmacked by the wonderful hospitality; we just could not understand it.

635

Mr Calder: Perhaps I might take your point further. Scotland House has Mr MacInnes, his colleagues and my office, and I hope it is a friendly base if you come out to Brussels. We hold a fair number of events of various kinds. We have now had a "Scotland Week" twice, although I should counsel you that the resource implications of doing so are enormous.

636

Mrs E Bell: We have already started that.

637

Mr Calder: A fair number of Scots came out for Scotland Week as well as for other events, bringing people from the institutions and regions to Scotland House, and I hope they also find it helpful. There is always great traffic of Scots through Scotland House.

638

Mrs E Bell: You mentioned civil servants. Have you ever had visits from Northern Ireland Ministers?

639

Mr Calder: Yes, I have entertained Northern Ireland Ministers on two occasions.

640

Dr McDonnell: The whole thing appears to hinge on relationships, and perception is often very different from reality - or perhaps perception is real enough without the component of human relationships. Perhaps it is a wilderness - a difficult and bureaucratic place if you fail to build such relationships. The question taxing our minds is how we in Northern Ireland - with a low base and coming from a late start - can get them right. From our perspective we see a three-legged stool, the first leg being the Executive with this office and its staff, which are already in place. However, we also see two other legs. One of them is the public, and we should like to think that the Assembly, this Committee and those Members with an interest in Europe are the best articulation there is likely to be of the wider public's views. The third leg is commerce.

641

I know you are here as the Executive interest. However, I should be interested to hear a few more sentences about your relationship with Scotland Europa. How do you feel it stacks up? Set me right if I am incorrect, but we perceive that in many cases the Executive's role in Brussels is to react. I do not mean that in a negative sense but with the meaning of responding to events. In other words, you are a nightwatchman for the Scottish Government.

642

Alongside that we see a desperate need for a proactive and engaging role, and in your case Scotland Europa probably fulfils that to a great extent. How do we in Northern Ireland stack it up? We are only around a quarter of the size of the community which you represent, and our resources are limited. Admittedly, the Executive has a great interest in Brussels - probably the key institutional interest. However, we are a little worried, since the institutions are all right up to a point, but Joe Bloggs sometimes disconnects. We noticed that the institutions forgot about him in Southern Ireland, with the result that he voted against the Nice treaty, and we have all this rumbling around in our heads.

643

We have a spread of political parties here; perhaps we should have liked to see one or two more, but what we have is enough to be going on with. Like your eight Scottish MPs, we are examining the matter on a cross-party basis. The five members you see before you represent four parties. But how do we strike a balance between the institutional and the opportunistic, between essential Government bureaucracy and creating opportunities, between fulfilling our responsibility to the European Union and bringing and holding people on board? What I am saying, if you forgive me, is that you can do a wonderful job in Brussels about which many people in Scotland will know nothing.

644

Our representatives here can do a wonderful job, and I am sure they are doing so, for there is no evidence to the contrary. However, we must make that known on the ground, and we are a little frightened that Joe Bloggs might not be aware of all the wonderful work done for him. How do you see that? Perhaps we might touch on it without being unduly critical or demanding that you make criticisms. Without putting yourself on the spot, how do you see us stacking up?

645

Mr Calder: Perhaps I could talk about some of my experiences in Scotland if they are relevant to you. I would not presume to advise you on what would be right in your case. I shall return to the point about the public, since it is the most difficult question. In relation to the question about the Government and the private sector, there are many different models for regional offices in Brussels. We are really at one extreme, since Scotland Europa is a body with members and tenants. It has only a small core staff, and the Welsh model is rather different in that respect.

646

We are therefore at one extreme. The most common model is that a regional office is simply a representative of the regional Government. If there is no regional Government, it may be a consortium of local authorities. These are the standard models. There are some, however, who in varying degrees involve some sort of private-sector economic development interest - perhaps a development agency. I believe you are talking to the Catalans, and they may be able to say something about that. There are one or two such cases.

647

There is a whole range of models to choose from, and our particular model, as I say, is at one extreme of a fairly broad spectrum. On the commercial side, I have been most intrigued and pleased by the interaction between my office and Scotland Europa, particularly in relation to their development-agency functions, covering trade, inward investment and so on. We found it very helpful to be together, for all sorts of things spin off - "synergy" is the technical word. We can suggest the involvement of Ministers. Since we meet in the corridors all the time and mingle, we manage to put all sorts of things together, whether it is related to policy, promotion, or business opportunities.

648

Perhaps I might give you a small example. During the last Scotland week the most successful of the social events - I know you are all fed up with receptions - was a reception to promote the Harris tweed industry. The United Kingdom ambassador held it in his residence. Scottish Enterprise and the Harris Tweed Association were much involved in putting it on. They invited along the Belgian fashion industry - it was pitched at the Belgian fashion market - and they produced models wearing modern Harris tweed, which is stunning. It is very light and has very intense colours. There was a great range of things, from the traditional to the way-out, with models presenting them. The tinkling ivories -

649

The Chairperson: We are not buying it.

650

Mr Calder: It was very successful, but that simply would not have happened if we had not had a Scotland Week. Both the Government and the economic development side were represented. It is one small example of the spin-off effect. I did not hear what Mr MacInnes said, but I imagine that he mentioned that Brussels is a great hub for multinationals, so it is an interesting place. On the commercial side, we have found that the model of involvement with development agencies and, in some cases, private sector interests is interesting.

651

If I knew the answer to the question about reaching the public, I could probably retire and make a fortune. The problem is how to deal with the disconnection between much - although not all - of the public and the institutions. Almost all European nations and regions face that problem at present. In a sense, it is what the future of Europe debate is about. It is a wider problem for Government generally.

652

Dr McDonnell: I would like to pursue that briefly, because I have a couple of other questions. I have never posed this question before, but what is the relationship between the Belgian public and the European Union? Are they appreciative of it, or resentful?

653

Mr Calder: In my experience, Belgium's stance has been traditionally very pro-European and keen on European integration, as has been the stance in several small countries in Europe.

654

Dr McDonnell: Do you mean the Belgian Government?

655

Mr Calder: The Belgian Government and the Belgian people have taken that view until recently. Perhaps I am only talking about the Belgian Government, but some of the things that Prime Minister Verhofstadt has said recently have been very open about the shortcomings of the institutions and the need to deal with them.

656

Perhaps I could mention one area in which I do have some competence to speak, which is that part of the future-of-Europe debate about the governance of the European Union. We have been involved in that, because we submitted a joint paper from the Executive and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (CoSLA), which included a series of proposals about how the governance of the European Union could take better account of the needs of regional interests, and make better use of democratic structures at regional and local level and connect better with people. We submitted ideas, such as a code of practice on consultation, which may sound pretty low key. However, that idea was picked up by the White Paper.

657

Much of the resentment that is felt about what happens in the EU is a result of the relevant bits of society having no proper understanding of the legislation that is going through. Sometimes people just hear that they cannot do something because of a Directive that was passed last year, and they are surprised, because they did not know about it. Therefore, much wider involvement of the public - at least those who are affected by a particular legislation - at an earlier stage would be one positive step. The Commission is now committed to taking that small, but positive, step.

658

We have submitted a range of proposals, and, if the Committee is interested, I can let you have a copy of our paper, which may deal with that difficult question to some extent. Our First Minister, Jack McConnell, was formerly Minister for Education, Europe and External Affairs, so we did give Europe a special focus within the ministerial team. That has been helpful for communicating with the Scottish public. Responsibility for Europe now rests with our Deputy First Minister.

659

Dr McDonnell: You mentioned the Committee of the Regions and your representation there. Can you outline what the Scottish representation on the Committee of the Regions is, and how it is arrived at?

660

Mr Calder: In the past, the UK Government formally appointed the Scottish representation on the Committee of the Regions. It has always been done on the basis of nominations from CoSLA. They have aimed for a geographical and political balance. We have four members and four alternates, so it is a team of eight representatives altogether.

661

We will now have two local authority representatives, one Parliament representative and one Scottish Executive representative, with alternates from their respective institutions backing them up. That is something new for us, although by chance two of our previous local authority representatives on CoSLA became Members of the Scottish Parliament at the time of devolution. The chairman of Parliament's European Committee, for example, was also a Committee of the Regions (CoR) member.

662

Dr McDonnell: Are those people still in the new dispensation? Are the two from local government merely rubber-stamped by the UK representation or are they appointed at local government level? Or are they selected after consultation? How do the Scottish Parliament and the Executive appoint their Members? Perhaps I ask for too much detail.

663

Mr Calder: I was not involved in the detail, but I think I know broadly what went on. With regard to the new situation of Members' appointments, there was consultation at political and official levels between the Parliament, the local authorities and the Executive, and agreement was reached on how the seats would be shared. In the Executive, that is endorsed by the Cabinet; in the Parliament it is discussed within their Bureau. Similarly, CoSLA has its own means of carrying out the procedure. It was debated in the Scottish Parliament and then put forward to the UK Government to make the formal nominations. I am not aware of any precedent for the UK Government's overturning a recommendation for membership of the Committee of the Regions.

664

Dr McDonnell: Does the Committee of the Regions do anything?

665

Mr Calder: We are in a very poor position to judge, because the Executive has not yet been represented on it. It will be from February.

666

Dr McDonnell: I do not ask you to judge, but to speculate generally.

667

Mr Calder: I can safely say that there is widespread concern that the Committee of the Regions does not have as big an impact as it might. That is for several reasons, the most obvious being because it is advisory. The legislative institutions are therefore not obliged to take any account of what the Committee of the Regions says. That is the real point of concern. What is interesting is that in discussions leading up to the 2004 Intergovernmental Conference on the Future of Europe, many proposals are coming forward on how the Committee of the Regions might be strengthened. We must wait and see whether that comes to pass.

668

The Chairperson: With regard to prioritisation of issues, you indicated that on the agenda there were still 120 papers which you felt might have been appropriate. What political input was there to that prioritisation?

669

Mr Calder: I should make it clear that that 120 was an attempt at official level to prioritise on the basis of the Commission's work programme. It did not work; we cannot follow 120 matters. We must deal with them, as some of them are about Scotland, but we in Brussels cannot focus our limited resources on 120 matters. We now prepare for each presidency, taking a forward look at what each must focus on, together with the major issues coming from the Commission. That goes forward to our Ministers and we consult with them in that context. There is also discussion in the EMILE (European Members Information Liaison Exchange) group of elected representatives on the most important matters for Scotland to which attention must be paid. That gives us a framework in which to work and in which our Ministers and other elected representatives can comment on what is important for Scotland.

670

The Chairperson: Can you give us examples of Scottish EU Office success in developing and influencing European policy to the benefit of Scotland?

671

Mr Calder: Yes. To take an example, in the area of legislation, there is under negotiation a proposal on the Health Rules for the Disposal of Animal By-Products Not Intended for Human Consumption. It sounds obscure, but it is legislation that suggests that fallen stock should always be incinerated for health reasons, to avoid transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) for example.

672

That makes sense for most parts of the community; however, it does not make sense if one lives on a remote Scottish island from which the cost - and the risks - of transporting material to the mainland for incineration do not make sense. My office has tried to ensure that the legislation takes account of the needs of very remote areas. We have attended the Council's working group meetings, and this is still going on, and we have worked with our MEPs on the parliamentary side. In fact, it is being discussed today in the Parliament.

673

To date, we have attained what we wanted in the matter. That is a good example, because often our influence is greatest in the smaller matters. In hugely important issues one's voice may be drowned among many others, but we have been able to make a difference in this.

674

Another important area for us is how the Commission manages the areas of policy that have been devolved to it, for example, state aids, structural funds or common agricultural policy. To take an example, we have been very much involved in the question of aids given to the CalMac ferries in the west of Scotland. We have been involved in long discussions with the Commission about the requirement to tender the ferry services if there is to be public support for them. That has been going on for quite a while, and it is still working its way through in Scotland. At one stage it was seen as a considerable threat by people in Scotland, and we, and many others, local authorities, parliamentarians, MEPs, and Ministers have been involved in discussions with the Commission on how to manage this. We have developed a consensus on the way forward. It started off as less of a Scottish team effort than I should have liked, frankly, but as people pulled together, we became much more successful.

675

The Chairperson: It is encouraging that a region can exercise some influence.

676

Mr Calder: It is. To take another example, the Commission encouraged responses to its first governance proposals. Of course, the United Kingdom made comments, but the Executive also made proposals jointly with CoSLA, and somewhat to my surprise, these comments seem to have had a significant effect on what the Commission decided. I was pleased about that.

677

The Chairperson: You have been involved in discussions with other regions with legislative powers. Is this a useful forum, and how will it benefit Scotland's interests?

678

Mr Calder: We have links with regions with legislative powers. We have bilateral links with German Laender, with Catalonia and with the Belgian regions for example. There have been two conferences for First Ministers of those regions with legislative power. The last was one in Liège in November, but for a variety of reasons Scotland and Northern Ireland did not have Ministers there. However, Tony Canavan and I represented our interests at that conference. That is a helpful development, and another conference is planned for Tuscany next year. We were also involved in a so-called "Flanders declaration". Most of the recent activity in this area has been about contributing to the debates about the future of Europe and governance.

679

The Chairperson: Thank you very much for telling us about your experience. This morning's session with Donald MacInnes and yourself was useful. We look forward to seeing you tomorrow when we come down to Scotland House. Thank you very much.

Wednesday 23 January 2002

Members present:
Mr Poots(Chairperson)
Mr Gibson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Dr McDonnell
Mr K Robinson

Witness:
Mr J Simpson ) European Economic
and Social Committee

680

The Chairperson: We are glad to welcome John Simpson who scarcely needs an introduction, as he is one of the top economists in the Province, and the vice-president of the European Economic and Social Committee. You will note from the rider that the opinions that he expresses in his submission are not those of the Committee, and we respect that.

681

Mr Simpson: Thank you for inviting me to meet the Committee of the Centre. I welcome the fact that the Committee has taken the initiative to carry out some of its work by talking to the people in Brussels, as well as talking to those in the Assembly service who have an interest in European affairs. Of course, I speak from a personal point of view today. Nevertheless, I can speak on behalf of my Committee colleagues without fear of causing controversy and say that they welcome the interest of a region such as Northern Ireland in learning more about how the European Union operates. During the six years that I have worked with the European Economic and Social Committee, it has taken an objective interest in events in Northern Ireland, and it continues to do so.

682

By coincidence, the current president of the Committee was also chairman of the Committee's delegation to Northern Ireland when the first peace package was being debated. As is so often the case with visitors to Northern Ireland, it remains a mystery to him that he could go from Belfast to Enniskillen via points south of the border, and in particular, via the cross-border road that runs through part of Monaghan and Fermanagh, and be told "that was the border", but not know whether he was heading North to South or South to North.

683

The European Economic and Social Committee appreciates that Northern Ireland has been through a difficult period, and is always sympathetic to the events there. Although European funding is evolving and forming part of a bigger picture, Committee Members would have wished to support the extension of the European Peace Programme to Peace II, as it is now. Obviously, as events unfold in this decade, people in Brussels will discuss what regions are deserving of help, and what should be done to help them. Northern Ireland is no longer classed under Objective 1, and may instead be classed under transitional Objective 1, or put in another grouping.

684

I may have already made my first misleading comments - perhaps misleading is too strong a word - by emphasising funds rather than policy. That is not the most constructive route for discussion about Northern Ireland affairs in Brussels. Too frequently over the years the easy debate has been on the amount of funding - namely whether those funds are additional or are displacing others, or how they affect the Assembly Budget. However, the real debate is on policy; what policies are evolving in Brussels, and how they might impact on a region such as Northern Ireland. That debate can be enhanced by the Assembly in general, and the Committee of the Centre in particular, with its monitoring of the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. Policy ideas in the European setting are continuously evolving.

685

We should have been taking an interest, but we have not always been in a good position to do that. The Northern Ireland Executive Office here, the Assembly and the Assembly Committees provide an opportunity to improve that relationship.

686

It would be simplistic, although central, to think of your work as an attempt to achieve a better set of relationships between the European Commission and Northern Ireland, its institutions, the Assembly and its Ministers. We must be aware that it is only a starting point to have the right contacts and influence in the Commission. We must step back and ask who is making which decisions, and what the Commission's role is in making those decisions. Representatives of the Commission will have an inherent bias - if I dare to call it that - which they will emphasise because it is their daily work. They will emphasise the centrality of the Commission in the administration and execution of processes of government. However, it is important to ask who will ultimately make the decisions. If the decision concerns proposed legislation, regulations or Directives, the short answer is that the Council of Ministers decides on major points of principle.

687

If you try to schedule a meeting with the Council of Ministers while you are in Brussels, you will find it difficult. The members of the Council of Ministers are not easy to network with in Brussels because they are Ministers of national Governments. It is important that your frame of reference includes an understanding of the nature of the Council of Ministers. The Council is made up of Ministers from the 15 Governments. In our case, we must ask who those representatives are who influence the Council.

688

I expect that you will meet representatives of the United Kingdom representation (UKRep). The Irish representation also takes an interest in what is likely to be argued from and for Northern Ireland. With regard to getting decisions made on major policies at the highest level, it is important to ensure that UKRep and the Irish representation listen to us with a sympathetic ear. Without having any malign intentions, the Commission will frequently try to persuade the Council of Ministers to take its ideas on board. The fact that you have persuaded the Commission to agree with your proposals or that it has talked to you, does not mean that the British or Irish Ministers will have incorporated your ideas into their thought processes when they sit around the table.

689

I am trying to convey a picture of complex decision-making. Even after new legislation has been through the Parliament and administered, designed and put into process by the Commission, the ultimate decisions lie with the Council of Ministers. There have been occasions when the Commission has been unable to persuade the Council of Ministers to accept what it wants to do. The Commission regularly complains that Governments - by which it means the Council of Ministers - are not prepared to take the Commission's advice, which it often gives to the Council of Ministers. There are currently debates about both policy and procedure. There is a debate about the governance of the European Union and about the input that we might have to the Laeken convention, which is being set up under the former French President, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing. That debate will provide an important arena for talking about procedure.

690

It will also be important to watch out for whom the British and Irish Governments nominate to that convention. Ultimately, that will determine how federal, or non-federal, the new structures will be after 2004. We will watch that to determine what input we should make.

691

Both the Committee of the Regions and my own Committee, the Economic and Social Committee, exist in order to express what we hope is a well-informed opinion on the proposals. The Commission's work programme goes to these Committees and is argued and debated. Recommendations are made to either accept it as it is, or to alter it and refine it.

692

That is an early step in any new legislation. It would be a mistake to decide to ignore new legislation and wait until it gets up and running. We should take an interest at the earliest possible moment.

693

We are weak in that area. I cannot speak for the Committee of the Regions, but I think that it would have the same opinion. The Economic and Social Committee has 220 members from 15 countries who are divided into three groups. One third are employers; one third come from organised workforces such as trade unions; and one third represent diverse interests. I am happy to be a "diverse interest".

694

If you can persuade the Economic and Social Committee to accept a new piece of social or economic legislation, you will have persuaded the trade unions, the employer organisations and some of the professions in Europe that it is something that they are prepared to support. That significantly underpins the issues in the wider community. The Committee structure shows that the founding fathers of the European Community were trying to ensure that they took the social partners with them.

695

As the Parliament becomes stronger, the British argument may be that the Economic and Social Committee would become redundant. I do not think that that would be the Irish argument, and the French and the Germans would not agree. They would not willingly allow the abolition of the Economic and Social Committee. The Germans, in particular, would not welcome the end of the Committee of Regions, because they regard it as extremely important to the representation of the Laender.

696

If I have clearly shown that the Institutions, the Council, the Commission, the Parliament, the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee all have a place in the decision making flow chart, you will realise that, in order to influence it, it is not good enough to wait until proposals reach a critical stage. One of the biggest difficulties is that, if we only become aware of a Commission policy when it is goes to the Council of the Ministers, it is probably too late.

697

The Chairperson: A few areas of your submission jumped out at me, and some of it is critical. Item 18 states that

"authorities need to have a clearer agenda."

698

Item 19 clarifies what the agenda should be.

699

Item 23 outlines that

"Local Departments do not, apparently, see the value in widening the network of contacts and influence in this way. Departments do not, at present, brief members of the Economic and Social Committee (and possibly MEPs and members of the Committee of the Regions?)."

700

We can clarify that they do not brief MEPs. It goes on to say that they

"rarely take any interest in the issues under debate at this level, despite the fact that it is an early opportunity to influence opinion."

701

It then states that the departmental budget statements prepared by the Department of Finance and Personnel, and the later detail in the appropriate accounts, are wilfully deficient in clarity.

702

In item 30, you state that

"The OFMDFM will only be effective if the reporting and information mechanism within and between Northern Ireland Departments functions fully and openly."

703

You probably agree that the Committee has taken on a worthwhile project in examining EU issues as they stand with the Departments. I am happy with your agenda for what Government Departments need. You clearly do not believe that enough is being done at an early stage with regard to legislation that comes from Brussels. How could we improve the way that we deal with that, given the small number of personnel that we could afford to have in Brussels, and the amount of paperwork and documentation that comes from Brussels?

704

Mr Simpson: Those are key issues. The number of personnel that could work full time on this matter in Brussels, on behalf of the Assembly and its Departments, is limited. Northern Ireland is a small region in this context. Part of the answer is that we must take the decision in principle that we wish to receive information at the earliest possible stage. Then we must acknowledge that we do not need to follow everything - we must be selective. At times, the matter of how an enlarged European Community will deal with regions such as Northern Ireland will be top of the agenda. That is a major issue at present. If we had only two, three or four individuals working on the subject, they could focus on certain issues for a period. Selectivity is part of the answer to your question.

705

I have criticised the Commission because it has become less open to informal discussions on progress than it was 10 years ago. However, it is quite open, and it is possible to get the discussion papers and to ask what the Commission has sent to the European Economic and Social Committee or the Committee of the Regions and what is happening with regard to those matters. The process of asking questions is most important. I receive a bundle of literature from Brussels each week which is an inch or two inches thick. Of that, 90% will go to the eternal environmental pot on the floor for reprocessing. However, the little bit that I keep relates to the selective areas that I am interested in. The same applies to the Assembly. Each week someone can look at what has been put on the table and at what the Commission web site says and pass those issues back to the Departments in Belfast to establish what is being done about them.

706

We have not had that facility until now. Therefore, we do not know how well it will work. However, to use the European Community terminology, one of the major issues at the moment is the debate about what will happen to cohesion policy when the new member states join. The big argument is that most of those states have a lower standard of living than the rest of Europe. Therefore, relatively, Northern Ireland does not look bad. Influence is already being brought to bear on that matter, because my colleagues are working on a response to the Commission's proposals for cohesion.

707

Some of your Assembly Colleagues were at a conference that Commissioner Barnier chaired some time ago, but that is not enough on its own. You have already spoken to Mr Calder from Scotland House. One of my colleagues on the European Economic and Social Committee, Campbell Christie, is a former general secretary of the Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC). He is also the chairman of Scotland's Civic Forum. He spends a high proportion of his time arguing for a renewed statement of cohesion policy that will make sure that Scotland does not lose out by 2005. Of course, he is not only doing that for Scotland, but he is examining the matter so that areas such as Scotland do not lose out.

708

He is not being selfish about it. There is a big debate about whether the European community should, having admitted so many new member states, direct all its extra efforts to the poorest regions. Campbell Christie argues for keeping the same line of affluence, so that anyone who is below the present line of affluence will remain within the cohesion policies for particular forms of treatment. That makes the Community's budget prospects horrendous. However, one can see why he is arguing that. It is a real debate in which we should be involved, and we should be watching closely the papers on it day-by-day.

709

The Chairperson: As an economist, do you think that it is cost effective to operate a minimalist policy concerning Europe? There is an argument that policies will be made anyway, and we will carry them out as instructed, but a little region such as Northern Ireland will not have much influence, and it is not worthwhile to pump massive amounts of resources into it.

710

Mr Simpson: I do not think that the Committee will end up with that laissez faire approach. It is worth doing something. It is worth knowing what is happening and trying to influence it. If you get a combination of the Scots, the Northern Irish, the Republic of Ireland and some of the Mediterranean regions - I am thinking of particular colleagues on Mediterranean islands - it can make a measure of influence, providing they all argue the same way.

711

Dr McDonnell: Do you mean the Corsicans?

712

Mr Simpson: Yes. Corsicans, Sardinians, Sicilians and Cretans. Allowances are made, but you must be prepared to participate. The danger is that, back in Belfast, the view will be that this Brussels office exists, and it does such-and-such a job. The office will only succeed according to the extent to which it is engaged in mutual exchange with a network of contacts here and in Northern Ireland. If Departments do not have the right relationship with the office, they will feel that its work is pointless. However, it has potential.

713

Dr McDonnell: I know it is not possible to get a single agenda or approach, but I heard a suggestion that we regulate our various conflicts of interests, rather than resolve them. How do you think we might implement that between Government Departments, the Executive, and the various Assembly Committees? This is not the only Committee, although it is the overarching one. We are all agreed that we are unhappy with a representation in Brussels that is largely bureaucratic and representative only of the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister. Sometimes we feel that it does not even represent that Office, and the bureaucracy may keep it in the dark. How do we widen it out?

714

Mr Simpson: If I understand you correctly, my submission has a Delphic reference to the sort of issues that you are talking about, although I cannot find it immediately. However, I believe that in the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister there is discussion of a European Union strategy paper, which will outline how it will handle those issues.

715

That has taken longer to appear than I would have expected, but the sooner it appears the better, because that will clarify where we all are. For example, this office needs to have a set of opposite numbers in the First Minister's office in Belfast to chase up and co-ordinate what is happening. It is important not to envisage this as one line of communication from whatever is happening in Brussels through this office to the First Minister's Office, then to other Departments and through Ministers to the Assembly.

716

We have to see it as a series of parallel lines in which those things that are specifically subject-related do not need to go through the centre. The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development is the easy example. The danger with it is that it would be too independent on this, but the Department's remit includes a series of subjects for which you would expect it to have contacts in this office as well as contacts elsewhere in Brussels. For example, the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development is handling the current debate about milk prices and export refunds subsidies on powdered milk. If it comes to a discussion in Northern Ireland political terms, the Minister will talk to the departmental Committee, and that is fair enough.

717

If it comes to water quality and the danger of Northern Ireland being prosecuted because we have so many areas that are below the standards that all the European countries have agreed, then the Department for Regional Development needs to outline its approach.

718

However, we need a much more developed network. The strength of our relationship is between civil servants and Commission officials. That may be the main track, but there should be a lot of networks around that.

719

Dr McDonnell: It should be a sieve rather than a bottleneck. It should be a multi-channel sieve.

720

Mr Simpson: There should be optical fibre type relationships.

721

Dr McDonnell: That is much more sophisticated - twenty-first century as opposed to nineteenth century.

722

Mrs E Bell: Mr Simpson, your submission was very interesting. We have all touched on paragraph 18 because, through our discussions with Westminster and Scotland - who have those specific European committees - we have been fed this idea. But we have also teased out, to a certain extent, the idea of having a European interest on the departmental side. The steering committee of the Scottish Parliament said that it wanted a representative from each Committee to make up a European committee, but that was not done in the end because people did not have the time to do it. We would have that difficulty too, but on the other hand it may be a cleaner way of doing it. What are your thoughts on that?

723

You said that there ought to be different roles, and you are right that the system should comprise the Ministerial Executive, the Assembly Committees and then a general overview body such as the Committee of the Centre. Given our doubtful view of Europe generally -not the Committee's view, obviously, as most of this Committee is becoming more European by the minute -how could we sell that idea to the Assembly, the Executive and also to the people? You are quite right that they all look to Europe for money. That has restricted us because people look on funding as the only thing that Europe can do for us. Your submission first gave me the idea that we could sell it in this way, even if only to copper fasten the economic benefits.

724

Mr Simpson: The spirit of what you are looking for is indeed the spirit that lay behind my suggestion. One obvious possibility is that the Assembly should have a Committee that co-ordinates a view of European affairs and is linked to the European Affairs Unit in the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. That could be the Committee of the Centre. However, you may feel that you have got enough to do. You may want to find another method.

725

It need not be a major commitment, so long as it is set up with a very clear statement that the departmental Committees have a European agenda in their brief. I do not know whether the Assembly accepts that, or if it would be novel; but I am not aware of any of the Assembly Committees looking at European competition policy or industrial policy. I do not think that the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment has studied those areas and explored their implications.

726

I was thinking about that when I read about the planning decision for Belfast allowing the deal between the Department for Social Development and Dunloe Ewart. Here we have a Department doing a deal about what may happen in terms of retail development in Belfast. I have to confess an interest. It is not a commercial interest. I am a protagonist on one side of that argument. It is a major issue for the Department for Social Development. As I look at it, I wonder if it falls within European competition policy, because it is a restraint of trade that could affect trade on the island.

727

I would expect Assembly Committees to take this kind of issue one at a time. An overview Committee might look in general at matters such as cohesion policy, which does not belong to any one Department. I believe that there are certain Permanent Secretaries in two Departments who would fight to say it was theirs, but that would be a mistake. These are issues which necessitate leadership.

728

Also behind your question was the feeling that though Northern Ireland may need this, there is not much public appreciation of the need for it. To use the old phrase, it is the problem of the chicken and the egg. Nobody is articulating these European issues locally in a way that adds to public understanding. How often do you read about European policy in any of the three magnificent Northern Ireland papers, never mind the various broadcasting channels? It is very rarely there. If you are from Northern Ireland and you want to keep in touch with European policy, your best strategy is to read pages 5 or 6 of the Financial Times every day.

729

Mrs E Bell: I am sure you know that the Scottish committee on Europe has more or less a scrutiny role, in which they examine legislation. I do not think we could sell that to the Assembly. The Assembly would not permit us to set up another Committee to look at legislation; it would want something more practical. What you were proposing would be supplementary, and might make the exercise more useful.

730

Mr Simpson: Yes I understand the point. You do not want a scrutiny committee that plans to scrutinise everything, because your Colleagues will ask you to back off. However, there are issues that will change from half-year to half-year, and we should be addressing those. What do we think of the proposals to change VAT and its impact on cross-border relations? The Assembly is not responsible for VAT.

731

Mrs Bell: Another point was the postal services.

732

Mr Simpson: Yes. What are we going to do about the postal services? What are we going to do about the requirement for competition in transport services? What are we going to do about the opening up of the market for electricity and gas? All of these are issues over which you may not have legislative authority, but you have a consumer interest.

733

Mrs Bell: It is also in our interests to try to get in at the beginning.

734

Mr Simpson: Yes, with the exception of postal services, where the changes are already well developed.

735

Mrs E Bell: That demonstrates why we need something specific.

736

Mr K Robinson: It is strange to see you in these surroundings, Mr Simpson.

737

In paragraph 38 of your submission strengths and weaknesses are discussed. You are politic in your criticism. The submission states:

"The present approach to the contact with the European institutions does seem to be less robust and effective than might be desired. The strongest features are probably the direct links between most Departments and their opposite numbers in the Commission. The weakest features, as seen from outside the Departmental structures, is that the network of relationships is too narrow."

738

During this visit, and on previous visits to Westminster and the Scottish Parliament, the Committee has been trying to tease out the value of structured official networking and that of informal networking. In Scotland and at Westminster, the balance would appear to be tipped in favour of formal networking. In Brussels it seems to be the opposite, and informal networking can produce almost as many good results as going through the predetermined channels.

739

Mr Simpson: I agree with you, if what you are saying is that the informal network seems to work more effectively in relationships with the Commission than if we were sitting in Belfast trying to maintain an informal network with the London Department. There is much more scope for that. That informal linkage means that information can be obtained that is better than that from London. However, the real strength lies in having the ear of UKRep, or the Irish representation as it applies in the Irish case. The last thing that is needed, as a result of having a stronger Scottish, Welsh or Northern Ireland input in Brussels, is to create a situation in which UKRep's reaction is that the regional assemblies are making life difficult for them. They have to feel that you are being positive. You may be critical, but you must let UKRep know that you are not pursuing a narrow set of interests, but are trying to see things from a broader perspective. That is what Mrs Bell is saying. The broader setting is needed so that in debate, whatever is established informally with the Commission, when it comes to the Council of Ministers, government representatives can be told what it is we have been looking at and what we hope will happen.

740

Mr K Robinson: Can we be as brash as that? A previous contributor told us that brashness sometimes delivers results.

741

Mr Simpson: It does, but as a consistent policy it might create an adverse reputation.

742

Mr K Robinson: We were warned about that.

743

Mr Simpson: It can be done every now and again.

744

Mr K Robinson: Yes, with careful application.

745

Access to information seems to be more readily available in Brussels than it is in the traditional British and Northern Ireland settings. Committees such as this one experience stress and strain. Can you tell us how to overcome that without clashing with current sources of information?

746

Mr Simpson: I probably cannot do that. It will grow with experience and confidence. It is good that doors can be knocked and answers can be obtained. I wish we could bring the same message back to Belfast, particularly to places such as Dundonald House and Clarence Court. A method cannot be prescribed. There must be a will. The very existence of the Assembly gives civil servants access to wider discussion.

747

However, Assembly Committees have one restrictive effect. I was talking to a colleague about electricity regulation, and he mentioned that a paper had been sent to the relevant Assembly Committee. I was told that I could not see the paper, because while it is with the Committee, and until its report is published, the paper is its property.

748

It was an interesting and perverse consequence that an issue that might otherwise have been discussed across a lunch table - it was discussed but the paper was not - was slightly frustrated by the convention that papers presented to an Assembly Committee are confidential until the report is published. I do not know if that is procedurally accurate, but that is the way it was told.

749

Mr K Robinson: It is accepted practice.

750

Dr McDonnell: There is a restraint. You are referring to the energy inquiry. I have been up to my neck in that inquiry for 12 months. The restraint is there to prevent me or somebody else breaking ranks on it. I put a motion down some months ago -

751

Mr Simpson: Was a third party putting any papers to you?

752

Dr McDonnell: I am not sure that it is a necessary protocol. It might be changed.

753

Mr Gibson: A number of important areas have already been covered. You have suggested that regular briefings by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to representatives of EU institutions were valuable, but have not been effective in the past. Can you tell us why those briefings were ineffective?

754

Mr Simpson: If you ask the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister about the desirability of that process, it will say that it should happen more often. The easiest answer that you might be offered is that there have been other things to deal with. However, we will get there. Fair enough, we had one meeting; but the problem was that there has only been one meeting. The promise that it would be done more frequently has not been followed up. So there are two issues: whether the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister will produce a general strategy; and whether it will hold this type of relationship exercise. The two issues are both lurking, and I would like to see them both happen.

755

Mr Gibson: As you know, the remit of our inquiry is to look at the Assembly's position and that of the Executive. There is also the wider issue of Northern Ireland plc. How could the Assembly improve its handling of EU issues?

756

Mr Simpson: The responsibility has to fall on a number of places. If I had to identify them in some sort of order, the first responsibility lies with Ministers and permanent secretaries to recognise this as a specific item on their agenda. It does not happen by accident. It should be on their agenda. The Civil Service is well trained. It should come up every three to six months.

757

Depending on how significant the European dimension is, each Assembly Committee should on a periodic basis ask the Department for a paper on the European issues that are on its agenda. This means that those issues will get into reports and they will get onto the Floor of the Assembly. They will be reported, and they may even provoke debate and argument. It is important that there is more debate and argument about those European issues.

758

There is one issue in my submission that we have not discussed, but which I think is important, that is the reporting of the impact of Europe on public expenditure. At the outset I did say "policy first, funds second", but I do not want to dismiss funds.

759

Mr Gibson: I presume that by "funds" you also mean costs?

760

Mr Simpson: Yes, I do. The Committee of the Centre will have found some points of interest in the appropriation costs that it received when it was reading the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General about a month ago. It will also have noticed that in every Department's expenditure, under each heading, an item of - I have forgotten the exact term - funds allocated as proportionate contribution to spending from the European Social Fund or other European funding. My next question is always: on what was that spent? It is all very well to say that the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, for example, earmarked £500,000 to back funds derived from the European regional development fund, but that is just an interim stage; it is just a line. I would want to know how that money was spent.

761

Public expenditure from the Assembly's own devolved budget is one matter, but that other expenditure also impacts on people. I want the appropriation accounts to be taken a step further. The Department of Finance and Personnel will have considerable difficulty with those sums and in presenting that information; I will not make life easy for it. However, you and I have an interest in finding out the impact of the funds in Northern Ireland, the amount allocated, and how those funds were mixed with the Assembly's funds.

762

The Chairperson: MEP briefing papers are now sent to the Assembly Committees, which is useful. The Committee of the Centre distributes those to the relevant Committees.

763

Mr Simpson: Would you ask for them to be sent to the Economic and Social Committee also?

764

The Committee Clerk: They are in the Assembly Library.

765

Mr Simpson: Since I joined the Economic and Social Committee in Brussels, I have told those whom I thought were central that, although I have been sent here and I receive many papers, I am a "free-ranging" official rather than a delegate, and I do my best. I have never been invited by a Government departmental official to attend discussions about a subject on which I am producing a paper. For example, in the past I was the Committee's shipbuilding expert, at a time when that was an important issue. However, no effort was ever made to recognise that I was writing about the subject or involved with it in Brussels. That type of communication works both ways, so I accept some of the blame. However, the wrong relationship exists between the Government Departments and me, or my successor, who will take up post soon when the membership changes. It is asking a good deal to tell someone in this position to do his own thing; a means of support or fallback on the system is needed.

766

Mr Gibson: Has a Department ever asked you for a set of priorities, as you perceive them here in Brussels, for its consideration? Would that happen regularly?

767

Mr Simpson: It does not happen.

768

Mr Gibson: Of your own accord, you feed back into the system any alerts or early warnings. Are you ever asked for responses or feedback?

769

Mr Simpson: Not from the Northern Ireland end. I work here and I must keep in touch with the Commission in respect of various subjects, but that is because I have been sent here and have been given this job to do. So long as I do not get imprisoned, I will be left alone. Perhaps, even if I were imprisoned, I would still be left alone.

770

Mr Gibson: Your answers reflect what the Committee suspected might be happening.

771

Mr K Robinson: Are you therefore free to select the issues that you think should be addressed, free from any hindrance? From one point of view, that would be a lovely situation, but that would isolate you from the system that the Committee of the Centre assumed to exist.

772

Mr Simpson: It does. As a member of the Economic and Social Committee, I can choose which subjects I want to follow up in more detail. Sometimes my Committee colleagues will make me responsible for a subject. However, I have my own set of interests, and, consequently, in the past year I was involved in the setting of EU economic policy, the stability and growth guidelines and their impact on national Governments. I read with interest the Commission's comments to the Irish Government about Charlie McCreevy's Budget last year. The Economic and Social Committee went to the European Central Bank to discuss its plans in respect of interest rates.

773

Closer to home, I have been working, in a small way, on the cohesion policy. I have also worked on the policy in regard to the outermost regions - that tends to mean the outermost islands. Eighteen months ago, I was asked to specialise in examining the way in which the argument regarding the introduction of the European patent should be made - although that issue does not have a Northern Ireland label, it is important for us. I have been carrying out that work ever since. There is a major bottleneck on European patent legislation. I was self-selected in the sense that nobody else from Northern Ireland is carrying out that work. The other two Committee members with a Northern Ireland accent are Bill Tosh, formerly of the Confederation of British Industry in Belfast, and John Freeman, former general secretary of the Transport and General Workers' Union in Belfast.

774

Mr K Robinson: You resemble a one-man House of Lords, because the House of Lords appears to have the luxury of being able to pluck a subject out, study it in depth and make a report on it.

775

Mr Gibson: Do you ever correspond with the UK Government? Do you communicate with it or does it communicate with you?

776

Mr Simpson: There is a major problem with the relationship. Twenty-seven people are nominated from the UK Government to the Economic and Social Committee, and nine people are nominated from the Irish Government. Six years ago the Department of Trade and Industry, the Department of Agriculture and one or two other Departments sent briefing papers regularly. That has almost disappeared and the British Government are not conducting the briefing that they should. When I say that we are not getting briefed from a Northern Ireland base, it is not happening from London either. I think that the Scottish Parliament are doing better.

777

On the Committee there are one or two national figures from the employers' side. Malcolm Levitt, Barclays Bank's most senior economic adviser, is a colleague from industry. He is perfectly skilled and argues on financial services action plans. The British Government do not need to supplement what he is doing. Nevertheless, it is a point of influence. Thank goodness that someone like Malcolm Levitt is there and has the expertise. On the Irish side there is Roy Donovan, who is a member of the board of the Central Bank of Ireland.

778

Mrs E Bell: One matter that concerns many of us, and not just on this Committee, is the slow progress of legislation in the Assembly. When we hear that 60% of legislation originates in Europe, we think that somewhere along the line someone will have to pull all that together. Do you have any ideas on that?

779

Mr Simpson: Tomorrow there is a session in the European Parliament when European legislation and how it affects business will be discussed. The 'Financial Times' has compiled a list of some 25 pieces of legislation that will come into effect in the UK in 2002, and slightly more than half of those started because of the agreement of the Council of Ministers in Brussels. That reflects the degree to which employment law, in relation to governance of companies, patents and so forth, all started with a discussion that reached the Council of Ministers. The chain, from someone expressing an idea to it becoming legislation, is a very long one. The process in Brussels is complex and tortuous.

780

When would you want to know that such-and-such a piece of legislation was being proposed? The danger is that you might comment on it on the first day when someone in the Commission says that there is a Green Paper. That subsequently becomes a White Paper, it goes out for consultation, it comes back to the Parliament, and then from there it goes to the Council, which may or may not approve it.

781

Imagine if your constituents are taking an interest in the subject - they will want to know where the decision is made. It becomes very unclear.

782

Mr K Robinson: We naively believed that if we could intervene at the earliest possible moment, we would have the greatest impact. However, Jim Nicholson, in his informal submission, pointed out that by the time it reached Parliament, it could be skewed there and turn out totally different from the original idea.

783

Mr Simpson: You must know about it early. If you are interested in it, you must then monitor it continuously.

784

The Chairperson: If you have the paper that is basically right for you at the outset, it is easier for the parliamentarians to retain that than to change something that is wrong.

785

Mr Gibson: Ensure that anything benign remains so.

786

The Chairperson: You indicated that other regions had established valuable networks and relationships and were doing good work in that area. Can you give us some examples of what they are doing?

787

Mr Simpson: They follow up issues that are topical at the time. The Finns are interested in what is happening to energy policy. You may have seen in the papers this week that the Finns intend to return to building nuclear power stations, if the Commission will allow them. They reckon that the evidence is good enough to justify it. They are allowed to have that opinion. In Brussels, my colleagues from Finland have a system whereby approximately once a month they meet the Finnish ambassador to Brussels - the equivalent of UKRep - to have, for example, a lunchtime conversation on topical issues. The Spaniards are well disciplined. They have regular contacts in Brussels with the Spanish equivalent to UKRep. We lack that system. I am sorry that UKRep has let that slip somewhat.

788

The Chairperson: We will have to draw to a close. We appreciate your useful submission, your time and your expertise. That will play a part in the final report. Thank you.

789

Mr Simpson: Thank you for the invitation.

Monday 4 February 2002

Members present:
Mr Poots (Chairperson)
Mr Gibson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Dr Birnie
Ms Gildernew
Dr McDonnell
Mr K Robinson

Witness:
Sir Nigel Sheinwald ) UK Permanent Representation to the EU (UKRep)

790

The Chairperson: The Committee welcomes Sir Nigel Sheinwald, who is the UK's permanent representative in Brussels.

791

Sir Nigel Sheinwald: This is an extremely valuable opportunity for me to be able to speak to the Committee and to contribute my comments on the role of the UK Permanent Representation to the EU (UKRep) in relation to Northern Ireland. I will start by addressing some points that you made in your letter to me.

792

The first area I want to address is the structure and role of UKRep and our relationship with European Union institutions. I am the permanent representative, Mr Bill Stow is the deputy permanent representative, and Mr David Richmond is a senior member of the organisation who works on foreign policy issues and is our representative on the newly established Political and Security Committee.

793

UKRep consists of about 140 people, over 60% of whom are from UK Government Departments, including devolved Administration Departments. The rest of the staff are recruited locally, and they mainly perform support roles.

794

UKRep is organised in nine subject-related sections, such as the EU council of economic and financial affairs (ECOFIN), external relations, justice and home affairs, agriculture, food, fisheries and so on. Our basic role, as the Committee may infer from our name, is to represent the UK's interests towards, and in, the European Union. That specifically means the interests of the UK Government, but our aim is to reflect wider UK interests in what we do. We form a permanent interface between the UK and the institutions in Brussels.

795

In promoting our agenda, I want to mention a few of our specific roles. The first of these is information gathering. We try to find out what the Commission is planning and what its ideas are. We try to influence plans "upstream" - at an early stage - so that the UK viewpoint is understood by the Commission and reflected in the ideas and proposals that it puts forward. We do not do that alone. We work with other Government Departments in the UK, the devolved Administrations and wider British interests in Brussels. The Commission is not our only target; there are many other bodies here with roles in the policy process.

796

Secondly, UKRep staff are involved in continuous negotiations in Brussels. The UKRep administrators who form my team represent the UK position on the various working groups, which deal with an enormous range of policy issues. Foreign policy issues, such as relations with Russia, are at one end of the spectrum, and tropical fruit, aspects of the single market, and telecom matters are at the other end.

797

Our staff represent the UK on those working groups. Sometimes they will assist a representative sent out from the UK, and sometimes they will be the main UK representatives. They look at Commission proposals and other proposals at the working level. When those ideas and proposals are ready for political assessment and approval, they are brought to the permanent representatives - Mr Stow, Mr Richmond and myself. We sift through the proposals and examine them as they come up to ministerial level. A proposal has to pass the Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) before it goes to a ministerial meeting in the Council. The main point of that is that Ministers make the decisions in Council meetings, but we advise them on the spot.

798

Negotiation does not only involve the Council. A lot of legislation is now co-decided, and even on legislation that is not subject to that procedure there is a great role for the European Parliament. Therefore, UKRep is active in the European Parliament. We lobby the European Parliament and keep in constant touch with both the United Kingdom Members and Members of other nationalities. We have a special unit here that co-ordinates our own work with the work of the Government in general in terms of our input to the European Parliament. I am travelling to Strasbourg this evening to meet MEPs. I try to do that five or six times a year. We brief MEPs from all parties, whether British or other nationalities.

799

Thirdly, we aim to help UK plc. An enormous range of interests is affected by the European Union, and some of the United Kingdom interests have their own offices here in Brussels. Obviously, the devolved Administrations are here - I will come to that later - but on top of that the representatives of a large number of UK regions are here, as well as British companies, lobbyists, trade unions, lawyers, journalists and academics. There is a large and effective British community here, of which we are a part. We look after visitors, businessmen and others. We help with competition cases and the promotion of commercial opportunities.

800

You asked me to discuss the role of UKRep in the formulation of UK policy. Over the past 30 years of membership of the European Union, and the European Community before it, UKRep has been plugged into much of UK consideration of policy. That has been enhanced by modern means of communication. We are part of the wider interdepartmental process that establishes the United Kingdom's line on individual issues. UKRep has a particular role, and people look to us for advice, especially in relation to tactics, negotiability, and the consistency of our positions in different areas. They are interested in our views on linkages and how the line that we take will play with and affect the other member states.

801

In doing that, we feed into an established process for the formulation of United Kingdom policy. In the United Kingdom, that is traditionally done by the European secretariat in the Cabinet Office and then decided by Ministers, either through correspondence or in meetings.

802

The devolved Administrations are fully plugged into that. Their representatives attend the same meetings as the UKRep people. They participate in the same correspondence and have the same ability to make input into the policy-making process.

803

At ministerial level, the joint committee can meet on European issues, and has done so twice in the past nine months. One meeting took place just before the Stockholm European Council in March, and the other just before Laeken in December. It has had wide-ranging discussions on current issues, including experience with devolution and the wide issue of the future of Europe.

804

UKRep's aim, which is consistent with the settlement on devolution and the terms of the memorandum of understanding on European Union issues, is to develop an agreed and consistent UK policy line that can then be delivered in negotiations here.

805

A good deal of thought was given in Belfast to the structure of the relationship between the Northern Ireland Executive's office in Brussels and UKRep. The relationship that you have chosen is one in which the Northern Ireland Executive office in Brussels is separate, but enjoys essentially the same relationship with UKRep as the Welsh Assembly's office and the Scottish Executive's office, which were established some time ago. They operate separately on a day-to-day basis, but their senior members are also members of the UK representation. They have diplomatic status. For that reason, they enjoy access to Council working groups and other meetings. It enables them to share information and expertise more freely. In your Executive's office there are two Belfast-based officials and two locally recruited people - a total of 4 people, compared with 140 in this building. It is, therefore, inevitable that they will need to tap into our expertise on the, often highly technical, issues that we are handling.

806

I hope that the present arrangement in relation to Northern Ireland and the other devolved Administrations will offer the best of both worlds, in the sense that we are able to get across the diversity and complexity of the relationships in the modern UK. It also provides an opportunity for Northern Ireland to get its views across to the institutions here in a much more direct way, to marshal its direct contacts and to make good use of the increased information flow.

807

The Northern Ireland Executive office will provide support for your Ministers when they participate in Council meetings, and will also provide an early warning. That is one of the advantages, because together UKRep and the devolved Administration offices are sometimes able to spot problems and help our colleagues back home to resolve them.

808

I must stress that on any given subject we are working within a single UK negotiating line. That is important, and it is for Ministers to agree. It is important for us in a Brussels context, because otherwise our line would be easily undermined and our partners, who are sometimes our competitors in negotiations, would easily be able to pick us off.

809

In practical terms, the head of the Northern Ireland Executive office is free to attend my team meetings here in UKRep. He is also invited to, and attends, my more private meetings with heads of section, and he may participate in visits from senior people from the UK such as Sir Richard Wilson, who was here last spring.

810

In UKRep we welcome secondments. There are a couple of types. Candidates from the devolved Administrations are free to compete with others from Whitehall for substantive postings here. There is one such person from Northern Ireland working for UKRep now. There is also scope for more informal, shorter secondments, often for training purposes. You do not currently have anyone in that category, but the Welsh Assembly has two such staff. There are also secondments to the Commission and the other European Union institutions. I understand that Belfast has three of those at the moment, and that is to be welcomed.

811

Secondments to UKRep help us by providing us with direct experience from the different policy angle of Belfast. It helps to give us confidence in our judgements. It also provides you with a pool of talented people who have direct experience of Brussels.

812

I will not go into the details of the future agenda now. You may wish to ask questions about that. There are a number of things that will be of direct interest to Northern Ireland. For example, the subject of enlargement is high on the agenda for those of us working in Brussels this year. The aim is to complete the accession negotiations for at least the first group of countries by the end of the year. That will have a huge impact on the European Union as a whole and on its individual parts. We will be thinking carefully about their role and influence in the period after enlargement.

813

Enlargement brings with it a debate on the future of the common agricultural policy and the future direction of the structural and cohesion funds. That debate has begun, and the Northern Ireland Executive, as well as others from Northern Ireland, have contributed to it.

814

Northern Ireland has already made a contribution to the debate on the future of European governance. The convention on the future of Europe will open at the end of February. That debate in the period leading up to the intergovernmental conference in 2004 will be controversial and difficult.

815

The Chairperson: Thank you for giving your time this morning. I understand that this is the first time that you have given evidence to one of the devolved Administrations; we feel suitably privileged.

816

You mentioned working parties. What has been the role of Northern Ireland's officials in those working parties so far, and how useful can that be?

817

Sir Nigel Sheinwald: They can take part in the United Kingdom delegation just as they can attend meetings in Whitehall. The lead official may come from the United Kingdom Permanent Representation or from home, but he or she will follow a United Kingdom line that has been decided beforehand at delegation meetings. On occasions, Ministers from devolved Administrations have spoken in Council meetings for the United Kingdom as a whole. Bríd Rodgers has attended meetings and has been part of the United Kingdom delegation, with a United Kingdom Minister in the lead.

818

Attendance at working group meetings depends on the Northern Ireland Executive office's resources. Officials have only recently begun to take part, and it is up to them to decide how much time they can spend on those meetings and how much they spend on their other responsibilities.

819

Mr Gibson: How important is it for a devolved Administration to work closely with your Department and with other Departments?

820

Sir Nigel Sheinwald: That is the name of the game for me. We wished to follow a model of working together that tries to achieve precisely that objective; it enables us to co-operate and to share information freely. I know of no other relationship in Brussels between the representations of national and regional government that is as co-operative and transparent as that between the United Kingdom Permanent Representation and the offices of the Northern Ireland Executive and other devolved Administrations. Although there are obviously potential tensions in handling such policies in the present devolved set-up, so far there have been relatively few problems in delivering our policy in Brussels.

821

Mr K Robinson: Thank you for persisting despite all the technical difficulties. Is the new Northern Ireland set-up likely to yield to a temptation, born of enthusiasm, to plough its own furrow? Will the Northern Ireland Executive office strengthen or weaken our influence on relations between the United Kingdom and the European Union?

822

Sir Nigel Sheinwald: It is impossible to give you an absolutely firm answer, since we are still in the early days, but I am sure that your influence can be strengthened. As I said, the set-up aims at the best of both worlds; the first target is to secure Northern Ireland's contribution to policy so that you are comfortable with the United Kingdom policy and feel represented. The part that the United Kingdom Government plays here gives you an advantage in negotiations that you would not have working alone.

823

Your office here also gives you the opportunity for distinctive lobbying and profiling, as the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister did to some effect on their visit last week. They met the President of the Commission and the President of the Parliament, among others. Those two aspects have been complementary. On the practical issue of structural funds there is obviously a great deal of direct contact between the lead Department in Belfast and the Commission. Both the Commission and the lead Department in Belfast come to the United Kingdom Permanent Representation for advice, since we can look across the waterfront and see issues as they relate to other parts of the United Kingdom. We have a certain expertise. For example, the negotiations on structural funds and the deal that we managed to secure in Berlin, where I was one of the team, demonstrate what can be achieved by the United Kingdom Government's pushing ahead. On that occasion we also worked very closely with the Irish Government, and there was also direct involvement in lobbying by Northern Ireland Ministers. That is the sort of thing that I have in mind; it involves partnership, co-operation and a sense that each participant has a role to play.

824

Mr K Robinson: You mentioned the meeting on the review of governance in 2004. What is the role of the Committee of the Regions? There is a widespread perception that Brussels governs while the United Kingdom Government trails behind; behind them trail the regions and even further back Joe Public is "hardly at the match at all", as we say in Belfast. Do you see an enhanced role for the Committee of the Regions? Would that have a great impact on the United Kingdom Permanent Representation as you know and love it?

825

Sir Nigel Sheinwald: The Committee of the Regions has six places as observers on the convention. The convention will start its work on 28 February and will run to the middle of next year. Therefore, the Committee will have a direct role in the convention, which will be putting forward ideas and options to the intergovernmental conference (IGC) later this year. The IGC will make the final decisions.

826

I do not know whether it is right to focus solely on the role of the Committee of the Regions; that may or may not figure in the debates. It is more a matter of the issues that the Commission's White Paper on governance highlighted and which also came out in the declaration on the future of Europe that was agreed by the Heads of Government at Laeken. Among the issues discussed were dividing and separating competences between the different layers of Government and political activity in the European Union, better entrenching subsidiarity in our procedures and avoiding unnecessarily intrusive European legislation, and perhaps even allowing a little more freedom for implementation down the line. That certainly brings citizens closer to decision-making, which, after all, is the rationale for devolution in the United Kingdom.

827

I hear echoes of this in some of our internal United Kingdom discussions on the broader European debate. It is a great opportunity for all parts of the United Kingdom to contribute to the discussion. Some of the ideas in the Commission's White Paper for improving its consultation with the European regions as it develops legislative proposals are very welcome in the United Kingdom. We have no hang-ups about that improved consultation, provided that we remember that the 15 member states are involved in the negotiations.

828

Dr Birnie: You used the phrase "within a single UK negotiating line". Can you compare your experience in the United Kingdom Permanent Representation with that of your counterparts in Spain or Germany, where federal or multi-level Governments have been operating for much longer? Have they had difficulties in maintaining so-called single negotiating lines? What problems have arisen as a result of that, and have they managed to overcome those problems? What lessons can we learn from other EU countries about marrying the impact of devolution with attempts to maintain the single national position in the Council of Ministers?

829

Sir Nigel Sheinwald: It is difficult to make direct comparisons because no situation in any of the other member states directly mirrors our own. I believe that the degree of input from the three devolved Administrations into the United Kingdom Government positions and the degree of involvement by Ministers at ministerial meetings far exceed what happens in Spain. It is somewhat different in Germany as the Länder have a constitutional role and their Ministers appear at ministerial meetings here. Our system for properly co-ordinating and reflecting views may not be perfect, but neither has it led to the sort of hold-ups that other member states occasionally experience. Generally, our system of co-ordination is more fluent and efficient than that of most other countries.

830

The Chairperson: You said that the Northern Ireland Executive have a role in Brussels. What role does the Assembly, as distinct from the Executive, have in Brussels?

831

Sir Nigel Sheinwald: That is a matter for the Assembly to reflect on. That issue has also come up in relation to the offices of the other devolved Administrations. The other two devolved Administrations have not set up a separate parliamentary representation in Brussels, and they hope to channel that activity through the office that has been established, for the time being at least. Listening to the speeches by the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister last week, I got the strong impression that they hoped that the office would serve a wider Northern Ireland interest than just the Executive's. Both spoke of the office's serving society as a whole and of its acting much more as a focus. That is a matter that Assembly Members should discuss with their Colleagues in the Executive; it is not a matter on which I should offer a view.

832

The Chairperson: Thank you for that diplomatic response.

833

How does the United Kingdom Permanent Representation support businesses and commercial organisations?

834

Sir Nigel Sheinwald: We support them in various ways. First, we provide a great deal of advice on the policy environment here to British companies, whether visiting or established here. I give a six-monthly business briefing; we meet people regularly to bring them up to speed on developments in social policy, the single market, economic policy and political issues such as enlargement and the future of Europe. These are issues that affect companies and trades unions directly.

835

The United Kingdom Permanent Representation also has a section that deals directly with commercial opportunities for British companies. Their principal activities concern the Community's external assistance and other programmes to ensure that British consultants and British companies are bidding effectively for a slice of the action in the Community's programmes. We recently beefed up that effort, and we work in close co-operation with Trade Partners UK.

836

The Chairperson: May we send you written questions for answer? Thank you for you time - in spite of all the difficulties - and we wish you well in your task in Brussels.

837

Sir Nigel Sheinwald: Yes, of course, and thank you. I hope that we shall meet before too long.

Wednesday 6 February 2002

Members present:
Mr Gibson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Beggs
Mrs E Bell
Dr Birnie
Ms Lewsley
Dr McDonnell
Mr McMenamin
Mr K Robinson
Mr Shannon

Witnesses:
Mr D Haughey ) Junior Minister, Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister
Mr W Haire ) Office of the First Minister and the Mrs J Mapstone ) Deputy First Minister

838

The Deputy Chairperson: I welcome Mr Denis Haughey, Junior Minister, Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, and his officials Mr Will Haire and Mrs Julie Mapstone.

839

I remind everyone, including myself, to switch off their mobile telephones.

840

The Junior Minister (Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister) (Mr Haughey): I have just come from a meeting of the European structural funds monitoring committee (CSF) in Lisburn, and it was the first time that I have heard a presentation given by a German Commission official against the background of 'The Flight of the Bumblebee' played on a mobile phone. Your mobile phone is much more modest than that.

841

I welcome the opportunity to talk about European matters. I am very interested in the subject and I have given quite bit of time to it since coming to office. The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister welcomes the examination of the development of European policy undertaken by your Committee. It obviously has immediate implications for the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, but also for all the Departments of the Administration, for the Assembly and for its Committees. Participation in Europe is not something that just involves the Administration; it involves every citizen of this society in one way or another. As an Administration, we are committed to developing policy in such a way that involves all sectors of civil society that have a reasonable interest in, and concern with, European issues.

842

The draft strategic framework paper that we have put in front of you provides a basis for us to develop policy as an Administration. I would hope that we would then go on to develop a policy and a strategy as a region in relation to Europe.

843

The Executive clearly recognise that there are key areas of research and extensive consultations that we need to undertake before we can develop what we might term a full strategic approach to the European Union and to our membership of it. Our initial approach was to establish the basic framework within which we could begin, over time, to work out a regional strategy or posture in relation to the European Union. Our initial concern has been the strategic framework within which we do that, and that is the focus of the document that is in front of you. It is out of the work that we are undertaking and the inquiry that you are conducting that we will gradually come to a fuller understanding and a fuller statement of the approach that we must take.

844

I want to turn quickly to the paper. It seeks to provide a framework for joint co-ordinated action by the Executive in relation to the European Union. It also encompasses some wider aspects relating to Northern Ireland more generally. It is linked to the objectives set out for the Administration's EU policy in the Programme for Government, and a more detailed and specific EU strategy will be developed within the framework that this paper outlines. That will be after further work by Departments on EU policy areas within their own areas of responsibility.

845

Therefore, the paper is the result of work undertaken in the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister but in conjunction with other Departments. To ensure that the strategy framework covers and allows for all European Union policy areas relevant to Northern Ireland, it was necessary for us to bring all 10 Government Departments with us. We have endeavoured to do that, but it has taken some time. We have not been able to do it as quickly as we might have wanted.

846

Departments have been involved in the development of this framework through the interdepartmental EU policy group. Several Departments submitted texts to cover specific policy areas of importance to Northern Ireland, for example, structural funds, environmental policy, agriculture, et cetera. The Departments have all now had an opportunity to comment on the final paper, and we are currently awaiting clearance of the paper at the Executive Committee by written procedure.

847

Therefore, we cannot absolutely say that this is the final version. It may be that some Ministers will suggest some amendments, corrections or additions. However, the amendments or additions are likely to be few in number and relatively minor.

848

What we are attempting to do in this Administration is quite ambitious - to develop a framework and, ultimately, a detailed strategic approach to the European Union across all areas of policy. The framework sets out general principles for our work in this regard. It sets out current major priorities and identifies aims, objectives and action points that will be necessary to take us on to the next stage of our work. The aims and objectives are set out fairly succinctly in annexe A, where we identify one overarching aim - to participate appropriately and effectively in Europe and to benefit fully from our membership of the European Union. A number of sub-aims flow from that, and within each of those, objectives are identified.

849

At annexe B the paper also identifies those responsibilities that fall within Departments, but have an EU dimension. Each of those policy areas has been assigned a high or medium level priority. That exercise provides us with a guide, not least to the work of the Brussels office and the current needs of EU work in relation to the smaller aspects of departmental policy.

850

The material in annexe B and the work that the Departments have put into compiling it will provide the bones of their new individual strategies. Our office will urge them to provide those in the next few weeks. Clearly, the framework must be revisited regularly and in an ongoing way. It must be developed and refined as we go along. We believe that we have made a start. I would be glad to hear the Committee's views on the start that the Department has made and to hear its perspective and input into this process.

851

The Deputy Chairperson: The meeting is running 15 minutes late, so I ask everyone to be as succinct as possible. Speeches are out; questions are in.

852

Dr McDonnell: There are some specific issues that I want to raise. How do you identify and prioritise a simple priority within EEC policy that the Executive needs to focus on? As well as prioritising and focusing, what consultation might be undertaken with Assembly Members and Committees in relation to working that out? There is a sense in this Committee, and in others, that we are not connected. How does the Assembly decide where its priorities lie, and how does it connect up with your office?

853

Mr Haughey: The Executive have a responsibility to conduct formal business in relation to the European Union. Therefore it is necessary for my Department to set in place the nuts and bolts and the machinery that will allow them to do that. For instance, this week we formally opened the Northern Ireland Executive office in Brussels. That was the first building block being put in place to enable the Administration to conduct normal, formal, routine business with the European Union. That is one priority that we have to undertake in order to do business properly.

854

It will be the responsibility of the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to co-ordinate European policy across all Departments. That is why we have set ourselves the task of establishing a framework within which we can devise a regional strategy for dealing with the European Union. That work has been undertaken.

855

At a lower level, it is for each Department to identify its priorities in relation to the specific policy matters that it has to deal with. For example, almost all of the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development's work is Europe-related. That Department, therefore, is in daily contact with the relevant authorities in Brussels. Other Departments have lesser contact, and some have relatively little contact or involvement in the European scene. However, each of them must set out their immediate priorities. We have been pressing them to do that.

856

The involvement of the Assembly is something that we will want to discuss in more detail. Now that the nuts and bolts and the basic machinery are in place, we want to see the Committee, and indeed all Members, who have a concern or interest in the European Union. We want to liaise closely with them on the development of European policy. Perhaps we could devise a way in which that might be done in the meetings that we have from time to time with this Committee.

857

To take your question a little further, Dr McDonnell, the Office wants to engage not only with Assembly Members but also with civil society in relation to the development of European policy. That is not just a matter for the Executive. As I said at the beginning, it is not just a matter for the Executive or the Asse