Fourth report of Session 2009-10 : Documents considered by the Committee on 15 December 2009, including the following recommendations for debate, European Development Fund (EDF) expenditure; financial management; European Defence Agency activity in 2009 a
The depth and pace of EU integration has demonstrated the need for effective democratic parliamentary scrutiny and accountability of Government at Westminster. This is the first major inquiry into the European scrutiny system in the House of Commons for eight years. There is more that the Committee could do to look at the impact of new proposals. There should be a new requirement to appoint ’Reporters' to take the lead within Committees on EU issues, as well as a more coordinated approach to the Commission Work Programme. Whilst the system need not be scrapped as some have said, it must be enhanced. Many problems arise from the fact that new Members are appointed for each document. The Committee argues forcefully for a return to the permanent membership system, new powers and a change of name to reflect the Committees' core purpose: EU Document Debate Committees. The Committee also examined how EU business is taken on the floor of the House, and the procedures which apply to it. They set out a series of recommendations about the way debates are scheduled and conducted and put the case for a new session of ’EU Questions'. They also review working practices and the visibility of the House's scrutiny of the EU in the media. It concluded that now is the time to propose the introduction of a form of national veto over EU legislative proposals, and then to explore the mechanics of disapplication of parts of existing EU obligations, notwithstanding the European Communities Act 1972
Twenty-fourth report of Session 2010-11 : Documents considered by the Committee on 30 March 2011, including the following recommendations for debate, the CAP towards 2020; financial services; trafficking in human beings; European contract law, report, tog
When the Committee published the Scrutiny Reform Report 18 months ago asked the Government to ensure that it responded to the Report within the customary two-month deadline. This did not happen, the Government response was received on the day the House rose for the summer recess, 22 July 2014, eight months after the Report's publication. Moreover, the tone of the Government's response to the key recommendations was overwhelmingly negative and did not sufficiently address our proposals, including those relating to the introduction of a form of national veto and the disapplication of EU law. In this Report the Committee first consider in more detail the background to, possible causes of and the implications of the Government's failure to schedule EU document debates, before turning to some of the other outstanding issues covered in the Scrutiny Reform Report, in particular papers deposit, limitâ documents, and the coverage of EU scrutiny and wider EU issues by the BBC. The Committee also sets out some outstanding scrutiny issues which the successor Committee may wish to consider, in particular scrutiny of the proposed EU-US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
Thirty-fourth report of Session 2010-12 : Documents considered by the Committee on 22 June 2011, including the following recommendations for debate, financial assistance to Member States: Portugal; preparation of the 2012 EU Budget; economic governance: t
Twelfth report of Session 2009-10 : Documents considered by the Committee on 24 February 2010, including the following recommendations for debate, Pre-accession assistance to the Western Balkan states and Turkey; financial services, report, together with
