DOCSLIB.ORG

Parliamentary Scrutiny of European Union Documents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Parliamentary Scrutiny of European Union Documents Parliamentary Scrutiny of European Union Documents Guidance for Departments August 2013 CABINET OFFICE Page 1 PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY OF EUROPEAN UNION DOCUMENTS GUIDANCE FOR DEPARTMENTS KEYWORD INDEX SECTION 1: PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY: OVERVIEW SECTION 2: DEPOSIT OF DOCUMENTS IN PARLIAMENT 2.1 Depositable documents 2.2 Documents the Committees have agreed need not be deposited 2.3 Documents not suitable for deposit 2.4 Procedure for deposit SECTION 3: EXPLANATORY MEMORANDA 3.1 Timetable 3.2 Form and content 3.3 Unnumbered EMs 3.4 Supplementary EMs 3.5 EMs on Proposals subject to the Ordinary Legislative Procedure 3.6 EMs on Proposals subject to the Special Legislative Procedure 3.7 Short EMs 3.8 Corrigenda to EMs 3.9 Circulation of EMs 3.10 Withdrawal of EMs SECTION 4: THE SCRUTINY PROCESS 4.1 The Commons Committee 4.2 The Lords Committee 4.3 Liaison with the Committees 4.4 Preparation for Committee meetings 4.5 Consideration by Committees 4.6 Scrutiny clearance 4.7 Further scrutiny 4.8 Withdrawal of debate recommendations 4.9 Cabinet Office records 4.10 Giving evidence to the Committees 4.11 Commission Legislation 4.12 Correspondence with the Scrutiny Committees SECTION 5: SCRUTINY DEBATES 5.1 Arranging Commons debates 5.2 European Committee Debates 5.3 Floor Debates 5.4 Government Motions and amendments 5.5 Second Debates Page 2 5.6 Debates in the Lords SECTION 6: UNCLEARED PROPOSALS: ACTION TO BE TAKEN 6.1 Government undertaking (Scrutiny Reserve Resolution) 6.2 Action required on uncleared proposals 6.3 Parliamentary scrutiny reserves 6.4 Statements to the House SECTION 7: PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED DURING RECESSES AND BETWEEN PARLIAMENTS 7.1 Procedure during recesses 7.2 Procedure between Parliaments 1. ANNEXES A. Commons Scrutiny Committee – terms of reference B. Lords Scrutiny Committee – terms of reference C. Standing Order 119: European Committees D. Commons Scrutiny Reserve Resolution E. Lords Scrutiny Reserve Resolution F. Lisbon Treaty Protocol on Role of National Parliaments G. Standard form of Explanatory Memorandum H. Example format for a corrigendum/addendum to an EM I. Example format for reference to scrutiny history in EMs. J. Circulation lists for various forms of Memoranda K Blank L Lisbon Treaty Protocol on Subsidiarity and Proportionality M Flow Chart – legislative process where ordinary legislative procedure applies N Pre and Post Council Evidence Procedures O Blank P Commons European Committee debates: Provision of papers and example motions Q Blank R. Blank S JHA Code of Practice: with Baroness Ashton Statement on Scrutiny of JHA Opt-In and Schengen Opt-Out decisions with Lords Scrutiny Resolution and MFE Statement T Blank U Government Undertakings on Scrutiny V Best Practice Tips for Successful Scrutiny W Instructions for Writing to the Committees Page 3 KEYWORD INDEX Subject Paragraph(s) Addenda to EMs 3.3.5, Annex H Amended proposals, handling of 2.1.1(i), 3.2.1, 3.4.1, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7.1, 4.7, 4.8.1b, 5.1.2, 6.2.11, 6.2.15 Anti-dumping measures 2.3.1(i), 2.3.10 Article 308 3.2.5(i) Chief Whip’s Office, role of 4.8.1(b), 5.1.2, 5.1.4-9, 5.2.3, 5.2.11-13, 5.4.2, 5.4.4 Ordinary Legislative Procedure 2.1.1i, 3.1.2, 3.2.5(ii), 3.5.1-3, 6.1.1, 6.2.1, 6.2.10, Annex M Commission legislation 2.1.1, 2.3.1 (iii), 4.11 Common Foreign and Security policy See inter-governmental pillars Comitology 4.11.1-3 Confidential documents, handling of 2.3.1(i-ii), 2.3.4, 2.3.7, 2.3.10, 5.2.6 (see also negotiating mandates, anti-dumping measures and working documents) Consultation documents, handling of 2.1.2 Consultation exercises 2.1.2ii, 2.1.4, 3.2.16, Special Legislative Procedure 3.2.5(ii), 3.6.1-3 Correspondence with Scrutiny 3.2.2, 3.2.17, 3.4.3, 4.10.3, 4.11.3, 4.12.1 Committees Corrigenda to EMs 3.7, Annex H Council Legal Service opinions 3.2.5, 5.2.6 Devolution 2.4.6, 3.1.2-3, 3.1.6, 3.2.3, 3.2.11, 3.9.1 6.1.3 European Economic Area (EEA) 3.2.1, 3.2.6-89 Euros 3.2.15 External Agreements 2.3.1(iv), 2.3.3, 2.3.8-9 European Committees: Operating procedures 5.2.9-13 Provision of papers 5.2.5-6, Annex P Terms of Reference Annex C Page 4 Foreign text 2.3.1(ix), 3.2.19 Fundamental Rights analysis See Human Rights General Approach 6.2.1, 6.2.16 Gibraltar 3.2.5(v) Government Undertakings Annex U Human Rights Act 1998: compatibility 3.2.5(vi), Annex G with Impact Assessment 3.1.2, 3.2.13 Inter-governmental pillars 2.1.1(iii-iv), 2.2.1-5, 2.3.11, 6.1.1 Implementation of legislation 3.2.4(iv), Annex G Justice and Home Affairs See Inter-governmental pillars Limité Documents 2.3.1 Management Committee, documents 2.3.1(iii) arising from disagreement with the Commission Minimum scrutiny period 6.3.4-6 Negotiating mandates 2.3.1(iv), 2.3.3-7 Overrides; Report to Parliament 6.2.10 Political Agreement 6.2.1, 6.2.8, 6.2.11, 6.2.15 Pre and Post Council Scrutiny 4.10.6, Annex N Regulatory Committee See Management Committee and Comitology Scrutiny Committee reports: Commons 4.5.1, 4.5.3, 5.2.6 Lords 4.5.4-7, 4.5.9 Statements to the House 6.2.12-13, 6.5, 7.1.4 Subsidiarity 3.2.10, Annex L Supplementary EMs 3.4.1-4, 4.7, 4.8.1 (b) , 5.4.3, 6.2.15 Terms of Reference: Page 5 Commons Scrutiny Committee 2.1.1, 4.1.1, Annex A Lords Scrutiny Committee 2.1.3, Annex B European Committees 5.2.1, Annex C Unnumbered EMs 2.3.1 (iii), 2.3.6, 2.3.8-10, 3.1.1, 3.3.1-4, 3.4.1, 3.4.4, 3.5.2 (ii), 4.7, 5.4.2, Annex G Unsigned EMs 3.2.1, 3.7.1-3, 3.8, Annex G Withdrawal of debate recommendations: Commons 4.8.1 Lords 4.8.2 Withdrawal of deposited documents 2.4.5 Working documents, handling of 2.1.2, 2.3.1(ii) , 3.3.1(ii), 3.3.2-4, 3.4.1 World Trade Organisation 3.2.12 Page 6 PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY: GUIDANCE FOR DEPARTMENTS 2. SECTION 1 3. PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY: OVERVIEW 1.1 This guidance is for departmental officials who will come into contact with the Parliamentary scrutiny process and provides comprehensive guidance on scrutiny policy and procedures. This section highlights the principles and stages of the process. Detailed practical guidance is given later.. For further advice, contact the European & Global Issues Secretariat of the Cabinet Office.* 4. WHAT IS PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY? 1.2 Parliamentary scrutiny is the process by which Parliament is given the opportunity to examine and express views on proposals for EU legislation and any other documents held to fall within the terms of reference of the Scrutiny Committees of both Houses of Parliament. (See Section 2, and Annexes A and B). The Government is committed to the principle of effective scrutiny of European legislation, and both Houses have agreed scrutiny reserve resolutions which state that Ministers will not agree to proposals in the Council of Ministers except in certain circumstances until scrutiny by the Committees has been completed (see Section 6). The importance attached to scrutiny by national parliaments throughout the EU is reflected in the Protocol on the Role of National Parliaments in the Lisbon Treaty (see Annex F). Parliament now has a direct role in considering the subsidiarity and proportionality implications of proposals (see ad hoc guidance letter (09)25 & (10)19). This role is set out in a protocol attached to the Lisbon Treaty (Annex L.) 1.3 A list of key Government undertakings on scrutiny is at Annex U 5. PRESENTATION OF EU DOCUMENTS TO PARLIAMENT 1.4 The Cabinet Office is responsible for the maintenance of the Government’s scrutiny procedures and is responsible for deciding, in consultation with Departments, and with the Committee clerks where necessary, which EU documents should be deposited in Parliament – taking steps to make sure that these decisions are consistent with the Standing Orders of both Scrutiny Committees. The Cabinet Office will take the initiative in most cases, but Departments must be vigilant in looking for documents that may be eligible for deposit and scrutiny. There will always be grey areas about whether a document should be deposited or whether it is caught by the terms of the scrutiny reserve resolutions, and it is therefore important that the Government is as flexible as possible in its approach to ensure that the spirit of the scrutiny reserve resolutions is respected as far as possible. The Government must not be left open to allegations that it is withholding documents from Parliament. The FCO/MOD and Home Office/MoJ ** Unless otherwise indicated, references to the Cabinet Office in this guide are to the European & Global Issues Secretariat Page 7 take the lead in deciding which documents under the Common and Foreign Security Policy and in the area of Freedom, Security and Justice respectively, should be subject to scrutiny.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • STUDENT LIAISON COMMITTEE Terms of Reference
    STUDENT LIAISON COMMITTEE Terms of Reference 1 Constitution and purpose 1.1 The University recognises that, in the interests of staff and students, it is important to continually advance the excellence of the student experience and the teaching, learning and research environment it provides. The voice of the student community is represented by the Students’ Union. 1.2 To this end and, in accordance with the provisions of the Articles of Government (paragraph 5.4), the University’s Governing Body has established a Student Liaison Committee (SLC). 1.3 The SLC provides a forum for students to raise views with the Board of Governors and members of the Academic Board and to: • consider and inform (the Board of Governors) on matters of concern and to advise the student body (Articles of Government paragraph 5.4); • receive reports on student satisfaction and the student experience and report to the Board of Governors; • provide communication channels between the student community and Governors; 2 Remit 2.1 To advise the University’s governing body on its statutory obligations with regard to the Students’ Union (SU), particularly the requirements of the Education Act 1994, and specifically: a) all matters concerning the SU’s Constitution which the SLC should review every five years (last reviewed 2011); b) all matters concerning the UWL/SU Code of Practice which the SLC should review every five years (last reviewed 2011); c) receive reports on the election of Officer Trustees in accordance with requirements of the Education Act 1994 (it has been agreed that these reports will only be brought forward if a substantial item needs to be brought to the Board’s attention).
    [Show full text]
  • Cabinet Office Consultation on 'Better Use of Data in Government
    Cabinet Office consultation on ‘Better use of data in government’ Response from the CLOSER Consortium CLOSER (Cohorts and Longitudinal Studies Enhancement Resources) is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and Medical Research Council (MRC) to maximise the use, value and impact of the UK’s longitudinal studies. The network brings together eight leading longitudinal studies, the British Library and the UK Data Archive. CLOSER’s response to the consultation predominantly reflects our interest in being able to link individual administrative records to longitudinal survey data collected from that same individual. The linking of these two forms of data offers potential that exceeds the sum of the two approaches in isolation. While administrative records can provide enviable coverage and frequency, they rarely provide the richness and depth that comes from survey data collected to tackle specific research questions; conversely, survey data collection can be costly and challenging to administer, leading to missing data and possible biases which can be overcome by using administrative records to fill in the missing information. Consequently, combining the two can yield considerable benefits. For example, recent analysis of the National Pupil Database (NPD) and Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) found higher participation rates in higher education among a range of groups including ethnic-minorities.1 However, those records could not help explain these differences in participation; exploring this required linking individual
    [Show full text]
  • Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14 Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons
    Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14 Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs by Command of Her Majesty July 2014 Cm 8914 Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14 Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs by Command of Her Majesty July 2014 Cm 8914 © Crown copyright 2014 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v.2. To view this licence visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/2/ or email [email protected] Where third party material has been identified, permission from the respective copyright holder must be sought. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at [email protected]. Print ISBN 9781474109796 Web ISBN 9781474109802 Printed in the UK by the Williams Lea Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. ID P002659226 42260 07/14 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee 24th Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14, Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons The Government welcomes the European Scrutiny Committee’s Inquiry into Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons and the detailed consideration the Committee has given this important issue.
    [Show full text]
  • Hansard Society Evidence to the House of Lords Liaison Committee: Review of Investigative and Scrutiny Committees
    Hansard Society evidence to the House of Lords Liaison Committee: Review of investigative and scrutiny committees Submitted: May 2018 Authors: Dr Ruth Fox (Director) and Dr Brigid Fowler (Senior Researcher) 2 Summary This submission covers: • Strengths and weaknesses of the current House of Lords committee structure • Possible changes to the current structure, focusing on: the quality of the legislative process; devolution; and policy foresight/horizon-scanning • Brexit-related considerations • Trade policy • Public engagement We recommend: • On the quality of the legislative process: the creation of a Legislative Standards Committee and a Post-Legislative Scrutiny Committee, and that the remit of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee be amended • On devolution, the creation of a new permanent committee • On policy foresight/horizon-scanning, the creation of a new ‘Future Forum’ or Committee • On Brexit-related matters, that the European Union Committee will need to continue to operate during any post-Brexit transition period as provided for in the draft UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement • On trade policy, that the Lords committee structure will need to change to accommodate scrutiny of this new policy area, and that the House will need to develop a view, ideally sooner rather than later, on how this might best be effected, in cooperation with the Commons. Submission Strengths and weaknesses of the current House of Lords committee structure 1. The House of Lords committee structure has a number of important strengths that should be retained in any reformed system: • It is more flexible than the Commons’ system: the fact that the committee structure is not tied to the shadowing of government departments allows the Upper House more discretion.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the Select Committee on the Reduction of Standing Committees of Tynwald
    REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE REDUCTION OF STANDING COMMITTEES OF TYNWALD t i I. • REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE REDUCTION OF STANDING COMMITTEES OF TYNWALD To the Honourable Noel Q Cringle, President of Tynwald, and the Honourable Members of the Council and Keys in Tynwald assembled PART 1 INTRODUCTION 1. Background At the sitting of Tynwald Court on 21st May 2002 it was resolved that a Select Committee of five members be established to - "investigate and report by no later than July 2003 on the feasibility of reducing the number of Standing Committees of Tynwald along with any recommendations as to the responsibilities and membership and any proposals for change." 2. Mr Karran, Mr Lowey, Mr Quayle, Mr Quine and Mr Speaker were elected. At 4, the first meeting Mr Speaker was unanimously elected as Chairman. 3. The Committee has held four meetings. C/RSC/02/plb PART 2 STRATEGY 2.1 The Committees of Tynwald that would be examined were determined as: Committee on Constitutional Matters; Committee on the Declaration of Members' Interests, Ecclesiastical Committee; Committee on Economic Initiatives; Joint Committee on the Emoluments of Certain Public Servants; Committee on Expenditure and Public Accounts; Tynwald Ceremony Arrangements Committee; Tynwald Honours Committee; Tynwald Management Committee; Tynwald Members' Pension Scheme Management Committee; and Tynwald Standing Orders Committee of Tynwald. A brief summary of the membership and terms of reference of each standing committee is attached as Appendix 1. 2 C/RSC/02/plb 2.2 In order to facilitate its investigation your Committee also decided that - (a) Comparative information on committee structures in adjacent parliaments should be obtained.
    [Show full text]
  • Cabinet Secretary for Culture and External Affairs.Dot
    Rt Hon Michael Gove MP Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Cabinet Office 70 Whitehall London SW1A 2AS __ 17 June 2020 Dear Michael In our joint statement of 14 June, which expressed disappointment in your decision not to request an extension to transition before we had an opportunity to discuss this crucial matter ahead of the high level political stocktake, we said that we would write to you on the subject of ‘rebooting’ the process of engagement between the UK and Devolved Governments on the EU-UK negotiations. This letter sets out our thinking on this important subject. We have, in the meantime, received your letter of 14 June responding to our statement. As you acknowledged, we have different views on the way forward and our governments are not going to agree on the core fundamental positions with regard to the EU-UK future relationship. To our mind, this is all the more reason for us to re-double our efforts to work together for the benefit of business and communities in all parts of the United Kingdom, particularly as the option of an extension will no longer be open to the UK after the end of this month. It was because of the immutability of that deadline within the Withdrawal Agreement that we were so disappointed that the final decision was taken in advance of the meeting. While we have had the opportunity to register our views on this issue on several occasions, we would point out the difference between the quantity of meetings and other contacts between our administrations, and the quality of the engagement.
    [Show full text]
  • Liaison Committee
    Liaison Committee House of Commons London SW1A 0AA Tel: 020 7219 5675 Email: [email protected] Website: https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/103/liaison-committee-commons From Sir Bernard Jenkin MP, Chair Rt Hon Jacob Rees-Mogg MP Leader of the House House of Commons London SW1A 0AA 17 February 2021 Dear Jacob, In anticipation of the announcement of the end of the current Parliamentary Session, I am writing on behalf of Select Committee Chairs to highlight a number of pieces of legislation which are awaiting time in the Government’s legislative programme. The Government’s legislative programme has been understandably impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic, but there are a number of outstanding proposals which Committees are keen to see brought forward or where further action or information is required: • Passing the Environment Bill should be a Government priority, given the gap that now exists in environmental governance following the end of the transition period. Provisions in the Bill respond to recommendations the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee and the Environmental Audit Committee have made across a range of inquiries in recent years. Both Committees conducted pre-legislative scrutiny of the first part of the Bill in 2019 and have continued to monitor its progress during the current Session. • The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee have also conducted pre-legislative scrutiny on the Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill, which increases sentences for some animal cruelty offences. This Bill will implement recommendations from the Committee dating back to 2016. The Committee completed pre-legislative scrutiny on the relevant provisions in 2018 but the Bill has yet to complete passage through the House.
    [Show full text]
  • Cabinet Office – Annual Report and Accounts 2020-21
    Annual Report and Accounts 2020-21 HC 391 Annual Report and Accounts 2020-21 (for period ended 31 March 2021) Accounts presented to the House of Commons pursuant to Section 6 (4) of the government Resources and Accounts Act 2000 Annual Report presented to the House of Commons by Command of Her Majesty Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 15 July 2021 HC 391 This is part of a series of departmental publications which, along with the Main Estimates 2021-22 and the document Public Expenditure: Statistical Analyses 2019, present the government’s outturn for 2020-21 and planned expenditure for 2021-22. © Crown copyright 2021 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-Government-licence/version/3 Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at: www.gov.uk/official-documents Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: [email protected] ISBN – 978-1-5286-2550-0 CCS – CCS0421468362 07/21 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Contents Directors’ Report 7 Foreword 8 Ministers and Board Members 10 Permanent Secretary’s perspective on performance 14 Cabinet Office Lead Non-Executive’s Report 17 Performance Report 19 Cabinet Office Overview 20 Long Term Expenditure Trends 24 Supporting the Government response to COVID-19 27 Strategic Objectives 32 Governance Report 55 Statement of Accounting Officer’s responsibilities 56 Governance Statement 58 Accountability Report 75 Remuneration and staff report 76 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Lead Non-Executive Director – Department for Education
    Lead Non-Executive Director – Department for Education Introduction The Department for Education’s (DfE) aim is to ensure world-class education and care that allows every child and young person to reach his or her potential, regardless of background. Over the next four years, the Department is leading an ambitious and wide-ranging programme of reform across early years, schools, 16-19, and children’s social care, building on and extending the changes of the last Parliament. We are expanding the academies and free school programme to empower professionals on the frontline, reforming the curriculum and qualifications so that they represent an international gold standard, and ensuring that young people leave school with the knowledge, skills and resilience to succeed in modern Britain. At the same time we are reforming adoption, fostering and children’s services so that they work quickly and effectively to transform the life chances of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged young people. These changes set a challenge for the organisation itself. We delivered significant organisational change in 2010-15 and halved administrative expenditure in real terms over this period. With substantial resources allocated to our priorities in the 2015 spending review, our focus for 2015-20 is on ensuring the Department has the capability and capacity it needs to implement the Government’s strategic priorities. Setting the right conditions for success in education and children’s services means becoming increasingly effective in how we deliver reform: transforming the way we go about our work in order to help leaders in the education and social care systems do likewise.
    [Show full text]
  • Download PDF on Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation in Relation To
    REPORT Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation in Relation to the UK’s Withdrawal from the European Union By Simon Patrick First published in Great Britain in 2017 by The Constitution Society Top Floor, 61 Petty France London, SW1H 9EU www.consoc.org.uk © The Constitution Society ISBN: 978-0-9954703-8-5 All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise), without the prior written permission of both the copyright owner and the publisher of this book. Contents About the Author 4 Summary 5 Introduction 6 The current procedures for delegated legislation 7 - Definition of ‘delegated legislation’ 7 - Types of Parliamentary control 7 - Scrutiny of instruments by select committees 9 - Procedure for formal consideration of instruments: Commons 10 - Procedure for formal consideration of instruments: Lords 11 Procedures in the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill, as presented 11 Possible criticisms of the procedure 12 - The context 12 - The existing proposals 12 - Henry VIII powers 13 Proposals for change 14 - Who should decide the procedure? 14 - Debates and examination of the merits of delegated legislation 15 - A possible solution 16 Resources required 17 Conclusion 17 SCRUTINY OF DELEGATED LEGISLATION ON BREXIT 3 About the Author Simon Patrick OBE was a House of Commons Clerk for 38 years, during the last ten of which he was a Principal Clerk responsible for, successively, delegated legislation, bills and select committees. He has also been Clerk of the European Scrutiny Committee and of the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments.
    [Show full text]
  • THE WALES COMMISSIONER the Equality and Human Rights
    THE WALES COMMISSIONER The Equality and Human Rights Commission CANDIDATE INFORMATION PACK 2021 Closing date for this post is: 3 September 2021 at 17:00 hrs Applications should be sent to: [email protected] If you require this information in an alternative format or in Welsh language please contact [email protected] Twitter - Follow us to keep up to date with public appointments vacancies http://publicappointments.cabinetoffice.gov.uk Page 1 of 16 Contents A Message from the Minister for Women and Equalities 3 Diversity and Equality of opportunity 4 Background to the Organisation 5 Role of the EHRC Wales Commissioner 6 Person specification and eligibility criteria 7 Conditions of appointment 8 Indicative timetable and how to apply 9 Privacy notice 11 How we will handle your application 14 Complaints Process 15 Standards in public life, political activity, disqualification from appointment 16 and conflicts of interests Page 2 of 16 A Message from the Minister for Women and Equalities Thank you for your interest in becoming the Wales Commissioner of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC). The EHRC is an independent body responsible for promoting and enforcing the laws that protect fairness, dignity and respect. It contributes to making and keeping Britain a fair society in which everyone, regardless of background, has an equal opportunity to fulfil their potential. The EHRC uses its unique powers to challenge discrimination, promote equality of opportunity and protect human rights. The Wales Commissioner chairs a statutory Wales Committee with important functions. The Committee’s main duties include advising the Commission about the exercise of its powers in so far as they affect Wales.
    [Show full text]
  • Triangle of Partnership Or Conflicts
    International Journal of Political Science (IJPS) Volume 4, Issue 4, 2018, PP 34-41 ISSN 2454-9452 http://dx.doi.org/10.20431/2454-9452.0404006 www.arcjournals.org Turkey in Relation to EU and Russia - Triangle of Partnership or Conflicts Bulent Acma1*, Mehmet Ali Ozcobanlar2 1Anadolu University, Department of Economics, Eskisehir/Turkey. 2Department of Management, University of Warsaw, Warsaw/Poland *Corresponding Author: Bulent Acma, Anadolu University, Department of Economics, Turkey Abstract: EU-Turkey-Russia. In this research, the relationship between European Union and Turkey, an age long neighbour to the continent and an associate member of European Union since 1963, are examined and analysed. Turkey is an important ally of the union and the only Muslim country-member of NATO from the very beginning of the treaty, since it joined the organization in 1952, at the same year that Greece did. The relations between the Union and Turkey are examined from the aspect of security. The reactions of the European Union to the recent political changes in Republic of Turkey, after the 15 July 2016 failed coup- attempt, are also examined. The EU - Turkey relations after the failed coup attempt and the international impact of it are studied from the perspective of political and social influence it might have. Russia is a vital energy supplier to the Union and Turkey is a geopolitical bridge between west and east, an energy corridor standing at the crossroad of important energy markets such as Iran, Iraq and Azerbaijan. The country has also relations with Cyprus, an upcoming gas supplier and an EU member.
    [Show full text]