Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

NATIONAL PARLIAMENT OFFICE

HOUSE OF COMMONS

BRUSSELS BULLETIN NO. 515

15 July 2016

Contents Page

POSTING OF WORKERS ...... 2 THYSSEN MEET S JURI M EP S T O DI SCUSS POSTING OF WORKERS ...... 2 CAPITAL MARKETS UNION ...... 5 LORD HILL GIVES FINAL EP ADDRESS ...... 5 OTHER NEWS ...... 8 UK’S REFERENDUM RESULT DISCUSSED BY OTHER NATIONAL PARLIAMENT S AND GOVERNMENT S ...... 8 DER SPIEGEL PUBLISHES JOINT INTERVIEW WITH SCHULZ AND JUNCKER...... 8 14TH ROUND OF TTIP NEGOT IATIONS T AKES P L ACE...... 8 MEETING AND EUROZONE DEBATE ...... 9 JUNCKER ACCEPT S SIR JULIAN KING AS NEW BRITI SH COMMISSIONER ...... 9 PANAMA PAP ERS COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY HOLDS ITS FIRST MEETING...... 9 18TH EU-CHINA SUMMIT TAKES PLACE IN BEIJING...... 10 COMMISSION ADOPTS COMMUNICATION ON VISA RECIPROCITY WITH US AND CANADA...... 10 MEP S ADOPT CHANGESTO FIREARMS DIRECTIVE ...... 10 COMMI SSI ON P ROP OSES REFORM OF THE ASYLUM SYSTEM AND RESETTLEMENT FRAMEWORK ...... 11 JEAN-CLAUDE PIRIS INTERVIEWED ON ART I CL E 50...... 11 MERKEL, HOLLANDE, RENZI TO HOLD SUMMIT ...... 12 OMBUDSMAN PUBLISHES FINDINGS OF INQUIRY INTO T RILOGUE T RANSP ARENCY...... 12 CALENDAR ...... 13 SLOVAK PRESIDENCY: FORTHCOMING COUNCIL MEETINGS (JULY TO DECEMBER 2016) ...... 13 SLOVAK PRESIDENCY: FORTHCOMING INTER-PARLIAMENTARY MEETINGS IN BRATISLAVA (JULY-DECEMBER 2016) ...... 14 OT HER EVENT S ...... 14

______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu

1

Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

Posting of Workers Thyssen meets JURI MEPs to discuss Posting of Workers On Tuesday 12 July, , European Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs, Skills and Labour Mobility, held an exchange of views with Members of the EPs Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) on the Posting of Workers Directive. The discussion centred on concerns raised by national Parliaments relating to subsidiarity and proportionality and the corresponding “Yellow Card” that was triggered.1

Introduction Thyssen began by noting that for many years there had been complaints that the existing Posting of Workers rules from 1996 had led to unfair outcomes. In particular, she mentioned both the fact that European citizens were facing downward pressure rather than enjoying upward convergence, and that currently there was a lack of employment fairness where instead there should be a level playing field. Thyssen said that existing legislation had tackled only part of these problems and stressed that more had to be done. She stated that the Commission was not blind to these complaints and that it had made an objective analysis based on “facts and figures” that suggested an amended Posting of Workers Directive was required. She said that the Commission had asked all Member States to contribute their data and added that a wide range of stakeholders - including national and European Parliamentarians, Ministers, business leaders and cross-industry social partners - had been engaged with during the consultation phase. As a result, Thyssen felt that she had been able to put a “balanced” proposal on the table on 8 March. The essence of Thyssen’s new proposal was that consistent rules on remuneration should apply for the same work at the same location, irrespective of who carried out that labour. She stressed that posted workers were not “second class” citizens and stated that their labour deserved to be fully valued: it was a matter of dignity. Thyssen said that national Parliaments from 11 Member States had issued Reasoned Opinions (ROs) expressing concerns about the proposal and noted that, as a result, the Subsidiarity Control Mechanism, as foreseen in Protocol 2 of the treaties, had been triggered. Thyssen said that she took this signal “very seriously” and welcomed the “strong voice” that national chambers now had in the European decision-making process. She then went on to address the three most common objections brought forward in the related ROs:

(1) The first issue raised by national Parliaments was that no EU action was required and that instead problems occurring in the context of the posting of workers were best solved at the national level. To this, Thyssen said that posting, by its very nature, was a cross-border phenomenon and that, in light of this, rules dealing with the matter were best set at Union level. Thyssen said that the objectives of achieving a level playing field for service providers and for ensuring appropriate protection of posted workers across the EU could not be effectively achieved by national action only. In her eyes, Member States acting unilaterally would lead to a fragmentation of the Internal Market and that in itself was reason enough to demand EU legislation.

(2) The second concern issued by national Parliaments was that the proposal would interfere with national competences on remuneration and on organising industrial relations. Thyssen offered a firm assurance that this was not the case and emphasised that such rules and regulations were indeed a Member State competence. Thyssen argued that the proposal fully respected this and that it made no attempt to harmonise the setting of wages across Europe.

1 See Brussels Bulletin No. 511 ______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu 2 Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

She argued that it merely ensured that mandatory rules on remuneration in the Member States where the work was carried out - set in accordance with that Member State’s national practice - applied to local workers and posted workers alike.

(3) The final area of reservation from national Parliaments was that the proposal would restrict the freedom to provide services and that it would remove the competitive advantage of lower wage countries and their businesses. Thyssen stated that those concerns were not related to the principle of subsidiarity as they did not touch upon the question of whether Union legislation was the right level at which to act, instead critiquing the impact of the proposed action instead. She added, however, that she couldn’t see how “clearer and fairer” rules on posting of workers would restrict the freedom to provide services: in her eyes, the EU’s Internal Market was a market with clear rules and that those rules were needed to organise the freedom to provide services in a way that was fair for everybody.

On a general note, Thyssen argued that the Commission’s proposal did not add any administrative requirements for businesses and nor did it remove the business case for posting, including from lower wage countries. Thyssen stressed that the proposal wo uld reduce but not entirely remove the differences in total labour costs between posted and local firms. She added that social security contributions and taxes would “for good reasons” continue to be due in the country of origin and noted that demand for posting would continue to be driven by labour and skills shortages in higher wage countries.

Thyssen concluded by stating that the Commission was scheduled to discuss the Reasoned Opinions at next week’s College meeting on 20 July and she emphasised that P resident Juncker was committed to pursuing enhanced political dialogue with national Parliaments beyond this decision. Thyssen pointed out that she and fellow Commissioners had taken part in more than 300 meetings with national Parliaments since taking office in November 2014 and she emphasised that having a strong collective national Parliament voice, alongside the EU institutions, would play a full role in healthy democratic debate.

Debate Daniel Buda (EPP, Romania) said that he was frustrated by Thyssen’s approach to the Posting of Workers Directive and suggested that it was indicative of wider shortcomings in how the Commission interacted with its Member States. He noted Reasoned Opinions had been issued by national Parliaments from 11 countries, yet that still the Commission wanted to “proceed as normal”. Buda drew a distinction between the average monthly salary in Germany (€2000) and his native Romania (€400) as a way of illustrating the shortcomings of the Commission’s “one-size-fits-all” approach. He said that Member States simply had to be able to set wages depending on their individual circumstances. Dietmar Koster (S&D, Germany) felt that the Commission’s proposals were “well balanced” and he noted that freedom of workers to move was a founding principle upon which the EU was built. He suggested that having universally cohesive rules in the field would help create the basis for a new social Europe. Kosma Zlotowski (ECR, Poland) felt that the Commission’s approach had been too generic and that insufficient due care and attention was being given to the Reasoned Opinions raised by national Parliaments. He also accused Thyssen of acting “hastily” and suggested that the Commission would be wiser to wait until results from new enforcement legislation could be gleaned. Victor Uspaskich (ALDE, Lithuania) welcomed Thyssen’s efforts to increase “social harmony” within the EU but said that taking note of the ______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu

3

Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

views expressed by national Parliaments could act as a good “show of faith” at a time when many European citizens no longer felt that the EU elite was listening to them.

Heidi Hautala (Greens/EFA, Finland) said that the Yellow Card procedure was a “poor substitute” for giving national Parliaments a truly credible role in the European decision- making process, while Jiri Mastalka (GUE/NGL, Czech Republic) suggested that for too long the EU had been focussed on “economic gain over working citizens’ pain”. Isabella Adinolfi (EFDD, ) argued that this was another example of the Brussels elite seeking to regulate more and more industries that would be better retained at Member State level, while Gilles Lebreton (ENF, France) stated that the EU was in a political crisis and had failed to establish the Single Market of workers that it had wanted to. He suggested that the Commission’s proposals would create further social dumping and that this, in turn, would cause greater resentment between the workers of different countries, rather than bringing them closer together.

Conclusion Thyssen said that the Posting of Workers Directive had “re-energised” the Commission’s commitment to respecting the subsidiarity control procedure. She underlined the importance of enacting European legislation on the topic and noted that, in the 20 years since the original Dire ctive was drafted, the ratio between the lower and higher earners in the EU had had grown from 1:3 to 1:10. She added that, in a personal capacity, she had engaged with national Parliamentarians at recent COSAC meetings; something that she was looking to continue through the S lovak Presidency of the Council of the EU. Thyssen noted that the posting of workers “naturally” had effects on two sides of any border and that, as a result, greater political conviction was needed to increase the mobility for workers throughout the Union, not reduce it. In her view, taking collective action at Union level was the most effective means of doing this.

______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu 4 Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

Capital Markets Union Lord Hill gives final EP address On Wednesday 13 July, Lord Hill, UK Commissioner for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union (CMU), gave his final address to the EP’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) on the state of play of Europe’s current financial climate and on his vision for further development of the CMU. Lord Hill took the decision to resign from office in light of Britain’s vote to leave the EU on 23 June. His policy brief is to be taken on by Commission Vice-President, , currently responsible for the Euro and Social Dialogue. 2

Introduction Lord Hill began by noting that many people had recently asked him whether his leaving office would mean a change of direction for the CMU. He said that he had seen suggestions that there would be a new emphasis on institutional change; that there was a possibility of having a Single European Supervisor; and that it could be possible to have a more ambitious CMU as and when Britain officially left the EU. Hill said that “to all of those people and all of those theories” the CMU had been built to reflect what people, Member States, industry and the EP had told the Commission that they wanted. He added that the policy priorities remained those that were identified through stakeholder consultation and that the current step-by-step approach was agreed by the whole College of Commissions, endorsed by the ECOFIN Council and given support by the EP too. Hill stated that there had been no appetite among Member States for a Single European Supervisor, yet there had been an acknowledgement that the CMU was a single market project for all European countries: big and small, old and new. He noted that his analysis of why the CMU was “desperately needed” had not been changed by the UK’s vote to leave the EU but, in any case, a leave vote simply strengthened the case for its development.

Hill stated that growth and economic activity in Europe were still not as high as they should be and he acknowledged that forecasts had been “revised down” as a result. For him, unemployment was “of course” still much too high, but he did point out mitigating circumstances: namely that the global outlook was more uncertain than when initial thinking about the development of the CMU had taken place. This was due to both slowing growth in emerging markets and the uncertainty surrounding the UK’s future relationship with the rest of the EU. For Hill, this meant that the focus on growth and on increasing financing to the wider economy was more urgent than ever before. Linked to this, Hill stated that the argument for the CMU to improve financial stability was also as strong as ever. He noted that Europe’s CMU was still half the size of that in the US and that the EU’s corporate bond market was a third of the corresponding American size, while Europe’s venture capital markets represented just 20% of the US equivalent. Hill noted that European SMEs still received 75% of their funding from banks and said that the lessons learned from the financial crisis of putting “all of your eggs in one basket” before bank liquidity “dried up” had not been fully taken on board. Hill described it as “absolutely essential” that the EU continued to diversify the funding sources for its economy and that this would become ever more important with London outside of the EU. He noted that Europe needed to develop the “shock absorber function” that capital markets provided after the US financial crisis which, in his view, allowed the American economy to recover more quickly than that in Europe. Hill did

2 See Brussels Bulletin No. 514 ______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu

5

Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

concede, however, that the big unknown for much of these intentions was what the nature of the relationship between the UK and the EU would look like in the months and years to come.

Hill said that the approach taken to date had enabled good progress on the agenda that he had set out upon taking office in November 2014. In his eyes, success could be seen in: increasing funding options available to companies that wanted to grow and invest; knocking down barr ie rs to investments across borders and improving choice for consumers; and developing financial regulation that was trusted, that was proportionate and that was as growth-friendly as possible. He then turned to what achievements to date CMU development had helped bring about.

Achievements Hill said that the first CMU action to come “on stream” was the amendment to Solvency II legislation that defined infrastructure as an asset class and reduced capital ratios for this type of investment by about a third. Hill added that insurers invested less than 1% of their balance sheet into infrastructure projects and that, as a result, even a small increase in this had the potential to see billions of Euros of additional investment. This would support the top priority of the : namely to increase investment in the EU’s economy and to create further jobs for its citizens. Lord Hill noted his pride at bringing forward a proposal to create a Prospectus regime that was “simpler, faster and cheaper”. He said that this should make a real difference for companies of all sizes that wanted to raise money on public markets, but that it would also aid investors by giving them more choice and more accessible information about potential investment opportunities. Hill welcomed the fact that Council had reached an agreement on the file and maintained a key element of the original Commission proposal: namely to exempt the smallest companies trying to raise capital under €10 million. Hill noted that if firms were raising small amounts of money domestically, then there was no sense in forcing them into a pan-European regime. In his words, “let’s be big on big things and small on small things”. Hill urged MEPs to work together with the Commission as, for him, companies and investors across the EU needed a better regime than the one they had today. Looking ahead, Hill said that the Commission would be coming forward with proposals to strengthen venture capital markets across Europe. In his eyes, they were important for smaller companies in their start-up phase, while it also helped retain talent and entrepreneurship in Europe, rather than seeing it go to the US in search of better financing. Hill added that the Commission would propose a revision of the EuVECA regulation so as to increase the range of businesses in which venture capital funds could invest, while opening up the EuVECA label to more fund managers.

Hill stressed that consumers needed to be at the heart of any CMU and that it was primarily for this reason that he had launched a Green Paper to look at financial services from their perspective. He suggested that digital innovation provided a great opportunity to better connect Europe’s markets and highlighted a recent report on crowd-funding as an exciting new source for young, innovative companies, particularly when they looked to move from being a start-up to the next stage of development. Hill said that responses to the Green Paper had identified a number of questions that the Commission was now examining more closely, namely: how could we encourage systems that can identify consumers remotely without compromising important security requirements? How can we improve the access to information for consumers to make informed decisions about financial products in countries other than their own? And how can the transparency of foreign exchange fees be improved? For Hill, it was important that these issues were addressed and that the Commission came ______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu 6 Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

forward with follow up actions on how to deepen the Single Market for retail financial services in the autumn. Hill added that, as part of the CMU Action Plan, the Commission had signalled intent to look at the financial services legislation that had already entered into force and to ensure that it was still working as intended. To do this, Hill announced that a ca ll for evidence had been launched on various pieces of financial services regulation to check that everything was working “as we had hoped” and was as growth-friendly as possible.

Outlook Hill concluded by stating that building a CMU was never going to be easy and that he was under no illusions about the size of the task at hand. His message upon leaving office, however, was to “stick with it” and to keep “hammering away” at the barriers to free movement of capital over the coming years. Hill said that with or without the UK on board, it was the right thing to do and he paid tribute to work already done in the field which had laid the foundations fo r an ambitious agenda. Hill noted that progress so far had been good and that step-by-step he felt measures had been put in place to strengthen trust in the financial system, as well as increasing competition and choice. He said that this was work that could support the growth and investment that was needed to create jobs. Businesses needed it, Europe needed it and “long live the Capital Markets Union”.

______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu

7

Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

Other News UK’s referendum result discussed by other national Parliaments and Governments The result of the UK’s referendum on EU membership has been widely discussed by other EU national Parliaments. These include the Austrian Nationalrat, the Belgian House of Representatives, the Czech Chamber of Deputies, the Estonian Parliament, the French Assemblée Nationale, the Irish Dáil, the Italian Senate, the Latvian Parliament, the Lithuanian Parliament, the Parliament, the Dutch House of Representatives, the Polish Sejm and the Slovenian Parliament. Some Parliaments, including Croatia and Spain, have just had or are soon to have elections, meaning that there has been no possibility to debate the referendum result. Others, including Hungary, were already in recess at the time of the vote. Two Parliaments, the Finnish Eduskunta and German Bundestag, have scheduled extraordinary plenary sessions to debate the result of the vote. In the French Assemblée Nationale, the Conference of Presidents established a mission d'information on the UK withdrawing from the EU. The temporary body will be chaired by the Speaker of the Assemblée Nationale. The Portuguese European Affairs Committee held a session with the UK Ambassador to Portugal on Wednesday 13 July. A number of Governments have announced new plans as a result of the referendum result. The Danish Government has established a cross-party group to examine the impact of a Brexit on Denmark. The Irish Government has said it will form a new Cabinet committee in the wake of the UK’s vote, as well as strengthening Irish missions in European capitals including Rome, London, Berlin and Paris.

Der Spiegel publishes joint interview with Schulz and Juncker On Friday 8 July, German publication Der Spiegel published a joint interview with EP President Martin Schulz and Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker. 3 In the interview, both men answered questions on their reaction to Brexit, their thoughts on future reform of the EU, and their friendship. Schulz stated that it had long been “routine” for Member States to blame the Commission for everything they could not agree on, with Juncker adding that those messages stuck with people, which was “deadly for Europe”. Asked if he was in favour of a new EP President in January 2017 (under a deal agreed between the two main political groups, the post is due to go to an EPP MEP), Juncker said that “I don't see why we shouldn't continue with a proven team.”

14th round of TTIP negotiations takes place On Sunday 10 July, the 14th round of negotiations on the Translatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) began, with negotiations running until Friday 15 July. The Commission tabled eight new proposals, on regulatory cooperation on cars, cosmetics, textiles, engineering, medical devices, and chemicals, as well as an institutional chapter and a chapter on digital trade. US negotiators tabled proposals on technical barriers to trade and trade defence as well as ICT. The 15th round of talks will take place in October, with EU Trade Ministers meeting in September to review progress on TTIP talks. A Commission spokesperson has said that the EU remained “committed to conclude the talks before the end of the Obama administration”, noting that the UK’s referendum result would not directly influence talks.

3 The full interview is available at http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/interview-with-jean­ claude-juncker-and-martin-schulz-a-1102110.html ______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu 8 Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

Eurogroup meeting and Eurozone debate On Monday 11 July, the Eurogroup met to discuss the economic and financial situation in the euro area; the post-programme surveillance in Ireland and Portugal; implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact in the Euro area countries; and the Euro area fiscal stance. Ministers also held a “thematic discussion” on growth and jobs and investment in the Euro area. That evening, MEPs on the Budgets (BUDG) and Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) Committees debated the need for a Euro area budget with Finance Ministers Jeroen Dijsse lb loe m ( the Netherlands), Michel Sapin (France), Pier Carlo Padoan (Italy), (Luxembourg), Peter Kažimír (Slovakia), Edward Scicluna () and (Greece). The two EP Committees are working on a joint report on a budgetary capacity for the Eurozone. The report, due to be approved by the Committees in September and by the EP as a whole in late October, will serve as the Parliament’s contribution to the White Paper on the completion of the Economic and Monetary Union, which the Commission is expected to present in 2017.

Juncker accepts Sir Julian King as new British Commissioner On Monday 11 July, President, Jean-Claude Juncker, accepted Sir Julian King as the new British European Commissioner. Sir Julian was nominated by outgoing Prime Minister to replace Lord Hill, the former Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union Commissioner, who resigned after Britain’s vote to leave the EU on 23 June. It was confirmed last week that this portfolio would be absorbed by Commission Vice-President for the Euro and Social Dialogue, Valdis Dombrovskis. 4 President Juncker met S ir Julian in Brussels on Monday morning and is expected to assign him a lower-profile portfolio than that held by Lord Hill, with a decision likely to be taken on this by the end of July. Sources have suggested that David Cameron has been pushing for the Environment brief (currently held by Malta’s ), but it is understood that there is still a possibility that Sir Julian could be appointed as a Commissioner “without portfolio”. Sir Julian, whose appointment will be reviewed by the and is subject to confirmation from the Council, has previously worked in Brussels as Chief of Staff to former British Trade Commissioners and . A Downing Street spokesperson noted that “Sir Julian King is an experienced diplomat, has a particular expertise in European affairs and the Prime Minister thinks that he will make a strong addition to the Commission”.

Panama Papers Committee of Inquiry holds its first meeting On Tuesday 12 July, the EP’s Committee of Inquiry into Money Laundering, Tax Avoidance and Tax Evasion (PANA) held its initial constitutive meeting to both confirm its mandate and elect the Chairs who will guide the work of the Committee over the coming year. 5 The Committee, which comprises 65 MEPs from all political groups, was formally launched at June’s plenary session in Strasbourg and is designed to investigate alleged contraventions and maladministration in the application of EU law in relation to money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion. Members elected Werner Langen (EPP, Germany) as the Committee’s Chair and also settled upon four Vice-Pres ide nts : Ana Go mes (S&D, Italy),

4 See Brussels Bulletin No. 514 5 Full details of the EP’s PANA Committee can be found here ­ http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/pana/home.html;jsessionid=EF9DB27781C1AF857B91 F6008CBC4BFC.node2 ______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu

9

Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

Pirkko Ruohonen-Lerner (ECR, Finland), Fabio de Masi (GUE/NGL, Germany) and Eva Joly (Greens, France). PANA has a 12-month mandate (expiring on 8 June 2017), at which point the Committee will presents its finding to all Members at the EP Plenary in July next year. There are five UK MEPs on the Committee: Annalise Dodds (S&D), Kay Swinburne (ECR), Molly Scott Cato (Greens/EF A), David Coburn (EF DD) and Raymond F inch (EFDD).

18th EU-China Summit takes place in Beijing From Tuesday 12 to Wednesday 13 July, the 18th EU-China Summit took place in Beijing. Disc uss io ns foc used on political and economic relations as well as global and regional issues. The EU was represented by European Council President Donald Tusk and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker. High Representative , Commission Vice President and Commissioner Cecilia Malmström were also present. Following the summit, President Juncker announced the creation of a bilateral working group on steel to monitor overcapacity. He also said that the EU was currently producing an impact assessment on the consequences for each Member State of granting Market Economy Status to China. The College of Commissioners would debate the issue later in July.

Commission adopts Communication on visa reciprocity with US and Canada On Wednesday 13 July, the Commission adopted a Communication regarding the visa reciprocity situation with Canada and the US. 6 The Commission noted in April that full visa waiver reciprocity with Canada and the US had not been achieved for citizens of all EU Member States, and invited the Council and EP to adopt positions on the matter. Neither has, to date, done so. The Commission Communication calls for full visa reciprocity and commits to monitoring the situation over the coming months. The UK and Ireland do not take part in the development of the EU's common visa policy, as they have an opt-out under the Treaties. As such, they would not be bound by any Commission decision taken on the matter.

MEPs adopt changes to Firearms Directive On Wednesday 13 July, Members on the EP’s Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (IMCO) passed a resolution by 27 votes to 10 with one abstention designed to introduce stronger controls on the purchasing and possessing of firearms throughout the EU. 7 The EU’s Firearms Directive was introduced in 1991, updated in 2008 and establishes the conditions under which individuals may lawfully acquire and possess guns or transfer them to another Member State within the Union. The changes approved by IMCO Members provide guidelines stating that: EU countries will have to introduce stronger controls on “blank­ firing” acoustic firearms; common European technical standards will be adopted to ensure that the deactivation of firearms is irreversible; various weapons used legally by hunters, sport shooters, military reservists, museums and collectors will not be added to the “Category A” list of restricted weapons (as suggested in the Commission’s original proposal); and that a monitoring system will be established at the Member State level designed to increase the sharing of information across borders and make it easier to trace weapons that are bought in one Member State yet used or sold in another. Following the IMCO vote, a mandate for MEPs to open negotiations with Council will be voted upon after the summer recess. Once approval has been granted, discussions with the Slovak Presidency will be led by British

6 See Commission press release at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2432_en.htm 7 The IMCO Draft Report can be found here ­ https://polcms.secure.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/upload/862510cb-7a1d-4154-8e46­ 2895bd48a2e0/PR%20weapons.pdf ______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu 10 Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

MEP Vicky Ford (ECR, UK). Council last debated the dossier on 10 June, yet is still to reach a General Approach.

Commission proposes reform of the Asylum System and Resettlement Framework On Wednesday 13 July, the Commission published three legislative proposals to complete the re form o f the Common European Asylum System. 8 The first would replace the Asylum Procedures Directive with a Regulation to establish a common EU procedure for international protection. The aim is to simplify, clarify and shorten asylum procedures; ensure common guarantees for asylum seekers; ensure stricter rules to combat abuse; and harmonise rules on safe countries. The second would replace the existing Qualification Directive with a new Regulation, aimed at harmonising protection standards in the EU; setting firmer rules sanctioning secondary movements; and strengthening integration incentives. The third would reform the Reception Conditions Dire ctive, ensuring that asylum seekers receive harmonised reception standards throughout the EU. The Commission also came forward with a proposal for an EU Resettlement Framework to establish a common European policy on resettlement.9

Jean-Claude Piris interviewed on Article 50 Jean-C la ude P ir is, fo r me r Director General of the Legal Service of the Council of the European Unio n, gave his thoughts on Article 50 in a recorded interview with E!Sharp, an online magazine analysing the EU. 10 Pir is p la yed a leading role in drafting EU Treaties from Maastricht to , the latter Treaty being the one to include Article 50. Piris was asked why an Article 50 existed. He said that, at the time of discussing and drafting the Lisbon Treaty, there was a dispute between lawyers. Some thought that the Treaties were signed for “eternity” and it was unthinkable that a Member State could leave. Others, including him, took the view that if a Member State wanted to leave, it could and would. It was clear that the matter had to be settled, and the Article was therefore drafted for inclusion in the Lisbon Treaty, in part to save on “thousands” in costs from trials and tribunals should a Member State leave without a mechanism for doing so. For him, the inclusion of the Article was politically significant, because it demonstrated that the EU was more of institutional organisation than a federal state in its formation. Turning to when Article 50 should be triggered, Piris said that the UK should not wait for too long, for both economic and political reasons. If the other 27 Member States became “fed up” with waiting, that could ruin the necessary goodwill needed for the negotiations. Once the Article was triggered, the ball would be in the court of “both camps”: the UK would have to say what it was expecting from the negotiations, and the other 27 Member States would issue political guidelines. Piris emphasised that the political guidelines were different from a mandate for negotiations; the latter would come in due course. In conclusion, P iris said that any future EU-UK deal would most likely be an Association Agreement and a mixed agreement, requiring EP consent, unanimity in Council and ratification by national Parliaments.

8 See Commission press release at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2433_en.htm 9 See Commission press release at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2434_en.htm 10 The full interview is available at http://esharp.eu/convers ations/brexit-article-50-and­ beyond#.V4KX9epSJ_I.email ______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu

11

Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

Merkel, Hollande, Renzi to hold Brexit summit On Wednesday 13 July, it was reported that the leaders of Germany, France and Italy would meet in Paris in August to discuss the way forward after the UK’s vote to leave the EU. On the same day, Reuters reported that German Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen, when presenting a report on German security policy, said that Germany and France would forge closer defence cooperation in the EU. Von der Leyen said that the UK had “paralysed” such initiatives in the past, and she put forward ideas such as a European Medical Force and a European Civilian-Military Headquarters as part of a long-term aim of moving toward a common security and defence union.

Ombudsman publishes findings of inquiry into trilogue transparency On Thursday 14 July, the European Ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, published the findings of her inquiry into the transparency of trilogues. 11 O’Reilly called on the EP, Commission and Council to further increase the transparency of law-making in the EU by publishing key documents related to trilogues, including dates and summary agendas; the positions of both co-legislators; and the names of those present in meetings. She also recommended that the three institutions develop a single and easy to use database where trilogue information would be published. The Ombudsman began her inquiry in May 2015, and, as part of a public consultation linked to the inquiry, received responses from five national Parliaments (including the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee). O’Reilly has asked the three institutions to inform her of the action taken in relation to her recommendations by 15 December 2016.

11 See press release at http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/press/releas e.faces/en/69214/html.bookmark ______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu 12 Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

Calendar Slovak Presidency: forthcoming Council meetings (July to December 2016) 14-15 July: Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs 18 July: Agriculture and Fisheries 18 July: Foreign Affairs Council 18-19 July: Informal Competitiveness 25 July: General Affairs Council 2-3 September: Informal Foreign Affairs Council (Gymnich) 9-10 September: Informal ECOFIN 13-14 September: Informal Agriculture a nd F is her ie s 20 September: General Affairs Council 23 September: Informal Foreign Affairs Council 27 September: Informal Defence 29-30 September: Competitiveness 3-4 October: Informal Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs 10-11 October: Agriculture and Fisheries 11 October: ECOFIN 13 October: Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs 13-14 October: Justice and Home Affairs 14 October: Transport, Telecommunications and Energy 17 October: Environment 17 October: Foreign Affairs Council 18 October: General Affairs Council 20-21 October: European Council 8 November: ECOFIN 11 November: Foreign Affairs Council 14-15 November: Agriculture and Fisheries 14-15 November: Foreign Affairs Council 15-16 November: General Affairs Council 16 November: ECOFIN 21-22 November: Education, Youth, Culture and Sports 28 November: Foreign Affairs Council 28-29 November: Competitiveness 1-2 December: Transport, Telecommunications and Energy 5 December: Transport, Telecommunications and Energy 6 December: ECOFIN 8-9 December: Justice and Home Affairs 8-9 December: Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs 12 December: Foreign Affairs Council 12-13 December: Agriculture and Fisheries 13 December: General Affairs Council 15-16 December: European Council 19 December: Environment

______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu

13

Brussels Bulletin No. 515: 15 July 2016

Slovak Presidency: forthcoming inter-parliamentary meetings in Bratislava (July-December 2016)

2-4 September: Inter-parliamentary Conference for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP)

16-18 October: Inter-parliamentary Conference on Stability, Economic Coordination and Governance in the European Union

13-15 November: COSAC Plenary Meeting

19-20 April: Meeting of the Chairpersons of the Committees on Energy Union

Other Events

7-8 September: Inter-institutional Conference on the future financing of the European Union, organised within the framework of the High Level Group on Own Resources (Brussels)

Alison Groves [email protected]; [email protected] Fraser McIntosh [email protected]; [email protected]

House of Commons, UK National Parliament Office, Brussels

00 32 2 284 3703/4656 (Brussels) (#6 24 3703/4656 from Westminster) 00 33 3 88 17 6846/6842 (Strasbourg) (#6 23 6846/6842 from Westminster)

Mobile: 00 32 486 646948 / 0032 486 646949

Website: www.parliament.uk/npo

______Track national parliament scrutiny at www.ipex.eu 14