Dominic Hannigan (Meath East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The first item on our agenda is democratic legitimacy and accountability in the European Union. On behalf of the joint committee, I am delighted to welcome Mr. Roland Freudenstein, deputy director and head of research at the Centre for European Studies. Mr. Freudenstein has travelled from Brussels to be with us today, for which we are very grateful. This is a continuation of the meetings we are holding on the future of the European Union. The Centre for European Studies, CES, is a leading Brussels based think tank with links with the European People's Party, EPP, to which many of the members present are affiliated. The centre was established in 2007 and promotes Christian Democrat conservative and like-minded political values which flow into EPP policy.

In recent months the committee has debated widely how to secure democratic legitimacy and accountability in the European Union. Mr. Francis Jacobs was here on Tuesday afternoon, 18 June, to give us his views and those of the European Parliament Information Office on how this could be done. The CES has recently done some work in this area and prepared a report which contains several recommendations for the upcoming European elections which will be held at the end of May next year. One of the suggestions is for transnational lists of candidates for the European Parliament and that the biggest political parties should declare their candidate for Commission President before the upcoming elections. Other bodies are suggesting this, too.

Before we begin, I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and asked to respect the parliamentary practice that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against a person, persons or an entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.