Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The first proposal is Schedule A, COM (2013) 312 - a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Copernicus programme and repealing regulation (EU) No. 911/2010. This is a European initiative for the implementation of information services dealing with environmental security. It replaces the European earth observation programme. It also covers activities for ensuring an uninterrupted provision of accurate and reliable data and information on environmental issues and of security matters to users in charge of policy making, implementation involved in the EU and its member states. As of 2014 the Copernicus programme will enter its full operation phase and this is the subject of the regulation. It is proposed that this proposal does not warrant further scrutiny. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The second proposal is Schedule A, COM (2013) 404 - proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions of the member states and of the European Union. The main objectives of the present proposal are to optimise the interaction between public and private enforcement of the EU competition rules and ensure victims of infringements of EU competition rules can effectively obtain compensation for the harm they have suffered.

As some of the legal and constitutional impact of some of the elements of the proposal have yet to be fully explored it is proposed that this proposal warrants further scrutiny. It is suggested that a letter be sent to the Secretary General of the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation stating that the committee is keeping a close watching brief on all developments regarding the Commission proposal, in particular regarding the outstanding subsidiarity issues. The letter would also ask that the committee be kept informed on the legal implications of this proposal in Irish law and receive an update on the legal advice pertaining to limitation periods, joint and several liability and the proposal for a mandatory recognition of decisions of non-Irish courts and competition authorities when considering private actions and damages by 27 August at the very latest. Does everybody agree that we send that letter?

Anthony Lawlor (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Could we also make a note to the Department about the delay in sending it on to this committee? We should have been allowed to scrutinise this before.

Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy wishes to record annoyance that it is so late coming to us.

Anthony Lawlor (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps we should note that the Competition Authority should be notified.

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That should be copied to the Competition Authority and a response requested from it. This is potentially very important. People are not in a position to fully engage with the Competition Authority because of the fear of resources and that they are not being heard. This directive seems to have some sort of importance in that so I would like to hear from the Competition Authority.

Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Are members happy that we will send a letter to the Department, noting the timeframe involved, and copy this to the Competition Authority and ask it to come back to us before 27 August with its thoughts and observations on this? Agreed. On foot of those answers we may decide to meet in early September to make a formal committee position on this issue? Is that agreed? Agreed.