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

Before we move on to the further scrutiny of COM (2013) 813, which relates to the protection of trade secrets and is listed in Schedule A for decision, I propose that we deal with nine proposals and four early warning notices that are listed in Schedule B for decision. Is it agreed that COM (2014) 1 be sent for further scrutiny? Agreed. Is it agreed that the other proposals listed in Schedule B - COM (2013) 775, COM (2013) 932, COM (2014) 41, COM (2014) 42, COM (2014) 50, COM (2014) 51, COM (2014) 87, and COM (2014)108 - do not warrant further scrutiny? Agreed. Is it agreed that the early warning notices listed in Schedule B - EWN (2013) C 351-27, EWN (2014) C 27-15, EWN (2014) L 10-11 and EWN (2014) C 28-11 - do not warrant further scrutiny? Agreed.

COM (2013) 813, which is listed in Schedule A for decision, is a proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information - trade secrets - against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure. This proposal seeks to protect business know-how, commercially sensitive and valuable information and trade secrets against theft, misuse and disclosure. It will introduce consistent rules across the Internal Market. When the joint committee considered this proposal on 11 February last, it was agreed that the proposal warranted further scrutiny. Since then, business stakeholders were invited to submit their views on the proposal to the committee. Replies were received from the Irish Small and Medium Enterprises Association and the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, following a public consultation undertaken by that Department. The contributions that were received welcomed the proposed legislation and verified the economic importance of trade secrets to Irish business and the need for appropriate legislation to protect those secrets. Based on the responses that were received, it is proposed that the proposal does not warrant further scrutiny by this committee. Is it agreed, therefore, to conclude the scrutiny of this proposal by sending a letter to the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation informing it that parliamentary scrutiny in this regard has been brought to a conclusion and reaffirming the view of business stakeholders on Article 5.2 of the proposal, which is that cost-effective and speedy civil redress mechanisms are needed on foot of this proposal? Agreed. That concludes our discussion on EU proposals.