Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I cannot accept amendment No. 9. This amendment requires the crimes in which Europol is competent to be listed in guidelines prepared following the enactment of the Bill. I cannot for the life of me understand why the amendment is being proposed. Perhaps Senator Ó Clochartaigh will choose to withdraw the amendment because it makes no sense.

Under section 1, a criminal offence is defined as "an offence for which Europol has competence in accordance with Article 4 of the Council Decision". I remind the House that under Article 4 of the decision, crimes which fall within Europol's remit include organised crime, terrorism and other forms of serious crime affecting two or more member states. The other forms of serious crime are listed in the annexe to the Council decision. Europol is also competent for related offences as listed in Article 4(3). Given that the Council decision is scheduled to the Bill and lists the offences within the competence of Europol, and that a reference to such offences is contained in section 1, I do not see what value is added or purpose served by requiring the further publication of information already contained in the Bill.

Any person who wants to find out what offences fall within Europol's competence could look to the Bill rather than separately published guidelines. Looking to the Bill is extraordinarily easy because page 60 contains an annexe which sets out the following offences: unlawful drug trafficking; illegal money laundering activities; crimes connected with nuclear radioactive substances; illegal immigrant smuggling; trafficking in human beings; motor vehicle crimes; murder and grievous bodily injury; illicit trade in human organs and tissues; kidnapping, illegal restraint and hostage taking; racism and xenophobia; organised robbery; illicit trafficking in cultural goods, including antiquities and works of art; swindling and fraud; racketeering and extortion; counterfeiting and product piracy; forgery of administrative documents and trafficking therein; forgery of money and means of payment; computer crime; corruption; illicit trafficking in arms, ammunition and explosives; illegal trafficking in endangered animal species; illicit trafficking in endangered plant species and varieties; environmental crimes; and illicit trafficking in hormonal substances and other growth promoters. The annexe sets out additional provisions which give definitional clarity to some of these crimes.

I cannot for the life of me figure out the purpose of an amendment stating that guidelines should be published when the Bill is enacted to clarify the areas in which Europol is competent because the legislation already makes this clear. Given the manner in which the legislation implements our European obligations, it is important that it should set out in primary legislation Europol's areas of competence.