Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 371: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on the EU Ombudsman's recommendations that the Council of the European Union should review its refusal to meet publicly whenever it is acting in its legislative capacity; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14917/06]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am aware of the European Ombudsman's recommendation regarding the Council of Ministers meeting in public. I have frequently expressed my support for greater transparency in the business of the Council of Ministers, particularly when performing its legislative functions. I would recall that Article I — 24.6 of the Constitutional Treaty provides that the Council of Ministers should meet in public when it is considering and voting on draft legislative acts. I value this aspect of the Constitutional Treaty, which can help strengthen the democratic credibility of the European Union.

The Council of Ministers has already responded to increased public interest in the functioning of the European Union by improving the transparency of its own proceedings. In December 2005, the Council of Ministers decided to take a number of practical steps to promote greater openness and transparency. As a consequence, deliberations and votes on legislative proposals governed by co-decision procedures, with the European Parliament, are to be video-streamed over the internet. This will ensure that they are available to the widest possible audience. The Council of Ministers also decided to increase the amount of non-legislative business which is to be conducted in public session. In March, policy debates in the environment, competitiveness, employment and transport councils were held in public session. There is also agreement that the Council of Ministers will review these new arrangements and I hope that this will lead to a further opening up of the business of the Council of Ministers to active public scrutiny.