GILES CHICHESTER MEP
for the South West and Gibraltar

COMMENT

Tsunami Money

The big issue on everyone’s mind at the opening of the January Plenary Session in Strasbourg was the impact and aftermath of the tsunami disaster on the countries around the Indian Ocean.  In addition to quoted figures of €1.5 billion aid pledged by the EU and Member States jointly for both emergency and reconstruction, there was a proposal for MEPs to donate a day’s pay to the cause.  I can report that I made my contribution to the Red Cross Appeal at home nearly three weeks before.

Legislate in haste?

Another meeting was with the Luxembourg Presidency of the Council wishing to review outstanding items of legislation being handled by our committee.  Every Presidency always wants to show it has done things by listing first or second readings completed on its watch.  I promised we will do our best (although my personal view is that rushed consideration of proposals makes for bad law).

The REACH Regulation

As can be seen from the list of lobbies, the big preoccupation of industry at present is the REACH regulation.  In truth I have been lobbied about this by a wide range of industry sectors, associations and individual companies as well as receiving representations from the Missions to the EU of a number of countries such as Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Israel, Japan, Mexico, Singapore, Thailand and USA.

Tory MEPs vote NON 

That being said, many MEPs clearly viewed the Report on the Draft Constitution for Europe as being very important.  The suggestion that funds allocated for celebrating the vote, which was 500 for 147 against (including we Conservative MEPs), should instead go to the disaster relief fund did not get much support.  Attention now switches to the series of referenda in Member States on whether to ratify or not.

External Relations

I am also being lobbied vigorously by individuals, NGOs (non-governmental organisations) like WWF and that powerful, influential bunch the WI (Women’s Institute); so wherever I look someone says something serious about chemicals, hazardous substances and the like.  We are having a one day hearing in the hemicycle (chamber) of the European Parliament in Brussels devoted to the subject, run by the three committees most closely involved in scrutinising the proposal.

Busy Commissioners 

My week was full.  I had private meetings with three of the Commissioners covered by my Industry Committee, plus two of them appeared before the committee for question and answer sessions.  A common theme to each was the forthcoming 7^th Framework Programme of Research and the importance of maintaining funding for specific areas such as energy and ICT (information and communication technology).

EEF Programme

I had a session with the director-general and two other staff members of the European Energy Forum, of which I am now President (Chairman in UK terms) to firm up our programme of dinner debates and visits for the year.  We have a nice sort of problem, namely too many proposals from would-be sponsor/organisers.  We set a maximum of 20 events and 4-5 visits.

Pressure on Parliamentarians

One aspect of this situation has significantly added to the pressures on parliamentarians and that is the anxieties felt both by industry and the coalition of interests which is driving this forward that their voice is not being heard or is being over-ridden by the other point of view.  So they redouble their efforts to put us MEPs right about the issues, taking double our time to cover the same ground.

Chicken and Egg 

However for Commissioner Potocnik, with overall responsibility for research, the main concern was the timing of the Parliament Report on the Commission Communication on guidelines for future European Union policy to support research.  He needs our opinion before finalising his proposals to put before the Council so as to feel he has broad support.

Lobby Allsorts

And just to give a flavour of what people are lobbying about at present, I met representatives from Japanese Chemical Companies in Europe (about REACH); CEFIC, the European Chemical Industries Council, (about REACH); the European Media Group (about pirating and copyright); FORATOM, the European Nuclear Industry association, (about a proposed visit to a facility); the World Life Sciences Forum (asking me to speak at their conference); the metals industry (about REACH); and the British Marine Industries Federation (about red diesel).

Supporters fear the proposal will be diluted and delayed and hazardous substances left insufficiently controlled.  They also, up until now, view the industry statements of support for the principles and objectives of REACH with suspicion because they follow up with strong concerns about practicalities, cost, administrative burdens, driving businesses outside the EU and a loss of competitiveness in favour of all the non-REACH counties.  Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and restriction of CHemicals.  The debate goes on.