Hl 6 Report On 2013 14

This report provides an overview of the work of the European Union Committee in session 2013-14. It highlights some of the key policies examined through scrutiny work and inquiries, reflects on the Committee's work with the EU institutions and other national parliaments, and gives a forward look at the work being undertaken in session 2014-15.

This report covers the work of the Committee and its sub-committees during the 2014-15 Session.

This report provides an overview of the work of the European Union Committee in session 2012-13. It highlights some of the key policies examined through scrutiny work and inquiries, reflects on the Committee's work with thie EU institutinos and other national parliaments, and gives a forward look at the work being undertaken in session 2013-14.

The EAW provides for the surrender from one EU Member State to another of those accused or convicted of crimes. It replaced existing extradition proceedings between Member States and was designed to speed up and simplify the transfer of suspected criminals and fugitives. Under the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, the UK had the option to opt out of all of the pre-Lisbon Treaty EU justice and home affairs legislation. In October 2012, the Government confirmed that it would make use of this provision to opt out of approximately 130 measures and that it would seek to opt back into 35, including the EAW. On 1 December 2014 the UK's opt-out will come into effect (though negotiations are underway to extend that deadline on a transitional basis to 7 December). If the UK has not opted back in by this date, it will no longer be part of the EAW scheme. The issue of the UK's opt-in, and the EAW in particular, has become an increasingly political topic and entwined with arguments about the EU more generally. The evidence session covered a number of issues relating to the EAW. It juxtaposed the two political arguments on this controversial issue by hearing from Baroness Ludford, in favour of opting in and working to improve the legislation and Jacob Rees-Mogg MP, who opposes the opt-in, calling for an alternative system that is not coming under the competence of the European Union and it remains a matter of UK law.

The last five years have seen a range of international developments, ranging from the growth of radicalisation and fundamentalism, to growing concerns around our energy supply, and rising aggression from Russia. The NSS must be flexible enough to support contingency planning, and in this Report the Committee recommends that the Government produce a classified NSS or annex which can be used in Government departments to influence planning assumptions for a range of scenarios. In its report the Committee said that the next NSS should look hard at the UK's place within the international order, and what strategic thinking should underpin its actions over the next five years. It also needs to influence the Comprehensive Spending Review, to ensure that the Government can make fully-informed decisions on security-related spending. The next NSS should set clear objectives for the UK's future place in the world and geopolitical priorities, and inform the Strategic Defence and Security Review's assessment of the means required to achieve them.

Lord Hanningfield's case arose after the Daily Mirror published, in December 2013, articles about Lord Hanningfield spending short periods of time on the parliamentary estate in July 2013 whilst claiming the daily allowance of £300. Following the articles a complaint was made to the Commissioner for Standards. The Commissioner for Standards undertook an investigation which focused on 11 sitting days in July 2013 when Lord Hanningfield was on the Parliamentary estate for fewer than 40 minutes and claimed £300 for each day. The Commissioner found that Lord Hanningfield did not undertake parliamentary work on the days in question and was in breach of the Code of Conduct. The Sub-committee considered the case and recommended that Lord Hanningfield be required to repay the £3,300 he wrongly claimed and that he be suspended from the service of the House until the end of the current Parliament. Lord Hanningfield appealed but the Committee did not uphold the appeal and maintained the original recommendation to pay the £3,300 and be suspended from service of the House

The Committee supports the proposal to introduce a power for the Commission to issue a statutory warning to a charity as a useful tool that falls in between issuing guidance and the opening of an inquiry. The statutory warning process should include safeguards on the face of the Bill including limiting the circumstances in which a warning could be ......