EUU, Alm.del - 2010-11 (1. samling) - Bilag 283: Referat af Trojka-møde og COSAC-formandsmøde 10-11/2-11 i Budapest

PROCEEDINGS:IN THE CHAIR: Mr Richárd HÖRCSIK, Chairman of the Committee on European Affairsfor the HungarianOrszággyűlés.1. Opening sessionThe meeting of the Chairpersons of COSAC organized by the Hungarian Presidency was heldon 11 February 2011 in the former Upper House Hall of the HungarianOrszággyűlésinBudapest.•Welcome address by Mr László KÖVÉR, Speaker of the HungarianOrszággyűlésIn his address, Mr László KÖVÉR welcomed the participants stating that their meeting wasthe tangible reflection of the national Parliaments’ increased influence. Theirs will be the tasknow to find their appropriate role in this new institutional landscape. Through the COSACplatform and by promoting the best practices, the Hungarian Presidency will endeavour tohelp achieve this aim in order to allow national Parliaments to find their way to a betteroversight of their respective governments e.g. on common foreign and security policy for theEuropean Union and on Eurojust. After having established their enhanced role, nationalParliaments must play it in full transparency. That is why the subsidiarity system was created.Indeed, although, up to now, its threshold has never been reached, every actor knows of itsexistence and will take it into account.Moreover, the Speaker emphasized that, in spite of frequent internal discussions, Hungary hasalways been able to manage its EU affairs properly. In this respect, the achievements of thecurrent trio will serve as an example for the one to come.Furthermore, Mr László KÖVÉR offered a brief overview of theOrszággyűlés’activities inthe framework of the Hungarian Presidency.

Beyond any doubt, the XLV COSAC meeting will be the main event with (1) Mr ViktorORBÁN, the Prime Minister, who will present the state of play of the Presidency, (2) anextensive briefing on the results of the economic integration and (3) with a number ofprocedural matters to be dealt with.Together with the European Parliament, theOrszággyűléswill focus on the integration of theWestern Balkans into the Union and on the energy policy.Cultural events will be organized in order to let the East European history be better known. Inthis context, Mr László KÖVÉR underlined that 2011 will be the year of Central EuropeanPresidencies.Lastly, there will be a number of memorial events remembering the participation ofHungarians in humanitarian activities, such as the deeds of Count János ESTERHÁZY andthe events that took place in Europe in 1848 and 1849.•Briefing on the meeting of the Presidential Troika of COSAC and preparation of theXLV COSAC meetingIn his introduction, Mr Richárd HÖRCSIK, Chairman of the Committee on European Affairs,welcomed the new Chairpersons of the Committees on European Affairs of the LatvianSaeima,the DutchTweede Kamerand the IrishHouses of the Oireachtasalbeit that,unfortunately, the latter was not able to be present at the meeting. He also welcomed thedelegation from the Parliament of Montenegro –Skupština.Indeed, as this country has beenan official candidate for EU membership since 17 December 2010, it was invited to COSACfor the first time.Furthermore, the Chairman recalled that his country became a member of the European Unionin 2004; in 2007, it joined the Schengen area and now, for the first time, it has taken over thePresidency of the Council of the European Union. Mr Richárd HÖRCSIK stressed that it wentwithout saying that, for Hungary, this was not only a milestone but also an opportunity. Thatexplained why Hungary did not come unprepared. In this respect, Mr Richárd HÖRCSIKreferred with gratitude to the willingness with which its predecessors had shared theirexpertise, to the preparatory conferences held by the Committee on European Affairs of theOrszággyűlésand to the results of the EU Presidency Working Group, which was establishedin February 2008 and had consisted of representatives of all parliamentary political groups.Secondly, the agenda of the meeting, as set out above, was adopted unanimously.Thirdly, Mr Richárd HÖRCSIK summarized the results of the meeting of the PresidentialTroika of 10 February 2010. In doing so, he first went through the draft programme of theXLV COSAC meeting. Regarding its first part,i.e.the state of play of the HungarianPresidency, he was confident that, by 30 May 2011, a number of clear results may bepresented.As to the second part, he announced that Mr Maroš ŠEFČOVIČ, the Vice-President of theEuropean Commission, will speak instead of the President, Mr José Manuel BARROSO.In connection to the part of the programme on the Rules of Procedure of COSAC, thePresidency will submit a number of technical proposals to the national Parliaments and theEuropean Parliament allowing them to formulate the suggestions they deem necessary.

The title of the next part of the programme will be changed into “Report on the Proceedingsof the Conference of Speakers of EU Parliaments”.In order to introduce the last part of the draft programme,i.e.the debate on the EU State ofthe Union, the former President of the European Commission, Mr Jacques DELORS, or MrDonald TUSK, the Prime Minister of the Polish Republic, will be invited as keynote speaker.The issues on the European electoral procedure and on freedom of religion will be kept“stand-by”.Having taken note of the draft programme and of its changes mentioned above, theChairpersons of COSAC unanimously approved the draft programme for the meeting of theXLV COSAC.Then, the Chairpersons endorsed the decision of the Presidential Troika to adopt the EuropeanParliament’s amendment to the draft outline of the Fifteenth Bi-annual Report. Mr RichárdHÖRCSIK added that the Report will consist of one chapter on EU economic governancecontaining issues of (1) the Europe 2020 Strategy, (2) the European Semester and the AnnualGrowth Survey, (3) economic governance and financial regulation in general and (4) theEuropean Commission Work Programme for 2012.Regarding the letter from the Chairwoman and the Vice-Chairwoman of the Committee onEuropean Affairs of the DanishFolketingon the Hungarian Media Law, Mr RichárdHÖRCSIK referred to his comments on that matter during the extended trio meeting of theEuropean Affairs Committees in Copenhagen on 24 and 25 January 2011. He added thatHungary considered a debate on this issue premature since the experts of both the EuropeanCommission and the Hungarian Government were still analysing it. Moreover, he emphasizedthat, if necessary, Hungary was committed to change this law in order to fully harmonize itwith the European legislation.Lastly, Mr Richárd HÖRCSIK announced that theOrszággyűléswould send a letter to thenational Parliaments enquiring their intention to maintain the current co-financing mechanismof the COSAC Secretariat.Mr Miodrag VUKOVIČ (the MontenegrinSkupština)expressed his gratitude for theinvitation of his parliamentary delegation to the meeting.Mr Česlovas Vytautas STANKEVIČIUS (the LithuanianSeimas)referred to the nationalParliaments' intention to weigh heavily on the parliamentary scrutiny of the common securityand defense policy as expressed during the XLIV COSAC meeting in Brussels. In thiscontext, he invited the Hungarian Presidency to take this item further thus enabling a decisionto be taken during the Polish Presidency.Both Ms Eva KJER HANSEN (the DanishFolketing)and Ms Susanna HABY (the SwedishRiksdag)emphasized the utmost importance of freedom of speech. Although they feltsupported by the announcement by the Hungarian Presidency regarding the Hungarian MediaLaw, they were anxious to see the specific proposals to change it. In particular, they expectedthe confidentiality of the journalists’ sources to be protected and the freedom of setting upblogs (even abroad) to be guaranteed.To this point Mr Richárd HÖRCSIK replied that Hungary considered freedom of press to beessential and that the Government were currently dealing with the issue.

2. Priorities of the Hungarian Presidency– guest speaker: Mr János MARTONYI, Ministerfor Foreign Affairs of the Republic of HungaryThe Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr János MARTONYI, started by drawing a distinctionbetween the method and the substance of the Presidency of the Council of the EuropeanUnion. Concerning the first one, Mr MARTONYI stressed that in the post-Lisbon era the roleof the rotating presidency had to be clarified. In his opinion, the role of the presidency of theCouncil was to trigger cooperation, coordination and as an "honest broker" find compromisesbetween the EU institutions and the Member States. Mr MARTONYI added that theinstitutions had to find their place in the new system as well.As far as the substance is concerned, the minister referred to the motto of the HungarianPresidency representing the intention to be ’a strong Europe with a human touch’ and said thatthe Presidency could be considered successful if by the end of June Europe would becomestronger. He underlined that recently the biggest fundamental challenge had been the EUeconomy. The minister thought that a comprehensive approach was needed, of which thevarious elements are interrelated, since the success depended on each element.Turning to the European semester, he stressed that the implementation was on two levels: theEuropean Commission and the rotating presidency. Mr MARTONYI explained thefunctioning of the mechanism, adding that in April country-specific guidelines would betaken. Concerning the six legislative initiatives on economic governance he mentioned that inMarch general approach would be debated at the European Council and by the end of June alllegislation should be concluded. In this work, the main task of the Hungarian Presidency is tofind compromise with the European Parliament.Concerning the European Stability Mechanism he mentioned that the basic decision would betaken by the European Council in March. As an additional element he mentioned thecompetitiveness pact, the outcome of which was uncertain for the time being.Mr MARTONYI continued with the energy questions, noting the results of the Energysummit of 4 February 2011. He emphasized that an integrated interconnected energy marketwas to be created by 2014, by then all necessary conditions of regulations and infrastructurehave to be met. He added that the Presidency aims to convince third countries that physicalinterconnection was important for all of us, not only for the Eastern European countries, eventhough different countries have different sources. An integrated market can guarantee safe andsecure supply of energy and its external elements are important as well.Continuing with cohesion policy he expressed the firm conviction of the HungarianPresidency that for a successful Europe 2020 Strategy an integrated and efficient cohesionpolicy was needed. He added that it would have an impact on the multiannual financialframework too and in mid-February the Council would hold an orientation debate. TheHungarian Presidency is convinced that a debate about the amounts should be preceded by adebate on policies. Although the length of the next financial framework is still uncertain, thefirst Commission communication is expected to be published in June.On agriculture, Mr MARTONYI pointed out that the EU needed a healthy Europeanagricultural policy that was financed fairly.

He went on to elaborate on two strategies the Hungarian Presidency is working on: the Romastrategy, and the EU Strategy for the Danube Region. As to the latter, he noted the element ofinclusion, since it involved 14 states including EU Member States, candidate countries andnon-members. He thought this mixture was the best proof for the Union’s being inclusive.Mr MARTONYI mentioned the Presidency’s intention to promote the accession of Bulgariaand Romania to the Schengen area. He also pointed out that Croatia’s accession was a priorityin general, which encouraged the other states of the Western Balkans, however he also saidthat a major priority of the Hungarian Presidency was to close the negotiations with Croatia.Finally, he underlined the importance of the Eastern Partnership with the six concernedcountries as he considered the EU had to test and prove itself in neighbourhood policies.Following the presentation, Members of national Parliaments welcomed the priorities of theHungarian Presidency. Many Members stressed the need for the EU action and participationin solving the conflict in North Africa. The Members also emphasized that the single marketand the CAP should be equal for all EU Member States. As for the European semester, it wasconsidered that this was a good time for national Parliaments to make their voice heard and itwas even proposed to give more insight for the parliaments on the exact texts to be decided onEuropean Council level, while also a strong demand on deregulation could be experienced.Some Members asked about Bulgaria’s and Romania’s preparedness to join the Schengenarea and welcomed Croatia’s progress towards EU membership. There was reference to theDanube Strategy especially concerning the issue of water power plants. The Turkishdelegation regretted the slowing down of Turkey’s accession and the blocking of negotiationchapters, which was then referred back by the Cypriot delegation saying that there wereobjective reasons for that. Other delegations underlined the importance of common energypolicy and the territorial and social cohesion, urged to work against food prices’ fluctuationthat may cause food shortage within the EU, raised the attention to the discrepancies of directpayments allocated to farmers in different Member States and warned against the simplifiedamendment of the Treaty of Lisbon which excluded from the initial debate nationalParliaments.In his reply Mr MARTONYI said that in case of Egypt Europe had a special responsibilityand the Member States and the High Representative Ms Catherine ASHTON followed closelythe situation. He confirmed that the Egyptians’ future lied in their hands. Furthermore, hestressed that violence was not acceptable and there must be a lasting transition to democracyand free and fair elections. The minister found it difficult to predict the outcome of thedemonstrations; however, he confirmed that Europe had to offer help. Mr MARTONYIrejected the idea of two-speed Europe, saying that the division within the eurozone could beonly transitional and not permanent as it had to be an example of stability where non-eurozone Members States were heading towards. He also reaffirmed the essential need forsmooth inter-institutional relations. Considering the treaty amendment, he replied extensivelywhy the foreseen procedure would be needed. Regarding the Schengen criteria he said that agroup of experts was examining if the technical conditions were met and said that thePresidency had to make sure that the candidate countries did their homework. Besides hehoped that despite the controversial issues there was a chance for Croatia to sign the accessiontreaty by the end of June. As for Turkey, he thought the blockage was a matter of politics, butthe Hungarian Presidency wanted to proceed. On direct payments, he said an orientationdebate would be useful on reforming the CAP. Referring to Danube Strategy he confirmedthat no water power plants would be built in Hungary and that Hungary considered the

Strategy more as a macro-regional strategy which included various cooperation and certainlynot only energy issues.3. The Commission Work Programme 2011 –guest speaker: Mr Maroš ŠEFČOVIČ, Vice-President of the European Commission in charge of Inter-Institutional Relations andAdministrationMr Maroš ŠEFČOVIČ, Vice-President of the Commission, stated that 2010 had been achallenging year for both national and European institutions, as it had seen the debt crisis, arecently elected European Parliament, a new Commission and a series of national elections.The Commission had responded with determination to the numerous challenges, andregarding the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty the job was nearly finished. The results ofefforts on financial stabilisation and supervision began to appear, with a certain stabilisationof markets and improving figures. 2011, too, would be a year of challenges. It was now timeto concentrate on exiting the crisis, which would require a joint effort by the EU and theMember States.Mr ŠEFČOVIČ recalled that the political dialogue between the Commission and nationalParliaments started five years ago, and that communication on monitoring the application ofthe principle of subsidiarity was improving. The number of opinions received in 2010, forinstance, was 50% up as compared to the 2009 figure. Mr ŠEFČOVIČ was convinced that theProtocol 2 card procedures could be avoided if the Commission did a proper job. NationalParliaments rightly wanted the subsidiarity issue to be given more prominence in Commissionproposals. The Vice-President acknowledged that more precise information should beprovided in the explanatory memorandum of proposals and not merely in the impactassessment. Parliamentary oversight by both national Parliaments and the EuropeanParliament was absolutely essential. Mr ŠEFČOVIČ called for national Parliaments to bemore involved in the Commission's Work Programme by providing input on what theyconsidered to be priorities for the year ahead. The COSAC plenary meeting in the first half ofthe year could be an appropriate occasion to do that.On the Commission’s Work Programme for 2011, Mr ŠEFČOVIČ highlighted that 2011would see the completion of the financial recovery package. Invigorating the single marketwould be the main task for the next year. Again, national Parliaments' input would be mostwelcome, for instance on proposals in the energy sector, a policy area with a huge potentialfor the EU economy.Mr ŠEFČOVIČ went on to mention the differences in quality regarding the transposition ofEU legislation into national law and considerable delays in some cases. In this context hestressed the need to complete the energy market by 2014.The March European Council meeting should come up with a comprehensive solution for thesovereign debt crisis and ways to boost economic governance in accordance with the Treaty.This process should be open to all 27 Member States. The specific role of nationalParliaments would involve democratic scrutiny and ensuring that national legislationcomplied with EU legislation.Regarding the EU 2020 strategy, Mr ŠEFČOVIČ insisted on the preparation of adequatenational reform programmes by Member States. Not all governments had presented such

programmes, and some of the programmes that had been submitted were vague. TheCommission would see with the governments concerned how these programmes could beimproved.During the ensuing debate 13 speakers took the floor. Points raised by the speakers included aquestion on delegated acts and the lack of clarity on what is and what is not essential inlegislative acts, as well as on the uncertainty on how non-EU Member States such as Turkeywill be involved in parliamentary scrutiny of common security and defence policy followingthe cessation of the activities of the Assembly of WEU by the end of June 2011. Participantsin the debate also raised issues like the need to further deregulate, in particular to the benefitof SMEs, the lack of involvement of national Parliaments in simplified Treaty amendmentprocedures, the necessity of integrating the economic, social and environmental dimension ofgovernance, the increasing number of instances where bilateral problems strain relations withcandidate countries and the risk of the citizens’ initiative getting out of control. The issue ofthe democratic deficit and how to bring Europe closer to citizens was also raised. It wassuggested that national Parliaments should scrutinize their governments, but this should not bedirectly related to the Commission, and moreover national Parliaments and the EU institutionsshould keep contact on specific issues, while keeping COSAC as a scrutiny forum and aforum for debates on issues like the state of the Union and on the Commission WorkProgramme.In his reply Mr ŠEFČOVIČ reiterated the importance of smooth communication betweennational Parliaments, the European Parliament and the Commission, as well as of a goodinstitutional balance. He acknowledged that delegated acts were indeed a complex matter thatrequired thead hocinvolvement of national Parliaments. Mr ŠEFČOVIČ pointed out that thefuture involvement of non-EU Member States in the parliamentary scrutiny of commonsecurity and defence policy was a matter to be decided upon by parliamentarians. Whenspeaking about the efforts undertaken by the Commission to reduce the financial burden, inparticular for SMEs, he also referred to the problem of “gold plating” of European legislationby national governments, often during the transposition phase. The Vice-President regrettedthat many national reform programmes lagged behind, encouraged national Parliaments tohold national debates with finance and economy ministers and voiced Commissioner Rehn’swish to have a joint conference with the European Parliament on the Annual Growth Survey.He explained that regarding the new stability mechanism, some Member States preferred anew article in the Treaty in order to avoid being challenged by their constitutional courts, thatthe aim was only to add an enabling clause and that the March European Council would haveto take a decision on that. Furthermore, Mr ŠEFČOVIČ acknowledged that in the context ofenlargement bilateral conflicts could be a big issue and that discussions with the countriesconcerned should start at a very early stage. Finally, he stressed the importance of thecitizens’ initiative being user-friendly, and use the new means of communication – a point onwhich the European Parliament had insisted.