 Good morning, and welcome to this, the 21st meeting of 2014 of the European and External Relations Committee. Can I make the usual request that mobile phones are switched off? Can I make an immediate apology for keeping people waiting? Are we technical difficulty? So, as I say, welcome and we will go straight into our first agenda item. The first agenda item this morning is a discussion on the new session of the European Parliament. I'm delighted to have with us today five of our six MEPs by video conference. We have Dr Ian Duncan, welcome back to committee Dr Duncan, but on the other side of the table this time. To Ian Hudgton, welcome Mr Hudgton, and to David Martin, welcome to you, and that's our Brussels contingent. With us today in committee, we have Catherine Stiler, welcome to Catherine, and David Coburn. Welcome, Mr Coburn, to committee this morning. Alan Smith has tendered his apologies, but he has set written evidence that you have in your papers. I thank you all for your written evidence, but I know that we have a tight timescale this morning, and you all have to be at different places, so we're going to move quite quickly on this. A wee bit etiquette for the room of the video conference is a slight time lag, so if we can just ensure that we allow that few seconds time for the transmission to go forward and for us to then be able to respond to that, that would be very helpful. I'm going to go straight to questions, but hopefully my opening question will allow each of you to give an overview of the work that you're currently undertaking. I'm going to start with the Brussels contingent this morning, because it allows us just to deal with that time lag and get used to it first. Starting with yourself, Dr Duncan, because that's where I'm going to start, just to put you on the spot, and I'm delighted to do so. Congratulations on your election. For all of the MEPs with us this morning, one of the things we're obviously very keen on is what's happening in Brussels now, we've had the election, we've had the new college of commissioners elected, what's the sort of a political impetus there, but personally what work are you involved in, as far as what committees and what pieces of work you're involved in that you think are coming over the horizon that'll have an impact on Scotland. Can you start with yourself, Dr Duncan, and go? We've got two Davids and two Ains this morning, so I'm trying to stick to surnames for the men, basically. If we could start with you, Dr Duncan, that would allow us to get kicked off. Well, Madam President, it's a pleasure to see you from this side. The last time I was doing this, I would be the nervous person about trying to make sure that the link actually worked, but it's quite nice to be sitting here watching it all unfold. It's an exciting time to be in Brussels right now. We are still in the early stages of the new session, so in truth it's still settling down. The commission has just really come into office, and so we're working through broadly legacy issues, which are holdovers from the previous mandate. We expect around the 15th or so of December to get the commission's work programme, and that will give us again a strong indication of the next five years and exactly where the issues are going to be and when they will unfold, and I know that your team will be on top of that. As of where I sit here, I now sit on three committees. One is a full member, which is the ENVY, the Environment and Public Health Committee. I also am a substitute on the Fisheries Committee, alongside Ian Hutchinson, and I am a substitute on the energy, the EATRA Committee. Priorities for me right now, there are some legacy issues, as I've said. In terms of fisheries, the landing obligation is a serious concern to me. You'll be aware the discard ban comes in for the first fisheries in the first of January 2015, which is important. That's the pelagic fisheries. The landing obligation gives the legal underpinnings to this particular discard ban, and though those underpinnings are not there, the proposals are not ready for the first of January, there will be no enforceability until that is signed off, and that will be sometime in the middle of next year. So for the first part, Scottish fishermen are going to be without the certainty of the law, which is a bad thing. There is some other information in terms of fisheries in the note that I sent you, so I won't go into that in any detail. If I can touch upon one other aspect which I'm going to be leading on, I'm part of the Parliament's delegation out to the UN climate change conference in Lima. Now I know Scotland has quite a tale to tell in terms of its commitment to climate change and to energy. I will be very interested to hear from you about what you would like me to be taking out there. I'll be sitting again with the Scottish Government and the UK Government to make sure that those views are held and incorporated, and I will be reporting back. It's an important first step where we will get a sense of where the commitments to climate change are heading, our ability to secure that two-degree reduction in overall global temperature. I will leave it there. There is more information, of course, in my note, but I'm very happy to take questions on any aspect of that. Okay, what I'll do is we'll go to all the members first and get their overview, and we can come back to questions. Mr Martin, would you be ready to go next? Yes, good morning. As Ian rightly says, we don't yet have the political guidelines or the political work programme for the European Commission, but we have clear priorities that we want included in that work programme. We want firstly the focus of this new commission to be on jobs, growth and investment because we think that's the crucial area for Europe at the present time getting the whole continent out of austerity. So we want to ensure that the youth guarantee scheme that already exists is properly spent and implemented. We know, although it's not yet formally been announced, but we know the commission is going to announce a £300 billion investment, a £300 billion euro investment in the European economy as a result of pressure from my own group when Mr Juncker came before us for endorsement. More recently, perhaps no coincidence because of the debate about tax in Luxembourg, the commission I think are now going to include something in their work programme and tackling tax avoidance, which is interesting that that announcement should come at this stage. Beyond that, we can all guess what will be in the commission's work programme, but we don't have it yet, but in my own area, I do most of my work on three committees, trade, foreign affairs and human rights, and I want to focus particularly on trade because it was in the previous Parliament and in this Parliament is going to be again one of the busiest committees. Towards the end of the last Parliament, we have completed the South Korean, Central American and Columbia Peru free trade agreements. We already have the outcome, the first year or so, of implementation of the South Korean free trade agreement and the news there is both good for Scotland and good for the European Union in that EU exports to Korea went up far more than imports from South Korea as a whole and Scottish whisky in particular did rather well out of the change of the tax regime and the protection it has given the result of the free trade agreement. So, good news for Scotland there. We have completed free trade agreements, the commission has completed free trade agreements with Singapore and Canada, which the European Parliament will have to ratify sometime in the next year to 18 months. It takes a long time because it has to go through what they have to go through what's called legal scrubbing to make sure that the texts are legally watertight and they have to be translated unfortunately into 24 languages. The Canada and Singapore is also good news for us because the commission were robust in insisting on GI geographical indicators being included in these free trade agreements which is important, as you will know, for a number of Scottish products. And again, they're both good markets for not just whisky but for other Scottish products like textiles and so on. So, it's encouraging these FTAs have been completed. We have to wait for the ratification process. I won't go into any detail but we're also of ongoing FTAs with Japan, Vietnam, Ecuador, Malaysia, India. We have investment agreements being negotiated with Myanmar and with China but probably the big one that people will know most about is so-called TTIP, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the United States. That has been very controversial. You perhaps get others who will say I'm wrong in this but I have to say having looked at it, there's nothing on paper on TTIP that we're only negotiating because there's no final text. But from speaking to negotiators on both sides I personally do not believe there's any threat to our health service as a result of TTIP. There's been a lot of talk and the press that TTIP will damage our health care. I don't believe that is going to be the case. There is worry about something called investor-state dispute which is a mechanism which allows big corporations to sue behind closed doors if they think their investments have been uncuelly discriminated against. My own group in the Parliament is absolutely against the idea that investor-state dispute should be in any trade agreement. But on the whole, if we can get a good TTIP again we believe it would be good for the Scottish economy and good for the European economy as a whole. Finally and very briefly, there are a number of other issues that are not particularly germane to Scotland but are important issues. We're trying to update the anti-torture regulation and the dual-use regulation. We have a very important file that a lot of Scottish NGOs have been engaged in which is the file on conflict minerals which is about four minerals that are most commonly associated with conflict in the world and trying to manage those. We are extending our GSP plus scheme which is a scheme of preferential access to the European market and the Philippines are next in line and of course we've been trying to help Ukraine show solidarity with Ukraine in terms of giving them trade preferences in the light of the problems they're facing with their big neighbour at the present time. Many other issues but I'll stop at that. Thank you very much. Mr Hudson. Thank you very much for this opportunity and congratulations on managing to get five out of six into one meeting. That's a record so far in this Parliament and I certainly look forward to future relations again with the members in the Scottish Parliament. You've had a pretty good overview of many of the issues that I mentioned in my paper as well just to confirm that I'm still continuing full member of the Fisheries Committee which I've been for all of the time I've been here in the European Parliament and like Ian Duncan I have concerns about now that we've finished with the structure and the so-called reform of the common fisheries policy the test of that suitability for purposes is going to be in the implementation and we do have a looming controversy to say the least about how the discard ban is to be implemented and I think there appears to be growing views within the committee that I think Ian Duncan and I share that instead of as the commission and indeed the council want to do having an omnibus regulation which tries to wrap up and foresee a whole range of what they call legal tidy up measures now that we should in fact be treating the application of the discard ban or the landing obligation on a fishery by fishery basis at the time when it's due to be implemented and therefore focusing very directly on the very different nature of different fisheries that will be involved and the reason for starting with the pelagic which is the one that's due to be implemented from the 1st of January coming is that relatively speaking it is a clean fishery and it's not the biggest problem fishery with unwanted catches and therefore discard so that's my attitude to our current discussion in committee and in parliament here is that we should just be focusing on those parts of the discard ban that come in on the 1st of January and that we look very more carefully at the complicated and difficult nature of how to apply it to the mixed white fishery which is also very important in Scotland. On the tea tip and we've all had I think and perhaps yourselves as well a significant mail bag from constituents expressing concerns of all kinds about this proposal and that range of concerns has not really been helped by the nature of the negotiation so far and what you might call the secretive nature of negotiation so far and it's only by pressure from MEPs and others that we've recently had negotiating mandate published and there's now some talk about further documentation being made available to all MEPs rather than just a select number who are involved in particular committee so I think a bit more openness would be very helpful about that but those who say and the UK government for example say don't worry there's nothing in here to upset the health service and its public nature well if that's the case personally I'd prefer that to be written in as a guarantee rather than given as a verbal assurance because often these agreements are all kinds of European agreements are based on so much compromise that the interpretation can be somewhat flexible to say the least in many cases so if there's no intention of affecting public services through this agreement then let's make sure that the wording of it is categoric and clear about that Otherwise we have just seen the new commission take office and have its first meetings and already it's facing a motion of censure in the European Parliament which I think might be considered next week partly based on the Luxembourg tax situation that has been the cause of some further attacks on President Junker I don't think the motion of censure will succeed and I think that at this stage I certainly on the particular subject of that the tax issues in Luxembourg and so on President Junker made very clear at our plenary here in Brussels last week that there is to be a commission investigation into these allegations in Luxembourg and in some other places that he personally will have nothing to do with that inquiry that the commissioner concerned will be fully independent in conducting that inquiry so I think the motion of censure in the commission is somewhat premature at this stage although of course the commission is indeed on trial anyway many of us had reservations about some aspects of individuals as well as the make up of the team it's an interesting new structure in the commission rather than 27 different sets of responsibility President Junker has grouped five vice presidents and given them broader portfolios with other commissioners than reporting through the vice presidents in logical supposedly policy groupings and I think that's worth a try but it remains to be seen how whether it will be more successful than past colleges of commissioners Thank you Thank you very much and bringing us back to Scotland now Mr Coburn Thank you for inviting me here it's a great pleasure to be here Well UKIP won the European election as you all know and I was elected from Scotland which shows that just as many folk in Scotland are vexed by the European Union those are vexed in England and a recent poll came out saying just that there's something between 35% in favour and 45% against so that's a very small margin as we get more exposure in the press in Scotland that will do it out narrow I'm on the fisheries committee, the pesh committee and also the energy committee obviously I won't continue to go on about it we've already discussed the fact that there are problems with landing obligations and the committee doesn't seem to understand the problems of Scottish fishermen bobbing out about in the North Sea what they pass in Brussels is not actually able to be utilised on the boat they've created laws that are probably unenforceable and very difficult for Scottish fishermen to make a living out of as for energy, UKIP are opposed as you all know to ugly German windmills all over our countryside which are destroying our tourist trade and don't provide any energy they just push up the prices for Scottish pensioners for power which is not very good and at the same time we still need some sort of backup when the wind doesn't blow, i.e. nuclear so the other problems I see coming up of course are T-tip which I disagree with my colleagues I think it is a problem for the national health service I don't think that these negotiations should be conducted by the European Union these businesses with the Americas should be conducted by the United Kingdom Government and it should not be done in Europe the commission continues to be unelected basically we're living under an unelected oligarchy in Brussels which is appointed some very dubious and odd characters Herr Junkers himself is now as you have heard under investigation over dodgy dealings when he was alleged dodgy dealings when he was the Prime Minister of Luxembourg we were made to see what that's going to bring out there have been calls for his resignation the budget as you know in the European Union is still not signed off after 19 years which I don't think inspires confidence I don't think it's a very good organisation of which we should be a member at an EU meeting I managed to get Herr Junker to agree with his colleague and previous President Barroso that it will be five years before an independent Scotland if ever such a thing happened can enter the EU and it must accept the euro which has bankrupted southern Europe, Greece, Spain, Portugal and now France this is obviously very worrying for Scots and one of the reasons why I think so many of them voted against separation I will continue in the European Union to fight for the cause of Scotland I will make sure that as little interference as possible is inflicted on our people and I will point out to business and the fishing industry and the agricultural industry and Scots in general the problems they face being ruled by Brussels I also happen to be very worried about what will happen to the Edinburgh financial services industry and the financial services industry in London the Frankfurt is extremely keen to have that and the European Union will do everything they can to see that that is the case we need to be very worried about the European Union in general because quite frankly most of our laws are passed there you good ladies and gentlemen are obtaining money by deception because all the decisions for this country and so is Westminster because all the decisions are being made in Brussels I think that I have made my position clear on the European Union and I hope that you will all see the light and join the UK Thank you very much Thank you very much Catherine Stuyler Thank you Madame convener I think that many of my colleagues have already outlined our concern and our priorities on jobs investment and growth and I would add to what David Martin said that the importance of the youth guarantee scheme is exceedingly important of course we do not know yet what the commission's work programme will be we have ideas about the jobs and growth package but we will be able to have a fuller discussion once we have that in front of us but you have asked us specifically to talk a bit about the work that we are doing I am vice-chair of the internal market committee which also includes consumer protection and with the new remit that it has on the digital single market it is very important to economic growth and also to our citizens and there are too many banners in the digital single market there are now two commissioners who have got responsibility on digital Commissioner Ansip and Commissioner Oettinger we are very lucky to have Commissioner Ansip who was the former Prime Minister in Estonia the hearing they said Estonia with Estonia the fact that he knows in his bones about what needs to happen to make digital a reality across the European Union and I think it's a very, very exciting time just yesterday we had Sir Tim Berner-Lee's come and talk to the MCO there's actually other people, other MEPs were allowed to come along as well and it was inspiring talking to him the founder of the World Wide Web about the importance about net neutrality and the importance of having an open web and I think when people like Sir Tim come and talk about the importance at European level that we have to fight for those ideals I think it's so important in terms of the practical day to day stuff I have responsibility as rapporteur on intellectual property rights in the internal market committee I was responsible for the budget in the internal market committee for 2015 and the standing rapporteur on construction products I continue the work that I did in the previous mandate into this mandate I am also rapporteur on gas appliances you might not think that that is of a key interest to people in Scotland but if you've got a gas fire or a gas cooker you want to make sure it's safe when you buy it really important and also added to that is energy efficiency and I'm a substitute member in the ECON committee and I would have to disagree with Mr Coburn about the importance of the European Union and financial services is the standing rapporteur on solvency 2 which is vital to our insurance industry I've got the privilege of being the rapporteur and seeing that through and the shadow rapporteur on insurance mediation I'm also on the EAFTA delegation and a substitute on the American delegation so thank you for your time madam convener thank you very much I could see both my colleagues Willie Coffey getting very excited about the digital stuff and my fellow girl geek Claire Adamson getting very excited about the scientist aspect of the World Wide Web they'll come back to you with questions I have absolutely no doubt about that I'm going to kick off questions from our open committee from Jamie McGregor cos Jamie's got some specific questions on some of the written evidence and then we'll open it out to other members yes well thank you very much and I'd like to thank all the MEPs for sending their statements just referring to Dr Duncan's a statement Ian I should probably call him you referred to the loss of the role of the chief scientific adviser who was actually Scottish from our growth and you make the point that you have concerns that this is a retrograde step could you comment on that further and is there any chance of this role being replaced? I call you Jamie indeed I think there is a serious problem unfolding here Anne Glover is a notable scientist she was Scotland's chief scientist she took that role and applied it to the whole of Europe her work and her contribution has been significant President Juncker came to my group and made a promise when asked the question about the continuation of this role he was asked would he see a role for a chief scientist to offer advice and he said he would see that so we took that as an indication that although Professor Glover made to admit office that the role itself would continue and that now seems not to be the case our concern is that it seems to have been the prompting and I will say no more than that of certain green groups who were who disliked her advice on amongst other things GMO issues now I have serious concerns we are often being told certainly in fisheries and elsewhere how important the science is to have at the heart of the debate and I think this sends exactly the wrong message I think science should be at the heart of the debate but to dismiss the scientist who provides it I think sends a message which is we don't need that and I think that's the wrong thing President Juncker has been asked again he seems to be a little bit more equivocal now than he was at the beginning where it seems very clear this would end I hope he will think again I think he should think again I would like to think the legacy of Professor Glover is a continuation of this role because I think it is a valuable role to bring science again closer to the decision making process thank you Yes, well if I could move to fisheries which I know both yourself and Ian Hutchins are experts on you talk about first of all the discard ban I'm very aware of the pelagic fisherman who, if this is going to hit first or it's going to come into being on the 1st of January 2015 for them are very concerned about the compliance rules and that there's a level playing field for Scottish fleet and fleets from non-EU countries who are fishing in the same waters for pelagic species Would you like to comment on that because there is a feeling that there's going to be some unfairness certainly from our Scottish fleet I have certainly had that fear put to me in the one certain terms not least when I was in Shetland in the run-up to the European elections but the formulation of the regulation as I understand it for the pelagic fishery, according to the UK government anyway they have expressed themselves satisfied that it was put together on a regional basis i.e. within put from the relevant member states now whether there's been enough consultation within the member states that's a matter that I don't have absolute clarity on but my understanding is that there can be no discrimination no inequality and enforcement issues when fishers are fishing for the same stock in the same waters and that's as it should be I understand that some boats will have cameras and others will not and I think that's what the concerns are about To pick up some of the things Ian and I are both in exactly the same page here we need to have a regionalised policy for management of fisheries we've got to make sure that all those who are participating in prosecuting the fishery no matter where they come from are bound by the same standards if they are not then we will be at an economic disadvantage and it's tough enough to be a fisherman these days without having an added burden of competing against others with a hand tied behind your back I think right now the commission continued to talk about the importance of regionalisation I've yet to see them demonstrate a commitment to it in any meaningful way and I think that's something that I'm sure Ian and I will both be pushing for and indeed I'm sure David Colburn too will be pushing for because we've got to make sure the commission here, the fisherman of Scotland and respond to that Further on that point you talk about the regionalisation and the wish to have subsidiarity and yet there appears to be a complete ban they want to have a complete ban on drift nets when in fact there are three I think that within the UK there are three drift net fisheries which are considered to be completely sustainable is that not an example of a broad brush and something that hasn't been really clearly thought through the old artily yes absolutely it is a broad brush but that is the commission proposal that there be a complete ban on all drift net fisheries now that is to get through both council and parliament and certainly from the two exchanges of views that we've had in the fisheries committee here on that subject it looks extremely unlikely to me that the commission will be supported by the parliament on that blanket ban because of regionalisation and I think we hear people talking about the importance of key features of CFP reform discard ban being one of them in many folks minds but in my mind one of the most important things about the CFP so called reform was at least the limited extent to which regionalisation or decentralisation is made an option and this is clearly the drift net ban clearly one of those which ought to be tackled on the basis of fishery by fishery approach on a regional basis because there are some areas where netting has been carried out on a relatively small scale, relatively inshore and relatively harmlessly in environmental terms and why should they be penalised by a blanket regulation which goes against the principle of regionalisation in the new CFP in my view If I could just finish off I'm struck right now by this proposal it fails on two counts regionalisation as Ian says it also fails in the science you can't have a fishery accorded the highest standard by the marine stewardship council of sustainable fishing and then say it must be halted that is nonsense on stilts and that brings the commission into disrepute and I've recommended I know Ian has as well that we send it back there is a need for a disk there is a need for a ban on certain types of drift netting but they're primarily in the Mediterranean not in the United Kingdom so the idea of a one net fits all policy is wrong and I had thought the commission the last time had agreed to move away from that and this of course is a legacy from that last period perhaps as we go forward this sort of approach will simply stop because frankly it should Mr Coburn do you want to come in on that point yet Just simply to agree with my colleagues and I'll be fighting with them on the same side we all agree on this I think it's disgraceful but then again if we leave the European Union we get a 200 mile limit back which I think would be preferable for all but I think decisions about fishing should be made in this country but since we're still in the European Union we must all fight together to make sure that Scottish fishermen get the best deal they can okay thank you Mr McGregor have you still got some questions I have got some other questions if I may continue or do you want me to allow others in do you want a different theme one particular one but to ask Mr Coburn I absolutely agree with you about the dangers to the financial service sectors in London and Edinburgh which are obviously very very important with the invisible earnings and everything else that comes with them and you say you will work to ensure that these do not disappear to Frankfurt how do you intend to do that well that is a very good point and quite frankly the best way of doing that is to leave the European Union I hate to harp on the same theme but there you are but while you're still in it I think the best way is simply to point out the inconsistencies point out what the commission are up to point out what the European Union in general is trying to do and the more we highlight and shine light under their rock and bring it to the attention of the British Government because I'm afraid Mr Cameron and his merry men don't seem to be as vexed about it as we are and this is not just a matter of invisible earnings it's also a great deal of employment in Edinburgh that rests on this and the last thing we want is to lose more jobs in Scotland I think we need jobs in Scotland more than anything else and that would be a tremendously bad set we must defend our position we do not want everything going to Frankfurt so again this is another major problem and another major reason why we must leave the European Union jobs will not only disappear from here to Frankfurt but they will also disappear off to the Far East where there are less regulations I'll come back later on Catherine, I know you've been working in some detail on this specific issue I wonder if you wanted to contribute at this point Thank you madam can be nervous a completely different perspective from Mr Coburn on financial services the rules that we make which apply across the European Union you need to have a strong voice in there to make your case I don't see David coming along to the Econ committee to make that case for Scottish financial services where 100,000 people are employed however I believe that we have to ensure that we make sure that our financial services regulation has a Scottish voice within that and I work very closely with the Scottish financial enterprise and others but I think that it would be a disaster for Scotland and the rest of the UK if we were to go down the route that Mr Coburn is proposing in particular for financial services so I suggest that maybe he speaks to financial services institutions and talks to them more in depth about the consequences I point out that I worked in the city for many years sorry Mr Coburn if we can speak through the chair please I point out that I worked for many years in the city of London so I think that I know an awful lot more about it than Catherine with respect sorry Mr Coffey you have a different line of questioning thanks very much good morning colleagues according to the European Commission 90 per cent of jobs in Europe by 2020 will require some form of digital skills and I was particularly pleased to see as one of Mr Unker's priorities the connected digital single market being amongst the 10 priorities therein I would be grateful to hear your views on that too there are two aspects that are of specific interest to me in this area one is on the whole digital connectivity infrastructure broadband issue and how we are making progress to make that more competitive and secondly on the digital skills agenda where only in the past few weeks a European Commission report has highlighted the digital competencies amongst the particular youngsters needs to be improved so I would just like to ask you about your views on that whether you support the aims and objectives of the digital single market whether it makes a contribution to jobs growth and competitiveness and what do you think we can do to improve the skills and competencies amongst our youngsters particularly in this digital age that we live in Catherine Stuyler I think you are absolutely right in your approach and I think that it was really good in the coding dojo about three or four now about four weeks ago where young people came to the Parliament to actually show us how to code and I think this kind of action maybe you could do something in the Scottish or maybe you've already done so but it was a really good event and where a boy from Ireland who was 12 was showing me how to do programming and when I talked to my eight year old son about these kind of things he suggested but I think that skills are paramount the digital single market what is the real economy and the thing about when you look at although 47 per cent of EU consumers have purchased online from a seller based in their home country only 15 per cent have purchased from another EU country so there are issues about trust issues about making sure and I suppose that's a mindset issue I think the key issues in EMCO are concluding the negotiations on the European data protection rules I think it's adding more ambition to the on-going reform of the EU telecoms rules it's about modernising copyright rules as well in light of the digital revolution and also modernising and simplifying consumer rules for online and digital purchases I think that those are some of the key challenges that we face but I think that with nearly cruise has just finished being the digital commissioner makes a little joke as the fact that they've taken two men to replace the work of one woman and saying that I think that that combination of Commissioner Ansip and Commissioner Oettinger I think that they will do a tremendous job to ensure that we get this right over the next five years because it's so pivotal to our economy thank you Is there any other update? My own business is based, the shipping business is based entirely on the internet so I'm very aware of this problem and I believe that we must have a better education system I regret the fact that we do not have final grammar schools like Aaron, Glenn and Scotland anymore I think that we need to get to grips with making sure that we have good schools that are teaching good technology it's extremely important, it is the future they're doing it in the far east if we don't do it here the future is the internet and the other big problem and something that I feel personally is a major problem for my business is payments and cross border fraud this is a major problem and something that the European Union can actually help with a little bit but it is something that is extremely important and something that we must get to grips with Thank you very much Is any of our Brussels contingent want to add anything to that? Just very briefly I mentioned at the start that the commission are likely to announce a 300 billion investment package so one half of what Mr Coffey was asking for in terms of structural investment is likely to come out of that if we get that programme right so there's a chance we can roll out more broadband connectivity as a result of that investment package slightly different from what was asked but the t-tip that I mentioned earlier one of the key aims of that is to improve telecommunications and digital connections between the US and the EU and people have mentioned the problem of buying consumer goods inside Europe that's even more difficult trying to do it transatlantic if you've ever for example just to take a slightly frivolous example but if you log on to the US iTunes instead of the UK iTunes there's songs you can't buy in the US but you can buy here if we get the t-tip right it'll be like one single market so that will both improve opportunities for consumers in the European Union but also for rural businesses and so on that will be able to access digitally into the US market ship into the US market on a much more simple basis in the can at the present time okay thank you very much Mr Coffey are you thank you very much for the contributions there it's just to clarify maybe Mr Colburn despite the obviously political views that we have and differences that we may express do you still support the concept of a digital single market in Europe as being one that encourages growth and competitiveness I think we need to have a single market in that area of course this is something we all need to co-operate on but it doesn't need to be done through the European Union I mean the European Union is just using our money to do something we could be doing ourselves I think there's a way the European Union does it is extremely complicated and unnecessarily so I'm sure it could be better negotiated by all the nations in Europe without having to go through the European Union but since we're here we might as well make the best of what we've got clear Adamson thank you very much good morning everyone it's just following on on the theme and something that we've touched on a little bit this morning and I know Mr Martin and Mr Steiler both mentioned the youth guarantee as being of particular interest given that economic growth is so key the other area of concern that I have is women's gender segregation in the workplace and given we're just been talking about digital economy that also applies to other STEM areas and I was wondering I had a little bit of a tease at the ambassador, the Italian ambassador who is here for their priorities for their presidency in that it was somewhat a little disappointing the gender make-up of the new commission so I just wondered how in your areas in the coming years you'll be able to look at these areas for women in the workplace yeah Mr Coburn you can't believe all men and all women are equal we don't believe in special pleading in our party you get on by merit you get more women than we have men standing in senior positions which is pretty good and that's not by special pleading special segregation I think everyone should have an equal shot at the cup obviously I deplore any sort of discrimination but I'm not a mad I may be a feminist in as much as I want women to get on in the world but I don't think we should have discrimination thank you for that question I think that many of us actually pushed the commission much harder at the beginning we thought there might only be three female commissioners which was completely unacceptable so the number that we now have although I would like to have parity was an achievement in many of us lobbying and pushing for that and I think that has to be recognised of MEPs to put that on the agenda but I think that the fact that we have a Spanish colleague from my political group who is chair of the women's rights committee the fact that gender mainstreaming is about making sure that all policies are about inclusivity as well and I think that gender is such an important issue when it comes to debates that we have about gender representation on boards whether it's about the issues and ongoing about maternity rights the fact that in the Parliament now the fact that when my baby was 11 weeks old I could take my son to go in and vote and it was seen as something positive because as you know we are not replaced when we vote as MEPs and that's something that really needs to be changed but I think that in the Parliament there's great recognition of those issues but we still have a fight on our hands and the fact that it took us to push the commission and Mr Junker to put that as an issue is something that we have to address again in five years time to make sure that doesn't happen Thank you Men in Brussels Ian Duncan Thank you Sorry we are not all men in Brussels two things I'd note there the first is that I think here in Brussels the European Union has quite a wide cultural base and there are a number of challenges and we are not all at the same place and it's trying to make sure that what happens in the European Union can serve as a beacon for others not just in terms of the gender mix but also in terms of other areas of prejudice whether it will cover age discrimination or ethnicity or sexuality whatever happens to be I think there is a role here and I think that that message can be sent from Brussels in a way that perhaps it can be heard in a very different way in other parts of the European Union I wrote that it was quite an interesting point made by President Juncker where he was seeking to solicit from the member states their nominees for his commission but he did make the statement that if you nominate a woman or if you put a woman forward I can guarantee she will get a more senior position and I thought that was an interesting offer not one taken up, oddly enough by many of the member states who then subsequently nominated but it was an interesting declaration of the outset so it will be interesting to see again as we move forward how well we do begin to move to a broader parity in some of those areas whether it will be driven here in the European Union or indeed elsewhere Thank you Mr Duncan I have a final comment that one of the things to really regret about Ann Glover and the removal of her post is that she was such a great role model for women across Europe Indeed before I go to Alec Rowley I'm just very conscious of the time and I wonder if our MEPs have got maybe an extra few minutes they can add on if they don't mind Excellent, excellent Alec Rowley Could I pick up on this question a tea tip and I think David you will know that there is widespread concern amongst trade unions within the UK, within Scotland and many others The Parliament, this committee is going to be doing quite a bit of work over the next month or two taking evidence sessions on tea tab but it comes back to a couple of points the argument in terms of health and the argument that was made at the referendum was that if Scotland was an independent state then it would be treated as such the fact that it was a no vote means that it's part of the UK and the UK state and therefore if health services are privatised in England that are not privatised in Scotland that we could have a situation where these large corporations could actually be and certainly the suggestion of this agreement that they could basically sue the UK or sue the Scottish Government if we were not putting our health services that are privatised in England out in Scotland that the health secretaries understand is taking legal advice on that and in the coming weeks we would hope to be able to get that but that is one of the major concerns the Italian ambassador gave evidence to this committee a number of weeks ago and was quite specific in that if services are in the public sector then they would not be part of the agreement but that's the issue around health but the very idea that you could have large American corporations basically suing to be the Scottish Government or the UK Government to try and get contracts and work just does not seem to be something that would be acceptable and back to the point that Ian Hudson made is that we do certainly need to have some kind of transparency around this because regardless of whether it's legitimate concerns or whether it's a feeding frenzy the fact is that there is a grown concern I think right across Scotland but across the UK of the implications that you tap Mr Martin, I'm going to let you come back on that and then I'll let you come in Mr Coburn Mr Martin, I think that one of the real concerns that has been lobbied to all of us and that's the reason why we're taking forward the committee is the investor dispute mechanism and I remembered from my notes that you'd said earlier that that was something that was a concern so maybe in answering Alex Rowley's question I will OK, thank you let me just say this morning Alex let me just say it outside that I'm my group I just want to speak for my group on this and I'm the socialist group co-ordinator so I lead for the whole of the socialist group on trade policy we take the view that a good t-tip will be good for jobs and growth in the US we're sceptical about some of the percentage of growth that would create a specific number of jobs we really just don't believe you can do economic modelling to that extent but we do believe the direction of travel with a good t-tip would be towards creating more jobs and stimulating growth that said we've said we have three red lines and Alex in a sense touched on at least two of the three firstly we will not support any t-tip that damages public services secondly we do not believe that a good t-tip should have investor state dispute in it and thirdly Alex didn't mention this but equally important we don't believe it should lower consumer standards you've probably heard about the debate that this might let chlorinated chicken or GMOs or whatever else into the European Union and if we can just deal with them each very briefly I'll try and be brief as I can but on public services firstly it should be made very clear that unless a service is privatised it doesn't even come in the remit of trade agreements so you cannot force privatisation the argument between Scotland and England at the present time is that where England has already privatised part of its health service if and I don't accept this argument but the argument is if t-tip was in existence they couldn't then take them back under public control so it's not that you would not be able to you'd have to be forced to privatise if it's not already in the public if it's not already in the private sector but it's what's called the ratchet clause that you couldn't then bring it back under public control that is not my interpretation of it my interpretation is that if you open up a service then it's open to competition you open it up and you don't exclude it from a trade agreement then you open it up not just a competition within your domestic market but to whoever you've signed your trade deal with in this case America but the other thing to emphasise is so far the EU has never signed a free trade agreement that doesn't exempt public services and specifically does not exempt health and the UK because remember states also have an opt out the UK has never signed it never not exercised it's right for an opt out on health services when the EU has signed a free trade agreement so the likelihood of public services being included are slim but the bigger problem is the one you alluded to and the one that Alec alluded to is the interstate dispute which has been abused in the past this is not a new thing firstly there are something like 1400 ISDSs around at the moment many of them and we believe illegally since the Lisbon Treaty came into force many of them internal EU agreements and one of the famous cases of course it's often cited as an argument against ISDS is the fact that Swedish companies the German government because of the Germany ending its nuclear programme and they are saying that it should be entitled to a significant compensation because Germany has denied them the right to make money in Germany by ending the nuclear programme and there have been other cases, the famous cases of Philip Morris case against Australia on plain packaging for cigarettes we don't believe it's right that companies should be able to sue for changes in public policy we don't believe it's right that they should be able to sue for future profits that they think they are losing if there's a policy change what is right though and this is where we have to find a balance is if assets are expropriated companies need to be protected and you might think in the modern world that doesn't happen very often but just think back less than a year to Argentina taking over Spanish assets in Argentina and not necessarily until investor-state dispute was exercised paying any compensation for that so we try to find a way where you can guarantee protection for physical assets but not for the other things investor-state dispute has been used for and further complication I'm sorry this is a bit more complicated but the further complication is that if you take America for example nine of the 27, 28 EU member states have investor-state dispute with the US and frankly they're all very badly worded at the moment all loosely worded which doesn't open them up for attack compared to the deal that the EU is likely to do which will be much tighter how can I say that because we've done a deal with Canada and if you look at the investor-state dispute with Canada it's much more restricted in terms of what can be sued for all of that said let me repeat though we do not believe investor-state dispute should be an agreement there's another mechanism for dealing with this issue which is state-to-state settlement not allowing individual private companies to sue but the point to emphasise is firstly it's not new it's been going on for a long time and secondly that the EU's model some people might say well I would say that but I believe this the EU model is better than any model that any of the existing member states have at the present time because we've learnt from history what we've made with the existing investor-state dispute on transparency finally the point that Alec was making he's absolutely right this started off it was very difficult initially to get good information that has changed quite dramatically we now have the negotiating mandate we now know what the commission is negotiating on after every round of negotiations from the very beginning the commission has been coming and reporting to the members of the trade committee which has been good for us but rather frustrating because it's been done behind closed doors in confidence that we're not meant to go out and talk about the specifics that we've been told and he's even rightly said at the beginning that it's going to be open to all members of parliament and the documentation is going to be open to all members of parliament so I don't think we're there yet but we're moving in the right direction in transparency but Alec's right to say this is an important issue we believe and I think collectively we believe that when we get to the end of this process we should have an informed public they should know what's at stake in terms of Teta whether you understand the content of it so that we can have an informed discussion and then the European Parliament point to emphasise European Parliament will have a vote on this this is not something the commission can settle or the member states can settle on their own at the end of the day the European Parliament will have a democratic vote to decide whether to accept or reject Teta okay thank you very much Mr Duncan I'll come back to you but Mr Coburn had gotten first and I'll come back and I think Jamie's got a brief supplementary comment Mr Coburn Chance, Mr Rowley's question I agree with you the last thing we want is T-Tip to be getting involved in public services and damaging the health service we don't want that to be the case absolutely not we believe that the health service should be protected against that again this is the problem you have if you allow the European Union which is making decisions about this for the whole of Europe I would much prefer this decision to be made in the UK by Westminster I don't think it should be made in the European Union I don't think people should be allowed to sue and I think we should if a decision is made in Scotland then it should be respected that the Scottish Parliament makes a decision and it has a responsibility for health but as far as I'm concerned we should not allow T-Tip to attack our public services UKIP believes very strongly in the health service and we will do everything we can to protect it okay, if I go to Dr Duncan and then to Ian Hutchison if you want to come in behind Dr Duncan Ian thank you very much Madam Convener like my colleagues I have a lot of mail on this and I of course was very concerned that a good agreement should be at its heart a way of generating growth and generating jobs but it has now come down to very focused concerns mostly around again the health service and its investor state dispute mechanism I sat with the chief negotiator about this so I could fully understand it and what became clear in the discussions was that the clauses which exist in the current trade agreements which have been signed in the past are remarkably loose and poor and yet when you look at what has been achieved a proposal and I say again it's a proposal it is substantially different and it begs the question whether a number of more prominent cases which have been regularly cited would indeed have been possible under the new revised clause proposed in the investor state dispute mechanism now I look upon the issue of the health care service as well in a broader sense not just in terms of the privatisation which I don't fully accept the comments made there but I also recognise that this area can have extraordinary benefits in terms of the support for medical devices which can reduce the costs and these devices themselves are significant and important to our health service as well as that we look at some of the issues around pharmaceuticals and other costs there and in terms of research and sharing so there are benefits which we can see and which will materially help the national health service as well so we need to be very careful when we are discussing this that we are not seeking to prejudice on the transparency issue we have to remember this is the first time we have ever really had transparency in any of these proposed negotiations in previous free trade agreements there simply wasn't any transparency so we made a huge leap forward the important thing again is we are in the process just now of negotiating the language and the material and importantly if we are not satisfied then we will not sign it off as a parliament if we are satisfied that is the important thing this is not a done deal this is not a secret deal it will not happen in a closed room it will happen here in the chamber actually it will happen in Strasbourg in the chamber of European Parliament and we will have an opportunity then to make sure that we are exercising the will of the Scottish people Mr Hodgerton just briefly I think it is good that there seems to be a broad level of agreement so far amongst the members from Scotland just a quick reference to why should the EU be negotiating trade deals I think it is true to say that even the UK government which likes to tell us that it is very big and powerful accepts that the EU has more negotiating power in the trade aspects the genuinely beneficial trade aspects of this kind of agreement than the UK itself would have and that is why the EU is supporting the process it is a bit to my mind a little bit too kind of careless if that is the word about whether or not public services may be affected but I think the most important thing arising from your recent deliberations is the fact that you are to have an inquiry from Scotland's point of view and I think that the issue about Scotland, England and different different kind of priorities in health services is one that really needs to be looped at and your inquiry can draw that out hopefully and help us too to ensure that we do what we can to help get it right at the end of the day One of the problems of course with all this is Ian was saying it goes to the Parliament we are going to say no the problem is basically the Parliament it's a Parliament of Unix because there's very little power we actually have there's an inbuilt majority that support the commission so you know it's not it's not all as simple as that You get a quick supplementary? Well it's just that on t-tip the US has been very clear I think that public sector services is never part of the trade agreements and I think the greatest gains for the UK and Scotland particularly would be oil and gas and financial services but also the farmers eyes are lighting up because for example the Scots beef import ban might be lifted I'm told which would be very important for Scottish farmers would you like to comment on some of the benefits of t-tip that could accrue to Scotland from a sensible good agreement? Mr Martin do you want to come back on that and then come in with a question or comment that you've got? Yeah in terms of the benefits the benefits are potentially enormous David Coburn was making a big play about financial services well it's very difficult for our banks and insurance companies to operate in the US market at the present time and one of our offensive interests the EU is to open up the US financial services to competition from British and European companies and I think we're being parochial to think that Scottish companies could do particularly well in that market if it was open and free and fair market it's obviously good news for Scottish food and drinks products as Jamie has said particularly beef but not just beef there's some specialised fishing prawns and so on that find it quite difficult for sanitary and cytosanitary reasons to get access to the US market that we'd hopefully deal with in such a trade agreement that are good to the borders and you'll find that some of the textile companies have serious concerns about although the level of tariffs on textiles is on average very low there are some significant tariff spikes which stop us selling some cashmere and other niche products into the US market and I could go on even very simple things like the recent base electronics companies who make small components find it difficult to be part of supply chains because of technical barriers to trade and so on if we deal with all of this it can be very good news in terms of connecting us to the US market and maybe I'll just leave it at that OK, thank you very much and very conscious of time now Mr Rowley do you want to come back in any of that? No I think the key point I would make is that there is genuine concern you say that yourself to the mail bags that you have and I think it's important that our European members of Parliament it might be comes to my final point because a number that you have in your written submission talked about the rise across Europe the rise of the right across Europe if we're going to address that then this idea I open this transparency and if this is a major concern as it's coming across then I think as MEPs it would be good to know what you're going to do to be much more proactive in pointing out the benefits and addressing the concerns Any reaction to that? Dr Duncan, sorry UKIP of course is not a right wing party we're a libertarian party in many ways we agree with a lot of things Labour parties say I think we're more libertarian than any other party as much as we don't want to tell people what to do whereas Liberal Democrats are extremely keen to tell you what to eat for breakfast not smoking, not drinking basically not having much fun at all so we're a much more freedom based party we want this little interference but obviously if more of the European Union continues to interfere in people's lives without a democratic mandate then quite frankly you're going to see the rise of the right in Europe like Madame Le Pen and various other people Dr Duncan and then Ian Hodgerton David would like to come in before me so I'm quite happy to see sorry I was trying not to respond to David Coburn's earlier amarbaries repeated it this idea that the European Parliament simply rubber stamps what the commission does absolute nonsense one of the biggest trade deals in the previous parliament was the act of the anti counterfeiting treaty and the European Parliament rejected it with the largest majority it's ever rejected the commission's proposal so the idea that the commission will go out negotiate bring forward a treaty and the parliament will say whatever the content of that treaty we accept it is just not true and we're going to have very tight and interesting debates when Singapore and Canada come before the European Parliament it's not going to be automatic it's not going to be a rubber stamp and Tita because of the attention it's been paid to Tita it's going to be highly controversial if it comes to this European Parliament I actually think the timescale in terms of negotiations and rather than the legal scrubbing and all the rest of it probably the next European Parliament deals with Tita but because of the public attention on Tita the idea that any piece are just going to say yes regardless of the content is an absolute nonsense and David should it wants to be a serious member of the European Parliament which actually concentrate on issues and actually make up his mind on the basis of the issues not on simple prejudice Dr Duncan Yes, well I'll just come back to a bit more prosaic approach then I have tried to be as active as I can so what I've done is I've written to the I've sat with the chief negotiator written to them we've had responses back from the director general for trade I have put that onto my website I've also put alongside that a number of the questions which are frequently asked with the answers alongside that we've had some correspondence with Len McCluskey who's had a number of concerns I've written to him directly with information and I've said to him in a very open manner please now come back to me with any other questions you might have please frame those and I will pursue those as well I'm wanting to make sure that I can ground out any concerns anybody has and I will always put that onto my website so that I can be as open and transparent as I possibly can be if anyone has any questions they can tweak me they can mail me they can write to me and I will put all that information out there so that people can come back and query so that there should be no suggestion that we're not very active and very engaged and telling people what we're up to Mr Hadgerton David Martin really said what I was going to say I mean it is completely and utterly untrue to suggest that the European Parliament has no power in fact the absolute contrary is the case on the vast majority of the legislative work that we do The various trade ministers of Europe could get together and agree a US trade deal and cut out the middle man, the EU with all the flannel, money, expense and all the rest of it and confusion it could all be done a lot faster and a lot more efficiently but that being beside the point a lot of things are agreed in Europe and are not exactly done by democratic means we all know that and the people have spoken many times about this and did so in the general election and by putting UKIP first The concerns that Alec has been sharing and we share those too about making sure the constituents that are writing to us and we have had thousands of expressions of interest in this as I'm sure you all have as well and maybe as Ian does we've got standard letters where all our committees seem to be having t-tip hearings where the negotiators actually come as well the things that we are trying to do to put people's concerns and David is doing a fantastic job as the co-ordinator in the socialist group to put those concerns forward and the trade committee itself is doing I think an excellent job of holding people together each committee actually has a standing rapporteur on t-tip so you would have had a standing if you were in the European Parliament that has never happened before there are issues that have to be addressed clearly and of course this is a negotiation nothing is done no deal is done until it's final so I think that we have to keep this dialogue on t-tip going and we have to ensure that you've given the information as well thank you I think in preparation for our inquiry our clerks will look very closely at the lead that's been taken by all of our members our final question from Rod Campbell this morning are you still okay for time as far as where you need to be next it can make it very very quickly very quickly, Rod Campbell thank you convener and I can also thank Mr Reilly for raising those questions on t-tip which were very interesting and I welcome the comments made on transparency in particular could I just move to one of Mr Younger's 10 policy priorities to be towards a new policy on migration I was interested to hear the comments of the representatives here on that Jake Catherine but he's not put anything forward yet so I can't obviously comment on that issue but I think once the commission's work programme is there then that's an opportunity to have a debate and a discussion on that okay Mr Coburn have you got anything to add on that one? yes well obviously UKIP believes that unlimited migrations are an enormous problem for the UK in general and Scotland in particular if we have unlimited migration we are unable to decide what's going to happen about our health service provide for it we're not able to work out what we lead in terms of schools or buildings or just about anything else for that matter and it is not in the interests of the UK to do that what it does is depress wages and that is not a good thing and if you ask them they'll see that more progressively they're voting for UKIP because they're worried about their position and their families I think that whatever the European Union do on migration unless all 28 countries agree to it nothing will happen and quite frankly we cannot afford what we've got going on at the moment this has to stop and UKIP are in favour of an Australian European Union style system whereby we choose the people we want to come to this country we chose to have an open door immigration policy which has created a great deal of trouble throughout the UK OK, thank you Ian Hurston Just briefly I like Catherine until we see a specific proposal it's difficult to say exactly how we might react but I can reasonably confidently predict that there will be no proposal apart from the basic right of free movement of citizens in the European Union and that's one of the things that is highly advantageous to Scotland and indeed the rest of the UK when we talk about immigration I don't include that right of free movement because that's not immigration it's one of the basic benefits that we have and it's fair to say that they're estimated to be about as many people from parts of the UK now resident in other parts of the European Union than the other way round so I think that there are benefits in both directions that will continue OK, Mr Duncan and Mr Martin have you got anything to add? Dr Duncan Just very briefly I think that my guests enrich our country I was brought up in a small village in Perthshire they now have a Polish Isle in a local co-op and I think that they are an extraordinary asset to our country I am aware however that it's not a huge share across the whole land and I think that a gamid of a serious debate so that we can make sure that we are talking about migrants in a sensible way which is as a huge economic asset as a huge cultural asset as a huge social asset OK, Mr Martin Actually you're going to get unusual consensus I agree with my two colleagues here in Catherine's right as well we don't have any detailed proposals yet this is not the EU movement this is migrants coming from outside the European Union and there I want to see Mr Juncker's proposals because I hope they'll be about ensuring that we have a humanitarian system for dealing with migrants who come to Europe because in some parts of Europe sadly they are treated very badly we do better in terms of policing our borders yes but we do it in a proper manner that we do more to help the countries that are the source of the migrants to improve their economy and to try and stem the flow that way by actually making living standards in the host country better than the country is but we really just don't know what Mr Juncker means by this I haven't got a piece of paper in front of me but if you look at his ten priorities they are frankly very bland on TTIP the one I remember he says something along the lines that we want a good and balanced TTIP statement so the priorities are not really in mind priorities that are kind of pious statements at the moment what we need is a commission work programme to see how we're going to put flesh on them Mr Campbell do you want to come back on that? The specific point that I might want to add on is just what the European Parliament were planning in terms of keeping an eye on the problems of human trafficking in this session anybody want to comment on that? Sorry Dr Duncan I'm going to hear from David Coburn first Just very briefly human trafficking is obviously an appalling business and we want it stopped I'm looking into it as much as possible it's very much a concern of UKIP as you can imagine and we will be doing whatever we can which is obviously in the European Union very difficult because the European Union 28 countries have to agree to change the open door immigration policy and at the end of the day the only way to stop it is to leave the European Union and I'm afraid that's the logical conclusion we cannot do anything to stop it and there is no effort on the part of the European Union to do anything about the problems that this is causing and that is leading to the rise as our gentleman was mentioning of the far right and that's what you're going to get if you don't stop open door immigration Dr Duncan I'm not sure Mr Coburn's could his finger on that that being said I'm the vice chair of the South Asia delegation and I'm putting a paper to that particular body on this very issue I am concerned and I believe we should be looking at it in detail I would like to use that particular delegation to begin a debate and I hope that's a wider debate and I know that Scotland is taking a very active role in this and I think that the European Parliament I know the work that you've done addressing that issue in Scotland and also Jenny Marra and it's such an important issue and I think at a European level where co-operation can be had between police forces in a joint way to conduct joint action collecting information is vitally important that's one of the strengths that we have by co-operating on some of those issues but anywhere where there's human trafficking of individuals and in particular children and women I think that we have to make sure that we put pressure on the new commission I think that you've just outlined and I think that we have to keep that on but I think that this might be something where the interest of the Scottish Parliament in tackling human trafficking and the work that's being done at European level really does work well together to tackle that horrific problem We're seriously looking forward to the piece of legislation coming up very briefly because I've literally, I mean the meeting before coming here was a meeting of the human rights subcommittee and again to counter David Coburn's allegations that nothing ever happens we were just being presented with a paper which I have in front of me which is fornors and human rights in Morocco for a radically new asylum and migration policy presented to us by the president of the national human rights council in Morocco and it's partly funded as a way of helping Morocco deal with these very issues migration more widely but human trafficking specifically Okay, thank you very much I think that we're going to have to finish very quickly Just to say that I'm very pleased that my European colleagues of various African political parties are all coalescing round UKIP's view on immigration probably something to do with the fact that we came within 300 votes of capturing a safe labour seat in the north of England and we're about to capture a Tory seat in the south I would like to agree with my colleague David Martin on that point Okay, thank you very much for your contribution I know that we've taken serious advantage of your time this morning we've taken you half an hour over the time we allotted, we very much appreciate that and going forward with our inquiries on our programme for Europe but also specifically on the T-tip stuff we may be relying on Mr Martin very greatly to feed us some information that we need to inform our work here but again, on behalf of the committee I thank you all for coming along this morning and I now close this meeting Thank you