On the substance, this can mean taking part, to the fullest extent, not only in all internal market developments, but also in the so-called «flanking policies» (and, indeed, beyond!), for instance, in the wide ran- ge of Community programmes and whether on research, the environ- ment or education: the more «intimate» the presence in the various ty- pes of committee involved in programme management, the better! Again, in more recent years, the Union has seen a mushrooming of spe- cialised agencies, whether for food or air safety, or data protection or border controls and that in a broad range of activities which were, in the past, followed more directly by the Commission. Clearly, to the extent they contribute financially to these agencies, the maximisers will not only seek to be members of the bodies running the programmes, but even to be able to have – dare I say it? – a vote in decision-making. And, as it be comes ever more difficult to separate the internal from the exter - nal, the maximisers will increasingly seek to have a stronger influence in «third country relations», for instance, the «open skies» policies of the Union. On the other hand, the «minimisers» would prefer to leave things much as they are: their motto might be: «don’t rock the boat». This would mean, for instance, that there should be no need to discuss whet- her a piece of the acquis is, at all, «relevant» and, thereby, to be extended to the EEA: this has been the case, recently, with the so-called «green- house gas emissions directive». Again, the minimisers are bound to be ir- ritated if they do have strong views on what they consider to be a fair compromise: thus, for them, the «‹.eu› top level internet domain» should be for EU users only, a separate «lower-level» «‹.eea› domain», for the EFTA/EEA states. And if they already have problems «at home», on is- sues such as novel foods and genetically modified orga n isms, the mini- misers will not look forward to these problems being exacerbated in their daily EEA work. Finally – and whether as maxi- or minimisers – «the protagonists» would tend to agree that joint committee decision-making procedures should be as straight-forward as possible. Thus, Regulation 2894 of 1994 could be applied to enable the Commission, even more than now, to put forward the Community position for joint committee decisions. In this way, duplication of effort – not least by the Council! – would be re duced: a current example being considered is the prolongation of 57 
Parallel Legislation in the EEA: Automatic or Manual?