4 Civil protection capacity of the European
Union
| (25502)
7890/04
COM(04) 200
| Commission Communication: Reinforcing the civil protection capacity of the European Union
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 25 March 2004
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 1 April 2004
|
| Department | Cabinet Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 22 April 2004
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
4.1 Since the early 1990s, the European Community has been developing
ways to improve cooperation between Member States in dealing with
major disasters caused by, for example, floods, forest fires,
oil spills, and radiological or chemical accidents. In the light
of the lessons of such disasters, in 2001 the Council adopted
a Decision to establish a "Community Mechanism for Civil
Protection".[2] It
made provision for Member States or third countries to seek assistance
from other States to deal with a disaster. A Member State where
a disaster with trans-border effects has occurred is required
to notify the Commission and other Member States which might be
affected by the emergency. The Decision also required the Commission
to create a European Monitoring and Information Centre, to set
up a Common Emergency Communication and Information System, and
to run a civil protection training programme.
4.2 The Monitoring and Information Centre, which
operates 24 hours a day, receives requests for assistance, forwards
them to other Member States and coordinates the replies. The
Centre provides all participating countries with information about
the emergency as it develops. It has access to the Commission's
database of information about equipment, medical supplies and
teams with relevant qualifications and experience.
4.3 In 2002, the Council approved the establishment
of the European Union Solidarity Fund.[3]
Member States affected by a disaster can receive grants from
the Fund to help meet the cost of, for example, immediate restoration
of water, power and other essential services, temporary accommodation
and immediate cleaning up.
4.4 In 2003, the European Parliament called on the
Council and the Commission to create a European Civil Protection
Force.
The document
4.5 The purpose of the Communication is to review
the Community's civil protection capacity and to propose improvements.
The Communication says that the Community Mechanism established
by Council Decision2001/792 has already become an important part
of the civil protection response capacity at EU level. But there
is scope for improvement and the Commission proposes:
- To close information gaps and
update the Commission's database by working with participating
countries to define available response capabilities, including
costs and the possible use of military assets.
- To develop further a programme of training and
joint exercises so as to ensure that teams from different countries
can work together efficiently, using foreign equipment, in dealing
with disasters. If necessary, proposals to enhance inter-operability
of equipment will be made.
- To examine the procedures for the coordination
of teams involved in providing assistance to third countries.
- To establish effective arrangements with relevant
United Nations agencies and the Red Cross.
- To increase the effectiveness of the EU's contribution
to crisis management in third countries.
- To provide rescue teams with common insignia
and equipment.
- To require Member States to inform the Monitoring
and Information Centre when a disaster occurs and about their
calls for assistance or their responses to such calls.
- To review and possibly extend Community funding
for transport costs linked to the provision of assistance either
inside or outside the EU.
- To examine the feasibility of the Community providing
immediate and repayable funds to help Member States deal with
emergencies which overwhelm their immediate financial capacity.
The Government's view
4.6 The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Chancellor
of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr Douglas Alexander) tells us that:
"In the light of the recent tragic events in
Madrid, the Government finds this to be a very timely communication
from the Commission, not least because it addresses some important
areas such as greater internal co-ordination within EU institutions
and improved cooperation with the UN on which the Government has
been seeking progress for some time. Much has been achieved in
the field of mutual Civil Protection assistance and, while wishing
to register a number of concerns, overall the Government welcomes
the Commission's Communication as a useful contribution to the
debate and the way forward in certain areas."
4.7 The Minister adds that the Government intends
to continue to press the EU to establish effective working relationships
with NATO for civil protection.
4.8 The Government is concerned about the value of
adding further information (for example, about specific items
of equipment) to the existing database. This is because interrogating
a complex database, before forwarding requests for assistance,
may cause unnecessary delay in alerting Member States to a country's
need for help. Moreover, an enlarged database might arouse false
expectations about the availability of equipment. The Minister
adds:
"The decision whether or not to provide military
assets will remain a decision for Member States and we continue
to believe that all Civil Protection work must be civil-led."
4.9 Before coming to a final view on the suggestion
for a European Civil Protection Force, ad hoc or formal, the Government
will seek clarification of the proposal and consult other Member
States. There may be value in some form of common identification
for EU teams providing assistance, but not at the expense of national
identification.
4.10 The Minister says that, while generally supportive
of the need to improve the inter-operability of emergency response
teams, the Government has doubts about the practicality of the
Commission's suggestion that teams should be trained to use specific
foreign equipment; this might entail a disproportionate training
burden or additional procurement costs.
4.11 The Government welcomes the Commission's intention
to explore ways to enhance the Community's contribution to UN-led
civil protection operations and to avoid duplication of effort.
The Minister adds:
"The UK has limited resources and has a long-standing
commitment to UN co-ordination of disaster response (UNDAC) in
third countries. Where a request for assistance has been directed
through the UN, and an operational response is considered most
appropriate under the circumstances, the UK will continue to work
directly with the UN."
Conclusion
4.12 We agree with the Minister that the Commission's
Communication is timely. Clearly, it is desirable that Member
States individually and collectively should be ready to help each
other — effectively and efficiently — if there is
a disaster, whether natural or caused by terrorism or accident.
It is necessary, therefore, that the Community should keep its
civil protection arrangements under review and improve them if
appropriate.
4.13 We note that the Government has reservations
about some of the proposals outlined in the Communication. We
also note the European Parliament's call for the creation of a
European Civil Protection Force. In our view, such Community
agencies should not be set up unless preceded by a rigorous analysis
which clearly establishes their need and the justification for
their costs. We can well understand, therefore, why the Government
will be seeking clarification and consulting widely before it
reaches a view on this suggestion.
4.14 Any legislative proposals to give effect
to the proposals would be subject to detailed negotiations and
would come before us for consideration. There are no questions
we need put to the Minister at this stage and so we clear the
Communication from further scrutiny.
2 Council Decision No. 2001/792/EC, Euratom; OJ No.
L 297, 15.11.01, p.7. Back
3
Regulation (EC) No. 2012/2002; OJ No. L 311, 14.11.02, p.3. Back
| 
