Select Committee on European Scrutiny Thirty-Seventh Report


2 Procedure for the adoption of measures relating to visas, asylum and immigration

(26128)

14497/04

Draft Decision providing for certain areas covered by Title IV of Part Three of the Treaty establishing the European Community to be governed by the procedure referred to in Article 251 of that Treaty

Legal baseArticle 67(2) EC; consultation; unanimity
Deposited in Parliament16 November 2004
DepartmentHome Office
Basis of considerationEM of 15 November 2004
Previous Committee ReportNone
To be discussed in CouncilDecember 2004
Committee's assessmentPolitically important
Committee's decisionFor debate in European Standing Committee B

Background

2.1 Title IV (Articles 61 to 69) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (the EC Treaty) makes provision for the adoption of measures concerning: the free movement of people within the Community; visas; asylum; immigration; judicial cooperation in civil matters having cross-border implications; and police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters.

2.2 The procedure for adopting such measures is specified in Article 67 of the Treaty. It provides that, subject to specific exceptions, "during a transitional period of five years following the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam" (that is, until May 2004), measures under Title IV of the Treaty were to be adopted by unanimity after consultation with the European Parliament. The following were the exceptions to this procedure:

  • measures relating to visas;
  • measures relating to civil matters other than family law; and
  • measures relating to asylum where the Council had already adopted legislation defining common rules and basic principles.

For these exceptional measures, the voting procedure since 1999 has been qualified majority voting (QMV).

2.3 Article 67(2) provides that, after May 2004, the Council, acting unanimously after consulting the European Parliament, must take a decision with a view to providing that measures, proposed under some or all of the Articles of Title IV, are to be adopted by QMV and co-decision with the European Parliament. The Treaty does not stipulate the date by which such a decision must be taken. Until the decision is taken, the procedure specified for the transitional period remains in force.

2.4 A Protocol to the EC Treaty provides that the United Kingdom is not bound by any measure under Title IV of the Treaty unless it opts into the measure before or after its adoption.

2.5 The Constitutional Treaty provides for co-decision and QMV for legislation on:

  • border checks, asylum and immigration;
  • judicial cooperation in civil matters (other than family law, for which unanimity would be required);
  • judicial cooperation in criminal matters (except that unanimity would be required for the creation of a European Prosecutor's Office, and a Member State would be able to refer to the European Council a framework law which, in its view, would affect fundamental aspects of its criminal justice system); and
  • police cooperation (except that unanimity would be required for framework laws).

2.6 Protocol 19 to the Constitutional Treaty provides that the United Kingdom would not be bound by legislation on border checks, asylum, immigration, judicial cooperation in civil matters or police cooperation unless the United Kingdom opted into it.

The document

2.7 At its meeting on 4/5 November 2004, the European Council asked the Council, not later than 1 April 2005, to adopt a decision based on Article 67(2) of the EC Treaty that co-decision with the European Parliament and QMV should be the procedure for the adoption of measures on crossing the Community's external and internal borders, on Member States sharing the burden of receiving refugees and displaced persons, and on illegal immigration and residence. But the European Council took the view that, pending the entry into force of the Constitutional Treaty, the Council should continue to act by unanimity in the adoption of measures on legal migration of third country nationals to and between Member States.

2.8 The draft Decision gives effect to the European Council's request from 1 April 2005 or from the first day of the month following the adoption of the Decision, whichever is the sooner.

The Government's view

2.9 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Home Office (Caroline Flint) tells us that the Government intends to opt into the Decision. The Government will continue to opt into Title IV measures which are in the interests of the United Kingdom. It is "keen to see such measures adopted without the delays experienced under unanimous voting in a Council of 25 Member States. The decision also does not affect the UK's frontiers protocol, which allows us to maintain our own border controls".

2.10 The Minister adds that the Dutch Presidency would like to adopt this Decision by the end of the Presidency. The last opportunity would be as an A point (i.e. without debate) at the Fisheries Council on 22/23 December.

Conclusion

2.11 As we understand the position, qualified majority voting is already the procedure for measures on the following matters:

  • visas;
  • asylum (except measures on minimum standards for procedures for granting and withdrawing refugee status); and
  • civil law matters except family law.

The proposed Decision would add the following matters to the measures for which QMV and co-decision is the procedure:

  • illegal immigration and illegal residence and the return of illegal migrants and residents;
  • burden sharing;
  • checks on the crossing of the Community's external border and internal borders (but the United Kingdom would retain control over its own borders); and
  • common standards and basic principles for granting or withdrawing refugee status when the current draft Directive on the subject has been adopted.

Unanimity would remain the procedure for measures on legal migration, on police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and on family law. And the United Kingdom would not be bound by any new measure under Title IV unless the Government had expressly opted into it.

2.12 On the one hand, the EC Treaty clearly stated that the requirement for unanimity for Title IV measures was for a five-year transitional period, after which the Council is required to decide whether the procedure should become QMV for measures to be adopted under some or all of the Articles of that Title. Some Title IV matters which affect national sovereignty — such as visas and most aspects of asylum — are already subject to QMV. And QMV might facilitate the adoption of measures which are in the United Kingdom's interest.

2.13 On the other hand, the matters where unanimity would cease to be required — such as illegal immigration and illegal residence and returns — affect national sovereignty, and adoption by QMV would provide less of a safeguard for Member States which objected to a measure and which (unlike the United Kingdom) had no right to decide whether to be bound by it.

2.14 In view of the political importance of the draft Decision, we recommend the document for early debate in European Standing Committee B, bearing in mind the wish of the Dutch Presidency to put the proposal to the Council in December for adoption.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004
Prepared 1 December 2004