5 Protection of critical infrastructure
against terrorism
| (26072)
13979/04
COM(04) 702
| Commission Communication: Critical Infrastructure Protection in the fight against terrorism
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 20 October 2004
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 1 November 2004
|
| Department | Home Office |
| Basis of consideration | EM of 21 December 2004
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Legally and politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
5.1 In June 2004, the European Council asked the Commission and
the High Representative to prepare an overall strategy to protect
critical infrastructure. "Critical infrastructure" for
these purposes consists of those facilities and networks, services
and assets the destruction or disruption of which would have a
serious impact on the health, safety or security of economic well-being
of citizens or the effective functioning of government in the
Member States. Such infrastructure includes systems for electricity
and gas production and distribution, telephone exchanges and other
communications systems, sewage plants, food distribution and key
government services.
The Commission Communication
5.2 The Communication describes the action the Commission is currently
taking for the protection of critical infrastructure and proposes
a number of additional measures.
5.3 In relation to the action the Commission is currently
taking, the Communication refers to a technical annex which provides
"a sector based overview of Commission achievements accomplished
so far". The Communication concludes that these "show
that the Commission has acquired considerable experience in this
field". (However, it appears the Commission has decided
that such detailed information need not be circulated. The annex
is classified and has not been released with the rest of the Communication.)
5.4 The Communication proposes a European Programme
for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP). It acknowledges
the principle of subsidiarity, considering that "Europe must
concentrate its efforts on the protection of infrastructures having
a transboundary effect and let the others under the sole responsibility
of the Member States but under a common framework". The
Commission proposes to report progress to the other institutions
each calendar year, analysing for each sector "the developments
of community work in the field of risk evaluation, development
of protection techniques, or ongoing/envisaged legal actions".
It also proposes, if necessary, "updates and horizontal [organisational]
measures for which there is a need for harmonisation, coordination
or cooperation". Such reports and measures would form the
basis of a European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection
(EPCIP).
5.5 The Commission wishes to create network of critical
infrastructure protection specialists from the Member States,
to be known as the Critical Intrastructure Warning Information
Network (CIWIN), which would be set up as soon as possible in
2005. It is envisaged that the network would assist in stimulating
an exchange of information on shared threats and vulnerabilities
and on appropriate measures and strategies to mitigate risk.
It is also envisaged that the network would be assisted, in cases
where sectoral standards or international norms do not exist,
by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) and also,
at an international level, through the International Organization
for Standardisation (ISO).
5.6 The Communication acknowledges that the governments
of Member States will continue to develop and maintain databases
of nationally significant critical infrastructure and "would
be responsible for the development, validation and audit of relevant
plans and so ensure continuity of services under their jurisdictions".
However, the Communication also states that "when laying
down the EPCIP the Commission would put forward suggestions as
to what should be the minimum content and format of such databases
and how they should be inter-connected".
5.7 The Communication notes that "Member States
should control the overall process while the Commission should
ensure an equal implementation throughout the Union with adequate
inspection systems".
The Government's view
5.8 In her Explanatory Memorandum of 21 December
2004, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Home Office
(Caroline Flint) notes that the model proposed for systematic
analysis of critical national infrastructure, associated risks
and the mechanism for ensuring proportionate protective security
mirrors those already in place in the UK. The Minister adds that
the Government supports the creation of the CIWIN group of experts
and the objective of extending proportionate protective security
throughout the EU and informs us that UK experts will attend and
assist in the collective decision-making on the suggested criteria
for databases and the mechanisms for Member States providing assurances
about the extent of protective security measures.
5.9 The Minister notes that the Communication suggests
that the EPCIP will promote a forum where the constraints of competition,
liability and information sensitivity can be balanced with the
benefits of a more secure infrastructure. The Minister comments
that "there will need to be further work to clarify and reach
agreement on the information to be included in the EPCIP (including
technical annexes) and authorised access to that information".
5.10 The Minister adds that the UK has made it a
Presidency target "to get the first EU Programme on Critical
Infrastructure Protection agreed by [the] end [of] 2005"
and that it has "notified the Commission that their work
needs to fit to this timetable".
Conclusion
5.11 The protection of critical infrastructure
is plainly of key importance to national security, but we do not
find the advantages of Commission involvement in this field to
be self-evident. We note that the Commission claims considerable
experience in this field, but that the evidence on which this
view is based has been withheld from its Communication. We ask
the Minister to tell us if she agrees with the assessment made
by the Commission and to describe the added contribution which
would be made by Commission involvement along the lines suggested
in the Communication.
5.12 We note that the Communication envisages
proposals by the Commission for "horizontal measures for
which there is a need for harmonisation, coordination or cooperation"
and ask the Minister if she would explain what legal basis there
might be for such measures under the EU, EC or Euratom Treaties.
We make the same request with reference to the statement by the
Commission that it "should ensure an equal implementation
throughout the Union with adequate inspections systems".
5.13 We shall hold the document under scrutiny
pending the Minister's reply.
| 
