Select Committee on European Scrutiny Eighth Report


4 Civil protection against terrorist attack

(26073)

13980/04

COM(04) 701

Commission Communication to the Council on preparedness and consequence management in the fight against terrorism

Legal base
Document originated20 October 2004
Deposited in Parliament1 November 2004
DepartmentHome Office
Basis of considerationEM of 21 December 2004
Previous Committee ReportNone; but see (26072) 13979/04: HC 38-v (2004-05), para 5 (26 January 2005)
To be discussed in CouncilNo date set
Committee's assessmentPolitically important
Committee's decisionNot cleared; further information requested

Background

4.1 The European Council of June 2004 asked the Commission and the Council to assess Member States' capacities to prevent and cope with terrorist attacks and to enhance existing cooperation on civil protection. The Communication is the Commission's response to that request. It reviews the action which the Commission is taking and proposes additional measures.

The Commission Communication

4.2 The Communication notes that the Community Civil Protection Mechanism was established in October 2001 as a means of ensuring cooperation and mutual assistance between the 25 EU Member States, three European Free Trade Area (EFTA) countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) and Bulgaria and Romania as EU candidate countries. The Mechanism is available to deal with the consequences of any disaster, whether its cause is natural or due to acts of terrorism. The Commission has a central co-ordinating role in receiving requests from Member States affected by a disaster or emergency, sending the requests to other Member States and passing any responses back to the requesting country.

4.3 The Communication also notes the training element of the Mechanism, with courses being run for national experts and team leaders involving simulation exercises in France, Denmark and Belgium and exchanges of experts to improve the capacity of Member States to respond to disasters. The Commission also maintains a database of information supplied by the Member States and relating to assets and capabilities available for assistance at European level. The database established by the EU Military Committee relating to military assistance in the event of terrorist attacks has also been made available.

4.4 The Communication states that a terrorist attack which involves explosive, chemical or biological agents could be "hugely disruptive" even if it does not kill or maim or involve "unlimited catastrophe" agents such as smallpox. The Communication points out that action in the health field is intended to cover a range of activities from detection and risk assessment through to decontamination and disposal of waste. A Health Security Committee has been set up to exchange information on threats related to health, to coordinate health preparedness and emergency response plans as well as to advise on the management of risks. A secure 24 hours/7 days a week rapid alert system has been established to link the Committee with the Commission. A network has also been created between seven laboratories in five EU Member States which have the capacity to handle and examine high-risk agents such as anthrax, tularemia and smallpox. The Communication notes that information has been shared on stocks of bioagent vaccines, antibiotics, antidotes and anti-virals in the Member States and that agreement has been reached on the information which needs to be collected on the medical resources required for mutual assistance in the event of medical disasters.

4.5 The Communication notes that planning for preparedness for and response to terrorist attacks has been a key priority and that a compilation of national emergency plans has been devised. EU-wide evaluation exercises will be carried out in 2005 in respect of smallpox and pandemic influenza. Also, Member States and the Commission are developing prediction models on the progress of diseases and dispersal agents under different scenarios with a wide range of demographic and geographical variables. The Commission has also developed a training programme covering the investigation of outbreaks of communicable diseases and forensic epidemiology. The Communication notes that the future European Union Centre for Disease Prevention and Control will provide disease surveillance as well as advice to Member States and the EU.

4.6 The Communication reviews the various rapid alert systems operated by the Commission (which include MIC — the Monitoring and Information Centre to facilitate mutual assistance between participating countries, ECURIE — the alert system for radiological emergencies, BICHAT — for biological and chemical attacks and threats, RAPEX — covering the non-food aspects of consumer health and safety, RASFF — consumer health in relation to food and animal feed, EWRS — communicable diseases, EUROPHYT — phytosanitary network for interception of organisms harmful to plants, SHIFT — health controls on imports of veterinary concern, and ADNS — animal health) and proposes a consolidation within a secure general alert system (ARGUS) to link all specialised systems at EU level. The Communication explains that the new system would respect the specific characteristics, competence and expertise of the existing systems, which would continue to carry out their present functions.

4.7 The Communication also proposes the establishment of a central Crisis Centre within the Commission to bring together representatives of all the relevant Commission services during an emergency. The Crisis Centre would co-ordinate Commission efforts to evaluate options for action and decide on responses.

4.8 The Communication argues that the "only missing link" in the present network of alert systems managed at EU level is "an alert system concerning public order and security as regards either preparation for or response to crises involving law enforcement". It states that "a European law enforcement network (LEN) will be established and it should be managed by EUROPOL. It should be in place by 2005. It will consist of a dedicated 24h/7 days-a-week multi-layered access network, to serve in particular the EU law enforcement community, using the current secure communication channels of the Europol network". The Communication goes on to explain the detailed operation of LEN and states that Member States will need to identify a responsible national contact point to issue and receive alerts and to take further action where necessary.

The Government's view

4.9 In her Explanatory Memorandum of 21 December 2004, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Home Office (Caroline Flint) explains that the Government supports the principle of mutual support for civil protection, both for preparedness and consequence management. The Minister also explains that the Government accepts that benefits will come from more effective internal co-ordination within EU systems and institutions.

4.10 The Minister adds that the Government has some concerns about the effectiveness and value of the complex asset databases which the Commission is creating, but that it has agreed to supply information on assets that could be made available to other countries in an emergency without affecting the UK's resilience if attacked.

4.11 The Minister notes that the Commission has a large number of alert systems and agrees that there is a case for them to be rationalised, but also notes that it is unclear at present whether the proposed ARGUS system is the best way forward. The Minister observes that the Commission has not explained clearly how it will improve current arrangements. As far as the Commission's internal Crisis Centre is concerned, the Minister comments that there is an argument for better internal co-ordination within the Commission's services, provided this does not create another level of bureaucracy and does not impinge on the proper roles of the governments of the Member States.

4.12 On the creation of a law enforcement agency network by June 2005, the Minister comments as follows:

"It is unclear that the Commission had discussed this proposal thoroughly with Europol and the other law enforcement agencies before issuing the Communication. Wide ranging consultation will be needed before final decisions were taken."

Conclusion

4.13 We thank the Minister for her helpful Explanatory Memorandum, and we agree with the assessments which the Government has made.

4.14 In relation to the proposal for a European Union law enforcement network managed by Europol, we were concerned that the Communication appeared to treat this as an accomplished fact rather than a suggestion for action. We were therefore taken aback to learn from the Minister that the Commission may not have thoroughly discussed this matter even with Europol before issuing its Communication. We ask the Minister for a fuller account of the consultations which have been conducted and if the Minister intends to raise with the Commission its apparent failure to consult on this issue.

4.15 We shall hold the document under scrutiny pending the Minister's reply.


 
previous page contents next page

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

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 1 March 2005