18 Prevention, preparedness and response
to terrorist attacks
| (26076)
13978/04
COM(04) 698
| Commission Communication on prevention, preparedness and response to terrorist attacks
|
| Legal base | — |
| Department | Home Office |
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 23 March 2005
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 38-vii (2004-05), para 3 (2 February 2005); and see (26072) 13979/04: HC 38-v (2004-05), para 5 (26 January 2005)
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared, but further information requested
|
Background
18.1 We considered this Communication from the Commission on 9
February 2005, noting that it followed the adoption by the European
Council on 18 June 2004 of a plan of action on combating terrorism.
The plan of action identified a number of priority issues, including
the prevention of terrorist attacks and management of their consequences,
the protection of critical infrastructures and the financing of
terrorism.
18.2 The Commission's Communication referred to a
pilot project agreed by the European Parliament to support the
financing of projects intended to help the victims to recover
and "to raise awareness of the public against terrorist threat".
The Commission suggested a burden-sharing mechanism to share
the losses caused by a terrorist attack, such as occurred on the
World Trade Center in New York, between all Member States. The
Commission also indicated that it would contribute to honouring
the victims of the bomb attacks in Madrid on 11 March 2004 by
"helping to make this day a day of civic and democratic debate
on securing freedom", and that it would contribute to the
production of a Memorial Report describing the measures taken
by the EU between 11 March 2004 and 11 March 2005, their state
of implementation and the main challenges.
18.3 We agreed with the Minister's caution about
the proposal for an agreement to share the cost of a terrorist
attack causing substantial loss such as occurred in New York in
2001, and thought this objective was unrealistic. We asked the
Minister if the Government agreed with the Commission about the
need to finance pilot projects to "raise awareness of the
public against terrorist threat". We also asked the Minister
to explain how the victims of the Madrid bombing in 2004 would
be assisted by the publication of a Memorial Report along the
lines suggested by the Commission, since this seemed to us an
empty and bureaucratic gesture involving public expenditure which
could have been applied elsewhere. We also asked the Minister
if the Government agreed with the Commission's proposition that
consistency and effectiveness in combating terrorism can be achieved
only by better "mainstreaming" of police and judicial
cooperation into the Commission's overall policies.
The Minister's reply
18.4 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at
the Home Office (Caroline Flint) addresses our concerns in her
letter of 23 March 2005. The Minister also attaches to her letter
a copy of the Memorial Report.
18.5 On the question of there being any need to finance
pilot projects to "raise awareness of the public against
terrorist threat", the Minister replies that she has not
had sight of any specific proposals and so considers herself unable
to comment on the substance or content of these initiatives. However,
the Minister comments that she is "as always, anxious that
the Community budget is spent in the most effective way".
She adds:
"While I agree with the Commission conceptually
that 'raising public awareness' must be central to the fight against
terrorism, it is clearly the responsibility of individual Member
States to determine how best to inform their citizens of the threat,
which will vary from one country to another. Nevertheless, we
believe the EU can add significant value to the efforts of Member
States, and continue [to] take a strong interest in working with
the Commission to produce proportionate and sensible proposals."
18.6 With regard to the Memorial Report, the Minister
states that she understands our concern that publication of the
report "may not have directly assisted the victims of the
Madrid attacks". Nevertheless, she considers that "it
was a useful exercise in that it provides the context for the
EU's response to the threat and a summary of current and future
activity" and that "it is a step towards the 'conceptual
framework' that the Government believes is necessary to support
EU counter-terrorism work and lead to better strategic prioritisation".
18.7 The Minister explains that the proposals which
are annexed to the Memorial Report are largely based on previous
Commission Communications, but notes that reference is also made
to a proposal for a binding legal instrument requiring Member
States to designate "national correspondents" within
their security and intelligence services. She comments that this
proposal is new and that the Government has concerns that it may
exceed the scope of Article 4 of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP,
which is concerned with police and judicial cooperation. She states
that the Government will seek further clarification from the Commission
on the competence of the European Union to legislate on such matters.
18.8 On the Commission's proposition that consistency
and effectiveness in combating terrorism can be achieved only
by better "mainstreaming" of police and judicial cooperation
into the Commission's overall policies, the Minister replies that
the Government believes that "the fight against terrorism
is in part delivered through effective police and judicial cooperation,
including at EU level". She adds:
"The Constitutional Treaty should help to improve
institutional coherence between the various policy positions and
legislative proposals that the Commission prepares, as well as
improve decision-making in an EU of 25 Member States. Nevertheless,
while greater co-ordination and coherence between the various
policy positions is important, national security remains the primary
concern of the Member State, and any EU 'mainstreaming' would
need to complement and support this position."
Conclusion
18.9 We thank the Minister for her reply and for
supplying us with a copy of the "Memorial Report". This
is a vacuous and self-congratulatory document, containing such
platitudes as "the threat of terrorism is complex and is
sometimes perceived as obscure and unpredictable" and "our
fearless and democratic response to the attacks of March 11 revealed
a certain maturity that ought to make us proud", with only
a brief paragraph devoted to the victims of terrorist attack,
despite this being the ostensible reason for the report. In relation
to such victims, the report asserts that it is a "testimonial
of the EU's commitment towards the victims of terrorism and their
loved ones" and makes a brief mention of financial support
by the Commission for programmes "some of which are aimed
specifically at helping the victims overcome their painful experience
while others have more of an educational, informative or academic
aim".
18.10 We welcome the Minister's comment that the
Community budget should be spent in the most effective way, and
we share her concern that the Commission may be using this occasion
to propose legislation at EU level relating to security and intelligence
services. Although we see no purpose in holding this document
under scrutiny any longer, we ask the Minister to inform us, in
due course, of the results of the Government's attempts to seek
clarification of the legislative competence of the European Union
in this sensitive area.
18.11 With this proviso, we clear the document.
| 
