6 Education and training programme 2007-13
| (25846)
11587/04
COM(04) 474
+ ADD 1
| Draft Decision establishing an integrated action programme in the field of lifelong learning
|
| Legal base | Articles 149(4) and 150(4) EC; co-decision; QMV
|
| Department | Education and Skills
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter 27 October 2005
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 34-vi (2005-06), para 6 (19 October 2005)
|
| To be discussed in Council | 15 November 2005
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Budgetary provisions not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
6.1 The European Community currently has four main education and
training programmes. They expire at the end of 2006. On 19 October,
we considered a draft Decision to establish, for 2007-13, a single
Integrated Programme for lifelong learning.[14]
Its total budget would be €13.6 billion, about three and
a half times as much as the combined budgets of the present programmes
between 2000-06.
6.2 The objectives of the new Programme would include
contributing to the development of lifelong learning; the promotion
of innovation; and a European dimension in education and vocational
training; helping to improve the attractiveness and accessibility
of lifelong learning; reinforcing the contribution of lifelong
learning to active citizenship and gender equality; promoting
competitiveness, employability and language learning; and encouraging
tolerance for other peoples and cultures.
6.3 The Integrated Programme would be implemented
through the six programmes :
- Comenius
to develop understanding of the diversity of European cultures
among the children and staff of primary and secondary schools;
- Erasmus to
support higher education and advanced vocational training;
- Leonardo da Vinci to
support all other aspects of vocational education and training;
- Grundtvig to
support adult education;
- Jean Monnet
to stimulate teaching and research related to European integration
and support institutions and associations concerned with European
integration and with education and training with a European dimension;
and
- Transversal to
support activities that cut across the other programmes (for example,
the development of language learning materials, innovative approaches
to teaching and dissemination of good practice).
6.4 The Government told the previous Committee that
it broadly supported the proposed Programme.[15]
Our predecessors asked the Government for further information
and kept the draft Decision under scrutiny.
6.5 In his letters of 12 July and 12 October, the
Minister of State for Lifelong Learning, Further and Higher Education
at the Department of Education and Skills (Mr Bill Rammell) replied
to the previous Committee's questions and told us:
- about the minor amendments
which have been made to the draft Decision during the negotiations
and which are likely to be agreed by the Council in November;
- about the amendments proposed by the European
Parliament's Culture and Education Committee; and
- that the UK Presidency hopes to gain "partial
political agreement" to the draft Decision at the Council
in November: that is, agreement on the non-budgetary elements
of the proposal, while leaving aside those articles which concern
the budgetary amounts, or which are directly related to the budgetary
amount.
6.6 On 12 September the European Parliament's Culture
and Education Committee agreed proposals for 71 amendments to
the draft Decision. The Minister told us that some of the Committee's
proposals were virtually the same as those already agreed in the
Council negotiations. Others were minor and the Council was likely
to accept them in full or subject to drafting points. But some
of the Committee's proposals would affect the budget for the Programme.
For example, the Committee proposed that the total budget be increased
from €13.6 billion to €14.6 billion. The Minister said
that the Council would not take a view on the Committee's budgetary
proposals until after the total EU budget for 2007-13 had been
settled.
6.7 The Minister also said that European Parliament
was "set" to adopt the Culture and Education Committee's
opinion on 25 October. He would then write to us again.
6.8 On 19 October, we noted the Minister's comments
on our predecessors questions and concluded that we need not pursue
those points further. But there was another matter on which we
should be grateful for the Minister's comments. We asked him if
he is satisfied that the provisions on language learning in Articles
18, 28 and 37 of the draft Decision are consistent with the principle
of subsidiarity.
6.9 There were no questions that we needed to put
to the Minister about the amendments agreed so far in the Council
negotiations. We noted the Minister's remarks on the proposals
of the European Parliament's Culture and Education Committee.
We reserved comment until we knew what opinion the European Parliament
itself would adopt at its plenary meeting on 25 October.
6.10 We concluded that we could understand why the
Government and other Member States see benefit in reaching a partial
political agreement on the non-budgetary provisions of the draft
Decision on 15 November. We saw no need to object to such a partial
and provisional approach on the express understanding that consideration
of any provision of the document can, if necessary, be re-opened
in the light of the settlement of the EU's overall budget for
2007-13; that the Government provides us with timely progress
reports; and that the budgetary provisions of the document remain
under scrutiny.
The Minister's letter of 27 October 2005
6.11 In his letter of 27 October, the Minister replies
to our question about whether the provisions on language learning
in Articles 18, 28 and 37 of the draft Decision were consistent
with the principle of subsidiarity. He also tells us about the
amendments adopted by the European Parliament on 25 October.
6.12 He notes that Article 149(2) of the EC Treaty
provides that Community action should be aimed at "developing
the European dimension in education, particularly through the
teaching and dissemination of the languages of the Member States".
He also notes that one of the proposed objectives of the Comenius
and Leonardo da Vinci programmes is "to encourage the learning
of modern languages" (Article 18 and 28) and one of the proposed
objectives of the Transversal programme is "to promote language
learning and to support linguistic diversity in the Member States"
(Article 37). He adds that this emphasis on language learning
is precedented by the existing Socrates and Commenius programmes.
In his view, language learning should form an important part of
the new Lifelong Leaning Programme.
6.13 The Minister gives three reasons why he believes
that the proposed language provisions in Articles 18, 28 and 37
are consistent with the principle of subsidiarity:
- "The first concept of
subsidiarity states that the Community can take action only if
the objectives of the action cannot be sufficiently achieved by
Member States. The complexity of managing language learning activities,
some of which might be multilateral in nature, between such a
large number of Member States would be difficult for any individual
Member State to manage on its own. It is my view therefore that
[the] language learning activities in the Lifelong Learning Programme
falls [sic] within this first concept.
- There are also clear benefits to the end user
of Community involvement particularly in terms of spreading good
practice and innovation between different activities as well as
ensuring uniformity of general approach. This leads me to believe
that the Community can better achieve these activities than …
Member States and falls [sic] within the second concept
of subsidiarity.
- Lastly it is my view that the language learning
activities proposed in the Lifelong Learning Programme does [sic]
not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the Treaty objective
and so is proportionate."
6.14 Finally, the Minister tells us that on 25 October
the European Parliament made no changes to the opinion of its
Culture and Education Committee which would affect the proposed
partial political agreement. While the European Parliament made
some changes to the Committee's proposals on issues with budgetary
implications, those changes are outside the scope of the Partial
Political Agreement and will not be put to the Council on 15 November.
Conclusion
6.15 One of our main functions is to scrutinise
the lawfulness of proposals for legislation. That entails questioning
any provision which might not be consistent with the requirements
of subsidiarity specified in Article 5 of the EC Treaty and the
Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity
and proportionality. It is evident from his letter of 27 October
that the Minister recognises the importance of this aspect of
scrutiny. We are grateful to him for setting out his opinion on
Articles 18, 28 and 37 so fully and for providing a clear statement
of his reasons for believing that the proposed provisions on language
learning satisfy the requirements of subsidiarity. We see no need
to pursue that issue further.
6.16 In our view, the amendments proposed by the
European Parliament's Culture and Education Committee, with the
exception of those with budgetary implications, were minor and
we can understand why they are acceptable to the Government. We
note that the European Council made no changes to those amendments
and that the other amendments, which would affect the budget,
will not be considered by the Council at its next meting. On that
basis, we confirm that we see no reason to object to the proposed
partial political agreement on the conditions set out in our previous
Report.
14 See headnote. Back
15
See HC 42-xxxi (03-04), para 2 (15 September 2004). Back
| 
