1 Education and training:
key competences
| (a)
(27000)
13425/05
COM(05) 548
(b)
(27473)
—
| (a)
Draft Recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning
(b)
Revised draft Recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning
|
| Legal base | Articles 149(4) and 150(4) EC; co-decision; QMV
|
| Department | Education and Skills
|
| Basis of consideration | (b) Minister's letter of 9 May 2006
|
| Previous Committee Report | (a) HC 34-xxvi (2005-06), para 9 (26 April 2006)
(b) None
|
| To be discussed in Council | 19 May 2006
|
| Committee's assessment | Legally and politically important
|
| Committee's decision | (a) Cleared
(b) For debate in European Standing Committee
|
Previous scrutiny
1.1 Last December, we considered document (a), a draft Recommendation
aimed at ensuring that, by the time they leave compulsory education,
all young people have been offered the means to develop eight
"key competences" .[1]
1.2 The Commission cited Articles 149 and 150 of
the EC Treaty as the legal bases for the proposal. Article 149(1)
provides that:
"The Community shall contribute to the development
of quality education by encouraging cooperation between Member
States and, if necessary, by supporting and supplementing their
action, while fully respecting the responsibility of the Member
States for the content of teaching and the organisation of education
systems and their cultural and linguistic diversity."
1.3 Article 149(4) authorises the Council to adopt
recommendations in order to contribute to the achievement of the
objectives of the Article. Recommendations are not binding on
Member States.
1.4 Article 150 provides that the Community is to
implement a vocational training policy to support and supplement
the action of the Member States. The Council may adopt measures
to contribute to the achievement of the Article's objectives,
excluding the harmonisation of national laws.
1.5 The Commission's explanatory memorandum on document
(a) said that the draft Recommendation:
"defines the key competences needed by all
citizens in knowledge-based economies and societies. It acknowledges
that implementation decisions are best taken at national, regional
and/or local level. It calls for Member States to ensure the acquisition
of key competences by all by the end of initial education and
training and … encourages them to tackle educational disadvantage."
[2]
1.6 The proposed key competences concern:
i) communication in the mother tongue;
ii) communication in foreign languages;
iii) mathematical competence and basic competences
in science and technology;
iv) digital competence (that is, competence in
the use of computers);
v) learning to learn;
vi) social and civic competences;
vii) entrepreneurship; and
viii) cultural expression (including an understanding
of the cultural and linguistic diversity of Europe).
1.7 The Annex to document (a) contains a definition
of each competence and a statement of the knowledge, skills and
attitudes each of them requires.
1.8 The Minister for Lifelong Learning, Further and
Higher Education at the Department for Education and Skills (Bill
Rammell) told us that, in recent years, policy initiatives in
the UK have had a strong focus on the basic skills of literacy;
numeracy; communication and social skills; and information and
computer technologies. The eight key competences proposed in document
(a) are broadly compatible with UK policy. He added, however,
that the Government had reservations about the definitions of
some of the competences.
1.9 We asked the Minister for his views on:
- whether Articles 149 and 150
of the EC Treaty provide an appropriate legal base for the draft
Recommendation;
- whether the proposed Recommendation conflicts
with respect for the responsibility of each Member State to decide
for itself the contents of teaching and the organisation of its
education system; and
- why a Recommendation is necessary.
1.10 On 19 April, the Minister replied. He told us
that the common European key competences could be "a useful
tool to facilitate national reforms and exchange of best practice
between Member States". He also said that, during the negotiations
on document (a), the Government had secured amendments to the
recitals which would bring the Recommendation fully within the
scope of Articles 149 and 150 of the EC Treaty. Moreover, in his
view, the amendments made it clear that the proposed Recommendation
would not affect the national curriculum "unless Member States
choose to refer to it when undertaking any curriculum reforms".
1.11 The Minister told us that the revised draft
of document (a) was to be considered by Coreper on 3 May and the
Education Council on 19 May.
1.12 When we resumed consideration of the draft Recommendation
on 26 April, we were unable to form a view on whether Articles
149 and 150 of the EC Treaty would provide an appropriate legal
base for the proposal because we had not been provided with a
revised text showing the amendments agreed in the working group.
For the same reason, we were unable to form our own view on whether
the Recommendation would conflict with respect for national responsibility
to define the content of teaching. Moreover, it appeared to us
that the Minister had not replied to our question about why the
Recommendation is necessary. We decided, therefore, to keep document
(a) under scrutiny pending receipt of the revised text and the
Minister's reply to our question.
The Minister's letter of 9 May 2006
1.13 The Minister encloses the revised text of the
document (document (b)) and gives us three reasons for the Government's
belief that the Recommendation is necessary:
- to give effect to the Conclusions
of the European Councils in 2000, 2003 and 2005 about the need
to define basic skills;
- because the EU's Employment Guidelines for Growth
and Jobs call for the adaptation of education and training systems
through better identification of occupational needs and key competences
as part of Member States' reform programmes; and
- because the proposed Recommendation would "provide
a common point of reference for Member States either when choosing
to undertake their own reforms of education and training systems,
or when learning about what has happened in other countries through
the open method of coordination".
1.14 The Minister tells us that, while Recommendations
are not binding, they carry a moral and political obligation.
So the Government aimed during negotiations to make sure that
the Recommendation would be fully within the scope of Articles
149 and 150 of the EC Treaty. He refers in particular to the amended
version of the Recommendation itself in document (b); it says
that the European Parliament and the Council:
"Hereby recommend that Member States use
the Key Competences for Lifelong Learning — A European
Framework in the Annex hereto as a reference tool, with a
view to ensuring ...".
He considers that it is clear from this that "the
Recommendation will not impact on the national curriculum unless
Member States choose to refer to it when undertaking any curriculum
reforms".
1.15 The Minister tells us that the French delegation
had proposed that the following paragraph should be added to the
definition of the knowledge required for the Civic Competence:
"Knowledge of the origins of the European
idea, the history of European integration, the EU institutions
and how they work, and the rights, principles and values underlying
the European project are also essential."
He says that the Government and the majority of other
Member States had opposed this because the amended text would
place "greater emphasis on EU as opposed to national or wider
international history and democratic institutions". When
the matter was discussed by Coreper on 3 May, agreement was reached
on a compromise text, which we quote in our Conclusion.
Conclusion
1.16 Article 149(1) of the EC Treaty could not
be clearer: any contribution by the Community to the development
of education must fully respect the responsibility of the Member
States for the content of teaching. In our view, the proposed
Recommendation conflicts with that requirement. It prescribes
eight key competences that all young people must be offered the
means to develop by the time they leave education and training.
The clear intention is that all Member States should implement
the Recommendation and that the content of teaching should conform
to it. We are not persuaded that the revised text in document
(b) cures this defect.
1.17 We are particularly concerned about the section
about the knowledge required for the Civic Competence. The compromise
text agreed at Coreper says:
"Civic competence is based on knowledge
of the concepts of democracy, citizenship and civil rights, including
how they are expressed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of
the European Union and international declarations and applied
by various institutions at the local, regional, national, European
and international levels. It includes knowledge of contemporary
events, as well as the main events and trends in national, European
and world history. In addition, an awareness of the aims, values
and policies of social and political movements should be developed.
Knowledge of European integration and of the EU's structures,
main objectives and values is also essential, as well as an awareness
of European diversity and cultural identity."
1.18 We draw special attention to the compromise
text because:
- it illustrates our view
that the proposed Recommendation conflicts with Article 149 of
the EC Treaty; and
- we question whether it would be acceptable,
in principle, for the Council and European Parliament to seek
to determine what history children should be taught.
1.19 We recommend, therefore, that the legal and
political issues raised by the draft Recommendation should be
debated in European Standing Committee.
1.20 We are, however, content to clear document
(a) from scrutiny because it has been superseded by document (b).
1 See HC 34-xiii (2005-06), para 4 (14 December 2005). Back
2
Document (a), pages 6 and 7. Back
| 
