21 Funds for the management of migration
| (27541)
9930/06
COM(06) 123
| (i) Draft Decision establishing the European Refugee Fund for the period 2008-13 as part of the General programme "Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows"
(ii) Draft Decision establishing the External Borders Fund for 2007-13 as part of the General programme "Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows"
(iii) Draft Decision establishing the European Return Fund for 2008-13 as part of the General programme "Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows"
|
| Legal base | (i) Article 63(2)(b) EC; co-decision; QMV
(ii) Article 62(2) EC; co-decision; QMV
(iii) Article 63(3)(b) EC; co-decision; QMV
|
| Department | Home Office |
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letters of 15 and 25 May 2007
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 34-xxxii (2005-06), para 8 (21 June 2006)
|
| Discussed in Council | 7-8 May 2007
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | (All) Cleared
|
Previous scrutiny
21.1 In July 2005, we considered the first drafts of Decisions
to modify and extend to 2013 the existing European Refugee Fund
and to create three new Funds:
- the External Borders Fund;
- the European Fund for the Integration of third
country nationals; and
- the European Return Fund.[63]
21.2 The current European Refugee Fund for
2005-10 provides financial support for Member States' work with
people who already have, or have applied for, refugee status or
protected person status. The draft Decision would extend the Fund
to the end of 2013.
21.3 Once people have entered the EU by crossing
the external borders, they can move freely throughout the Schengen
area. So the effective protection of the external borders is in
the interests of all Member States in the Schengen area. But the
burden of protecting them falls disproportionately on the minority
of Member States which have the longest external land and sea
borders. Accordingly, the Commission proposed a draft Decision
to establish an External Borders Fund. Member States would
be eligible for grants from the Fund towards the cost of border
control-related expenditure.
21.4 The purpose of the proposed European Fund
for Integration would be to provide financial support for
the efforts of Member States to enable third country nationals
(other than refugees) who are legally resident in their areas
to settle and take an active part in all aspects of the life of
the host communities.
21.5 The objectives of the European Return Fund
would be to improve Member States' management of the return of
illegally-resident third country nationals, strengthen cooperation
between Member States and promote common standards for both voluntary
and enforced returns. Grants from the Fund would be available
towards, for example, the costs of measures to assist the integration
of returned people in their countries of origin and the cost of
temporary accommodation and travel and subsistence for returned
people and their escorts.
21.6 The Government told us that it intended to opt
into the draft Decisions on the proposed Refugee, Integration
and Return Funds But the United Kingdom would be precluded from
opting into the External Borders Fund Decision because it does
not take part in the provisions of the Schengen acquis
about the management of the external borders.[64]
We decided to keep the four draft Decisions under scrutiny pending
reports on the progress of the negotiations.[65]
21.7 In June 2006, we considered:
- a revised text of the draft
Decision on the European Refugee Fund;
- an amendment to one Article of the draft Decision
on the External Borders Fund and a revised text of the Financial
Statement; and
- an amendment to one Article of the draft Decision
on the European Return Fund and a revised text of the Financial
Statement.
21.8 The main purpose of these proposals was to reduce
the budgets of the Funds in the light of the settlement of the
EU's total budget for 2007-13.
21.9 The Minister of State for Immigration, Citizenship
and Nationality at the Home Office (Mr Liam Byrne) told us that
the proposed changes to the budgets were acceptable to the Government.
Moreover, the Government also supported the other amendments to
the draft Decision on the Refugee Fund subject to a few detailed
points.
21.10 We decided to clear the first drafts of the
four Decisions but to keep the three revised texts under scrutiny
pending a report from the Minister on the further negotiations
on the proposals.[66]
The Minister's letters of 15 and 25 May 2007
21.11 The Minister tells us that he sent us a progress
report in September 2006. But we did not receive it.
21.12 The Minister's letters of 15 and 25 May say
that the texts of the Decisions on the European Refugee Fund and
the Return Fund have not changed since we considered them in June
2006. Both Decisions were adopted by the Council at its meeting
on 7-8 May. The Government voted against their adoption because
the documents were still under scrutiny. But the specified procedure
for both Decisions was Qualified Majority Voting and a sufficient
majority of Member States was in favour of adoption.
21.13 The same Council meeting adopted the Decision
to establish the External Borders Fund. The Government took no
part in the adoption because the UK is excluded from the Decision
because it does not take part in the relevant provisions of the
Schengen acquis.
21.14 The Minister also tells us that the substance
of the draft Decision to establish an Integration Fund remains
unchanged, although there have been some acceptable minor amendments.
The revised text is enclosed with his letter of 25 May. The Decision
is likely to be put to the JHA Council meeting on 12-13 June for
adoption. The Government supports the proposal to set up the Integration
Fund and the Minister asks us to clear the draft Decision so that
the UK can take part in its adoption.
Conclusion
21.15 We are grateful to the Minister for his
helpful letters. We are glad that the Government voted against
the adoption of Decisions on the Refugee and Return Funds at the
Council in May because they were still under scrutiny. But the
Government could not prevent the Council from adopting the Decisions
by Qualified Majority Voting and it did not breach the scrutiny
reserve. We now formally clear the Refugee and Return Fund Decisions
from scrutiny.
21.16 We also clear the Draft Decision on the
External Borders Fund from which the UK is excluded.
21.17 We need to be satisfied, however, that the
legal base for the revised draft of the Decision on the Integration
Fund is appropriate. We ask the Minister to explain to us why
he considers that it is. Pending his reply, we expect the Government
not to take part in the adoption of the proposal.
63 See HC 34-i (2005-06), para 28 (4 July 2005). Back
64
The main aim of the Schengen Convention of 1990 was to abolish
checks at the borders between the original signatories (France,
Germany and the Benelux countries) while strengthening control
of the external borders of the Schengen area. Subsequently, a
large number of "flanking" measures were adopted on,
for example, police cooperation in cross-border surveillance,
and a common format for visas. The collective name for the Convention
and subsequent agreements is "the Schengen acquis".
The UK and Ireland are not part of the Schengen area but participate
in some of the provisions of the acquis, such as those
on police and judicial cooperation and on narcotic drugs. Back
65
See HC 34-viii (2005-06), para 7 (2 November 2005). Back
66
See HC 34-xxxii (2005-06), para 8 (21 June 2006). Back
| 
