11 EU Home Affairs Funds for 2014-20
| (33394)
17285/11
COM(11) 752
| Draft Regulation laying down general provisions on the Asylum and Migration Fund and on the instrument for financial support for police cooperation, preventing and combating crime, and crisis management
|
| Legal base | Articles 78(2), 79(2), 79(4), 82(1), 84 and 87(2) TFEU; co-decision; QMV
|
| Document originated | 15 November 2011
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 25 November 2011
|
| Department | Home Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 29 November 2011
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| Discussion in Council | 13 December 2011
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
11.1 In its Communication, Building an open and secure Europe:
the home budget for 2014-20, the Commission sets out its proposals
for funding EU home affairs policies under the next Multiannual
Financial Framework ("the MFF").[66]
One of its principal objectives is to simplify the existing funding
structure by reducing the number of EU funding instruments and
by establishing a set of overarching provisions applicable to
all EU home affairs funding. It has therefore proposed the creation
of two EU Funds for 2014-20—the Asylum and Migration Fund
and the Internal Security Fund—which would replace six existing
funding instruments.[67]
The two new Funds would be based on four Regulations comprising:
- a single, horizontal Regulation containing general provisions
on the programming, management and control of both Funds;
- a Regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration
Fund and setting out the resources available and the objectives
of EU funding; and
- two Regulations together establishing the Internal
Security Fund; the first setting out the resources available and
the objectives of EU funding for police cooperation, action to
prevent and combat crime, and crisis management; the second covering
the common visa policy and management of the EU's external borders.
11.2 The Commission has proposed an overall EU home
affairs budget of €10,911 million for the period 2014-20,
broken down as follows:
- Asylum and Migration Fund —
€3,869 million;
- Internal Security Fund — €4,648 million;
- Existing large-scale IT systems managed by the
newly established IT Agency — €822 million; and
- EU Agencies (Europol, Frontex, the European Asylum
Support Office, the European Police College and the European Monitoring
Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction) — €1,572 million.[68]
The draft Regulation
11.3 The draft Regulation is a horizontal instrument
establishing general rules on partnership, programming, reporting,
monitoring and evaluation, and on management and control systems,
which are applicable to both of the proposed new Funds and which
are intended to ensure common "delivery mechanisms"
for all EU home affairs funding. The draft Regulation does not
define the scope and purpose of the two Funds or the resources
available for each one, as these are set out in separate, Fund-specific
Regulations.[69]
11.4 The legal bases proposed for the draft Regulation
provide for EU action in the fields of asylum, legal and illegal
immigration, the integration of legally resident third country
nationals, judicial cooperation in criminal matters, crime prevention
and cooperation between police and law enforcement authorities.
According to the Commission, these are areas where "there
is an obvious added value in mobilising the Union budget"
in order to provide the means needed to constitute an area of
freedom, security and justice.[70]
The Commission believes that the draft Regulation will ensure:
- more policy-driven and results-oriented
funding;
- a significant simplification of delivery mechanisms;
- more flexibility in financial management and
implementation; and
- an improved framework for monitoring and evaluating
the impact of EU funding, and greater transparency and accountability
for spending decisions.
THE MAIN ELEMENTS OF THE DRAFT REGULATION
11.5 Chapter II of the draft Regulation sets out
general principles which are intended to govern the provision
of financial support under both of the Funds. Chapter III establishes
a framework for funding so-called "Union actions" (transnational
actions), emergency assistance in the event of a sudden crisis,
and technical assistance (for example, studies and reports, IT
systems, communication activities). In most cases, the provision
of financial assistance would be managed centrally by the Commission,
but the draft Regulation also foresees a role for EU Agencies.
11.6 Chapter IV — the bulk of the draft Regulation
— concerns the development and implementation of national
programmes which will absorb most of the available resources under
both Funds. In developing their national programmes, Member States
are required to work in partnership with a wide range of governmental
and non-governmental stakeholders and to set up a monitoring committee
to oversee and support implementation. All EU funding to implement
national programmes will be subject to the principle of shared
management by the Commission and each Member State, based on the
following elements:
- a high level policy dialogue
at the start of the programming period (in 2014);
- preparation of a national multiannual programme
identifying objectives to be achieved with the support of EU funding,
targets and an indicative timetable, as well as a framework for
monitoring progress and evaluating outcomes;
- preparation of a financial plan, broken down
by each financial year;
- the submission of annual reports on progress
made in implementing the national programme; and
- a mid-term review in 2017, at which point a Member
State may propose changes to its national programme.
11.7 The provision of EU funds to support national
programmes is capped at 75% of total eligible expenditure (although
the cap may be raised to 90% in some cases), with Member States
required to find the remaining 25% from other public or private
sources, in accordance with the principle of co-financing. The
draft Regulation stipulates that Member States are responsible
for the management and control of their national programmes. They
are required to designate a single accredited Responsible Authority
to handle all communication with the Commission and to ensure
compliance with the management and control systems set out in
the draft Regulation; and to designate an independent Audit Authority
to verify compliance.
11.8 The draft Regulation empowers the Commission
to develop a common monitoring and evaluation framework in order
to measure the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, added value,
and sustainability of actions undertaken by Member States and
to assess whether the objective of simplifying and reducing administrative
burdens has been achieved.
11.9 The Commission is required to produce an interim
evaluation of the draft Regulation (and accompanying Fund-specific
Regulations) by June 2018 and a final evaluation report in 2024,
following the closure of national programmes. The final evaluation
report must include an assessment of the impact of the Fund-specific
Regulations on the overall development of the area of freedom,
security and justice, with particular reference to:
- the development of a common
culture of border security, law enforcement cooperation and crisis
management;
- effective management of migration flows into
the EU;
- the development of a Common European Asylum System;
- fair and equal treatment of third country nationals;
- solidarity and cooperation between Member States
in addressing migration and internal security issues; and
- a common EU approach on migration and security
towards third countries.
The Government's view
11.10 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Crime
and Security (James Brokenshire) notes that the draft Regulation
is based on Articles in Title V of Part Three of the Treaty on
the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) to which the UK's
opt-in Protocol applies. He continues:
"The Government is committed to taking all
opt-in decisions on a case-by-case basis, putting the national
interest at the heart of our decision making. In making that decision,
we will have particular regard to the following:
- Our participation in the linked
Regulations establishing the ISF and Asylum Migration Funds ;
- The extent to which we think the proposals can
be improved in negotiations, and the degree to which the prospects
of improving them would be enhanced if we were to opt in, and
thus have a vote;
- The implications of not opting in for our broader
relationship with the EU and its institutions, and with other
Member States- in particular regarding our ability to influence
EU debates on migration and asylum, promote our own agenda in
the EU, and to secure co-operation and support from other Member
States on immigration and Justice and Home Affairs questions."[71]
11.11 The Minister notes that negotiations for a
new Multiannual Financial Framework for 2014-20 provide an opportunity
"to rejuvenate the EU budget and prepare for new challenges"
but adds that this should not be "at the cost of higher EU
spending overall. Increasing the funding share of any EU programme
must be done through reprioritisation within the EU budget."[72]
He says that the title of the draft Regulation would appear to
limit its scope of application to the Asylum and Migration Fund
and to that part of the Internal Security Fund covering policing,
criminal law and crisis management. He explains, however, that
a separate Regulation on the external borders and visas component
of the Internal Security Fund includes a cross-reference to the
draft Regulation, thereby ensuring that uniform arrangements apply
to both Funds. He continues:
"We understand this approach was necessary
to reflect the variable geometry involved, where the UK is excluded
from the external border and visa elements of the ISF. We believe
this is appropriate in order to ensure consistency of approach
in managing the Funds."[73]
11.12 Turning to the substance of the draft Regulation,
the Government accepts that the creation of a single Asylum and
Migration Fund (replacing three separate funds) is likely to reduce
the administrative burden for the Commission and Member States
but questions whether this will also be the case for the Internal
Security Fund. This is because funding for measures to prevent
and combat crime and to tackle terrorism and other security-related
risks under existing EU Programmes has hitherto been directly
managed by the Commission. The shared management model proposed
by the Commission for the criminal law, policing and crisis management
elements of the Internal Security Fund would therefore be a new
development and the Government will wish to consider its potential
resource and other implications for the UK.
11.13 The Minister welcomes the flexibility given
to Member States to determine, on the basis of national rules,
the eligibility of expenditure (subject to a limited number of
common principles set out in the draft Regulation) and believes
that this will simplify management processes. He also supports
the requirement for Member States to prepare annual reports "to
ensure accountability and sound financial management" and
for the Commission to conduct a mid-term review in 2017 to assess
whether the new arrangements are functioning effectively.[74]
11.14 The Minister notes that there is provision
for EU Agencies to carry out transnational Union actions and emergency
assistance under certain conditions, but adds that the Government
will "seek to ensure there is no duplication in funding and
that the powers are within the Union Agencies' current remits
(so that they are not granted additional powers)."[75]
He believes that there is scope to simplify the mechanism for
accessing emergency assistance.
11.15 The Minister questions the need for each Member
State to establish a monitoring committee to support implementation
of their national programmes on the grounds that it may be burdensome
and hinder delivery. He also notes that the processes for developing
and implementing national programmes will need to be carefully
managed, especially in their early stages, to ensure that there
is no negative impact on funding during the first year (2014).
11.16 Finally, the Minister notes that the Commission
will present the draft Regulation and other related proposals
to the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 13 December. He expects
negotiations on the proposed new Funds to continue during 2012
and adds that they will only be concluded once the overall Multiannual
Financial Framework for 2014-20 has been agreed towards the end
of 2012 or early in 2013.
Conclusion
11.17 We note that the draft Regulation is subject
to the UK's opt-in. The Minister's Explanatory Memorandum identifies
a number of issues which will require careful consideration, notably
the practical implications of the shared management model for
the Internal Security Fund, but we believe that the Government's
principal concern is the size of the budget for the proposed new
Asylum and Migration Fund and Internal Security Fund. Although
the draft Regulation does not determine the budget, it contains
a set of common rules applicable to both Funds. The Government
would therefore have to opt into the draft Regulation if it wished
to participate in either or both of the Funds. The three month
period available to the Government to determine whether or not
to opt in will, however, expire well in advance of any agreement
on the budget for each Fund. We therefore intend to hold the proposal
under scrutiny and ask the Minister to inform us at the earliest
opportunity of the Government's opt-in decision, and the reasons
for its decision.
66 (33393); see chapter 18 of this Report. Back
67
These are the European Refugee Fund, the European Fund for the
Integration of Third Country Nationals, the European Return Fund,
the External Borders Fund, the Programme for the Prevention of
and Fight against Crime (ISEC) and the Prevention, Preparedness
and Consequence Management of Terrorism and other Security-related
Risks (CIPS). Back
68
The current conversion rate is £1 = 1.1685 Euro. Back
69
See (33396), chapter 13 of this Report and (33395) and (33397),
chapter 12 of this Report. Back
70
See p. 5, para 3 of the Commission's explanatory memorandum. Back
71
See para 15 of the Minister's Explanatory Memorandum. Back
72
See para 17 of the Minister's Explanatory Memorandum. Back
73
See para 16 of the Minister's Explanatory Memorandum. Back
74
See para 23 of the Minister's Explanatory Memorandum. Back
75
See para 24 of the Minister's Explanatory Memorandum. Back
|
