29 Erasmus for All: EU Programme for
Education, Training, Youth and Sport
| (33449)
17188/11
+ ADDs 1-6
COM(11) 788
| Draft Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing "Erasmus for All": the Union Programme for Education, Training, Youth and Sport
|
| Legal base | Articles 165(4) and 166(4) TFEU; co-decision; QMV
|
| Department | Business, Innovation and Skills
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 15 July 2013
|
| Previous Committee Reports | HC 86-i (2012-13), chapter 5 (9 May 2012);
HC 428-li (2010-12), chapter 2 (22 February 2012); HC 428-xlvi (2010-12), chapter 5 (11 January 2012)
|
| Discussion in Council | Partial general approach agreed in May 2012
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background and previous scrutiny
29.1 The draft Regulation would establish a single EU funding
Programme — "Erasmus for All" — to support
a range of activities in the field of education and vocational
training, youth and sport. It would replace a multiplicity of
existing spending programmes and, the Commission suggests, offer
substantial cost savings whilst also supporting investment in
human capital to help achieve the objectives and headline targets
set out in the Europe 2020 Strategy for jobs and growth. The
Commission's original proposal included provision for a budget
of just over €17 billion for the period 2014-20. Our Fifty-first
Report of 11 January provides a more detailed overview of the
draft Regulation and the Government's position.
29.2 The Government broadly agreed with the objectives
and much of the content of the draft Regulation, accepted that
the introduction of a single Programme created the potential for
substantial efficiency gains, but rejected the Commission's budget
proposals as unrealistic and unacceptable. In April 2012, the
Government informed us that the then Danish Presidency intended
to seek agreement to a "partial general approach" at
the Education Council on 11 May which would exclude two important
elements of the draft Regulation. First, the budget, since the
final amount agreed would depend on the outcome of negotiations
on the EU's Multiannual Financial Framework for 2014-20. Second,
a provision proposing the creation of a new loan guarantee scheme
intended to enable post-graduate students to study for a Masters
degree in another Member State. As the Government hoped to secure
a significant budget reduction and had yet to indicate whether
it intended to support the loan guarantee scheme, we decided to
retain the draft Regulation under scrutiny whilst granting a waiver
to enable the Government to signal its support for the remaining
elements forming part of the partial general approach.
The Minister's letter of 15 July 2013
29.3 The Minister for Universities and Science (Mr
David Willetts) confirms that a partial general approach was agreed
at the Education Council in May 2012. Since then, discussions
have focussed on reconciling the positions of the Commission (as
set out in its original proposal), the Council (based on the text
which formed the basis for the partial general approach) and the
European Parliament. Trilogue negotiations with the European
Parliament began in November 2012 and the Minister, anticipating
that a formal First Reading agreement is likely to be reached
in the coming weeks, invites us to clear the draft Regulation
from scrutiny.
29.4 The Minister first sets out the UK's key negotiating
objectives. These were to:
"retain the streamlining and efficiency gains
for the education and youth programmes set out in the Commission's
original proposal; to keep the name Erasmus for All; resist the
use of delegated acts to implement the programme; and restrict
use of the new sports programme to support non-profit sports events."
29.5 He adds that, following cross-Whitehall consultation,
the Government decided that it would support the proposed Masters
loan guarantee facility, provided it was allocated a sufficient
percentage of the overall Programme budget for it to be viable.
The Government accepts that there is a gap in the market as regards
the provision of financial support for mobile full-time Masters
students. Whilst an EU loan facility would not be able to meet
total demand for funding, it is expected to give banks the confidence
to expand the amount of funding made available without the onerous
guarantees that currently deter potential Master students from
studying in another EEA country. Commission estimates indicate
that an EU contribution of €880 million would generate more
than €5 billion loans and benefit approximately 43,000 students
each year.[104] The
Minister notes that there is no similar UK loan guarantee scheme
for graduate students who wish to study elsewhere in Europe.
Encouraging student mobility would, he suggests, increase the
employability of UK graduates and promote greater international
collaboration on research and innovation. He adds that the higher
education sector and the devolved administrations have expressed
support for the proposal.
29.6 The Minister summarises some of the more contentious
elements of the trilogue negotiations and the outcomes agreed:
- the Programme will be known as "Erasmus
+" — a compromise between the European Parliament's
preference for an entirely new name ("Yes Europe") and
the Commission's original proposal ("Erasmus for All");
- the brand names for existing programmes —
Erasmus (higher education), Comenius (schools), Leonardo (vocational
training), and Grundtvig (adult education) — will be retained,
but they will have a common set of objectives;
- the draft Regulation includes specific percentage
allocations for each strand of the Programme as follows: 77.5%
for education and training; 10% for youth; 3.5% for the Masters
loan guarantee facility; 1.9% for Jean Monnet actions;[105]
1.8% for sport; 3.4% for operating grants for national implementing
agencies; and 1.9% for administrative expenditure. The Government
is satisfied that there is a sufficient budget to make the Masters
loan facility viable, but would have preferred greater budget
flexibility between the different strands. Agreement was reached
on a 5% margin of flexibility between the strands and on a slight
reduction in the budget for administration;
- the Programme will be implemented by means of
implementing rather than delegated acts, thereby giving Member
States greater control of the annual work programme and budget;
- funding for the Masters loan guarantee facility
(3.5% of the Programme budget) is based on a compromise between
the Commission's proposal for 5% and the 2% advocated by Member
States either opposing the facility or seeking to reduce its budget;
and
- the Commission's original proposal for EU funding
to support non-commercial European sports events — removed
from the Council's partial general approach on the grounds that
it would have little impact in increasing participation at grassroots
level — has been reinstated, but spending is limited to
a maximum of 10% of the total budget allocated to the Sports strand
(or 0.18% of the total Programme budget).
29.7 The Minister concludes that all of the Government's
negotiating objectives, with the exception of the slight change
to the name of the Programme and lower than expected budget flexibility
between each of the Programme strands, have been achieved. Turning
to the overall Programme budget, he continues:
"[T]he agreement included only budget percentages;
any decisions on the overall budget and profile remain subject
to an overall settlement of the Multi-Annual Financial Framework
(MFF) which is satisfactory to the UK. The Irish Presidency proposed
a broadly pro rata reduction to the figures in the original Commission
proposal of €17bn, which implies an Erasmus + budget of some
€13bn. This would still represent a real increase relative
to 2013 spend, but is in line with the priorities agreed in the
MFF settlement reached by Heads of Government at the February
European Council. Negotiations on the budget are now expected
to conclude under the Lithuanian Presidency, probably in September."
29.8 The Minister underlines the importance of securing
agreement in good time to ensure that the Programme, which is
of considerable importance to UK universities, businesses and
other research organisations, can start on time with no interruption
in funding. He expects to issue a competitive tender to choose
the National Agency responsible for implementing the Programme
in the UK and reiterates his request for scrutiny clearance.
Conclusion
29.9 We thank the Minister for his informative
letter. We note that the budget outcome, in light of the priorities
agreed by the European Council in February 2013, will represent
a real terms increase in the funding available for the Erasmus
+ Programme for 2014-20, compared to the previous financing period
from 2007-13, but will also be significantly lower than the sum
originally proposed by the Commission. We also note the Minister's
support for the loan guarantee facility for postgraduate students
intending to study for a Masters degree elsewhere within the European
Economic Area and his confidence that the sum agreed will be sufficient
to make the scheme viable. We are now content to clear the draft
Regulation from scrutiny.
104 The loan guarantee would cover up to €12,000
for a one-year Master's programme and up to €18,000 for a
two-year programme. Back
105
These are intended to promote excellence in teaching and research
in the field of European studies. Back
|
