Documents considered by the Committee on 26 February 2014 - European Scrutiny Committee Contents


12 Female genital mutilation

(35614)

17228/13

COM(13) 833

Commission Communication: Towards the elimination of female genital mutilation
Legal base
DepartmentHome Office
Basis of considerationMinister's letter of 20 February 2014
Previous Committee ReportHC 83-xxxi (2013-14), chapter 6 (5 February 2014)
Discussion in CouncilNo date set
Committee's assessmentPolitically important
Committee's decisionNot cleared; further information requested

Background and previous scrutiny

12.1 The purpose of this Commission Communication is to describe what action the EU has already taken to combat female genital mutilation (FGM) and to propose a series of further (non-legislative) actions to:

·  ensure a better understanding of the prevalence of FGM within the EU;

·  promote sustainable change to prevent FGM;

·  support more effective prosecution of FGM;

·  provide protection for girls or women at risk of FGM; and

·  contribute to the worldwide elimination of FGM.

12.2 The Communication draws on the findings of a report published in 2013 by the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) which highlighted the absence of reliable and comparable data on the prevalence of FGM within the EU, as well as inadequate monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of legislative and policy measures to tackle FGM, and called for better specialist support services and professional training, multi-agency cooperation, sustainable funding, and enforcement of existing laws to avoid impunity.[64]

12.3 Our Thirty-fourth Report, agreed on 5 February 2014, summarises the problems identified in tackling FGM within the EU and the actions proposed by the Commission. They include:

·  the development of a common methodology and indicators to measure the prevalence of FGM;

·  better use of EU funding to support professional training;

·  an analysis of existing criminal laws relating to FGM (prosecutions for FGM are rare, and there have been none in the UK, despite the introduction of specific legislation in 1985);

·  the exchange of best practice;

·  the inclusion of references to FGM in country of origin information produced by the European Asylum Support Office; and

·  incorporating FGM in political and human rights dialogues with third countries and supporting initiatives within the UN and regionally to eliminate FGM.

12.4 The Minister for Crime Prevention (Norman Baker) broadly endorsed the objectives and actions proposed in the Communication but suggested that, with the possible exception of sharing good practice, they could be sufficiently achieved by Member States alone and were therefore inconsistent with the principle of subsidiarity.

12.5 Whilst expressing understanding for the Minister's caution concerning the "added value" of EU action, we noted the links between the activities proposed in the Communication and the measures being taken domestically to combat FGM, in some cases supported by EU funding. Many of the activities appeared to be a continuation of existing EU efforts, rather than an expansion into new areas of activity, and were intended to complement, not replace, action at domestic level. We asked the Minister whether he considered that the EU's existing efforts should be curtailed, and to identify more clearly which of the actions proposed in the Communication would, in his view, be inconsistent with the principle of subsidiarity. We also asked for an assurance that the Government would consult external stakeholders and provide a summary of their views and suggested that the Communication should be included on the agenda of a future Justice and Home Affairs Council, given the Government's reservations about the role envisaged for the EU, and the strength of its own commitment to combating FGM.

The Minister's letter of 20 February 2014

12.6 The Minister (Norman Baker) re-iterates the Government's commitment to tackling FGM, adding that Ministers have recently signed a cross-Government declaration to end FGM which seeks to:

·  ensure the law is as robust as possible to help secure domestic prosecutions;

·  fund community engagement activities aimed at changing attitudes to FGM;

·  build a stronger evidence base through NHS data to encourage local action;

·  improve social work training to ensure FGM is seen and dealt with as child abuse;

·  improve the criminal justice system response to secure prosecutions; and

·  join up the UK's international and domestic programmes to help eradicate FGM at home and overseas.

12.7 Turning to the justification for EU action in terms of subsidiarity, the Minister continues:

    "The Government recognises that tackling FGM will require a multi-pronged approach and there is some action in the Communication which, due to the scale and effects achieved, will add more value when taken at European level. This includes action to encourage EU level effective practice sharing, providing EU level funding and monitoring the transposition of relevant EU legislation."

12.8 He considers that Member State, rather than EU action, is more appropriate in the following areas:

·  producing written guidance for professionals;

·  devising and delivering training for professionals — including professionals in health, education and law enforcement;

·  developing systems for proper co-operation and information sharing between different public agencies and public services;

·  enforcing domestic criminal legislation — by the police/CPS in the UK; and

·  providing support services for victims who are based in the UK.

12.9 The Minister continues:

    "I do not feel that implementing [these actions] collectively, at EU level, will produce a better result in the UK given the significant amount of work we are already undertaking domestically. For example, the UK have published multi- agency practice guidelines for practitioners on FGM, designed specifically for police, children's services, teachers and health practitioners and we are in the process of developing an E-learning package for safeguarding professionals. Similarly the Crown Prosecution have published an FGM action plan which seeks to achieve a prosecution for FGM.

    "As stated in my Explanatory Memorandum, we are fully committed to sharing effective practice, where skills and knowledge can be transferred across Member States, and we will continue to seek opportunities to do this. In the spring of 2015, we will be hosting an event to share effective practice and learning to support colleagues across the EU in improving their own response to tackling FGM."

12.10 The Minister says that the Government does not intend to undertake a separate consultation of stakeholders, adding:

    "The proposals contained within the Communication are consistent with Government policy. We have on-going engagement with key stakeholders working on FGM and through this we are able to assess their views on policy proposals."

12.11 He anticipates that the Greek Presidency will seek to adopt a set of Council Conclusions on Violence against Women and Girls which is likely to include a reference to FGM. He continues:

    "This is welcome. On present plans this is most likely to take place at the Council meeting in June, although as yet we do not have a draft of their proposal. As this is the case I do not propose to press for the Communication to be put on as a separate agenda item at a Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting."

Conclusion

12.12 We thank the Minister for his letter which confirms that the content of the Commission Communication is consistent with Government policy and so would appear to add little value to action already being undertaken domestically in the UK. We note, however, that the report on FGM published by the European Institute for Gender Equality in 2013 reveals a disparate picture across the EU as a whole. We therefore agree with the Minister that, in tackling FGM within the EU, the Commission should focus its efforts on facilitating the exchange of information on the most effective policy approaches and legal frameworks to prevent FGM, protect those at risk, and prosecute the perpetrators.

12.13 We stated in our earlier Report[65] that the Communication warranted political consideration at Council level, given the Government's reservations about the role envisaged for the EU in combating FGM. We note that FGM is likely to be considered by the Council as part of a broader set of Conclusions on violence against women and girls to be agreed towards the end of the Greek Presidency. We ask the Minister to tell us what type of EU action on FGM he expects to be included in the draft Conclusions and, once a draft becomes available, to indicate whether he considers the action proposed to be appropriate and proportionate. Meanwhile, the Communication remains under scrutiny, and we again draw it to the attention of the Home Affairs Committee to inform its current inquiry into female genital mutilation.


64   See http://eige.europa.eu/sites/default/files/EIGE-Report-FGM-in-the-EU-and-Croatia_0.pdf. Back

65   See headnote. Back


 
previous page contents next page


© Parliamentary copyright 2014
Prepared 11 March 2014