17EU asylum reform
|
Committee’s assessment |
Legally and politically important |
|
Not cleared from scrutiny; further information requested; drawn to the attention of the Home Affairs Committee |
|
|
Document details |
(a) Proposal for a Regulation establishing a Union Resettlement Framework (b) Proposal for a Regulation on standards for determining who qualifies for international protection, a uniform status for refugees or individuals eligible for subsidiary protection, and the content of the protection granted (c) Proposal for a Regulation establishing a common procedure for international protection in the European Union and repealing Directive 2013/32/EU (d) Proposal for a Directive laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection (recast) |
|
Legal base |
(a) Article 78(2)(d) and (g) TFEU, ordinary legislative procedure, QMV (b) Articles 78(2)(a) and (b) and 79(2) TFEU, ordinary legislative procedure, QMV (c) Article 78(2)(d) TFEU, ordinary legislative procedure, QMV (d) Article 78(2)(f) TFEU, ordinary legislative procedure, QMV |
|
Department |
Home Office |
|
Document Number |
(a) (37966), 11313/16, COM(16) 468; (b) (37967), 11316/16 + ADD 1, COM(16) 466; (c) (37968), 11317/16 + ADDs 1–2, COM(16) 467; (d) (37969), 11318/16, COM(16) 465 |
Summary and Committee’s conclusions
17.1In 2016 the Commission proposed a comprehensive package of EU asylum reforms which is intended to establish “an effective and protective” asylum system “based on harmonised rules and mutual trust between Member States”. The reforms have been put forward in two phases. The first phase concerned changes to the Dublin rules and to the associated Eurodac database which establish criteria and mechanisms for allocating responsibility for asylum claims made within the EU. It also included a proposal to transform the European Asylum Support Office into a new EU Asylum Agency with a stronger mandate to oversee the application of EU asylum laws.
17.2Documents (a) to (d) form part of the second phase of asylum reforms. Document (a)—the proposed EU Resettlement Regulation—would apply to third country (non-EU) nationals outside the EU who are in need of international protection. The Commission believes that a comprehensive EU framework for resettlement would lead to a gradual “scaling up” of Member States’ collective resettlement efforts, enable the EU to contribute more effectively to global resettlement initiatives by making a single, EU-wide resettlement pledge, and “discourage irregular and dangerous journeys and save lives” by offering “alternative legal pathways” to the EU.220
17.3The remaining documents would apply to third country nationals who are already in the EU when they apply for asylum. Document (b)—the proposed Qualification Regulation—concerns the criteria applied by Member States to determine whether a third country national seeking asylum qualifies for international protection. The Commission believes that “applicants for international protection must have the same chance of obtaining the same form of protection, or having their claim rejected, irrespective of where they apply for asylum in the Union”.221 Its aim is to produce greater convergence in asylum recognition rates across the EU, harmonise the rights accorded to beneficiaries of international protection, introduce more frequent “status reviews”, and apply stricter rules to discourage secondary movements between Member States.222
17.4Document (c)—the proposed Asylum Procedures Regulation—would harmonise asylum procedures throughout the EU in an attempt to reduce the “pull factors” which may draw individuals to Member States with more favourable asylum recognition rates and reception conditions and result in an uneven distribution of asylum seekers and sharing of responsibility amongst Member States. Document (d)—the proposed Reception Conditions Directive—has a two-fold purpose: to ensure that all Member States provide “sufficient and decent reception conditions” while an application for international protection is being examined, and to reduce “wide divergences” in the reception conditions currently provided by Member States. The proposal takes the form of a Directive rather than a Regulation as the Commission recognises that full harmonisation is neither feasible nor desirable given the “significant differences in Member States’ social and economic conditions”.223
17.5Our predecessors were critical of the Government’s handling of these proposals which are all subject to the UK’s Title V (Justice and Home Affairs) opt-in. Despite having recommended in September 2016 that the Government’s opt-in decisions should be debated, the opt-in debate did not take place until December 2016, after the three month deadline for opting in at the negotiating stage had expired on all four proposals.224 The Government has not opted into any of these proposals but has opted into the proposed Eurodac Regulation which forms part of the wider EU asylum reform package.
17.6When our predecessors last considered the proposals in February, they reminded he Government that it had not provided a complete response to the concerns raised by the International Rescue Committee (IRC) over a year ago, in September 2016, on the proposed EU Resettlement Regulation. They also sought confirmation that a Written Ministerial Statement had been issued informing the House of the Government’s decision not to opt into the proposed EU Resettlement Regulation and the reasons for its decision. They requested progress reports on the negotiation of the EU asylum reform package and expressed particular interest in the potential impact of any divergences in the asylum rules applied by the UK and the EU on the UK’s asylum system once the UK leaves the EU.
17.7The Immigration Minister (Brandon Lewis) says that negotiations are proceeding “at varying paces”, reflecting the complexity of the proposals. Coreper (the Council preparatory body on which each EU Member State is represented) was invited by the Estonian Presidency in July to agree a mandate to begin negotiations with the European Parliament on the proposed Qualification Regulation, but the Minister makes clear that the mandate will need to be revisited as discussions progress on the other related EU asylum reform proposals. He confirms that the Government has issued a Written Ministerial Statement setting out its reasons for deciding not to opt into the proposed EU Resettlement Regulation and responds to the outstanding concerns raised in the International Rescue Committee’s submission on the proposal.225
17.8We welcome the Minister’s undertaking to provide regular updates as negotiations progress on these proposals and on the Commission’s wider asylum reform package. As our predecessors indicated in February, these updates should set out the main differences between the Commission’s original proposals and any general approach or negotiating mandate agreed either by Coreper or the Council. His next update should therefore include details of the agreement reached by Coreper in July on the proposed Qualification Regulation.
17.9The documents remain under scrutiny. We draw this chapter to the attention of the Home Affairs Committee.
Full details of the documents
(a) Proposal for a Regulation establishing a Union Resettlement Framework and amending Regulation (EU) No 516/2014: (37966), 11313/16, COM(16) 468. (b) Proposal for a Regulation on standards for the qualification of third country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection and for the content of the protection granted and amending Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third country nationals who are long-term residents: (37967), 11316/16 + ADD 1, COM (16) 466. (c) Proposal for a Regulation establishing a common procedure for international protection in the European Union and repealing Directive 2013/32/EU: (37968), 11317/16 + ADDs 1–2, COM(16) 467. (d) Proposal for a Directive laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection (recast): (37969), 11318/16, COM(16) 465.
Background
17.10Our earlier Reports listed at the end of this chapter provide a detailed overview of the proposals and the Government’s position.
The Minister’s letters of 27 September 2017
17.11The Minister apologises for the delay in responding to a number of concerns raised by the International Rescue Committee (IRC) which were set out in the Reports agreed by our predecessors on 14 December 2016 and 22 February 2017. First, the Government was asked to clarify its position on the involvement of the European Parliament in agreeing the annual Union resettlement plan proposed in the EU Resettlement Regulation. The Minister responds:
“We note that it is expected that the Council will take full account of the views of the High Level Resettlement Committee, and we do not consider there is need for the European Parliament to have a further role in approving the plan.”
17.12Second, the International Rescue Committee raised the possibility of EU teams being deployed to third countries to assist with the processing of applications for resettlement. The Minister observes:
“We would expect that the UNHCR [UN Refugee Agency] and the IOM [International Organisation for Migration] would be the main partners in providing support to the resettlement scheme in third countries, given their existing expertise in this area. However we do not in principle object to the use of the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) to support this process if this was appropriate in the context of implementing a particular targeted resettlement scheme.”
17.13Third, the Government was asked to clarify its position on the figures put forward by the International Rescue Committee as representing a “fair and achievable share” of the EU’s and the UK’s global responsibility towards refugees—for the EU, a minimum of 108,000 refugees a year over five years and for the UK (if it does not participate in the EU resettlement scheme) 15,608 refugees a year over five years. The Government was also asked for its assessment of the likely gap between the International Rescue Committee’s recommended figure for the UK and the number actually resettled in the UK over the next five years. The Minister responds:
“I would reiterate the Government’s position on resettlement places, which is that we will resettle 20,000 refugees from the Syrian conflict and up to 3,000 vulnerable children and family members by 2020, in addition to those resettled via our long running Gateway scheme (750 per year) and Mandate scheme (open to those with a family member willing to support them in the UK). In 2016 the UK resettled over 5,000 refugees. According to Eurostat figures, this is more than any other EU country and represents over a third of all refugees resettled to the EU in 2016. Over 8,500 refugees have been resettled under the Syrian Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme since it began. We consider that this represent the UK’s fair share and do not have plans to extend the resettlement programmes at present.”
17.14The Minister expects the Presidency to table a revised text shortly, following a series of bilateral discussions with Member States.
17.15Turning to the other proposals, the Minister undertakes to provide “updates on these dossiers as negotiations progress”, adding:
“As the outcome becomes clearer, I will consider and report on potential divergences in the asylum rules applied by the UK and the EU on the UK’s asylum system once it has left the EU. I note that negotiations are still at early stages and these proposals contain a significant amount of complex detail, including legal issues that will require full consideration.
“By way of update, I can inform you that discussions are progressing on these four measures, although at varying paces. The Asylum Procedures Regulation and Reception Conditions Directive continued to be discussed at Council Working Party level. On the Asylum Qualification Regulation, on the 17 July, the Presidency invited COREPER to agree on the compromise proposals, with a view to granting the Presidency a mandate to start negotiations with the European Parliament. We understand the mandate will be agreed upon on the understanding that it will be necessary to revisit some parts of the text relating in particular to the on-going discussions of other proposals of the CEAS [Common European Asylum System].”
Previous Committee Reports
Thirty-second Report HC 71–xxx (2016–17), chapter 8 (22 February 2017), Twenty-sixth Report HC 71–xxiv (2016–17), chapter 8 (18 January 2017), Twenty-fifth Report HC 71–xxiii (2016–17), chapter 10 (11 January 2017), Twenty-fourth Report HC 71–xxii (2016–17), chapter 2 (14 December 2016), Twentieth Report HC 71–xviii (2016–17), chapter 1, chapter 2 and chapter 3 (23 November 2016), and Twelfth Report HC 71–x (2016–17), chapter 1, chapter 2 and chapter 3 (14 September 2016).
220 See p.5 of the Commission’s explanatory memorandum accompanying the proposed Regulation.
221 See the Commission’s fact sheet on its latest asylum reform proposals.
222 See the Commission’s infographic on the changes proposed.
223 See p.6 of the Commission’s explanatory memorandum accompanying the proposed recast Directive.
224 An oral evidence session took place with the then Immigration Minister (Mr Robert Goodwill) on 22 February 2017. See the transcript.
225 See the Written Ministerial Statement of 23 February 2017, Hansard 38–9WS.
1 December 2017