Letter from Lord Tordoff, Chairman of the Committee,
to James Paice, MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for
Education and Employment
Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Decision
establishing the Community action programme "European Voluntary
Service for young people" and a proposal for a Council Resolution.
(Document Number 5056/97)
Thank you for your Department's Explanatory Memorandum of
5 February on the above document. The proposal has now been considered
by both the European Communities Committee and its Sub-Committee
F (Social Affairs, Education and Home Affairs).
The Committee agrees with your Department's view that the
Community should not embark on a new action programme in this
area until a full evaluation of the youth volunteer pilots and
the volunteering strand of the Youth for Europe III programme
have been undertaken. We note, however, that the Commission refers
in paragraph 12 of the document to the findings of an ex-ante
evaluation and the initial results of the current pilot action
which were supposed to be attached to the document. We would be
grateful if you would provide an explanation why these documents
were not deposited with the document.
We accept that Article 126 of the EC Treaty is capable of
a broad interpretation, encompassing youth volunteering as an
educational activity We question, however, whether certain aspects
of the proposal, in particular those specified in Article 2(3)(b)
("innovative initiatives, particularly in the social, environmental
and cultural fields and with regard to the fight against different
forms of exclusion") are matters which fall within the ambit
of Article 126. We would welcome your Department's views on this
matter.
We share your concern that the draft Council Resolution relates
to matters which properly fall within the scope of the Third
Pillar. Contamination between the Pillars should be avoided and
the draft Resolution should be restricted to matters falling
within the scope of the EC Treaty.
I would be grateful if you would supply a more detailed account
of what support this programme is attracting from other Member
States and what improvements the Government will be seeking during
the negotiations on this proposal if it finds itself in a minority
position.
Sub-Committee F has retained this document under scrutiny
pending receipt of further information on the matters raised
above.
20 March 1997
Letter from James Paice, MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary
of State for Education and Employment, to Lord Tordoff Chairman
of the Committee
Thank you for your letter of 20 March about the Commission's
proposal for a Decision to establish a European Voluntary Service
for Young People, about which I sent you an Explanatory Memorandum
on 5 February.
I am sorry that you have not seen the ex-ante evaluation
referred to in the body of the Commission document. We assumed
you already had it. A copy is now enclosed. For completeness,
I also attach a copy of the preliminary progress report which
is referred to in the Commission document as well.
Agreement on the Youth for Europe III Decision established
youth volunteering as an educational activity. The present proposal
goes somewhat beyond youth volunteering and makes references,
for example, to racism and xenophobia which are in our view outside
the scope of Article 126. The inappropriateness of the legal base
of individual elements of the proposal will be used to challenge
the text in Working Group negotiations. We shall be seeking deletions
from, and improvements to, the text of the Decision regarding
the references to social security policies, immigration and rights
of residence, accreditation, the comitology arrangements, racism
and xenophobia, and the budget. It seems, at this point, that
the accompanying Resolution may also be dropped entirely, owing
to vigorous opposition from the majority of Member States. This
should avoid any question of contamination between the Pillars
which you feared might otherwise result.
We are not alone in our concerns about the main proposal,
and have strong support for negotiating out the more objectionable
elements of the text. However, we have little prospect of blocking
the proposal outright. It is becoming increasingly clear as negotiations
proceed that the political will exists, to one degree or another,
in other Member States to ensure the adoption of a decision on
volunteering in some form. There is some support among Member
States for a two year rather than a five year programme at least,
to run concurrently with the remainder of YFE III until the end
of 1999. This approach, given that a volunteering programme of
some kind appears inevitable, would at least allow for a thorough
and meaningful evaluation of youth action programmes before the
establishment of new activity into the next century.
I hope that this information is helpful.
8 April 1997
