Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2011)753 - Establishment, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for police cooperation, preventing and combating crime, and crisis management - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2011)753 - Establishment, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for police cooperation, ... |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2011)753  |
| date | 15-11-2011 |
The policies relating to the area of Freedom, Security and Justice have been steadily growing in importance over the last years. These policies are at the heart of the European project to create an area without internal borders where EU citizens and third-country nationals may enter, circulate, live and work, bringing new ideas, capital, knowledge and innovation or filling gaps in the national labour markets, confident that their rights are fully respected and their security assured. The growing importance of home affairs policies has been confirmed by the 2009 Stockholm Programme i, and it is also one of the areas which have seen important changes under the Lisbon Treaty.
In the field of Internal Security, key documents such as the Commission's Communication on the Internal Security Strategy i have provided clear guidance on the direction of activities in the years to come. Internal security is an area where the Union will be facing important challenges. Terrorism and organised crime, drug trafficking, corruption, cyber crime, trafficking in human beings and arms will continue to pose serious threats. Aggregate levels of crime are anticipated to remain stable but the nature of crime is expected to change with criminals using new technologies to commit crimes. Cross-border and organised crime can be expected to increase and become more sophisticated and international in nature. Some types of crime such as fraud, money laundering and cybercrime, are expected to grow. Further actions will also have to be taken to protect Union critical infrastructure more effectively notably against terrorist attacks and develop an integrated Union approach to risk and crisis management. To tackle all these future challenges, enhanced actions at Union level are essential to succeed in protecting the citizens from increasingly trans-national threats and support the operational work carried out by Member States' competent authorities, including through adequate Union funding. In this context the Stockholm Programme explicitly called for the creation of a Fund to support the implementation of the Internal Security Strategy and a coherent and comprehensive approach to law enforcement cooperation, including the management of the Union's external borders.
Against this background, in its proposal of 29 June 2011 on the next multi-annual financial framework for the period 2014-2020 i, the Commission suggested to set up an Internal Security Fund, as part of a simplified two-Fund structure for future expenditure in the home affairs area which also includes an Asylum and Migration Fund. The Internal Security Fund will have a global budget of EUR 4,648 million (in current prices) to support the implementation of the five strategic objectives set by the Internal Security Strategy: disrupting international crime networks; preventing terrorism and addressing radicalisation and recruitment; raising the levels of security for citizens and businesses in cyberspace; strengthening security through border management; and increasing Europe's resilience to crises and disasters.
Due to the different Treaty bases for the broad range of strategic objectives to be covered, it is not legally possible to establish the Internal Security Fund as a single financial instrument. It is therefore proposed to establish the Fund as a comprehensive financing framework, comprising two sector-specific proposals – of which this is one –, complemented by a horizontal instrument laying down common provisions. .
The legal architecture is explained in more detail under section 3.
Contents
In accordance with the greater emphasis placed on evaluation as a tool to inform policy making, this proposal is informed by evaluation results, stakeholder consultation and impact assessment.
Work on the preparation of the future financial instruments for home affairs started in 2010 and continued into 2011. As part of this preparatory work, an evaluation/impact assessment study was launched in December 2010 with the aid of an external contractor. This study was completed in July 2011 and brought together available evaluation results for the existing financial instruments and informed the problems, objectives and policy options, including their likely impact, examined in the impact assessment. Building upon this study, the Commission prepared an impact assessment report on which the Impact Assessment Board delivered its opinion on 9 September 2011.
In accordance with the greater emphasis placed on evaluation as a tool to inform policy making, this legislative proposal took also full account of the formal mid-term evaluation of the General Programme Security and Safeguarding Liberties i, covering the implementation of the ISEC (Prevention of and Fight against Crime) and CIPS (Prevention, Preparedness and Consequence Management of Terrorism and other Security-related risks) programmes between 2007 and 2009. In its report of 16 June 2011, the Commission assessed the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the implementation of the Programmes and the results obtained, including an accurate mapping of the programme activities, analysis of the performance of the projects financed, and a review of the instruments and implementation mechanisms in order to identify possible corrective measures.
The results of a dedicated on-line public consultation on the future of home affairs funding[5], which ran from 5 January to 20 March 2011 and was open to stakeholders from within the Union and from third countries, have all been taken into consideration in the preparation of this proposal. A total of 115 responses were received from individuals and on behalf of organisations, including 8 position papers. Respondents from all Member States contributed to the consultation as well as respondents in some third countries.
In April 2011 the conference 'The future of EU funding for Home Affairs: A fresh look' brought together key stakeholders (Member States, international organisations, civil society organisations etc) and gave them the opportunity to share their views on the future of Union funding for home affairs. The conference was also an occasion to validate the outcome of the stock taking and the public consultation.
The future of EU funding for home affairs was raised and discussed with institutional stakeholders on numerous occasions, including at an informal lunch discussion during the JHA Council on 21 January 2011, an informal breakfast with the political coordinators of the European Parliament on 26 January 2011, at the hearing of Commissioner Malmström before the Parliament's SURE Committee on 10 March 2011 and during an exchange of views between the Director-General of DG Home Affairs and the Parliament's LIBE Committee on 17 March 2011.
Specific expert advice on the future financial instruments in the area of Internal Security was provided through discussions that took place at the COSI meeting on 5 October 2010 where a preliminary exchange of views was made with representatives of the Member States and representatives of agencies (Eurojust, Europol, CEPOL and Frontex) and during the EOS Conference on Industry and Security on 9 February 2011. Moreover, technical aspects linked to the implementation of the future financial instrument in the area of Internal Security were also discussed with Member States' experts at the meetings on 15 February and 18 July 2011 of the two committees for the General Programme on Security and Safeguarding Liberties (ISEC and CIPS).
These consultations, conferences and expert discussions confirmed that there is an overall consensus among key stakeholders on the need to broaden the scope of action for Union funding in the field of internal security, including as regards its external dimension, and a need to work towards more simplification in the delivery mechanisms and greater flexibility, notably to respond to emergencies. In order to add value, Union spending should reflect better Union level priorities and strategic commitments and should support the implementation of the Union's home affairs acquis. In the area of internal security, stakeholders considered that the broad thematic priorities have already been fixed by the 2009 Stockholm Programme and the 2010 Internal Security Strategy. A future funding mechanism should therefore be defined comprehensively, comprising law enforcement, border guards and customs communities. The need to make greater use of relevant Union agencies, such as Europol and Frontex was also considered important. There was broad support to reduce the number of financial instruments to a two-Fund structure on the condition that this leads to simplification. Stakeholders also agreed on the need for a flexible emergency response mechanism. Shared management with a move to multi-annual programming was generally seen as the appropriate management mode for home affairs spending. Non-governmental organisations, however, were of the view that direct management should also be continued.
The right to act derives from Article 3 i of the Treaty on European Union which states that 'the Union shall offer its citizens an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to external border controls, asylum, immigration and the prevention and combating of crime'.
Union action is justified on the grounds of the objectives laid out in Article 67 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union (TFEU), hereafter 'the Treaty', setting out the means to constitute an area of freedom, security and justice.
The Regulation is based on multiple legal bases in Title V of the Treaty in the area of freedom, security and justice (Articles 82 i, 84 and 87 i TFEU). These articles constitute compatible legal bases in the light of the legal particularities that apply to decision-making under this Title.
Due to different voting rules in the Council stemming from variable geometry pursuant to Protocols 19 (on the Schengen acquis), 21 (the position of the UK and Ireland in respect of the area of Freedom, Security and Justice) and 22 (the position of Denmark, including in relation to Title V, part three of the Treaty) it is not legally possible to draw up one single comprehensive legislative proposal for an Internal Security Fund, despite the coherence of the policy objectives to be addressed.
The Internal Security Fund is therefore created as a comprehensive financing framework which is composed of two separate acts, setting up the different components of the Fund and laying down the objectives, the eligible actions and the envelopes of each component:
· A Regulation setting up, as part of the Fund, the component for police co-operation, preventing and combating crime, and crisis management;
· A Regulation setting up, as part of the Fund, the border management and common visa policy component.
Within the comprehensive framework of the Internal Security Fund, this Regulation shall provide financial support to police cooperation, exchange and access to information, crime prevention and the fight against cross-border as well as serious and organised crime, including terrorism, the protection of people and critical infrastructure against security-related incidents and the effective management of security-related risks and crisis, taking into account common Union policies (strategies, programmes and action plans), legislation, practical co-operation and threat and risk assessments. Consequently, the two programmes which currently provide financial support for this policy area (ISEC, CIPS) should be repealed with effect from 1 January 2014, subject to transitional rules. As far as the CIPS programme is concerned (Council Decision 2007/124/EC, EURATOM), this is not possible within the framework of this Regulation but requires a separate legal act, due to the different voting rules under its double legal base (EC/Euratom).
Overall, this is an area where there is a clear added value in Union interventions compared to Member States acting alone. The European Union is in a better position than Member States to address cross-border situations and to provide a platform for common approaches, financial support provided under this Regulation contributes in particular to strengthening national and European capabilities as well as cross-border cooperation and coordination, facilitated and secure communication, networking, mutual trust and the exchange of information and best practices. However, it is fully acknowledged that interventions should take place at an appropriate level and the role of the Union should not go beyond what is necessary. As the Budget Review has highlighted, the 'EU budget should be used to finance EU public goods, actions that Member States and regions cannot finance themselves, or where it can secure better results'.[6]
The Commission's proposal for the next multi-annual framework includes a proposal of EUR 4.648 million (in current prices) for the Internal Security Fund for the period 2014-2020. Within this global envelope, the resources indicatively available for the implementation of this Specific Regulation amount to EUR 1,128 million. Indicatively, 50% of this amount (EUR 564 million) should be used for national programmes of Member States while the other 50% (EUR 564 million) should be centrally managed to fund Union actions, emergency actions and technical assistance.
Internal Security Fund including new IT systems|| 4,648
- Police cooperation instrument|| 1,128
- Border instrument|| 3,520
· Clear focus on strategic priorities
In order to ensure that a sufficient and demonstrable impact can be achieved, this regulation proposes for the period 2014-2020 to concentrate Union financial support on five key strategic priorities (as identified by the Union's Internal security strategy):
– preventing and fighting against cross-border, serious and organised crime;
– raising the levels of security for citizens and business in cyberspace;
– preventing terrorism and addressing radicalisation and recruitment;
– raising capabilities to protect critical infrastructure in all economic sectors; and
– increasing Europe's resilience to crisis and disaster.
These strategic priorities, which are laid down in more detail in the annex to this Regulation, have to be taken into account by Member States when drafting their multi-annual national programmes. They can be amended at any time in a simplified procedure through delegated act in the event of newly emerging risks or threats. Moreover, to provide additional incentives, the EU co-financing rate for national measures implementing any of these Union strategic priorities can be increased up to 90%, in accordance with the Horizontal Regulation, instead of 75%.
The concrete measures supported by this Regulation cover primarily actions strengthening Member States operational capacities, such as joint cross-border operations, exchange of best practices, testing and validating of new methodologies and technologies (to close the gap to Union funded security research), the acquisition of technical equipment and infrastructures, training and exchange of staff, analytical activities such as risk and threat assessments as well as networking.
To use more effectively the competence and expertise of relevant Union agencies in the home affairs field, the Commission also envisages to make use of the possibility offered by the Financial Regulation[7] to entrust, within the resources available under this regulation, the implementation of specific tasks to such agencies in the framework of their missions and in complementary with their work programmes. For the tasks covered by this Instrument this concerns in particular the European Police Office (Europol), e.g. for the organisation of joint investigation teams or a Prüm helpdesk function, and the European Training College (Cepol), e.g. for the development and implementation of European Training schemes, common thematic curricula and modules including for staff from law enforcement authorities from appropriate third-countries.
· Distribution of available resources
The total amount for this Instrument for the period 2014-2020 consists of two parts: the Union budget (EUR 1,128 million in current prices) and the – not yet known – contributions by the countries associated with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, Liechtenstein), which shall participate in this Instrument. From the Member States, Denmark will not participate in this Regulation and Ireland and the UK may opt-in to it, in accordance with their respective Protocols.
The total amount of EUR 1,128 million is evenly divided (50/50 ratio): Member States will obtain an indicative amount of EUR 564 million (in current prices) for their national programmes (shared management) and for Union actions, emergency assistance and technical assistance, the Commission will implement the same indicative amount under direct and indirect management.
The criteria chosen for the allocation of available funds to Member States relate to the main goods that Member States have to protect: their population, their territory, persons and cargo processed through their air and seaports and European critical infrastructure designated in accordance with Union law. As, in this context, account has also been taken of Member States' different financial capacities, their Gross Domestic Product (in inverse proportion) has been added as a fifth allocation criteria.
· Emergency assistance and actions in or in relation to third-countries
Specific provisions are introduced in this regulation and in the Horizontal Regulation to enable the Union to take rapid and effective actions in the event of any security-related incident or newly emerging threat which has or may have a significant adverse impact on the security of people in one or more Member States (emergency situation). Such emergency assistance is always decided upon by the Commission but can also be proposed by Member States, Union Agencies, International Organisations or the Article 71 committee (COSI) represented by the Member State holding the Presidency of the Council. Emergency assistance is not limited to the Union and may also include measures in or in relation to third-countries.
Generally the list of actions in or in relation to third-countries eligible under this Regulation focuses on short-term operational actions having a direct impact on the Union's internal security, such as joint cross-border operations, the acquisition of technical equipment, exchange and training measures, threat and risk assessments as well as funding support to awareness-raising and communication activities. Actions in third-countries are primarily implemented by the Commission through direct or indirect management in accordance with the Financial Regulation. Such actions shall not be directly development oriented and shall complement, as appropriate, the financial assistance provided through the Union's external aid instruments, which remain the main source of funding to help third-countries build their relevant capacities. In implementing such actions, full coherence will be sought with the principles and general objectives of the Union's external action and foreign policy related to the country or region in question. Complementarity will be ensured through enhanced coordination with the European External Action Service and relevant Commission services.