REPORT on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism

7.9.2020 - (COM(2020)0220 – C9‑0160/2020 – 2020/0097(COD)) - ***I

Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
Rapporteur: Nikos Androulakis
Rapporteur for opinion (*):
Tomas Tobé, Committee on Development
(*) Associated committee – Rule 57 of the Rules of Procedure


Procedure : 2020/0097(COD)
Document stages in plenary

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism

(COM(2020)0220 – C9‑0160/2020 – 2020/0097(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

 having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2020)0220),

 having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 196(2) and 322(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C9‑0160/2020),

 having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposed legal basis,

 having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

­ after consulting the Court of Auditors,

 having regard to Rules 59 and 40 of its Rules of Procedure,

 having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Budgets,

 having regard to the letter from the Committee on Development,

 having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A9-0148/2020),

1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

 

Amendment  1

Proposal for a decision

Citation 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 196 and Article 322(1)(a) thereof,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 196 thereof,

Amendment  2

Proposal for a decision

Recital 1 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(1a) Climate change is leading to an increase in the frequency, intensity and complexity of natural disasters worldwide, and developing countries, in particular the least developed countries and small island developing states, are particularly vulnerable due, on the one hand, to their underdeveloped capacity to adapt to, and mitigate, the consequences of climate change, and to respond to climate-related disasters, and, on the other hand, to their geographical exposure to floods, droughts and forest fires.

Amendment  3

Proposal for a decision

Recital 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) Whilst recognising the primary responsibility of Member States for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters, the Union Mechanism promotes solidarity between Member States in accordance with Article 3(3) of the Treaty on European Union.

(2) Whilst the primary responsibility for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters remains with the Member States, the Union Mechanism, and in particular rescEU, promotes solidarity between Member States in accordance with Article 3(3) of the Treaty on European Union by complementing existing capacities of Member States, enabling more effective preparedness and response, where capacities at national level are not sufficient.

Amendment  4

Proposal for a decision

Recital 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(2a) Forest fires threaten lives, livelihoods and biodiversity, cause the release of high amounts of carbon emissions, and decrease the carbon absorption capacity of the planet, which further exacerbates climate change. Of particular concern are situations where primary forest or radioactively contaminated areas are destroyed by fire. The increase in climate-related disasters, including forest fires, requires a strengthening of the operations of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism outside the Union, including the activities focusing on prevention and disaster preparedness.

Amendment  5

Proposal for a decision

Recital 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3) The unprecedented experience of the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that the Union effectiveness in managing a crisis is limited by the scope of its governance framework, but also by the degree of Union preparedness in case of disasters impacting a majority of Member States.

(3) The unprecedented experience of the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that the Union effectiveness in managing a crisis is limited by the scope of its governance framework, but also by the degree of Union preparedness in case of disasters impacting a majority of Member States. Moreover, it is clear that the Union and Member States are insufficiently prepared for more extreme and complex disasters with far-reaching, longer-term global consequences, such as a large-scale pandemic. Therefore, it is essential that Member States' civil protection actions be better coordinated and that rescEU be reinforced.

Amendment  6

Proposal for a decision

Recital 3 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(3a) The experience of the COVID-19 crisis has shown that the Union and Member States are not adequately prepared to respond to large-scale emergencies and that the existing legal framework is not sufficiently fit for purpose. The COVID-19 crisis has also highlighted how the consequences of catastrophes for human health, the environment, society and the economy can take on unprecedented proportions. In view of the need to strengthen the Union’s ability and actions as regards health and civil protection, it is essential that rescEU be reinforced and made more flexible, faster and that it be better coordinated with national civil protection authorities. It is also essential that sufficient information be provided by Member States on their prevention and preparedness with respect to emergencies.

Amendment  7

Proposal for a decision

Recital 3 b (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(3b) In order to maximise transparency and accountability for Union citizens, the Commission should bring forward guidance on how to measure the proportion of spending carried out through the Union Civil Protection mechanism that should qualify as Official Development Aid (ODA).

Amendment  8

Proposal for a decision

Recital 3 c (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(3c) Given the experience of the COVID-19 outbreak and considering the need to enhance the Union's response capability in the fields of health and civil protection, rescEU should be significantly reinforced to improve its performance in each of the three pillars of the Union Mechanism: prevention, preparedness and response.

Amendment  9

Proposal for a decision

Recital 5

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) In order to be better prepared when confronted with such events in the future, urgent action is required for reinforcing the Union Mechanism.

(5) In order to be better prepared when confronted with such events in the future, urgent action is required for reinforcing the Union Mechanism. The reinforcement of the Union Mechanism should complement Union policies and funds and should not be a substitute for the mainstreaming of the principle of disaster resilience into those policies and funds.

Amendment  10

Proposal for a decision

Recital 6

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) To improve planning in prevention and preparedness, the Union should continue advocating for investment in prevention of disasters across sectors, and for comprehensive risk management approaches that underpin prevention and preparedness, taking into account a multi-hazard approach, an ecosystem-based approach and the likely impacts of climate change, in close cooperation with the relevant scientific communities and key economic operators. To that effect, cross-sectoral and all-hazard approaches should be put at the forefront and be based on Union wide resilience goals feeding into a baseline definition of capacities and preparedness. The Commission is to work together with Member States when defining Union wide resilience goals.

(6) To improve resilience and planning in prevention and preparedness, the Union should reinforce investment in prevention of disasters across borders and across sectors, including those that arise due to seismic activity, such as earthquakes, or due to floods or due to hydrogeological instability, such as landslides, and for comprehensive risk management approaches that underpin prevention and preparedness, taking into account a multi-hazard approach, an ecosystem-based approach and the likely impacts of climate change, in close cooperation with the relevant scientific communities and key economic operators. To that effect, cross-sectoral, cross-border and all-hazard approaches should be put at the forefront and be based on Union wide resilience goals feeding into a baseline definition of capacities and preparedness. The Commission is to work together with Member States and the European Parliament when defining Union wide resilience goals

Amendment  11

Proposal for a decision

Recital 6 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6a) In order to ensure that disaster prevention is efficient, stress tests and a process for certification of the response capacities should be considered key elements. Regular risk assessments at regional and local level are necessary for national authorities to be able to take measures to reinforce resilience where necessary, including by using the existing Union funds. Such risk assessments should focus on features that are specific to each region, such as seismic activity, frequent floods or forest fires. Those assessments should also include the level of cross-border cooperation, in order for the Union Mechanism to have detailed information on locally available capacities so that intervention can become more targeted.

Amendment  12

Proposal for a decision

Recital 6 b (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6b) The development of Union disaster resilience goals to support prevention and preparedness actions should involve an accurate assessment of and take into account the long-term social consequences observed in the first post-emergency stage that are managed by civil protection agencies, with particular attention being given to the most vulnerable people.

Amendment  13

Proposal for a decision

Recital 8 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(8a) The creation of a pool of resources brings together a series of rescue teams, experts and equipment that Member States always keep in standby mode for Union Civil Protection missions. It is essential that those teams meet demanding criteria of quality and reliability to ensure their interoperability.

Amendment  14

Proposal for a decision

Recital 9

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9) The Union Mechanism should make use of Union space infrastructures such as the European Earth Observation Programme (Copernicus), Galileo, Space Situational Awareness and GOVSATCOM, which provide important Union level tools to respond to internal and external emergencies. Copernicus Emergency Management Systems are providing support to the ERCC in the various emergency phases from early warning and prevention to disaster and recovery. GOVSATCOM is to provide secure satellite communication capability specifically tailored to the needs of governmental users in emergency management. Galileo is the first global satellite navigation and positioning infrastructure specifically designed for civilian purposes in Europe and worldwide, and can be used in other areas such as emergency management, including early warning activities. Galileo's relevant services will include an emergency service, which broadcasts, through emitting signals, warnings regarding natural disasters or other emergencies in particular areas. The Member States should be able to use this service. Where they decide to use it, in order to validate the system, they should identify and notify to the Commission the national authorities competent to use that emergency service.

(9) The Union Mechanism should make use of Union space infrastructures such as the European Earth Observation Programme (Copernicus), Galileo, Space Situational Awareness and GOVSATCOM, which provide important Union level tools to respond to internal and external emergencies. Copernicus Emergency Management Systems are providing support to the ERCC in the various emergency phases from early warning and prevention to disaster and recovery. GOVSATCOM is to provide secure satellite communication capability specifically tailored to the needs of governmental users in emergency management. Galileo is the first global satellite navigation and positioning infrastructure specifically designed for civilian purposes in Europe and worldwide, and can be used in other areas such as emergency management, including early warning activities. Galileo's relevant services will include an emergency service, which broadcasts, through emitting signals, warnings regarding natural disasters or other emergencies in particular areas. Given its potential for saving lives and facilitating the coordination of emergency actions, Member States should be encouraged to use this service. Where they decide to use it, in order to validate the system, they should identify and notify to the Commission the national authorities competent to use that emergency service.

Amendment  15

Proposal for a decision

Recital 9 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(9a) The Union Mechanism and rescEU should be developed in a way that enables the Union to effectively respond to a wide range of emergencies. Climate change is leading to an increase in the frequency, intensity and complexity of natural disasters within the Union and worldwide, requiring a high degree of solidarity among countries. Every year, many Member States are ravaged by forest fires that destroy thousands of hectares and claim numerous lives. This situation was particularly apparent during the 2017 forest fire season in Portugal, which led to the Commission’s rescEU proposal of November 2017. The prevention and response capability of Member States, including those most affected by forest fires, is often insufficient. It is therefore essential that prevention of, preparedness for and response to disasters is strengthened and that the Union Mechanism comprise sufficient capacities, including during the rescEU transition period, to act when forest fires and other natural disasters occur.

Amendment  16

Proposal for a decision

Recital 9 b (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(9b) During the COVID-19 pandemic, building on the existing provisions of Decision No 1313/2013/EU, the Commission was able to include in rescEU medical stockpiling, consisting of medical countermeasures such as intensive care medical equipment, personal protective equipment, laboratory supplies, vaccines and therapeutics, for the purpose of preparedness and response to a serious cross-border threat to health. From this medical stockpiling, personal protective equipment was delivered to Member States and candidate countries. Nevertheless, because only Member States may acquire, rent or lease rescEU capacities, more than one month passed between the adoption of the implementing act for the establishment of the above-mentioned stockpiling and the first deployment of the medical equipment and supplies concerned.

Amendment  17

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) In order to have the operational capacity to respond swiftly to a large-scale emergency or to a low probability event with a high impact such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the Union should have the possibility of acquiring, renting, leasing or contracting rescEU capacities to be able to assist Member States overwhelmed by large-scale emergencies, in line with the supporting competence in the area of civil protection and with a particular attention to vulnerable people. Those capacities are to be pre-positioned in logistical hubs inside the Union or, for strategic reasons, via trusted networks of hubs such as the UN Humanitarian Response Depots.

(10) In order to have the operational capacity to respond swiftly and effectively to large-scale emergencies or to low probability events with a high impact such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the Union should have the possibility of autonomously acquiring, renting, leasing or contracting rescEU capacities to be able to assist Member States overwhelmed by large-scale as well as cross-border emergencies, in line with the supporting competence in the area of civil protection. Those capacities are to be pre-positioned in logistical hubs inside the Union. EMA and ECDC should where necessary be consulted in the definition, management and distribution of capacities dedicated to responding to medical emergencies.

Amendment  18

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(10a) In carrying out the activities of the Union Mechanism, particular attention should be paid to the protection of vulnerable people. In addition, and in order to prevent gender-based violence, including domestic violence during times of crisis, the Commission should develop, together with Member States, guidance based on best practices to support victims of gender-based violence within the Union Civil Protection Mechanism.

Amendment  19

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10 b (new)

 

Draft legislative resolution

Amendment

 

(10b) On the basis of the principles of solidarity and universal coverage of quality health services and the central role of the Union in accelerating progress on global health challenges, the Union Civil Protection Mechanism should, in a manner that achieves synergy and complementarity with other relevant Union programmes, in particular EU4Health, create a better prevention, preparedness and response capacity in respect of medical emergencies.

Amendment  20

Proposal for a decision

Recital 11

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11) rescEU capacities acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by Member States could be used for national purposes, but only when not used or needed for response operations under the Union Mechanism.

(11) rescEU capacities acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by Member States or the Commission could be used for national purposes by the Member States hosting those capacities, but only when not used or needed for response operations under the Union Mechanism and with priority given to the fight against cross-border emergencies.

Amendment  21

Proposal for a decision

Recital 12

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) Where needed, the Union has an interest in responding to emergencies in third countries. Whilst primarily established for use as a safety net within the Union, in duly justified cases and taking into account the humanitarian principles, rescEU capacities could be deployed outside the Union.

(12) Where needed, the Union has an interest in responding to emergencies in third countries. Whilst primarily established for use as a safety net within the Union, in duly justified cases, in consultation with humanitarian actors prior to the interventions, and taking into account the humanitarian principles rescEU capacities could be deployed outside the Union.

Amendment  22

Proposal for a decision

Recital 13

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13) In order to support Member States to deliver the assistance, the European Civil Protection Pool should be further reinforced by co-financing the operational costs of the committed capacities when deployed outside the Union.

(13) In order to support Member States to deliver the assistance also outside the Union, the European Civil Protection Pool should be further reinforced by co-financing the operational costs of the committed capacities at the same level, irrespective of whether they are deployed inside or outside the Union.

Amendment  23

Proposal for a decision

Recital 14 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(14a) To strengthen cooperation in aerial forest firefighting and in response to other disasters, administrative processes should be streamlined where possible in order to ensure prompt intervention.

Amendment  24

Proposal for a decision

Recital 16

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16) Given that the deployment of rescEU capacities for response operations under the Union Mechanism provides significant Union added value by ensuring an effective and fast response to people in emergencies, further visibility obligations should be made to provide Union prominence.

(16) Given that the deployment of rescEU capacities for response operations under the Union Mechanism provides significant Union added value by ensuring an effective and fast response to people in emergencies, further visibility obligations should be made to provide information to Union citizens and media and also to provide Union prominence. National authorities should receive communication guidelines from the Commission for each particular intervention to ensure that the Union's role is appropriately publicised.

Amendment  25

Proposal for a decision

Recital 17

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17) In order to increase flexibility as well as achieve optimal budget execution, indirect management should be included as a method of budget implementation.

(17) In order to increase flexibility as well as to achieve optimal budget implementation, this Decision should provide for indirect management as a method of budget execution, to be used where justified by the nature and content of the action concerned.

Justification

Direct management by the Commission, including Union delegations, should be privileged, wherever possible. Indirect management should only be used when it can be clearly demonstrated that this is a more effective and efficient mode of implementation for the type of action at hand.

Amendment  26

Proposal for a decision

Recital 17 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(17a) In accordance with Article 155 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a (‘the Financial Regulation’), the entities listed in Article 62(1)(c) of that Regulation and in Article 25(2) of this Decision should annually fulfil their reporting obligations. The reporting requirements for those entities are laid down in the verification agreement referred to in Article 130(3) of the Financial Regulation.

 

____________________

 

1a Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1).

Justification

As indirect management is a new mode of implementation under the UCPM, it is important to recall the reporting obligations of entities operating under indirect management as laid down in Article 155 of the Financial Regulation.

Amendment  27

Proposal for a decision

Recital 18

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18) In order to promote predictability and long-term effectiveness, when implementing Decision No 1313/2013/EU, the Commission should adopt annual or multi-annual work programmes indicating the planned allocations. This should help the Union to have more flexibility in budget execution and thereby enhance prevention and preparedness actions.

deleted

Amendment  28

Proposal for a decision

Recital 18 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(18a) Delegated acts should define strengthened competences of leading Union Agencies to manage the rescEU capacities, lead the procurement process and to provide recommendations on specific quantities and products to be placed in geographically dispersed logistical hubs.

Amendment  29

Proposal for a decision

Recital 18 b (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(18b) The establishment, management and distribution of strategic Union reserves and stockpiles of capacities dedicated to responding to medical emergencies under the EU4Health programme should complement the reserves of rescEU.

Amendment  30

Proposal for a decision

Recital 22 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(22a) The Union Mechanism should also allow for the possibility of additional, voluntary contributions by Member States.

Amendment  31

Proposal for a decision

Recital 23

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(23) While prevention and preparedness measures are essential to enhance the robustness of the Union in facing natural and man-made disasters, the occurrence, timing and magnitude of disasters is by its nature unpredictable. As shown in the recent COVID-19 crisis, financial resources requested to ensure an adequate response may significantly vary from year to year and should be made available immediately. Reconciling the principle of predictability with the need to react rapidly to new needs consequently means adapting the financial implementation of the programmes. Consequently, it is appropriate to authorise carry-over of unused appropriations, limited to the following year and solely devoted to response action, in addition to Article 12(4) of the Financial Regulation.

(23) While prevention and preparedness measures are essential to enhance the robustness of the Union in facing natural and man-made disasters, the occurrence, timing and magnitude of disasters is by its nature unpredictable. As shown in the recent COVID-19 crisis, financial resources requested to ensure an adequate response may significantly vary from year to year and should be made available immediately. Reconciling the principle of predictability with the need to react rapidly to new needs consequently means adapting the financial implementation of the programmes. Consequently, it is appropriate to authorise carry-over of unused appropriations, limited to the following year and devoted to prevention, preparedness and response actions, in addition to Article 12(4) of the Financial Regulation.

Amendment  32

Proposal for a decision

Recital 25

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(25) Annex I to Decision No 1313/2013/EU is not flexible enough to allow the Union to properly adjust investments in prevention, preparedness and response and thus it is deleted. Investment levels to be allocated to the different phases of the disaster risk management cycle need to be determined in advance. This absence of flexibility prevents the Union from being able to react to the unpredictable nature of disasters.

deleted

Amendment  33

Proposal for a decision

Recital 25 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(25a) During the COVID-19 pandemic, in order to have functioning rescEU capacities and for the Union Mechanism to effectively respond to the needs of Union citizens, additional financial appropriations have been made available to finance actions under the Union Mechanism. It is important to give the Union the necessary flexibility to be able to react effectively to the unpredictable nature of disasters, while at the same time maintaining a certain predictability in the fulfilment of the objectives set out in this Decision. It is important to achieve the necessary balance in the fulfilment of those objectives. In order to update the percentages set out in Annex I, according to the priorities of the reformed Union Mechanism, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission.

Amendment  34

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 1 – paragraph 2

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(-1) In Article 1, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

2. The protection to be ensured by the Union Mechanism shall cover primarily people, but also the environment and property, including cultural heritage, against all kinds of natural and man-made disasters, including the consequences of acts of terrorism, technological, radiological or environmental disasters, marine pollution, and acute health emergencies, occurring inside or outside the Union. In the case of the consequences of acts of terrorism or radiological disasters, the Union Mechanism may cover only preparedness and response actions.

‘2. The protection to be ensured by the Union Mechanism shall cover primarily people, but also the environment and property, including cultural heritage, against all kinds of natural and man-made disasters, including the consequences of acts of terrorism, technological, radiological or environmental disasters, marine pollution, hydrogeological instability and acute health emergencies, occurring inside or outside the Union. In the case of the consequences of acts of terrorism or radiological disasters, the Union Mechanism may cover only preparedness and response actions.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594118872421

Amendment  35

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 1 – paragraph 3

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(-1a) In Article 1, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:

3. The Union Mechanism shall promote solidarity between the Member States through practical cooperation and coordination, without prejudice to the Member States' primary responsibility to protect people, the environment, and property, including cultural heritage, on their territory against disasters and to provide their disaster-management systems with sufficient capabilities to enable them to cope adequately and in a consistent manner with disasters of a nature and magnitude that can reasonably be expected and prepared for.

‘3. The Union Mechanism shall promote solidarity between the Member States through practical cooperation and coordination, without prejudice to the Member States' primary responsibility to protect people, the environment, land and property, including cultural heritage, on their territory against disasters and to provide their disaster-management systems with sufficient capabilities to enable them to prevent, and cope adequately and in a consistent manner with, disasters of a nature and magnitude that can reasonably be expected and prepared for.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594118872421

Amendment  36

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 b (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(-1b) In Article 3(1), point (c) is replaced by the following:

(c) to facilitate rapid and efficient response in the event of disasters or imminent disasters, including by taking measures to mitigate the immediate consequences of disasters;

(c) to facilitate rapid and efficient response in the event of disasters or imminent disasters, including by removing any obstacles of a bureaucratic nature.’

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594118872421

Amendment  37

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(1a) In Article 4, the following point is inserted:

 

“4a. ‘Union disaster resilience goals’ means objectives established to support prevention and preparedness actions for the purposes of improving the capacity of the Union and its Member States to withstand the effects of a disaster which causes or is capable of causing transboundary effects, to provide a common baseline regarding the preservation, in spite of the effects of such a disaster, of critical societal functions, and to ensure that the internal market functions properly in such a context;”

Amendment  38

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c

 

Present Text

Amendment

 

(1b) In Article 5(1), point (c) is replaced by the following:

(c) establish and regularly update a cross-sectoral overview and map of natural and man-made disaster risks the Union may face, by taking a coherent approach across different policy areas that may address or affect disaster prevention and taking due account of the likely impacts of climate change;

“(c) establish and regularly update a cross-sectoral overview and map of natural and man-made disaster risks, including disasters which cause or are capable of causing transboundary effects, the Union may face, by taking a coherent approach across different policy areas that may address or affect disaster prevention and taking due account of the likely impacts of climate change;”

Amendment  39

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 c (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point h

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(1c) In Article 5(1), point (h) is replaced by the following:

(h) promote the use of various Union funds which may support sustainable disaster prevention and encourage the Member States and regions to exploit those funding opportunities;

(h) promote the use of Union funds which may support sustainable disaster prevention, including prevention of disasters caused by hydrogeological instability, and encourage the Member States and regions to exploit those funding opportunities;

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594118872421

Amendment  40

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point -a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c

 

Present Text

Amendment

 

(-a) In paragraph 1, point (c ) is replaced by the following:

(c) further develop and refine disaster risk management planning at national or appropriate sub- national level;

“(c) further develop and refine disaster risk management planning at national or appropriate sub-national level, including as regards cross-border collaboration, taking into account the Union disaster resilience goals referred to in Article 6(5) and the risks related to disasters which cause or are capable of causing transboundary effects;”

Amendment  41

Proposal for a decisionArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point -a a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d

 

 

Present Text

Amendment

 

(-aa) In paragraph 1, point (d) is replaced by the following:

(d) make available to the Commission a summary of the relevant elements of the assessments referred to in points (a) and (b), focusing on key risks. For key risks having cross-border impacts as well as, where appropriate, for low probability risks with a high impact, Member States shall describe priority prevention and preparedness measures. The summary shall be provided to the Commission by 31 December 2020 and every three years thereafter and whenever there are important changes;

“(d) make available to the Commission a summary of the relevant elements of the assessments referred to in points (a) and (b), focusing on key risks. For key risks having cross-border impacts and risks related to disasters which cause or are capable of causing transboundary effects, as well as, where appropriate, for low probability risks with a high impact Member States shall describe priority prevention and preparedness measures. The summary shall be provided to the Commission by 31 December 2020 and every three years thereafter and whenever there are important changes;”

Amendment  42

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(f) improve disaster loss data collection at the national or appropriate sub-national level to ensure evidence-based scenario building as referred to in Article 10(1).;

(f) improve disaster loss data collection at the national or appropriate sub-national level to ensure evidence-based scenario building as referred to in Article 10(1), especially when it comes to identifying gaps in cross-border disaster-response capacities.

Amendment  43

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 5

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.  The Commission shall define Union disaster resilience goals to support prevention and preparedness actions. Disaster resilience goals shall ensure a common baseline for maintaining critical societal functions in the face of cascading effects of a high impact disaster and for ensuring the functioning of the internal market. The goals shall be based on forward looking scenarios, including the impacts of climate change on disaster risk, data on past events and cross-sectoral impact analysis with a particular attention to vulnerable people.

5. By ... [18 months from the date of entry into force of this amending decision], the Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 in order to supplement this Decision by establishing Union disaster resilience goals to support prevention and preparedness actions. Disaster resilience goals shall ensure a common baseline for maintaining critical societal functions in the face of cascading effects of a high impact disaster and for ensuring the functioning of the internal market. Those goals shall be based on forward looking scenarios, including the impacts of climate change and biodiversity loss on disaster risk, data on past events and cross-sectoral impact analysis and analysis of the long-term social impact on the regions affected, with a particular attention to vulnerable people. In the drafting of disaster resilience goals, the Commission shall specifically focus on recurrent disasters that hit Member States' regions and suggest that national authorities take concrete measures, including those to be implemented with the use of Union funds, to strengthen the resilience to crises.

The Commission shall be empowered to adopt, where necessary, delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 to define Union disaster resilience goals.

 

Amendment  44

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The ERCC shall in particular coordinate, monitor and support in real-time the response to emergencies at Union level. The ERCC shall work in close contact with national crisis systems, civil protection authorities and relevant Union bodies.

The ERCC shall in particular coordinate, monitor and support in real-time the response to emergencies at Union level. The ERCC shall work in close contact with national crisis systems, civil protection authorities, community-level voluntary groups and relevant Union bodies.

Amendment  45

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 8 – point c – indent 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

- to develop transnational detection and warning systems of Union interest;

- to develop transnational detection and early warning systems of Union interest in order to mitigate the immediate effects of disasters or pandemics on human lives;

Amendment  46

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 8 – point c – indent 3 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

- to provide technical training assistance to local communities for the purpose of enhancing their capacities as regards their first unassisted reaction to a crisis;

Amendment  47

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 9 – paragraph 10 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(5a) In Article 9, the following paragraph is added:

 

‘10a. Member States shall take appropriate actions in order to ensure that the first responders are properly equipped and prepared to respond to any kind of disaster as referred to in Article 1.’

Amendment  48

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 10 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The Commission and the Member States shall work together to improve cross-sectorial resilience planning, both for natural and man-made disasters likely to have a trans-boundary effect, including the adverse effects of climate change. The resilience planning shall include scenario-building at Union level for disaster prevention and response based on the risk assessments referred to in point (a) of Article 6(1) and the overview of risks referred to in point (c) of Article 5(1), disaster risk management planning referred to in point (c) of Article 6(1), disaster loss data referred to in point (f) of Article 6(1), asset mapping and the development of plans for the deployment of response capacities, taking into account the Union disaster resilience goals referred to Article 6(5).

1. The Commission and the Member States shall work together to improve cross-sectorial, resilience planning, both for natural and man-made disasters likely to have a trans-boundary effect, including the adverse effects of climate change and the increasing incidence of cross-border wildfires. The resilience planning shall include scenario-building at Union level for disaster prevention and response based on the risk assessments referred to in point (a) of Article 6(1) and the overview of risks referred to in point (c) of Article 5(1), disaster risk management planning referred to in point (c) of Article 6(1), disaster loss data referred to in point (f) of Article 6(1), asset mapping and the development of plans for the deployment of response capacities, taking into account the Union disaster resilience goals referred to Article 6(5).

Amendment  49

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 10 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission and the Member States shall identify and promote synergies between civil protection assistance and humanitarian aid funding provided by the Union and Member States in disaster resilience planning of response operations for humanitarian crises outside the Union.

2. The Commission and the Member States shall identify and promote synergies between civil protection assistance and humanitarian aid funding provided by the Union and Member States in disaster resilience planning of response operations for humanitarian crises outside the Union, in consultation with humanitarian actors including local ones and local authorities whenever possible.

Amendment  50

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 11 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. On the basis of identified risks, resilience goals referred to in Article 6(5), scenario-building referred to in Article 10(1) and overall capacities and gaps, the Commission shall define, by means of implementing acts in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2), the types and the number of key response capacities required for the European Civil Protection Pool ("capacity goals").

2. On the basis of identified risks, overall capacities, gaps and any existing Union disaster resilience goals as referred to in Article 6(5) and any existing scenario-building as referred to in Article 10(1), the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, define the types and specify the number of key response capacities required for the European Civil Protection Pool ("capacity goals"). Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).

Amendment  51

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Directive No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission shall define, by means of implementing acts adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2), the capacities rescEU shall consist of, based on the resilience goals referred to in Article 6(5), scenario-building as referred to in Article 10(1), taking into account identified and emerging risks and overall capacities and gaps at Union level, in particular in the areas of aerial forest fire fighting, chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents, and emergency medical response.

2. The Commission shall establish, within logistical hubs, European reserves of medical countermeasures and equipment which would include the medical countermeasures that respond to high impact low probability events. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, define the capacities rescEU shall consist of, based inter alia on any existing Union disaster resilience goals as referred to in Article 6(5) and any existing scenario-building as referred to in Article 10(1), taking into account identified and emerging risks and overall capacities and gaps at Union level, in particular in the areas of aerial forest fire fighting, earthquake and flood rescues, chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents, and emergency medical response. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2). The Commission shall regularly update the information on the number and classification of rescEU capacities and make that information directly available to other Union institutions.

Amendment  52

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

For capacities dedicated to responding to medical emergencies, such as a strategic stockpile, emergency medical teams and any other relevant capacities, the Commission shall ensure that effective coordination and synergies are achieved with other Union programmes and funds and in particular with the EU4Health Programme1a and with relevant Union and international actors.

 

_______________________

 

1a Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of a Programme for the Union's action in the field of health for the period 2021-2027 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 282/2014 (“EU4Health Programme”), COM(2020) 405 final

Amendment  53

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

rescEU capacities shall be acquired, rented, leased, and/or otherwise contracted by the Commission or Member States. The Commission may acquire, rent, lease or otherwise contract rescEU capacities to stock and distribute supplies or to provide services to Member States, through procurement procedures in accordance with the Union's financial rules. Where rescEU capacities are acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by Member States, direct grants may be awarded by the Commission to Member States without a call for proposals.

rescEU capacities shall be acquired, rented, leased, and/or otherwise contracted by the Commission or Member States. The Commission may acquire, rent, lease or otherwise contract rescEU capacities to stock and distribute high-quality supplies or to provide services to Member States, through procurement procedures in accordance with the Union's financial rules. Where the Commission acquires rescEU capacities, it shall retain the ownership of such capacities even when they are distributed to Member States. Where rescEU capacities are rented, leased or otherwise contracted by the Commission, the Commission shall retain full control of such capacities. Where the Commission acquires non-reusable capacities, it may transfer ownership of such capacities to the requesting Member State. Where rescEU capacities are acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by Member States, direct grants may be awarded by the Commission to Member States without a call for proposals.

Justification

The COVID-19 crisis has clearly demonstrated the importance of checking the quality of any medical supplies and equipment, especially when procured outside the Union.

Amendment  54

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

rescEU capacities shall be hosted by the Member States that acquire, rent, lease or otherwise contract those capacities. As a way to enhance Union resilience, rescEU capacities acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by the Commission are to be strategically pre-positioned inside the Union. In consultation with Member States, rescEU capacities acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by the Commission could also be located in third countries via trusted networks managed by relevant international organisations.

rescEU capacities shall be hosted by the Member States that acquire, rent, lease or otherwise contract those capacities. As a way to enhance Union resilience, rescEU capacities acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by the Commission are to be strategically pre-positioned inside the Union.

Amendment  55

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 5

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(aa) Paragraph 5 is replaced by the following:

5. A Member State that owns, rents or leases rescEU capacities shall ensure the registration of those capacities in CECIS, and the availability and deployability of those capacities for Union Mechanism operations.

‘5. The Commission or the Member State owning, renting, leasing or otherwise contracting rescEU capacities shall ensure the registration of those capacities in CECIS, and the availability and deployability of those capacities for Union Mechanism operations.

rescEU capacities may only be used for national purposes, as referred to in Article 23(4a), when not being used or needed for response operations under the Union Mechanism.

rescEU capacities may only be used for national purposes, as referred to in Article 23(4a), when not being used or needed for response operations under the Union Mechanism.

rescEU capacities shall be used in accordance with implementing acts adopted under point (g) of Article 32(1) and with operational contracts between the Commission and the Member State owning, renting or leasing such capacities, which further specify the terms and conditions of deployment of rescEU capacities, including participating personnel.

rescEU capacities shall be used in accordance with implementing acts adopted under point (g) of Article 32(1) and with operational contracts between the Commission and the Member State owning, renting or leasing such capacities, which further specify the terms and conditions of deployment of rescEU capacities, including participating personnel.

 

The terms and conditions specified in the operational contracts shall also ensure that rescEU capacities are used in compliance with this Decision, notably with the requirement to make rescEU capacities available as laid down in paragraph 6 of this Article and with the general objectives as laid down in Article 1. Those terms and conditions shall also specify the measures to be taken in cases of non-compliance in order to safeguard the appropriate use of Union funding.’

(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594134200012&from=EN)

Amendment  56

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

rescEU capacities may be deployed outside the Union in accordance with paragraphs 6 to 9 of this Article.

rescEU capacities may be deployed outside the Union in accordance with paragraphs 6 to 9 of this Article. Specific provisions shall be put in place by the Commission to guarantee accountability and the correct use of rescEU capacities in third countries, including providing for access by Union controlling officers. Visibility of the Union Mechanism in third countries shall be ensured in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 20a of this Decision.

Amendment  57

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point f a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(8a) In the second subparagraph of Article 13(1), the following point is added:

 

‘(fa) create capabilities of specific response expertise which can be used in the case of disasters affecting cultural heritage.’

Amendment  58

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 15 – paragraph 3 – point b

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) collect and analyse validated information on the situation, in conjunction with the affected Member State, with the goal of generating common situational awareness, and disseminate it to the Member States;

(b) collect and analyse validated information on the situation, in conjunction with the affected Member State, with the goal of generating common awareness of the situation and the response to the situation, and disseminate it directly to the Member States;

Amendment  59

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 16 – paragraph 2

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(9a) In Article 16, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

2. Interventions under this Article may be conducted either as an autonomous assistance intervention or as a contribution to an intervention led by an international organisation. The Union coordination shall be fully integrated with the overall coordination provided by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), and shall respect its leading role. In the case of man-made disasters or complex emergencies, the Commission shall ensure consistency with the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid, and respect for humanitarian principles.

“2. Interventions under this Article may be conducted either as an autonomous assistance intervention or as a contribution to an intervention led by an international organisation. The Union coordination shall be fully integrated with the overall coordination provided by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), and shall respect its leading role. In the case of man-made disasters or complex emergencies, the Commission shall, whenever possible, consult humanitarian actors including local ones and ensure consistency with the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid, and respect for humanitarian principles.”

Amendment  60

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) upon request for prevention expertise in accordance with Article 5(2);

(a) upon request for prevention expertise in accordance with Article 5(2), particularly in the event of a pandemic;

Amendment  61

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) upon request for preparedness expertise in accordance with Article 13(3);

(b) upon request for preparedness expertise in accordance with Article 13(3), particularly in the event of a pandemic;

Amendment  62

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(aa) developing cartographical material for the swift deployment and mobilization of resources, especially bearing in mind the specificities of cross-border regions for the purpose of trans-boundary risks such as wildfires;

Amendment  63

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(ba) in paragraph 3, the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

The financial allocation referred to in paragraph 1 may also cover expenses pertaining to preparatory, monitoring, control, audit and evaluation activities, which are required for the management of the Union Mechanism and the achievement of its objectives.

"The financial allocation referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a of this Article and in Article 19a may also cover expenses pertaining to preparatory, monitoring, control, audit and evaluation activities, which are required for the management of the Union Mechanism and the achievement of its objectives."

(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594118872421)

Amendment  64

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b b (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 3 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(bb) the following paragraph is inserted:

 

"3a. The financial envelope referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a of this Article and in Article 19a shall be allocated to cover actions on preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters."

(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594118872421)

Amendment  65

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 4

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c)  paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

deleted

‘4. The financial envelope referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a shall be allocated to cover actions on preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters.’;

 

Amendment  66

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 4

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(ca) Paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

4.  The financial envelope referred to in paragraph 1 shall be allocated, over the period 2014-2020, according to the percentages and principles set out in Annex I.

"4.  The financial envelope referred to in paragraph 1 shall be allocated, over the period 2014-2020, according to the percentages set out in point 1 of Annex 1 and the principles set out in point 3 of that Annex.";

(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=159411887242113)

Amendment  67

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c b (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 4 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(cb) the following paragraph is inserted:

 

“4a. The financial envelope referred to in paragraph 1a of this Article and in Article 19a shall be allocated, over the period 2021-2027, according to the percentages set out in point 2 of Annex 1 and the principles set out in point 3 of that Annex.";

Amendment  68

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraphs 5 and 6

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) paragraphs 5 and 6 are deleted.

deleted

Amendment  69

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 5

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(da) paragraph 5 is replaced by the following:

5.  The Commission shall review the breakdown set out in Annex I in the light of the outcome of the interim evaluation referred to in point (a) of Article 34(2). The Commission shall be empowered to adopt, where necessary in light of the results of that evaluation, delegated acts in accordance with Article 30, to adjust each of the figures in Annex I by more than 8 percentage points and up to 16 percentage points. Those delegated acts shall be adopted by 30 June 2017.

"5.  The Commission shall review the breakdown set out in Annex I in light of the outcome of the evaluation referred in Article 34(3). The Commission shall be empowered to adopt, where necessary in light of unexpected events affecting the execution of the budget or in light of the establishment of rescEU capacities, delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 in order to amend Annex I so as to adjust each of the figures in points 1 and 2 of Annex I by more than 10 percentage points.";

(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594118872421)

Amendment  70

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d b (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 6

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(db) paragraph 6 is replaced by the following

6.  Where, in case of a necessary revision of the budgetary resources available for response actions, imperative grounds of urgency so require, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts to adjust each of the figures in Annex I by more than 8 percentage points and up to 16 percentage points, within the available budgetary allocations and in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 31.

“6.  Where, in case of a necessary revision of the budgetary resources available for response actions, imperative grounds of urgency so require, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 in order to amend Annex I so as to adjust each of the figures in points 1 and 2 of Annex I by more than 10 percentage points, within the available budgetary allocations in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 31.";

(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594118872421)

Amendment  71

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d c (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 6 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(dc)  In Article 19, the following paragraph is added:

 

“6a. The European Parliament and the Council shall authorise the available annual appropriations without prejudice to the provisions of Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No ..../... laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021-2027 and the Interinstitutional Agreement of ... 2020 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on cooperation in budgetary matters and sound financial management.”

Amendment  72

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19a – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Measures referred to in Article 2 of Regulation [ERI] shall be implemented under this Decision through amounts referred to in point (iv) of Article 3(2)(a) of that Regulation, subject to its Article 4(4) and (8).

Measures referred to in Article 2 of Regulation [ERI] shall be implemented under this Decision with an amount of EUR 2 187 620 000 in current prices as referred to in point (iv) of Article 3(2)(a) of that Regulation, subject to its Article 4(4) and (8).

Justification

It is preferable, for reasons of clarity and transparency, to cite in the UCPM legal base the exact amount to be provided for the UCPM through the Recovery Instrument.

Amendment  73

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 20a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Any assistance or funding provided under this Decision shall be given appropriate visibility. In particular, Member States shall ensure that public communication for operations funded under the Union Mechanism:

Any assistance or funding provided under this Decision shall be given appropriate visibility in line with the specific guidelines issued by the Commission for specific interventions. In particular, Member States shall ensure that public communication for operations funded under the Union Mechanism:

Amendment  74

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 20a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

Where RescEU capacities are used for national purposes as referred to in Article 12(5), Member States shall, by the same means as referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph, acknowledge the origin of those capacities and ensure the visibility of the Union funding used to acquire those capacities.

Amendment  75

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point a a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point h

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(aa) In Article 21(1), point (h) is replaced by the following:

(h) supporting the preparedness activities described in Article 13;

‘(h) supporting the preparedness activities described in Article 13, particularly through the reinforcement of existing training networks, the synergies between them, and fostering the creation of new networks with a focus on innovative solutions and new risks and challenges;’

(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594134200012&from=EN)

Amendment  76

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The financial assistance referred to in this paragraph may be implemented by multi-annual work programmes. For actions extending beyond one year, budgetary commitments may be broken down into annual instalments.

deleted

Amendment  77

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 25 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission shall implement the Union's financial support in accordance with the Financial Regulation in direct management or in indirect management with bodies referred to in Article 62(1)(c) of the Financial Regulation.

2. The Commission shall implement the Union's financial support in direct management in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 or in indirect management with the bodies referred to in point (c) of Article 62(1) of that Regulation. When choosing the mode of implementation of financial support, priority shall be given to direct management. Where justified by the nature and content of the action concerned, the Commission may use indirect management. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 in order to supplement this Decision by setting out actions carried out under the Union Mechanism, which may be implemented by indirect management.

Justification

Direct management by the Commission, including Union delegations, should be privileged, wherever possible. Indirect management should only be used when it can be clearly demonstrated that this is a more effective and efficient mode of implementation for the type of action at hand.

Amendment  78

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 25 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

In order to implement this Decision, the Commission shall adopt annual or multi-annual work programmes, by means of implementing acts. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2). The annual or multi-annual work programmes shall set out the objectives pursued, the expected results, the method of implementation and their total amount. They shall also contain a description of actions to be financed, an indication of the amount allocated to each action and an indicative implementation timetable. With regard to the financial support referred to in Article 28(2), the annual or multi-annual work programmes shall describe the actions foreseen for countries referred to therein.

In order to implement this Decision, the Commission shall adopt annual work programmes, by means of implementing acts. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2). The annual work programmes shall set out the objectives pursued, the expected results, the method of implementation and their total amount. They shall also contain a description of actions to be financed, an indication of the amount allocated to each action and an indicative implementation timetable. With regard to the financial support referred to in Article 28(2), the annual work programmes shall describe the actions foreseen for countries referred to therein.

Amendment  79

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 25 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

However no annual or multi-annual work programmes shall be required for actions falling under the disaster response laid down in Chapter IV, which cannot be provided for in advance.

However no annual work programme shall be required for actions falling under the disaster response laid down in Chapter IV, which cannot be provided for in advance.

Amendment  80

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 25 – paragraph 5

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. In addition to Article 12(4) of the Financial Regulation, commitment and payment appropriations, which have not been used by the end of the financial year for which they were entered in the annual budget shall be automatically carried over and may be committed and paid up to 31 December of the following year. The carried-over appropriations shall be used solely for response actions. The carried-over appropriations shall be used first in the following financial year.

5. In addition to Article 12(4) of the Financial Regulation, commitment and payment appropriations, which have not been used by the end of the financial year for which they were entered in the annual budget shall be automatically carried over and may be committed and paid up to 31 December of the following year. The carried-over appropriations shall be used for prevention, preparedness and response actions. The carried-over appropriations shall be used first in the following financial year.

Amendment  81

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 30 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 6(5) and in the second subparagraph of Article 21(3) shall be conferred on the Commission until 31 December 2027.

2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 6(5), Article 19(5) and (6), the second subparagraph of Article 21(3) and Article 25(2) shall be conferred on the Commission until 31 December 2027.

Amendment  82

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 – point a a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 30 – paragraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(aa) paragraph 3 is deleted;

Amendment  83

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 30 – paragraph 4

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The delegation of power referred to in Article 6(5) and in the second subparagraph of Article 21(3) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the Decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.

4. The delegation of power referred to in Article 6(5), in Article 19(5) and (6), in the second subparagraph of Article 21(3) and in Article 25(2) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the Decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force

Amendment  84

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 – point c

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 30 – paragraph 7

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 6(5) or the second subparagraph of Article 21(3) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.

7. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 6(5), Article 19(5) and (6), the second subparagraph of Article 21(3) or Article 25(2) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council

Amendment  85

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 34 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(22a) in Article 34(2), the following subparagraph is added:

 

“By ... [24 months from the date of entry into force of this amending decision], the Commission shall evaluate the functioning of the Union Mechanism as well as the coordination and synergies achieved with the EU4Health Programme and other Union health legislation, with a view to presenting a legislative proposal that would include the creation of a specific European Health Response Mechanism."

(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594118872421)

Amendment  86

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Annex I

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(23) Annex I is deleted.

deleted

Amendment  87

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Annex I

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(23a)  Annex I is amended as follows:

Annex I

"Annex I

 

Percentages and principles for allocation of the financial envelope for the implementation of the Union Mechanism referred to in Article 19(1) and (1a) and Article 19a

Percentages for allocation of the financial envelope for the implementation of the Union Mechanism referred to in Article 19(1)

1.  Percentages for allocation of the financial envelope for the implementation of the Union Mechanism referred to in Article 19(1) for the period 2014 to 2020

Prevention: 20 % +/- 8 percentage points

Prevention: 10 % +/- 10 percentage points

Preparedness: 50 % +/- 8 percentage points

Preparedness: 65 % +/- 10 percentage points

Response: 30 % +/- 8 percentage points

Response: 25 % +/- 10 percentage points

 

2.  Percentages for allocation of the financial envelope for the implementation of the Union Mechanism referred to in Article 19(1a) and Article 19a for the period 2021 to 2027

 

Prevention: 8 % +/- 10 percentage points

 

Preparedness: 80 % +/- 10 percentage points

 

Response: 12 % +/- 10 percentage points

Principles

3.  Principles

When implementing this Decision, the Commission shall give priority to actions for which this Decision sets a deadline within the period leading to the expiry of that deadline, with the objective of meeting the deadline in question.

When implementing this Decision, the Commission shall give priority to actions for which this Decision sets a deadline within the period leading to the expiry of that deadline, with the objective of meeting the deadline in question."

(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013D1313-20190321&qid=1594118872421)


EXPLANATORY SYATEMENT

Since its creation in 2013, the Union Civil Protection Mechanism has helped Member States to deal with increasingly frequent natural disasters. In 2017, it was clear from the deadly forest fires in Portugal that in order for the Union Mechanism to be able to respond to natural and man-made disasters, an extra level of solidarity at Union level was needed.

In line with the new legal framework provisions of March 2019, we created rescEU, a pan-European reserve of fire-fighting aeroplanes and helicopters, specialised medical equipment and strategic stockpiling of medical supplies and other resources. Those capacities are in addition to national resources. The European Commission is financing between 80% and 90% of total purchase and maintenance costs and in certain cases up to 100%.

Even if rescEU has been in place for just over a year, it has already proven its worth. During the summer of 2019, the first rescEU capacities, two Italian and one Spanish firefighting airplanes, were deployed in Greece.

A few months later, during the COVID-19 pandemic, in mid-March 2020, medical stockpiling, consisting of medical countermeasures such as intensive care medical equipment, personal protective equipment, laboratory supplies, vaccines or therapeutics, for the purpose of preparedness and response to a serious cross-border threat to health was also included as part of rescEU. Thanks to this stockpiling, personal protective equipment was delivered to three Member States and two candidate countries that requested the activation of the Union Mechanism. In addition, thanks to the finance and coordination of the Union Mechanism, more than 75 000 European citizens were able to return to their homes.

The Union Mechanism has been one of the few solidarity instruments during the recent medical emergency. Nevertheless, this crisis showed the need for faster and more effective solidarity. Despite the creation of rescEU, the Union Mechanism is still relying on Member States willingness and readiness, as they are the ones responsible for the acquisition of capacities. As shown in recent months, this system of mutual European solidarity tends to falter when all, or most, Member States are confronted by the same emergency simultaneously. Because it requires the action of Member States, the Union remains unable to step in to fill these critical gaps with the needed resources and in timely fashion. It took more than one month from the adoption of the necessary implementing act for the inclusion of medical stockpiling as a rescEU capacity, to the first deployment in a Member State. In order to ensure an effective overall Union response to large-scale emergencies, more flexibility and autonomy to act at Union level is required in situations when overwhelmed Member States cannot ensure an adequate response..

In its resolution of 17 April 2020[1], the European Parliament called on the Commission to “strengthen all components of crisis management and disaster response, and to further strengthen instruments such as RescEU to ensure a truly common, coordinated and effective response at EU level; believes that European disaster risk management, preparedness and prevention should be enhanced in addition to common equipment, materials and medicines stocks, in order to allow for their quick mobilisation to protect the lives and livelihoods of EU citizens; believes that the EU Civil Protection Mechanism should be strengthened in order to facilitate the joint repatriation of EU citizens.”

The Rapporteur thus welcomes the targeted changes introduced by European Commission’s proposal, which heed Parliament’s call. He also agrees that we need to learn from past mistakes and work fast so we can be ready when the new Multiannual Financial Framework begins in 2021. He also welcomes the significant increase of the allocated budget by 2 billion euros, almost tripling the total proposed amount. He reminds that during the latest negotiations at European Council level, the Union Mechanism was about to receive less than one billion euros for the period 2021-2027. Immediately after, in the midst of the crisis, its budget was increased by 410 million euros for both the creation of medical stockpiling and the repatriation of EU citizens.

With his amendments, the Rapporteur is trying to reinforce the legislative proposal on the issues of prevention and preparedness. He is of the opinion that for the newly introduced “disaster resilience goals” to be effective and offer an added value, they have to be taken into account by the Member States when they are drafting their risk management plans. In addition, the Rapporteur asks the European Commission to create a common list of risks with transboundary effects so that the Member States are prepared for the same risks that may affect all of them. Under the current legislative framework, each Member State drafts its own list of possible risks. This is understandable as to a large extent the list depends on the geographical position and other factors that differ from one Member State to another. At the same time, there are some risks that are common to all Member States and may have effects which are not limited to the neighbouring countries but affect the whole region. All Member States should be ready to address these risks effectively.

On the rescEU capacities, the Rapporteur is of the opinion that the European Commission should be able to procure capacities directly so as to enable the Union Mechanism to respond swiftly and effectively to the needs of the Member States, whenever it is needed.  In order to ensure legal clarity, he believes that the Commission should keep the ownership of the capacities it procures. He also agrees that rescEU capacities should be deployed outside of the Union in order to help third countries around the world to respond to natural and man-made disasters. As it has been proven in the past, the Union Civil Protection Mechanism is an important instrument of EU soft diplomacy around the world. He disagrees though, with the proposal of the European Commission for the prepositioning of those capacities outside the Union territory. During the recent medical emergency, we witnessed in many occasions third countries confiscating personal protective equipment bought by other countries. He believes that only inside the Union we can ensure the necessary safety and quality standards.

Your rapporteur also considers it important to clarify the relation between the Union Civil Protection Mechanism and the EU4Health as both programs will be responsible for the creation of medical stockpiling. He also asks the Commission to review the effectiveness of the current framework and if needed, present a new legislative proposal for the creation of a specialised European Health Response Mechanism, as the European Parliament has already requested[2].

The Rapporteur also wants to propose that Member States be obliged to make reference to the Union Civil Protection Mechanism and the EU funding they have received whenever they are using rescEU capacities for national purposes. As the financing rate for all capacities is increased from 80% - 90% to 100%, it is important that the EU contribution not be forgotten or disregarded.

Finally, as the previous report was adopted by the Committee just a few months ago, with a very big majority, he submitted again some of the proposals contained in it.

As it concerns the deletion of Annex I by the Commission and its substitution by a multiannual work program, adopted by an implementing act, the Rapporteur proposes, for the purpose of greater transparency regarding the use of this funding, to reinstate the Annex, the provisions of which specify the percentages to be allocated for prevention, preparedness and response. However, bearing in mind the major change reflected in last year’s review and the fact that projects for the prevention of natural disasters such as floods and forest fires are funded mainly by other EU instruments, it is proposed to redistribute the funding, channelling a significantly larger amount into preparedness, including the purchase of rescEU assets. He also gives to the Commission greater flexibility to make any necessary changes over the next seven years. The need of flexibility as it was demonstrated during the recent medical emergency is well noted but it has to be reminded that whenever the budget is modified both the annual and multiannual work programs have to be modified. On the contrary, the percentages on the Annex give much greater flexibility as it has to be modified only if they surpass the 10% discretion limit.

In addition, the Rapporteur has re-introduced the obligation for the Commission to specify by delegated act the areas where indirect management will be used as a method of budgetary execution.

Many of the proposed changes both by the Commission and the Rapporteur echo the Parliament’s position from two years ago. Your Rapporteur strongly believes that the recent crises demonstrated that a more ambitious Mechanism is needed if we want the European Union and its Member States to be ready and able to deal effectively with any future natural or manmade disaster.


 

 

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS ON THE LEGAL BASIS

European Parliament

2019-2024

EP logo RGB_Mute

 

Committee on Legal Affairs

The Chair

 

2.9.2020

Mr Pascal Canfin

Chair

Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety

BRUSSELS

Subject: Opinion on the legal basis of the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (COM(2020)0220 – C9‑0160/2020 – 2020/0097(COD))

Dear Mr Chair,

By letter dated 13 July 2020,[3] you requested, pursuant to Rule 40(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the appropriateness of the legal basis for the Commission’s proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism.[4]

The committee considered the above question at its meeting of 2 September 2020.

I - Background

The Commission proposal is based on Article 196 and Article 322(1)(a) of the TFEU.

The request is made with regards to the amendment tabled by the rapporteur in ENVI deleting the reference to Article 322(1)(a) of the TFEU on the basis of, according to ENVI letter, “technical considerations and in particular on the fact that this article concerns the adoption of financial rules through regulations and therefore does not seem applicable to the decision”.

Prior to the current proposal that was adopted in June 2020, the Commission adopted a proposal for a decision amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism in March 2019 which was based on Article 196 TFEU only. The ENVI Committee adopted a report on this proposal in March 2020. In the explanatory memorandum, the Commission states that “This proposal builds on the progress achieved to date by the European Parliament and the Council in their consideration and deliberations on Commission proposal COM(2019) 125 final”.  According further to the Commission proposal’s financial statement, “[t]he decision amends an existing action (Union Mechanism) and is to be considered in parallel to the pending proposal also amending the Union Mechanism, which was adopted by the Commission in 2019”.

In reply to ENVI’s concern about the appropriateness of adding Article 322(1)(a) TFEU as a legal basis for the proposed decision, put into question by the tabling of the amendment deleting this Article, this note only assesses the appropriateness of Article 322(1)(a) TFEU as a legal basis.

II - The relevant Treaty Article

Under Title II on “Financial provisions”:

Article 322(1)(a)

1. The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, and after consulting the Court of Auditors, shall adopt by means of regulations:

(a) the financial rules which determine in particular the procedure to be adopted for establishing and implementing the budget and for presenting and auditing accounts;

III - CJEU case law on the choice of legal basis

The Court of Justice has traditionally viewed the question of the appropriate legal basis as an issue of constitutional significance, guaranteeing compliance with the principle of conferral of powers (Article 5 TEU) and determining the nature and scope of the Union’s competence.[5]  The choice of a legal basis is therefore not discretionary. According to the Court’s settled case law, the choice of legal basis for a Union measure must rest on objective factors which are amenable to judicial review including, in particular, the aim and the content of the measure.[6] The Court also considers that it is not possible to determine the legal basis for a measure in light of the legal basis used for the adoption of other Union measures which might, in certain cases, display similar characteristics.[7] The choice of an incorrect legal basis may therefore  justify the annulment of the act in question. In this context, an institution’s wish for more active participation in the adoption of a given measure, the circumstances in which a measure was adopted as well as the work that has been done in other aspects within the scope of action covered by a given measure are irrelevant for the identification of the correct legal basis.[8]

In principle, only a single, appropriate legal basis should be chosen. If the examination of a measure reveals that it pursues a twofold purpose or that it has a twofold component one of which is identifiable as the main or predominant purpose or component, whereas the other is merely incidental, that measure must be based on a single legal basis, namely that required by the main or predominant purpose or component.[9] Exceptionally, where a measure has several contemporaneous objectives or components, which are indissociably linked, without one being secondary and indirect in relation to the other(s), such a measure will have to be based on the various corresponding legal bases.[10] This would however only be possible if the procedures laid down for the respective legal bases are not incompatible with each others and do not undermine the right of the European Parliament.[11] Further, the measure chosen has to comply with the prescribed type of the legislative act when specified in the Treaty.

IV - Appropriateness of Article 322(1)(a) as a legal basis

Article 322(1)(a) TFEU used as a legal base imposes a specific type of legislative act, without any discretion left to the EU legislator in this regard. Before even assessing whether Article 322(1)(a) TFEU could be, in light of the aim and content of the proposal, an appropriate legal basis, it must be noted that Article 322(1)(a) provides for the ordinary legislative procedure and requires that the act be adopted as a regulation. In the present case, the type of the proposed act is a decision, as is the case for the legislative act the proposal is meant to amend. Therefore, on formal grounds, the type of the act proposed is not compatible with Article 322(1)(a).

There is therefore no need to further assess whether, in light of the aim and content of the proposal, Article 322(1)(a) is an appropriate legal basis and could be used as a dual one with Article 196 TFEU.

V - Conclusion and recommendation

Without prejudice to any assessment of whether the proposed measure is, in light of the aim and content of the measure proposed, correctly based on Article 196 only or should be based on two or more legal bases, it appears sufficient to state that given the type chosen for the proposal for amending act (a decision), Article 322(1)(a) TFEU does not formally appear to be an appropriate legal basis for the proposal for a decision amending the Decision on Union Civil Protection Mechanism, as it provides for the adoption of a regulation whereas the amending act in question is a decision.

At its meeting of 2 September 2020, the Committee on Legal Affairs accordingly decided, unanimously [12], to recommend to the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety to remove Article 322(1)(a) TFEU from the legal basis of the proposed decision.

Yours sincerely,

Adrián Vázquez Lázara

 


 

 

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT

Mr Pascal Canfin

Chair

Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety

BRUSSELS

Subject: Opinion on Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (COM(2020)0220 – C9‑0160/2020 – 2020/0097(COD))

Dear Mr Chair,

Under the procedure referred to above, the Committee on Development has been asked to submit an opinion to your committee. At its meeting of 29 June 2020, the Coordinators of the committee decided to send the opinion in the form of a letter.

The Committee on Development considered the matter at its meeting of 15 July 2020. At that meeting[13], it decided to call on the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments.

Yours sincerely,

Tomas Tobé

 

AMENDMENTS

Proposal for a decision

Recital 1 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(1a) Whereas climate change is leading to an increase in frequency, intensity and complexity of natural disasters worldwide, and developing countries, in particular the least developed countries and small island developing states, are particularly vulnerable due, on the one hand, to their underdeveloped capacity to adapt to, and mitigate, the consequences of climate change, and to respond to climate-related disasters, and, on the other hand, to their geographical exposure to floods, droughts and forest fires;

Proposal for a decision

Recital 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(2a) Forest fires threaten lives, livelihoods and biodiversity, cause the release of high amounts of carbon emissions, and decrease the carbon absorption capacity of the planet which, further exacerbates climate change. Of particular concern are situations where primary forest or radioactively contaminated areas are destroyed by fire. The increase in climate-related disasters, including forest fires, requires a strengthening of the operations of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism outside the Union, including the activities focusing on prevention and disaster preparedness;

 

 

Proposal for a decision

Recital 3 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(3 a) In order to maximise transparency and accountability for Union citizens, the Commission should bring forward guidance on how to measure the proportion of spending carried out through the Union Civil Protection mechanism that should qualify as Official Development Aid (ODA);

Proposal for a decision

Recital 12

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) Where needed, the Union has an interest in responding to emergencies in third countries. Whilst primarily established for use as a safety net within the Union, in duly justified cases and taking into account the humanitarian principles, rescEU capacities could be deployed outside the Union.

(12) Where needed, the Union has an interest in responding to emergencies in third countries. Whilst primarily established for use as a safety net within the Union, in duly justified cases, in consultation with humanitarian actors prior to the interventions, and taking into account the humanitarian principles rescEU capacities could be deployed outside the Union.

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 10 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission and the Member States shall identify and promote synergies between civil protection assistance and humanitarian aid funding provided by the Union and Member States in disaster resilience planning of response operations for humanitarian crises outside the Union.

2. The Commission and the Member States shall identify and promote synergies between civil protection assistance and humanitarian aid funding provided by the Union and Member States in disaster resilience planning of response operations for humanitarian crises outside the Union, in consultation with humanitarian actors including local ones and local authorities whenever possible.

 

 

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 16 – paragraph 2

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(9a) in Article 16, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

2. Interventions under this Article may be conducted either as an autonomous assistance intervention or as a contribution to an intervention led by an international organisation. The Union coordination shall be fully integrated with the overall coordination provided by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), and shall respect its leading role. In the case of man-made disasters or complex emergencies, the Commission shall ensure consistency with the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid (*), and respect for humanitarian principles.

2. Interventions under this Article may be conducted either as an autonomous assistance intervention or as a contribution to an intervention led by an international organisation. The Union coordination shall be fully integrated with the overall coordination provided by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), and shall respect its leading role. In the case of man-made disasters or complex emergencies, the Commission shall , whenever possible, consult humanitarian actors including local ones and ensure consistency with the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid (*), and respect for humanitarian principles.


 

 

 

 

European Parliament

2019-2024

EP logo RGB_Mute

 

Committee on Budgets

 

2020/0097(COD)

OPINIONOF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETS (1.9.2020)

for the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety

on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism

(COM(2020)0220 – C9‑0160/2020 – 2020/0097(COD))

Rapporteur for opinion: Niclas Herbst

 

 


SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The rapporteur welcomes the proposal for a targeted revision of the current legislation of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) with the aim of ensuring that the Union and Member States are better prepared for future crises. The rapporteur recalls that the UCPM is one of the most tangible expressions of the EU’s core value of solidarity. However, the ongoing COVID-19 crisis has blatantly exposed the limitations of the current set-up, with the Mechanism unable to respond fully to the majority of requests for assistance received from Member States, participating States and third countries. Thus, the rapporteur is convinced that we need to prepare better at Union level for risks of a transboundary nature and large-scale disasters that could impact several Member States simultaneously, with a high impact and significant disruptive potential.

The rapporteur strongly believes that an ambitious financial envelope is needed to match the level of ambition of the recently reformed UCPM, and particularly the set-up of ‘rescEU’, the dedicated reserve of response capacities with command and control at Union level. He welcomes the Commission’s proposal to draw, for the period 2021-2027, EUR 1 268 282 000 from heading 5 ‘Resilience, Security and Defence’ and EUR 2 187 620 000 (in current prices) from a new EU Recovery Instrument, to be mobilised as external assigned revenue through empowerment provided in the new Own Resources Decision. The proposal also entails the recruitment of 134 additional staff, of which 30 under this Decision.

The rapporteur considers the proposed envelope, which would almost triple the original proposal of May 2018, and staffing levels proportionate to the purpose and scope of this targeted revision. He assumes that, in light of the current Mechanism’s failure to respond to the Member States’ needs for assistance and the additional funding mobilised for medical stockpiling and repatriation flights during the COVID-19 crisis, it has become clear even to the Council that reducing UCPM funding in the next MFF is not a realistic scenario. It should also be noted that pooling resources optimally and generating economies of scale by smart investments at Union level will lead to significant savings for Member States’ national budgets.

The rapporteur welcomes several proposals for budgetary simplification and increased budgetary flexibility, such as the addition of the indirect management mode and the automatic carry-over of unused appropriations for response actions to year N+1. However, he disagrees with the deletion of the breakdown of spending by pillar in Annex I, as it is important for the co-legislators to keep track of the relative distribution of spending on prevention, preparedness and response. Sufficient flexibility is guaranteed by the possibility of amending the Annex by means of a delegated act.

The rapporteur welcomes the possibility of the ERCC and Member States making use of Union space infrastructures such as Copernicus, Galileo, Space Situational Awareness and GOVSATCOM, which provide important Union level tools to respond to internal and external emergencies. Synergies between the various tools should be fully exploited and the Member States should be actively encouraged to use this service.

The rapporteur wishes to emphasize the importance of ensuring a proper geographic coverage when pre-positioning rescEU capacities in logistical hubs inside the Union, so that all Member States may benefit equally efficiently and speedily from the use of these assets.

The rapporteur underlines the importance of checking the quality of medical supplies and equipment procured under the Mechanism. The COVID-19 crisis has clearly demonstrated the need for this, especially in case of procurement from manufacturers outside the Union.

The rapporteur also emphasizes the need to protect the Union’s financial interests adequately, in particular in view of the envisaged use of the indirect management mode.  He wishes to highlight the important role that the European Public Prosecutor's Office (‘EPPO’) has to play in this respect.

Finally, the rapporteur welcomes the enhanced provisions on visibility of EU assistance through the UCPM in Article 20a and wants to underline the need for proactive public communication by Member States on operations funded under the Union Mechanism.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Budgets calls on the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

Amendment  1

Proposal for a decision

Recital 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) Whilst recognising the primary responsibility of Member States for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters, the Union Mechanism promotes solidarity between Member States in accordance with Article 3(3) of the Treaty on European Union.

(2) Whilst recognising the primary responsibility of Member States for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters, the Union Mechanism, including rescEU, promotes solidarity between Member States in accordance with Article 3(3) of the Treaty on European Union by strengthening the current capacities of Member States and ensuring that preparedness and response are effective where those capacities are insufficient.

Amendment  2

Proposal for a decision

Recital 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3) The unprecedented experience of the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that the Union effectiveness in managing a crisis is limited by the scope of its governance framework, but also by the degree of Union preparedness in case of disasters impacting a majority of Member States.

(3) The unprecedented experience of the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that the Union effectiveness in managing a crisis is limited by the scope of its governance framework, but also by the degree of Union preparedness in case of disasters impacting a majority of Member States. Moreover, it is clear that the Union and Member States are insufficiently prepared for more extreme and complex disasters with far-reaching, longer-term global consequences, such as a large-scale pandemic. Therefore, it is essential that Member States' civil protection actions be better coordinated and that rescEU be reinforced.

Amendment  3

Proposal for a decision

Recital 3 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(3a) Given the experience of the COVID-19 outbreak and considering the need to enhance the Union's response capability in the fields of health and civil protection, rescEU should be significantly reinforced to improve its performance in each of the three pillars of the Union Mechanism: prevention, preparedness and response.

Amendment  4

Proposal for a decision

Recital 5

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) In order to be better prepared when confronted with such events in the future, urgent action is required for reinforcing the Union Mechanism.

(5) In order to be better prepared when confronted with such events in the future, urgent action is required for reinforcing the Union Mechanism. The reinforcement of the Union Mechanism should complement Union policies and Funds and should not be a substitute for the mainstreaming of the principle of disaster resilience into those policies and Funds.

Amendment  5

Proposal for a decision

Recital 6

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) To improve planning in prevention and preparedness, the Union should continue advocating for investment in prevention of disasters across sectors, and for  comprehensive risk management approaches that underpin prevention and preparedness, taking into account a multi-hazard approach, an ecosystem-based approach and the likely impacts of climate change, in close cooperation with the relevant scientific communities and key economic operators. To that effect, cross-sectoral and all-hazard approaches should be put at the forefront and be based on Union wide resilience goals feeding into a baseline definition of capacities and preparedness. The Commission is to work together with Member States when defining Union wide resilience goals.

(6) To improve planning in prevention and preparedness, the Union should reinforce investment in prevention of disasters across sectors, and for comprehensive risk management approaches that underpin prevention and preparedness, taking into account a multi-hazard approach, an ecosystem-based approach and the likely impacts of climate change, in close cooperation with the relevant scientific communities, key economic operators, and regional and local authorities, which are key players in the disaster management cycle, as well as with the third sector and voluntary organisations operating in the field. To that effect, cross-sectoral and all-hazard approaches should be put at the forefront and be based on Union wide resilience goals feeding into a baseline definition of capacities and preparedness. The Commission is to work together with Member States and the European Parliament when defining Union wide resilience goals, and to take into account any operational emergency response plans that already exist at national, regional or local level.

Amendment  6

Proposal for a decision

Recital 6 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6a) In order to ensure that disaster prevention is efficient, stress tests and a process for certification of the response capacities should be considered as key elements. Regular risk assessments at regional and local level are necessary for national authorities to be able to take measures to reinforce resilience where necessary, including by using the existing Union funds. Such risk assessments should focus on features that are specific to  each region, such as seismic activity, frequent floods or forest fires. Those assessments should also include the level of cross-border cooperation, in order for the Union Mechanism to have detailed information on locally available capacities so thatintervention can become more targeted.

Amendment  7

Proposal for a decision

Recital 6 b (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6b) The development of Union disaster resilience goals to support prevention and preparedness actions should involve an accurate assessment of and take into account the long-term social consequences observed in the first post-emergency stage that are managed by civil protection agencies, with particular attention being given to the most vulnerable people.

Amendment  8

Proposal for a decision

Recital 9

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9) The Union Mechanism should make use of Union space infrastructures such as the European Earth Observation Programme (Copernicus), Galileo, Space Situational Awareness and GOVSATCOM, which provide important Union level tools to respond to internal and external emergencies. Copernicus Emergency Management Systems are providing support to the ERCC in the various emergency phases from early warning and prevention to disaster and recovery. GOVSATCOM is to provide secure satellite communication capability specifically tailored to the needs of governmental users in emergency management. Galileo is the first global satellite navigation and positioning infrastructure specifically designed for civilian purposes in Europe and worldwide, and can be used in other areas such as emergency management, including early warning activities. Galileo's relevant services will include an emergency service, which broadcasts, through emitting signals, warnings regarding natural disasters or other emergencies in particular areas. The Member States should be able to use this service. Where they decide to use it, in order to validate the system, they should identify and notify to the Commission the national authorities competent to use that emergency service.

(9) The Union Mechanism should make use of Union space infrastructures such as the European Earth Observation Programme (Copernicus), Galileo, Space Situational Awareness and GOVSATCOM, which provide important Union level tools to respond to internal and external emergencies. Copernicus Emergency Management Systems are providing support to the ERCC in the various emergency phases from early warning and prevention to disaster and recovery. GOVSATCOM is to provide secure satellite communication capability specifically tailored to the needs of governmental users in emergency management. Galileo is the first global satellite navigation and positioning infrastructure specifically designed for civilian purposes in Europe and worldwide, and can be used in other areas such as emergency management, including early warning activities. Galileo's relevant services will include an emergency service, which broadcasts, through emitting signals, warnings regarding natural disasters or other emergencies in particular areas. Given its potential for saving lives and facilitating the coordination of emergency actions, Member States should be encouraged to use this service. Where they decide to use it, in order to validate the system, they should identify and notify to the Commission the national authorities competent to use that emergency service.

Amendment  9

Proposal for a decision

Recital 9 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(9a) The Union Mechanism and rescEU should be developed in order to effectively respond to a wide range of emergencies, many of which are caused by climate change. The frequency and intensity of natural disasters inside as well as outside the Union have increased in recent years, including in areas where previously they did not exist. Hence, it is imperative that the Union Mechanism include sufficient capacities to deal with increasing occurrences of natural disasters, such as forest fires and flooding.

Amendment  10

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) In order to have the operational capacity to respond swiftly to a large-scale emergency or to a low probability event with a high impact such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the Union should have the possibility of acquiring, renting, leasing or contracting rescEU capacities to be able to assist Member States overwhelmed by large-scale emergencies, in line with the supporting competence in the area of civil protection and with a particular attention to vulnerable people. Those capacities are to be pre-positioned in logistical hubs inside the Union or, for strategic reasons, via trusted networks of hubs such as the UN Humanitarian Response Depots.

(10) In order to have the operational capacity to respond swiftly to a large-scale emergency or to a low probability event with a high impact such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the Union should have the possibility of acquiring, renting, leasing or contracting rescEU capacities to be able to assist Member States overwhelmed by large-scale emergencies, in line with the supporting competence in the area of civil protection and with a particular attention to vulnerable people. Those capacities are to be pre-positioned in logistical hubs inside the Union or, for strategic and duly justified reasons, via trusted networks of hubs such as the UN Humanitarian Response Depots. rescEU should increase synergies among national logistical hubs so as to facilitate a more effective operational response, to boost regional capacity and to contribute to the long-term objective of guaranteeing maximal flexibility and the ability to respond to many types of disaster, beyond the current pandemic. Taking advantage of its close engagement with Member State authorities, the Union Mechanism should be used to collect information on the national capacities available in the Member States where the hubs are hosted and to assess the preparedness of national crisis systems and civil protection authorities, so as to be able to issue concrete country-specific recommendations for improving them further.

Amendment  11

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(10a) Given the commonly agreed value of solidarity, the Union has a central role to play in accelerating progress towards achieving the goal of equitable and universal provision of quality health services as a basis for the Union’s policies in the area of civil protection.

Amendment  12

Proposal for a decision

Recital 16

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16) Given that the deployment of rescEU capacities for response operations under the Union Mechanism provides significant Union added value by ensuring an effective and fast response to people in emergencies, further visibility obligations should be made to provide Union prominence.

(16) Given that the deployment of rescEU capacities for response operations under the Union Mechanism provides significant Union added value by ensuring an effective and fast response to people in emergencies, further visibility obligations should be made to provide information to Union citizens and media and also to provide Union prominence. National authorities should receive communication guidelines from the Commission for each particular intervention to ensure that the Union's role is appropriately publicised.

Amendment 13

Proposal for a decision

Recital 17

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17) In order to increase flexibility as well as achieve optimal budget execution, indirect management should be included as a method of budget implementation.

(17) In order to increase flexibility as well as to achieve optimal budget implementation, this Decision should provide for indirect management as a method of budget execution, to be used only where justified by the nature and content of the action concerned.

Justification

Direct management by the Commission, including Union delegations, should be privileged, wherever possible. Indirect management should only be used when it can be clearly demonstrated that this is a more effective and efficient mode of implementation for the type of action at hand.

Amendment  14

Proposal for a decision

Recital 17 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(17a) In accordance with Article 155 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a (‘the Financial Regulation’), the entities listed in Article 62(1)(c) of that Regulation and in Article 25(2) of this Decision should annually fulfil their reporting obligations. The reporting requirements for those entities are laid down in the verification agreement referred to in Article 130(3) of the Financial Regulation.

 

____________________

 

1a Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 ( OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1).

Justification

As indirect management is a new mode of implementation under the UCPM, it is important to recall the reporting obligations of entities operating under indirect management as laid down in Article 155 of the Financial Regulation.

Amendment  15

Proposal for a decision

Recital 18

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18) In order to promote predictability and long-term effectiveness, when implementing Decision No 1313/2013/EU, the Commission should adopt annual or multi-annual work programmes indicating the planned allocations. This should help the Union to have more flexibility in budget execution and thereby enhance prevention and preparedness actions.

(18) In order to promote predictability and long-term effectiveness, when implementing Decision No 1313/2013/EU, the Commission, in consultation with relevant stakeholders and institutions, should adopt annual and multi-annual work programmes indicating the planned allocations. This should help the Union to have more flexibility in budget execution and thereby enhance prevention and preparedness actions.

Amendment  16

Proposal for a decision

Recital 18 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(18a) The establishment and management of additional strategic Union reserves and stockpiles of crisis-relevant products under the EU4Health programme should complement the reactive reserves of rescEU.

Amendment  17

Proposal for a decision

Recital 22 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(22a) The Union Mechanism should also allow for the possibility of additional, voluntary contributions by Member States.

Amendment  18

Proposal for a decision

Recital 23

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(23) While prevention and preparedness measures are essential to enhance the robustness of the Union in facing natural and man-made disasters, the occurrence, timing and magnitude of disasters is by its nature unpredictable. As shown in the recent COVID-19 crisis, financial resources requested to ensure an adequate response may significantly vary from year to year and should be made available immediately. Reconciling the principle of predictability with the need to react rapidly to new needs consequently means adapting the financial implementation of the programmes. Consequently, it is appropriate to authorise carry-over of unused appropriations, limited to the following year and solely devoted to response action, in addition to Article 12(4) of the Financial Regulation.

(23) While prevention and preparedness measures are essential to enhance the robustness of the Union in facing natural and man-made disasters, the occurrence, timing and magnitude of disasters is by its nature unpredictable. As shown in the recent COVID-19 crisis, financial resources requested to ensure an adequate response may significantly vary from year to year and should be made available immediately. Reconciling the principle of predictability with the need to react rapidly to new needs consequently means adapting the financial implementation of the programmes. Consequently, it is appropriate to authorise carry-over of unused appropriations, limited to the following year and devoted to prevention, preparedness and response actions, in addition to Article 12(4) of the Financial Regulation.

Amendment  19

Proposal for a decision

Recital 25

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(25) Annex I to Decision No 1313/2013/EU is not flexible enough to allow the Union to properly adjust investments in prevention, preparedness and response and thus it is deleted. Investment levels to be allocated to the different phases of the disaster risk management cycle need to be determined in advance. This absence of flexibility prevents the Union from being able to react to the unpredictable nature of disasters.

deleted

Justification

The co-legislators should keep track of the relative distribution of funding by pillar (prevention, preparedness and response). Sufficient flexibility is guaranteed by the possibility of amending the Annex by means of a delegated act.

Amendment  20

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(1a) In Article 4, the following point is inserted:

 

4a. 'Union disaster resilience goals' means objectives establishing prevention and preparedness actions in order to secure the capacity of the Union and its Member States to respond to disasters, while ensuring that the internal market functions properly in a situation whereby a disaster or crisis may have negative transboundary effects.

Amendment  21

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 5

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.  The Commission shall define Union disaster resilience goals to support prevention and preparedness actions. Disaster resilience goals shall ensure a common baseline for maintaining critical societal functions in the face of cascading effects of a high impact disaster and for ensuring the functioning of the internal market. The goals shall be based on forward looking scenarios, including the impacts of climate change on disaster risk, data on past events and cross-sectoral impact analysis with a particular attention to vulnerable people.

5. The Commission shall define Union disaster resilience goals to support prevention and preparedness actions. Disaster resilience goals shall ensure a common baseline for maintaining critical societal functions in the face of cascading effects of a high impact disaster and for ensuring the functioning of the internal market. The goals shall be based on forward looking scenarios, including the impacts of climate change and biodiversity loss on disaster risk, data on past events and cross-sectoral impact analysis and analysis of the long-term social impact on the regions affected, with a particular attention to vulnerable people. In the drafting of disaster resilience goals, the Commission shall specifically focus on recurrent disasters that hit Member States' regions and suggest that national authorities take concrete measures, including those to be implemented with the use of EU funds, to strengthen the resilience to crises.

Amendment  22

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 7 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The ERCC shall in particular coordinate, monitor and support in real-time the response to emergencies at Union level. The ERCC shall work in close contact with national crisis systems, civil protection authorities and relevant Union bodies.

The ERCC shall in particular coordinate, monitor and support in real-time the response to emergencies at Union level. The ERCC shall work in close contact with national crisis systems, civil protection authorities, community-level voluntary groups and relevant Union bodies.

Amendment  23

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 8 – point c)– indent 3 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

- to provide technical training assistance to local communities for the purpose of enhancing their capacities as regards their first unassisted reaction to a crisis;

Amendment  24

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission shall define, by means of implementing acts adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2), the capacities rescEU shall consist of, based on the resilience goals referred to in Article 6(5), scenario-building as referred to in Article 10(1), taking into account identified and emerging risks and overall capacities and gaps at Union level, in particular in the areas of aerial forest fire fighting, chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents, and emergency medical response.

2. The Commission shall define, by means of implementing acts adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2), the capacities rescEU shall consist of, based on the resilience goals referred to in Article 6(5), scenario-building as referred to in Article 10(1), taking into account identified and emerging risks and overall capacities and gaps at Union level, in particular in the areas of aerial forest fire fighting, seismic, chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents, and emergency medical response. The Commission shall regularly update the information on the number and classification of rescEU capacities and make that information directly available to other Union institutions.

Amendment  25

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

As concerns capacities for tackling medical emergencies, such as strategic stockpiling and emergency medical teams, the Commission shall ensure that they are coordinated and achieve synergies with other relevant Union programmes, in particular with the EU4Health Programme, with the objective of delivering a consistent response and avoiding duplication of activities, thus potentially generating financial savings.

Amendment  26

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

rescEU capacities shall be acquired, rented, leased, and/or otherwise contracted by the Commission or Member States. The Commission may acquire, rent, lease or otherwise contract rescEU capacities to stock and distribute supplies or to provide services to Member States, through procurement procedures in accordance with the Union's financial rules. Where rescEU capacities are acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by Member States, direct grants may be awarded by the Commission to Member States without a call for proposals.

rescEU capacities shall be acquired, rented, leased, and/or otherwise contracted by the Commission or Member States. The Commission may acquire, rent, lease or otherwise contract rescEU capacities to stock and distribute high-quality supplies or to provide services to Member States, through procurement procedures in accordance with the Union's financial rules. Where rescEU capacities are acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by Member States, direct grants may be awarded by the Commission to Member States without a call for proposals.

Justification

The COVID-19 crisis has clearly demonstrated the importance of checking the quality of any medical supplies and equipment, especially when procured outside the Union.

Amendment  27

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

rescEU capacities shall be hosted by the Member States that acquire, rent, lease or otherwise contract those capacities. As a way to enhance Union resilience, rescEU capacities acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by the Commission are to be strategically pre-positioned inside the Union. In consultation with Member States, rescEU capacities acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by the Commission could also be located in third countries via trusted networks managed by relevant international organisations .;

rescEU capacities shall be hosted by the Member States that acquire, rent, lease or otherwise contract those capacities. As a way to enhance Union resilience, rescEU capacities acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by the Commission are to be strategically pre-positioned inside the Union. In consultation with Member States and the European Parliament, rescEU capacities acquired, rented, leased or otherwise contracted by the Commission could also be located in third countries via trusted networks managed by relevant international organisations.

Amendment  28

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

rescEU capacities may be deployed outside the Union in accordance with paragraphs 6 to 9 of this Article.;

rescEU capacities may be deployed outside the Union in accordance with paragraphs 6 to 9 of this Article. Specific provisions shall be put in place by the Commission to guarantee accountability and the correct use of rescEU capacities in third countries, including providing  for access by Union controlling officers. Visibility of the Union Mechanism in third countries shall be ensured in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 20a of this Decision.;

Amendment  29

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d

Decision 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraphs 5 and 6

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) Paragraphs 5 and 6 are deleted

(d) Paragraphs 5 and 6 are replaced by the following:

 

5. The Commission shall review the breakdown set out in Annex I in light of the outcome of the evaluation referred in Article 34(3). The Commission shall be empowered to adopt, where necessary in light of unexpected events affecting the execution of the budget or in light of the establishment of rescEU capacities, delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 in order to amend Annex I so as to adjust each of the figures in Annex I by more than 10 percentage points. In addition, the Commission shall be encouraged to organise impact assessments for any proposal to amend Annex I and consultations of relevant stakeholders in that regard.

 

6. Where, in the event of a necessary revision of the budgetary resources available for response actions, imperative grounds of urgency so require, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 in order to amend Annex I so as to adjust each of the figures in Annex I by more than 10 percentage points, within the available budgetary allocations in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 31.

Amendment  30

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 6 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(da)  In Article 19, the following paragraph 6a is added:

 

(6a) The European Parliament and the Council shall authorise the available annual appropriations without prejudice to the provisions of the Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. ..../... laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021-2027 and the Interinstitutional Agreement of ... 2020 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on cooperation in budgetary matters and sound financial management.

Amendment  31

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19a  – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Measures referred to in Article 2 of Regulation [ERI] shall be implemented under this Decision through amounts referred to in point (iv) of Article 3(2)(a) of that Regulation, subject to its Article 4(4) and (8).

Measures referred to in Article 2 of Regulation [ERI] shall be implemented under this Decision with an amount of EUR 2 187 620 000 in current prices as referred to in point (iv) of Article 3(2)(a) of that Regulation, subject to its Article 4(4) and (8).

Justification

It is preferable, for reasons of clarity and transparency, to cite in the UCPM legal base the exact amount to be provided for the UCPM through the Recovery Instrument.

Amendment  32

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 20a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Any assistance or funding provided under this Decision shall be given appropriate visibility. In particular, Member States shall ensure that public communication for operations funded under the Union Mechanism:

Any assistance or funding provided under this Decision shall be given appropriate visibility in line with the specific guidelines issued by the Commission for specific interventions. In particular, Member States shall ensure that public communication for operations funded under the Union Mechanism:

Amendment  33

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 25 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission shall implement the Union's financial support in accordance with the Financial Regulation in direct management or in indirect management with bodies referred to in Article 62(1)(c) of the Financial Regulation.

2. The Commission shall implement the Union's financial support in direct management in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 or in indirect management with the bodies referred to in point (c) of Article 62(1) of that Regulation. When choosing the mode of implementation of financial support, priority shall be given to direct management. Where justified by the nature and content of the action concerned, the Commission may use indirect management. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 in order to supplement this Decision by setting out actions carried out under the Union Mechanism which may be implemented by indirect management.

Justification

Direct management by the Commission, including Union delegations, should be privileged, wherever possible. Indirect management should only be used when it can be clearly demonstrated that this is a more effective and efficient mode of implementation for the type of action at hand.

Amendment  34

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 25 – paragraph 5

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. In addition to Article 12(4) of the Financial Regulation, commitment and payment appropriations, which have not been used by the end of the financial year for which they were entered in the annual budget shall be automatically carried over and may be committed and paid up to 31 December of the following year. The carried-over appropriations shall be used solely for response actions. The carried-over appropriations shall be used first in the following financial year.

5. In addition to Article 12(4) of the Financial Regulation, commitment and payment appropriations, which have not been used by the end of the financial year for which they were entered in the annual budget shall be automatically carried over and may be committed and paid up to 31 December of the following year. The carried-over appropriations shall be used for prevention, preparedness and response actions. The carried-over appropriations shall be used first in the following financial year.

Amendment  35

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 – point (a)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 30 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 6(5) and in the second subparagraph of Article 21(3) shall be conferred on the Commission until 31 December 2027.

2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 6(5), Article 19(5) and (6), the second subparagraph of Article 21(3) and Article 25(2) shall be conferred on the Commission until 31 December 2027.

Amendment  36

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Annex I

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(23) Annex I is deleted.

deleted

Justification

The co-legislators should keep track of the relative distribution of funding by pillar (prevention, preparedness and response). Sufficient flexibility is guaranteed by the possibility of amending the Annex by means of a delegated act.

 


PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism

References

COM(2020)0220 – C9-0160/2020 – 2020/0097(COD)

Committee responsible

 Date announced in plenary

ENVI

17.6.2020

 

 

 

Opinion by

 Date announced in plenary

BUDG

17.6.2020

Rapporteur

 Date appointed

Niclas Herbst

19.6.2020

Discussed in committee

13.7.2020

 

 

 

Date adopted

1.9.2020

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

38

1

1

Members present for the final vote

Rasmus Andresen, Clotilde Armand, Robert Biedroń, Anna Bonfrisco, Olivier Chastel, Lefteris Christoforou, David Cormand, Paolo De Castro, José Manuel Fernandes, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Alexandra Geese, Valentino Grant, Elisabetta Gualmini, Francisco Guerreiro, Valérie Hayer, Eero Heinäluoma, Niclas Herbst, Monika Hohlmeier, Petros Kokkalis, Mislav Kolakušić, Moritz Körner, Joachim Kuhs, Zbigniew Kuźmiuk, Hélène Laporte, Pierre Larrouturou, Janusz Lewandowski, Margarida Marques, Siegfried Mureşan, Victor Negrescu, Andrey Novakov, Jan Olbrycht, Dimitrios Papadimoulis, Karlo Ressler, Bogdan Rzońca, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Nils Torvalds, Nils Ušakovs, Johan Van Overtveldt, Rainer Wieland, Angelika Winzig

Substitutes present for the final vote

Petros Kokkalis

 


 

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

38

+

PPE

Lefteris Christoforou, José Manuel Fernandes, Niclas Herbst, Monika Hohlmeier, Janusz Lewandowski, Siegfried Mureşan, Andrey Novakov, Jan Olbrycht, Karlo Ressler, Rainer Wieland, Angelika Winzig

S&D

Robert Biedroń, Paolo De Castro, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Elisabetta Gualmini, Eero Heinäluoma, Pierre Larrouturou, Margarida Marques, Victor Negrescu, Nils Ušakovs

Renew Group

Clotilde Armand, Olivier Chastel, Valérie Hayer, Moritz Körner, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Nils Torvalds

ID

Anna Bonfrisco, Valentino Grant, Hélène Laporte

Verts/ALE

Rasmus Andresen, David Cormand, Alexandra Geese, Francisco Guerreiro

ECR

Zbigniew Kuźmiuk, Bogdan Rzońca, Johan Van Overtveldt

GUE/NGL

Petros Kokkalis, Dimitrios Papadimoulis

 

1

-

ID

Joachim Kuhs

 

1

0

NI

Mislav Kolakušić

 

Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

- : against

0 : abstention

 

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Title

Amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism

References

COM(2020)0220 – C9-0160/2020 – 2020/0097(COD)

Date submitted to Parliament

2.6.2020

 

 

 

Committee responsible

 Date announced in plenary

ENVI

17.6.2020

 

 

 

Committees asked for opinions

 Date announced in plenary

AFET

17.6.2020

DEVE

17.6.2020

BUDG

17.6.2020

REGI

17.6.2020

Not delivering opinions

 Date of decision

AFET

7.7.2020

REGI

5.6.2020

 

 

Associated committees

 Date announced in plenary

DEVE

23.7.2020

 

 

 

Rapporteurs

 Date appointed

Nikos Androulakis

2.6.2020

 

 

 

Legal basis disputed

 Date of JURI opinion

JURI

2.9.2020

 

 

 

Discussed in committee

2.7.2020

2.9.2020

 

 

Date adopted

3.9.2020

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

72

6

1

Members present for the final vote

Nikos Androulakis, Bartosz Arłukowicz, Margrete Auken, Simona Baldassarre, Marek Paweł Balt, Traian Băsescu, Aurelia Beigneux, Monika Beňová, Sergio Berlato, Alexander Bernhuber, Malin Björk, Simona Bonafè, Delara Burkhardt, Pascal Canfin, Sara Cerdas, Mohammed Chahim, Nathalie Colin-Oesterlé, Miriam Dalli, Esther de Lange, Christian Doleschal, Marco Dreosto, Bas Eickhout, Eleonora Evi, Agnès Evren, Fredrick Federley, Pietro Fiocchi, Catherine Griset, Jytte Guteland, Teuvo Hakkarainen, Anja Hazekamp, Martin Hojsík, Pär Holmgren, Jan Huitema, Yannick Jadot, Adam Jarubas, Petros Kokkalis, Athanasios Konstantinou, Ewa Kopacz, Joanna Kopcińska, Ryszard Antoni Legutko, Peter Liese, Sylvia Limmer, Javi López, César Luena, Fulvio Martusciello, Liudas Mažylis, Joëlle Mélin, Tilly Metz, Silvia Modig, Dolors Montserrat, Alessandra Moretti, Dan-Ștefan Motreanu, Ville Niinistö, Ljudmila Novak, Grace O’Sullivan, Jutta Paulus, Stanislav Polčák, Jessica Polfjärd, Luisa Regimenti, Frédérique Ries, María Soraya Rodríguez Ramos, Sándor Rónai, Rob Rooken, Silvia Sardone, Christine Schneider, Günther Sidl, Linea Søgaard-Lidell, Nils Torvalds, Edina Tóth, Véronique Trillet-Lenoir, Petar Vitanov, Alexandr Vondra, Mick Wallace, Pernille Weiss, Michal Wiezik, Tiemo Wölken, Anna Zalewska

Substitutes present for the final vote

Billy Kelleher, Susana Solís Pérez

Date tabled

7.9.2020

 


 

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

72

+

PPE

Bartosz Arłukowicz, Alexander Bernhuber, Traian Băsescu, Nathalie Colin‑Oesterlé, Christian Doleschal, Agnès Evren, Adam Jarubas, Ewa Kopacz, Peter Liese, Fulvio Martusciello, Liudas Mažylis, Dolors Montserrat, Dan‑Ștefan Motreanu, Ljudmila Novak, Jessica Polfjärd, Stanislav Polčák, Christine Schneider, Edina Tóth, Pernille Weiss, Michal Wiezik, Esther de Lange

S&D

Nikos Androulakis, Marek Paweł Balt, Monika Beňová, Simona Bonafè, Delara Burkhardt, Sara Cerdas, Mohammed Chahim, Miriam Dalli, Jytte Guteland, César Luena, Javi López, Alessandra Moretti, Sándor Rónai, Günther Sidl, Petar Vitanov, Tiemo Wölken

Renew

Pascal Canfin, Fredrick Federley, Martin Hojsík, Jan Huitema, Billy Kelleher, Frédérique Ries, María Soraya Rodríguez Ramos, Susana Solís Pérez, Linea Søgaard‑Lidell, Nils Torvalds, Véronique Trillet‑Lenoir

ID

Simona Baldassarre, Marco Dreosto, Luisa Regimenti, Silvia Sardone

Verts/ALE

Margrete Auken, Bas Eickhout, Pär Holmgren, Yannick Jadot, Tilly Metz, Ville Niinistö, Grace O'Sullivan, Jutta Paulus

ECR

Sergio Berlato, Pietro Fiocchi, Joanna Kopcińska, Ryszard Antoni Legutko, Alexandr Vondra, Anna Zalewska

GUE/NGL

Anja Hazekamp, Petros Kokkalis, Silvia Modig, Mick Wallace

NI

Eleonora Evi, Athanasios Konstantinou

 

6

-

ID

Aurelia Beigneux, Catherine Griset, Teuvo Hakkarainen, Sylvia Limmer, Joëlle Mélin

ECR

Rob Rooken

 

1

0

GUE/NGL

Malin Björk

 

Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

- : against

0 : abstention

 

 

Last updated: 8 September 2020
Legal notice - Privacy policy