Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2011)758 - For the period 2014 to 2020 the Rights and Citizenship Programme - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2011)758 - For the period 2014 to 2020 the Rights and Citizenship Programme. |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2011)758  |
| date | 15-11-2011 |
As confirmed by the Stockholm Programme, the development of an area of freedom, security and justice remains a priority for the European Union. Although significant progress has already been achieved in this field with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and the resulting binding character of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the Union is still faced with many challenges such as the insufficient or inconsistent implementation of certain rights across the Union or a lack of awareness about certain Union legislation both by citizens and public authorities. Legislative and policy measures as well as their coherent implementation are key tools. Funding can contribute to the development of this area through supporting legislation and policy-making and promoting their implementation.
In accordance with the Communication on the EU Budget Review, a fresh look was taken at the existing funding instruments and delivery mechanisms to ensure clear focus on European added value and to cater for rationalisation and simplification of the funding mechanisms. In ‘A Budget for Europe 2020’[2], the Commission identified the need for a simpler and more transparent budget to overcome the problems that arise from the complexity of programme structures and the existence of multiple programmes. The area of Rights was mentioned as an example of the existing fragmentation, where action should be taken.
Within this framework and aiming at simplification and rationalisation, the Rights and Citizenship Programme is the successor of three current programmes:
- Fundamental Rights and Citizenship,
- Daphne III,
- The Sections 'Antidiscrimination and Diversity' and 'Gender Equality' of the Programme for Employment and Social Solidarity (PROGRESS).
The merge of these programmes, all based on provisions outside Title V of Part III of the TFEU, will allow for a comprehensive funding approach in this area.
The general objective of this proposal is to contribute to the creation of an area, where the rights of persons, as enshrined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, are promoted and protected. In particular, this Programme should promote the rights deriving from European citizenship, the principles of non-discrimination and equality between women and men, the right to the protection of personal data, the rights of the child, the rights deriving from the Union consumer legislation and from the freedom to conduct a business in the internal market.
To be truly effective and bring about clear results for citizens and businesses, the rights need to be known by those who apply them, by those who advise people on their rights and by those who benefit from these rights, and be applied consistently and effectively across the Union. This can be achieved by supporting training and awareness-raising, strengthening networks and facilitating transnational cooperation. Moreover, the European Union needs to equip itself with a sound analytical basis to support policy-making and legislation in the rights and citizenship area.
Contents
A public stakeholder consultation on future funding activities in the area of Justice, Fundamental Rights and Equality for the period after 2013 was launched on 20 April 2011. It was available online for two months and was open to all interested stakeholders and individuals. 187 respondents – with an important part of NGOs - from most Member States submitted their contribution.
The respondents evaluated positively the policy objectives of the programmes and confirmed the need for funding in the areas covered. The European added value was acknowledged and no area was identified where funding should be discontinued. The need for simplification and improvement was acknowledged and most of the proposed measures received a positive response, including the reduction of the number of programmes and the simplification of procedures.
The stakeholders were in favour of funding activities such as exchange of good practices, training of professionals, information and awareness raising activities, support to networks, studies etc. All types of activities which met with approval by the respondents are foreseen explicitly in Article 5 of the proposal. The respondents were in agreement with the Commission's proposals concerning the actors appropriate to receive funding and the types of funding mechanisms that could be used.
One impact assessment was carried out concerning the future funding activities for the whole area of justice, rights and equality, which currently comprises six programmes. This impact assessment is relevant for both the proposal on the Justice Programme, as well as the proposal on the Rights and Citizenship Programme. The impact assessment builds on the interim evaluations of the current programmes, which confirmed the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the programmes, but they also identified some shortcomings and room for improvement. The impact assessment has considered three options:
Option A: to maintain six programmes and to address some of the identified problems through changes in the internal management of the programmes. Improving management and fostering strong synergies between the programmes would address some of the issues. However, the main cause of the problems, i.e. the multitude of programmes would not be directly addressed and consequently the improvements to be achieved by this option would be limited.
Option B: to maintain all measures of option A and additionally to merge the current six programmes into two programmes. This option would allow for flexibility in the use of funds and in addressing annual policy priorities. It would achieve increased simplification (both for the beneficiaries and the administration) and efficiency of the programmes, since significantly fewer procedures would be needed. The effectiveness of the programmes would also be improved as the fragmentation and dilution of funds would be addressed better within two programmes. Human resources could be freed, since fewer procedures would reduce the administrative burden and they would be allocated to activities improving the effectiveness of the programmes (dissemination of results, monitoring, providing information, etc).
Option C: to implement only one programme. This option addresses all problems caused by the multiple legal instruments and by the increased administrative burden of managing multiple programmes. However, due to legal constraints the scope of this programme would not be able to cover the funding needs of all policy areas. A choice would have to be made between the area of justice and the area of rights and citizenship. Although this solution can deliver maximum impact in terms of management, however it would not be possible to address sufficiently the policy priorities and needs of the whole policy area.
Resulting from the analysis and comparison of the options, the preferred option is the implementation of two programmes which would cover the funding needs of all policy areas (option B). In comparison to the status quo option B presents clear advantages and no disadvantage. Option A is not as beneficial as option B and option C only offers partial coverage of the policy areas, which renders this option unsuitable.
The proposal is based on Articles 19, 21, 114, 168, 169 and 197 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The combination of these articles is necessary to continue supporting policies which are developed and implemented in the three current programmes, and is not meant to extend activities to new policy areas. The combination of more than one article is necessary in order to achieve the general objectives of the Programme in a comprehensive way and to adopt a simplified and more efficient approach to funding. The use of this set of articles provides the necessary legal basis for the proposed activities and therefore there is no necessity to make use of Article 352 TFEU.
Article 19 foresees the adoption of incentive measures to support Member State action in the area of combating discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation, including activities promoting equality between women and men and supporting the rights of the child.
Article 21 provides for Union measures to facilitate the exercise of citizens' rights to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States. Actions aiming at informing citizens and authorities about the rights to diplomatic and consular protection and about their voting rights can also be covered by this Article as they are facilitating in practise the exercise of citizen’s right to move.
Article 114 foresees the approximation of laws aimed at the establishment and functioning of the internal market. Article 169 foresees, in addition to the approximation of laws under Article 114, the adoption of measures to support, supplement and monitor policy of the Member States to protect the health safety and economic interest of consumers as well as promoting the right to information, education and to organise themselves in order to safeguard their interests. Both provisions can serve as a basis to fund activities related to consumer and contract law issues. A high level of consumer protection and the development of contract law to facilitate cross-border transactions create the necessary conditions to empower the Union citizens to exercise their rights across the border.
Article 168 foresees a high level of human health protection and Union action complementing national policies in preventing physical and mental illness and obviating sources of danger to physical and mental health. Violence against children constitutes a danger to the physical and mental health of the children, including often cross-border threats. Children are vulnerable citizens and need an increased level of protection against these dangers to their physical and mental health. Violence against women constitutes also a serious threat to the physical and mental health of victims, who are in need of a high level of protection.
Article 197 allows supporting Member States in implementing Union law by facilitating the exchange of information or supporting training schemes. This provision will be particularly important in areas such as fundamental rights, citizenship and data protection, where national authorities have an important role to play.
The funding activities proposed respect the principles of European added value and of subsidiarity. Funding from the Union budget concentrates on activities whose objectives cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States alone, where the Union intervention can bring additional value compared to action of Member States alone. Activities covered by this Regulation contribute to the effective application of the acquis by developing mutual trust between Member States, increasing cross-border cooperation and networking and achieving correct, coherent and consistent application of Union law across the Union. The European Union is in a better position than Member States to address cross-border situations and to provide a European platform for mutual learning. A sound analytical basis for the support and the development of policies will be supported. European Union intervention allows for these activities to be pursued consistently across the Union and brings economies of scale.
The proposal complies with the proportionality principle in that it does not go beyond the minimum required in order to achieve the stated objective at European level and what is necessary for that purpose.
The financial envelope for the implementation of the Rights and Citizenship Programme for the period 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020 shall amount to EUR 439 million (current prices).
The aim of the proposed approach is to combine the simplification of funding procedures, as requested by all involved parties, with a more result-oriented approach. The main elements of this approach are the following:
- The proposal defines the general and specific objectives pursued by the Programme (Articles 3 and 4) and the areas of action where the Programme will focus on (Article 5). The general and specific objectives define the scope of the programme (policy areas), whereas the types of action are funding-oriented, they are applicable to all policy areas concerned and define in a horizontal way the outputs that can be achieved by funding. At the same time, they define where funding can really be of added value for the achievement of the policy objectives. In implementing this Regulation the Commission will establish annually the funding priorities in the respective policy areas. The Programme can make use of all financial instruments foreseen in the Financial Regulation. The participation is open to all legal entities legally established in the Member States or in a third country participating in the Programme, with no further limitations to the access to the programme. This structure allows for simplification, as well as for better orientation of the programme to the policy needs and developments. Moreover, it provides a stable context for evaluation, as the specific objectives are directly linked to indicators for evaluation, which will remain consistent for the whole duration of the programme and will be monitored and evaluated regularly. It is proposed not to reserve specific amounts per policy area within the programme in order to achieve flexibility and to improve the implementation of the programme.
- The participation of third countries is limited to EEA, accession and candidate countries and potential candidates. Other third countries, notably countries where the European Neighbourhood Policy applies, may be associated to actions of the Programme, if this serves the purpose of these actions.
- The annual priorities of the programme will be defined in an annual work programme. Because this implies policy-driven choices, the adoption of the annual work programme is subject to the opinion of a Committee of Member States under the Advisory procedure.
- The Commission may use, on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis, an existing executive agency for the implementation of the programme, as provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 of 19 December 2002 laying down the statute for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programmes.