Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2018)473 - Proposal for a regulation establishing, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the instrument for financial support for border management and visa - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2018)473 - Proposal for a regulation establishing, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the instrument for financial ... |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2018)473  |
| date | 12-06-2018 |
1. CONTEXTOFTHEPROPOSAL
• Reasons for and objectives of the proposal
The effective protection of our external borders is a prerequisite for ensuring the safe area for the free movement of persons and goods within the Union. This is also among the main objectives of the Union’s response to the challenges in the areas of migration and security as outlined in the Commission’s Communication on A European Agenda on Migration1. The Union’s objective (under Article 67(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union (TFEU)) of ensuring a high level of security within an area of freedom, security and justice should be achieved, inter alia, through common measures on the crossing of internal borders by persons and on border controls at the Union’s external borders, and the common visa policy. The achievement of an internal area without borders where persons and goods can circulate freely brings important benefits, both to European citizens as well as business. The Schengen area is one of the key means through which European citizens can exercise their freedoms, and the internal market can prosper and develop. It is one of the most tangible achievements of the Union which makes it even more necessary to strengthen the efforts aimed at safeguarding its integrity, especially in times of challenges posed by migratory pressure.
The Union budget played a key role in funding a common response to the various dimensions of the migration crisis and the preserving the Schengen area. The Commission proposes to increase support to securing our external borders. This includes the proper management of flows of goods and persons by strengthening external border control and ensuring that Member States have adequate equipment to carry out customs control.
Against this background, on 2 May 2018 the Commission adopted a proposal for the next multiannual financial framework for the period 2021-2027 in which it is suggested to set up a new Integrated Border Management Fund that will provide vital and reinforced support to Member States for securing the common external borders of the Union, with an envelope of EUR 9 318 000 000 (in current prices). A five-fold increase as compared to the current multiannual financial framework for the overall envelope for border management is foreseen for the next period. The Integrated Border Management Fund will contribute to the further development of the common visa policy and ensure European Integrated Border Management at the external borders with a view to managing the efficient crossing of the external borders. This includes addressing migratory challenges and potential future threats at those borders, thereby contributing to addressing serious crime with a cross-border dimension and to ensuring a high level of internal security within the Union in full respect for fundamental rights, while safeguarding the free movement of persons within it. Funding support should be continued to be provided to Member States to build and enhance their capacities in these areas and to reinforce cooperation, including with the relevant Union agencies. The Fund will also play a role in ensuring more uniformity in the performance of customs controls at the external borders, by addressing the current differences between the Member States due to geographical situation and differences in capacities and resources available. Within that framework, the proposed Integrated Border Management Fund (IBMF) will be composed of two instruments: an instrument for financial support for border management and visa and an instrument for
1 COM(2015) 240 final of 13 May 2015.
equipment.2 This
financial support for customs control equipment. This proposal concerns only the instrument for border management and visa. A separate proposal covering the instrument for customs control equipment is presented by the Commission in parallel.
Strengthening the European integrated border management at the external borders, as defined in Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 establishing the European Border and Coast Guard3, is a key pillar of EU action and a prerequisite to the normal functioning of the Schengen system. The concept of the European integrated border management brings together a number of components that need to be addressed in a comprehensive and coordinated way, ranging from the area of border control, including the referral of third country nationals in need of protection, the prevention and detection of cross-border crime, search and rescue operations, to risk analyses. Interagency cooperation is also an important component of the European integrated border management, as are solidarity mechanisms, including Union funding, such as the new IBMF, and in particular the instrument for border management and visa.
The EU external borders are common borders requiring collective and joined-up actions by competent national authorities and EU actors and by the Union as a whole. Managing these common external borders is therefore a shared responsibility between the Member States and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (EBCGA), constituting the two pillars of the European Border and Coast Guard. For the European Border and Coast Guard to implement effectively European integrated border management, a close cooperation between its constituent parts is key. An adequate distribution of dedicated EU financial resources is needed to ensure that Member States that are most affected have sufficient capacity to address the challenges they are confronted with, for the benefit of the Union as a whole. The instrument for border management and visa will contribute to that.
The efforts of national border guards and customs control authorities that will be supported by the instrument need to be complemented by a strong and fully operational European Border and Coast Guard Agency at the core of a fully integrated EU border management system. This is why the Commission intends to propose a major scaling up of the Agency to fully operational status, with a standing corps of around 10,000 border guards.4 It also requires a well-functioning European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (eu-LISA).
In the next multiannual financial framework, Union funding under the external action instruments will furthermore provide strengthened support to cooperation with third countries aimed at improving the management of their borders, countering irregular migration and improving the management of migration flows.
The main challenge the proposal aims to address is the need for greater flexibility in managing the future instrument, as compared with the current programming period, but also tools to ensure that funding is steered towards EU priorities and actions with a significant
OJ C […], […], p. […].
Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2016 on the
European Border and Coast Guard and amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament
and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EC) No 863/2007 of the European Parliament and of the
Council, Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 and Council Decision 2005/267/EC (OJ L 251,
16.9.2016, p.
1).
A Modern Budget for a Union that Protects, Empowers and Defends: The Multiannual Financial
Framework for 2021-2027, COM(2018) 321, 2.5.2018.
4
added value to the Union. New mechanisms for the allocation of funding between shared, direct and indirect management are needed to address new challenges and priorities.
The key for the distribution of funding is flexibility in determining the right delivery mode and the themes to which funding should be allocated, while maintaining a critical mass of upfront funding for structural and large, multiannual investments in line with Member States’ needs for the further development of their border management systems. The allocation of funding will also fully take into account the need for Member States to focus investments on key EU priorities in accordance with the Union acquis.
In addition to a basic amount of EUR 5 000 000 that is envisaged to be allocated to Member States at the beginning of the programming period, the financial envelope foreseen for the programmes of Member States will be allocated based on a distribution key that will reflect the needs and pressure experienced by Member States in the two areas covered by this instrument (border management and visas). Funding will be distributed based on the following weighing: 30% for external land borders, 35% for external sea borders, 20% for airports and 15% for consular offices. For border management, the distribution of resources for external sea and land borders of each Member State will be based on the length of and the pressure on those external borders (70%). Furthermore, the workload at the external sea and land borders will be a factor for the distribution of resources for those borders (30%). The resources for airports will be distributed based on the workload of Member States at those airports. As for the resources for consular offices, 50% of the resources will be distributed taking into account the number of consular offices and the other 50% for the workload at those consular offices as regards the management of visa policy.
The share for the Member States’ programmes is approximately 60 % of the total financial envelope. It is proposed that Member States be provided with around 50 % of the envelope at the beginning of the programming period, while retaining the possibility of topping up the envelope periodically. It is envisaged that one fixed top-up of 10 % of the envelope will be made at mid-term (technical adjustment of the distribution key subject to financial performance according to which a Member State should have submitted payment claims covering at least 10 % of the initial amount of payment appropriations).
The remaining 40 % of the overall financial envelope should be managed through the thematic facility, which will periodically provide funding for a number of priorities defined in Commission financing decisions. This facility offers flexibility in the management of the instrument by allowing the disbursement of funds to the technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission and the following components of the thematic facility:
– support for specific actions, providing additional funding for dedicated actions of high EU added value, through the Member States’ national programmes;
– support for Union actions, managed through direct and indirect management; and
– emergency assistance.
Actions under the thematic facility would be programmed through annual or multiannual work programmes, adopted by Commission Implementing Decision. The facility will make it possible to address new priorities or take urgent action through the delivery mode that is best suited to the policy objective.
The instrument will furthermore maintain support for the functioning of the Special Transit Scheme implemented by Lithuania, in line with the EU’s obligations, compensating Lithuania
for the transit visa fees it foregoes and additional costs it incurs as a result of the facilitated transit document (FTD) and facilitated rail transit document (FRTD) scheme, such as the costs of replacing and upgrading equipment and IT systems, and training and operational costs.
Further simplification will be ensured in the implementation of the instrument, in particular by ensuring a coherent approach with rules applicable to the management of other Union Funds (‘single rule book’), providing better guidance on the management and control systems and audit requirements, and ensuring that the eligibility rules under shared management make full use of simplified cost options (SCOs). It is also important to maximise EU added value of the actions supported by the instrument and to implement an improved monitoring and evaluation framework so as to strengthen the performance-based management of the funds.
This proposal provides for a date of application as of 1 January 2021 and is presented for a Union of 27 Member States, in line with the notification by the United Kingdom of its intention to withdraw from the European Union and Euratom based on Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union received by the European Council on 29 March 2017.
Consistency
with existing policy provisions in the policy area
The instrument for border management and visa builds on the investments and achievements made with the support of its predecessors: the External Borders Fund in 2007-2013, as established by Decision No 574/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council5, and the instrument for external borders and visa as part of the Internal Security Fund (ISF) in 2014-2020, as established by Regulation (EU) No 515/2014 of the European Parliament and
Council6.
The instrument for border management and visa will continue supporting overall EU policies in the area of external border management and visas, such as the strengthening of European integrated border management, the purchase of border management equipment to be used by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, the common visa policy and relevant IT systems.
Union agencies active in the field of border management, in particular the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, eu-LISA, but also the European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA) are vital to ensuring security of the borders and the free movement of persons in the Union, working closely together with Member States' authorities. For instance, Member States make sure that IT systems on national level are interoperable and therefore enable information exchange between different authorities, while the agency for large-scale systems (eu-LISA) ensures that information exchange between all IT systems in the Union can function. Full consistency and complementarity will therefore also be ensured in the way the Union budget supports these agencies and Member States through the instrument for border management and visa. It is important to also ensure complementarity with actions implemented by the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) and the European Fisheries
Decision No 574/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 May 2007 establishing the External Borders Fund for the period 2007 to 2013 as part of the General programme Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows (OJ L 144, 6.6.2007, p. 22).
Regulation (EU) No 515/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 establishing, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa and repealing Decision No 574/2007/EC (OJ L 150, 20.5.2014, p. 143).
5
6
Control Agency (EFCA), for example by sharing equipment used for maritime and border surveillance to enable the best possible use of resources to strengthen maritime security.
Responding to the key challenges in the field of border management requires forceful actions from both Member States and the Agencies concerned. This is why the Commission proposes to significantly increase the budget allocated in particular to the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. Together with the envisaged budget for eu-LISA, the budgetary contributions will amount to EUR 12 013 000 000 (in current prices) for the next multiannual financial framework. This will allow for the major reinforcement in the role and reach of notably the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, in particular through a standing corps of around 10 000 border guards.7 The two instruments creating an Integrated Border Management Fund however do not cover the funding allocated to the agencies. Therefore this proposal regulates only the instrument for border management and visa that will provide support to the implementation of European integrated border management at the external border by the Member States, in full synergy with the work of the Union agencies in this area.
• Consistency with other Union policies
The Union’s policy objective of moving towards European integrated border management concerns an area in which various other EU policy areas complement and reinforce one another. As border management takes place at the external borders, cooperation and coordination between border management authorities and other relevant authorities, in particular customs authorities, is indispensable. In the new multiannual financial framework, strong synergies between funding instruments supporting these authorities will be ensured in order to maximise the impact of the EU budget in the area of migration and borders.
By ensuring that authorities responsible for border management and customs control have the necessary equipment and expertise at their disposal and that they work together in a seamless manner, we can make sure that irregular migration is reduced and that the inflow of dangerous or unwanted goods into the Union is diminished. The two components of the IBMF, the instrument for border management and visa and a newly established instrument for customs control equipment will contribute to this. The former instrument will ensure strong and effective border management while safeguarding the free movement of people, while the latter will support a well-functioning customs union. The former will focus exclusively on actions that relate to checks on persons in the context of border control, while the latter will target actions that relate to the purchase, maintenance and upgrading of equipment for customs control. It will cover equipment that can be used for checks of both goods and persons. This way, synergies between the two instruments forming part of the IBMF will be fully ensured.
Cooperation and coordination with other authorities in the field of migration and security is important to make integrated border management a success. These are authorities dealing with asylum, migration management, return and cross-border crime, as well as actors in the area of maritime security and surveillance.
The Asylum and Migration Fund (AMF) is the proposed future funding instrument that should support the work of national authorities in providing reception to asylum applicants and migrants when they arrive on EU territory as well as returning those who have no right to stay in the EU. The AMF and the instrument for border management and visa will operate in full
7 COM(2018) 321 final of 2 May 2018.
synergy to achieve a more significant impact of both Funds in the area of migration and border management. This is important to, for instance reduce the number of irregular migrants coming into the Union, as well as to make sure that those who have no right to stay are returned to their countries of origin.
The new Internal Security Fund (ISF) is the future funding instrument that should contribute to ensuring a high level of security in the Union, in particular by tackling terrorism and radicalisation, organised crime and cybercrime and by assisting and protecting victims of crime, in full coherence with actions supported by the future instrument for border management and visa.
The border management and visa instrument will enable also the purchase of multipurpose equipment for maritime surveillance, in order to maximise synergies in the area of maritime surveillance too.
Measures in and in relation to third countries supported through the instrument will be implemented in full synergy and coherence with, and will complement other actions outside the Union supported through the Union's external financing instruments. In particular, in implementing such actions, full coherence will be sought with the principles and general objectives of the Union’s external action and foreign policy related to the country or region in question. In relation to the external dimension, the instrument for border management and visa will target support to enhance cooperation with third countries and to reinforce key aspects of their border surveillance and border management capabilities in areas of interest to the Union’s migration policy and Union’s security objectives.
2. LEGALBASIS, SUBSIDIARITYAND PROPORTIONALITY
• Legal basis
Article 3(2) of the Treaty on European Union provides that ‘the Union shall offer its citizens an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to external border controls, asylum, immigration and the prevention and combating of crime’.
The legal basis for the proposed Union action can be found in the list of measures contained in Article 77(2), as well as in Article 79(2)(d) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union (TFEU), such as the common policy on visas, the checks on persons at external borders, any measures for the gradual establishment of an integrated management system for external borders and the combatting of trafficking in persons.
Attention is also drawn to Article 80 TFEU, which underlines that these Union policies set out in Chapter 2 of Title 5 of Part Three of the TFEU and their implementation are to be governed by the principle of solidarity and the fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the Member States.
Additionally, the Commission adopted on 29 May 2018 a proposal for a Common Provisions Regulation8, in order to improve the coordination and harmonise the implementation of
8 Regulation (EU) ../..
delivery9. The
instrument for border management and visa will also be covered by this Regulation as regards
the shared management part.
The different Union Funds implemented under shared management pursue complementary objectives and share the same management mode, therefore Regulation (EU) No .../... [Common Provisions Regulation] sets out a series of common principles such as partnership.
That Regulation also contains the common elements of strategic planning and programming, including provisions on the Partnership Agreement to be concluded with each Member State, and sets out a common approach to the performance orientation of the Funds. Accordingly, it includes enabling conditions, and arrangements for monitoring, reporting and evaluation. Common provisions are also set out with regard to eligibility rules, financial management and management and control arrangements.
Variable geometry
The measures proposed based on Article 77(2) TFEU, constitute developments of the Schengen acquis. As a consequence, Article 4 of Protocol (No 22) on the position of Denmark applies with regard to that Member State, as well as Article 4 of Protocol (No 19) on the Schengen acquis integrated into the framework of the European Union with regard to Ireland.
The proposed measures constitute developments of the Schengen acquis regarding borders and visas to which four countries which are not Member States are associated on the basis of agreements with the Union. Once adopted, notified and accepted, the proposed measures will, as a consequence, apply also to those four countries.
Subsidiarity (for non - e xcl usive competence)
Overall, external border management is an area where there is clear added value in Union intervention, as compared with Member States acting alone. The Union is in a better position than Member States to provide a framework for Union solidarity in border control, visa policy and the management of migration flows, and to provide a platform for the development of common IT systems supporting the implementation of these policies.
In that context, the financial support provided under this Regulation therefore contributes in particular to the strengthening of national and European capabilities in those areas. For that purpose, the Regulation aims inter alia:
— to support more systematically the services provided by individual Member States in securing the area without internal borders;
— to enhance the inter-agency cooperation between border and other law enforcement authorities; and
— to ensure that Member States have more specialised equipment available to put at the disposal of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency for joint operations in the interest of safeguarding the area without internal borders.
It is fully acknowledged that interventions should take place at an appropriate level and the role of the Union should not go beyond what is necessary.
9 COM(2018) 375 of 29 May 2018.
Proportionality
The proposal complies with the proportionality principle and falls within the scope for action in the area of freedom, security and justice, as defined in Title V of the TFEU. The objectives and corresponding funding levels are proportional to what the instrument aims to achieve. The actions envisaged in this proposal address the European dimension of border management and the common visa policy.
Choice
of instrument
Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council to establish, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the instrument for border management and visa.
3. RESULTS OF EX POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER
Contents
- CONSULTATIONS
- Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2016 on the
- of the
- support under shared management, with the main aim of simplifying policy
- Stakeholders concurred that in order to maximise EU added value, EU spending should reflect EU-level priorities and policy commitments and support the implementation of the EU home
- For the Asylum and Migration Fund, the Border Management and Visa Instrument (as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund) and the
- flexibility provided by the thematic facility. It should explain the advantage of this mechanism over emergency funding in the previous
ANDIMPACTASSESSMENTS
• Ex post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation
The proposal takes into account the results of evaluations of the previous funding instrument in the area of border management and visa. It builds on the ex post evaluation of the External Borders Fund, which was the Fund in the 2007-2013 programming period, and the interim evaluation of the Internal Security Fund instrument for external border and visa (ISF Borders and Visa), which is the Fund in the current (2014-2020) period.
As regards effectiveness, the ISF Borders and Visa is considered effective in the areas in which it intervenes, the common visa policy and border management. The Fund helped to facilitate legitimate travel and to reinforce Member States’ national capacities in visa issuance. Its contribution to consular cooperation and to strengthening cooperation with third countries was so far limited in many Member States. The development of a common visa policy was supported through the establishment and operation of IT systems, with particular regard to national visa information systems. By reinforcing the border management capacity at the external borders of the Union, the Fund contributed to safeguarding the free movement of persons within the Schengen area. It contributed to the effectiveness of external border controls by supporting measures focused on the purchase, modernisation, upgrade and replacement of border control and surveillance equipment. Due to mainly external factors, limited progress was registered in promoting the development, implementation and enforcement of policies ensuring the absence of any control on persons. The cooperation between Member States was facilitated by the Fund and the cooperation between Member States and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, including the purchase of equipment to be used in joint operations with the help of the Fund, contributed to solidarity and responsibility-sharing.
Overall, the evaluation, within the limits of data available, indicates that the results of the interventions were achieved at reasonable cost in terms of both human and financial resources. However, most Member States point to a need for additional guidance from the Commission on the implementation of the Fund. The perceived administrative burden can be considered a factor affecting efficiency. Despite a number of measures aimed at simplification and reducing administrative burden, Member States still perceive administrative burden as high and the implementation of the SCOs as problematic. Increased simplification has been noted under direct management.
The Fund’s original rationale and objectives are still relevant in the aftermath of the migratory crisis. Appropriate mechanisms to address the changing needs were put in place at both the programming and implementation stages. The flexibility offered by ISF Borders and Visa, consisting of transfers of money between different objectives, helped to address the changing needs. However, Member States would appreciate the even greater flexibility that would come from removing the minimum allocations of funds to objectives and reducing the number of national objectives.
The Fund is considered to be coherent with other EU and national interventions. Coherence with other EU financing instruments was ensured at the programming stage. Coordinating mechanisms have been put in place to ensure continued coherence at the implementation stage. The monitoring committees and the responsible authorities play key roles in ensuring coherence. The Fund’s objectives complement those of other national policies. Complementarity with other EU financing instruments was planned at the programming stage. Coordinating mechanisms have been put in place to ensure complementarity at the implementation stage, but could be further improved. The different implementation modes complement each other.
The Fund ensured EU added value through innovative investments in infrastructure and equipment. It supported cooperation between Member States. Training activities enabled by the Fund contributed to the harmonisation of practices between Member States. Greater EU added value could have been expected in the areas of consular cooperation, cooperation with non-EU countries and IT systems.
The sustainability of actions funded by ISF Borders and Visa relies on continued EU funding, as national funding appears to be insufficient to ensure a similar level of investment. Training activities play an important role in ensuring the sustainability of actions in the long
Stakeholder
consultations
Two dedicated open public consultations on EU funds in the areas of migration and security ran from 10 January 2018 to 9 March 2018. Overall, respondents strongly emphasised the need for simplification in the delivery of home affairs funding instruments, greater flexibility (specifically in relation to the ability to respond to migration- and security-related crises) and for increased funding and support in areas with high levels of responsibility-sharing (such as border management) and/or cooperation between Member States and with the relevant Union agencies. Responses demonstrate that these measures can improve the effectiveness and efficiency of instruments, and EU added value. Stakeholders also pointed to the need for greater home affairs policy leverage in non-EU countries.
Member States and Schengen-associated countries were consulted in the framework of the AMIF-ISF Committee (representatives of the Member States’ responsible authorities for AMIF and ISF). Member States provided input on the main funding priorities, problems, the architecture of the funds and delivery modes. Other key stakeholders and beneficiaries of AMIF and ISF funding through direct and indirect management, such as international organisations and civil society organisations, were also consulted, as were the relevant Union agencies.
Stakeholders concurred that in order to maximise EU added value, EU spending should reflect EU-level priorities and policy commitments and support the implementation of the EU home
term.
affairs acquis. They called for sufficient funding to be made available to face current and newly emerging challenges. Sufficient funding should also be made available for the relevant Union agencies, in line with their increasing activities. Stakeholders agreed on the need for more flexibility to be built into the structure of the Funds. They found that, in order to retain sufficient flexibility to be able to react to changing circumstances, the multiannual national programmes should be maintained. Non-governmental organisations were of the view that direct management should also be continued.
These consultations confirmed an overall consensus among key stakeholders on the need to retain a wide scope of action for EU funding in this policy area, including as regards its external dimension, enhancing the impact of home affairs policies, more simplification in delivery mechanisms and flexibility, in particular to respond to emergencies.
Collection
and use of expertise
Work on the preparation of the future financial instruments for home affairs started in 2016 and continued into 2017 and 2018. As part of this work, an MFF study, Border management and visas beyond 2020, was carried out in 2017 by an external contractor, and the impact assessment was also supported by a study prepared by an external contractor launched in September 2017. These studies brought together available results from evaluations of the existing financial instruments and from the stakeholder consultations, and explored the problems, objectives and policy options, including their likely impact, as examined in the impact assessment.
Impact
assessment
An impact assessment for this proposal covered the Asylum and Migration Fund, the new ISF and the IBMF (composed of the instrument for border management and visa and the instrument for customs control equipment). The summary sheet for the impact assessment and the positive opinion of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board can be found on the following website: ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/?fuseaction=ia.
The impact assessment report analysed various policy options in terms of how the funding will be delivered, addressing issues such as coherence and complementarities with other EU funding instruments, the external dimension of migration and security funding, flexibility in a stable financial environment (including the thematic facility), management modes, the possibility of providing emergency assistance and a possible mid-term review mechanism. The preferred option is a mix of options building on the results and recommendations of the ex post evaluation of previous Funds and the interim evaluation of current Funds.
The impact assessment report addresses the recommendations made by the Regulatory Scrutiny Board. The table below outlines the main considerations and recommendations for improvement received for the Asylum and Migration Fund, the Border Management and Visa Instrument (as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund) and the Internal Security Fund and how the impact assessment report was amended to reflect these.
Main
considerations
Regulatory Scrutiny Board
Modifications
impact assessment report
The report does not explain how increasing EU competence in these areas [of home affairs] and expanded role of agencies will affect the overall
For the Asylum and Migration Fund, the Border Management and Visa Instrument (as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund) and the
| system. | Internal Security Fund, the report has been revised to explain how the extension of EU competence and larger role of Agencies affects the roles of the respective Funds (section 3.2). Having a key role in the implementation of Union migration and security policies, Home Affairs Agencies will have an important role during the programming phase of national programmes while their monitoring activities would feed into the mid-term review. An expanded mandate of the Agencies would not have as purpose to substitute the current tasks performed by Member States but rather to enhance and upgrade actions of the Union and its Member States in the area of migration, border management and security. |
| Further considerations and recommendations for improvement | Modifications impact assessment report |
| (1) The report should present the main changes in the programme structure and the priorities compared to the current programming period. Moreover, the report should clarify the scope of the external component of the programme, i.e. its complementarity with the external instruments. | The report has been revised to present the main changes to the programme structure compared to the current programming period (section 3.2) and to clarify the scope of the external component and its complementarity with the external instruments (section 3.3). The objectives of the Funds are based on the scope of their predecessors which, in general, were considered sufficiently broad to support the implementation of EU policy priorities, providing EU added value. Adaptations to priorities and actions reflect policy developments and the need for synergies with other EU Funds. Interventions in the external dimension will be designed and implemented in coherence with EU external action and foreign policy, in particular with the EU’s external Instrument. |
| (2) The report should also explain how the extension of EU competence and larger role for agencies affects the roles of the respective programmes. Does it increase the need for actions at national level, for delegation to the agencies, or reduce the priority of some interventions? | Please see the modifications made to the report accommodating the main consideration by the Regulatory Scrutiny Board presented above. |
| (3) The Board understands that the new mechanism for performance reserves was still under development when drafting the report. Its final version should however update and clarify the chosen mechanism and justify it in the light of experience from other EU funds (as orally explained to the Board). | The report has been revised to update and clarify the preferred mechanism, taking into account experience from other EU Funds and developments in the framework of preparing the future Common Provisions Regulation for shared management (section 4.1.4). No dedicated performance reserve is presented in the preferred option. A minimum level of financial implementation is included for allocating top-up funding in the technical adjustment at mid-term while performance elements would be taken into account when providing additional funds via the thematic facility. |
| (4) The report should clarify how the new emergency mechanism will function within the envelopes of each of the three funds for migration and security, and that the use of emergency assistance should be limited due to the new | The report has been revised to provide clarifications on how the new emergency mechanism will function (section 4.1.3). Emergency assistance provided through the Funds should be complementary to the Emergency Aid Reserve (at |
flexibility provided by the thematic facility. It should explain the advantage of this mechanism over emergency funding in the previous
programming period.
The monitoring arrangements are not well developed. The report should clarify how the programmes’ success will be defined and measured.
the level of the EU budget) and be used in clearly defined situations. Due to the flexibility embedded in the thematic facility, the use of emergency assistance is expected to be more limited than in the current programming period. Emergency assistance may be implemented through shared, direct or indirect management.
The report has been revised (section 5) to present the measurement of the success of the programmes. This will be based on objectives set between Commission and Member States, to be agreed in the national programmes, and the subsequent
measurement of achievements towards those objectives, through output and result indicators included in the legal proposals. Reporting requirements for shared management are laid down in the Common Provisions Regulation.
Regulatory
fitness and simplification
The Common Provisions Regulation10 will ensure simplification of the instrument through the use, as far as possible, of common rules for the implementation of programmes. Furthermore, Member States will be encouraged to use even more simplified cost options. The audit approach will be streamlined to focus more on risk-based audit sampling and to follow the ‘single audit’ principle in order to reduce administrative burden.
Further simplification under direct management will be achieved through the use of common Commission-wide IT tools (e-Grants management system).
Fundamental
rights
Financial support from the Union budget is indispensable to the implementation of European integrated border management to support Member States in their efforts to manage crossings of the external borders efficiently and to address migratory challenges and potential future threats at those borders, thereby helping to counter serious crime with a cross-border dimension. These objectives will be pursued in full compliance with the Union’s commitments on fundamental rights. This will be monitored closely during the implementation of the Fund.
4.
BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS
The Commission’s proposal for the next multiannual financial framework includes EUR 8 018 000 000 (in current prices) for the instrument for border management and visa for the 2021-2027 period.
Implementation will be by means of shared, direct or indirect management. The global resources will be allocated as follows: approximately 60 % to the Member States’ programmes implemented under shared management; and 40 % to the thematic facility, for specific actions at national or transnational level, Union actions and emergency assistance.
10
OJ L […], […], p.
The thematic facility envelope will also be used for the technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission.
5. OTHERELEMENTS
• Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements
The monitoring and evaluation framework will be improved, inter alia through a better methodology for tracking investments across relevant Union funds, so as to stimulate timely performance and to ensure that evaluations can provide effective input for any future revisions of policy interventions. This will be done through better indicators, closer cooperation with relevant partners and mechanisms to incentivise performance. A mid-term evaluation and a retrospective evaluation will be carried-out by the Commission. These evaluations will be carried out in line with paragraphs 22 and 23 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016, where the three institutions confirmed that evaluations of existing legislation and policy should provide the basis for impact assessments of options for further action. The evaluations will assess the instrument’s effects on the ground based on indicators and targets and on a detailed analysis of the degree to which the instrument can be deemed relevant, effective and efficient, provides enough EU added value and is coherent with other EU policies. They will include lessons learnt to identify any issues or any potential to further improve the actions or their results and to help maximise the instrument's impact.
The Member States are expected to report on the implementation of their programmes in accordance with the modalities set out in this Regulation and the Common Provisions Regulation.
Detailed
explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal
Chapter I — General provisions of the proposed Regulation sets out its purpose, scope and key definitions. It also sets out the objectives of the Regulation. The proposed scope of these articles builds largely on the current Regulation for the Internal Security Fund — Borders and Visa, while taking into account new policy developments, such as the establishment of the European Border and Coast Guard, including the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, the modernisation of the common visa policy and the development of new large-scale IT systems and their interoperability. Strong emphasis is put on supporting actions with a European dimension.
Chapter II — Financial and implementation framework sets out general principles for the support provided under the Regulation and conveys the importance of consistency and complementarities with relevant EU funding instruments. It stipulates the delivery modes for the actions supported under the Regulation: shared, direct and indirect management. The proposed mix of delivery modes is based on the positive experience with this combination in the implementation of the current funding instrument.
The first section of this chapter lays down the common provisions. The proposal indicates an amount for the financial envelope for the instrument and its use through various implementation arrangements.
The second section describes the implementation framework for the shared management part of the instrument, notably as regards the programmes of the Member States. The conditions applying to actions supported under the Regulation are also set out, such as those relating to the purchase of equipment and training activities. The section sets out detailed arrangements
for the mid-term review of Member States’ programmes and for the implementation of specific actions and operating support, including the Special Transit Scheme.
The third section lays down the provisions for actions implemented under direct and indirect management, while the fourth section lays down the provisions for emergency assistance, which can be implemented through shared, direct or indirect management.
The fifth and final section sets out necessary provisions on monitoring, reporting, information and communication requirements and evaluation.
Chapter III — Transitional and final provisions contains provisions on the delegation of power to the Commission to adopt delegated acts, and on the Committee procedure. It is stipulated that the Regulation will be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States from 1 January 2021.