Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2018)462 - European Instrument for Nuclear Safety complementing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument on the basis of the Euratom Treaty - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2018)462 - European Instrument for Nuclear Safety complementing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument ... |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2018)462  |
| date | 14-06-2018 |
1. CONTEXTOFTHEPROPOSAL
• Reasons and objectives
This proposal is made in the context of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2021-2027 as outlined in the communication ‘A modern Budget for a Union that Protects, Empowers and Defends – The Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027’1 from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. The communication sets the main priorities and overall budgetary framework for EU external action programmes under the heading ‘Neighbourhood and the World’. The European Instrument for Nuclear Safety complements this framework with activities to be carried out within the framework of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom Treaty).
The objective of the new European Instrument for Nuclear Safety is to promote the establishment of effective and efficient nuclear safety standards in third countries in accordance with Article 203 of Euratom Treaty, building on the experience of nuclear safety activities within the Euratom Community.
The non-proliferation regime has been challenged in recent years and calls for a continuous support to strengthen the international framework to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction. This is the primary role of the safeguards of nuclear materials which aims at preventing and detecting the diversion of nuclear materials. Moreover, under different association and partnership agreement (e.g. with Ukraine), the Union has committed to support the concerned countries in adopting in their national legislation the acquis communautaire, including nuclear safeguards.
Under the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020, a financing instrument which will expire on 31 December 2020 was dedicated to the promotion of a high level of nuclear safety (Regulation (EURATOM) 237/2014 establishing the Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation).
In line with the Communication ‘A new, modern Multiannual Financial Framework for a European Union that delivers efficiently on its priorities post-2020’2 and as concluded in the impact assessment3 that accompanies this Regulation, most instruments should be streamlined into one broad instrument. Parts of nuclear safety cooperation activities currently covered by the Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation may not fall under a streamlined broad instrument, since they need to follow the specific procedure of Article 203 of Euratom Treaty which is incompatible with the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) procedure based on Articles 209 and 212 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Recent reviews and evaluations4 of the external instruments have shown the added value and relevance of the existing instruments. However, they have also highlighted opportunities for improvements, in particular the need to simplify ways of working and to enable the EU to respond to unforeseen circumstances with greater flexibility. The lessons learned taken
1 COM (2018) 321 final
2 COM/2018/092 final
3 SWD (2018) 337.
4 https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/mid-term-review-report-external-financing-instruments en
together with the growing challenges have prompted the Commission to modify the architecture of the external financing instruments to the extent possible.
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 the European Atomic Energy Community based on Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union received by the European Council on 29 March 2017.
• Consistency with existing policy provisions
This proposal provides an enabling framework through which external action policies and international obligations can be implemented.
• Consistency with other Union policies
When implementing this Regulation, consistency with other areas of external action and with other relevant EU policies will be ensured. As reflected in the 2030 Agenda, this means taking into account the impact of all policies on sustainable development at all levels — nationally, within the EU, in other countries and at global level.
Moreover, synergies with actions under other EU programmes should be sought, in order to maximise the impact of combined interventions. Interactions and complementarity with such programmes should allow for an enhanced Union impact. Actions funded under this proposal should be consistent and complementary to those carried out under the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument5 covering nuclear activities, the Instrument for Pre-Accession III6, the Decision on Overseas Countries and Territories7, the common foreign and security policy and the newly proposed European Peace Facility8 which is financed outside the EU budget.
2. LEGALBASIS, SUBSIDIARITYAND PROPORTIONALITY
• Legal basis
This proposal is based on Article 203 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community.
• Subsidiarity
The Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (“the Community”) are together in a unique position to deliver external assistance for a number of reasons. Their status as a supranational entity brings with it political influence and consequent leverage. The Community has a global presence through its Union delegations, which ensures a vast network of information on developments affecting countries worldwide. The EU and the Community are also parties to most multilateral processes aiming at addressing global
Regulation COM(2018)460 final Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument. COM (2018) 465 final Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA III).
COM(2018) 461 final Proposal for a Council Decision on the Association of the Overseas Countries and Territories with the European Union including relations between the European Union on the one hand, and Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark on the other ('Overseas Association Decision'). C(2018) 3800 final Proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to the Council for a Council Decision establishing a European Peace Facility.
5
6
8
challenges. This allows the EU and the Community to be constantly aware of new needs and problems and, therefore, to reallocate resources accordingly. Complementarities at the level of the Community and the Union action and the actions carried out by the Member States are increasing. This enhances dialogue and cooperation with partner countries, which is increasingly channelled through joint programming with Member States.
The Union and the Community are also able to complement Member States activities in dealing with potentially dangerous situations or in the event of particularly costly interventions. In some areas where Member States are not active, the Union and the Community remain the main, and sometimes the only, actors to intervene.
The subsidiarity related to nuclear safety and nuclear safeguards activities is referred to in the Euratom Treaty and in particular in the furtherance of the objectives contained in Title Two Chapters 3 and 7 thereof. The Community also pursues close cooperation, in accordance with Chapter 10, with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in this specific area.
The EU and the Community have significant expertise in this field originating from the history of Europe itself, building on its own safeguard activities within the Union, and from successful policies. It has a recognised international reputation in the area of the nuclear safety and nuclear safeguards of nuclear materials in particular through its role in implementing safeguards in the EU and in supporting the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The EU and the Community can provide added value based on the volume of resources channelled through its instruments, its relatively flexible modes of management and the predictability of resources over the period of the Multi-annual Financial Framework.
• Proportionality
In line with the principle of proportionality, the proposed Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve its objectives.
Choice
of the instrument
One of the objectives of the Euratom Treaty is to attain a high level of nuclear safety in the Union. This should also be achieved outside of the Union. Since the Euratom Treaty has not provided the necessary powers, on the basis of Article 203, appropriate measures must be taken. The proposal takes the form of a Regulation, ensuring its uniform application, binding nature in its entirety and direct applicability.
3. RESULTS OF RETROSPECTIVE EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER
Contents
ANDIMPACTASSESSMENTS
• Retrospective evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation
The mid-term review report9 adopted by the Commission on ten of the external financing instruments10, the ex post evaluation reports on macro-financial assistance and the mid-term
The mid-term review report COM(2017) 720 final, was based on ten staff working documents, one per instrument (see list below), which in turn were based on ten independent evaluations. The mid-term report, the staff working documents and the independent evaluations can be found at here: https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/public-consultation-external-financing-instruments-european-union_en
9
review on the European Investment Bank external lending mandate11 all concluded that the external financing instruments were, overall, fit for purpose and that positive trends were emerging in relation to the achievement of objectives. The reports show that more resources are needed for external financing instruments because they have been stretched to their financial limit.
The instruments set the scope, objectives and procedures for implementing the policies. The mid-term review report has shown that their enabling nature allows them to cover most needs and goals of EU and Community external action. They would benefit from better reflecting a number of developments such as: the new policy framework including the universal coverage of the 2030 Agenda and the external projection of internal policies. In addition, more consideration needs to be given to the links between development and security and the overall level of ambition for peace and security in external action.
Consistency is needed between an instrument's component parts, between different instruments and with donors. Overall, the mid-term review report notes mixed findings on coherence. In terms of coherence within the instruments, the findings were satisfactory. There was a certain level of consistency between the instruments but the multiplicity of programmes sometimes led to overlapping actions, in particular complex cooperation with more advanced developing countries. In addition, the interplay between geographic and thematic approaches sometimes resulted in inconsistent responses at country level.
• Stakeholder consultations
When drafting the evaluation documents that fed into the mid-term review report, three types of consultations with stakeholders were held. Evaluators carried out some one thousand structured or semi-structured interviews with EU officials and representatives from EU institutions, Member States and partner countries. Several technical workshops were held to present and discuss the draft evaluations with participants from the European Parliament, Council working groups, Member States committees, and civil society organisations and local authorities. An open public consultation was held in 201712. It aimed at gathering feedback from stakeholders on the findings emerging from the evaluations of the instruments and on the future external financing instruments after 202013.
The main messages emerging from the stakeholders consulted are summarised below.
Flexibility: Stakeholders agreed that the new financing instruments should be more flexible in responding to unforeseeable challenges and crises. In particular, they underlined the need to make it easier to shift funds across regions and between aid modalities. However, it was also underlined that increasing flexibility should not come at the cost of less predictability, weaker country ownership and less focus on achieving long-term development objectives. To ensure flexibility and predictability, some respondents argued in favour of having sufficient reserves.
Coherence: Stakeholders considered it necessary to ensure greater consistency between the internal and external policies of the EU, and between the external instruments themselves.
10 The 10 instruments were the: Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI); European Development
Fund (EDF); European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI); Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA II); Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace (IcSP); European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR); Partnership Instrument (PI); Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation (INSC); Greenland Decision (GD); and Common Implementing Regulation (CIR). eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52016DC0584
https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/public-consultation-external-financing-instruments-european-union_en For more information on the public consultation see https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/public-consultation-external-financing-instruments-european-union_en
11
Some emphasised the need to strengthen complementarity and synergy between geographical and thematic instruments. Others argued that the Sustainable Development Goals provide the most appropriate basis for increasing consistency between internal and external policies. Most recommended that the EU take a leading role in improving complementarity between various stakeholders, both inside and outside the EU.
Some respondents highlighted the risk of overlap whereby the same policy objectives are funded by multiple instruments. Respondents also called for clear delineation of instruments, while underlining the need to ensure that geographic and thematic programmes take advantage of cross-sectoral synergies and linkages between them.
Complementarity: On the structure of future instruments, stakeholders agreed that combining geographic and thematic programmes brings positive results. They emphasised that the value of geographically structured instruments lies in their capacity to address the specific needs of partner countries in a tailored manner. This is crucial given the diversity of the challenges and needs across these countries. Global, targeted interventions offered by instruments such as the Partnership Instrument and the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace was also appreciated by stakeholders.
Simplification: The EU was strongly encouraged to further simplify the overall architecture of the instruments. The EU should also continue its efforts to simplify cumbersome administrative and financial procedures. Civil society and local authorities emphasised that procedures and rules currently in place have important implications for their ability to become more involved in development cooperation.
Leverage: Stakeholders agreed that innovative financial instruments can play an important role in leveraging public and private financing for EU external assistance. The positive findings on the leverage effects and financial additionality of such instruments in the recent evaluation on blending14 are considered encouraging. However, civil society respondents raised concerns about private sector priorities overriding poverty reduction objectives in partner countries.
Since nuclear safety, including safeguards fall under the Euratom Treaty, this proposal cannot respond to the concerns expressed by stakeholders. Nevertheless coherence and complementarity with the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument which responds to the main concerns raised by stakeholders will be ensured, including by implementing activities in the nuclear field that are ancillary to its broader objectives, mainly peaceful uses of nuclear energy in line with the development and international cooperation policy for health, agriculture, industry and social projects addressing the consequences of any nuclear accident.
• External expertise
The mid-term review report and associated staff working documents were largely based on a set of independent evaluation reports conducted between 2016 and 2017 (one evaluation per instrument). At the same time, an independent report was also produced on the set of external action instruments covered by the mid-term review report, drawing key lessons and messages from them 15.
See https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/evaluation-blending_en
See https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/public-consultation-external-financing-instruments-european-
union_en
Beyond these recent reports, the OECD Development Assistance Committee peer review of the EU’s development cooperation in 201216 came up with a set of recommendations with regard to the architecture, rules and procedures of the Union's external financing instruments. For example, the OECD called on the EU to further simplify and modernise cooperation, by reducing the number of budget items, aligning the rules of the Development Cooperation Instrument and European Development Fund, streamlining approval procedures and increasing consistency between regional and thematic programmes. The EU was asked to become more effective, timely and flexible both at programme level and across the set of instruments. The latter was particularly sought after in situations of fragility and crisis, in which the OECD saw significant room for improvement.
• Impact assessment
In 2018 the Commission carried out an impact assessment17 covering the external action heading ‘Global Europe’ under the 2014-2020 Multi-annual Financial Framework focusing on the major changes proposed for external action, including streamlining several instruments into one broad instrument and the integration of the activities currently financed by the European Development Fund into the EU budget.
The impact assessment also concluded that most instruments aside from those with a very specific nature such as humanitarian aid with its principle of neutrality could be merged in one instrument, namely: the Common Implementing Regulation, Development Cooperation Instrument, European Development Fund, European Fund for Sustainable Development, External Lending Mandate, European Neighbourhood Instrument, European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights, Guarantee Fund, Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace, Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation18 and Partnership Instrument. Those instruments that should remain separate are: the instrument for pre-accession assistance; humanitarian aid; the common foreign and security policy budget; overseas countries and territories including Greenland; the EU’s Union Civil Protection Mechanism; the EU aid volunteers scheme; support for the Turkish Cypriot community; the Emergency Aid Reserve; and the new European Peace Facility.
As noted by the Commission19 and supported by feedback from partners during the open public consultation, the current architecture of the external financing instruments is too complex. Streamlining a number of instruments into one broad instrument would provide an opportunity to rationalise their management and oversight systems and so reduce the administrative burden for all stakeholders. Having a simplified oversight system would allow the relevant institutions to have a better, more comprehensive view of the EU’s external expenditure.
A broad instrument would provide a more geographically and thematically comprehensive approach, facilitating the implementation of different policies in a trans-regional, multi-sectoral and global way. The EU would facilitate coherent responses and synergies, breaking down thematic and geographic silos.
16
19
www.oecd.org/dac/peerreviews">www.oecd.org/dac/peer-reviews SWD (2018) 337. Placeholder
Except for nuclear activities that need to follow the specific procedure of Article 203 of the Euratom Treaty.
In particular, in the ‘Reflection paper on the future of EU finances’ (June 2017), and the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and to the Council (February 2018).
On 25 April 2018, the impact assessment was examined by the Regulatory Scrutiny Board and received a positive opinion with reservations20 on the understanding that the assessment should be adjusted in order to integrate the Board’s recommendations on certain aspects. As a result, the assessment was revised to:
– provide more information on the governance structure of the new instrument,
including information on decision-making procedures;
– further explain several funding issues, including the funding baseline, the ring-
fencing for regions and thematic areas and the contribution key of Member States to the European Development Fund; and
– elaborate how the future monitoring and evaluation systems would work.
The Board’s opinion and the associated modifications made to the impact assessment are further described in annex 1 of the impact assessment.
• Simplification
A priority for the Commission across the Multiannual Financial Framework is to simplify its regulatory environment.
Streamlining a number of instruments within one broad instrument will provide an opportunity to rationalise management and oversight systems, and so reduce the administrative burden for EU institutions and Member States. Instead of focusing on multiple programming processes, debates would be more focused on political objectives and engagement with external partners. In addition, actions that receive cumulative funding from different Union programmes shall be audited only once, covering all involved programmes and their respective applicable rules. Nuclear activities will therefore be part of the new NDICI and only the nuclear safety activities that require a specific Euratom legal base will be under the present instrument, implemented in full coherence with the NDICI.
In terms of aligning rules, incorporating provisions from the Common Implementing Regulation will give the new instrument a coherent set of principles across all its component parts and will make it easier to understand for partners and implementing agents. These are either recalled or adapted to this regulation which retains references to the NDICI for a coherent and simplified approach.
• Fundamental rights
The EU is founded on a strong engagement to promote and protect fundamental rights, human rights, democracy and the rule of law. It actively supports these rights and principles within its borders, but also when engaging in relations with third countries.
4. BUDGETARYIMPLICATIONS
In its Communication of 2 May 201821, the European Commission proposed to allocate EUR 89 500 000 000 (in current prices) to the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument 2021-2027, of which 300 000 000 (in current prices) will be allocated to this Instrument to complement nuclear activities that fall under the Euratom Treaty.
Placeholder
COM (2018) 321, 2.5.2018
5. OTHERELEMENTS
• Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements
The Commission will regularly monitor its actions and review progress made towards delivering results. In line with paragraphs 22 and 23 of the Inter-institutional Agreement of 13 April 201622, 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 Commission will carry out an interim and a final evaluation. The evaluations will assess the instrument’s effects on the ground based on the relevant indicators and an analysis of the degree to which the instrument can be deemed relevant, effective, efficient, provides enough EU added value and is coherent with other EU policies. The evaluations will include lessons learned to identify any problems or potential to further improve the actions or their results and to help maximise their impact.
The conclusions of the evaluations accompanied by observations will be communicated to the Council and the European Parliament.
Progress will be monitored on the basis of indicators aligned with the objectives of the proposal. From 2022 onwards, the Commission will send the European Parliament and the Council an annual report on the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation.
carried out in a timely manner to feed into the decision-making process.
• Geographic scope and participation of third countries
The proposed Regulation has a worldwide geographic scope.
As regards the choice of partners outside the Union, the Commission may decide to work with international organisations, partner countries or entities from other third countries under indirect management for the implementation of a specific action, when this is in the interest of the Union and of the objectives of such action, and subject to the rules and conditions laid down in the Financial Regulation. This choice would require a Commission decision.
Provisions
of the proposal
TITLE II – IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INSTRUMENT
22 Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and
the European Commission on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016; OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1–14.