Procedure : 2017/0309(COD)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected : A8-0180/2018

Texts tabled :

A8-0180/2018

Debates :

PV 30/05/2018 - 22
CRE 30/05/2018 - 22
PV 12/02/2019 - 4
CRE 12/02/2019 - 4

Votes :

PV 31/05/2018 - 7.6
CRE 31/05/2018 - 7.6
Explanations of votes
PV 12/02/2019 - 9.9
Explanations of votes

Texts adopted :

P8_TA(2018)0236
P8_TA(2019)0070

REPORT     ***I
PDF 1153kWORD 182k
22.5.2018
PE 616.870v03-00 A8-0180/2018

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(2017/0772/2) – C8‑0409/2017 – 2017/0309(COD))

Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety

Rapporteur: Elisabetta Gardini

Rapporteur for the opinion (*):

Željana Zovko, Committee on Development

(*) Associated committee – Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure

PR_COD_1amCom

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
 OPINION of the Committee on Development
 OPINION of the Committee on Budgets
 OPINION of the Committee on Regional Development
 PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE
 FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

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(2017)0772/2 – C8‑0409/2017 – 2017/0309(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM2017/0772/2),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 196 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8‑0409/2017),

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

–  having regard to the reasoned opinion submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the Czech Chamber of Deputies, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinions and position in the form of amendments of the Committee on Development, the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on Regional Development and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (A8-0180/2018),

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.   Calls on the Commission to refrain from using redeployments for financing new policy priorities that are added in the course of an ongoing multiannual financial framework, as this will inevitably have a negative impact on the implementation of other key Union activities;

4.   Calls on the Commission to provide for sufficient financing for the Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) under the next multiannual financial framework starting in 2021, building on the present overhaul of the UCPM;

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

Amendment    1

Proposal for a decision

Recital 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1)  The Union Civil Protection Mechanism ('the Union Mechanism') governed by Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and the Council12strengthens cooperation between the Union and the Member States and facilitates coordination in the field of civil protection in order to improve the Union's response to natural and man-made disasters.

(1)  The Union Civil Protection Mechanism ('the Union Mechanism') governed by Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and the Council12 strengthens cooperation between the Union, the Member States and their regions and facilitates coordination in the field of civil protection in order to improve the Union's response to natural and man-made disasters.

_________________

_________________

12 Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 924).

12 Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 924).

Amendment    2

Proposal for a decision

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3)  Natural and man-made disasters can strike anywhere across the globe, often without warning. Whether of natural or man-made origin, they are becoming increasingly frequent, extreme and complex, exacerbated by the impacts of climate change, and irrespective of national borders. The human, environmental, and economic consequences stemming from disasters can be enormous.

(3)  Natural and man-made disasters can strike anywhere across the globe, often without warning. Whether of natural or man-made origin, they are becoming increasingly frequent, extreme and complex, exacerbated by the impacts of climate change, and irrespective of national borders. The human, environmental, social and economic consequences stemming from disasters can be of an unknown scale. Unfortunately, those disasters are sometimes intentional, for example in the case of terrorist attacks.

Amendment    3

Proposal for a decision

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4)  Recent experience has shown that reliance on voluntary offers of mutual assistance, coordinated and facilitated by the Union Mechanism, does not always ensure that sufficient capacities are made available to address the basic needs of people affected by disasters in a satisfactory manner, nor that the environment and property are properly safeguarded. This is particularly so where Member States are simultaneously affected by recurrent disasters and collective capacity is insufficient.

(4)  Recent experience has shown that reliance on voluntary offers of mutual assistance, coordinated and facilitated by the Union Mechanism, does not always ensure that sufficient capacities are made available to address the basic needs of people affected by disasters in a satisfactory manner, nor that the environment and property are properly safeguarded. This is particularly so where Member States are simultaneously affected by disasters that are both recurrent and unexpected, both natural and man-made, and collective capacity is insufficient. To overcome those insufficiencies and emerging hazards, all Union instruments should be made use of in a fully flexible manner, including through the promotion of active participation of the civil society. Nevertheless, Member States should undertake adequate preventive actions in terms of preserving an amount of national capacities that is sufficient to properly deal with disasters.

Amendment    4

Proposal for a decision

Recital 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(4a)   Forest fire prevention is vital in the context of the global commitment to reduce CO2 emissions. Indeed, the combustion of trees and peat-rich soils in forest fires results in the emission of CO2. More specifically, studies have shown how fires cause 20% of all CO2 emissions around the world, i.e. more than the combined emissions of all the transport systems on earth (vehicles, ships and aircraft).

Amendment    5

Proposal for a decision

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5)  Prevention is of key importance for protection against disasters and requires further action. To that effect, Member States should share risk assessments on a regular basis as well as summaries of their disaster risk management planning in order to ensure an integrated approach to disaster management, linking risk prevention, preparedness and response actions. In addition, the Commission should be able to require Member States to provide specific prevention and preparedness plans in relation to specific disasters, notably with a view to maximising overall Union support to disaster risk management. Administrative burden should be reduced and prevention policies strengthened, including by ensuring necessary links to other key Union policies and instruments, notably the European Structural and Investment Funds as listed in recital 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/201313.

(5)  Prevention is of key importance for protection against disasters and requires further action. To that effect, Member States should share risk assessments, on their national safety and security risks, on a regular basis as well as summaries of their disaster risk management planning in order to ensure an integrated approach to natural and man-made disaster management, linking risk prevention, preparedness and response actions. In addition, the Commission should be able to require Member States to provide specific prevention and preparedness plans in relation to specific disasters, including man-made ones, notably with a view to maximising overall Union support, in particular from the European Environment Agency (EEA), to disaster risk management. It is essential to reduce the administrative burden and to strengthen prevention policies, including by reinforcing links and cooperation with other key Union policies and instruments, notably the European Structural and Investment Funds as listed in recital 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/201313.

 

 

Amendment    6

Proposal for a decision

Recital 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(5a)  Risk constitutes a negative stimulus for the development of regions. Prevention and risk management imply the reformulation of policies and institutional frameworks, and the strengthening of local, national and regional capacities to design and implement risk management measures, coordinating a wide range of actors. Preparing risk maps by regions and / or member states, strengthening the response capacity and reinforcing prevention actions, with special emphasis on climate risks, is crucial. It is crucial that risk maps take into account both the risks caused by the current climate variability and the projected trajectories of climate change.

Amendment    7

Proposal for a decision

Recital 5 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(5b)  When Member States prepare their risk assessments and their risk management planning, they should take into account the specific risks to wildlife and animal welfare. The Commission should encourage across Europe the dissemination of information about animals affected in disasters. Training programmes and courses should be further developed in this regard.

Amendment    8

Proposal for a decision

Recital 5 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(5c)  The 2017 forest fire season was particularly long and intense in many Member States, resulting in over 100 deaths in one Member State alone. The lack of available assets, outlined in the Capacity Gaps Report 1a, and the inability of the European Emergency Response Capacity ('EERC' or 'voluntary pool') to respond in good time to all 17 requests for forest fire assistance, proved that the voluntary nature of Member States' contributions is insufficient during large-scale emergencies affecting several Member States at the same time.

 

_________________

 

1a Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on progress made and gaps remaining in the European Emergency Response Capacity, 17.02.2017.

Amendment    9

Proposal for a decision

Recital 5 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(5d)  The most natural partners for deepening cooperation are neighbouring Member States who share the same expertise and structures and are most likely to be affected by the same disasters and risks.

Amendment    10

Proposal for a decision

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6)  There is a need to reinforce the collective ability to prepare and respond to disasters notably through mutual support in Europe. In addition to strengthening the possibilities already offered by the European Emergency Response Capacity ('EERC' or 'voluntary pool'), from now on referred to as "European Civil Protection Pool", the Commission should also establish rescEU. The composition of rescEU should include emergency response capacities to respond to wildfires, large-scale floods and earthquakes, as well as a field hospital and medical teams in line with World Health Organisation standards, that can be rapidly deployed.

(6)  There is a need to reinforce the collective ability to prepare and respond to disasters notably through mutual support in Europe. In addition to strengthening the possibilities already offered by the European Emergency Response Capacity ('EERC' or 'voluntary pool'), from now on referred to as "European Civil Protection Pool", the Commission should also establish rescEU. The composition of rescEU should include emergency response capacities to respond to wildfires, large-scale floods and earthquakes, terrorist attacks and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear attacks, as well as a field hospital and medical teams in line with World Health Organisation standards, that can be rapidly deployed. In this regard, it is important to strengthen and include the specific capacities of local and regional authorities, since they are the first to intervene after a disaster. Those authorities should develop cooperation models in which communities can share best practices, giving them the opportunity to help to develop their resilience in the face of natural disasters.

Amendment    11

Proposal for a decision

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6a)  The role of regional and local authorities in disaster prevention and management is of great importance and their response capacities need to be appropriately involved in any coordination and deployment activities carried out under this Decision, in accordance with Member States' institutional and legal frameworks, with a view to minimising overlaps and to fostering interoperability. Such authorities can play an important preventive role and they are also the first to react in the aftermath of a disaster,together with their volunteers’ capacities. Therefore, there is a need for on-going cooperation at local, regional and cross-border level with a view to establishing common alert systems for rapid intervention prior to the mobilisation of rescEU, as well as regular public information campaigns on initial response measures.

Amendment    12

Proposal for a decision

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7)  The Union should be able to support Member States where available capacities are insufficient to allow for an effective response to disasters by contributing to the financing of leasing or rental arrangements for ensuring rapid access to such capacities or by financing their acquisition. This would substantially increase the effectiveness of the Union Mechanism, by ensuring availability of capacities in cases where an effective response to disasters would otherwise not be ensured, particularly for disasters with wide ranging impacts affecting a significant number of Member States. Union procurement of capacities should allow for economies of scale and better coordination when responding to disasters.

(7)  The Union should be able to support Member States where available material and technical capacities are insufficient to allow for an effective response to disasters, including in the case of cross-border events, by contributing to the financing of leasing or rental arrangements for ensuring rapid access to such capacities or by financing their acquisition. This would substantially increase the effectiveness and deployability of the Union Mechanism, by ensuring the speedy availability of material and technical capacities, including for rescuing elderly persons or persons with disabilities, in cases where an effective response to disasters would otherwise not be ensured, particularly for disasters with wide ranging impacts affecting a significant number of Member States, such as cross-border epidemics. The pre-committed suitable equipment and Union procurement of capacities should allow for economies of scale and better coordination when responding to disasters. Optimal and transparent use of financial resources should be ensured.

Justification

When mobilising capacities through the UCPM, speed is of the utmost importance, as illustrated by the tragic consequences of the late deployment of firefighting planes in the most recent forest fire seasons in Southern Europe. EU co-funding should always be provided under conditions of full transparency and accountability.

Amendment    13

Proposal for a decision

Recital 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(7a)  Many Member States are faced with a lack of material and technical equipment when unexpected disasters arise. The Union Mechanism should therefore make it possible to expand the material and technical base where necessary, in particular for the sake of rescuing persons with a disability, elderly persons or persons with an illness.

Amendment    14

Proposal for a decision

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9)  In order to strengthen efficiency and effectiveness of training and exercises and enhance co-operation between Member States' national civil protection authorities and services it is necessary to establish a Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network that is based on existing structures.

(9)  Training, research and innovation are essential aspects of cooperation in the civil protection field. The efficiency and effectiveness of training and exercises, the promotion of innovation, and dialogue and co-operation between Member States' national civil protection authorities and services should be strengthened on the basis of existing structures with the involvement of and the exchange of information with centres of excellence, universities, researchers and other expertise available in the Member States.

Amendment    15

Proposal for a decision

Recital 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(9a)  While strengthening civil protection in the light of disaster trends, both weather-related and those relating to internal security, is one of the most important priorities throughout the whole Union, it is essential to complement the Union’s tools with a stronger territorial and community-led dimension, as local community action is the fastest and most effective way of limiting the damage caused by a disaster.

Amendment    16

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10)  In order to achieve the functioning of the rescEU capacity, additional financial appropriations should made available to finance actions under the Union Mechanism.

(10)  In order to achieve the functioning of the rescEU capacity, additional financial appropriations should made available to finance actions under the Union Mechanism, but not at the expense of the financial envelopes allocated to other key Union policies such as those promoting rights, equality and citizenship, justice or human development worldwide, including all the funds allocated to gender equality and women’s empowerment programmes and projects, in particular, bearing in mind that the implementation of some of those programmes has been exceptionally successful: payment allocations for REC reached more than 99% in the previous three years.

Justification

New policy proposals should be accompanied by new resources. The rapporteur strongly rejects the use of any redeployments at the expense of successful, chronically underfunded programmes such as the Rights, equality and citizenship (REC) and Justice programmes. Almost 100% absorption rate for the REC programme implies that no new resources can be deployed from this programme without negatively affecting specific projects and organizations. FEMM has been continuously pointing out the need to increase the funding of the REC in view of DAPHNE and gender equality programmes.

Amendment    17

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(10a) Separate funding and budgetary allocations should be guaranteed for the revised Union Mechanism. Considering the need to avoid any negative impact on the financing of existing multiannual programmes, the increase in financing for the targeted revision of the Union Mechanism in the years 2018, 2019 and 2020 should be drawn exclusively from all means available under Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/20131a, with particular recourse to the Flexibility Instrument.

 

___________________

 

1a Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884).

Justification

New policy proposals should be accompanied by new resources. The rapporteur strongly rejects the use of any redeployments at the expense of successful, chronically underfunded programmes such as the Rights, equality and citizenship and Justice programmes. Instead, any additional funding necessary should be mobilised using the flexibility provisions of the MFF Regulation.

Amendment    18

Proposal for a decision

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11)  There is a need to simplify Union Mechanism procedures to ensure that Member States can access assistance and capacities needed in order to respond to natural or man-made disasters as rapidly as possible.

(11)  There is a need to simplify, streamline and increase the flexibility of the Union Mechanism procedures to ensure that Member States can quickly access assistance and capacities needed in order to respond to natural or man-made disasters as rapidly and as efficiently as possible.

Amendment    19

Proposal for a decision

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12)  In order to maximise the use of existing funding instruments and support Member States in delivering assistance, particularly in response to disasters outside the Union, a derogation to Article 129(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 966/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council14 should be provided for when financing is granted pursuant to Articles 21, 22 and 23 of Decision No 1313/2013/EU.

(12)  In order to maximise the use of existing funding instruments and support Member States in delivering assistance, including in response to disasters outside the Union, a derogation to Article 129(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 966/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council14 should be provided for when financing is granted pursuant to Articles 21, 22 and 23 of Decision No 1313/2013/EU. Notwithstanding that derogation, funding for civil protection activities and humanitarian aid, in particular, should remain clearly separate in any future Union funding architecture and be fully in line with the different objectives and legal requirements of that architecture.

__________________

__________________

14 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1).

14 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1).

Amendment    20

Proposal for a decision

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13)  It is important to ensure that Member States take all the necessary actions in order to effectively prevent natural and man-made disasters and mitigate their effects. Provisions should reinforce links between prevention, preparedness and response actions under the Union Mechanism. Coherence should also be ensured with other relevant Union legislation on prevention and disaster risk management, including for cross-border prevention action and response to threats such as serious cross-border health threats15. Likewise, coherence should be ensured with international commitments such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030, the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development.

(13)  It is important to ensure that Member States take all the necessary actions in order to effectively prevent natural and man-made disasters and mitigate their effects. Provisions should reinforce links between prevention, preparedness and response actions under the Union Mechanism. Coherence should also be ensured with other relevant Union legislation on prevention and disaster risk management, including for cross-border prevention action and response to threats such as serious cross-border health threats15. Territorial cooperation programmes under cohesion policy provide for specific actions to take into account disaster resilience, risk prevention and risk management, and further efforts should be made towards more vigorous integration and greater synergies. Furthermore, all actions should be coherent with, and actively contribute to meeting, international commitments such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030, the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development.

__________________

__________________

15 Decision No 1082/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on serious cross border threats to health and repealing Decision No 2119/98/EC (OJ L 293, 5.11.2013, p. 1).

15 Decision No 1082/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on serious cross border threats to health and repealing Decision No 2119/98/EC (OJ L 293, 5.11.2013, p. 1).

Amendment    21

Proposal for a decision

Recital 13 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(13a)  It is essential that the modules previously registered in the Common Emergency Communication and Information System (CECIS) be maintained in order to respond to requests for assistance and to participate in the training system in the usual way.

Justification

It provides a framework for collecting validated information on the situation, for dissemination to the Member States and for sharing lessons learnt from deployments. The retention of the registered modules would mean for Austria that ten modules of the state fire brigade associations would not fall out of the system.

Amendment    22

Proposal for a decision

Recital 13 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(13b)  It is equally important to connect the Union Mechanism, which is limited to the period immediately following the catastrophe, to other Union instruments focused on reversing the damage, such as the Solidarity Fund.

Amendment    23

Proposal for a decision

Recital 13 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(13c)  It is essential that the Solidarity Fund be modified by introducing the obligation to repair the damage to the environment and by using the GDP per capita of the region or Member State instead of the global GDP as an indicator for its approval, to prevent large, populated regions with low levels of wealth from not being eligible to benefit from the Fund. It is very important to value the environment affected by a catastrophe in an economic way, especially areas of high natural value, such as protected areas or covered by the Natura 2000 network, in order to repair them.

Amendment    24

Proposal for a decision

Recital 13 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(13d)  There is a need for Union action to focus also on providing technical training assistance so that the capacity of communities for self-help can be enhanced, leaving them better prepared to provide an initial response and contain a disaster. Targeted training and education for public safety practitioners, such as community leaders, social and medical care practitioners, the rescue and firefighting services as well as local voluntary intervention groups which should dispose of rapidly available intervention equipment, can help contain a disaster and reduce fatalities both during and in the aftermath of the crisis.

Amendment    25

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e)  to increase the availability and use of scientific knowledge on disasters.

(e)  to increase the availability and use of scientific knowledge on disasters, including in the outermost regions and Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs);

Amendment    26

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(aa)  in paragraph 1 the following point is added:

 

“(ea)  to mitigate the immediate consequences that catastrophes may have on human lives and on cultural and natural heritage;”

Amendment    27

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(ab)  in paragraph 1, the following point is added:

 

“(eb)  to step up cooperation and coordination activities at cross-border level.”

Amendment    28

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a)  take action to improve the knowledge base on disaster risks and facilitate the sharing of knowledge, the results of scientific research, best practices and information, including among Member States that share common risks.

(a)  take action to improve the knowledge base on disaster risks and to better facilitate and promote cooperation and the sharing of knowledge, the results of scientific research and innovation, best practices and information, including among Member States that share common risks;

Amendment    29

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

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

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(3a)  In Article 5(1), the following point is inserted:

 

“(aa)  coordinate the harmonisation of information and guidance on alert systems, including on a cross-border level;”

Amendment    30

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(3b)  Article 5(1), point (f) is replaced by the following:

(f)  compile and disseminate the information made available by Member States; organise an exchange of experiences about the assessment of risk management capability; develop, together with the Member States and by 22 December 2014, guidelines on the content, methodology and structure of those assessments; and facilitate the sharing of good practices in prevention and preparedness planning, including through voluntary peer reviews;

"(f)  compile and disseminate the information made available by Member States; organise an exchange of experiences about the assessment of risk management capability; develop, together with the Member States and by 22 December 2019, new guidelines on the content, methodology and structure of those assessments; and facilitate the sharing of good practices in prevention and preparedness planning, including through voluntary peer reviews;"

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1523544518145&uri=CELEX:32013D1313)

Amendment    31

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a)  develop risk assessments at national or appropriate sub-national level and make them available to the Commission by 22 December 2018 and every three years thereafter;

(a)  develop risk assessments at national or appropriate sub-national level in consultation with relevant local and regional authorities and aligned with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and make them available to the Commission by 22 December 2018 and every three years thereafter, based on a model agreed on with the Commission,’and, in this context, existing national information systems shall be used;

Amendment    32

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(aa)  point (d) is replaced by the following:

(d) participate, on a voluntary basis, in peer reviews on the assessment of risk management capability.

(d)   participate, on a voluntary basis, in peer reviews on risk management capability with a view to identifying actions that bridge the gaps.

Justification

The purpose of the decision to amend the original text is to clarify the aim of the measure in the context of the overall revision of Article 6.

Amendment    33

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

A summary of the relevant elements of the risk management planning shall be provided to the Commission, including information on the selected prevention and preparedness measures, by 31 January 2019 and every three years thereafter. In addition, the Commission may require Member States to provide specific prevention and preparedness plans, which shall cover both short- and long-term efforts. The Union shall duly consider the progress made by the Member States with respect to disaster prevention and preparedness as part of any future ex-ante conditionality mechanism under the European Structural and Investment Funds.

A summary of the relevant elements of the risk management planning shall be provided to the Commission, including information on the selected prevention and preparedness measures, in accordance with a template to be established by means of an implementing act, by 31 January 2019 and every three years thereafter. That implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2). In addition, the Commission may require Member States to provide specific prevention and preparedness plans which shall cover both short- and long-term efforts. In this regard, these efforts may include a commitment on the part of Member States to encourage investments based on risk assessments and to ensure better post-disaster reconstruction. The additional administrative burden at national and sub-national levels shall be kept as low as possible.

Amendment    34

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 3

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission may also establish specific consultation mechanisms to enhance appropriate prevention and preparedness planning and coordination among Member States prone to similar type disasters.

The Commission may, in cooperation with the Member States, also establish specific consultation mechanisms to enhance appropriate prevention and preparedness planning and coordination among Member States prone to similar type disasters. The Commission and the Member States, where possible, shall also foster consistency between disaster risk management and climate change adaptation strategies.

Justification

The Commission’s decision to establish possible specific consultation mechanisms should include the involvement of the Member States which are an integral part of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism.

Amendment    35

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 3 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(ba) the following fourth paragraph is added:

 

“The Commission may take appropriate measures where it is of the view that a Member State's preventative efforts are insufficient in the light of the risks that the Member State in question is facing.”

Amendment    36

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point k

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(4a)  In Article 8(1), point (k) is replaced by the following:

(k)  in close consultation with the Member States, take additional necessary supporting and complementary preparedness action to achieve the objective specified in point (b) of Article 3(1)

“(k)  in close consultation with the Member States, take additional necessary supporting and complementary preparedness action, including through coordination with other Union instruments, to achieve the objective specified in point (b) of Article 3(1).”

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013R1303&from=EN)

Amendment    37

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(4b)  In Article 9, the following paragraph is inserted:

 

“1a.  Member States shall strengthen relevant administrative capacities of the competent regional and local authorities, in accordance with their institutional and legal framework.”

Amendment    38

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

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 the planning of disaster response operations under the Union Mechanism, including through scenario-building for disaster response based on the risk assessments referred to in point (a) of Article 6 and the overview of risks referred to in point (c) of Article 5(1), asset mapping and the development of plans for the deployment of response capacities.

1.  The Commission and the Member States shall work together to improve the planning of disaster response operations, both for natural or man-made disasters, under the Union Mechanism, including through scenario-building for disaster response based on the risk assessments referred to in point (a) of Article 6 and the overview of risks referred to in point (c) of Article 5(1), asset mapping, including earth-moving machinery, mobile electricity generators and mobile fire-fighting equipment among those assets, and the development of plans for the deployment of response capacities.

Amendment    39

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 11 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  A European Civil Protection Pool shall be established. It shall consist of a pool of pre-committed response capacities of the Member States and include modules, other response capacities and experts.

1.  A European Civil Protection Pool shall be established. It shall consist of a voluntary pool of pre-committed response capacities of the Member States and include modules, other response capacities and experts.

Justification

A compulsory registration of capacities is not possible for some Member States and their voluntary schemes. Account must also be taken of the fact that Member States may not be able to provide any capacities, for example: due to force majeure.

Amendment    40

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

1a.  As national prevention should be the first priority of Member States to reduce safety and security risks, the European Civil Protection Pool shall be complementary to existing national capacities.

Amendment    41

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 11 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  On the basis of identified risks, the Commission shall define the types and the number of key response capacities required for the European Civil Protection Pool ("capacity goals"). The Commission shall monitor progress towards the capacity goals and remaining gaps and shall encourage Member States to address such gaps. The Commission may support Member States in accordance with Article 20, point (i) of Article 21(1) and Article 21(2).

2.  On the basis of needs and risks identified on the ground, the Commission shall, in cooperation with the competent authorities of the Member States, define the types and the number of key response capacities required for the European Civil Protection Pool ("capacity goals"). The Commission shall monitor progress towards the capacity goals and remaining gaps and shall encourage Member States to address such gaps. The Commission may support Member States in accordance with Article 20, point (i) of Article 21(1) and Article 21(2).

Justification

From the point of view of subsidiarity, it is more useful if needs are analysed on the ground or if the Commission cannot act alone in this instance, but with the Member States.

Amendment    42

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point c

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 11 – paragraph 7

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7.  Response capacities that Member States make available for the European Civil Protection Pool shall be available for response operations under the Union Mechanism following a request for assistance through the ERCC, unless Member States are faced with an exceptional situation substantially affecting the discharge of national tasks.

7.  Response capacities that Member States make available for the European Civil Protection Pool shall be available for response operations under the Union Mechanism following a request for assistance through the ERCC, unless in the case of domestic emergencies, force majeure or when Member States are faced with an exceptional situation substantially affecting the discharge of national tasks. The ultimate decision on their deployment shall be taken by the Member State which registered the response capacity concerned.

Amendment    43

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point c

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 11 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

In the event of deployment of such response they shall remain under the command and control of the Member States making them available and may be withdrawn when Member States are faced with an exceptional situation substantially affecting the discharge of national tasks preventing them from keeping those response capacities available. In such cases, the Commission shall be consulted.

In the event of deployment of such response they shall remain under the command and control of the Member States making them available and may be withdrawn if those Member States are faced with domestic emergencies, force majeure or if an exceptional situation prevents them from keeping those response capacities available. In such cases, the Commission shall be consulted.

Amendment    44

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  rescEU shall be established to provide relief where existing capacities do not allow responding effectively to disasters.”

1.  rescEU shall be established to provide relief in exceptional circumstances when capacities at national level are not available and where existing capacities do not allow responding effectively to disasters. RescEU capacities shall not be used to replace Member States' own capacities and relevant responsibilities.

Amendment    45

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  The composition of rescEU shall consist of the following capacities:

2.  The composition of rescEU shall consist of capacities additional to those that already exist in the Member States, with a view to supplementing and strengthening them, and shall seek to address current and future risks. The capacities are to be identified on the basis of any gaps in response capacities related to health emergencies, industrial, environmental, seismic or volcanic disasters, to mass population movements and emergencies, floods and fires including forest fires, as well as terrorist attacks and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear threats.

 

On the basis of the identified gaps, rescEU shall contain at least the following capacities:

(a) aerial forest firefighting;

(a) aerial forest firefighting;

(b) high capacity pumping;

(b) high capacity pumping;

(c) urban search and rescue;

(c) urban search and rescue;

(d) field hospital and emergency medical teams.

(d) field hospital and emergency medical teams.

Amendment    46

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

2a.  The nature of these capacities shall remain flexible and may change in order to address new developments and future challenges, such as the consequences of climate change.

Amendment    47

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 4

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. On the basis of identified risks and taking into account a multi-hazard approach, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 to define the types of response capacities required in addition to those identified in paragraph 2 of this Article and revise the composition of rescEU accordingly. Consistency shall be ensured with other Union policies.

4. On the basis of identified risks and capacities and risk management planning according to Article 6 and taking into account an multi-hazard approach, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 to define the types of response capacities required in addition to those identified in paragraph 2 of this Article and revise the composition of rescEU accordingly. Consistency shall be ensured with other Union policies.

Where, in the case of a disaster or imminent disaster, imperative grounds of urgency so require, the procedure provided for in Article 31 shall apply to delegated acts adopted pursuant to this Article.

Where, in the case of a disaster or imminent disaster, imperative grounds of urgency so require, the procedure provided for in Article 31 shall apply to delegated acts adopted pursuant to this Article.

Amendment    48

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 5

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.  The Commission shall define quality requirements for the response capacities forming part of rescEU. The quality requirements shall be based on established international standards, where such standards already exist.

5.  The Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, shall define quality requirements for the response capacities forming part of rescEU. The quality requirements shall be based on established international standards, where such standards already exist.

Amendment    49

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 7

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7.  rescEU capacities shall be available for response operations under the Union Mechanism following a request for assistance through the ERCC. The decision on their deployment shall be taken by the Commission, which shall retain command and control of rescEU capacities.

7.  rescEU capacities shall be available for response operations under the Union Mechanism following a request for assistance through the ERCC. The decision on their deployment shall be taken by the Commission, which shall retain the strategic coordination of rescEU capacities and be the authority over deployment whilst the operational command and control shall remain with the officials responsible in the recipient Member States.

Amendment    50

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 8

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8.  In case of deployment, the Commission shall agree with the requesting Member State on the operational deployment of rescEU capacities. The requesting Member State shall facilitate operational co-ordination of its own capacities and rescEU activities during operations.

8.  In case of deployment, the Commission through the ERCC shall agree with the requesting Member State on the operational deployment of rescEU capacities. The requesting Member State shall facilitate operational co-ordination of its own capacities and rescEU activities during operations.

Amendment    51

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 10

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

10.  Where the Commission procures equipment such as aerial forest firefighting equipment, by means of acquisition, leasing or rental, the following shall be ensured:

10.  Where the Commission procures equipment such as aerial forest firefighting equipment, by means of acquisition, leasing or rental, the following shall be ensured:

(a)  in case of acquisition of equipment, an agreement between the Commission and a Member State provides for the registration thereof in that Member State.

(a)  in case of acquisition of equipment, an agreement between the Commission and a Member State provides for the registration thereof in that Member State.

(b)  in case of leasing and rental, the registration of the equipment in a Member State.

(b)  in case of leasing and rental, the registration of the equipment in a Member State shall not be compulsory.

 

(ba)  commercial aircraft management is assigned to EASA certified operators.

Amendment    52

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12a – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of operations and progress made under Articles 11 and 12 every two years.

The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of operations and progress made under Articles 11 and 12 every year.

Justification

To ensure full parliamentary scrutiny and oversight of the process and in order to detect possible changes with a budgetary impact as early as possible, it is suggested that the Parliament and Council receive updated information on the progress of the reinforcement of the UCPM on an annual basis, including mandatory information of budgetary and cost developments.

Amendment    53

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12a – paragraph 1 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

This information shall include an overview of the budgetary and cost developments, with a detailed technical and financial assessment, precise information on cost increases and changes in the types of response capacities required and the quality requirements of those capacities, if any, as well as the reasons for any such increases or changes.

Justification

To ensure full parliamentary scrutiny and oversight of the process and in order to detect possible changes with a budgetary impact as early as possible, it is suggested that the Parliament and Council receive updated information on the progress of the reinforcement of the UCPM on an annual basis, including mandatory information of budgetary and cost developments.

Amendment    54

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission shall establish a network of relevant civil protection and disaster management actors and institutions, forming together with the Commission a Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network.

The Commission shall establish a network of relevant civil protection and disaster management actors and institutions, including centres of excellence, universities and researchers, forming together with the Commission a Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network. The Commission shall take due account of the expertise available in the Member States and the organisations active on the ground.

Amendment    55

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 1 –subparagraph 2 – introductory sentence

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Network shall carry out the following tasks in the field of training, exercises, lessons learnt and knowledge dissemination, in close coordination with relevant knowledge centres, where appropriate:

The Network shall, while aiming for a gender balanced composition, carry out the following tasks in the field of training, exercises, lessons learnt and knowledge dissemination, in close coordination with relevant knowledge centres, where appropriate:

Amendment    56

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(9a)  In Article 13(1), point (a) is replaced by the following:

(a) set up and manage a training programme for civil protection and emergency management personnel on prevention of, preparedness for and response to disasters. The programme shall include joint courses and a system for exchange of experts, whereby individuals may be seconded to other Member States.

‘(a)  set up and manage a training programme for civil protection and emergency management personnel on prevention of, preparedness for and response to disasters. The programme shall include joint courses and a system for exchange of experts, whereby individuals may be seconded to other Member States. A new Erasmus civil protection programme shall be introduced, in keeping with the rules and principles of Regulation (EU) No 1288/2013*.

The training programme shall aim to enhance the coordination, compatibility and complementarity between capacities referred to in Articles 9 and 11, and to improve the competence of experts referred to in points (d) and (f) of Article 8;

The Erasmus civil protection programme shall also aim to enhance the coordination, compatibility and complementarity between capacities referred to in Articles 9, 11 and 12, and to improve the competence of experts referred to in points (d) and (f) of Article 8.

 

The Erasmus civil protection programme shall include an international dimension aimed at supporting the Union’s external action, including its development goals, through cooperation between Member States and between partner countries.

 

_______________

 

*Regulation (EU) No 1288/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing ‘Erasmus+’: the Union programme for education, training, youth and sport and repealing Decisions No 1719/2006/EC, No 1720/2006/EC and No 1298/2008/EC (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 50).’

Justification

Your rapporteur considers it necessary to amend Article 13(1) of Decision 1313/2013/EU, even if the new Commission proposal for a decision does not make provision for this. The amendment ensures consistency with the objectives of the Commission proposal. The establishment of an Erasmus civil protection programme will help to develop uniform European training standards based on the same basic training levels for civil protection staff in all Member States.

Amendment    57

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point f

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(9b)  In Article 13(1), point (f) is replaced by the following:

(f)  stimulate and encourage the introduction and use of relevant new technologies for the purpose of the Union Mechanism.

‘(f)  stimulate research and innovation and encourage the introduction and use of relevant new technologies for the purpose of the Union Mechanism.’

Amendment    58

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(9c)  in Article 13, the following paragraph is added:

 

‘3a.  The Commission shall extend training capacities, and increase the sharing of knowledge and experience, between the Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network and international organisations and third countries, to contribute to meeting international commitments with regard to disaster risk reduction, particularly those in the Sendai Framework.’

Justification

This additional paragraph seeks to promote the sharing of knowledge and experiences, including the potential for expanding training capacities to third countries (as mentioned in the interim evaluation), to improve future response operations and improve coherence with the Sendai framework.

Amendment    59

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 16 – paragraph 2

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(11a)  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.

‘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 clearly define, in consultation with humanitarian actors, the scope of the intervention and its relationship with the parties involved in the wider humanitarian response, ensuring consistency with the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid and respect for humanitarian principles.’

Justification

The interim evaluation of the civil protection mechanism found that, in a changing landscape of response operations, the blurred definition of civil protection interventions in humanitarian response operations impacted the ability of the mechanism to achieve its objectives. This amendment to the current decision seeks to help clarifying the scope of civil protection interventions in man-made disasters and complex emergencies, in which humanitarian aid operations are also active.

Amendment    60

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph – point 12

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

The necessary appropriations for the Union Mechanism shall be gradually authorised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the annual budgetary procedure, taking due account of all means available under Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013*, with particular recourse to the Flexibility Instrument, as set out in Annex I.

 

____________________

 

* Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884).

Justification

New policy proposals should be accompanied by new resources. The rapporteur strongly rejects the use of any redeployments at the expense of successful, chronically underfunded programmes such as the Rights, equality and citizenship and Justice programmes. Instead, any additional funding necessary should be mobilised using the flexibility provisions of the MFF Regulation.

Amendment    61

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 20 a – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Any assistance or funding provided under this Decision shall give appropriate visibility to the Union, including prominence to the Union emblem for those capacities referred to under Article 11, 12 and 21(2)(c).

Any assistance or funding provided under this Decision shall give appropriate visibility to the Union, including prominence to the Union emblem for those capacities referred to under Article 11, 12 and 21(2)(c). A communication strategy shall be developed in order to make the tangible results of the actions taken under the Union Mechanism visible to citizens.

Amendment    62

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

2a.  For Member States’ capacities that are not pre-committed to the European Civil Protection Pool, the amount of Union financial support for transport resources shall not exceed 55% of the total eligible cost. To be eligible for such funding, Member States shall undertake to produce a register of all the capacities at their disposal, together with the relevant management structures, over and beyond those pre-committed to the European Civil Protection Pool, enabling them to respond to health, industrial, seismic or volcanic disasters, to mass population movements and emergencies, to floods and forest fires, to terrorist attacks and to chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear attacks.

Amendment    63

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 26 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  Synergies and complementarity shall be sought with other instruments of the Union such as those supporting cohesion, rural development, research, health, as well as migration and security policies. In the case of a response to humanitarian crises in third countries the Commission shall ensure the complementarity and coherence of actions financed under this Decision and actions financed under Regulation (EC) No 1257/96.

2.  Synergies, complementarity and increased coordination shall be developed with other instruments of the Union such as those supporting cohesion, including the European Union Solidarity Fund, rural development, research, health, as well as migration and security policies, without entailing the reallocation of the funds from those areas. In the case of a response to humanitarian crises in third countries the Commission shall ensure the complementarity and coherence of actions financed under this Decision and actions financed under Regulation (EC) No 1257/96, whilst respecting the distinct and independent nature of those actions and their funding, and ensuring that they are in line with the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid.

Justification

In light of the Commission proposal for Article 26 (1), which allows funding from different sources for civil protection actions, the proposed amendment seeks to ensure the clear differentiation between humanitarian and civil protection operations and their funding.

Amendment    64

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point g

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(g)  the establishment, management and maintaining of rescEU, as provided for in Article 12, including criteria for deployment decisions and operating procedures;

(g)  the establishment, management and maintaining of rescEU, as provided for in Article 12, including criteria for deployment decisions, operating procedures and the conditions for deployment of rescEU capacities at national level by a Member State and financial and other arrangements related thereto;

Amendment    65

Proposal for a decision

Annex I (new)

 

 

Amendment

ANNEX I

INDICATIVE ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL ALLOCATIONS FOR THE PERIOD 2018-2020

 

 

2018

2019

2020

TOTAL

Total additional appropriations under Heading 3*

CA

19,157

115,2

122,497

256,854

 

PA

11

56,56

115,395

182,955

Total additional appropriations under Heading 4*

CA

2

2

2,284

6,284

 

PA

0,8

1,8

2,014

4,614

Total additional appropriations under Headings 3 and 4 combined*

CA

21,157

117,2

124,781

263,138

 

PA

11,8

58,36

117,409

187,569

(figures in EUR million)

* The full amounts are to be provided through the Flexibility Instrument.

Justification

The additional financing needed for the present revision of the UCPM in the years 2018-2020 should be defined in more detail in the Decision itself, through a self-standing, detailed Annex I. Any additional funding necessary for financing this revision of the UCPM should be mobilised using the flexibility provisions of the MFF Regulation.


EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

A worrying context

Natural disasters in Europe and worldwide are increasing significantly, both because of the frequency with which they occur and their intensity, and pose a serious threat to our societies, economies and ecosystems.

The scale of the problem can be understood simply by looking at, for example, the natural disasters of 2017, which, in Europe alone caused 200 deaths. The fires which spread in 2017 devastated the south of the continent, burning more than one million hectares of land and killing over 100 people in just six months. 2017 was also the year in which a series of tropical storms repeatedly struck the European overseas territories in the Caribbean, testing EU assistance to its limits. Still more unexpectedly, in the same year, there were even violent hurricanes which caused serious flooding and destruction on the North Atlantic side of Europe.

The future scenario described by scientific researchers is even more worrying, given that these events are expected to intensify. Years like 2017 will no longer be an exception, but the rule. Without a shadow of a doubt, the main reason for this is climate change, which has amplified the negative impact of events caused by extreme weather conditions. It is no coincidence that climate change has been described as one of the biggest global health threats of the 21st century.

The situation could be improved

However, in the face of such a scenario, the European Union has not remained idle. Over the years, it has developed a sound disaster response network; the Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) is key to this system. In playing its support role, the Mechanism has helped Member States to optimise their disaster prevention and risk reduction efforts. The Mechanism has intervened both inside and outside the EU, through the Emergency Response Coordination Centre - ERCC. The recent interim evaluation of the Mechanism points out that it ‘constitutes a visible expression of European solidarity’.

However, recent operational experiences at events such as the 2017 fire season or the 2015-2016 migration crisis have highlighted the shortcomings of the Mechanism in terms of effectiveness and efficiency.

The current model is based on voluntary contributions from Member States, which make available in advance their capacities to the EERC (from now on referred to as the European Civil Protection Pool) in exchange for financial support by the Union to cover expenses such as adaptation, certification and transport costs. However, this system has proven to be insufficient to respond to major emergencies that affect several Member States at the same time. The main problem in relying primarily upon national capacities is that they are not available for use in the EU if they are being used nationally.

To ensure that the European Union can provide for the safety of its citizens in the face of disasters, it must be underpinned by a stronger Mechanism that is able to respond robustly and reliably. Your rapporteur believes that a more ambitious Mechanism is needed.

A vision for the future

Your rapporteur’s vision for a fully developed Union Civil Protection Mechanism is built on three essential elements.

1. A genuine European civil protection capacity. The future mechanism should acquire further capacities compared to those currently existing in the Member States, in addition to having its own capacities. A genuine European Civil Protection Capacity should be established. This new Capacity will fill the gaps identified in the national response systems. The intention is not to take over or duplicate the work of the Member States, but to complement it where necessary.

To build this Capacity, the Union will fund the acquisition of new resources, such as, for instance, fire-fighting aircraft. The new capacities could be based on rental contracts, or on the repair or adaptation of existing capacities, for which the Union should contribute significantly. There are other examples of financial incentives: the Union could bear the costs resulting from the action of the Union Mechanism, or transport costs.

Some of these aspects are already provided for in the current Union Mechanism, which is a good start. However, the low level of co-financing offered by the current system means that the incentives are not being properly exploited.

2. The consistency of the Capacity with other existing instruments. The new Mechanism should also be more consistent, both within the EU and beyond. This means that the establishment of the Capacity must go hand in hand with further efforts by Member States in terms of prevention. The new system encourages everyone to be responsible. Prevention will have a key role in disaster management and will have to be developed in the future. Therefore, your rapporteur’s idea of the new Mechanism is one that does not act in isolation, but builds on the strength of other EU instruments and focuses on risk prevention.

Such consistency, however, should not only relate to prevention, but also to response. The new Mechanism should dovetail with other existing EU disaster response instruments, such as the humanitarian aid instrument. Proper coordination between the two instruments will ensure that overall EU action is more consistent and effective both outside and within EU borders.

3. A fair allocation of resources. As a direct consequence of the two preceding elements, your rapporteur believes that in the future, the EU needs to make a greater financial commitment. The current Mechanism budget of EUR 368 million for the period 2014-2020 is paltry compared to the more than EUR 433 billion in economic losses caused by extreme climate-related events since 1980 in the Member States.

Your rapporteur takes the view that a greater EU financial commitment should be accompanied by an appropriate coordination role for the Union. The European Union will be expected to exercise full command over, and control of, any new European Civil Protection Capacity. Given that the Union will make full provision for the acquisition of resources for the new Capacity, it will also retain possession of it.

In addition, your rapporteur considers it advisable to establish an Erasmus civil protection programme, to strengthen the cooperation that already exists between Member States.

Lastly, your rapporteur wishes to stress that citizens continue to trust in a European civil protection service: over the years, Eurobarometer data have constantly shown that 90 % of respondents considered it important that the EU help to coordinate the response to disasters within its territory through its civil protection role. Most EU citizens (56 %) believe that their country does not have sufficient capacities to cope with all major disasters alone. These figures show that a Europe based on civil protection is what the citizens want to see.


OPINION of the Committee on Development (25.4.2018)

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 on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism

(COM(2017)0772/2 – C8‑0409/2017 – 2017/0309(COD))

Rapporteur for opinion: Željana Zovko (*)

(*) Associated committee – Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

Europe and the world are facing a growing number of disasters, with great human and material costs. The frequency and intensity of weather-related disasters, notably floods and forest fires are also increasing as a result of climate change. The European Union Civil Protection Mechanism (EUCPM)(1) aims to support, complement and facilitate the coordination of Member States actions with the objective of increasing the prevention, preparedness and response to disaster. The EUCPM can be activated in response to disasters occurring both inside and outside the Union (the latter represent more than half of all activations of the mechanism). In responses to disasters outside the Union, the EUCPM is often activated in parallel to the provision of humanitarian assistance by the EU.

The Commission proposal(2) to amend this decision currently being considered by the European Parliament and Council seeks to: 1) reinforce the EU’s and Member States’ capacities to respond to disasters by creating a dedicated reserve of assets at EU level (rescEU), which will be deployed upon decision by the Commission, and also by seeking a more effective contribution of Member States to the European Civil Protection Pool; 2) strengthen the focus on prevention actions and the coherence with other EU policies; and 3) promote a simplified and effective administrative procedure in the operations of the mechanism.

In this DEVE opinion to the ENVI Committee, the rapporteur supports the reinforcement of the EU’s and Member States’ capacities to respond to disasters, whilst stressing that the principle of subsidiarity must be fully respected. In this line, the rapporteur seeks to introduce a number of changes to the Commission proposal and the current decision based, among others, on the findings of recent evaluations(3).

The objectives of the most important changes are as follow:

•  reinforce the international cooperation dimension of the EUCPM, including through extending training capacities and knowledge sharing. This should furthermore support international disaster risk reduction commitments (notably the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030).

•  stress the need for a clear definition of the scope of EUCPM operations in man-made or complex emergencies in line with the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid. Underline that these activities – and their funding instruments – should remain fully differentiated even when synergies and complementarity between instruments are sought.

•  ensure that capacities at the EU level (rescEU) are complementary to, and not substitute, the development civil protection capacities at the national level, by maintaining the co-financing of transport costs for assets not part of the European Civil Protection Pool.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Development 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 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9)  In order to strengthen efficiency and effectiveness of training and exercises and enhance co-operation between Member States' national civil protection authorities and services it is necessary to establish a Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network that is based on existing structures.

(9)  In order to strengthen efficiency and effectiveness of training and exercises and enhance co-operation between Member States' national civil protection authorities and services it is necessary to establish a Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network that is based on existing structures. That network should promote and strengthen relations with international organisations and third countries in order to reinforce cooperation in disaster risk reduction, and contribute to the commitments made in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030.

Amendment    2

Proposal for a decision

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12)  In order to maximise the use of existing funding instruments and support Member States in delivering assistance, particularly in response to disasters outside the Union, a derogation to Article 129(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 966/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council14 should be provided for when financing is granted pursuant to Articles 21, 22 and 23 of Decision No 1313/2013/EU.

(12)  In order to maximise the use of existing funding instruments and support Member States in delivering assistance, particularly in response to disasters outside the Union, a derogation to Article 129(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 966/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council14 should be provided for when financing is granted pursuant to Articles 21, 22 and 23 of Decision No 1313/2013/EU. Notwithstanding that derogation, funding for civil protection activities and humanitarian aid, in particular, should remain clearly separate in any future Union funding architecture and be fully in line with the different objectives and legal requirements of that architecture.

__________________

__________________

14 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002, (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1).

14 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002, (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1).

Amendment    3

Proposal for a decision

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13)  It is important to ensure that Member States take all the necessary actions in order to effectively prevent natural and man-made disasters and mitigate their effects. Provisions should reinforce links between prevention, preparedness and response actions under the Union Mechanism. Coherence should also be ensured with other relevant Union legislation on prevention and disaster risk management, including for cross-border prevention action and response to threats such as serious cross-border health threats15. Likewise, coherence should be ensured with international commitments such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030, the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development.

(13)  It is important to ensure that Member States take all the necessary actions in order to effectively prevent natural and man-made disasters and mitigate their effects. Provisions should reinforce links between prevention, preparedness and response actions under the Union Mechanism. Coherence should also be ensured with other relevant Union legislation on prevention and disaster risk management, including for cross-border prevention action and response to threats such as serious cross-border health threats15. Furthermore, all actions should be coherent with, and actively contribute to meeting international commitments such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030, the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development.

__________________

__________________

15 Decision No 1082/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on serious cross border threats to health and repealing Decision No 2119/98/EC (OJ L 293, 5.11.2013, p. 1).

15 Decision No 1082/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on serious cross border threats to health and repealing Decision No 2119/98/EC (OJ L 293, 5.11.2013, p. 1).

Amendment    4

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 2

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(3a)  in Article 5, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

2.  At the request of a Member State, a third country or the United Nations or its agencies, the Commission may deploy an expert team on site to provide advice on prevention measures.

“2.  The Commission may also, at the request of a Member State, a third country or the United Nations or its agencies, or on its own initiative, having sought the agreement of the relevant stakeholders, deploy an expert team on site to provide advice on prevention measures.”

Justification

This amendment to the current decision seeks to allow a more active role by the Commission in the use of expert prevention missions, including in third countries, as this can increase their visibility and accessibility. These missions can, as highlighted in the interim evaluation, contribute – together with other instruments – to increase international cooperation on civil protection and improve coherence with the Sendai framework.

Amendment    5

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(aa)  terrestrial forest firefighting;

Amendment    6

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 4

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4.  On the basis of identified risks and taking into account a multi-hazard approach, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 to define the types of response capacities required in addition to those identified in paragraph 2 of this Article and revise the composition of rescEU accordingly. Consistency shall be ensured with other Union policies.

4.  On the basis of identified risks, taking into account a multi-hazard approach and the civil protection experience of Member States, and after consultation with the relevant crisis-prone regions , the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 to define the types of response capacities required in addition to those identified in paragraph 2 of this Article and revise the composition of rescEU accordingly. Consistency shall be ensured with other Union policies.

Amendment    7

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 7

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7.  rescEU capacities shall be available for response operations under the Union Mechanism following a request for assistance through the ERCC. The decision on their deployment shall be taken by the Commission, which shall retain command and control of rescEU capacities.

7.  rescEU capacities shall be available for response operations under the Union Mechanism following a request for assistance through the ERCC. The decision on their deployment shall be taken by the Commission, which shall retain the authority of deployment of rescEU capacities.

Amendment    8

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 3

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(9a)  in Article 13, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:

3.  At the request of a Member State, a third country or the United Nations or its agencies, the Commission may deploy an expert team on site to provide advice on preparedness measures.

“3.  The Commission may also, at the request of a Member State, a third country or the United Nations or its agencies, or on its own initiative, having sought the agreement of the relevant stakeholders, deploy an expert team on site to provide advice on preparedness measures.”

Justification

This amendment to the current decision seeks to allow a more active role by the Commission in the use of expert preparedness missions, including in third countries, as this can increase their visibility and accessibility. These missions can, as highlighted in the interim evaluation, contribute – together with other instruments – to increase international cooperation on civil protection and improve coherence with the Sendai framework.

Amendment    9

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(9b)  in Article 13, the following paragraph is inserted:

 

“3a.  The Commission shall extend training capacities, and increase the sharing of knowledge and experience, between the Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network and international organisations and third countries, to contribute to meeting international commitments with regard to disaster risk reduction, particularly those in the Sendai Framework.”

Justification

This additional paragraph seeks to promote the sharing of knowledge and experiences, including the potential for expanding training capacities to third countries (as mentioned in the interim evaluation), to improve future response operations and improve coherence with the Sendai framework.

Amendment    10

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 16 – paragraph 2

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(11a)  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.

“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 clearly define, in consultation with humanitarian actors, the scope of the intervention and its relationship with the parties involved in the wider humanitarian response, ensuring consistency with the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid and respect for humanitarian principles.”

Justification

The interim evaluation of the civil protection mechanism found that, in a changing landscape of response operations, the blurred definition of civil protection interventions in humanitarian response operations impacted the ability of the mechanism to achieve its objectives. This amendment to the current decision seeks to help clarifying the scope of civil protection interventions in man-made disasters and complex emergencies, in which humanitarian aid operations are also active.

Amendment    11

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

2a.  For assets not committed to the European Civil Protection Pool, the amount of Union financial support for transport resources shall not exceed 55% of the total eligible costs. To be eligible to receive such funding, Member States shall create a register of all the civil protection assets that they have available to respond to disasters, beyond those committed to the European pool.

Amendment    12

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 26 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  Synergies and complementarity shall be sought with other instruments of the Union such as those supporting cohesion, rural development, research, health, as well as migration and security policies. In the case of a response to humanitarian crises in third countries the Commission shall ensure the complementarity and coherence of actions financed under this Decision and actions financed under Regulation (EC) No 1257/96.

2.  Synergies and complementarity shall be sought with other instruments of the Union such as those supporting cohesion, rural development, research, health, as well as migration and security policies. In the case of a response to humanitarian crises in third countries the Commission shall ensure the complementarity and coherence of actions financed under this Decision and actions financed under Regulation (EC) No 1257/96, whilst respecting the distinct and independent nature of the actions and their funding, and ensuring that they are in line with the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid.

Justification

In light of the Commission proposal for Article 26 (1), which allows funding from different sources for civil protection actions, the proposed amendment seeks to ensure the clear differentiation between humanitarian and civil protection operations and their funding.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Union Civil Protection Mechanism

References

COM(2017)0772 – C8-0409/2017 – 2017/0309(COD)

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

ENVI

14.12.2017

 

 

 

Opinion by

       Date announced in plenary

DEVE

14.12.2017

Associated committees - date announced in plenary

15.3.2018

Rapporteur

       Date appointed

Željana Zovko

8.2.2018

Discussed in committee

20.2.2018

20.3.2018

 

 

Date adopted

24.4.2018

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

21

0

1

Members present for the final vote

Ignazio Corrao, Mireille D’Ornano, Nirj Deva, Doru-Claudian Frunzulică, Enrique Guerrero Salom, Maria Heubuch, Teresa Jiménez-Becerril Barrio, Arne Lietz, Linda McAvan, Norbert Neuser, Vincent Peillon, Cristian Dan Preda, Lola Sánchez Caldentey, Elly Schlein, Eleni Theocharous, Paavo Väyrynen, Bogdan Brunon Wenta, Anna Záborská, Joachim Zeller, Željana Zovko

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote

Pál Csáky, Monika Vana

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

21

+

ALDE

Paavo Väyrynen

ECR

Eleni Theocharous

EFDD

Ignazio Corrao, Mireille D'Ornano

GUE/NGL

Lola Sánchez Caldentey

PPE

Pál Csáky, Teresa Jiménez-Becerril Barrio, Cristian Dan Preda, Bogdan Brunon Wenta, Anna Záborská, Joachim Zeller, Željana Zovko

S&D

Doru-Claudian Frunzulică, Enrique Guerrero Salom, Arne Lietz, Linda McAvan, Norbert Neuser, Vincent Peillon, Elly Schlein

VERTS/ALE

Maria Heubuch, Monika Vana

0

-

 

 

1

0

ECR

Nirj Deva

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

(1)

Decision No. 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013

on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism

(2)

Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism 2017/0309 (COD)

(3)

Interim evaluation of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism, 2014-2016 (Final Report), August 2017

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Interim Evaluation of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism for the period 2014-2016 {SWD(2017) 287 final}

European Court of Auditors Special Report 33/2017 “Union Civil Protection Mechanism: the coordination of responses to disasters outside the EU has been broadly effective”


OPINION of the Committee on Budgets (25.4.2018)

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(2017)0772/2 – C8‑0409/2017 – 2017/0309(COD))

Rapporteur for opinion: José Manuel Fernandes

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The rapporteur welcomes the proposal to amend the present Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) with the aim of ensuring that the Union can provide a better crisis and emergency support to its citizens in and outside Europe, including through enhanced disaster prevention efforts. He recalls that the UCPM is one of the most tangible expressions of the EU’s core value of solidarity.

The rapporteur underlines that investing in prevention and disaster preparedness is the best form of protection, not only because it has the greatest potential for saving lives and preventing human suffering, but also because it can avoid incurring huge remedial costs once a disaster strikes. According to the Commission’s own calculations, 1 euro spent on disaster preparedness saves up to 7 euros in relief efforts.

The rapporteur is convinced that an overhaul of the current system has been long overdue. The insufficiency of the present, voluntary system has been painfully exposed in the Union’s response to a number of recent disasters, in particular through the lack of available assets during the 2016 and 2017 forest fire seasons, whereby only 10 of 17 requests for forest fire assistance could be granted, and even those often after significant delays, resulting in a loss of over 100 lives. Also, several reports have pointed out the existing gaps in terms of the availability of certain critical response capacities, in particular with regard to forest fire fighting planes, shelter, and possibly other types of resources.

The rapporteur is of the opinion that the proposed structure with two complementary pillars, consisting of, on the one hand, a European Civil Protection Pool of pre-committed Member State response capacities and, on the other hand, the so-called ‘rescEU’, a dedicated reserve of response capacities with command and control at Union level, which is to serve as a last-resort capacity, is the most appropriate and effective way of overcoming the limitations of the current framework. By pooling resources optimally and generating economies of scale, the strengthened UCPM will also lead to significant savings for Member States.

The rapporteur recalls that the total cost of the Commission’s proposal is estimated at EUR 280 million for the period 2018-2020, of which EUR 256,9 million in Heading 3 ‘Security and citizenship’, EUR 6,3 million in Heading 4 ‘Global Europe’ and EUR 16,9 million in Heading 5 ‘Administrative expenditure’. Of the proposed operational expenditure, 54 % would be allocated to preparedness, including the acquisition or leasing of rescEU assets, 37 % to response, and 9 % to prevention activities. The proposal also entails the recruitment of 100 additional staff over three years. The rapporteur considers these proposals proportionate to the scale and purpose of the revision.

The rapporteur welcomes the proposed use of the Flexibility Instrument to cover the bulk (88 %) of the additional resources needed. However, he strongly rejects the proposed redeployment of funding from existing programmes in Headings 3 and 4 to the tune of EUR 31,3 million. As has been underlined by the Committee on Budgets on many occasions, significant new policy proposals should be accompanied by new resources. Moreover, many of the affected programmes, such as the Rights, equality and citizenship and Justice programmes, boast excellent implementation rates and have been underfunded for years. The rapporteur therefore proposes to finance the full amount of the additional resources needed under Headings 3 and 4 through the Flexibility Instrument, as detailed in a new Annex I.

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

Draft legislative resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

 

2 a. Calls on the Commission to refrain from using redeployments for financing new policy priorities that are added in the course of an ongoing multiannual financial framework, as this will inevitably have a negative impact on the implementation of other key Union activities.

Justification

New policy proposals should be accompanied by new resources. The rapporteur strongly rejects the use of any redeployments at the expense of successful, chronically underfunded programmes such as the Rights, equality and citizenship and Justice programmes.

Amendment    2

Draft legislative resolution

Paragraph 2 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

 

2 b. Calls on the Commission to provide for sufficient financing for the Union Civil Protection Mechanism under the next multiannual financial framework starting in 2021, building on the present overhaul.

Justification

In order to build on the current revision of the UCPM, which strengthens both the policy and the financing, it will be important for the Commission, when coming forward with its new proposals for the next multiannual financial framework, to propose an ambitious financial envelope for the UCPM after 2020.

Amendment    3

Proposal for a decision

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7) The Union should be able to support Member States where available capacities are insufficient to allow for an effective response to disasters by contributing to the financing of leasing or rental arrangements for ensuring rapid access to such capacities or by financing their acquisition. This would substantially increase the effectiveness of the Union Mechanism, by ensuring availability of capacities in cases where an effective response to disasters would otherwise not be ensured, particularly for disasters with wide ranging impacts affecting a significant number of Member States. Union procurement of capacities should allow for economies of scale and better coordination when responding to disasters.

(7) The Union should be able to support Member States where available capacities are insufficient to allow for an effective response to disasters by contributing to the financing of leasing or rental arrangements for ensuring rapid access to such capacities or by financing their acquisition. This would substantially increase the effectiveness and deployability of the Union Mechanism, by ensuring the speedy availability of capacities in cases where an effective response to disasters would otherwise not be ensured, particularly for disasters with wide ranging impacts affecting a significant number of Member States. Union procurement of capacities should allow for economies of scale and better coordination when responding to disasters. Optimal and transparent use of financial resources should be ensured.

Justification

When mobilising capacities through the UCPM, speed is of the utmost importance, as illustrated by the tragic consequences of the late deployment of firefighting planes in the most recent forest fire seasons in Southern Europe. EU co-funding should always be provided under conditions of full transparency and accountability.

Amendment    4

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) In order to achieve the functioning of the rescEU capacity, additional financial appropriations should made available to finance actions under the Union Mechanism.

(10) In order to achieve the functioning of the rescEU capacity, additional financial appropriations should be made available to finance actions under the Union Mechanism, but not at the expense of the financial envelopes allocated to other key Union policies such as those promoting rights, equality and citizenship, justice or human development worldwide.

Justification

When mobilising capacities through the UCPM, speed is of the utmost importance, as illustrated by the tragic consequences of the late deployment of firefighting planes in the most recent forest fire seasons in Southern Europe. EU co-funding should always be provided under conditions of full transparency and accountability.

Amendment    5

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(10 a) Separate funding and budgetary allocations should be guaranteed for the revised Union Civil Protection Mechanism. Considering the need to avoid any negative impact on the financing of existing multiannual programmes, the increase in financing for the targeted revision of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism in the years 2018, 2019 and 2020 should be drawn exclusively from all means available under Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/20131a, with particular recourse to the Flexibility Instrument.

 

___________________

 

1a Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884).

Justification

New policy proposals should be accompanied by new resources. The rapporteur strongly rejects the use of any redeployments at the expense of successful, chronically underfunded programmes such as the Rights, equality and citizenship and Justice programmes. Instead, any additional funding necessary should be mobilised using the flexibility provisions of the MFF Regulation.

Amendment    6

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12a – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of operations and progress made under Articles 11 and 12 every two years.'

The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of operations and progress made under Articles 11 and 12 every year.

Justification

To ensure full parliamentary scrutiny and oversight of the process and in order to detect possible changes with a budgetary impact as early as possible, it is suggested that the Parliament and Council receive updated information on the progress of the reinforcement of the UCPM on an annual basis, including mandatory information of budgetary and cost developments.

Amendment    7

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12a – paragraph 1 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

This information shall include an overview of the budgetary and cost developments, with a detailed technical and financial assessment, precise information on cost increases and changes in the types of response capacities required and the quality requirements of those capacities, if any, as well as the reasons for any such increases or changes.'

Justification

To ensure full parliamentary scrutiny and oversight of the process and in order to detect possible changes with a budgetary impact as early as possible, it is suggested that the Parliament and Council receive updated information on the progress of the reinforcement of the UCPM on an annual basis, including mandatory information of budgetary and cost developments.

Amendment    8

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph – point 12

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

The necessary appropriations for the Union Mechanism shall be gradually authorised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the annual budgetary procedure, taking due account of all means available under Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013*, with particular recourse to the Flexibility Instrument, as set out in Annex I.'

 

____________________

 

* Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884).

Justification

New policy proposals should be accompanied by new resources. The rapporteur strongly rejects the use of any redeployments at the expense of successful, chronically underfunded programmes such as the Rights, equality and citizenship and Justice programmes. Instead, any additional funding necessary should be mobilised using the flexibility provisions of the MFF Regulation.

Amendment    9

Proposal for a decision

Annex I (new)

 

 

Amendment

ANNEX I

INDICATIVE ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL ALLOCATIONS FOR THE PERIOD 2018-2020

 

 

2018

2019

2020

TOTAL

Total additional appropriations under Heading 3*

CA

19,157

115,2

122,497

256,854

 

PA

11

56,56

115,395

182,955

Total additional appropriations under Heading 4*

CA

2

2

2,284

6,284

 

PA

0,8

1,8

2,014

4,614

Total additional appropriations under Headings 3 and 4 combined*

CA

21,157

117,2

124,781

263,138

 

PA

11,8

58,36

117,409

187,569

(figures in EUR million)

* The full amounts are to be provided through the Flexibility Instrument.

Justification

The additional financing needed for the present revision of the UCPM in the years 2018-2020 should be defined in more detail in the Decision itself, through a self-standing, detailed Annex I. Any additional funding necessary for financing this revision of the UCPM should be mobilised using the flexibility provisions of the MFF Regulation.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Union Civil Protection Mechanism

References

COM(2017)0772/2 – C8-0409/2017 – 2017/0309(COD)

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

ENVI

14.12.2017

 

 

 

Opinion by

       Date announced in plenary

BUDG

14.12.2017

Rapporteur

       Date appointed

José Manuel Fernandes

13.12.2017

Discussed in committee

22.3.2018

 

 

 

Date adopted

24.4.2018

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

27

2

0

Members present for the final vote

Jean Arthuis, Richard Ashworth, Reimer Böge, Gérard Deprez, Manuel dos Santos, André Elissen, José Manuel Fernandes, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Ingeborg Gräßle, Monika Hohlmeier, John Howarth, Bernd Kölmel, Vladimír Maňka, Siegfried Mureşan, Liadh Ní Riada, Jan Olbrycht, Răzvan Popa, Paul Rübig, Petri Sarvamaa, Indrek Tarand, Inese Vaidere, Monika Vana, Tiemo Wölken, Marco Zanni

Substitutes present for the final vote

Jean-Paul Denanot, Anneli Jäätteenmäki, Ivana Maletić, Andrey Novakov, Tomáš Zdechovský

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

27

+

ALDE

Jean Arthuis, Gérard Deprez, Anneli Jäätteenmäki

ECR

Bernd Kölmel

GUE/NGL

Liadh Ní Riada

PPE

Richard Ashworth, Reimer Böge, José Manuel Fernandes, Ingeborg Gräßle, Monika Hohlmeier, Ivana Maletić, Siegfried Mureşan, Andrey Novakov, Jan Olbrycht, Paul Rübig, Petri Sarvamaa, Inese Vaidere, Tomáš Zdechovský

S&D

Jean-Paul Denanot, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, John Howarth, Vladimír Maňka, Răzvan Popa, Manuel dos Santos, Tiemo Wölken

VERTS/ALE

Indrek Tarand, Monika Vana

2

-

ENF

André Elissen, Marco Zanni

0

0

 

 

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention


OPINION of the Committee on Regional Development (30.4.2018)

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(2017)0772 – C8‑0409/2017 – 2017/0309(COD))

Rapporteur: Daniel Buda

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The European Civil Protection Mechanism is an important strategy of the European Union to promptly respond to emergencies that may occur in territories inside or outside the European Union, and enables coordinated assistance through the share of resources in all its participating countries but it needs to be improved in terms of prevention, preparedness, organization and emergency management capacities.

Your draftsman believes that the EU Civil Protection Mechanism plays a key role in the implementation of Article 196 of TFEU which encourages cooperation between Member States in order to improve the effectiveness of systems for preventing and protecting against natural or man-made disasters.

In this context, your draftsman welcomes the initiative presented by the European Commission which aims to simplify and to strengthen the current solidarity mechanism with a greater financial effort by the European Union to create, in addition to the national capacities, an ambitious European capacity reserve to reinforce the assets of the Member States.

Your draftsman underlines the already existing contribution of European Structural and Investment Funds to promote climate change adaptation, risk prevention and management. Furthermore, he believes that, in order to facilitate a rapid and effective deployment of assistance, the mobilization of assets under RescEU should have a regional approach, in particular by strengthening and involving the capacities of local and regional authorities, with a view to better respond to the particularities of the regions affected.

Exploiting synergies between different Union funds represents an important factor of improved effectiveness and increased efficiency in sustainable disaster prevention and response. Therefore, your draftsman encourages a better cooperation and coordination between the different instruments including The European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) in an integrated approach.

Your draftsman supports as well the proposal made by the Commission to create a network of skills and expertise of the different Member States in the field, proposing the involvement of centres of excellence and universities.

Finally, your draftsman believes that a better communication strategy should be developed in order to make the actions and the results under EU Civil Protection Mechanism more visible to citizens and strengthen their confidence in the Union capacity to both prevent and respond to disasters.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Regional Development 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 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1)  The Union Civil Protection Mechanism ('the Union Mechanism') governed by Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and the Council12strengthens cooperation between the Union and the Member States and facilitates coordination in the field of civil protection in order to improve the Union's response to natural and man-made disasters.

(1)  The Union Civil Protection Mechanism ('the Union Mechanism') governed by Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and the Council12 strengthens cooperation between the Union, the Member States and their regions and facilitates coordination in the field of civil protection in order to improve the Union's response to natural and man-made disasters.

_________________

_________________

12 Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 924).

12 Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 924).

Amendment    2

Proposal for a decision

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3)  Natural and man-made disasters can strike anywhere across the globe, often without warning. Whether of natural or man-made origin, they are becoming increasingly frequent, extreme and complex, exacerbated by the impacts of climate change, and irrespective of national borders. The human, environmental, and economic consequences stemming from disasters can be enormous.

(3)  Natural and man-made disasters can strike anywhere across the globe. Whether of natural origin and exacerbated by climate change, or man-made, including new types of threats, such as those related to internal security, they are becoming increasingly frequent, extreme and complex, surpassing national borders. The human, environmental, and economic consequences stemming from disasters are often enormous in the medium and long term.

Amendment    3

Proposal for a decision

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4)  Recent experience has shown that reliance on voluntary offers of mutual assistance, coordinated and facilitated by the Union Mechanism, does not always ensure that sufficient capacities are made available to address the basic needs of people affected by disasters in a satisfactory manner, nor that the environment and property are properly safeguarded. This is particularly so where Member States are simultaneously affected by recurrent disasters and collective capacity is insufficient.

(4)  Recent experiences have shown that reliance on voluntary offers of mutual assistance, coordinated and facilitated by the Union Mechanism, does not always ensure that sufficient capacities are made available to address the basic needs of people affected by disasters in a timely and satisfactory manner, nor that the environment and property are properly safeguarded. This is particularly so where Member States and their regions, as well as those Member States and regions in the near neighbourhood are affected by recurrent and simultaneous disasters and the collective capacity is insufficient. The system should be improved and Member States should take adequate preventive action to preserve and strengthen national capacities to a level that is sufficient to properly respond to disasters.

Amendment    4

Proposal for a decision

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5)  Prevention is of key importance for protection against disasters and requires further action. To that effect, Member States should share risk assessments on a regular basis as well as summaries of their disaster risk management planning in order to ensure an integrated approach to disaster management, linking risk prevention, preparedness and response actions. In addition, the Commission should be able to require Member States to provide specific prevention and preparedness plans in relation to specific disasters, notably with a view to maximising overall Union support to disaster risk management. Administrative burden should be reduced and prevention policies strengthened, including by ensuring necessary links to other key Union policies and instruments, notably the European Structural and Investment Funds as listed in recital 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/201313.

(5)  Prevention is of key importance for protection against disasters and requires further action on all levels as the impact of climate change affects all territories and is cross-border in nature. To that effect, Member States in partnership with their local and regional authorities should share risk assessments, as well as summaries of their disaster risk management planning in order to ensure an integrated approach to disaster management, including in cross-border events, linking risk prevention, preparedness and response actions as swiftly as possible, including through education and professional training. In addition, where appropriate, the Commission should request Member States to provide specific training, prevention, preparedness, as well as evacuation plans in relation to specific disasters, such asearthquakes, droughts, heat waves, wildfires, floods and water shortages, and humanitarian and technological disasters, notably with a view to maximising the overall Union support to disaster risk management. It is essential to reduce the administrative burden and to strengthen prevention policies and operational capacities, also at cross-border level, including by enhancing the links and coordination with other key Union policies and instruments, notably the European Structural and Investment Funds as listed in Article 1 and recital 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/201313 and of the European Union Solidarity Fund. In this context, it is important to underline that the European Structural and Investment Funds (‘ESI Funds’) are already contributing to promoting climate change adaptation, risk prevention and management and that there is an ex-ante conditionality in place that is linked to that objective.

_________________

_________________

13 Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320).

13 Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320).

Amendment    5

Proposal for a decision

Recital 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(5a)  The Union’s macro-regional strategies could offer high quality frameworks for cooperation with a view to establishing operational preventive actions, as well as reaction and management centres, allowing also for collaboration in this field with neighbourhood third countries.

Amendment    6

Proposal for a decision

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6)  There is a need to reinforce the collective ability to prepare and respond to disasters notably through mutual support in Europe. In addition to strengthening the possibilities already offered by the European Emergency Response Capacity ('EERC' or 'voluntary pool'), from now on referred to as "European Civil Protection Pool", the Commission should also establish rescEU. The composition of rescEU should include emergency response capacities to respond to wildfires, large-scale floods and earthquakes, as well as a field hospital and medical teams in line with World Health Organisation standards, that can be rapidly deployed.

(6)  There is a need to reinforce the collective ability to train for, prepare for and respond to disasters notably through effective mutual support and cooperation in Europe, with a view to ensuring that interventions are more predictable and that the assistance deployment time is significantly reduced. In addition to strengthening the possibilities already offered by the European Emergency Response Capacity ('EERC' or 'Civil Duty to Assist'), from now on referred to as "European Civil Protection Pool", the Commission should also establish rescEU. The composition of rescEU should include pre-committed joint emergency response capacities to respond to natural or man-made disasters such as wildfires, large-scale floods, earthquakes, terrorist threats or other unforeseen events, including any possible acute lack of medication, as well as a field hospital and medical teams in line with World Health Organisation standards that can be deployed to intervene rapidly and simultaneously in several locations. Operational assets under rescEU should be made available upon request for response operations to address capacity gaps and reinforce efforts provided under the Civil Protection Pool. Special provisions should be made for intervention in the Outermost Regions and Overseas Countries and Territories (‘OCTs’), taking account of their remoteness and specificities.

Amendment    7

Proposal for a decision

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6 a)  The role of regional and local authorities in disaster prevention and management is of great importance and their response capacities need to be appropriately involved in any coordination and deployment activities carried out under this Decision, in accordance with Member States' institutional and legal framework, with a view to minimising overlaps and to fostering interoperability. Such authorities can play an important preventive role and they are also the first to react in the aftermath of a disaster, together with their volunteers’ capacities. Therefore, there is a need for on-going cooperation at local, regional and cross-border level with a view to establishing common alert systems for rapid intervention prior to the mobilisation of rescEU, as well as regular public information campaigns on initial response measures.

Amendment    8

Proposal for a decision

Recital 6 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6 b)  In order to facilitate a rapid and effective deployment of assistance, the mobilisation of assets under rescEU should also have a territorial dimension and should take into consideration the importance of adopting a regional and, where appropriate, a community-led approach, with a view to appropriately responding to the particularities of the regions and limiting the damage caused by a disaster.

Amendment    9

Proposal for a decision

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7)  The Union should be able to support Member States where available capacities are insufficient to allow for an effective response to disasters by contributing to the financing of leasing or rental arrangements for ensuring rapid access to such capacities or by financing their acquisition. This would substantially increase the effectiveness of the Union Mechanism, by ensuring availability of capacities in cases where an effective response to disasters would otherwise not be ensured, particularly for disasters with wide ranging impacts affecting a significant number of Member States. Union procurement of capacities should allow for economies of scale and better coordination when responding to disasters.

(7)  The Union should be able to support Member States where available material and technical capacities are insufficient to allow for an effective response to disasters, including in the case of cross-border events by contributing to the financing of leasing or rental arrangements for ensuring rapid access to such capacities or by financing their acquisition. This would substantially increase the effectiveness of the Union Mechanism, by ensuring availability of material and technical capacities, including for rescuing elderly persons or persons with disabilities in cases where an effective response to disasters would otherwise not be ensured, particularly for disasters with wide ranging impacts affecting a significant number of Member States. The pre-committed suitable equipment and Union procurement of capacities should allow for economies of scale and better coordination when responding to disasters.

Amendment    10

Proposal for a decision

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9)  In order to strengthen efficiency and effectiveness of training and exercises and enhance co-operation between Member States' national civil protection authorities and services it is necessary to establish a Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network that is based on existing structures.

(9)  Training, research and innovation are essential aspects of cooperation in the civil protection field. In order to strengthen efficiency and effectiveness of training and exercises, to promote innovation by incorporating the new technologies such as high-tech equipment and the latest results of research to ensure more effective monitoring of urban and forest areas, as well as to enhance dialogue and co-operation between Member States' national civil protection authorities, and services, including at cross-border level, it is necessary to establish a Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network that is based on existing structures in which researchers, research and training centres of Member States, universities and where appropriate centres of excellence and civil sector organisations are involved. In the case of the outermost regions and OCTs, measures should be taken to ensure that they are also integrated into that network, in parallel with reinforcing training cooperation, as well as prevention and response capacities with third countries in the area.

Amendment    11

Proposal for a decision

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11)  There is a need to simplify Union Mechanism procedures to ensure that Member States can access assistance and capacities needed in order to respond to natural or man-made disasters as rapidly as possible.

(11)  There is a need to simplify, streamline and increase the flexibility of the Union Mechanism procedures to ensure that Member States can quickly access assistance and capacities needed in order to respond to natural or man-made disasters as rapidly and efficiently as possible.

Amendment    12

Proposal for a decision

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13)  It is important to ensure that Member States take all the necessary actions in order to effectively prevent natural and man-made disasters and mitigate their effects. Provisions should reinforce links between prevention, preparedness and response actions under the Union Mechanism. Coherence should also be ensured with other relevant Union legislation on prevention and disaster risk management, including for cross-border prevention action and response to threats such as serious cross-border health threats15. Likewise, coherence should be ensured with international commitments such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030, the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development.

(13)  It is important to ensure that Member States and their local and regional authorities take all the necessary actions in order to effectively prevent natural and man-made disasters and mitigate their effects, including by regular management of woodlands, management of combustible materials and carrying out forest planning. Provisions should reinforce links between prevention, preparedness and response actions under the Union Mechanism. Coherence should also be ensured with other relevant Union legislation on prevention and disaster risk management, including for cross-border and inter-municipal prevention and early warning action and response to threats such as serious cross-border health threats15, , including radioactive, biological or chemical accidents. Territorial cooperation programmes under cohesion policy provide for specific actions to take into account disaster resilience, risk prevention and risk management and therefore enhanced efforts for stronger integration and more synergies are needed. Likewise, coherence should be ensured with international commitments such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030, the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development. Arrangements for better coordination with the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF), with a view to responding to natural disasters should also be established.

__________________

__________________

15 Decision No 1082/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on serious cross border threats to health and repealing Decision No 2119/98/EC (OJ L 293, 5.11.2013, p. 1).

15 Decision No 1082/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on serious cross border threats to health and repealing Decision No 2119/98/EC (OJ L 293, 5.11.2013, p. 1).

Amendment    13

Proposal for a decision

Recital 13 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(13 a)  There is a need for Union action to focus also on providing technical training assistance so that the capacity of communities for self-help can be enhanced, leaving them better prepared to provide an initial response and contain a disaster. Targeted training and education for public safety practitioners, such as community leaders, social and medical care practitioners, the rescue and firefighting services as well as local voluntary intervention groups which should dispose of rapidly available intervention equipment, can help contain a disaster and reduce fatalities both during and in the aftermath of the crisis.

Amendment    14

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c

 

Present text

Amendment

 

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

(c)  to facilitate rapid and efficient response in the event of disasters or imminent disasters; and

(c)  to facilitate rapid and efficient response in the event of disaster or imminent disasters including through deploying adequate material and technical capacities for emergency rescue operations;

Amendment    15

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e)  to increase the availability and use of scientific knowledge on disasters.

(e)  to increase the availability and use of scientific knowledge on disasters, including in the outermost regions and OCTs;

Amendment    16

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(aa)  in paragraph 1 the following point (ea) is added:

 

(ea)  to step up cooperation and coordination activities at cross-border level;

Amendment    17

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a)  take action to improve the knowledge base on disaster risks and facilitate the sharing of knowledge, the results of scientific research, best practices and information, including among Member States that share common risks.

(a)  take action to promote education, raise awareness, improve the knowledge base on disaster risks and facilitate the dialogue, sharing of knowledge and cooperation, the results of scientific research and innovation, with recommendations and short-term forecasts, best practices and information, including among Member States and their local and regional authorities, the neighbouring third countries, as well as outermost regions and OCTs where appropriate, that share common risks;

Amendment    18

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

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

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(3a)  In Article 5 (1) point (aa) is inserted:

 

(aa)  provide assistance in decision-making upon request;

Amendment    19

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

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

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(3b)  In Article 5 (1) point (ab) is inserted:

 

(ab)  coordinate the harmonisation of information and guidance on alert systems, including on a cross-border level;

Amendment    20

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 c (new)

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point h

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(3c)  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 and coordination of various Union funds which may support sustainable disaster prevention and response and encourage Member States and regions to exploit those funding opportunities for increased synergies, including with a view to expanding and updating their material and technical capacities;

Amendment    21

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – point a

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a)  develop risk assessments at national or appropriate sub-national level and make them available to the Commission by 22 December 2018 and every three years thereafter;

(a)  develop risk assessments at national or appropriate sub-national level in partnership with relevant local and regional authorities and make them available to the Commission by 22 December 2018 and every two years thereafter;

Amendment    22

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

A summary of the relevant elements of the risk management planning shall be provided to the Commission, including information on the selected prevention and preparedness measures, by 31 January 2019 and every three years thereafter. In addition, the Commission may require Member States to provide specific prevention and preparedness plans, which shall cover both short- and long-term efforts. The Union shall duly consider the progress made by the Member States with respect to disaster prevention and preparedness as part of any future ex-ante conditionality mechanism under the European Structural and Investment Funds.

A summary of the relevant elements of the risk management planning shall be provided to the Commission, including information on the selected prevention and preparedness measures, by 31 January 2019 and every two years thereafter. In addition, the Commission may request Member States to provide specific prevention and preparedness plans, and shall provide them with a guiding framework for the preparation of such plans, which shall cover both short- and long-term efforts. The Union shall duly consider the progress made by the Member States, also at regional and local level, with respect to disaster prevention and preparedness as part of a strengthened future ex-ante conditionality mechanism for investments under the European Structural and Investment Funds.

Amendment    23

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point k

 

Present text

Amendment

 

4a.  In Article 8, paragraph1, point (k) is replaced by the following:

(k)  in close consultation with the Member States, take additional necessary supporting and complementary preparedness action to achieve the objective specified in point (b) of Article 3(1)

“(k)  in close consultation with the Member States, take additional necessary supporting and complementary preparedness action, including through coordination with other Union instruments, to achieve the objective specified in point (b) of Article 3(1).”

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013R1303&from=EN)

Amendment    24

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(4 b)  In Article 9, the following paragraph is inserted after paragraph 1:

 

“1a.  Member States shall strengthen relevant administrative capacities of the competent regional and local authorities, in accordance with their institutional and legal framework.”

Amendment    25

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

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 the planning of disaster response operations under the Union Mechanism, including through scenario-building for disaster response based on the risk assessments referred to in point (a) of Article 6 and the overview of risks referred to in point (c) of Article 5(1), asset mapping and the development of plans for the deployment of response capacities.

1.  The Commission and the Member States shall work together to improve the planning of disaster response operations, both for natural or man-made disasters, under the Union Mechanism, including through scenario-building for disaster response based on the risk assessments referred to in point (a) of Article 6 and the overview of risks referred to in point (c) of Article 5(1), asset mapping and the development of plans for the deployment of response capacities.

Amendment    26

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 11 – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  A European Civil Protection Pool shall be established. It shall consist of a pool of pre-committed response capacities of the Member States and include modules, other response capacities and experts.

1.  A European Civil Protection Pool shall be established. It shall consist of a set of Member States' pre-authorised response capabilities and include modules, other response capacities and experts, based on the principle of the civil duty to assist.

Amendment    27

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point d

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 11 – paragraph 10

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

10.  The references to the European Emergency Response Capacity, EERC and the voluntary pool shall be understood as a reference to the European Civil Protection Pool.

10.  The references to the European Emergency Response Capacity, EERC and the civil duty to assist shall be understood as a reference to the European Civil Protection Pool.

Amendment    28

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c)  urban search and rescue;

(c)  urban, mountain and forest search and rescue;

Amendment    29

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

On the basis of identified risks and taking into account a multi-hazard approach, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 to define the types of response capacities required in addition to those identified in paragraph 2 of this Article and revise the composition of rescEU accordingly. Consistency shall be ensured with other Union policies.

On the basis of identified risks and taking into account a multi-hazard approach and the need for flexibility as regards the response capacities, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 30 to define the types of response capacities required in addition to those identified in paragraph 2 of this Article and revise the composition of rescEU accordingly. Consistency shall be ensured with other Union policies.

Amendment    30

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 7

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7.  rescEU capacities shall be available for response operations under the Union Mechanism following a request for assistance through the ERCC. The decision on their deployment shall be taken by the Commission, which shall retain command and control of rescEU capacities.

7.  rescEU capacities shall be available for response operations under the Union Mechanism following a request for assistance through the ERCC. The decision on their deployment shall be taken by the Commission, which shall retain command and control of rescEU capacities and shall use a common and standardised operational language that can be understood by all entities that intervene in the event of disasters.

Amendment    31

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 8

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8.  In case of deployment, the Commission shall agree with the requesting Member State on the operational deployment of rescEU capacities. The requesting Member State shall facilitate operational co-ordination of its own capacities and rescEU activities during operations.

8.  In case of deployment, the Commission shall agree with the requesting Member State or States, if appropriate on the operational deployment of rescEU capacities. The requesting Member State shall facilitate operational co-ordination of its own capacities, including the response capacities of regional and local authorities, as well as of volunteers and rescEU activities during operations.

Amendment    32

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12 – paragraph 9

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

9.  The coordination of different response capacities shall be facilitated where appropriate by the Commission through the ERCC in accordance with Articles 15 and 16.

9.  The coordination among the different response capacities shall be facilitated where appropriate by the Commission, by taking into consideration, inter alia, the need to adopt a regional approach, and using, where appropriate cross-border arrangements, based on availability and proximity. That coordination shall also be facilitated through the ERCC in accordance with Articles 15 and 16.

Amendment    33

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission shall establish a network of relevant civil protection and disaster management actors and institutions, forming together with the Commission a Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network.

The Commission shall establish a network of relevant civil protection and disaster management actors and institutions, including research and training centres, universities, researchers and centres of excellence where appropriate forming together with the Commission a Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network which shall be also open for knowledge and sharing of best practice with third countries.

The Network shall carry out the following tasks in the field of training, exercises, lessons learnt and knowledge dissemination, in close coordination with relevant knowledge centres, where appropriate:'

The Network shall carry out the following tasks in the field of training, exercises, lessons learnt, knowledge dissemination, communication and public awareness programmes in close coordination with relevant knowledge centres.

Amendment    34

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(9 a)  In Article 13, paragraph 1, point (a) is replaced by the following:

(a)  set up and manage a training programme for civil protection and emergency management personnel on prevention of, preparedness for and response to disasters. The programme shall include joint courses and a system for exchange of experts, whereby individuals may be seconded to other Member States.

(a)  set up and manage a training programme for civil protection and emergency management personnel aimed at providing specialised expertise related to prevention of, preparedness for and response to disasters. The programme shall make use of existing centres of excellence and universities, where appropriate, and shall include joint courses and a system for exchange of experts, whereby individuals may be seconded to other Member States. The programme shall also include provisions for cooperation with neighbouring third countries.

Amendment    35

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point f

 

Present text

Amendment

 

(9 b)  In Article 13, paragraph 1, point (f) is replaced by the following:

(f)  stimulate and encourage the introduction and use of relevant new technologies for the purpose of the Union Mechanism.

(f)  stimulate research and innovation and encourage the introduction and use of relevant new technologies for the purpose of the Union Mechanism.

Amendment    36

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 20a – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Any assistance or funding provided under this Decision shall give appropriate visibility to the Union, including prominence to the Union emblem for those capacities referred to under Article 11, 12 and 21(2)(c).

Any assistance or funding provided under this Decision shall ensure appropriate visibility to the Union, including prominence to the Union emblem for those capacities referred to under Article 11, 12 and 21(2) (c). A communication strategy shall be developed with a view to making the actions under the Union Mechanism visible to citizens and to increasing their confidence in the Union’s disaster prevention and response capacity.

Amendment    37

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b – point i

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c)  costs necessary to upgrade or repair response capacities to a state of readiness and availability that makes them deployable as part of the European Civil Protection Pool, in accordance with the quality requirements of the European Civil Protection Pool and, where relevant, recommendations formulated in the certification process ('adaptation costs'). Those costs may include costs related to operability, interoperability of modules and other response capacities, autonomy, self-sufficiency, transportability, packaging, and other necessary costs, provided that they specifically relate to the capacities' participation in the European Civil Protection Pool.

(c)  costs necessary to upgrade or repair response capacities to a state of readiness and availability that makes them deployable as part of the European Civil Protection Pool, in accordance with the quality requirements of the European Civil Protection Pool and, where relevant, recommendations formulated in the certification process ('adaptation costs'). Those costs may include costs related to operability, interoperability of modules and other response capacities, autonomy, self-sufficiency, transportability, packaging, and other necessary costs including those relating to the promotion of civil protection-related volunteering and training of volunteers, provided that they specifically relate to the capacities' participation in the European Civil Protection Pool.

Amendment    38

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 26 – paragraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  Synergies and complementarity shall be sought with other instruments of the Union such as those supporting cohesion, rural development, research, health, as well as migration and security policies. In the case of a response to humanitarian crises in third countries the Commission shall ensure the complementarity and coherence of actions financed under this Decision and actions financed under Regulation (EC) No 1257/96.

2.  Synergies, complementarity and increased coordination shall be developed with other instruments of the Union such as those supporting cohesion, including the European Union Solidarity Fund, rural development, research, health, as well as migration and security policies, without entailing the reallocation of the funds from those areas. In the case of a response to humanitarian crises in third countries the Commission shall ensure the complementarity and coherence of actions financed under this Decision and actions financed under Regulation (EC) No 1257/96.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Union Civil Protection Mechanism

References

COM(2017)0772 – C8-0409/2017 – 2017/0309(COD)

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

ENVI

14.12.2017

 

 

 

Opinion by

       Date announced in plenary

REGI

14.12.2017

Rapporteur

       Date appointed

Daniel Buda

7.12.2017

Discussed in committee

24.1.2018

27.3.2018

 

 

Date adopted

26.4.2018

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

25

1

1

Members present for the final vote

Pascal Arimont, Victor Boştinaru, Rosa D’Amato, Aleksander Gabelic, Michela Giuffrida, Ivan Jakovčić, Constanze Krehl, Louis-Joseph Manscour, Iskra Mihaylova, Konstantinos Papadakis, Stanislav Polčák, Liliana Rodrigues, Fernando Ruas, Ruža Tomašić, Monika Vana, Matthijs van Miltenburg, Lambert van Nistelrooij, Derek Vaughan, Kerstin Westphal

Substitutes present for the final vote

Petras Auštrevičius, Daniel Buda, John Howarth, Ivana Maletić, Bronis Ropė, Damiano Zoffoli

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote

Marek Plura, Boris Zala

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

25

+

ALDE

Petras Auštrevičius, Ivan Jakovčić, Iskra Mihaylova, Matthijs van Miltenburg

EFDD

Rosa D’Amato

PPE

Pascal Arimont, Daniel Buda, Ivana Maletić, Marek Plura, Stanislav Polčák, Fernando Ruas, Lambert van Nistelrooij

S&D

Victor Boştinaru, Aleksander Gabelic, Michela Giuffrida, John Howarth, Constanze Krehl, Louis-Joseph Manscour, Liliana Rodrigues, Derek Vaughan, Kerstin Westphal, Boris Zala, Damiano Zoffoli

VERTS/ALE

Bronis Ropė, Monika Vana

1

-

NI

Konstantinos Papadakis

1

0

ECR

Ruža Tomašić

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

4.4.2018

POSITION IN THE FORM OF AMENDMENTS

of the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality

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)2017/0772 – C8‑0409/2017 – 2017/0309(COD))

On behalf of the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality: Angelika Mlinar (rapporteur)

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality presents the following amendments to the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, as the committee responsible:

Amendment    1

Proposal for a decision

Recital 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(4a)  Gender equality is a fundamental value of the Union – as recognised by the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights – which the Union has committed to integrating into all its activities. In particular, Article 8 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union lays down the principle of gender mainstreaming, stating that “in all its activities, the Union shall aim to eliminate inequalities, and to promote equality, between men and women;”

Amendment    2

Proposal for a decision

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5)  Prevention is of key importance for protection against disasters and requires further action. To that effect, Member States should share risk assessments on a regular basis as well as summaries of their disaster risk management planning in order to ensure an integrated approach to disaster management, linking risk prevention, preparedness and response actions. In addition, the Commission should be able to require Member States to provide specific prevention and preparedness plans in relation to specific disasters, notably with a view to maximising overall Union support to disaster risk management. Administrative burden should be reduced and prevention policies strengthened, including by ensuring necessary links to other key Union policies and instruments, notably the European Structural and Investment Funds as listed in recital 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/20131.

(5)  Prevention is of key importance for protection against disasters and requires further action. To that effect, Member States should share risk assessments on a regular basis as well as summaries of their disaster risk management planning in order to ensure an integrated approach to disaster management, linking risk prevention, preparedness and response actions. Member States should ensure comprehensive gender-sensitive programing since natural and human-made disasters, as well as environmental policies impact men and women differently. Therefore, in order to develop equitable and effective disaster risk reduction and strengthen civil protection mechanisms, gender issues need to be incorporated in all phases from prevention to preparedness and response processes, including shared risk assessments, crisis management interventions both in conflict and post-conflict situations. In addition, the Commission should be able to require Member States to provide specific prevention and preparedness plans in relation to specific disasters, notably with a view to maximising overall Union support to disaster risk management. Administrative burden should be reduced and prevention policies strengthened, including by ensuring necessary links to other key Union policies and instruments, notably the European Structural and Investment Funds as listed in recital 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/20131.

_____________________

_____________________

Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320).

Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320).

Amendment    3

Proposal for a decision

Recital 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(7a) In all its actions, the Union should take into account that in addition to the immediate effects of a disaster, women may have specific health care needs. Member States and the Union should as a priority ensure that pregnant women receive the necessary health care.

Amendment    4

Proposal for a decision

Recital 7 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(7b)  Sanitary and hygienic facilities, services and resources should be provided during all the stages of risk management, with special consideration and awareness to the particular needs of women and girls.

Amendment    5

Proposal for a decision

Recital 7 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(7c)  Women and girls are at an increased risk of experiencing physical and sexual violence in emergency settings. Therefore, it is vital that disaster management projects include measures to prevent and effectively respond to gender-based violence such as measures to keep women safe in wake of a disaster, while providing services to support victims of gender-based violence with healthcare, psychological support and other types of assistance. Issues related to violence against women and girls should be integrated into existing risk reduction and emergency response training and manuals.

Amendment    6

Proposal for a decision

Recital 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(9a)  In order to prevent and respond in a more effective way to the particular risks women and girls face in emergency settings, the staff and personnel working for the planning, deployment and managing in the field of disaster risk management and civil protection, should receive gender-sensitive training. For this purpose, the ongoing dialogue and work between the Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network with networks and organisations of women’s rights defenders with an expertise in the field of environmental disasters, is of utmost importance to gain a fully transversal approach to prevention, preparedness and response to disasters in the Union and in the Member States.

Amendment    7

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10)  In order to achieve the functioning of the rescEU capacity, additional financial appropriations should made available to finance actions under the Union Mechanism.

(10)  In order to achieve the functioning of the rescEU capacity, additional financial appropriations should made available to finance actions under the Union Mechanism, but not at the expense of the financial envelopes allocated to other key Union policies such as those promoting rights, equality and citizenship, justice or human development worldwide including all the funds allocated to gender equality and women’s empowerment programmes and projects, in particular, having in mind that the implementation of some of these programmes has been exceptionally successful (payment allocations for REC reached more than 99% in the previous three years).

Justification

New policy proposals should be accompanied by new resources. The rapporteur strongly rejects the use of any redeployments at the expense of successful, chronically underfunded programmes such as the Rights, equality and citizenship (REC) and Justice programmes. Almost 100% absorption rate for the REC programme implies that no new resources can be deployed from this programme without negatively affecting specific projects and organizations. FEMM has been continuously pointing out the need to increase the funding of the REC in view of DAPHNE and gender equality programmes.

Amendment    8

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(10 a)  Separate funding and budgetary allocations should be guaranteed for the revised Union Civil Protection Mechanism. Considering the need to avoid any negative impact on the financing of existing multiannual programmes, the increase in financing for the targeted revision of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism in the years 2018, 2019 and 2020 should be drawn exclusively from all means available under Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/20131a, with particular recourse to the Flexibility Instrument.

 

___________________

 

1a Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884).

Justification

New policy proposals should be accompanied by new resources. The rapporteur strongly rejects the use of any redeployments at the expense of successful, chronically underfunded programmes such as the Rights, equality and citizenship and Justice programmes.

Amendment    9

Proposal for a decision

Recital 10 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(10b)  The planning and allocation of funding and budgeting for the revised Union Civil Protection Mechanism should incorporate the use of the gender-budgeting perspective, entailing a gender-based assessment to better incorporate a gender perspective to deal with emergency crisis in risk management and disaster prevention efforts.

Amendment    10

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a)  progress in implementing the disaster prevention framework: measured by the number of Member States that have made available to the Commission their risk assessments, an assessment of their risk management capability and a summary of their disaster management planning as referred to in Article 6;

(a)  progress in implementing the disaster prevention framework: measured by the number of Member States that have made available to the Commission their risk assessments, an assessment of their risk management capability and a summary of their disaster management planning as referred to in Article 6. Assessments shall be gender-sensitive;

Amendment    11

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 12a – paragraph 1

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of operations and progress made under Articles 11 and 12 every two years.

The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of operations and progress made under Articles 11 and 12 every two years, with specific data on gender inclusion.

Amendment    12

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Network shall carry out the following tasks in the field of training, exercises, lessons learnt and knowledge dissemination, in close coordination with relevant knowledge centres, where appropriate; '

The Network shall, while aiming for a gender balanced composition, carry out the following tasks in the field of training, exercises, lessons learnt and knowledge dissemination, in close coordination with relevant knowledge centres, where appropriate; '

Amendment    13

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(9a)  In Article 13, the following paragraph is added:

 

2a.  When carrying out the tasks set out in paragraph 1, the Commission and Member States shall ensure that the trainings and qualification processes, as well as the manuals on risk reduction and emergency response integrate a gender perspective with a special focus on the prevention of and response to violence against women and girls;

Justification

This additional paragraph seeks to introduce gender sensitivity in the Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network through trainings and manuals.

Amendment    14

Proposal for a decision

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

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(9b)  In Article 13, the following paragraph is added:

 

3a.  The Commission shall ensure that disaster data will be made available disaggregated by gender, as required by The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, to address the role of women in risk-reduction planning and to address gender perspective throughout the process;

Justification

This additional paragraph seeks to introduce gender sensitivity to gathering of disaster data. For promotion and enhancement of cooperation, data and statistics are key in understanding and eventually in responding to disaster risks. The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction is clear that the relevant data should be disaggregated.

Amendment    15

Proposal for a decision

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12

Decision No 1313/2013/EU

Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

 

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

EUR 480 630 000 in current prices shall derive from Heading 3 "Security and Citizenship" of the multiannual financial framework and EUR 150 936 000 in current prices from Heading 4 "Global Europe".'

The necessary appropriations for the Union Mechanism shall be gradually authorised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the annual budgetary procedure, taking due account of all means available under Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013*, with particular recourse to the Flexibility Instrument.'

 

____________________

 

* Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884).

Justification

New policy proposals should be accompanied by new resources. The rapporteur strongly rejects the use of any redeployments at the expense of successful, chronically underfunded programmes such as the Rights, equality and citizenship and Justice programmes.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Union Civil Protection Mechanism

References

COM(2017)0772 – C8-0409/2017 – 2017/0309(COD)

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

ENVI

14.12.2017

 

 

 

Opinion by

       Date announced in plenary

FEMM

8.2.2018

Rapporteur

       Date appointed

Angelika Mlinar

21.2.2018


PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Title

Union Civil Protection Mechanism

References

COM(2017)0772 – C8-0409/2017 – 2017/0309(COD)

Date submitted to Parliament

23.11.2017

 

 

 

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

ENVI

14.12.2017

 

 

 

Committees asked for opinions

       Date announced in plenary

AFET

14.12.2017

DEVE

14.12.2017

BUDG

14.12.2017

REGI

14.12.2017

 

FEMM

8.2.2018

 

 

 

Not delivering opinions

       Date of decision

AFET

20.3.2018

 

 

 

Associated committees

       Date announced in plenary

DEVE

15.3.2018

 

 

 

Rapporteurs

       Date appointed

Elisabetta Gardini

16.1.2018

 

 

 

Discussed in committee

20.3.2018

 

 

 

Date adopted

17.5.2018

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

48

8

5

Members present for the final vote

Pilar Ayuso, Zoltán Balczó, Ivo Belet, Biljana Borzan, Paul Brannen, Soledad Cabezón Ruiz, Nessa Childers, Birgit Collin-Langen, Miriam Dalli, Seb Dance, Angélique Delahaye, Stefan Eck, Bas Eickhout, José Inácio Faria, Karl-Heinz Florenz, Francesc Gambús, Elisabetta Gardini, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Jens Gieseke, Julie Girling, Sylvie Goddyn, Françoise Grossetête, Andrzej Grzyb, Jytte Guteland, György Hölvényi, Anneli Jäätteenmäki, Benedek Jávor, Urszula Krupa, Jo Leinen, Peter Liese, Lukas Mandl, Valentinas Mazuronis, Susanne Melior, Rory Palmer, Massimo Paolucci, Piernicola Pedicini, Bolesław G. Piecha, Pavel Poc, John Procter, Julia Reid, Annie Schreijer-Pierik, Davor Škrlec, Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu, Ivica Tolić, Nils Torvalds, Adina-Ioana Vălean, Damiano Zoffoli

Substitutes present for the final vote

Nikos Androulakis, Nicola Caputo, Esther Herranz García, Jan Huitema, Peter Jahr, Karol Karski, Ulrike Müller, Stanislav Polčák, Bart Staes, Dubravka Šuica, Tiemo Wölken

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote

John Flack, Jaromír Kohlíček, Miltiadis Kyrkos

Date tabled

23.5.2018


FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

48

+

ALDE

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Anneli Jäätteenmäki, Valentinas Mazuronis, Ulrike Müller, Nils Torvalds

ECR

Karol Karski, Urszula Krupa, Bolesław G. Piecha

EFDD

Piernicola Pedicini

PPE

Pilar Ayuso, Ivo Belet, Birgit Collin-Langen, Angélique Delahaye, José Inácio Faria, Karl-Heinz Florenz, Francesc Gambús, Elisabetta Gardini, Jens Gieseke, Françoise Grossetête, Andrzej Grzyb, Esther Herranz García, György Hölvényi, Peter Jahr, Peter Liese, Lukas Mandl, Stanislav Polčák, Annie Schreijer-Pierik, Ivica Tolić, Dubravka Šuica, Adina-Ioana Vălean

S&D

Nikos Androulakis, Biljana Borzan, Paul Brannen, Soledad Cabezón Ruiz, Nicola Caputo, Nessa Childers, Miriam Dalli, Seb Dance, Jytte Guteland, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Jo Leinen, Susanne Melior, Rory Palmer, Massimo Paolucci, Pavel Poc, Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu, Tiemo Wölken, Damiano Zoffoli

8

-

ALDE

Jan Huitema

ECR

John Flack, John Procter

ENF

Sylvie Goddyn

VERTS/ALE

Bas Eickhout, Benedek Jávor, Davor Škrlec, Bart Staes

5

0

EFDD

Julia Reid

GUE/NGL

Stefan Eck, Jaromír Kohlíček

NI

Zoltán Balczó

PPE

Julie Girling

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

Last updated: 25 May 2018Legal notice