EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

The Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006[1] allows for the mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund, within an annual ceiling of EUR 1 billion, over and above the relevant headings of the financial framework. The conditions of eligibility to the Fund are detailed in Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002[2].

On the basis of applications for assistance from the Fund by Spain in relation to an earthquake in the Murcia region, and from Italy following flooding, total estimates of the damage caused are as follows:

|| || || || || (EUR)

|| Direct damage accepted || Threshold || Amount based on 2,5 % || Amount based on 6 % || Total amount of EU aid proposed

Spain – earthquake in Lorca || 842,838 million || 3 536 million || 21 070 950 || - || 21 070 950

Veneto flooding || 676,357 million || 3 536 million || 16 908 925 || - || 16 908 925

Total || || || || || 37 979 875

In the light of the examination of the applications[3], and considering the maximum possible grant from the Fund as well as the scope for reallocating appropriations under the heading requiring additional expenditure, the Commission proposes to mobilise the European Union Solidarity Fund for a total amount of EUR 37 979 875, to be allocated under heading 3b of the financial framework.

By presenting this proposal to deploy the Fund, the Commission initiates the simplified trilogue procedure, as required by Point 26 of the Inter-institutional Agreement of 17 May 2006, in view of securing the agreement of the two arms of the Budgetary Authority on the need to use the Fund and the amount required. The Commission invites each arm of the budgetary authority to inform the other arm and the Commission on its intentions.

In case of disagreement by either of the two arms of the Budgetary Authority, a formal trilogue meeting will be convened.

The Commission will present a draft amending budget (DAB) in order to enter in the 2011 budget specific commitment and payment appropriations, as requested in Point 26 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006.

Proposal for a

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

on the mobilisation of the EU Solidarity Fund

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management[4], and in particular point 26 thereof,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund[5],

Having regard to the proposals from the Commission,[6]

Whereas:

(1) The European Union has created a European Union Solidarity Fund (the "Fund") to show solidarity with the population of regions struck by disasters.

(2) The Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 allows the mobilisation of the Fund within the annual ceiling of EUR 1 billion.

(3) Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 contains the provisions whereby the Fund may be mobilised.

(4) Spain submitted an application to mobilise the Fund, concerning a disaster caused by an earthquake, and Italy submitted an application to mobilise the Fund, concerning a disaster caused by flooding.

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

For the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2011, the European Union Solidarity Fund shall be mobilised to provide the sum of EUR 37 979 875 in commitment and payment appropriations.

Article 2

This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels,

For the European Parliament For the Council

The President The President

[1] OJ C 139, 14.06.2006, p. 1

[2] OJ L 311, 14.11.2002, p. 3

[3] Communication to the Commission SEC(2011) 1383 on the application to mobilise the European Union Solidarity Fund presented by Spain, and Communication to the Commission SEC(2011) 1373 on the application to mobilise the European Union Solidarity Fund presented by Italy.

[4] OJ C 139, 14.06.2006, p. 1.

[5] OJ L 311, 14.11.2002, p. 3.

[6] OJ C […], […], p. […] and OJ C […], […], p. […]