Opinion on the proposal for a Council decision establishing a Community action programme in the field of civil protection () (96/C 100/22)

On 8 July 1995, the Committee of the Regions decided, under Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to draw up an Opinion on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Commission on Urban Policies was made responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject. The Rapporteur was Dr Heiner Berger.

At its 9th Plenary Session of 20 and 21 September 1995 (meeting of 20 September 1995), the Committee of the Regions adopted the following Opinion.

1. Introduction

The Council's decisions to date on Community-wide cooperation in the field of civil protection have been followed with great interest by the COR. There is a great need for civil protection measures to support the efforts of local and regional authorities to provide protection against dangers arising from natural disasters, large-scale industrial risks or other serious accidents. Such efforts are very costly in terms of staff and money.

2. General comments

2.1. The COR welcomes the submission of a proposal for a Council Decision establishing a Community action programme in the field of civil protection. The COR expressly declares that the Community's responsibility only concerns measures of coordination and encouragement.

2.2. The COR notes that the proposal is founded on Article 235 of the EU Treaty, in the absence of any specific legal basis. The COR expressly declares that the proposed action programme is not allowed to anticipate any decisions; these should first be taken during the 1996 IGC and be ratified by the Member States.

2.3. The COR expressly supports the objectives of the proposed action programme set out in paragraph 4 of the explanatory memorandum. In pursuing them the programme is to focus on supporting and backing up national, regional and local initiatives designed to improve civil protection and establish a framework for effective and rapid cooperation between Member States' civil protection services when needed.

2.4. However, this equal emphasis on national, regional and local activities in the interests of efficient protection is not reflected in the proposed action programme, because the term 'civil protection` does not bring out clearly enough these different layers of responsibility.

2.5. The organizational difference at local level between emergency prevention and emergency rescue needs to cover larger-scale disasters. Accordingly, a distinction should be drawn between civil protection and disaster rescue. While emergency rescue can be largely administered at national level by means of laws, instructions from the authorities and guidelines for the protection of the public, disaster rescue organized at local (regional) level must, as a rule, focus on reacting as quickly and effectively as possible in practice to a sudden danger (quick response). Experience has shown that the most suitable units for responding rapidly to an emergency are those which are responsible daily for combating damage from fires, medical emergencies and industrial or natural disasters.

A further distinction should be drawn between

(a) dangerous situations which can be combated using only local and/or regional services;

and

(b) those where the use of local, regional and supra-regional services is required.

The term 'disaster` does not normally cover dangerous situations in which only local and regional services are used. However, the recent floods in the Maastricht area were a clear example of how such dangerous situations can also be of European significance. Here, regional services provided effective cross-border help which clearly showed to those people threatened by the floods the value of cross-border assistance in the spirit of European solidarity. Large numbers of aeroplanes and helicopters were needed to put out the recent forest fires around Athens. Here, short-term and rapid supraregional assistance was needed, e.g. from Germany. The need was not for the usual civil protection services but for specially trained staff using special techniques.

2.6. On the basis of this experience the COR thinks the action programme must be geared more to:

'Protection from dangerous situations which exceed the capacity of local services and can only be handled with the help of regional or supra-regional services.`2.7. The COR also thinks the action programme should give equal priority to promoting cross-border regional cooperation by rescue organizations, e.g. in the Maas-Rhine Euro-region; and the setting-up and involvement of various supra-regional rapid intervention special units.

2.8. An EU fund should be set up to finance supra-regional intervention and EU intervention in non-EU countries.

2.9. The COR particularly recommends that the action programme should concentrate on the practical aspects. Because of the variety of national emergency services and the need to respect the principle of subsidiarity, it will be difficult to influence the administrative side of civil protection, so theoretical discussion will not be of much use.

Disasters will be rare and exceptional in the Community. Training to handle large-scale damage is therefore especially important. The knowledge gained would then also be of enormous help when disasters occur at Community level. The following are of particular importance in practice:

a) simplifying the procedures for calling in services from the same region but of a different nationality;

b) improving communications between rescue services, with special attention being paid to coordination of available technology and overcoming language barriers through the use of intelligent systems; and

c) developing managers' capacity to work with management organizations in other Member States.

2.10. The experience of non-governmental and local emergency organizations is particularly valuable when organizing regional emergency services. The COR would like the EU Commission to draw on the experience of such organizations when planning and implementing the proposed measures, since this would ensure that maximum attention was paid to practical aspects.

3. Specific comments

In view of the considerations set out above, the COR recommends that Articles 1, 3 and 4 and parts A and B of the Annex be drafted as follows:

'Article 1

A Community action programme is hereby established to provide protection from dangerous situations which exceed the capacity of a local service and can only be handled with the help of other local services or regional or supra-regional services (large-scale emergencies).

Article 3

1. Each individual action undertaken within the framework of the action programme shall be aimed at supporting, backing up and supplementing the civil protection activities undertaken in the Member States.

2. This individual action shall be selected primarily on the basis of the following criteria:

a) contribution to increasing the degree of preparedness of emergency planning and rescue services in the Member States in order that they might usefully respond to an emergency;

b) contribution to improving techniques and methods of response: pilot projects;

c) contribution to public information, education and awareness, so as to help citizens to protect themselves more effectively.

3. Each individual action shall be implemented in close cooperation with the national, regional or local authorities concerned and with organizations and associations providing emergency services in the Member States.

4. Each action shall take account of the results of the Community and national research in the relevant fields.

5. The Commission and the Member States shall encourage complementary operation of this programme and of the European Community action programme for the implementation of a vocational training policy.

Article 4

For the purposes of implementing the programme, the Commission shall be assisted by an advisory committee on civil protection composed of representatives of the Member States and a representative of the Committee of the Regions and chaired by the representative of the Commission.

When preparing the proposed measures the Commission shall draw on the experience of non-governmental and local organizations providing emergency services.

The representative of the Commission shall submit to the committee a draft of the measures to be taken. The committee shall deliver its opinion on the draft, within a time limit which the chairman may lay down according to the urgency of the matter, if necessary by taking a vote.

The Opinion shall be recorded in the minutes; in addition, each Member State shall have the right to ask to have its position recorded in the minutes.

The Commission shall take the utmost account of the opinion delivered by the committee and shall inform the committee of the manner in which its opinion has been taken into account.

The Commission may also refer any other matter relating to civil protection to the advisory committee on civil protection.

>TABLE>

`

4. Conclusions

Finally, the COR wishes to reiterate its approval of the present proposed action programme and particularly expects the suggested involvement of rescue services responsible daily for responding to emergencies in the Member States to lead to a major improvement in the possibilities for cross-border assistance.

Done at Brussels, 20 September 1995.

The Chairman of the Committee of the Regions

Jacques BLANC

() OJ No C 142, 8. 6. 1995, p. 19.