CELEX: 52012PC0527
Language: en
Date: 2012-09-20
Title: Proposal for a DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Decision No 574/2007/EC with a view to increasing the co-financing rate of the External Borders Fund for certain Member States experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability

|
			
		
		
		52012PC0527
		
			Proposal for a DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Decision No 574/2007/EC with a view to increasing the co-financing rate of the External Borders Fund for certain Member States experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability /* COM/2012/0527 final - 2012/0253 (COD) */
			
				
		
		
			
			   	EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
1.           CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
·                        
Reasons and objectives 
The sustained
financial and economic crisis is stepping up the pressure on national financial
resources as Member States reduce their budgets. In this context, ensuring the
smooth implementation of programmes adopted under the four Funds established as
part of the General Programme on ‘Solidarity and
Management of Migration Flows’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Funds’), is of particular importance as a means of injecting funds into the
economy.
Nonetheless,
implementation of the programmes is often challenging as a result of liquidity
problems caused by budget constraints that often lead to severe cutbacks in
expenditures, consequently augmenting problems during a period of sustained
crisis. This is the case in particular for those Member States which have been
most affected by the current crisis and have received financial assistance
under a programme from the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism (EFSM),
the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) or bilateral loans for the euro
countries or from the Balance of Payments (BoP) mechanism for non-euro countries.
To date, six countries — including Greece, which also received financial
assistance before the establishment of EFSM via bilateral loans — have
requested financial assistance under the various support mechanisms and have
agreed with the Commission on a macro-economic adjustment programme. These six countries
are Hungary, Romania, Latvia (under the BoP), Portugal, Greece and Ireland
(under the EFSM/EFSF/bilaterally). It should be noted that the programme for
Hungary expired in 2010 while the programme for Latvia expired in early 2012.
To ensure that
Member States benefiting from a financial support mechanism (or any other
Member States which may be concerned by such assistance in the future) continue
to implement the programmes adopted under the Funds and disburse funds to
projects, this proposal contains provisions that would allow the Commission to increase
the Union co-financing rate for these countries, for the period during which they
benefit from financial assistance provided by one of the support mechanisms under
any funding instruments. This will provide additional financial resources to
the Member States and will make it easier to continue implementing the
programmes on the ground.
·                        
General context
There can be no
doubt that the deepening financial crisis in some Member States is having a
substantial effect on the real economy given among other things, the amount of accumulated
debt and the difficulties encountered by governments wishing to borrow money
from the market at sustainable costs. 
The Commission
has been very active in putting forward proposals for the best way to react to
the current financial crisis and its socio-economic consequences. Its three
proposals for these issues have been adopted. The first revises Regulation (EC)
No 1083/2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional
Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund with a view to
increasing the amount of the Union contribution which is disbursed through
interim payments and payments of the final balance by up to 10 percentage
points above the current limits (Regulation (EU) No 1311/2011 of 13 December
2011). The second proposal revises Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on
support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural
Development with a view to increasing the Fund’s contribution rate up to 95% in the regions eligible under
Convergence objectives, the outermost regions and the smaller Aegean Islands
and up to 85% in other regions (Regulation (EU) No 1312/2011 of 19 December
2011). The third revises Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 on
the European Fisheries Fund allowing for an increased
amount of Union contribution to be disbursed through interim payments and
payments of the final balance by up to 10 percentage points above the current
limits (Regulation (EU) No 387/2012 of 19 April 2012).
·                        
Provisions in force in the policy sphere of
the proposal
Article 16 of Decision No 574/2007/EC of
the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 May 2007 establishing the External Borders Fund for the period 2007 to 2013
as part of the General programme ‘Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows’
provides that the Union co-financing rate for supported actions does not in
principle exceed 50%. Article 16 also provides that this Union co-financing
rate may be increased to 75% if the Member State in question is covered by the
Cohesion Fund or if the action addresses specific priorities identified in the strategic guidelines.
·                        
Consistency with other policies and
objectives of the Union 
The proposal is consistent with other proposals and initiatives
adopted by the European Commission as a response to the financial crisis.
2.           RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS OF
INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
·                        
Consultation of interested parties
There was no consultation of external stakeholders.
·                        
Procurement and use of expertise
Use of external expertise has not been necessary.
·                        
Impact analysis
The proposal will allow the Commission to
apply higher co-financing rates for the countries benefiting from one of the support
mechanisms. 
There is no need for additional budget as
the annual national allocation from the Funds for the countries and the
programmes over the 2007-2013 programming period will not change. 
3.           LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE
PROPOSAL
·                        
Summary of the proposal 
It is proposed to modify Article 16 of Decision No 574/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council to allow the Union co-financing rate applicable to the External Borders
Fund programmes of the Member States concerned to be increased by 20 percentage
points, provided they are benefiting from one of the support mechanisms. 
Once a decision granting financial assistance
to a Member State under one of the support mechanisms has been taken, the
Member State may submit to the Commission either a draft annual programme or a draft revised annual programme applying the increased Union co-financing rate.
To be entitled to apply the increased Union
co-financing rate, a Member State must benefit from one of the support
mechanisms at the time of submitting its draft annual programme or draft revised annual programme. However, once an
action of a specific annual programme has been co-financed at the increased Union
co-financing rate, it remains so until the end of the eligibility period of the
related annual programme whether or not the Member State still benefits from one
of the support mechanisms. 
·                        
Legal basis 
The legal basis
is Decision No 574/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23
May 2007 establishing the External Borders Fund for the
period 2007 to 2013 as part of the General programme ‘Solidarity and Management
of Migration Flows’. Based on the principle of shared management between the
Commission and the Member States, this Decision includes provisions for the
programming process as well as arrangements for programme management (including
financial management), monitoring, financial control and evaluation of
projects.
·                        
Subsidiarity principle 
The proposal
complies within the subsidiarity principle to the extent that it seeks to
provide increased support through the Funds for certain Member States undergoing
serious difficulties notably with respect to their economic and financial
stability and faced with a deterioration in their deficit and debt positions or
slowed economic growth, reflecting structural domestic challenges and the international
economic and financial environment. In this context, it is necessary to
establish, at European Union level, a temporary mechanism which allows the
European Union to co-finance certified expenditure under the Funds, using a
higher co-financing rate.
·                        
Proportionality principle 
The proposal conforms to the proportionality principle:
This proposal
is indeed proportionate since it goes a long way in providing increased support
from the Funds to Member States that are in difficulties or seriously
threatened with severe difficulties caused by exceptional occurrences beyond their
control and falling under the conditions of Council Regulation (EU) No 407/2010
(establishing the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism (EFSM)), or
receiving, for those same reasons, financial assistance from the European
Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) or the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), or
in difficulties or seriously threatened with difficulties as regards their
balance of payments and falling under the conditions of Council Regulation (EC)
No 332/2002. This would also apply to Greece, which received financial
assistance under a particular agreement established outside the support
mechanisms under an Intercreditor Agreement and the Euro Area Loan Facility
Act. 
·                        
Choice of instrument 
Proposed instrument: Decision.
Other instruments would not be appropriate for the following
reasons:
The Commission
has explored the scope for manoeuvre provided by the legal framework and
considers it necessary, in the light of experience gained so far, to propose amendments
to the Decision. The objective of this revision is to make the co-financing of actions
easier, thereby accelerating both their implementation and the impact of such
investments on the real economy.
4.           BUDGETARY
IMPLICATION 
There is no
impact on commitment appropriations since no modifications are proposed to the
maximum amounts of the Funds’
financing provided for in the annual programmes for the programming period
2007-2013. 
The proposal
shows the European Commission’s
willingness to assist the Member States in their efforts to deal with the
financial crisis. The amendments will provide the Member States concerned with
the necessary funds necessary to support projects and economic recovery.
2012/0253 (COD)
Proposal for a
DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL
amending Decision No 574/2007/EC with a
view to increasing the co-financing rate of the External Borders Fund for
certain Member States experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with
respect to their financial stability 
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 77(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the
European Commission,
After transmission of the draft legislative
act to the national parliaments,
Acting in accordance with the ordinary
legislative procedure,
Whereas:
(1)       Decision No 574/2007/EC of
the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 May 2007[1] establishes the External
Borders Fund for the period 2007 to 2013 as part of the General programme ‘Solidarity
and Management of Migration Flows’ and provides for different Union
co-financing rates for actions supported by the Fund. 
(2)       The unprecedented global
financial crisis and economic downturn have seriously damaged economic growth
and financial stability, provoking a marked deterioration in financial,
economic and social conditions in several Member States. Some Member States are
experiencing serious difficulties or are threatened with such difficulties, particularly
with respect to their financial and economic stability, leading to deterioration
in their deficit and debt positions and threatening economic growth heightened
by the international economic and financial environment. 
(3)       While important actions to
counterbalance the negative effects of the crisis have already been taken, the
impact of the financial crisis on the real economy, the labour market and
society at large is being widely felt. Pressure on national financial resources
is increasing and further steps should be taken rapidly to alleviate that
pressure through the maximal and optimal use of Union funding.
(4)       Council Regulation (EC) No
332/2002 of 18 February 2002 establishing a facility providing medium-term
financial assistance for Member States’ balances of payments[2] provides that the Council is to
grant medium-term financial assistance where a Member State which has not
adopted the euro is in difficulties or is seriously threatened with
difficulties as regards its balance of payments. 
(5)       Romania was granted such
financial assistance by Council Decision 2009/459/EC[3]. 
(6)       On 9 May 2010 the Council adopted
a comprehensive package of measures, including (a) a Council Regulation
establishing the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism[4] based on Article 122(2) of the
Treaty, and (b) the European Financial Stability Facility to provide financial support
to euro-area Member States in difficulties caused by exceptional circumstances
beyond such euro-area Member States’ control with the aim being to safeguard
the financial stability of the euro area as a whole as well as its Member
States. 
(7)       Ireland and Portugal were
granted financial assistance by the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism
under Council Implementing Decisions No 2011/77/EU[5] and No 2011/344/EU[6] respectively. They have also
received funds from the European Financial Stability Facility. 
(8)       The Intercreditor
Agreement and the Loan Facility Agreement for Greece, concluded on 8 May 2010,
entered into force on 11 May 2010. On 12 March 2012, the finance ministers of
the 17 euro-area Member States interrupted this first programme and approved a
second programme of financial assistance for Greece. It was decided that the
financial vehicle for this second programme would be the European Financial
Stability Facility, which would also disburse the remaining amount to be contributed
by the euro area under the first programme. 
(9)       On 2 February 2012, the finance
ministers of the 17 euro-area Member States signed the Treaty establishing the
European Stability Mechanism. Under that Treaty, which follows European Council
Decision 2011/199/EU of 25 March 2011 amending Article 136 of the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union with regard to a stability mechanism for
Member States whose currency is the euro[7], the European Stability Mechanism will become the primary provider
of financial assistance to euro-area Member States as of its entry into force
in mid-2012. Thus, this Decision should already take the European Stability
Mechanism into account.
(10)     In its conclusions of 23
and 24 June 2011 the European Council welcomed the Commission’s intention to
enhance the synergies between the loan programme for Greece and Union funds and
supported efforts to increase Greece’s capacity to absorb Union funds in order
to stimulate growth and employment by refocusing on improving competitiveness
and job creation. Moreover, it welcomed and supported the preparation by the
Commission, together with the Member States, of a comprehensive programme of
technical assistance to Greece. This amendment to Decision No 574/2007/EC contributes
to such efforts to enhance synergies. 
(11)     In
view of the exceptional circumstances, Regulation (EU) No 1083/2006 laying down
general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European
Social Fund and the Cohesion
Fund
was amended by Regulation (EU) No 1311/2011 to allow
for an increase in the co-financing rate applied under the Structural Funds and
the Cohesion Fund for Member States which are facing serious difficulties with
respect to their financial stability[8].
A similar approach was adopted towards those same Member States in the
framework of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (Regulation (EU)
No 1312/2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005)[9] and in the framework of the
European Fisheries Fund (Regulation (EU) No 387/2012 amending Council Regulation
(EC) No 1198/2006)[10].
Likewise, those Member States should be supported in the framework of the four
Funds established as part of the General Programme on
'Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows', namely the External Borders
Fund, the European Return Fund, the European Refugee Fund and the European Fund for the Integration of third-country nationals (hereinafter referred to as 'the Funds') established
for the period 2007-2013.
(12)     The
Funds are key tools for helping Member States tackle important challenges in
the area of migration, asylum and external borders such as the development of a
comprehensive Union immigration policy to enhance the competitiveness and
social cohesion of the Union and the creation of a Common European Asylum
System. 
(13)     To make European Union
funding easier to manage in the area of migration, asylum and external borders and
to improve the availability of funding for the Member States to implement their
annual programmes under the Funds, it is necessary, on a temporary basis and without
prejudice to the 2014-2020 programming period, to arrange for an increase in
the Union co-financing rate under the Funds by an amount corresponding to
twenty percentage points above the co-financing rates currently applicable, for
Member States experiencing serious difficulties with respect to their financial
stability. This means that the Funds annual national allocation in accordance with
the basic acts will remain unchanged while national co-financing will be
reduced accordingly. Ongoing annual
programmes will need to be revised to reflect the changes resulting from the
application of the increased Union co-financing rate.
(14)     Any Member State seeking to
benefit from the increased co-financing rate should provide the Commission with
a written statement together with its draft annual programme or draft revised
annual programme. In its statement, the Member State concerned should provide a
reference to the relevant Council Decision or to any relevant decision making
it eligible to benefit from the increased Union co-financing rate. 
(15)     The unprecedented crisis
affecting international financial markets and the economic downturn have seriously
damaged the financial stability of several Member States. As a rapid response
is necessary to counter the effects on the economy as a whole, this Decision
should enter into force as soon as possible.
(16)     Decision No 574/2007/EC should therefore be amended
accordingly. When reference is made to Article 16 of
Decision No 574/2007/EC or to the percentage of Union contribution provided
therein, this should be construed as a reference to the revised Article 16 and
to the — possibly increased — percentage of the Union contribution. 
(17)     As regards Iceland and
Norway, this Decision constitutes a development of the Schengen acquis
which falls within the areas referred to in Article 1, Points A and B of
Council Decision No 1999/437/EC of 17 May 1999 on certain arrangements for the
application of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and
the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the association of
those two States with the implementation, application and development of the
Schengen acquis[11].

(18)     As regards Switzerland,
this Decision constitutes a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis
within the meaning of the Agreement between the European Union, the European
Community and the Swiss Confederation on the latter’s association with the
implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis which
fall within the area referred to in Article 1, Points A and B of Council
Decision No 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2008/146/EC
on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community, of the Agreement[12].
(19)     As regards Liechtenstein,
this Decision constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis
within the meaning of the Protocol between the European Union, the European
Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the
accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the
European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss
Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and
development of the Schengen acquis which fall within the area referred
to in Article 1, Points A and B of Council Decision No 1999/437/EC read in
conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2011/350/EU on the conclusion,
on behalf of the Union, of the Protocol[13].

(20)     Under the Protocol on the
position of Denmark, annexed to the treaty on European Union and the Treaty on
the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark does not take part in the
adoption by the Council of the measures pursuant to Title V of Part Three of
the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, with the exception of ‘measures
determining the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of a visa
when crossing the external borders of the Member States, or measures relating
to a uniform format for visas’. This Decision builds on the Schengen acquis,
and under Article 4 of the Protocol on the position of Denmark annexed to the
Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
Union, Denmark shall decide within a period of six months after the Council has
decided on a proposal or initiative to build upon the Schengen acquis
under the Provisions of Title V of Part Three of the Treaty on the Functioning
of the European Union whether it will implement this Decision in its national
law. 
(21)     This Decision constitutes a
development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in which the United
Kingdom does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2000/365/EC of
29 May 2000 concerning the request of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland to take par in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis
and the subsequent Council Decision 2004/926/EC of 22 December 2004 on the
putting into effects of parts of the Schengen acquis by the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The United Kingdom is therefore
not taking part in its adoption and is not bound by it or subject to its
application. 
(22)     This Decision constitutes a
development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in which Ireland
does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC of 28
February 2002 concerning the request of Ireland to take par in some of the
provisions of the Schengen acquis. Ireland is therefore not taking part
in its adoption and is not bound by it or subject to its application. 
HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
In Article 16
of Decision No 574/2007/EC, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following: 
‘4.        The Union
contribution to supported projects, as regards actions implemented in the
Member States under Article 4 shall not exceed 50 % of the total cost of a
specific action.
This may be
increased to 75 % for projects addressing specific priorities identified in the
strategic guidelines referred to in Article 20.
The Union contribution
shall be increased to 75 % in the Member States covered by the Cohesion Fund.
The Union contribution
may be increased by 20 percentage points provided that the Member State concerned
meets one of the following conditions at the time of submission of its draft
annual programme in accordance with Article 23(3) of this Decision or draft
revised annual programme in accordance with Article 23 of Commission Decision 2008/456/EC*:
(a)     medium-term financial assistance is made
available to it in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 332/2002**;
(b)     financial assistance is made available to
it in accordance with Council Regulation (EU) No 407/2010*** or financial
assistance is made available to it by other euro area Member States before the
entry into force of that Regulation;
(c)     financial assistance is made available to
it in accordance with the intergovernmental agreement reached establishing the
European Financial Stability Facility or the Treaty establishing the European
Stability Mechanism.
The Member State concerned shall submit a
written statement to the Commission together with its draft annual programme or
draft revised annual programme confirming that it meets one of the conditions referred
to in points (a), (b) or (c) of the fourth subparagraph. 
A project co-financed at the increased
rate may remain so whether or not one of the conditions referred
to in points (a), (b) or (c) of the fourth subparagraph is still met in the course of the implementation of the related annual
programme.
________
*          OJ L
167, 27.6.2008, p. 1.
**        OJ L 53,
23.2.2002, p. 1.
***      OJ L 118,
12.5.2010, p. 1.’
Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the
day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the
European Union.
Article 3
This
Decision is addressed to the Member States in accordance with the Treaties.
Done at Brussels, 
For the European Parliament                       For
the Council
The President                                                 The
President
[1]               OJ L 144, 6.6.2007, p. 22.
[2]               OJ L 53, 23.2.2002, p. 1.
[3]               OJ L 150, 13.6.2009, p. 8. Decision as last amended
by Council Decision 2010/183/EU (OJ L 83, 30.3.2010, p. 19). 
[4]               OJ L 118, 12.5.2010, p. 1.
[5]               OJ L 30, 4.2.2011, p. 34.
[6]               OJ L 159, 17.6.2011, p. 88.
[7]               OJ L 91, 6.4.2011, p. 1.
[8]               OJ L 337, 20.12.2011, p. 5.
[9]               OJ L 339, 21.12.2011, p. 1.
[10]             OJ L 129, 16.5.2012, p. 7.
[11]             OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 31.
[12]             OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 1.
[13]             OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 19.