BETA


Events

2017/08/30
   EC - Follow-up document
Details

In accordance with Decision No 1313/2013/EU, the Commission presented a report on the interim evaluation of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) for the period 2014-2016.

On the basis of the findings of the external evaluation report, its own assessment and the operational experience and lessons learned, the Commission concluded that the mechanism is well on track to achieve the general and specific objectives set out in the decision.

Main findings : the report showed that, in general, the objectives of the UCPM seem to remain relevant to the needs of Europe:

according to Eurobarometer 2017, a large majority of European citizens support a common EU policy in the field of civil protection and agree that the EU should lead the coordination of disaster responses to help the affected countries, both in Europe as in the rest of the world; recent resolutions of the European Parliament also called on the Commission to further support cooperation between the various European civil protection authorities; stakeholders consulted also highlighted the flexibility of the UCPM which they perceive positively.

As regards the specific objectives , the analysis of the UCPM effectiveness showed that:

it is fully on track to achieve objectives pertaining to disaster prevention framework (objective 1) and readiness for disasters (objective 2); the UCPM's response to disasters (objective 3) has been timely and effective according to the vast majority of stakeholders consulted; public awareness and preparedness to disasters (objective 4) have received slightly less satisfactory views from stakeholders when compared to the other objectives; external coherence, that is the linkages between the UCPM and other Union policy areas, has increased as compared to the previous framework (2007-2013).

The existence of a single European hub for information sharing and operational coordination, the introduction of common European standards for disaster response capacities and common guidelines on risk assessments , which have contributed to the development of an overview of risks in the EU in the framework of the UCPM legislation, are perceived as having delivered high EU added value in the areas of disaster response, preparedness and prevention, respectively.

Challenges and necessary improvements : the evaluation also highlighted a number of challenges that, if addressed promptly, could increase even further the impact of UCPM supported action.

A general area identified for improvement is the strengthening of the UCPM results monitoring framework , including better measurability through the possible introduction of quantitative indicators and baselines, in support of a stronger focus on impact over time.

Several improvements are suggested:

1) Prevention :

increase the focus of the annual prevention (and preparedness) projects that the UCPM finances every year; better articulate the linkages between the UCPM prevention (and preparedness) projects and broader EU programmes (e.g. Cohesion/European Regional Development Fund, European Investment Bank, etc.); strengthen the link between prevention and preparedness/response activities.

2) Preparation :

re-assess the system of incentives for pooling assets in the Voluntary Pool based on lessons learnt and other knowledge emerging from operations; develop a more needs-based approach to training and exercise programmes by focusing on skills rather than performance (i.e., the number of individuals trained) to better meet the needs of operations; expand the end-user side of trans-national early warning systems platforms, such as the European Forest Fire Information System (EFFIS) and the European Flood Awareness System (EFAS).

3) Reaction :

promote a consistent collection of quantitative data and produce systematic analysis of response missions to improve future performance; consider the pre-deployment of a small UCPM team ahead of the formal UCPM activation when facing imminent disasters (e.g. cyclones, river floods, etc.); further simplify the administrative and financial procedures for engaging response capacities under the UCPM; ensure the best match between operational needs and experts deployed in the EU civil protection teams.

From a cross-cutting perspective, prevention and preparedness missions should adopt a results-based approach , and coherence between the UCPM and the instruments of the neighbourhood policy should be strengthened.

Outlook : the report stressed that the UCPM needs to be closer to local and regional actors , while continuing to strengthen, through national civil protection authorities, the governance of disaster risk management at both cross-border and along the European-national regional-local chain.

The Commission shall assess the appropriateness of amending the provisions of Decision No 1313/2013/EU with a view to: (i) strengthening effectiveness by providing realistic incentives, attaining simplifications and reducing administrative burden; (ii) matching current/emerging risks with response capacities; (iii) making full use of Europe's expertise and assets for preparedness and response.

2017/08/30
   EC - Follow-up document
2017/02/17
   EC - Follow-up document
Details

This Commission report to the European Parliament and the Council concerns the progress made and the gaps remaining in the European Emergency Response Capacity.

Background to the report: the report recalls that in a world of rising risks, the Union must be prepared to respond to a multitude of potential disasters. The European Emergency Response Capacity (EERC) was created in 2013 as part of the Union's Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) to improve the level of preparedness of civil protection systems within the Union.

For the first time, UCPM States can make available a range of emergency response resources for immediate deployment in EU operations. By registering national resources in the EERC, participating states undertake to ensure that they are available for EU response operations when a request for assistance is made through the European Commission’s Emergency Response Coordination Centre.

The EERC is one of the main innovations of the last revision of European civil protection legislation. It has resulted in a shift from a relatively reactive and ad hoc coordination system to a more predictable, planned and coherent organisation of the EU disaster response.

Objectives of the report and main conclusions: this report provides an update on the progress made towards achieving the EERC's capacity objectives and assesses the extent of remaining capacity gaps. In addition to a numerical comparison of objectives and achievements, it builds on the experience gained in the UCPM over the last 2 years (2015-2016). This would suggest that a revision or adaptation of medium-term capacity objectives is necessary.

Since the establishment of the EERC, 16 participating States have made available 77 response capacities (e.g. search and rescue teams, medical teams, water purification systems, etc.) for Union operations around the world. A large number of objectives of the EERC, or "capacity objectives", which are set out in EU legislation, have therefore been achieved.

It appears that there are, however, some gaps or shortcomings in terms of available resources with respect to aircraft used for fighting forest fires and shelter capacities.

The question of whether other types of resources are adequately available needs to be further evaluated.

Aspects that need to be further assessed include:

· the resources needed for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear disasters,

· large field hospitals and medical evacuation capabilities within the framework of the European Medical Corps,

· unmanned aerial systems and

· communication teams.

It may also be necessary to revise some of the current capacity objectives to reflect changes in risk assessments and operational experience.

The report also points out that further analysis is needed in some areas to assess whether there are potentially significant deficits in the EU's ability to respond or whether certain capacity targets as defined in the legislation in force need to be reviewed.

To help ensure sufficient availability of key resources, the Commission published another call for proposals for buffer capacity in 2017. It covers response capabilities in the areas of forest fire fighting with aircraft, shelter capacities, unmanned ground vehicles for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) disasters, emergency medical services, remotely piloted aerial systems, as well as flood containment.

Recommendation: The Commission proposes that the participating States remedy in several ways the remaining deficits for which no capacity is available at national level, for example:

· forming consortia and developing joint modules,

· by seeking contractual agreements on access to such resources,

· by encouraging further research on the subject,

· using existing capacity-building programmes at national and EU level, for example in the context of the EU Structural Funds.

Lastly, the evaluation indicates that the EERC capacity targets need to be reviewed at least every 2 years and the first review will start in 2017. This exercise may lead to the definition of new capacity targets based on national risk assessments, recent disaster experience, general trends, and other relevant sources of information.

2014/02/13
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2013/12/20
   Final act published in Official Journal
Details

PURPOSE: to establish a Union Civil Protection Mechanism in order to prepare for, and respond to disasters.

LEGISLATIVE ACT: Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism.

BACKGROUND: in view of the significant increase in the numbers and severity of natural and man-made disasters in recent years and in a situation where future disasters will be more extreme and more complex with far-reaching and longer-term consequences as a result, in particular, of climate change and the potential interaction between several natural and technological hazards, an integrated approach to disaster management is increasingly important.

CONTENT: the Decision establishes the Union Civil Protection Mechanism, which promotes solidarity and supports the coordination of Member States' actions in the field of civil protection with a view to improving the effectiveness of systems for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters. It lays down the general rules for the Union Mechanism as well as the rules for the provision of financial assistance. The Decision is intended to bring better predictability and quality of assistance, and increased cost-efficiency by means of scale and complementarity. The protection to be ensured by the Union Mechanism will cover primarily people, but also the environment and property, including cultural heritage, against all kinds of natural and man-made disasters, including the consequences of acts of terrorism, technological, radiological or environmental disasters, marine pollution, and acute health emergencies, occurring inside or outside the Union.

The main points are as follows:

Specific objectives : these are:

· to achieve a high level of protection against disasters by preventing or reducing their potential effects, by fostering a culture of prevention and by improving cooperation between the civil protection and other relevant services;

· to enhance preparedness at Member State and Union level to respond to disasters;

· to facilitate rapid and efficient response in the event of disasters or imminent disasters; and

· to increase public awareness and preparedness for disasters.

Union structure: the Mechanism is based on a Union structure consisting of an Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC), a European Emergency Response Capacity (EERC) in the form of a voluntary pool of pre-committed capacities from the Member States, trained experts, a Common Emergency Communication and Information System (CECIS) managed by the Commission and contact points in the Member States. This provides a framework for collecting validated information on the situation, for dissemination to the Member States and for sharing lessons learnt from interventions.

Prevention actions: the Commission shall, inter alia:

· take action to improve the knowledge base on disaster risks and facilitate the sharing of knowledge, best practices and information,

· promote Member States' risk assessment and mapping activity

· regularly update a cross-sectoral overview and map of natural and man-made disaster risks the Union may face

· support the development and implementation of Member States' risk management activity.

Preparedness actions: the Decision sets out the general preparedness actions that must be taken both by the Commission and by Member States. Amongst the Commission’s tasks is the management of the ERCC and CECIS, and developing a network of trained experts from Member States, who can be available at short notice to assist the ERCC.

Member States, for their part shall identify modules, other response capacities and experts within their civil protection or other emergency services, which could be made available for intervention upon request through the Union Mechanism.

Response action : the response mechanism includes a enhanced coordination system which encompasses:

· notification of disasters in the EU between Member States;

· disaster response : when a disaster occurs within the Union, or is imminent, the affected Member State may request assistance through the ERCC. The request shall be as specific as possible. In exceptional situations of increased risk a Member State may also request assistance in the form of temporary pre-positioning of response capacities;

· any Member State to which a request for assistance is addressed through the Union Mechanism shall promptly determine whether it is in a position to render the assistance required and inform the requesting Member State of its decision through the CECIS, indicating the scope, terms and, where applicable, costs of the assistance it could render. The ERCC shall keep the Member States informed;

· when a disaster occurs outside the Union, or is imminent, the affected country may request assistance through the ERCC. The assistance may also be requested through or by the United Nations and its agencies, or a relevant international organisation.

Emergency Response Coordination Centre : the ERCC must ensure 24/7 operational capacity, and serve the Member States and the Commission in pursuit of the objectives of the Union Mechanism. On the basis of identified risks, the Commission will define the types and the number of key response capacities required for the EERC ("capacity goals") and will monitor progress towards these capacity goals identifying potentially significant response capacity gaps in the EERC. Response capacities that Member States make available for the EERC shall be available for response operations under the Union Mechanism following a request for assistance through the ERCC. The ultimate decision on their deployment shall be taken by the Member States which registered the response capacity concerned.

Risk assessment : the Union Mechanism includes a general framework for the sharing of information on risks and risk management capabilities . Member States must: (i) develop risk assessments and risk management capability at national or appropriate sub-national level and make available to the Commission a summary of the relevant elements; (ii) participate, on a voluntary basis, in peer reviews on the assessment of risk management capability.

Financial framework : the financial envelope for the implementation of the Union Mechanism for the period 2014 to 2020 shall be EUR 368 428 000 in current prices:

· EUR 223 776 000 in current prices shall derive from Heading 3 "Security and Citizenship" of the multiannual financial framework and

· EUR 144 652 000 in current prices from Heading 4 "Global Europe".

The annual appropriations shall be authorised by the European Parliament and the Council within the limits of the multiannual financial framework.

Percentages for allocation of the financial envelope are as follows:

· Prevention: 20 % +/- 8 percentage points

· Preparedness: 50 % +/- 8 percentage points

· Response: 30 % +/- 8 percentage points

Evaluation: the Commission shall evaluate the application of the Decision and submit:

· an interim evaluation report on the results obtained by no later than 30 June 2017;

· a communication on the continued implementation of this Decision by no later than 31 December 2018; and

· an ex-post evaluation report by no later than 31 December 2021.

ENTRY INTO FORCE: 21.12.2013.

APPLICATION: 01.01.2014.

DELEGATED ACTS: the Commission will be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance in order to review the breakdown of the financial envelope for the implementation of the Decision by 30 June 2017, in light of the outcome of the interim evaluation. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission for a period of seven years until 31 December 2020. The European Parliament or the Council may object to a delegated act within two months from the date of notification (which may be extended by two months.) If the European Parliament or the Council make objections, the delegated act will not enter into force. The urgency procedure should apply if, at any time, an immediate revision of the budgetary resources available for response actions is needed.

2013/12/17
   CSL - Draft final act
Documents
2013/12/17
   CSL - Final act signed
2013/12/16
   EP/CSL - Act adopted by Council after Parliament's 1st reading
2013/12/16
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2013/12/16
   CSL - Council Meeting
2013/12/10
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2013/12/10
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2013/12/10
   EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 608 votes to 78, with 10 abstentions, a legislative resolution on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism.

Parliament adopted its position at first reading following the ordinary legislative procedure. The amendments adopted in plenary are the result of a compromise negotiated between the European Parliament and the Council.

General objective and subject matter: the Union Civil Protection Mechanism shall aim to strengthen the cooperation between the Union and the Member States and to facilitate coordination in the field of civil protection in order to improve the effectiveness of systems for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters .

The protection to be ensured by the Union Mechanism shall cover primarily people, but also the environment and property, including cultural heritage, against all kinds of natural and man-made disasters, including the consequences:

of acts of terrorism, technological, radiological or environmental disasters, marine pollution, acute health emergencies, occurring inside or outside the Union.

In the case of the consequences of acts of terrorism or radiological disasters, the Union Mechanism may cover only preparedness and response actions.

The proposed Decision recalled the Member States' primary responsibility in this area through laying down the general rules for the Union Mechanism and the rules for the provision of financial assistance under the Union Mechanism.

Technical details outline the scope of the mechanism in terms of its specific objectives. The three-fold themes are as follows:

1) Preventive action: this arm shall seek to:

take action to improve the knowledge base on disaster risks ; facilitate the sharing of knowledge, best practices and information, including among Member States that share common risks; establish and regularly update a cross-sectoral overview and map of natural and man-made disaster risks the Union may face ; promote and support the development and implementation of Member States' risk management activity through the sharing of good practices, and facilitate access to specific knowledge and expertise on issues of common interest; compile and disseminate the information made available by Member States; organise an exchange of experiences about the assessment of risk management capability; report periodically to the European Parliament and to the Council on the progress made in the implementation of the risk assessment actions; 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; promote prevention measures in the Member States and third countries through the sharing of good practices, and facilitate access to specific knowledge and expertise on issues of common interest; take additional necessary supporting and complementary prevention action.

Risk management: in order to promote an effective and coherent approach to prevention of and preparedness for disasters, Member States shall develop risk assessments at national or appropriate sub-national level and make available to the Commission a summary of the relevant elements every three years and make available the assessment of their risk management capability. Member States shall also participate, on a voluntary basis, in peer reviews on the assessment of risk management capability .

2) Preparedness action: an Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC) is hereby established. The ERCC shall ensure 24/7 operational capacity, and serve the Member States and the Commission in pursuit of the objectives of the Union Mechanism. The Commission shall carry out a series of preparedness actions such as the management of the ERCC.

The preparedness arm shall put in place:

modules , in particular to meet priority intervention or support needs under the Union Mechanism; response capacities , which could be available from the competent services, or which may be provided by non-governmental organisations and other relevant entities a planning for disaster response under the Mechanism , including the development of disaster response scenarios, identifying resources and developing plans to deploy response capabilities; a European Emergency Response Capacity (EERC) 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; measures addressing response capacity gaps, either individually or through a consortium of Member States cooperating together on common risks, any strategic capacity gaps that have been identified; training, exercises, lessons learnt and knowledge dissemination . The training programme shall aim to enhance the coordination, compatibility and complementarity between capacities and to improve the competence of experts. A training network shall be established to enhance all phases of disaster management, taking into account adaptation to and mitigation of climate change.

3) Reponse action: the response mechanism includes a enhanced coordination system including:

notification of disasters in the EU between Member States; disaster response: when a disaster occurs within the Union, or is imminent, the affected Member State may request assistance through the ERCC. The request shall be as specific as possible. In exceptional situations of increased risk a Member State may also request assistance in the form of temporary pre-positioning of response capacities; any Member State to which a request for assistance is addressed through the Union Mechanism shall promptly determine whether it is in a position to render the assistance required and inform the requesting Member State of its decision through the CECIS, indicating the scope, terms and, where applicable, costs of the assistance it could render. The ERCC shall keep the Member States informed; when a disaster occurs outside the Union, or is imminent, the affected country may request assistance through the ERCC. The assistance may also be requested through or by the United Nations and its agencies, or a relevant international organisation.

Reserve in case of disaster: in order to improve the planning of disaster response operations under the Union Mechanism and to enhance the availability of key capacities, it is necessary to develop an EERC in the form of a voluntary pool of pre-committed capacities from the Member States and a structured process to identify potential capacity gaps. Experts from the Commission and from other services of the Union may be integrated in the team in order to support the team and facilitate liaison with the ERCC. Experts dispatched by OCHA or other international organisations may be integrated in the team in order to strengthen cooperation and facilitate joint assessments. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Decision, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission with respect to the interaction of the ERCC with the Member States' contact points and the operational procedures for the response to disasters inside and outside the Union.

On a technical level, provisions are laid down as regards logistical support in terms of transport and the mobilisation of equipment.

Pursuant to a request for assistance, the Commission may take additional necessary supporting and complementary action in order to ensure consistency in the delivery of the assistance.

Financed actions : all actions of prevention, preparedness and operations eligible for financial assistance under the European Union Mechanism as well as access to equipment and transport resources within the mechanism are also detailed in the text of the draft decision.

The draft decision further details:

the type of aid beneficiaries; the types of financial assistance; types of intervention procedures and implementing procedures.

Budgetary resources: the financial envelope for the implementation of the Union Mechanism for the period 2014 to 2020 shall be EUR 368 428 000 in current prices.

Percentages for allocation of the financial envelope for the implementation of the Union Mechanism are as follows:

Prevention: 20 % +/- 8 percentage points Preparedness: 50 % +/- 8 percentage points Response: 30 % +/- 8 percentage points

This amount shall derive from Heading 3 ‘Security and Citizenship’ and Heading 4 ‘Global Europe’.

N.B. The Commission shall review the breakdown set out in Annex I in the light of the outcome of the interim evaluation. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt, where necessary in light of the results of that evaluation, delegated acts in accordance with Article 30, to adjust each of the figures in Annex I by more than 8 percentage points and up to 16 percentage points. Those delegated acts shall be adopted by 30 June 2017 .

Where, in case of a necessary revision of the budgetary resources available for response actions, imperative grounds of urgency so require , the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts to adjust each of the figures in Annex I, within the available budgetary allocations.

Complementarity and consistency of Union action: actions receiving financial assistance under this Decision shall not receive assistance from other Union financial instruments. Synergies and complementarity shall be sought with other instruments of the Union. 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.

Third countries and international organisations: the Union Mechanism shall be open to the participation of:

EFTA countries which are members of the EEA;

acceding countries, candidate countries and potential candidates;

candidate countries and potential candidates not participating in the Union Mechanism, as well as to countries that are part of the ENP, to the extent that that financial assistance complements funding available under a future Union legislative act.

Evaluation: actions receiving financial assistance shall be monitored regularly in order to follow their implementation. The Commission shall evaluate the application of this Decision and submit to the European Parliament and to the Council:

an interim evaluation report on the results obtained and the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the implementation of this Decision by no later than 30 June 2017; a communication on the continued implementation of this Decision by no later than 31 December 2018; and an ex-post evaluation report by no later than 31 December 2021.

The interim evaluation report and the communication respectively shall be accompanied, if appropriate, by proposals for amendments to this Decision.

Documents
2013/01/08
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety adopted the report by Elisabetta GARDINI (EPP, IT) on the proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism.

The Committee on Development, exercising its prerogatives of an associated committee in accordance with Rule 50 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure , was also consulted for an opinion on this report.

The parliamentary committee recommends that the European Parliament’s position adopted in first reading under the ordinary legislative procedure should amend the Commission’s proposal as follows:

Moving from a coordination mechanism to a European mechanism: Members consider that it is urgent to leave behind the system of ad hoc coordination and move towards an efficient European disaster management mechanism based on an integrated approach .

General objectives of the mechanism: Members stipulate that the Union should support, coordinate and supplement actions of Member States in the field of civil protection with a view to improving the effectiveness of systems for preventing, preparing for and responding to major disasters minimising especially human, but also environmental and material losses .

With a view to emphasising the subsidiarity principle, Members specify that the Union’s action should render the Mechanism more efficient and effective, and mobilise resources more quickly, with the Member States still retaining their individual responsibility.

Members also added technical details to the specific objectives of the Mechanism with a view to increasing public awareness and preparedness for major disasters.

1. Prevention: Members insisted on the following points in regard to this area:

strengthened regional cooperation in the field of sharing knowledge and best practices, and in the training programmes; introduction of risk mapping based on guidelines, defining terminology, methodology, impact assessment and scenarios ; the use of Union funds for sustainable disaster prevention .

2. Risk management plans: in order to ensure the effectiveness of the Mechanism, Members States shall communicate to the Commission their risk management plans. The risk management plans shall, as a minimum, be a collation of the information from either national or regional plans , including, but not limited to, possible risks together with risk maps, capacities available, and contingency plans in place. The submission of information concerning both national and regional plans, as well as the plans themselves, and any relevant data, shall be encouraged.

In terms of timetable, Members consider that Member States should ensure by the end of 2014 (and not 2016), at the latest, that their risk management plans are ready and communicated to the Commission. Member States shall update their risk management plans every two years , and communicate those updated plans to the Commission. The involvement of the regional and local authorities concerned and of specialised institutions in the preparation and updating of their risk management plans is also desirable.

3. Preparation: Members call on the Commission to establish and manage the Emergency Response Centre (ERC) in coordination with the existing national and regional bodies , ensuring 24/7 operational capacity. A number of other amendments are proposed in particular in regard to the integration and coordination of the mechanism.

The Commission should develop and update guidelines on host nation support , in cooperation with the Member States, on the basis of operational experience and support the creation of voluntary peer review assessment programmes for the Member States' preparedness strategies.

Members stress the following points:

priority intervention modules: in this regard, Members stress the voluntary nature of the development of the modules and call for special attention to be paid to civil protection capacities in the border areas of the Member States; planning of operations: the involvement of non-governmental civil protection and humanitarian actors, as well as strengthened cooperation at regional level; in regard to the European Emergency Response Capacity (EERC), the interoperability of the capacities mobilised and its European visibility are important (by displaying, in particular, the national and European emblems). It should be noted that Members propose an exception from the principle of mobilising the available capacities for the purposes of the EERC when the Member State that manages given assets is itself faced with a major disaster. In this case, the responsibility of the affected Member State to protect its people and territory by using the given asset should have priority over the obligation to make the asset available; joint exercises should be included under the cooperation mechanism’s training programme. These would be in cooperation with Member States and would take account of the needs and interests of Member States of a given region which face similar disaster risks.

4. Response: as far as this aspect is concerned, Members stress the role of Member States in particular at the moment of response in the event of a disaster in the EU . In the event of a disaster outside the EU , Members emphasise the need to strengthen the link between emergency measures, rehabilitation and development with humanitarian and development operators.

The use of military means as a last resort: Members consider that the use of military means under civilian oversight as a last resort often constitutes an important contribution to disaster response. Where the use of military capacities as a last resort is considered in support of civil protection operations to be appropriate, cooperation with the military should follow the modalities, procedures and criteria established by the Council or its competent bodies as well as "The Guidelines on the Use of Foreign Military and Civil Defence Assets in Disaster Relief" (Oslo Guidelines, rev. 1.1 of 2007) of the UN for making available to the Mechanism military capacities relevant to the protection of civilian populations.

Consistency and complementarity: Members call for the Union and the Member States to coordinate their respective support programmes with the aim of increasing the effectiveness and efficiency in the delivery of support and policy dialogue in line with the established principles for strengthening operational coordination, and for harmonising policies and procedures. Coordination shall involve regular consultations and frequent exchanges of relevant information and best practices.

Involvement of third countries in the Mechanism : Members stipulate that funding under the Union Civil Protection Mechanism should be complementary to funding from other sources, such as the IPA and the ENPI, as this would ensure greater funding for civil protection activities for candidate and potential candidate countries and Neighbourhood Policy countries.

Delegated acts: Members have totally restructures the decision-making process in regard to the Mechanism. They consider that the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of

establishing and managing the Emergency Response Centre (ERC); specifying the functioning of the Common Emergency Communication and Information System; specifying the conditions for identifying modules and the general requirements for their functioning and interoperability; establishing conditions for resources available for assistance intervention; specifying the functioning of the European emergency response capacity (EERC) as a voluntary pool , the capacity goals for the EERC, the interoperability and quality requirements for capacities in the EERC, and the process for certification and registration of capacities; specifying the modalities for addressing capacity gaps; defining the aim, the content, the structure, the organisation, and the target group of the training programme and the training network; specifying the procedure for responding to major disasters or imminent major disasters within and outside the Union; specifying the functioning of the expert teams and the conditions of selection, dispatching and disengaging an expert team; specifying the level of detail of the information on equipment and transport resources and specifying the procedures for the identification of such equipment and resources and for the provision of additional transport resources; specifying the procedure for requesting and deciding on granting Union financial support for transport; and adopting the annual work programmes.

In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Decision, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission with respect to the managing the process for certification and registration of capacities of the EERC and applications for funding from third countries.

Financial allocation: in the draft legislative resolution, Members recall that the financial envelope specified in the legislative proposal constitutes only an indication to the legislative authority and cannot be fixed until agreement is reached on the proposal for a R egulation laying down the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for the years 2014-2020. They reiterate that sufficient additional resources are needed in the next MFF in order to enable the Union to fulfil its existing policy priorities and the new tasks provided for in the Lisbon Treaty . They underline that even with an increase in the level of resources for the next MFF of at least 5% compared to the 2013 level only a limited contribution can be made to the achievement of the Union’s agreed objectives and commitments.

It should also be noted that Members propose an indicative allocation (in percentages) of the budget lines relevant to the Mechanism: actions inside the EU (financed from heading 3 “Security and Citizenship”) would receive 70% of the budget, while actions outside the EU (financed from heading 4 “Global Europe”) would receive 30% . Of the overall financial envelope, at least 20 % should be allocated to general actions to strengthen prevention, preparation and response effectiveness. This portion of specific aid could be granted to candidate countries and potential candidate countries not participating in the Mechanism and to countries coming under the European Neighbourhood Policy, in so far as it complements funding under the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) and the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI).

Documents
2012/11/28
   EP - Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
2012/11/27
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2012/11/22
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2012/11/16
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2012/10/25
   CSL - Debate in Council
Documents
2012/10/25
   CSL - Council Meeting
2012/10/22
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2012/10/18
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2012/10/18
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2012/09/19
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2012/07/19
   CofR - Committee of the Regions: opinion
Documents
2012/06/18
   EP - PAŞCU Ioan Mircea (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in AFET
2012/06/14
   EP - Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
2012/06/01
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2012/04/26
   CSL - Resolution/conclusions adopted by Council
Details

The Council adopted conclusions on improving civil protection through lessons learnt (doc. 8149/12).

The Council Decision of 8 November 2007 establishing a Community Civil Protection Mechanism had entrusted the Commission with the task of setting up a programme of lessons learnt from the interventions conducted within the framework of the mechanism and disseminating these lessons through the information system.

In its conclusions, the Council notes that the lessons learnt programme is a cornerstone in the Civil Protection Mechanism's role of facilitating reinforced cooperation in civil protection action to save lives and to protect the environment, property and cultural heritage, and that it is worth developing further at EU and national levels.

The Council calls upon Member States and the Commission, within the framework of the Mechanism, to take steps to develop a systematic approach to data and information collection and compilation from civil protection interventions and exercises, covering the entire disaster management cycle (prevention, preparedness and response activities), in order to provide a comprehensive and adequate basis for evaluation.

2012/04/26
   CSL - Council Meeting
2012/04/11
   AT_BUNDESRAT - Contribution
Documents
2012/03/26
   PT_PARLIAMENT - Contribution
Documents
2012/03/15
   BG_PARLIAMENT - Contribution
Documents
2012/03/07
   IT_SENATE - Contribution
Documents
2012/03/05
   DE_BUNDESRAT - Contribution
Documents
2012/02/07
   EP - GARDINI Elisabetta (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in ENVI
2012/02/06
   EP - STAVRAKAKIS Georgios (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in BUDG
2012/01/26
   EP - VLASÁK Oldřich (ECR) appointed as rapporteur in REGI
2012/01/25
   EP - STRIFFLER Michèle (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in DEVE
2012/01/19
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2011/12/20
   EC - Document attached to the procedure
2011/12/20
   EC - Document attached to the procedure
2011/12/20
   EC - Legislative proposal published
Details

PURPOSE: to provide for a new Civil Protection Mechanism for the Union for the period 2014-2020.

PROPOSED ACT: Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council.

BACKGROUND: this proposal seeks to replace the Council Decisions on the Civil Protection Mechanism , which facilitates reinforced cooperation between the Member States and the Union in the field of civil protection and the Civil Protection Financial Instrument , which provides funding for the actions under the Mechanism to ensure protection against natural and man-made disasters. After a comprehensive evaluation of the Civil Protection legislation for the period 2007-2009 and taking account of lessons learnt from past emergencies, this proposal merges the two Council Decisions into a single legal act.

The proposal builds on the 2010 Commission Communication ' Towards a stronger European disaster response: the role of civil protection and humanitarian assistance ' and the 2009 Communication on ' A Community approach on the prevention of natural and man-made disasters ' which were welcomed by Parliament (see INI/2011/2023 and INI/2009/2151 ).

The proposal contributes to Europe's 2020 objectives and to increasing the security of EU citizens and building resilience to natural and man-made disasters . Furthermore, by supporting and promoting measures to prevent disasters, an EU Civil Protection policy would reduce the costs to the EU economy from disasters and therefore obstacles to growth.

The proposal also makes a significant contribution to simplification. The new decision merges into a single text the provisions relating to the functioning of the Mechanism and those relating to the financing of its activities, that in the past were in separate decisions. It also simplifies the existing procedures for the pooling and co-financing of the transport of assistance (e.g. by avoiding a systematic reimbursement of 50%, as is the case under the current rules, and by appointing a lead state in transport operations involving several Member States), thereby significantly reducing the administrative burden on the Commission and Member States. It also establishes simplified rules for the activation of the Mechanism in emergencies in third countries. The strengthened Mechanism will contribute to the implementation of the Solidarity Clause , on which the European Commission and the High Representative will bring forward a proposal in 2012.

IMPACT ASSESSMENT: the main problems identified in the impact assessment are: i) the reactive and ad hoc mechanics of the EU Civil protection cooperation limit the effectiveness, efficiency and coherence of European disaster response, ii) unavailability of critical response capacities (capacity gaps), iii) limited transport solutions and heavy procedures hinder optimal response, iv) limited preparedness in training and exercises, and v) lack of integration of prevention policies.

Following the impact assessment , it was proposed to include the following aspects in the legislative proposal:

on response : the inclusion of essential elements and principles on the voluntary pool of assets and on EU-funded assets with a reference to the implementation rules; on transport: a revision of some of the current legal provisions to increase the maximum EU financing rate for transport operations, and simplify administrative procedures; on prevention and preparedness : a general EU policy framework and Commission guidelines, with provision for Member States’ risk management plans (RMPs).

LEGAL BASIS: Article 196 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

CONTENT: this proposal provides for the creation of a new civil protection mechanism for the Union to support, coordinate and supplement the actions of the Member States in the field of civil protection in improving the effectiveness of systems for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters of all kinds within and outside the Union. The idea is to provide for an integrated approach to disaster management .

The proposal provides for a general objective which is subdivided into specific objectives, accompanied by indicators to measure the progress made.

Specific objectives :

to achieve a high level of protection against disasters by preventing or reducing their effects and by fostering a culture of prevention; to enhance the Union's state of preparedness to respond to disasters; and to facilitate rapid and efficient emergency response interventions in the event of major disasters.

Proposed measures :

1) Prevention : the purpose is to enhance the importance of the EU prevention policy framework and effectively linking it to the preparedness and response actions. The proposal sets out the tasks for the Commission in this context which, in particular, include: i) improving the knowledge base on disaster risks and facilitating the sharing of knowledge, best practices and information; ii) supporting and promoting Members States' risk assessment and mapping; iii) an inventory of natural and man-made risks the Union may face taking into account the future impact of climate change; and iv) raising awareness about the importance of risk prevention and supporting Member States in public information, education and awareness-raising, etc.

Building on the ongoing work on risk assessments and to ensure effective cooperation within the Mechanism, Member States are required to communicate, with the help and support of the Commission, their risk management plans by end 2016 .

2) Preparation :

The main focus of the proposal is on preparedness actions to improve the response planning, to enhance EU response capacity and the overall level of preparedness for large-scale disasters.

In comparison with the previous mechanism the main changes include:

establishing and managing of a Emergency Response Centre ('ERC') on the basis of the existing Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC), which should be strengthened to ensure 24/7 operational capacity; developing a coherent planning framework for response operations by preparing reference scenarios, mapping existing capacities and developing contingency plans for their deployment. Synergies between in-kind assistance and humanitarian aid are also sought; establishing a European Emergency Response Capacity in the form of a voluntary pool of pre-identified capacities, which Member States make available for operations under the Mechanism. The need for increased visibility of the capacities is also highlighted; identification and filling gaps in the response capacities by supporting the development of complementary EU-funded capacities , where this has been considered more cost-efficient than Member States' individual investments. A special monitoring procedure is envisaged and the Commission is obliged to report every two years to the Council and the Parliament on the progress; enlarging the scope of the current EU preparedness actions in the field of training, including through the establishment of a training network and diversification of the training programme. The Commission can also provide guidance on EU and international civil protection training; sending expert teams to advise on prevention and preparedness measures at the request of an affected state or the UN and its agencies; providing the possibility to assist Member States in pre-positioning emergency response capacities in logistical hubs inside the EU.

3) Response : the proposed changes seek to ensure more effective and swifter response through:

temporary pre-positioning of capacities in situations of increased risk; proposal of an emergency response plan and request for deployment of the capacities; requiring Member States to ensure host nation support for the incoming assistance, as called for in the Council Conclusions on Host Nation support.

4) Other specific measures : to enable the implementation of the mechanism, the Commission shall be authorised to finance preparation, follow-up, monitoring, audit and evaluation actions that are necessary for the management of the programme and the achievement of its objectives.

External dimension of civil protection operations : in operations outside the Union, the proposal promotes consistency in the international civil protection work through:

providing assistance through the Mechanism at the request of the United Nations or its agencies, or a relevant international organisation; the Commission informing the European External Action Service to allow for consistency between civil protection operation and the overall EU relations with the affected country; clarifying the cases when consular support assistance can be provided, taking into account a forthcoming proposal for a Council Directive on coordination and cooperation measures regarding consular protection for unrepresented EU citizens.

The countries concerned would be the following:

European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries which are members of the European Economic Area (EEA); acceding countries, candidate countries and potential candidates; countries coming under the European Neighbourhood Policy as well as potential candidate countries not participating in the Mechanism; and international or regional organisations where relevant bilateral or multilateral agreements between these organisations and the Union so allow.

Financial support provisions : eligible actions fall within the following 4 fields:

general actions, prevention and preparedness, response, and transport.

The provisions relating to the support for transport under the current Instrument are amended and simplified and introduce revised conditions for financing increasing the co-financing rates up to 85% of the total eligible cost and up to 100% in limited cases when certain criteria are met. New provisions allow one Member State to take the lead in requesting EU financial support for operations, which involve several Member States and allowing an affected Member State requesting assistance to request also co-financing of transport costs.

Changes are also introduced to the types of financial intervention to allow for the reimbursement of expenses and the establishment of trust funds. In the case of grants and public procurement, it will not be necessary to include emergency response related operations in the annual work programme of the Commission.

Lastly, the proposal contains the classic provisions with regard to the protection of the financial interests of the Union against fraud and other irregularities, implementation, evaluation and transitional measures until the entry into force of this decision.

Repeal : when the decision enters into force, the existing mechanisms will be repealed.

BUDGETARY IMPLICATION: the Commission's Communication on 'A Budget for Europe 2020' envisages budgetary commitments for the EU civil protection policy of EUR 513 million in current prices, as follows:

EUR 276 million inside the Union and EUR 237 million for operations outside the Union.

The financial provisions of this Decision should apply as of 1 January 2014 as they are related to the Multi-annual Financial Framework 2014-2020.

Documents

Activities

AmendmentsDossier
414 2011/0461(COD)
2012/09/04 DEVE 4 amendments...
source: PE-494.807
2012/09/19 REGI 100 amendments...
source: PE-494.850
2012/10/15 AFET 67 amendments...
source: PE-497.862
2012/10/18 ENVI 226 amendments...
source: PE-496.667
2012/10/22 BUDG 14 amendments...
source: PE-498.028
2012/11/27 ENVI 3 amendments...
source: PE-500.659

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
rapporteur
name: GARDINI Elisabetta date: 2012-02-07T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
date
2012-02-07T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: GARDINI Elisabetta group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
rapporteur
name: PAŞCU Ioan Mircea date: 2012-06-18T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
date
2012-06-18T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: PAŞCU Ioan Mircea group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
rapporteur
name: STRIFFLER Michèle date: 2012-01-25T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
date
2012-01-25T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: STRIFFLER Michèle group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
rapporteur
name: STAVRAKAKIS Georgios date: 2012-02-06T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
date
2012-02-06T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: STAVRAKAKIS Georgios group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/4
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
rapporteur
name: VLASÁK Oldřich date: 2012-01-26T00:00:00 group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR
committees/4
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
date
2012-01-26T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: VLASÁK Oldřich group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR
docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/sec/2011/1630/COM_SEC(2011)1630_EN.pdf
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/sec/2011/1630/COM_SEC(2011)1630_EN.pdf
docs/12/body
EC
events/6/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2013-3&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2013-0003_EN.html
events/9/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2013-0540
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2013-0540_EN.html
docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/sec/2011/1630/COM_SEC(2011)1630_EN.pdf
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/sec/2011/1630/COM_SEC(2011)1630_EN.pdf
activities
  • date: 2011-12-20T00:00:00 docs: url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=934 type: Legislative proposal published title: COM(2011)0934 body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/echo/ title: Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO) Commissioner: GEORGIEVA Kristalina type: Legislative proposal published
  • date: 2012-01-19T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: AFET date: 2012-06-18T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: PAŞCU Ioan Mircea body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2012-02-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: S&D name: STAVRAKAKIS Georgios body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2012-01-25T00:00:00 committee_full: Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: STRIFFLER Michèle body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: ESTRELA Edite group: ALDE name: TAYLOR Rebecca group: Verts/ALE name: HASSI Satu group: ECR name: ROSBACH Anna group: GUE/NGL name: MATIAS Marisa group: EFD name: ROSSI Oreste responsible: True committee: ENVI date: 2012-02-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: GARDINI Elisabetta body: EP responsible: False committee: REGI date: 2012-01-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich
  • body: CSL meeting_id: 3162 council: Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) date: 2012-04-26T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
  • date: 2012-06-14T00:00:00 body: EP type: Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
  • body: CSL meeting_id: 3195 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3195*&MEET_DATE=25/10/2012 type: Debate in Council title: 3195 council: Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) date: 2012-10-25T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
  • date: 2012-11-28T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: AFET date: 2012-06-18T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: PAŞCU Ioan Mircea body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2012-02-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: S&D name: STAVRAKAKIS Georgios body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2012-01-25T00:00:00 committee_full: Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: STRIFFLER Michèle body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: ESTRELA Edite group: ALDE name: TAYLOR Rebecca group: Verts/ALE name: HASSI Satu group: ECR name: ROSBACH Anna group: GUE/NGL name: MATIAS Marisa group: EFD name: ROSSI Oreste responsible: True committee: ENVI date: 2012-02-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: GARDINI Elisabetta body: EP responsible: False committee: REGI date: 2012-01-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich
  • body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2013-3&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title: A7-0003/2013 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: AFET date: 2012-06-18T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: PAŞCU Ioan Mircea body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2012-02-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: S&D name: STAVRAKAKIS Georgios body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2012-01-25T00:00:00 committee_full: Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: STRIFFLER Michèle body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: ESTRELA Edite group: ALDE name: TAYLOR Rebecca group: Verts/ALE name: HASSI Satu group: ECR name: ROSBACH Anna group: GUE/NGL name: MATIAS Marisa group: EFD name: ROSSI Oreste responsible: True committee: ENVI date: 2012-02-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: GARDINI Elisabetta body: EP responsible: False committee: REGI date: 2012-01-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich date: 2013-01-08T00:00:00
  • date: 2013-12-10T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=22404&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20131210&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2013-0540 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0540/2013 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2013-12-16T00:00:00 body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Agriculture and Fisheries meeting_id: 3285
  • date: 2013-12-16T00:00:00 body: EP type: End of procedure in Parliament
  • date: 2013-12-16T00:00:00 body: EP/CSL type: Act adopted by Council after Parliament's 1st reading
  • date: 2013-12-17T00:00:00 body: CSL type: Final act signed
  • date: 2013-12-20T00:00:00 type: Final act published in Official Journal docs: url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32013D1313 title: Decision 2013/1313 url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2013:347:TOC title: OJ L 347 20.12.2013, p. 0924
commission
  • body: EC dg: European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO) commissioner: GEORGIEVA Kristalina
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
date
2012-02-07T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: GARDINI Elisabetta group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
AFET
date
2012-06-18T00:00:00
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
rapporteur
group: S&D name: PAŞCU Ioan Mircea
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
date
2012-06-18T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: PAŞCU Ioan Mircea group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
BUDG
date
2012-02-06T00:00:00
committee_full
Budgets
rapporteur
group: S&D name: STAVRAKAKIS Georgios
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
date
2012-01-25T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: STRIFFLER Michèle group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/2
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
DEVE
date
2012-01-25T00:00:00
committee_full
Development (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: PPE name: STRIFFLER Michèle
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
date
2012-02-06T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: STAVRAKAKIS Georgios group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
ENVI
date
2012-02-07T00:00:00
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: PPE name: GARDINI Elisabetta
committees/4
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
date
2012-01-26T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: VLASÁK Oldřich group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR
committees/4
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
REGI
date
2012-01-26T00:00:00
committee_full
Regional Development
rapporteur
group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich
council
  • body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Agriculture and Fisheries meeting_id: 3285 url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3285*&MEET_DATE=16/12/2013 date: 2013-12-16T00:00:00
  • body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) meeting_id: 3195 url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3195*&MEET_DATE=25/10/2012 date: 2012-10-25T00:00:00
  • body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) meeting_id: 3162 url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3162*&MEET_DATE=26/04/2012 date: 2012-04-26T00:00:00
docs
  • date: 2011-12-20T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/sec/2011/1630/COM_SEC(2011)1630_EN.pdf title: SEC(2011)1630 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=SECfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=1630 title: EUR-Lex type: Document attached to the procedure body: EC
  • date: 2011-12-20T00:00:00 docs: url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=SECfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=1632 title: EUR-Lex title: SEC(2011)1632 type: Document attached to the procedure body: EC
  • date: 2012-06-01T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE490.991 title: PE490.991 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2012-07-19T00:00:00 docs: url: https://dm.cor.europa.eu/CORDocumentSearch/Pages/redresults.aspx?k=(documenttype:AC)(documentnumber:0740)(documentyear:2012)(documentlanguage:EN) title: CDR0740/2012 type: Committee of the Regions: opinion body: CofR
  • date: 2012-09-19T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE492.589&secondRef=03 title: PE492.589 committee: DEVE type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2012-10-18T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE496.667 title: PE496.667 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2012-10-18T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE496.668 title: PE496.668 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2012-10-22T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE494.684&secondRef=02 title: PE494.684 committee: REGI type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2012-11-16T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE496.444&secondRef=02 title: PE496.444 committee: BUDG type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2012-11-22T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE496.418&secondRef=02 title: PE496.418 committee: AFET type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2012-11-27T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE500.659 title: PE500.659 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2013-12-17T00:00:00 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=ADV&RESULTSET=1&DOC_ID=[%n4]%2F13&DOC_LANCD=EN&ROWSPP=25&NRROWS=500&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC title: 00097/2013/LEX type: Draft final act body: CSL
  • date: 2014-02-13T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=22404&j=0&l=en title: SP(2014)148 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
  • date: 2017-02-17T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2017/0078/COM_COM(2017)0078_EN.pdf title: COM(2017)0078 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2017&nu_doc=0078 title: EUR-Lex summary: This Commission report to the European Parliament and the Council concerns the progress made and the gaps remaining in the European Emergency Response Capacity. Background to the report: the report recalls that in a world of rising risks, the Union must be prepared to respond to a multitude of potential disasters. The European Emergency Response Capacity (EERC) was created in 2013 as part of the Union's Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) to improve the level of preparedness of civil protection systems within the Union. For the first time, UCPM States can make available a range of emergency response resources for immediate deployment in EU operations. By registering national resources in the EERC, participating states undertake to ensure that they are available for EU response operations when a request for assistance is made through the European Commission’s Emergency Response Coordination Centre. The EERC is one of the main innovations of the last revision of European civil protection legislation. It has resulted in a shift from a relatively reactive and ad hoc coordination system to a more predictable, planned and coherent organisation of the EU disaster response. Objectives of the report and main conclusions: this report provides an update on the progress made towards achieving the EERC's capacity objectives and assesses the extent of remaining capacity gaps. In addition to a numerical comparison of objectives and achievements, it builds on the experience gained in the UCPM over the last 2 years (2015-2016). This would suggest that a revision or adaptation of medium-term capacity objectives is necessary. Since the establishment of the EERC, 16 participating States have made available 77 response capacities (e.g. search and rescue teams, medical teams, water purification systems, etc.) for Union operations around the world. A large number of objectives of the EERC, or "capacity objectives", which are set out in EU legislation, have therefore been achieved. It appears that there are, however, some gaps or shortcomings in terms of available resources with respect to aircraft used for fighting forest fires and shelter capacities. The question of whether other types of resources are adequately available needs to be further evaluated. Aspects that need to be further assessed include: · the resources needed for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear disasters, · large field hospitals and medical evacuation capabilities within the framework of the European Medical Corps, · unmanned aerial systems and · communication teams. It may also be necessary to revise some of the current capacity objectives to reflect changes in risk assessments and operational experience. The report also points out that further analysis is needed in some areas to assess whether there are potentially significant deficits in the EU's ability to respond or whether certain capacity targets as defined in the legislation in force need to be reviewed. To help ensure sufficient availability of key resources, the Commission published another call for proposals for buffer capacity in 2017. It covers response capabilities in the areas of forest fire fighting with aircraft, shelter capacities, unmanned ground vehicles for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) disasters, emergency medical services, remotely piloted aerial systems, as well as flood containment. Recommendation: The Commission proposes that the participating States remedy in several ways the remaining deficits for which no capacity is available at national level, for example: · forming consortia and developing joint modules, · by seeking contractual agreements on access to such resources, · by encouraging further research on the subject, · using existing capacity-building programmes at national and EU level, for example in the context of the EU Structural Funds. Lastly, the evaluation indicates that the EERC capacity targets need to be reviewed at least every 2 years and the first review will start in 2017. This exercise may lead to the definition of new capacity targets based on national risk assessments, recent disaster experience, general trends, and other relevant sources of information. type: Follow-up document body: EC
  • date: 2017-08-30T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2017/0460/COM_COM(2017)0460_EN.pdf title: COM(2017)0460 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2017&nu_doc=0460 title: EUR-Lex summary: In accordance with Decision No 1313/2013/EU, the Commission presented a report on the interim evaluation of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) for the period 2014-2016. On the basis of the findings of the external evaluation report, its own assessment and the operational experience and lessons learned, the Commission concluded that the mechanism is well on track to achieve the general and specific objectives set out in the decision. Main findings : the report showed that, in general, the objectives of the UCPM seem to remain relevant to the needs of Europe: according to Eurobarometer 2017, a large majority of European citizens support a common EU policy in the field of civil protection and agree that the EU should lead the coordination of disaster responses to help the affected countries, both in Europe as in the rest of the world; recent resolutions of the European Parliament also called on the Commission to further support cooperation between the various European civil protection authorities; stakeholders consulted also highlighted the flexibility of the UCPM which they perceive positively. As regards the specific objectives , the analysis of the UCPM effectiveness showed that: it is fully on track to achieve objectives pertaining to disaster prevention framework (objective 1) and readiness for disasters (objective 2); the UCPM's response to disasters (objective 3) has been timely and effective according to the vast majority of stakeholders consulted; public awareness and preparedness to disasters (objective 4) have received slightly less satisfactory views from stakeholders when compared to the other objectives; external coherence, that is the linkages between the UCPM and other Union policy areas, has increased as compared to the previous framework (2007-2013). The existence of a single European hub for information sharing and operational coordination, the introduction of common European standards for disaster response capacities and common guidelines on risk assessments , which have contributed to the development of an overview of risks in the EU in the framework of the UCPM legislation, are perceived as having delivered high EU added value in the areas of disaster response, preparedness and prevention, respectively. Challenges and necessary improvements : the evaluation also highlighted a number of challenges that, if addressed promptly, could increase even further the impact of UCPM supported action. A general area identified for improvement is the strengthening of the UCPM results monitoring framework , including better measurability through the possible introduction of quantitative indicators and baselines, in support of a stronger focus on impact over time. Several improvements are suggested: 1) Prevention : increase the focus of the annual prevention (and preparedness) projects that the UCPM finances every year; better articulate the linkages between the UCPM prevention (and preparedness) projects and broader EU programmes (e.g. Cohesion/European Regional Development Fund, European Investment Bank, etc.); strengthen the link between prevention and preparedness/response activities. 2) Preparation : re-assess the system of incentives for pooling assets in the Voluntary Pool based on lessons learnt and other knowledge emerging from operations; develop a more needs-based approach to training and exercise programmes by focusing on skills rather than performance (i.e., the number of individuals trained) to better meet the needs of operations; expand the end-user side of trans-national early warning systems platforms, such as the European Forest Fire Information System (EFFIS) and the European Flood Awareness System (EFAS). 3) Reaction : promote a consistent collection of quantitative data and produce systematic analysis of response missions to improve future performance; consider the pre-deployment of a small UCPM team ahead of the formal UCPM activation when facing imminent disasters (e.g. cyclones, river floods, etc.); further simplify the administrative and financial procedures for engaging response capacities under the UCPM; ensure the best match between operational needs and experts deployed in the EU civil protection teams. From a cross-cutting perspective, prevention and preparedness missions should adopt a results-based approach , and coherence between the UCPM and the instruments of the neighbourhood policy should be strengthened. Outlook : the report stressed that the UCPM needs to be closer to local and regional actors , while continuing to strengthen, through national civil protection authorities, the governance of disaster risk management at both cross-border and along the European-national regional-local chain. The Commission shall assess the appropriateness of amending the provisions of Decision No 1313/2013/EU with a view to: (i) strengthening effectiveness by providing realistic incentives, attaining simplifications and reducing administrative burden; (ii) matching current/emerging risks with response capacities; (iii) making full use of Europe's expertise and assets for preparedness and response. type: Follow-up document body: EC
  • date: 2017-08-30T00:00:00 docs: url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SWD:2017:0287:FIN:EN:PDF title: EUR-Lex title: SWD(2017)0287 type: Follow-up document body: EC
  • date: 2012-04-11T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2011)0934 title: COM(2011)0934 type: Contribution body: AT_BUNDESRAT
  • date: 2012-03-15T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2011)0934 title: COM(2011)0934 type: Contribution body: BG_PARLIAMENT
  • date: 2012-03-05T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2011)0934 title: COM(2011)0934 type: Contribution body: DE_BUNDESRAT
  • date: 2012-03-07T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2011)0934 title: COM(2011)0934 type: Contribution body: IT_SENATE
  • date: 2012-03-26T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2011)0934 title: COM(2011)0934 type: Contribution body: PT_PARLIAMENT
events
  • date: 2011-12-20T00:00:00 type: Legislative proposal published body: EC docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0934/COM_COM(2011)0934_EN.doc title: COM(2011)0934 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=0934 title: EUR-Lex summary: PURPOSE: to provide for a new Civil Protection Mechanism for the Union for the period 2014-2020. PROPOSED ACT: Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council. BACKGROUND: this proposal seeks to replace the Council Decisions on the Civil Protection Mechanism , which facilitates reinforced cooperation between the Member States and the Union in the field of civil protection and the Civil Protection Financial Instrument , which provides funding for the actions under the Mechanism to ensure protection against natural and man-made disasters. After a comprehensive evaluation of the Civil Protection legislation for the period 2007-2009 and taking account of lessons learnt from past emergencies, this proposal merges the two Council Decisions into a single legal act. The proposal builds on the 2010 Commission Communication ' Towards a stronger European disaster response: the role of civil protection and humanitarian assistance ' and the 2009 Communication on ' A Community approach on the prevention of natural and man-made disasters ' which were welcomed by Parliament (see INI/2011/2023 and INI/2009/2151 ). The proposal contributes to Europe's 2020 objectives and to increasing the security of EU citizens and building resilience to natural and man-made disasters . Furthermore, by supporting and promoting measures to prevent disasters, an EU Civil Protection policy would reduce the costs to the EU economy from disasters and therefore obstacles to growth. The proposal also makes a significant contribution to simplification. The new decision merges into a single text the provisions relating to the functioning of the Mechanism and those relating to the financing of its activities, that in the past were in separate decisions. It also simplifies the existing procedures for the pooling and co-financing of the transport of assistance (e.g. by avoiding a systematic reimbursement of 50%, as is the case under the current rules, and by appointing a lead state in transport operations involving several Member States), thereby significantly reducing the administrative burden on the Commission and Member States. It also establishes simplified rules for the activation of the Mechanism in emergencies in third countries. The strengthened Mechanism will contribute to the implementation of the Solidarity Clause , on which the European Commission and the High Representative will bring forward a proposal in 2012. IMPACT ASSESSMENT: the main problems identified in the impact assessment are: i) the reactive and ad hoc mechanics of the EU Civil protection cooperation limit the effectiveness, efficiency and coherence of European disaster response, ii) unavailability of critical response capacities (capacity gaps), iii) limited transport solutions and heavy procedures hinder optimal response, iv) limited preparedness in training and exercises, and v) lack of integration of prevention policies. Following the impact assessment , it was proposed to include the following aspects in the legislative proposal: on response : the inclusion of essential elements and principles on the voluntary pool of assets and on EU-funded assets with a reference to the implementation rules; on transport: a revision of some of the current legal provisions to increase the maximum EU financing rate for transport operations, and simplify administrative procedures; on prevention and preparedness : a general EU policy framework and Commission guidelines, with provision for Member States’ risk management plans (RMPs). LEGAL BASIS: Article 196 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). CONTENT: this proposal provides for the creation of a new civil protection mechanism for the Union to support, coordinate and supplement the actions of the Member States in the field of civil protection in improving the effectiveness of systems for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters of all kinds within and outside the Union. The idea is to provide for an integrated approach to disaster management . The proposal provides for a general objective which is subdivided into specific objectives, accompanied by indicators to measure the progress made. Specific objectives : to achieve a high level of protection against disasters by preventing or reducing their effects and by fostering a culture of prevention; to enhance the Union's state of preparedness to respond to disasters; and to facilitate rapid and efficient emergency response interventions in the event of major disasters. Proposed measures : 1) Prevention : the purpose is to enhance the importance of the EU prevention policy framework and effectively linking it to the preparedness and response actions. The proposal sets out the tasks for the Commission in this context which, in particular, include: i) improving the knowledge base on disaster risks and facilitating the sharing of knowledge, best practices and information; ii) supporting and promoting Members States' risk assessment and mapping; iii) an inventory of natural and man-made risks the Union may face taking into account the future impact of climate change; and iv) raising awareness about the importance of risk prevention and supporting Member States in public information, education and awareness-raising, etc. Building on the ongoing work on risk assessments and to ensure effective cooperation within the Mechanism, Member States are required to communicate, with the help and support of the Commission, their risk management plans by end 2016 . 2) Preparation : The main focus of the proposal is on preparedness actions to improve the response planning, to enhance EU response capacity and the overall level of preparedness for large-scale disasters. In comparison with the previous mechanism the main changes include: establishing and managing of a Emergency Response Centre ('ERC') on the basis of the existing Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC), which should be strengthened to ensure 24/7 operational capacity; developing a coherent planning framework for response operations by preparing reference scenarios, mapping existing capacities and developing contingency plans for their deployment. Synergies between in-kind assistance and humanitarian aid are also sought; establishing a European Emergency Response Capacity in the form of a voluntary pool of pre-identified capacities, which Member States make available for operations under the Mechanism. The need for increased visibility of the capacities is also highlighted; identification and filling gaps in the response capacities by supporting the development of complementary EU-funded capacities , where this has been considered more cost-efficient than Member States' individual investments. A special monitoring procedure is envisaged and the Commission is obliged to report every two years to the Council and the Parliament on the progress; enlarging the scope of the current EU preparedness actions in the field of training, including through the establishment of a training network and diversification of the training programme. The Commission can also provide guidance on EU and international civil protection training; sending expert teams to advise on prevention and preparedness measures at the request of an affected state or the UN and its agencies; providing the possibility to assist Member States in pre-positioning emergency response capacities in logistical hubs inside the EU. 3) Response : the proposed changes seek to ensure more effective and swifter response through: temporary pre-positioning of capacities in situations of increased risk; proposal of an emergency response plan and request for deployment of the capacities; requiring Member States to ensure host nation support for the incoming assistance, as called for in the Council Conclusions on Host Nation support. 4) Other specific measures : to enable the implementation of the mechanism, the Commission shall be authorised to finance preparation, follow-up, monitoring, audit and evaluation actions that are necessary for the management of the programme and the achievement of its objectives. External dimension of civil protection operations : in operations outside the Union, the proposal promotes consistency in the international civil protection work through: providing assistance through the Mechanism at the request of the United Nations or its agencies, or a relevant international organisation; the Commission informing the European External Action Service to allow for consistency between civil protection operation and the overall EU relations with the affected country; clarifying the cases when consular support assistance can be provided, taking into account a forthcoming proposal for a Council Directive on coordination and cooperation measures regarding consular protection for unrepresented EU citizens. The countries concerned would be the following: European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries which are members of the European Economic Area (EEA); acceding countries, candidate countries and potential candidates; countries coming under the European Neighbourhood Policy as well as potential candidate countries not participating in the Mechanism; and international or regional organisations where relevant bilateral or multilateral agreements between these organisations and the Union so allow. Financial support provisions : eligible actions fall within the following 4 fields: general actions, prevention and preparedness, response, and transport. The provisions relating to the support for transport under the current Instrument are amended and simplified and introduce revised conditions for financing increasing the co-financing rates up to 85% of the total eligible cost and up to 100% in limited cases when certain criteria are met. New provisions allow one Member State to take the lead in requesting EU financial support for operations, which involve several Member States and allowing an affected Member State requesting assistance to request also co-financing of transport costs. Changes are also introduced to the types of financial intervention to allow for the reimbursement of expenses and the establishment of trust funds. In the case of grants and public procurement, it will not be necessary to include emergency response related operations in the annual work programme of the Commission. Lastly, the proposal contains the classic provisions with regard to the protection of the financial interests of the Union against fraud and other irregularities, implementation, evaluation and transitional measures until the entry into force of this decision. Repeal : when the decision enters into force, the existing mechanisms will be repealed. BUDGETARY IMPLICATION: the Commission's Communication on 'A Budget for Europe 2020' envisages budgetary commitments for the EU civil protection policy of EUR 513 million in current prices, as follows: EUR 276 million inside the Union and EUR 237 million for operations outside the Union. The financial provisions of this Decision should apply as of 1 January 2014 as they are related to the Multi-annual Financial Framework 2014-2020.
  • date: 2012-01-19T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2012-04-26T00:00:00 type: Resolution/conclusions adopted by Council body: CSL summary: The Council adopted conclusions on improving civil protection through lessons learnt (doc. 8149/12). The Council Decision of 8 November 2007 establishing a Community Civil Protection Mechanism had entrusted the Commission with the task of setting up a programme of lessons learnt from the interventions conducted within the framework of the mechanism and disseminating these lessons through the information system. In its conclusions, the Council notes that the lessons learnt programme is a cornerstone in the Civil Protection Mechanism's role of facilitating reinforced cooperation in civil protection action to save lives and to protect the environment, property and cultural heritage, and that it is worth developing further at EU and national levels. The Council calls upon Member States and the Commission, within the framework of the Mechanism, to take steps to develop a systematic approach to data and information collection and compilation from civil protection interventions and exercises, covering the entire disaster management cycle (prevention, preparedness and response activities), in order to provide a comprehensive and adequate basis for evaluation.
  • date: 2012-06-14T00:00:00 type: Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament body: EP
  • date: 2012-10-25T00:00:00 type: Debate in Council body: CSL docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3195*&MEET_DATE=25/10/2012 title: 3195
  • date: 2012-11-28T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2013-01-08T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2013-3&language=EN title: A7-0003/2013 summary: The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety adopted the report by Elisabetta GARDINI (EPP, IT) on the proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism. The Committee on Development, exercising its prerogatives of an associated committee in accordance with Rule 50 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure , was also consulted for an opinion on this report. The parliamentary committee recommends that the European Parliament’s position adopted in first reading under the ordinary legislative procedure should amend the Commission’s proposal as follows: Moving from a coordination mechanism to a European mechanism: Members consider that it is urgent to leave behind the system of ad hoc coordination and move towards an efficient European disaster management mechanism based on an integrated approach . General objectives of the mechanism: Members stipulate that the Union should support, coordinate and supplement actions of Member States in the field of civil protection with a view to improving the effectiveness of systems for preventing, preparing for and responding to major disasters minimising especially human, but also environmental and material losses . With a view to emphasising the subsidiarity principle, Members specify that the Union’s action should render the Mechanism more efficient and effective, and mobilise resources more quickly, with the Member States still retaining their individual responsibility. Members also added technical details to the specific objectives of the Mechanism with a view to increasing public awareness and preparedness for major disasters. 1. Prevention: Members insisted on the following points in regard to this area: strengthened regional cooperation in the field of sharing knowledge and best practices, and in the training programmes; introduction of risk mapping based on guidelines, defining terminology, methodology, impact assessment and scenarios ; the use of Union funds for sustainable disaster prevention . 2. Risk management plans: in order to ensure the effectiveness of the Mechanism, Members States shall communicate to the Commission their risk management plans. The risk management plans shall, as a minimum, be a collation of the information from either national or regional plans , including, but not limited to, possible risks together with risk maps, capacities available, and contingency plans in place. The submission of information concerning both national and regional plans, as well as the plans themselves, and any relevant data, shall be encouraged. In terms of timetable, Members consider that Member States should ensure by the end of 2014 (and not 2016), at the latest, that their risk management plans are ready and communicated to the Commission. Member States shall update their risk management plans every two years , and communicate those updated plans to the Commission. The involvement of the regional and local authorities concerned and of specialised institutions in the preparation and updating of their risk management plans is also desirable. 3. Preparation: Members call on the Commission to establish and manage the Emergency Response Centre (ERC) in coordination with the existing national and regional bodies , ensuring 24/7 operational capacity. A number of other amendments are proposed in particular in regard to the integration and coordination of the mechanism. The Commission should develop and update guidelines on host nation support , in cooperation with the Member States, on the basis of operational experience and support the creation of voluntary peer review assessment programmes for the Member States' preparedness strategies. Members stress the following points: priority intervention modules: in this regard, Members stress the voluntary nature of the development of the modules and call for special attention to be paid to civil protection capacities in the border areas of the Member States; planning of operations: the involvement of non-governmental civil protection and humanitarian actors, as well as strengthened cooperation at regional level; in regard to the European Emergency Response Capacity (EERC), the interoperability of the capacities mobilised and its European visibility are important (by displaying, in particular, the national and European emblems). It should be noted that Members propose an exception from the principle of mobilising the available capacities for the purposes of the EERC when the Member State that manages given assets is itself faced with a major disaster. In this case, the responsibility of the affected Member State to protect its people and territory by using the given asset should have priority over the obligation to make the asset available; joint exercises should be included under the cooperation mechanism’s training programme. These would be in cooperation with Member States and would take account of the needs and interests of Member States of a given region which face similar disaster risks. 4. Response: as far as this aspect is concerned, Members stress the role of Member States in particular at the moment of response in the event of a disaster in the EU . In the event of a disaster outside the EU , Members emphasise the need to strengthen the link between emergency measures, rehabilitation and development with humanitarian and development operators. The use of military means as a last resort: Members consider that the use of military means under civilian oversight as a last resort often constitutes an important contribution to disaster response. Where the use of military capacities as a last resort is considered in support of civil protection operations to be appropriate, cooperation with the military should follow the modalities, procedures and criteria established by the Council or its competent bodies as well as "The Guidelines on the Use of Foreign Military and Civil Defence Assets in Disaster Relief" (Oslo Guidelines, rev. 1.1 of 2007) of the UN for making available to the Mechanism military capacities relevant to the protection of civilian populations. Consistency and complementarity: Members call for the Union and the Member States to coordinate their respective support programmes with the aim of increasing the effectiveness and efficiency in the delivery of support and policy dialogue in line with the established principles for strengthening operational coordination, and for harmonising policies and procedures. Coordination shall involve regular consultations and frequent exchanges of relevant information and best practices. Involvement of third countries in the Mechanism : Members stipulate that funding under the Union Civil Protection Mechanism should be complementary to funding from other sources, such as the IPA and the ENPI, as this would ensure greater funding for civil protection activities for candidate and potential candidate countries and Neighbourhood Policy countries. Delegated acts: Members have totally restructures the decision-making process in regard to the Mechanism. They consider that the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of establishing and managing the Emergency Response Centre (ERC); specifying the functioning of the Common Emergency Communication and Information System; specifying the conditions for identifying modules and the general requirements for their functioning and interoperability; establishing conditions for resources available for assistance intervention; specifying the functioning of the European emergency response capacity (EERC) as a voluntary pool , the capacity goals for the EERC, the interoperability and quality requirements for capacities in the EERC, and the process for certification and registration of capacities; specifying the modalities for addressing capacity gaps; defining the aim, the content, the structure, the organisation, and the target group of the training programme and the training network; specifying the procedure for responding to major disasters or imminent major disasters within and outside the Union; specifying the functioning of the expert teams and the conditions of selection, dispatching and disengaging an expert team; specifying the level of detail of the information on equipment and transport resources and specifying the procedures for the identification of such equipment and resources and for the provision of additional transport resources; specifying the procedure for requesting and deciding on granting Union financial support for transport; and adopting the annual work programmes. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Decision, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission with respect to the managing the process for certification and registration of capacities of the EERC and applications for funding from third countries. Financial allocation: in the draft legislative resolution, Members recall that the financial envelope specified in the legislative proposal constitutes only an indication to the legislative authority and cannot be fixed until agreement is reached on the proposal for a R egulation laying down the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for the years 2014-2020. They reiterate that sufficient additional resources are needed in the next MFF in order to enable the Union to fulfil its existing policy priorities and the new tasks provided for in the Lisbon Treaty . They underline that even with an increase in the level of resources for the next MFF of at least 5% compared to the 2013 level only a limited contribution can be made to the achievement of the Union’s agreed objectives and commitments. It should also be noted that Members propose an indicative allocation (in percentages) of the budget lines relevant to the Mechanism: actions inside the EU (financed from heading 3 “Security and Citizenship”) would receive 70% of the budget, while actions outside the EU (financed from heading 4 “Global Europe”) would receive 30% . Of the overall financial envelope, at least 20 % should be allocated to general actions to strengthen prevention, preparation and response effectiveness. This portion of specific aid could be granted to candidate countries and potential candidate countries not participating in the Mechanism and to countries coming under the European Neighbourhood Policy, in so far as it complements funding under the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) and the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI).
  • date: 2013-12-10T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=22404&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2013-12-10T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20131210&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2013-12-10T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2013-0540 title: T7-0540/2013 summary: The European Parliament adopted by 608 votes to 78, with 10 abstentions, a legislative resolution on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism. Parliament adopted its position at first reading following the ordinary legislative procedure. The amendments adopted in plenary are the result of a compromise negotiated between the European Parliament and the Council. General objective and subject matter: the Union Civil Protection Mechanism shall aim to strengthen the cooperation between the Union and the Member States and to facilitate coordination in the field of civil protection in order to improve the effectiveness of systems for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters . The protection to be ensured by the Union Mechanism shall cover primarily people, but also the environment and property, including cultural heritage, against all kinds of natural and man-made disasters, including the consequences: of acts of terrorism, technological, radiological or environmental disasters, marine pollution, acute health emergencies, occurring inside or outside the Union. In the case of the consequences of acts of terrorism or radiological disasters, the Union Mechanism may cover only preparedness and response actions. The proposed Decision recalled the Member States' primary responsibility in this area through laying down the general rules for the Union Mechanism and the rules for the provision of financial assistance under the Union Mechanism. Technical details outline the scope of the mechanism in terms of its specific objectives. The three-fold themes are as follows: 1) Preventive action: this arm shall seek to: take action to improve the knowledge base on disaster risks ; facilitate the sharing of knowledge, best practices and information, including among Member States that share common risks; establish and regularly update a cross-sectoral overview and map of natural and man-made disaster risks the Union may face ; promote and support the development and implementation of Member States' risk management activity through the sharing of good practices, and facilitate access to specific knowledge and expertise on issues of common interest; compile and disseminate the information made available by Member States; organise an exchange of experiences about the assessment of risk management capability; report periodically to the European Parliament and to the Council on the progress made in the implementation of the risk assessment actions; 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; promote prevention measures in the Member States and third countries through the sharing of good practices, and facilitate access to specific knowledge and expertise on issues of common interest; take additional necessary supporting and complementary prevention action. Risk management: in order to promote an effective and coherent approach to prevention of and preparedness for disasters, Member States shall develop risk assessments at national or appropriate sub-national level and make available to the Commission a summary of the relevant elements every three years and make available the assessment of their risk management capability. Member States shall also participate, on a voluntary basis, in peer reviews on the assessment of risk management capability . 2) Preparedness action: an Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC) is hereby established. The ERCC shall ensure 24/7 operational capacity, and serve the Member States and the Commission in pursuit of the objectives of the Union Mechanism. The Commission shall carry out a series of preparedness actions such as the management of the ERCC. The preparedness arm shall put in place: modules , in particular to meet priority intervention or support needs under the Union Mechanism; response capacities , which could be available from the competent services, or which may be provided by non-governmental organisations and other relevant entities a planning for disaster response under the Mechanism , including the development of disaster response scenarios, identifying resources and developing plans to deploy response capabilities; a European Emergency Response Capacity (EERC) 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; measures addressing response capacity gaps, either individually or through a consortium of Member States cooperating together on common risks, any strategic capacity gaps that have been identified; training, exercises, lessons learnt and knowledge dissemination . The training programme shall aim to enhance the coordination, compatibility and complementarity between capacities and to improve the competence of experts. A training network shall be established to enhance all phases of disaster management, taking into account adaptation to and mitigation of climate change. 3) Reponse action: the response mechanism includes a enhanced coordination system including: notification of disasters in the EU between Member States; disaster response: when a disaster occurs within the Union, or is imminent, the affected Member State may request assistance through the ERCC. The request shall be as specific as possible. In exceptional situations of increased risk a Member State may also request assistance in the form of temporary pre-positioning of response capacities; any Member State to which a request for assistance is addressed through the Union Mechanism shall promptly determine whether it is in a position to render the assistance required and inform the requesting Member State of its decision through the CECIS, indicating the scope, terms and, where applicable, costs of the assistance it could render. The ERCC shall keep the Member States informed; when a disaster occurs outside the Union, or is imminent, the affected country may request assistance through the ERCC. The assistance may also be requested through or by the United Nations and its agencies, or a relevant international organisation. Reserve in case of disaster: in order to improve the planning of disaster response operations under the Union Mechanism and to enhance the availability of key capacities, it is necessary to develop an EERC in the form of a voluntary pool of pre-committed capacities from the Member States and a structured process to identify potential capacity gaps. Experts from the Commission and from other services of the Union may be integrated in the team in order to support the team and facilitate liaison with the ERCC. Experts dispatched by OCHA or other international organisations may be integrated in the team in order to strengthen cooperation and facilitate joint assessments. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Decision, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission with respect to the interaction of the ERCC with the Member States' contact points and the operational procedures for the response to disasters inside and outside the Union. On a technical level, provisions are laid down as regards logistical support in terms of transport and the mobilisation of equipment. Pursuant to a request for assistance, the Commission may take additional necessary supporting and complementary action in order to ensure consistency in the delivery of the assistance. Financed actions : all actions of prevention, preparedness and operations eligible for financial assistance under the European Union Mechanism as well as access to equipment and transport resources within the mechanism are also detailed in the text of the draft decision. The draft decision further details: the type of aid beneficiaries; the types of financial assistance; types of intervention procedures and implementing procedures. Budgetary resources: the financial envelope for the implementation of the Union Mechanism for the period 2014 to 2020 shall be EUR 368 428 000 in current prices. Percentages for allocation of the financial envelope for the implementation of the Union Mechanism are as follows: Prevention: 20 % +/- 8 percentage points Preparedness: 50 % +/- 8 percentage points Response: 30 % +/- 8 percentage points This amount shall derive from Heading 3 ‘Security and Citizenship’ and Heading 4 ‘Global Europe’. N.B. The Commission shall review the breakdown set out in Annex I in the light of the outcome of the interim evaluation. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt, where necessary in light of the results of that evaluation, delegated acts in accordance with Article 30, to adjust each of the figures in Annex I by more than 8 percentage points and up to 16 percentage points. Those delegated acts shall be adopted by 30 June 2017 . Where, in case of a necessary revision of the budgetary resources available for response actions, imperative grounds of urgency so require , the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts to adjust each of the figures in Annex I, within the available budgetary allocations. Complementarity and consistency of Union action: actions receiving financial assistance under this Decision shall not receive assistance from other Union financial instruments. Synergies and complementarity shall be sought with other instruments of the Union. 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. Third countries and international organisations: the Union Mechanism shall be open to the participation of: EFTA countries which are members of the EEA; acceding countries, candidate countries and potential candidates; candidate countries and potential candidates not participating in the Union Mechanism, as well as to countries that are part of the ENP, to the extent that that financial assistance complements funding available under a future Union legislative act. Evaluation: actions receiving financial assistance shall be monitored regularly in order to follow their implementation. The Commission shall evaluate the application of this Decision and submit to the European Parliament and to the Council: an interim evaluation report on the results obtained and the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the implementation of this Decision by no later than 30 June 2017; a communication on the continued implementation of this Decision by no later than 31 December 2018; and an ex-post evaluation report by no later than 31 December 2021. The interim evaluation report and the communication respectively shall be accompanied, if appropriate, by proposals for amendments to this Decision.
  • date: 2013-12-16T00:00:00 type: Act adopted by Council after Parliament's 1st reading body: EP/CSL
  • date: 2013-12-16T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
  • date: 2013-12-17T00:00:00 type: Final act signed body: CSL
  • date: 2013-12-20T00:00:00 type: Final act published in Official Journal summary: PURPOSE: to establish a Union Civil Protection Mechanism in order to prepare for, and respond to disasters. LEGISLATIVE ACT: Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism. BACKGROUND: in view of the significant increase in the numbers and severity of natural and man-made disasters in recent years and in a situation where future disasters will be more extreme and more complex with far-reaching and longer-term consequences as a result, in particular, of climate change and the potential interaction between several natural and technological hazards, an integrated approach to disaster management is increasingly important. CONTENT: the Decision establishes the Union Civil Protection Mechanism, which promotes solidarity and supports the coordination of Member States' actions in the field of civil protection with a view to improving the effectiveness of systems for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters. It lays down the general rules for the Union Mechanism as well as the rules for the provision of financial assistance. The Decision is intended to bring better predictability and quality of assistance, and increased cost-efficiency by means of scale and complementarity. The protection to be ensured by the Union Mechanism will cover primarily people, but also the environment and property, including cultural heritage, against all kinds of natural and man-made disasters, including the consequences of acts of terrorism, technological, radiological or environmental disasters, marine pollution, and acute health emergencies, occurring inside or outside the Union. The main points are as follows: Specific objectives : these are: · to achieve a high level of protection against disasters by preventing or reducing their potential effects, by fostering a culture of prevention and by improving cooperation between the civil protection and other relevant services; · to enhance preparedness at Member State and Union level to respond to disasters; · to facilitate rapid and efficient response in the event of disasters or imminent disasters; and · to increase public awareness and preparedness for disasters. Union structure: the Mechanism is based on a Union structure consisting of an Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC), a European Emergency Response Capacity (EERC) in the form of a voluntary pool of pre-committed capacities from the Member States, trained experts, a Common Emergency Communication and Information System (CECIS) managed by the Commission and contact points in the Member States. This provides a framework for collecting validated information on the situation, for dissemination to the Member States and for sharing lessons learnt from interventions. Prevention actions: the Commission shall, inter alia: · take action to improve the knowledge base on disaster risks and facilitate the sharing of knowledge, best practices and information, · promote Member States' risk assessment and mapping activity · regularly update a cross-sectoral overview and map of natural and man-made disaster risks the Union may face · support the development and implementation of Member States' risk management activity. Preparedness actions: the Decision sets out the general preparedness actions that must be taken both by the Commission and by Member States. Amongst the Commission’s tasks is the management of the ERCC and CECIS, and developing a network of trained experts from Member States, who can be available at short notice to assist the ERCC. Member States, for their part shall identify modules, other response capacities and experts within their civil protection or other emergency services, which could be made available for intervention upon request through the Union Mechanism. Response action : the response mechanism includes a enhanced coordination system which encompasses: · notification of disasters in the EU between Member States; · disaster response : when a disaster occurs within the Union, or is imminent, the affected Member State may request assistance through the ERCC. The request shall be as specific as possible. In exceptional situations of increased risk a Member State may also request assistance in the form of temporary pre-positioning of response capacities; · any Member State to which a request for assistance is addressed through the Union Mechanism shall promptly determine whether it is in a position to render the assistance required and inform the requesting Member State of its decision through the CECIS, indicating the scope, terms and, where applicable, costs of the assistance it could render. The ERCC shall keep the Member States informed; · when a disaster occurs outside the Union, or is imminent, the affected country may request assistance through the ERCC. The assistance may also be requested through or by the United Nations and its agencies, or a relevant international organisation. Emergency Response Coordination Centre : the ERCC must ensure 24/7 operational capacity, and serve the Member States and the Commission in pursuit of the objectives of the Union Mechanism. On the basis of identified risks, the Commission will define the types and the number of key response capacities required for the EERC ("capacity goals") and will monitor progress towards these capacity goals identifying potentially significant response capacity gaps in the EERC. Response capacities that Member States make available for the EERC shall be available for response operations under the Union Mechanism following a request for assistance through the ERCC. The ultimate decision on their deployment shall be taken by the Member States which registered the response capacity concerned. Risk assessment : the Union Mechanism includes a general framework for the sharing of information on risks and risk management capabilities . Member States must: (i) develop risk assessments and risk management capability at national or appropriate sub-national level and make available to the Commission a summary of the relevant elements; (ii) participate, on a voluntary basis, in peer reviews on the assessment of risk management capability. Financial framework : the financial envelope for the implementation of the Union Mechanism for the period 2014 to 2020 shall be EUR 368 428 000 in current prices: · EUR 223 776 000 in current prices shall derive from Heading 3 "Security and Citizenship" of the multiannual financial framework and · EUR 144 652 000 in current prices from Heading 4 "Global Europe". The annual appropriations shall be authorised by the European Parliament and the Council within the limits of the multiannual financial framework. Percentages for allocation of the financial envelope are as follows: · Prevention: 20 % +/- 8 percentage points · Preparedness: 50 % +/- 8 percentage points · Response: 30 % +/- 8 percentage points Evaluation: the Commission shall evaluate the application of the Decision and submit: · an interim evaluation report on the results obtained by no later than 30 June 2017; · a communication on the continued implementation of this Decision by no later than 31 December 2018; and · an ex-post evaluation report by no later than 31 December 2021. ENTRY INTO FORCE: 21.12.2013. APPLICATION: 01.01.2014. DELEGATED ACTS: the Commission will be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance in order to review the breakdown of the financial envelope for the implementation of the Decision by 30 June 2017, in light of the outcome of the interim evaluation. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission for a period of seven years until 31 December 2020. The European Parliament or the Council may object to a delegated act within two months from the date of notification (which may be extended by two months.) If the European Parliament or the Council make objections, the delegated act will not enter into force. The urgency procedure should apply if, at any time, an immediate revision of the budgetary resources available for response actions is needed. docs: title: Decision 2013/1313 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32013D1313 title: OJ L 347 20.12.2013, p. 0924 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2013:347:TOC
other
  • body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Former Council configuration
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/echo/ title: Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO) commissioner: GEORGIEVA Kristalina
procedure/Modified legal basis
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
New
Rules of Procedure EP 150
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
ENVI/7/08551
New
  • ENVI/7/08551
procedure/final/url
Old
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32013D1313
New
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32013D1313
procedure/instrument
Old
Decision
New
  • Decision
  • Repealing Decision 2007/162/EC, Euratom 2005/0052(CNS) Repealing Decision 2007/779/EC, Euratom 2006/0009(CNS) Amended by 2017/0102(COD) Amended by 2017/0309(COD) Amended by 2019/0070(COD)
procedure/subject
Old
  • 3.70.10 Man-made disasters, industrial pollution and accidents
  • 3.70.11 Natural disasters, Solidarity Fund
  • 4.30 Civil protection
  • 4.70.06 Outlying and outermost regions, overseas countries and territories
  • 6.10.05 Peace preservation, humanitarian and rescue tasks, crisis management
  • 6.50 Emergency, food, humanitarian aid, aid to refugees, Emergency Aid Reserve
New
3.70.10
Man-made disasters, industrial pollution and accidents
3.70.11
Natural disasters, Solidarity Fund
4.30
Civil protection
6.10.05
Peace preservation, humanitarian and rescue tasks, crisis management
6.50
Emergency, food, humanitarian aid, aid to refugees, Emergency Aid Reserve
procedure/summary
  • Repealing Decision 2007/162/EC, Euratom
  • Repealing Decision 2007/779/EC, Euratom
activities/0/commission/0/DG/title
Old
Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection
New
Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO)
activities/0/docs/0/celexid
CELEX:52011PC0934:EN
links/European Commission/title
Old
PreLex
New
EUR-Lex
other/1/dg/title
Old
Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection
New
Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO)
procedure/subject/5
Old
6.50 Emergency, food, humanitarian aid, aid to refugees
New
6.50 Emergency, food, humanitarian aid, aid to refugees, Emergency Aid Reserve
activities
  • date: 2011-12-20T00:00:00 docs: url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=934 celexid: CELEX:52011PC0934:EN type: Legislative proposal published title: COM(2011)0934 type: Legislative proposal published body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/echo/ title: Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection Commissioner: GEORGIEVA Kristalina
  • date: 2012-01-19T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: AFET date: 2012-06-18T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: PAŞCU Ioan Mircea body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2012-02-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: S&D name: STAVRAKAKIS Georgios body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2012-01-25T00:00:00 committee_full: Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: STRIFFLER Michèle body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: ESTRELA Edite group: ALDE name: TAYLOR Rebecca group: Verts/ALE name: HASSI Satu group: ECR name: ROSBACH Anna group: GUE/NGL name: MATIAS Marisa group: EFD name: ROSSI Oreste responsible: True committee: ENVI date: 2012-02-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: GARDINI Elisabetta body: EP responsible: False committee: REGI date: 2012-01-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich
  • body: CSL meeting_id: 3162 council: Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) date: 2012-04-26T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
  • date: 2012-06-14T00:00:00 body: EP type: Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
  • body: CSL meeting_id: 3195 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3195*&MEET_DATE=25/10/2012 type: Debate in Council title: 3195 council: Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) date: 2012-10-25T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
  • date: 2012-11-28T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: AFET date: 2012-06-18T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: PAŞCU Ioan Mircea body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2012-02-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: S&D name: STAVRAKAKIS Georgios body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2012-01-25T00:00:00 committee_full: Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: STRIFFLER Michèle body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: ESTRELA Edite group: ALDE name: TAYLOR Rebecca group: Verts/ALE name: HASSI Satu group: ECR name: ROSBACH Anna group: GUE/NGL name: MATIAS Marisa group: EFD name: ROSSI Oreste responsible: True committee: ENVI date: 2012-02-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: GARDINI Elisabetta body: EP responsible: False committee: REGI date: 2012-01-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich
  • body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2013-3&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title: A7-0003/2013 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: AFET date: 2012-06-18T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: PAŞCU Ioan Mircea body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2012-02-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: S&D name: STAVRAKAKIS Georgios body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2012-01-25T00:00:00 committee_full: Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: STRIFFLER Michèle body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: ESTRELA Edite group: ALDE name: TAYLOR Rebecca group: Verts/ALE name: HASSI Satu group: ECR name: ROSBACH Anna group: GUE/NGL name: MATIAS Marisa group: EFD name: ROSSI Oreste responsible: True committee: ENVI date: 2012-02-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: GARDINI Elisabetta body: EP responsible: False committee: REGI date: 2012-01-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich date: 2013-01-08T00:00:00
  • date: 2013-12-10T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=22404&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20131210&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2013-0540 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0540/2013 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2013-12-16T00:00:00 body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Agriculture and Fisheries meeting_id: 3285
  • date: 2013-12-16T00:00:00 body: EP type: End of procedure in Parliament
  • date: 2013-12-16T00:00:00 body: EP/CSL type: Act adopted by Council after Parliament's 1st reading
  • date: 2013-12-17T00:00:00 body: CSL type: Final act signed
  • date: 2013-12-20T00:00:00 type: Final act published in Official Journal docs: url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32013D1313 title: Decision 2013/1313 url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2013:347:TOC title: OJ L 347 20.12.2013, p. 0924
committees
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: AFET date: 2012-06-18T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: PAŞCU Ioan Mircea
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2012-02-06T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: S&D name: STAVRAKAKIS Georgios
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2012-01-25T00:00:00 committee_full: Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: STRIFFLER Michèle
  • body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: ESTRELA Edite group: ALDE name: TAYLOR Rebecca group: Verts/ALE name: HASSI Satu group: ECR name: ROSBACH Anna group: GUE/NGL name: MATIAS Marisa group: EFD name: ROSSI Oreste responsible: True committee: ENVI date: 2012-02-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE name: GARDINI Elisabetta
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: REGI date: 2012-01-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: VLASÁK Oldřich
links
National parliaments
European Commission
other
  • body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Former Council configuration
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/echo/ title: Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection commissioner: GEORGIEVA Kristalina
procedure
dossier_of_the_committee
ENVI/7/08551
reference
2011/0461(COD)
instrument
Decision
legal_basis
Treaty on the Functioning of the EU TFEU 196-p2
stage_reached
Procedure completed
summary
subtype
Legislation
Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
title
Union Civil Protection Mechanism 2014-2020
type
COD - Ordinary legislative procedure (ex-codecision procedure)
final
subject