eu-com-schengen-coop

3.3 Exchange of information
The group established during the previous reporting period a regular exchange of information in
accordance with the Visa Code Article 48 . This gathering of information has not been absent from
difficulties:
a) In a relatively low risk and visa free country like Canada, the local provision of monthly
statistics is cumbersome and of little practical use.
b) AGORA has limitations regarding the support of dynamic documents i.e. each MS
introduces its own data regularly, and therefore the process is still centralized by the EU
Delegation and adding to its workload.
c) It does not address the exchange of visa refusal information which could, in some
instances, prove of practical use.
d) Annual visa statistics are already produced on the basis of the information provided by
the capitals.
The Chair asked the Commission DG Home about the possibility of halting the local collection of
monthly visa statistics. He was however reminded that the exchange of visa statistics stems from the
Visa code and therefore they needed to be exchanged, albeit with the possibility of doing it on the
quarterly basis as it is practice in other equivalent countries.
It is on this basis that the LSC group agreed, on its meeting of April 2014, to implement the
exchange of information on a quarterly basis, for which an ad-hoc mechanism will be put in place.
3.4 Any other initiative taken in LSC
The combined Consular and Local Schengen Cooperation groups visited the Ottawa airport border
facilities, including its detention centre. The visit, very well organised by the Canadian Border
Service Agency, allowed for a fruitful exchange of views between Canadian Border authorities and
consular officials from the Member States.
4. Challenges
The implementation of the Visa Information System (VIS), due for 15 May 2014, will require an
accommodation period but some Member States have already been using it during 2013 and
commented its smooth roll-out.
The challenge of the Schengen overstays, mentioned at the previous reporting period has been
clarified but not resolved. For quick reference, it indicated that:
Schengen overstays is unfortunately an irritant which cannot be solved locally. It has been raised
many times and at different levels, by our CAN interlocutors. At the crux of the matter is the
apparent lack of "reciprocity" – 90 day limit in Schengen area vs 180 limit in Canada. The existence
of bi-lateral agreements which would allow extended stay beyond the 90 days, does not seem
sufficient enough to prevents anxiety and sometimes fines, for CAN travellers to the Schengen
zone. Specific information to this matter, both in the Canadian Ministry and of the Schengen
Member States' web sites, can however alleviate the situation and facilitate the travelling of bona
fide visitors. The group plans to address this in the coming months.
12893/14 PR/lm 50
DG D 1 A
EN