Council of Europe Conseil de l'Europe . *

Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe

Congrès des pouvoirs locaux et régionaux de l'Europe

CONF/ERFURT (3) 22 s:\delai.sh\erfurt\conf3.22e TN2422.97

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON

"CRIME AND URBAN INSECURITY IN EUROPE: THE ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL AUTHORITIES"

Kaisersaal, Erfurt, Germany

26 - 28 February 1997

TRANSFRONTIER CO-OPERATION BETWEEN LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND CRIME PREVENTION IN THE GERMAN-DUTCH EUREGIO

by

Dr. Heinrich A. Hoffschulte President of the German Section of the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR) Chairman of the EUREGIO Working Group on European Questions Frontiers protect criminals, not law-abiding citizens

Public discussion of two issues - the growth of international crime and the opening of frontiers, a goal which has been becoming steadily more urgent, at latest, since the 1957 Rome treaties were concluded - in the last fifteen years makes it clear that one recurrent prejudice simply cannot be eradicated: the belief that opening frontiers encourages international crime and that this step should be taken cautiously, if not positively delayed. The truth is that frontiers have long ceased to be a serious problem for international and organised crime, but are still an insuperable practical obstacle, not just in bringing criminals to justice, but even more in preventing and combating crime.

People who argue that keeping frontiers and frontier controls is important for the purpose of combating crime often point to the successes scored in picking up wanted criminals at frontiers. For years, statistics on the number of wanted criminals arrested and crimes detected in the course of random checks were quoted. For a long time, the use made of these figures in public discussion certainly reflected the interests of frontier officials, whose position and jobs were particularly threatened by the dismantling of frontiers.

This is understandable, but not ultimately convincing. Following this logic to the end would mean bringing back, on trunk routes within the Federal Republic, the frontiers which used to exist between the German states in the last century or the East/West frontiers which were done away with in 1989; indeed, checks carried out at the Kamen (eastern Ruhr) and Frankfurt West motorway junctions or on the motorways to Berlin would certainly turn up more criminals than those carried out, for example, on the frontier between Germany and Holland.

When the Schengen Agreement was under discussion, the preventive importance of frontiers was repeatedly mentioned. Indeed, on one occasion, the Conference of Land Ministers of the Interior unanimously adopted a resolution insisting that, before the frontiers were opened further and controls disappeared entirely, nineteen (!) law-harmonisation and other measures must be taken; otherwise, they could not agree to the removal of controls. Given that unanimity is still the rule in security matters within the EU, our frontiers would certainly still be the same today if this advice had been followed.

But demands of this kind are, quite simply, mistaken and misleading. The plain truth, which is often overlooked, is that frontiers help criminals. They give them, in effect, a protective shield, a kind of "cordon anti-sanitaire" or shelter, in which they can take refuge from the police and the courts and lay new plans in peace.

Classic examples include (but are not restricted to) the kind of petty crime that centres on late-night bars and gaming halls in frontier areas, with effects which are often little short of grotesque. The low-life elements change places, as each group crosses the frontier to meet "on the other side", where - in theory - nobody knows them. These goings-on in frontier red-light districts are basically absurd - but the bar-hoppers, alas, are not the only ones who are left looking foolish.

In fact, it is no exaggeration to say that frontiers invite crime, both petty and serious. They give law-abiding citizens a false sense of security, but actually produce the opposite effect by helping criminals to evade pursuit, discovery and arrest, which have always been impeded by the fact that state frontiers also mark the dividing line between areas of responsibility, making it harder for the authorities on either side to agree on concerted action.

In our German-Dutch frontier region, or EUREGIO, different ways of dealing with drugs were a problem for many years. Both countries agreed that possessing and selling the so-called "hard" drugs must be punished, but there was sharp disagreement for a long time on the best way of handling the supposedly "soft" drugs in small "daily doses". The took the view that the danger of hard drugs could be countered by making small quantities of hashish available, more or less officially, in "coffee shops" which everyone knew about. These became genuine places of pilgrimage - obviously for addicts from Germany, and particularly the frontier region, too.

It was only when the communities in which these "shops" were located banded together in protest, because petty crime in these areas had risen sharply and the police could barely cope with the countless burglaries, thefts from cars and other typical "habit-funding" crimes, that the authorities backtracked and stopped handing out drugs like cups of tea or coffee.

Reports that drugs were easier to come by in the Netherlands actually had the effect of attracting criminals and traffickers, since addicts' expectations sent demand through the ceiling. The authorities' obvious lack of interest, at least in small consumers of narcotics or "soft" drugs, created a kind of "safe haven", even for the big traffickers. Official neglect meant tolerance in practice. Rightly or wrongly, this gave drug offenders and dealers the feeling that they stood a better chance of getting off scot-free. The magnetic effects were considerable - and the frontier protected the whole process.

The romantic notion that frontiers mean safety has recently been having yet another field-day in German-Danish frontier regions where, for various reasons, a gut feeling has developed that frontiers are a good thing, quite apart from their obvious political and administrative functions.

The argument that frontiers make it easier to trace, arrest and prosecute offenders is in any case highly dubious from a rule-of-law standpoint. Successes here are obviously due to the fact that the controls carried out at frontiers would otherwise require, in any law-governed state, a court search warrant or at least the strong suspicion that an offence had been committed. Anyone who talks about "internal frontiers", while feeling that controls of this kind should normally be subject to rule-of-law conditions, is clearly implying that frontier controls, while still formally lawful, actually represent a "misuse" of frontiers in terms of legal policy.

Local authorities were ahead of states in co-operating across frontiers

With a view to completion of the internal market and the (political) European Union, transfrontier co-operation is now all the rage everywhere. Its actual intensity varies. It can be managed entirely by local authorities close to the frontier, be organised by national or regional governments, or take mixed forms, involving community groups, chambers of commerce and associations too. In its structural policy, the European Union has also come to realise that transfrontier regions play, or should play, a special role in development of the Union. Against this background, I should now like to

say something about the EUREGIO's 45-year practical experience of transfrontier co- operation; put this briefly in the context of the present international legal system, and tell you about the EUREGIO's experience in the field of crime control and prevention.

Forty-five years' transfrontier experience in the German-Dutch EUREGIO

Proximity to the Netherlands has allowed the Münsterland to learn about transfrontier co- operation and appreciate its benefits. In this German-Dutch frontier area, we started working from Steinfurt-Burgsteinfurt with our Dutch neighbours, in the very early post-war years, to forge the contacts needed to overcome the war's legacy. These efforts in the EUREGIO are today recognised by the EU Commission in Brussels as exemplary for the many transfrontier regions which have since come into being within the EU or on its external frontiers.

The term EUREGIO denotes both a geographical area and a purpose: EUREGIO = European REGIOn. The EUREGIO lies in the central part of the German-Dutch frontier zone, approximately between the Rhine, the Ems and the Ijssel. The German section comprises the northern and western Münsterland and the county of Bentheim, and the Dutch section takes in the Twente and Achterhoek. In other words, the EUREGIO is located at the geographical heart of north-western Europe's great economic centres. The Rhine-Ruhr area, the Dutch Randstad and the North German ports are all within some 250 km.

At the same time, exploiting the advantages of this location depends on intensive co-operation within the region. Taken separately and in terms of their own countries, the German and Dutch components of the EUREGIO are simply peripheral regions - with effects which are common, to a greater or lesser degree, to nearly all frontier regions.

Being peripheral at national level tends to isolate a region from the centres of political discussion and decision - in our case, the capitals, Bonn or, in future (even more so), Berlin and The Hague, as well as the Land capitals, Düsseldorf and Hannover. Industry, business and trade are normally focused on national centres, and the same is true of transport and communications.

On the other hand, in spite of its links with two different states, the EUREGIO has a relatively high degree of geographical, cultural, architectural, economic and even linguistic unity. To that extent, it is very definitely a region, as the EU understands that term. Transfrontier co-operation has benefited greatly from being able to build on this tradition.

Founding of the EUREGIO in 1958

The EUREGIO's establishment in 1958 was followed, in the mid-sixties, by the setting-up of the EUREGIO Working Group, putting co-operation on a clearly structured footing. Senior administrators from both sides met in equal numbers at regular intervals to discuss an agreed agenda. A major step towards integration of the region was taken in 1978, when the EUREGIO Council was established. This was actually the first transfrontier regional and parliamentary assembly within the European Union. It comprises political representatives of the territorial authorities which work together within the EUREGIO, and the German and Dutch sides have the same number of members, who are elected by the councils and local assemblies of those authorities. Membership therefore reflects the results of local elections on both sides of the frontier.

As well as the normal voting members, parliamentarians who work or live in the EUREGIO are advisory members of the Council. This applies to members of the Dutch Lower and Upper House, members of the Bundestag, members of the European Parliament, members of the provincial parliaments of Gelderland and Overijjsel, and members of the Land parliaments of Nordrhein-Westfalen and Niedersachsen.

The EUREGIO today takes in the operating areas of three so-called local government communities, comprising some 110 local government districts, towns and circumscriptions. These three communities are the Samenwerkingsverband Twente and the Samenwerkingsverband Oost-Gelderland in Holland and the Kommunalgemeinschaft Rhein- Ems (founded as long ago as 1954 in the Steinfurt local government district) in Germany.

As supreme body, the EUREGIO Council is responsible for discussing and co-ordinating basic issues. Its decisions are implemented, and its sessions prepared, by the EUREGIO Working Group, which now comprises six senior officials from each of the three participating communities.

Everyday management is dealt with by two EUREGIO managers in the EUREGIO secretariat. Since 1985, this has has been located directly on the German-Dutch border and staffed by both nationalities. It is the first body of its kind in Europe.

A new EUREGIO House was officially opened in Gronau at the end of January 1992. The Association of European Border Regions (AEBR) now has offices in the building too - a choice of location dictated, as the AEBR President explained, by the fact that transfrontier co- operation was far more developed in this region than in any other, and as such an example to be followed.

Promoting transfrontier development

A link between the region, the relevant supra-regional and national authorities (the German and Dutch governments, the Länder of Nordrhein-Westfalen and Niedersachsen, the Dutch (frontier) provinces, the German chief administrative officers and local government districts) and also the European Union is provided by a steering committee, comprising representatives of this transfrontier region and appointed by the EUREGIO. The above authorities are involved in an advisory capacity and cannot be bound by majority decisions.

This joint steering committee operates today on the basis of the German-Dutch treaty of 1991 and the Council of Europe's Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation of 1980, in accordance with the European Union's support programmes (recently under the INTERREG Programme and the EU "target areas" in particular), and also as a "support committee" (see Fig. 1, below). я я о -О u а с о. ŕи- ее £ •«-» t/; о U> ï— С '•S

—л

OJ с > Я О ю 'S СЛ о (U T- о -С сл E с B о и E (Ü о 3Ui о Uсл 1-1 с £ о •о с м> я с о (Л а* U о. оО 3 СЛ

с о сл '•ís С *3 .«2 "3 v: сл u С О '•Б 'S. о о CL, Х> Я (Л ^ U (Л С о о с л • u о о «Ž S с S а3 . и¡D о о2- ÛI > О сл О

ÄО я3 я о J > The Steering Committee's recommendations ultimately have a directly determining effect on the decisions authorising use of the funds made available by the EU, Federation and Länder, e.g. INTERREG, Federal structural aid and Land resources which the jointly appointed investment bank (in Düsseldorf) is required to take. At a time when many politicians and members of the public have got into the habit of groaning over Brussels bureaucracy, totally forgetting that home bureaucracy, even where EU support programmes are concerned, is far more of a problem, this committee shows how dynamically and rapidly joint European programmes can be implemented.

The EUREGIO and the Steering Committee are also examples of just what local self- government can achieve in co-operation with regional, national and EU partners.

The EUREGIO's statute states that the aim is "to promote transfrontier developments in the fields of infrastructure, economics, culture, leisure and other social tasks". The broadness of this remit has made it necessary to set up various committees, each comprising experts in the field covered. There are thus committees on transport, social affairs, agriculture and the environment. One of the most important areas is covered by the Committee on Economics and Employment. This comprises representatives of the relevant regional organisations, including chambers of commerce, trade unions and economic development agencies.

Internal integration through the "transfrontier action programme"

Srengthening the region's economy is one important aspect of the EUREGIO's work. Integrating it internally is another. To achieve these goals, the Land economic ministries of Nordrhein-Westfalen and Niedersachsen, the Federal German Economics Ministry and the Netherlands Economics Ministry agreed to draw up a transfrontier action programme for the EUREGIO (treaty of 11 May 1984).

With the help of the authorities concerned, an expert opinion was prepared, incorporating the two so-called "supreme goals" into a system of practical specific goals, measures and recommendations. An analysis of the region's strengths and weaknesses was taken as a basis in formulating, not just general guidelines for future development, but also very specific directives for action. Numerous projects have already been implemented and others are in the pipeline.

The foundations of the action programme, i.e. co-operation in working out the target system and in introducing and implementing specific projects, are laid in the specialised committees, one of them being the above-mentioned Committee on Economics and Employment. The programme itself is ongoing. Important criteria in selecting projects for implementation are: transfrontier character, balanced regional distribution of projects and the existence of an adequate basis in the region for those chosen. Projects fall into four main categories:

training and the labour market community-level projects agriculture and rural areas environmental protection and waste disposal, and cover a very broad range, from transfrontier vocational training through telematics (mailbox) systems and tourism to sewage treatment.

The international law of transfrontier co-operation has built on the EUREGIO's experience up and now underwrites it.

This is not the place to describe the legal development of transfrontier co-operation in detail. It is enough to say that the local authorities' pioneering work is something to be proud of, and their practical experience of co-operation since the 1950s is reflected in:

the Council of Europe's European Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities of 21 May 1980, which Germany and the Netherlands ratified in 1981; the European Regional/Spatial Planning Charter, which was based on this Outline Convention in 1983; the European Union's structural policy and structural funds, which were developed on the basis of Article 3 of the EEC Treaty of 25 March 1957, and particularly the INTERREG programmes to promote transfrontier co-operation; the German-Netherlands treaty of 1991; the setting-up of a German-Netherlands Regional Planning Commission, comprising representatives of the German Lander and the Dutch Provinces; the statutes of the German-Netherlands frontier regions, such as the EUREGIO, as reformulated on these secure legal foundations; joint structural development programmes for transfrontier regions, introduced to implement the EU's INTERREG support programmes I and II.

The following figure clarifies this now very comprehensive system of national laws and international agreements: Transfrontier co-operation in European and national law

European Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities of 21 May 1980 Council of Europe Germany: ratified on 21.09.1981 and in force since 22.12.1981 Netherlands: ratified on 26.10.1981 and in force since 27.01.1982 | I "European Regional/Spatial Planning Charter of 1983 I (Internal Market policy) Art 3 of the EEC Treaty of 25.03.1957 European Union: Structural policy and structural funds INTERREG programmes Promotion of transfrontier co-operation/ J support programmes, etc. German-Netherlands state treaty of 1991 1 Agreement on co-operation in the regional National states planning field of 30 March 1976 (e.g. Germany)

J T-* German-Netherlands Regional Planning Commission

I EUREGIO transfrontier association 45 years of German-Netherlands transfrontier Counties (Kreise) co-operation since 1948/50 County boroughs (kreisfreie Städte) Formal establishment of the German-Netherlands >u»>H>n.»>MM>l»Hlll|HM«

Structural development programmes i r r. i_ _, _ Implementation of the EU's INTERREG I and INTERREG n support programmes EUREGIO crime prevention activities

In the past, crime prevention and punishment in the EUREGIO faced some very real obstacles, and contact problems made things even harder. The events of the nazi era and the second world war make this understandable. For a long time, it was unthinkable that uniformed Germans should enter Holland on transfrontier police operations. And, when armed criminals fled across the border, it was not taken for granted that armed and uniformed German might pursue them.

In practice, however, the "official channels" were not easily followed. Technically, any request for help was supposed to go from the local police authority on the German side to the chief administrative officer, then to the Minister of the Interior of Nordrhein-Westfalen, then to the Foreign Ministry in Bonn, then to the Netherlands Foreign Ministry, then to the police minister concerned, and so back to the or frontier police - while the criminals looked on in gleeful derision. Obviously, this whole system was unworkable. But there were also, of course, the "unofficial channels" - a polite way of saying that the rules were broken. The idea that frontier police should not give armed chase across the border was taken more seriously, however - and this obviously made them think twice when going after armed criminals.

Needless to say, as time went on, radio and telephone contacts were used and other small steps taken in an effort to eliminate or overcome the technical obstacles to effective co- operation in bringing criminals to justice. The results were mixed.

An incident from my own experience may help to give you some idea of the reservations and obstacles which existed at that time. When I was asked, in 1986, to prepare a report and proposals based on the frontier region's experience for a special European Parliament Committee (the Committee of Enquiry into the Drugs Problem in the EC countries, Rapporteur, Sir Jack Stewart-Clark), I relied on personal contacts and on the expertise of several MEPs. The report was wanted urgently, and so a preliminary version went straight to the European Parliament. By the same post, a copy also went to the Minister of the Interior, via the chief administrative officer. An unintended mistake was made here by using the local police authority's official writing paper. To make this point clear, I should explain that, in Nordrhein-Westfalen, every district police authority is answerable to the chief administrator of its district, a local government official elected by the district assembly. The Land is a large one, with some 18 million inhabitants, and this arrangement is a sound one, since it makes for greater sensitivity to local and regional differences and needs in the districts, towns and municipalities - an effect heightened by links with other local government bodies and authorities. The inevitable happened: the Minister of the Interior said nothing about the content of the report, but immediately complained that the proper channel had not been followed and pointed out that contacts with the European institutions were his responsibility. The trouble was that the MEPs did not want a ministerial or indeed diplomatic report, but an account of the frontier region's actual experience, which the central Land authority cannot convey as directly.

At that stage, this kind of thing was happening all the time, although the Ministry of the Interior itself was unhappy with the situation. Of course, the problem of contact with the European Parliament could be settled easily. All the chief administrator had to do was put his report on the district's official paper. The real problem was totally different. The fact of the matter was that, regardless of the past, police on both sides of the frontier should have been in daily contact, should have used the same radio systems, and should have pooled their expertise and information on crime detection and prevention. The trouble is that governments cannot simply jump in and do something about pragmatic issues like this; they hang back cautiously, even when practical problems are piling up and people look to them to co-operate in finding effective solutions.

This is where the EUREGIO's way of doing things comes in. Official contacts between the two countries' police forces were hamstrung by formalities, but the EUREGIO could simply go ahead and invite its member bodies and their police officials for joint talks - without an "agenda" to start with, but then, increasingly openly, on specific questions of crime prevention and control, traffic problems and policing in general. Security questions were not, and are not, just a matter for the police, but depend - particularly where prevention is concerned - on intensive co-operation between local authorities and the police.

The following are just some of the EUREGIO's many activities over the years:

From 1958 joint talks between local authorities on questions of frontier security, chiefly smuggling to start with, but also technical standards for telecommunications, warning systems, firefighting, etc.;

From 1974 joint talks involving members of the European Parliament, the German and Netherlands parliaments, and the parliaments of the German Länder and Dutch provinces, and visits by parliamentary delegations, focusing particularly on: everyday frontier problems, opening of frontiers, internal security, co-operation between the German frontier police, customs officials, the Dutch police, courts, narcotics experts, etc., a further aim in every case being to exchange and pass on new ideas, conclusions, maxims for action and information on situations (and indeed sensitivities);

From 1978 sponsored by the EUREGIO (invitations on its official paper!), regular meetings with the police, the frontier police, the Koninklijke Maréchaussée and the customs service.

1981 Opening of the Koker-Juffer (sale of drugs in cafes for young people) in Enschede/NL. The principle of expediency is applied to drug consumption in the Netherlands (cf. above), worldwide indignatiin at this attitude and serious problems of prevention in the EUREGIO frontier region;

1982 First German-Netherlands drugs conference in a frontier region (Kloster Frenswegen), with government, police and scientific representatives, narcotics experts, politicians... Followed by working-out of a common action strategy for the EUREGIO area in the EUREGIO Council. Preliminary work on a study to be carried out with the University of Amsterdam and "Epidemiological Research Berlin";

From 1983 Working group on "everyday frontier problems"; From 1984 Help with preparation of the Schengen Agreement: participation in consultation process, forming of opinion in the EUREGIO and practical suggestions based on own experience and regional expertise;

1986 Participation in work of European Parliament's Committee of Enquiry into the Drugs Problem in the EC countries;

1988 Second German-Netherlands EUREGIO conference on drugs, presentation of the study on the use of tobacco, alcohol and drugs in the German-Netherlands frontier area;

From 1989 Working group on "transfrontier protection against disasters" under the German-Netherlands agreement on transfrontier co-operation. Regular sessions and agreement on projects;

1989 Inventory/catalogue of everyday frontier problems with proposals on solutions;

From 1991 INTERREG - Projects and seminars for police, security and inspecting authorities on both sides of the frontier, including project for a "European Crime Prevention Centre" as an institute at the University of Münster;

From 1992 The frontier control posts are gradually dismantled, and customs officers transferred to other duties (e.g. at airports, etc.). The control post buildings disappear. Motor traffic passes through unchecked;

1993 Presentation of an in-depth study on the use of tobacco, alcohol and drugs in the German-Netherlands frontier region, commissioned on 20.10.1991 (from the University of Amsterdam and "Epidemiological Research Berlin");

1995 Presentation of the first joint handbook for the German-Netherlands police in the EUREGIO by the Chief Administrative Officer in Münster and the Queen's Commissioner in the Province of . The handbook contains practical directions on such matters as action across the frontier, radio communication, police pursuit outside their official area, arrests, the use of firearms, mandatory notification, etc.

Nov. 1995 Mayor van Agt (of Haaksbergen), as chairman of a working group, presents a 55-page report on "Integral Security - Euregional Issues". In preparing the report, "the members of the working group have been increasingly surprised to see how very differently (from a Dutch standpoint) things are regulated in Nordrhein-Westfalen and Niedersachsen". The report accordingly insists that the two sides must get to know each other better and ends by making a series of recommendations.

1996 On an official visit, the Netherlands Minister of Justice and her fellow-minister from Nordrhein-Westfalen, Mr Horstman, discuss internal security in the EUREGIO, the problems of drug consumption and particularly the "coffee shops", where drugs are sold more or less officially, general frontier problems, the effects of the Schengen Agreement on concerted action by German and Dutch police, and the proposal for a joint German-Dutch police unit to combat frontier crime (modelled on the German-Dutch army corps stationed in Münster).

1996 The controversial semi-official drugs cafe, the Koker-Juffer, is closed. A permanent Netherlands liaison office, with a co-ordinator, is oficially established at police headquarters in Münster.

This list is necessarily incomplete and contains examples only. However, it does show that, in this area, as in that covered by the international framework legislation referred to above, co-operation at local government level, with its pragmatic approaches and methods, has always been well ahead of the action taken at state level. This is easily explained by the effects of the two world wars, the essential caution of diplomatic agencies and ministries (which have to consider questions of principle) and, above all, the remoteness of central government from the practical problems of people actually living in frontier areas.

An important part in this whole process has been played by regular co-operation between regional newspapers, which grew out of other EUREGIO initiatives. This can promote mutual understanding far more effectively than all the politicians' speeches and proposals, however well-meant, which indeed depend on such co-operation. One welcome result of this press co- operation is the far more pragmatic, far less emotional view which the public now take of security issues. Some time ago, when German police pursued criminals into Holland and actually fired a number of shots, since their Netherlands colleagues, alerted by radio, could not get to the scene in time, the incident got some angry headlines far away in The Hague, but the regional papers reacted calmly and objectively, making the point that both countries stood to gain by fighting (well-organised) crime together. Asked for their views, members of the public reacted in the same way.

Having a broad understanding of one's neighbours is a vital aspect of all this. This is particularly important in connection with crime and crime prevention, and part of it is understanding other traditions - not to say cultures - in criminal law. A German, for example, gets a shock when he finds himself facing criminal charges in Holland for a driving offence that would have earned him a simple fine at home. Conversely, we have already seen that disagreement on the drug problem can rapidly lead to mutual recrimination, unless each side makes an effort to explain its position clearly to the other.

In the long run, it will be necessary, at least within the European Union, to provide joint training for senior police officers (if not others) from the member states, just as the federal state and Lander in Germany have for many years been running a joint Senior Police College in Münster - which has done much to ensure uniformity of methods and approaches. A European Senior Police College of this kind would mark an enormous step forward for internal security in Europe.

In the field of crime and crime prevention, this kind of joint endeavour now seems one of the best ways of getting round the problem that frontiers have so far protected criminals, rather than the public - which is why we must now work together to dismantle them (both in fact and in people's minds). Obviously, the EUREGIO is always ready to give other transfrontier regions the benefit of its long years of practical experience, and the EU-sponsored centre of the Association of « European Border Regions (AEBR) and its staff can help here too. There is no need to reinvent the wheel daily. The same is true of the Council of Europe which, in its work on crime prevention and on international co-operation, is always welcome to draw on the lessons 1 we have learned here. I can say this whole-heartedly as Chairman of the EUREGIO Working Group on European issues.

Seen in these terms, the work of the European Crime Prevention Centre is simply a logical extension of the EUREGIO's work, using research, the pooling of experience, scientific analysis and transfrontier co-operation to prevent and combat crime, which is increasing sharply in many places, and has been quicker off the mark than we had hoped in taking advantage of the opened frontiers. This applies to the high level of mobility of individual criminals and particularly, of course, to (international) organised crime and the mafia structures in East and West, with their highly sophisticated technical resources. The centre's aim is to act as a clearing-house for information on crime prevention.

The developments which have taken place on the western frontiers and particularly in the EUREGIO may still seem a dream on other frontiers in central and eastern Europe. And yet it is already very clear, as frontiers are de-emphasised and daily become less important, that this is something our fellow-Europeans want at the end of this twentieth century, in which war and destruction have created new frontiers and enhanced the significance of old ones, to the point where people have been driven out, forced to flee or subjected to what is still cynically called, in the case of Yugoslavia's collapse, ethnic cleansing.

We all hope that the common "European home" will bring us, in addition to peace and prosperity, that internal security which first makes a community livable and strengthens its cohesion. And, if we want our frontiers to be as meaningless and as easy to cross as those between Germany and Holland have been for years, then we must always be willing to learn frorfi others, wherever they are, and take over their good ideas.

The EUREGIO, the Association of European Border Regions (AEBR) and the European Crime Prevention Centre (ECPC) at the University of Munster are all ready to help here.