10 Annual report on EC development policy
and external assistance in 2002
| (25023)
12347/03
COM(03) 527
| Annual Commission Report 2003 on the EC development policy and the implementation of external assistance in 2002.
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 3 September 2003
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 14 November 2003
|
| Department | International Development
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 20 November 2003 and Minister's letter of 24 November 2003
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| Discussed in Council | 17 November 2003 GAERC
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
The annual report
10.1 Some 350 pages long, the report mixes analytical assessments
with lengthy descriptive accounts. It also provides a wealth
of financial information. It starts by reiterating the main objective
of the Community's development policy. This, it says, is
"to reduce and eventually eradicate poverty, through support
for economically, socially and environmentally sustainable development,
promotion of [and] the gradual integration of the developing countries
into the world economy and a determination to combat inequality."
10.2 The EU's development efforts are set firmly in the global
context of achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) endorsed
at the UN's Millennium Summit.[38]
It attempts to maximise its impact by focusing on six areas where
it expects to be able to add particular value. These are :
- the link between trade and development;
- regional integration and cooperation;
- support for macro-economic policies and equal
access to social services;
- transport;
- food security and rural development; and
- institutional capacity building, in particular
good governance and the rule of law.
10.3 The promotion of human rights, equality between
men and women, environmental sustainability and conflict prevention
are integrated into all of the Community's assistance programmes.
10.4 The Commission describes the system which has
been developed in an expert group in which it participates with
Member States, the OECD Development Assistance Committee, the
UN Development Programme and the World Bank to monitor progress
against a set of MDG-related indicators, together with illustrations
of how policy developments in EC priority areas are contributing
towards meeting the MDGs.
10.5 Added to work on these strategic objectives
were the demands imposed by continued global political and economic
instability during 2002. Tasks included preparations for enlargement
and work on the International Financing for Development Conference
in Monterrey and the World Summit on Sustainable Development in
Johannesburg.
10.6 Among the main achievements in 2002 the report
emphasises the completion of the programming process and the adoption
of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP) approach to cooperation
with low-income countries. It spells out work done to improve
the "3 Cs" — Coordination, Complementarity and
Coherence.
10.7 The Commission's inter-service Quality Support
Group carried out a preliminary analysis of the extent to which
Country Strategy Paper allocations followed the six priority areas
listed above. This suggested that the CSP process had led to
a concentration of the Commission's aid in the intended areas.
10.8 Chapter 2 gives an account of the management
reform process, focussing on progress in 2002. Information is
provided under the four main headings of the reform programme:
- quality improvement;
- rationalisation of financial management and procedures;
- creation of the Europe Aid Cooperation Office;
and
- deconcentration (devolving more authority for
the management of projects to the Commission's delegations abroad).
10.9 The Commission says that it is in the process
of moving increasingly towards a results-oriented system of monitoring
projects and programmes. The monitoring system (ROM) introduced
in 2002 now provides the Commission with independent advice on
its project portfolio and ensures that comparable data is available
for all regions. The findings of several major evaluations of
sectors and themes completed during the reporting period are presented.
10.10 These first strategic chapters are followed
by descriptive accounts of the EC's activities during the reporting
period. Chapter 5 covers implementation of some of the Community's
main thematic budget lines such as democracy and human rights,
food security, AIDS and co-financing Non-Governmental Organisations.
Chapter 6 covers each of the EC's geographical programmes: the
Balkans; Eastern Europe; Central Asia; the Southern Mediterranean
and the Middle East; Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific; Asia
and Latin America. Chapter 7 features the Commission's approach
to water management. Detailed financial tables are set out in
Chapter 8.
10.11 Annexes provide more information on the reform
process.
The Government's view
10.12 The Secretary of State for International Development
(Mr Hilary Benn) says that the Government welcomes the publication
of an annual report, which it sees as an important tool for sharing
information and analysing the impact and policy aims of EC aid.
10.13 The Minister comments:
"Since its first appearance, we have also pressed
to give it more importance amongst the Union's management tools.
This could be done by linking it more clearly to the Council's
annual planning instruments, the annual budgetary process and
the Commission's Programme of Action, which establish the yearly
objectives for [the] EC's development programmes.
"The first two Annual Reports were much criticised
by Member States and led to a number of recommendations spelled
out in two subsequent November Development Council Conclusions.
Mostly, these argued for a more analytical report with better
focus on impact and results assessment.
"This report is an improvement compared to its
predecessors, although some of the earlier criticism is still
relevant. It does seek to respond to earlier requests by giving
more emphasis to strategic objectives, the Millennium Development
Goals, results-orientation and the reform process. The EC's work
on developing country-based systems for monitoring progress towards
the MDGs is in fact well in advance of many donors. It also indicates
some improvements and a reform process [which is] starting to
yield results. Most welcome is the inferred increase in
EC oda [overseas development assistance] going to low income countries
of up to 52% in 2002 (from 43% in 2001). There is also some evidence
of improved portfolio performance. A new results-oriented monitoring
system concludes that a majority of tested projects record good
effectiveness, with projects progressing according to plan or
better. A slight improvement over 2001 project performance was
also noted. All Member States have pressed for a final in-depth
assessment of the reform programme in mid-2004. This should enable
us to assess its real impact, and could point towards possible
areas for further reform in the future.
"But more strategic information is at the cost
of succinctness. With close to 350 pages, mixing analytical assessments
with lengthy descriptive accounts, the current format needs to
be revisited. We have joined others in calling for a different
type of Report that would meet the requirements of all its audiences,
and asked for some proposals in time for the 2004 version.
"The Report is also a testimony to the EC's
continued lack of focus and fragmented development profile. Despite
worthy efforts to streamline EC programming, it continues to pursue
a broad range of objectives applying a variety of instruments
with little consistency across the globe. In consequence, it
is hard to assess the extent to which EC programmes are meeting
their objectives, let alone contributing globally towards meeting
the MDGs. It is particularly difficult to assess the poverty
reducing impact of its programmes in various regions, in line
with the November 2000 development policy declaration. Recognising
this, the Commission has offered to suggest proposals for harmonising
and rationalising its financial instruments in the context of
the next Financial Perspective. We very much welcome this. A
firmer focus on the core — i.e. assessing EC's performance
in meeting its strategic objectives across its range of interventions
is also needed. A more analytical Annual Report, focusing on
results and impact rather than inputs and achieved actions, forms
part of this.
"We see the Annual Report as an important management
tool and a key measure of the impact and quality focus of EC aid.
We want to continue to improve it. We have voiced our concerns
with the 2002 Annual Report in the preparations for the November
2003 General Affairs and External Relations Council and spoke
to the above comments at the actual meeting. The Council Conclusions
that were adopted very much reflect our concerns."
The Minister's letter
10.14 In a letter dated 24 November 2003, the Minister
apologises for not having been able to provide us with time to
consider the document prior to its adoption. It was issued in
early September and considered by the Council on 17 November.
Unfortunately, due to staff changes the need for scrutiny was
overlooked at desk level. Normally the Cabinet Office sends formal
notification for scrutiny of a document to the Department, but
in this case this "fail safe" mechanism did not draw
attention to the document as no such notification was received.
Conclusion
10.15 The Minister rightly points to the need
for a different type of report that would meet the requirements
of all its audiences. Although it is prefaced by an executive
summary, at 350 pages it is dauntingly lengthy and the key messages
are unlikely to be fully appreciated, except by a persevering
few with time on their hands. Papers of such inordinate length
are inevitably costly in terms of staff effort, as well as translation
costs. The decision to issue such a lengthy paper must call into
question the Commission's case for extra resources to undertake
the many tasks placed on it.
10.16 We clear the document, but intend to ask
the Minister to provide us in a forthcoming evidence session with
a more succinct account of the Commission's work in a demanding
area of activity which requires a constant ability to innovate
and adapt to changing circumstances. We may wish to ask him,
for instance, if the Commission is adopting efficient working
methods, whether these are cost-effective, why it continues to
lack focus and operate a "fragmented" development assistance
effort, whether it should further refine its priorities and whether
it is adequately staffed for the tasks allocated to it.
38 The development goals in the UN Millennium Declaration
include eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, achieving universal
primary education, promoting gender equality, reducing child mortality,
improving maternal health, combating AIDS, malaria and other diseases,
and ensuring environmental sustainability. Back
| 
