|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
The Secretary of State for International Development (Hilary Benn): The European Council on 1516 December agreed to establish a 10th European Development Fund (EDF) to provide development assistance to African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries that are signatories to the ACP-EU Partnership (Cotonou) Agreement.
I am pleased to announce that the 10th EDF will provide €22,682 million (£15,536 million) over the period 200813. This is a significant increase on the
20 Dec 2005 : Column 201WS
value of the 9th EDF and the EDF will remain as an EU intergovernmental fund, both important objectives of the UK Government. The UK share of the 10th EDF will be 14.82 per cent. rising from a 12.69 per cent. share of the 9th EDF, reflecting our recognition of an upward trend in the effectiveness of the Fund, and our commitment to increasing EU assistance to Africa.
I believe that this represents a good outcome for our ACP partners and I am delighted that the UK Presidency was able to deliver this positive agreement after lengthy negotiations. Member States will now negotiate an intergovernmental agreement on the structure, allocation, programming and management arrangements of the 10th EDF. This will present an opportunity to further enhance the effectiveness of the EDF. I will keep the House informed fully on progress.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for International Development (Mr. Gareth Thomas): I am placing in the Libraries of both Houses a copy of a discussion paper, "The EU's contribution to the international response to the 2004 Asian Tsunami: Achievements, next steps and lessons learned".
The paper has been written by the Department for International Development and the European Commission to inform discussions at a high-level meeting in Brussels on 20 December 2005. The meeting will examine the international humanitarian and reconstruction response to the 26 December 2004 South East Asian tsunami, with a particular focus on the EU.
Invited participants include the European Commissioners for Humanitarian Aid and External Relations, representatives of the Council of Ministers, Members of the European Parliament, countries affected by the disaster, the United Nations, international financial institutions, the International Federation of the Red Cross and civil society organisations.
The paper examines EU activity in three main areas: financial assistance for humanitarian and reconstruction needs; support for peace building via reconstruction work; and reinforcing preventive measures, early warning and disaster preparedness. The paper highlights a number of issues that continue to influence the effectiveness of aid delivery. These include conflict sensitivity, co-ordination, monitoring, accountability, local ownership, communication, strengthening the humanitarian system, ensuring funds continue to flow, equity in distribution and early warning and disaster preparedness.
The aim of the meeting is to identify lessons learned from the EU's response that could guide the international community's response in the tsunami-affected countries and in other disaster-affected countries in the future.
The Prime Minister (Mr. Tony Blair):
I am pleased to announce that Her Majesty in Council has approved the appointments of Janet Paraskeva as the First Civil
20 Dec 2005 : Column 202WS
Service Commissioner and Janet Gaymer CBE as the Commissioner for Public Appointments. Janet Gaymer is also being appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner.
In announcing these appointments, I would also like to record my appreciation to their predecessors, Baroness Prashar CBE and Baroness Fritichie DBE, who have come to the end of their terms of appointments. I am grateful to them for the contributions that they have made in ensuring the highest standards in their work.
"To review the Business Appointment Rules to ensure that they are compatible with a public service that is keen to encourage greater interchange with the private and other sectors which is essential for effective delivery in today's public service. The review will consider the operation of the system, taking account of practice overseas. It will also consider the current machinery for dealing with applications and the necessary resources".
I am today placing copies of Sir Patrick's report in the Library of the House and would like to place on record my thanks to him for his careful consideration of the issues. The report makes a number of recommendations relating to handling of the business appointments rules for civil servants and other public servants. The report does not cover Ministers.
The Government are attracted to some of Sir Patrick's recommendations. However, it is conscious that the Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) is currently undertaking an Inquiry into the role and independence of the ethical regulation of Government, which includes the Business Appointments processes. We would therefore welcome the views of PASC before providing a substantive response to this report.
In particular, we would welcome the views of PASC on the proposal to transfer responsibility for business appointments processes for crown servants to the Civil Service Commissioners which would involve increasing the numbers of Commissioners and providing additional support. This would have a cost and would disperse the oversight and administration of the rules to more than one body.
The Government would also welcome the views of PASC on the proposals that there should effectively be one test and that where this test is satisfied that there should be one form of restriction placed upon public servants who are proposing to move to other jobs.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Barry Gardiner):
I chaired the extraordinary Competitiveness Council in Brussels on 13 December 2005 on the draft regulation for the
20 Dec 2005 : Column 203WS
registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals (REACH), and establishing a European chemicals agency. This followed the constructive debate held at the 2829 November Competitiveness Council.
The Competitiveness Council reached unanimous political agreement on the draft REACH regulation following a policy debate based on the UK presidency compromise text and additional proposals presented by the presidency directly to the Council. The Council will formally adopt its common position at a later session once the legal text has been finalised. The common position will be forwarded to the European Parliament for a second reading under the co-decision procedure.
The Minister for Industry and the Regions (Alun Michael): As the Prime Minister explained in his statement to Parliament of 19 December, the European Council of 1516 December 2005 succeeded in achieving agreement on the next EC budget for the 200713 Financial Perspective. As part of the package, the Member States reached agreement on future Structural and Cohesion Funds spending for the 200713 budgetary cycle. The deal is now subject to an Inter-Institutional Agreement with the European Commission and the European Parliament.
The European Council has agreed that there should be a Structural and Cohesion Funds budget of €308 billion, representing 0.37 per cent. of EU Gross National Income (GNI), for the 200713 Financial Perspective. This will be focused on three Objectives: a Convergence Objective for regions with a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) below 75 per cent. of the EU average; a Competitiveness Objective for other regions; and a Co-operation Objective for cross-border and trans-national projects.
The agreement constitutes an increase of 31 per cent. or around €73 billion in comparison with the current Structural Funds budget of around €235 billion for the 20002006 Financial Perspective, excluding expenditure under the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG). The new Structural Funds budget is 8.3 per cent. less than in the Commission's initial proposals of July 2004. The reformed budget will enable the EU to address priorities in the new Member States while still maintaining some funding for richer Member States, in particular their poorer regions.
In summary, the European Council has agreed to allocate: €252 billion (or 81.9 per cent. of the Structural Funds budget) to the Convergence Objective, including €62 billion for the Cohesion Fund (for Member States with a GNI below 90 per cent. of the EU average) and €12 billion for so-called "phasing-out regions" (the regions that no longer qualify for full Convergence funding, but would have done without enlargement); €48 billion (or 15.7 per cent. of the Structural Funds budget) to the Competitiveness Objective, including €10 billion for so-called "phasing-in regions" (the regions that no longer qualify for full Convergence funding, and would no longer qualify even if enlargement had not taken place); and €7.5 billion (or 2.4 per cent. of the Structural Funds budget) to the Co-operation Objective.
20 Dec 2005 : Column 204WS
The Government have argued consistently that, following enlargement, it is right that the Structural Funds should be focused to a greater extent on the poorest EU Member States. Overall the 10 new Member States, together with Bulgaria and Romania, will receive a total of €158 billion in Structural Funds (or €174 billion including transfers to the EAGGF and FIFG). The 10 new Members will see a more than 250 per cent. increase in their Structural Funds receipts from an average of €7 billion per annum during the 200406 period to an average of €19 billion per annum in the 200713 period. We estimate this to be equivalent to an average increase in their domestic public sector expenditure of up to 7 per cent. In per capita terms, the new Member States will receive an average per citizen of around €1,500 in Structural and Cohesion Funds, and around €2,500 including other spending, over the next Financial Perspective.
The older EU Member States (the EU15) will face reductions in spending compared with current levels, reflecting their comparative prosperity and the need to support the economic convergence of the new Member States. However, the UK will continue to receive substantial funds for its poorest regions. We estimate that the UK will receive a total of approximately €9.4 billion (in 2004 prices) in Structural Funds receipts from 200713, in comparison with approximately €15.85 billion (in 1999 prices) in the current Financial Perspective, excluding funds now transferred to the EAGGF and FIFG.
Of this, the UK will receive approximately €2.6 billion in Convergence funding for its poorest regions. Cornwall and West Wales and the Valleys will receive full Convergence funding, while the Highlands and Islands will receive phasing-out Convergence funding averaging approximately two-fifths of the intervention rates for the UK's future full Convergence regions. The UK will also receive approximately €6.2 billion in Competitiveness funding for its other regions. Of this, South Yorkshire and Merseyside will receive phasing-in Competitiveness funding averaging approximately one-third of the intervention rates for the UK's future full Convergence regions. It will be for the Government, in agreement with the Commission, to decide how the UK's remaining Competitiveness funding should be allocated between its nations and regions. Finally, the UK will receive approximately €0.6 billion in Co-operation funding. The Government will also need to agree with the Commission how this should be allocated.
At this stage it is not possible to provide precise figures for the amounts to be received by UK regions. We will only know the precise figures after an Inter-Institutional Agreement has been reached on the final EC budget and once the European Commission has produced official Structural Funds allocations for the UK and its regions. Our initial estimate is that Cornwall is likely to receive full Convergence funding of approximately one-third higher than current allocations, West Wales and the Valleys should receive full Convergence funding approximately equal to current allocations, the Highlands and Islands should receive phasing-out Convergence funding of over half its current allocations, and South Yorkshire and Merseyside should receive phasing-in Competitiveness funding of approximately one-third of current
20 Dec 2005 : Column 205WS
allocations. These comparisons are in real terms and exclude allocations that have now been transferred to the EAGGF and FIFG.
In the light of this outcome, which means that the UK and its poorer regions will continue to receive substantial Structural Funds, the conditions for application of the domestic funding Guarantee, set out in the written statements to Parliament by the then Secretary of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Ms. Hewitt), on 17 September and 11 December 2003, do not apply. As those statements made clear, the purpose of the Guarantee was to ensure that our nations and regions would not lose out if the Member States agreed a reform package where the Structural Funds were focused solely on the poorest countries, and it would apply only if the richer Member States no longer received Structural Funds allocations in the next Financial Perspective. It should be noted that spending on regional development from the UK's own
20 Dec 2005 : Column 206WS
resources already far exceeds the contribution from Europe as a result of increased allocations over recent years. Domestic regional spending allocations will be considered further in the Comprehensive Spending Review, taking into account the outcome of the negotiations, the needs of the regions and the overall fiscal context. The Devolved Administrations will receive the normal formula shares of changes in overall departmental provision.
As part of the reform negotiations, the Member States have agreed to strengthen the strategic focus of future Structural Funds spending by establishing Community Strategic Guidelines on Cohesion and National Strategic Reference Frameworks, which will set out the broad objectives for future programmes. The Government plan to consult on the UK's draft National Strategic Reference Framework early in 2006 and, as part of the consultation, they will also seek views on the methodology for allocating the UK's Competitiveness funding.