14 EC External Action through Thematic
Programmes
| (26778)
11734/05
COM(05) 324
| Commission Communication: "External Actions through Thematic Programmes under the Future Financial Perspectives 2007-2013"
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 3 August 2005
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 26 August 2005
|
| Department | International Development
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 5 October 2005
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | To be determined
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested. Relevant to any debates on EU external assistance
|
Background
14.1 At present the EC's External Actions spending is funded from
a multitude of diverse instruments and budget lines. As part of
the 2007-2013 Financial Perspective, the Commission proposed,
last September, that all External Actions spending should be rationalized
and simplified under one heading (Heading 4) and implemented under
six Instruments. Three new instruments would support EU external
policies directly: a Pre-Accession Instrument (IPA) for
candidate and potential candidate countries covering institution-building,
cooperation, rural development and human resources development;
a European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI)
for all countries covered by the European Neighbourhood policy,
to enhance political security, economic and cultural cooperation
and to offer participation in EU activities; and a Development
Cooperation and Economic Cooperation Instrument (DCECI)
to support developing countries in reaching the UN Millennium
Development Goals, which the Commission proposed should include
the successor to the 9th European Development Fund (i.e. that
the EDF should be "budgetised"). They would be complemented
by three horizontal Instruments, principally to respond
to crisis situations until normal cooperation can resume: a new
Instrument for Stability and the existing, essentially
unchanged Humanitarian Aid and Macro Financial Assistance
Instruments.
The Commission Communication
14.2 This Communication sets out the Commission's proposal for
defining and managing thematic programmes with a global geographical
coverage under the next Financial Perspective (FP) 2007-2013,
and forms part of the initiative outlined above, to simplify the
structure and improve the delivery of its external assistance.
It is helpfully summarised by the Secretary of State for International
Development (Mr Hilary Benn) in his 5 October 2005 Explanatory
Memorandum:
"The Communication proposes that these new instruments
should provide the legal bases for a number of specific thematic
programmes. It presents criteria for thematic programmes, the
scope and rationale for the programmes envisaged and management
provisions for their programming, budgeting and adoption. It sets
out a role for the European Parliament and the Council in this
process.
"The Communication makes clear that country
and regional programmes are the main vehicle for Community spending.
An important principle underlying thematic programmes is 'subsidiarity';
they should add value and seek to complement and be coherent with
country and regional programmes. Thematic programmes should include
actions that cannot be achieved through country and regional programmes
such as global initiatives and support to NGOs, or actions that
are cross-cutting or multi-regional, or where agreement with a
partner government is not possible.
"Thematic programmes are proposed in the
areas of:
1) democracy and human rights, to promote and
protect human rights and fundamental freedoms and democracy and
democratic processes;
2) human and social development, to address aspects
of health, HIV/AIDS, population, education and training, gender
equality, decent work, social cohesion and culture, and cover
EC's strategic partnerships with UN agencies and institutions;
3) environment and sustainable management of
natural resources including energy, to address the environmental
dimension of development and the promotion of sustainable energy;
4) non-state actors in development, supporting
the role of civil society organisations, other non-state actors
and local authorities in partner countries in the development
process;
5) food security to support the delivery of agricultural
research and global programmes and innovative policies in this
field;
6) cooperation with industrialised countries
to promote better relations and a favourable environment for partnerships
between the EU and partner countries; and
7) migration and asylum, to support countries
in their efforts to address all aspects of migration issues.
"Specific thematic strategies will be prepared
for each topic. They will set out the objectives, expected results,
areas of intervention, added value and links with other international
actors. In drawing these up, the Commission propose to discuss
with Council and the European Parliament the scope, objectives
and political priorities for each programme. A multi-annual indicative
framework will be presented to the European Parliament and the
Council 2 years before the relevant budget year, suggesting financial
allocations for each thematic programme. Civil society will be
consulted in the design of the thematic programmes.
"The thematic programmes cut across the
geographical instruments. However, as the pre-accession instrument
IPA is designed to cover all aspects of the acquis communautaire
and all Community policies, the Communication has only proposed
a supplementary thematic programme for the area of democracy and
human rights. Money will be earmarked for thematic programmes
for each of the relevant geographic instruments."
The Government's view
14.3 The Secretary of State (Mr Hilary Benn) comments
as follows:
"As Presidency, the UK will consult Member
States in Council working group discussions during the months
of September and October. We expect many Member States to welcome
the proposal, which represents an important step towards radically
simplifying the complex budget structure for EC external spending.
The use of a coherent, standardised approach to thematic programming
and adoption, and the subsequent reduction in number of thematic
Regulations should meet with Delegations' approval.
"The Communication provides an outline of
what the Commission wants to do but it is short on detail. Detailed
communications on each of the thematic programmes are to follow
later in the year, but in their absence we have some concerns
about how things will work in practice. For example, there is
no information about how thematic strategies will be adopted —
in what sort of Member States Committees. Other Member States
may also seek clarity on this.
"The scope of the thematic programmes reflects
the range of current thematic regulations, albeit re-grouped under
a new set of headings. A novelty is the incorporation of some
programmes, currently funded outside of the external chapter of
the EU budget (Heading IV) and seen as the external dimension
of EU internal policies. Striking the right balance between actions
that benefit partner countries and those that promote EU's internal
policies in the wider world will be important. If thematic programmes
cover EU internal policies, previously funded outside Heading
IV, it will be important to ensure additional funding is transferred.
Equally, ensuring that the existence of thematic funding does
not reduce the importance of addressing these issues in geographic
programmes is vital.
"Various European Parliament Committees
have called for a separate instrument for democracy and human
rights. It remains to be seen whether the Commission's suggestion
to include this as a thematic programme will satisfy them.
"Member States are likely to have views
on the eligibility criteria for thematic funding, whether the
suggested scope should be expanded and how they will be incorporated
into the six instruments. There may also be pressure from some
Member States and the European Parliament to include more thematic
programmes, for example on trade.
"The European Parliament is likely to question
its suggested role in adopting thematic programmes and argue for
a reinstatement of their current legislative power in this regard.
The UK will ensure sufficient opportunities for Member States
to discuss these issues during the autumn".
14.4 The Secretary of State explains that the proposal
does not include any financial allocations, since the decision
on the global envelope available for thematic funding, and for
each thematic programme, will be part of the wider agreement on
the next Financial Perspective: "[the] UK will contribute
its budget share, i.e. around 18%".
14.5 Finally, he explains that when the proposal
will come before the Council is unclear. "It could depend
on broader negotiations with the European Parliament on the external
action instruments". Discussions are also taking place in
the Development Cooperation Working Group and other appropriate
working groups.
Conclusion
14.6 The proposed outcome — adding value
through complementarity and coherence with country and regional
programmes — makes sense, since the Commission's own experience
(set out in the Annex, "Lessons Learned From Evaluations"[50])
demonstrates both the basic worth of well-chosen thematic programmes
and the failings of the current arrangements: large numbers, fragmented,
inflexible and inefficient because of the current system of parallel
implementation of thematic and country programmes.
14.7 However, it is plain both from the Communication
and the Secretary of State's remarks that there are a number of
uncertainties about how the Commission's proposal would work in
practice, as well as their acceptability to Member States and
the European Parliament in their current form. At our last meeting[51]
we recommended the new External Instruments for debate; and elsewhere
in this Report we have recommended the proposed new Development
Policy Statement for debate. We think that this Communication
would be relevant to those debates.
14.8 Furthermore, we should be grateful if the
Secretary of State would write to us again, when the picture is
clearer, with his views on the outcome. In the meantime, we shall
keep the document under scrutiny.
50 COM (05) 324, pages 11 and 12. Back
51
(26041-5): 13686-90/04: HC 34-iv (2005-06) 20 July 2005. Back
|
