52 EC External Action — new instruments
for co-operation
| (a)
(27653)
—
(b)
(27654)
—
(c)
(27655)
—
|
Draft Regulation establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance
Draft for a Regulation establishing European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument
Draft Regulation establishing an Instrument for Stability
|
| Legal base | (a) Article 181a EC; unanimity for candidate countries, QMV for others; consultation
(b) Articles 179 and 181a EC; QMV; co-decision
(c) Articles 179 and 181a EC; QMV; co-decision
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | Letter of 17 August 2006
|
| Previous Committee Reports | (26041-5) 13686-90/04: HC 34-iv (2005-06), para 3 (20 July 2005), HC 38-v (2004-05), para 9 (26 January 2005) and HC 38-i (2004-05), para 13 (1 December 2004). Also see (25367) 6232/04: HC 42-xv (2003-04), paras 1-37 (24 March 2004) and (25847) 11607/04: HC 42-xxxiv (2003-04), para 13 (27 October 2004)
|
| To be discussed in Council | 17-18 July 2006 General Affairs and External Relations Council
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared, but further information requested
|
Background
52.1 Hitherto, the EC's External Actions spending has been funded
from a multitude of diverse instruments and budget lines. As part
of the 2007-13 Financial Perspective, the Commission proposed,
in September 2004, 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, co-operation,
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 co-operation and to offer participation in EU activities;
and
— a Development Co-operation and Economic
Co-operation Instrument (DCECI) , which would both
encompass co-operation with developed and developing economy partners
and support the poorest countries in reaching the UN Millennium
Development Goals, and which the Commission proposed should incorporate
the successor to the 9th European Development Fund (i.e. that
the EDF should be "budgetised").
52.2 These three Instruments would be complemented
by three thematic Instruments, principally to respond to
crisis situations until normal co-operation can resume: the existing,
essentially unchanged Humanitarian Aid and Macro Financial
Assistance Instruments and a new Instrument for Stability.[132]
52.3 Although broadly supportive of the Commission
proposals, the relevant FCO and DfID Ministers had a number of
concerns, principally that the IPA, ENPI and DCECI were more geographical
than developmental; about the EDF "budgetisation" proposal;
and that the Stability Instrument was much less well-defined than
the others, with a real risk of overlap with both CFSP and actions
under the JHA pillar and an uncertain legal basis (Article 308
TEC).
52.4 Both we and our predecessors considered these
documents on several occasions, eventually recommending them for
debate.[133] On 10
November 2005 the European Standing Committee concluded that it
"agrees with the Government that they provide a good basis
for discussion of external actions spending (Heading 4) in the
next Financial Perspectives 2007-2013".[134]
The Proposed Regulations
52.5 In his three Explanatory Memoranda of 5 July
2006, the Minister for Europe (Mr Geoffrey Hoon) explains that,
following agreement in Coreper, the text of each Instrument was
agreed by the European Parliament on 4 July, and the Presidency
will aim for Council approval at the 17-18 July General Affairs
and External Relations Council.
INSTRUMENT FOR PRE-ACCESSION ASSISTANCE
52.6 The countries covered by the IPA are: Croatia,
Turkey, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Albania, Bosnia
and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia, including Kosovo (as defined
in UNSCR 1244). The IPA will replace the existing geographic and
thematic programmes of assistance (Phare, ISPA, SAPARD and Turkey
pre-accession instruments, as well as the CARDS instrument). The
Minister continues as follows:
"The IPA's overall objective is to assist EU
candidate countries and potential candidate countries in progressive
alignment with the standards and policies of the EU, with a view
to eventual membership. The overall scope of the instrument is
set out in Article 2, and includes a wide range of areas. IPA
programming and implementation is divided into five components.
These are Transition Assistance and Institution Building; Cross-Border
Co-operation; Regional Development; Human Resources Development;
and Rural Development.
"The IPA makes a distinction between EU candidate
countries and potential candidate countries. Only candidate countries
are eligible for assistance under the Regional Development, Human
Resources Development and Rural Development components. These
three components are aimed at preparing candidate countries for
the management of Structural Funds, and largely mirror Structural
Funds regulations. To manage this type of assistance, a country
has to operate decentralised management structures, and have demonstrated
autonomous programming and management capabilities. Potential
candidates are still eligible to receive funds in the areas covered
by the three components, but the assistance must be provided through
the Transition Assistance and Institution-Building component.
This enables potential candidates to build their capacity in these
decentralised programming and management structures, and will
allow them to prepare for structural funds once they become candidates.
"The political framework for the IPA will remain
the annual enlargement package. This includes the European and
Accession Partnerships, the Progress Reports and the Enlargement
Strategy Paper. This package will also include a Multi-annual
Indicative Financial Framework (MIFF), which will present the
planned allocation of funds, in line with the priorities outlined
in the package. The MIFF will be established on a three year rolling
basis.
"A Multi-annual Indicative Planning Document
(MIPD) will be established for each country. This planning document
will present indicative allocations for the main priorities within
each component. Like the MIFF, this will be established on a three
year rolling basis, and reviewed annually. Assistance on a programme
level will be provided through specific multi-annual or annual
programmes, by country and by component. Article 7 outlines the
content of these documents.
"The IPA regulation establishes an IPA Committee,
composed of Member State representatives and chaired by the Commission.
This will assist the Commission in ensuring the co-ordination
and coherence between assistance granted under the different components,
and will operate according to the procedure laid down for a management
committee."
52.7 The Commission will submit to the Council and
European Parliament, by 31 December 2010, a report evaluating
the implementation of the Regulation in the first three years.
This is in addition to regular evaluation reports, of efficiency
and effectiveness against objectives, which shall be sent to the
IPA Committee for discussion and feedback into programme design
and resource allocation.
The Government's view
52.8 The Minister says that the Government remains
a great supporter of EU enlargement; that it has spread security
and prosperity across Europe; and that it is in the interests
of current and future EU states that the process continues. He
continues as follows:
"The new IPA will support candidates and potential
candidates in their preparations for EU membership. We welcome
the streamlining of all pre-accession assistance within a single
framework, which should ensure that EU assistance is provided
in a co-ordinated, coherent, and effective manner.
"The UK is committed to improving the effectiveness
of EU expenditure. Therefore, we welcome the language on best
practice in the delivery of assistance. Specifically, we welcome
the requirement in Article 7 that all programme objectives shall
be specific, relevant and measurable, and have time-bound benchmarks;
we support the provisions for donor co-ordination in Article 20,
which will further effective coordination of EU assistance with
that of other donors, including member states and other multilateral
donors such as the UN; and we are pleased that the regulation
has taken on board many of the findings of the recent evaluations
of previous instruments of assistance to the region and the lessons
from the accession countries. The framework regulation contains
sufficient recognition of the economic and social challenges that
countries face on the path towards EU integration, and of the
need to address these."
52.9 The Minister says that the Indicative Financial
Framework for this instrument for 2007-13 is €11,468
million at current prices — a reduction from the Commission's
original proposed allocation of €12,919 million — which
he believes will provide the necessary funding to support the
preparations of all candidates and potential candidates for EU
accession.
THE EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD AND PARTNERSHIP INSTRUMENT
52.10 The countries covered by the ENPI are: Algeria,
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Egypt, Georgia, Israel, Jordan,
Lebanon, Libya, Moldova, Morocco, the Palestinian Authority of
the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the Russian Federation, Syria, Tunisia
and Ukraine. The ENPI will cover all assistance by the European
Union to these countries, except areas covered by the Stability
Instrument and proposed new Instruments for Democracy and Human
Rights and Thematic Programmes[135]
(including migration and the environment). The ENPI will replace
existing geographic and thematic programmes of assistance (TACIS,
MEDA, Euratom, financial and technical co-operation with the West
Bank and Gaza). The ENPI aims to promote enhanced co-operation
and progressive economic integration between the European Union
and the partner countries and, in particular, in the implementation
of Partnership and Cooperation Agreements, Association Agreements
or other existing and future agreements; and to encourage partner
countries' efforts aimed at promoting good governance, and equitable
social and economic development.
52.11 The Minister describes an extended list of
areas of potential co-operation, running from (a) to (y), as "combining
neighbourhood issues with traditional development objectives"
in which "a new emphasis will be placed on cross-border co-operation,
bringing together regions of Member States and partner countries
sharing a common border (land or sea)". Assistance is to
be for the common benefit of both Member States and partners,
and adjoining regions can be associated. "Specific provisions
for cross-border programmes, modelled on the Structural Funds
approach, are included in the Regulation."
52.12 The objectives will be met through country
or multi-country, and cross-border programmes, based on Strategy
Papers and Multi-annual Indicative Programmes for 2007-10. The
baseline will be the level of assistance provided under the present
Financial Perspectives to beneficiary countries and regions; thereafter,
"due account will be taken of the readiness of these countries
to set and implement objectives agreed with the Union, and future
funding will grow accordingly". Priorities for assistance
will be developed on the basis of action plans established in
bilateral agreements between the EU and partner countries. Where
action plans do not exist, assistance may still be provided when
relevant to pursue EU objectives. The same evaluation process
will be applied as in the IPA.
The Government's view
52.13 The Minister says:
"We support the European Neighbourhood Policy,
for which this instrument will provide financial and technical
support. This policy is designed to strengthen relationships with
neighbouring countries, encouraging the same sorts of reforms
that have been generated through the enlargement process. We support
the list of countries included in the European Neighbourhood and
Partnership Instrument and welcome the new emphasis on cross-border
programmes. We are pleased that the scope of the Instrument now
specifies support for equitable development in addition to general
cooperation and integration.
"We broadly welcome the objectives set out in
Article 2 of the draft Regulation, particularly the strengthened
references to civil society, and support their implementation.
We similarly welcome the provision in Article 4 to waive a requirement
for co-financing in certain cases when this is necessary to support
the development of civil society and non-state actors for measures
aimed at promoting human rights and fundamental freedoms and supporting
democratisation.
"We are also pleased that the Regulation does
not include a percentage split between the eastern and
southern neighbours. The annexed Commission Declaration makes
clear that, although the baseline for assistance to particular
countries and regions will be the levels under the present Financial
Perspectives, resource allocation in future years will be determined
objectively rather than on historical precedents. We welcome the
inclusion of clauses aiming to ensure best practice in the management
of these Community programmes, including by strengthening coordination
with other donors and increased emphasis on learning lessons from
past assistance."
52.14 The Minister says that the Indicative Financial
Framework for this instrument for 2007-13 is €11,181
million in current prices:
"We believe that there is scope for a smaller
overall budget increase than proposed, in order to ensure a fairer
share of resources for areas where funding looks set to decline
while needs remain acute (particularly Asia). The Government will
keep a close eye on annual budget appropriations and will seek
to maximise resources where needs and impact are greatest."
THE STABILITY INSTRUMENT
52.15 The Minister says that the scope of the Stability
Instrument has changed in the course of the negotiations. He recalls
that nuclear safety elements were originally included and says
that "the decision (which we supported) to change the legal
base of the Instrument from Article 308 to Articles 179 and 181a
of the Treaty establishing the European Community meant that a
separate Instrument for Nuclear Assistance would be required to
cover these elements". The General Objectives are set out
in Article 1 as follows:
a) "In a situation of crisis or emerging
crisis, to contribute to stability by providing an effective response
to help preserve, establish or re-establish the conditions essential
to the proper implementation of the Community's development and
cooperation policies.
b) "In the context of stable conditions
for the implementation of Community cooperation policies in third
countries, to help build capacity both to address specific global
and transregional threats having a destabilising effect and to
ensure preparedness to address pre- and post-crisis situations."
52.16 In addition, sub-paragraph 3 of that Article
notes that "Measures taken under this instrument may be complementary
and shall be consistent with and without prejudice to measures
adopted under Title V and Title VI of the TEU", which are
the Titles that relate, respectively, to the provisions on a Common
Foreign and Security Policy and on Police and Judicial Cooperation
in Criminal Matters.
52.17 Article 2 says that Community assistance under
this Regulation shall complement that provided under related Community
instruments for external assistance and be provided only to the
extent that those instruments are inadequate to the task in hand;
be consistent with the strategic policy framework for the partner
country; and be closely coordinated, at decision-making level
and on the ground, with Member States' activities. "Long
term priorities will be addressed through multi-annual programmes,
based on multi-country strategy papers. These will be consistent
with, and avoid duplication of, country, multi-country or thematic
strategy papers adopted under other Community instruments for
external assistance." Annual Action Programmes will set out
measures to be adopted on the basis of multi-country Strategy
Papers and Multi-annual Indicative Programmes.
52.18 Article 3 sets out in detail, from a) to p),
a wide range of assistance that may be provided "in response
to situations of crisis or emerging crisis". Together with
Article 6, measures are also allowed for in exceptional and unforeseen
crisis situations where effectiveness is particularly dependent
on rapid or flexible implementation. The Minister explains adds
that "these will have a comitology (management procedure)
threshold of €20m (below this the Commission is committed
to seek the views and guidance of the Council)". There is
also scope for Special Measures not provided for in the multi-country
Strategy Papers or Multi-annual Indicative Programmes which, if
costing more than €5 million, will be subject to the same
comitology procedure.
52.19 Article 4 covers "Assistance in the context
of stable conditions for co-operation", under the headings
of:
— threats
to law and public order, to the security and safety of individuals,
to critical infrastructure and to public health;
— risk mitigation and preparedness relating
to chemical, nuclear and biological materials or agents; and
— pre-and post-crisis capacity building.
52.20 The Commission shall regularly evaluate the
results efficiency and effectiveness of measures carried out,
and send "significant" evaluation reports to the Management
Committee for discussion and feedback into programme design and
resource allocation. The Commission shall also submit annual reports
to the Council and European Parliament, and, by 31 December 2010,
a review evaluating the implementation of the Regulation in the
first three years.
The Government's view
52.21 The Minister says that the around 70% of funding
under the Stability Instrument will be directed towards short-term
assistance to help countries respond to crises or emerging crises,
and that the remainder will support longer-term activities to
help build capacity to address specific and transregional threats
having a destabilising effect, e.g., counter-terrorism, organised
crime and trafficking. He goes on to say that the Stability Instrument
covers a number of areas where the Government is "keen to
see the Community providing financial and technical support including
areas where the Community has been very active to date" and
that "the UK has therefore been a strong supporter of the
Instrument overall".
52.22 He continues as follows:
"One key concern has been to protect the scope
of CFSP action. Given that the Stability Instrument inevitably
provides a general basis for Community action across a wide range
of areas and in fields which are close to those covered by CFSP,
we have taken the lead in seeking to ensure that it does not encroach
on CFSP activities and objectives."
52.23 The Minister says, without further comment,
that the Indicative Financial Framework for this instrument
for 2007-13 is €2,062 million in current prices.
Conclusion
52.24 Close to €25 billion over the next
Financial Perspective is a large amount of the European taxpayers'
money. Measures to rationalise, control and evaluate that expenditure
in the ways outlined are therefore much to be welcomed, as is
the inclusion in the regulations of mechanisms for continuing
Member State involvement in management and for continuing evaluation
and feedback.
52.25 Nevertheless, it is plain from some of the
Minister's comments that there are still important areas of ambiguity.
His remarks on the ENPI suggest that there remain real differences
of view over the issue of its "developmental versus geographical"
nature. He feels able only "broadly" to welcome its
objectives. Moreover, it is not as clear to us as it seems to
be to him that the wording in the Commission Declaration to which
he refers does make clear that future allocations will be "determined
objectively". Furthermore, he suggests that the budget is
bigger than it needs to be for the wrong reasons, yet is not able
to explain how he will be able to do anything about it, other
than to say that he "will keep a close eye on annual budget
appropriations" and "seek to maximise resources where
needs and impact are greatest" — phrases that are as
broad as they are long.
52.26 As for the Instrument for Stability, it
is good to know that the UK has taken the lead in seeking to ensure
that it does not encroach on CFSP activities and objectives, since
it is plain that the very wide range of activities covered by
Articles 3 and 4 are precisely those that are being and/or could
be carried out inter-governmentally in third countries. But it
would have been more reassuring if the Minister had said somewhat
more about how this essential outcome has been achieved: were
there any difficulties in the negotiations with the Commission
and, if so, regarding what aspects? Also, what are the areas where
the Community has been very active to date and where the Government
is keen to see the Community providing financial and technical
support?
52.27 We should therefore be grateful if he would
elaborate on the means by which encroachment will be prevented
and on his somewhat qualified endorsement of the ENPI, since it
will be important in monitoring how these new arrangements work
to have as clear a picture as possible of the starting point.
52.28 In the meantime, we clear the documents.
132 (26041) 13686/04, HC 38-i (2004-05), para 9 (1
December 2004). Back
133
See headnote. Back
134
Stg Co Deb, European Standing
Committee, 10 November, 2005, Cols 3-36. Back
135
See HC 34-xx (2005-06), paras 5 and 15 (1 March 2006). Back
| 
