15 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 | Minister's letter of 17 February 2006
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 34-v (2005-06), para 14 (12 October 2005)
|
| To be discussed in Council | To be determined
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared; further information requested.
|
Background
15.1 At present the EC's External Actions spending is funded from
a multitude of diverse instruments and budget lines. As part of
the 2007-13 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,
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
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 co-operation can resume: a new
Instrument for Stability and the existing, essentially
unchanged Humanitarian Aid and Macro Financial Assistance
Instruments.
The Commission Communication
15.2 This Communication sets out the Commission's proposal for
defining and managing a number of specific thematic programmes
with a global geographical coverage under the next Financial Perspective
(FP) 2007-13, with the new instruments providing the legal bases,
and forms part of the initiative not only to simplify the structure
but, especially, to improve the delivery of its external assistance.
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.
15.3 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:
- democracy and human rights,
to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms and
democracy and democratic processes;
- 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;
- environment and sustainable management of natural
resources including energy, to address the environmental dimension
of development and the promotion of sustainable energy;
- 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;
- food security to support the delivery of agricultural
research and global programmes and innovative policies in this
field;
- co-operation with industrialised countries to
promote better relations and a favourable environment for partnerships
between the EU and partner countries; and
- migration and asylum, to support countries in
their efforts to address all aspects of migration issues.
15.4 Specific thematic strategies would be prepared
for each topic, setting out the objectives, expected results,
areas of intervention, added value and links with other international
actors. The Commission proposed to discuss the scope, objectives
and political priorities for each programme with Council and the
European Parliament. A multi-annual indicative framework would
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 would be consulted
in the design of the thematic programmes.
15.5 In his 5 October 2005 Explanatory Memorandum,
the Secretary of State for International Development (Hilary Benn)
explained that money would be earmarked for thematic programmes
for each of the relevant geographic instruments, as the thematic
programmes cut across the geographical instruments. As the pre-accession
instrument IPA is designed to cover all aspects of the acquis
communautaire and all Community policies, the Communication
proposed a supplementary thematic programme only for democracy
and human rights.
15.6 The Secretary of State also said that he expected
many Member States to welcome the proposal, particularly the use
of a coherent, standardised approach to thematic programming and
the reduction in number of thematic Regulations. But the Communication
was short on detail, and there were 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. For example, there was no information
about how thematic strategies would be adopted — in what
sort of Member States Committees. Given the novelty of incorporating
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 the EU's
internal policies in the wider world would be important; so, too,
ensuring the transfer of additional funding and that the existence
of thematic funding did not reduce the importance of addressing
these issues in the geographic programmes. It remained to be seen
whether a democracy and human rights thematic programme would
satisfy the constituency in the European Parliament that were
continuing to press for a separate instrument for democracy and
human rights. The European Parliament was also likely to question
its suggested role in adopting thematic programmes and argue for
a reinstatement of their current legislative power.
15.7 The Secretary of State explained that the proposal
did 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. Finally, he explained that when
the proposal would come before the Council was unclear.
15.8 Against this uncertain background, we asked
the Secretary of State to write to us again, when the picture
was clearer, with his views on the outcome, and in the meantime
kept the document under scrutiny.
The Minister's letter
15.9 In his letter of 17 February 2006, the Secretary
of State says:
"The status of these thematic programmes has
been subject of much debate with the European Parliament (EP),
who wish to reinstate their current legislative power and retain
the programmes as regulations also under the next FP. The Commission,
on the other hand, has sought to adopt a less complex process
for determining policy priorities by issuing them as communications,
on which EP and Council give an opinion.
"We tabled the global Communication in Council
at an early stage of our Presidency. At the time, and due to the
uncertainty around the handling of thematic programmes, many Member
States did not feel in a position to proceed. Discussions with
the EP continued throughout the autumn. The Austrian Presidency
is now determined to resolve the situation and is exploring various
compromises with the involved parties.
"In the meantime, the Commission has tabled
the seven thematic programmes for Council consideration. Whatever
the outcome of negotiations with the EP, it will be important
to agree the main policy priorities for thematic actions, as laid
out in the communications, in time to begin specific operations
in January 2007.
"We understand that the Austrian Presidency
do not intend to revert to the global Communication in question,
as general discussions on handling thematic programmes across
the external action instruments and on the individual seven programmes
would effectively serve this purpose. We are content with this
approach and are in the process of preparing separate EMs for
each communication. We plan to raise the generic issues spelled
out in my EM on the global Communication both in Council discussions
on the specific thematic communications, and when negotiating
the content of the new Development Cooperation and Economic Cooperation
Instrument.
"I will keep you informed of further progress
and write back to you once the situation has become clearer. In
the meantime, I hope your Committee will agree to clear the global
Communication from scrutiny, and also look favourably on the forthcoming
thematic communications."
Conclusion
15.10 Given the situation outlined by the Secretary
of State, the Commission Communication is effectively a dead letter,
the process having moved beyond the global concept to the seven
individual thematic programmes. So we now clear the document.
15.11 But, as is clear from the Thematic Programmes
that we consider elsewhere in this Report, uncertainties remain
about the main policy priorities, funding and how they will inter-relate
with the new external instruments, as well as the role of the
European Parliament, as a result of which we are keeping them
under scrutiny.[58]
58 See para 5 of this Report. Back
|
