Memorandum by British Overseas NGOs for
Development (BOND) on the implications of the new EU Reform Treaty
on the European Union's development policies
The new EU Reform Treaty presents a series of
extremely important opportunities for institutional reform. The
creation of the new post of High Representative of the Union
for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the European
External Action Service mean that there will be new institutional
structures in place, which will have a very significant impact
on the EU's development policies.
The implementation of the EU Reform Treaty will
be the only real opportunity between now and the next Financial
Perspectives in 2014 (i) to ensure that there is greater coherence
between development cooperation and other EU's external action
policies and (ii) to improve effectiveness and impact of EC development
cooperation.
Development cooperation and humanitarian aid
are dealt with under Title III of the EU Reform Treaty (Cooperation
with third countries and humanitarian aid). The two main articles
that deal with development cooperation and humanitarian aid (Article
III-118b and 118j).
— Set the eradication of poverty as
the primary objective of development cooperation;
— Call for coherence between EU policies
that affect developing countries and development goals; and
— Require member states and EU development
cooperation to complement and reinforce each other.
BOND strongly welcomes the proposed legal framework
for development policy with poverty eradication as its primary
objective, and the legally enshrined principle of the coherence
of EU policies with development objectives. However, it is vital
that these laudable principles are translated into effective institutional
structures, which will allow for effective action and will ensure
effective implementation of the commitments made in 2005.
KEY ISSUES
INCLUDE:
— The creation of a post of High
Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.
This new EU foreign policy chief will permanently chair ministerial
meetings of the GAERC as well as serve as Vice-President of the
Commission, merging the jobs of High Representative and external
relations Commissioner. The High Representative will come with
a significant aid budget and staff.
— The High Representative will be supported
by the European External Action Service (EEAS) made up
of national and EU diplomats and officials from the Commission.
The EEAS will have responsibility for providing staff for EU Delegations
in third countries. The EU Delegations will replace the existing
Commission's Delegations.
— The number of EU Commissioners
will be reduced by two thirds (from 27 to 18) by 2014.
What are the implications of the changes in the
functions of High Representative, who will also hold the position
of Vice-President of the European Commission? What political and
legal issues arise?
How will the new organisational structure work
in practice and what institutional issues need to be resolved?
Will the establishment of a European External
Action Service make the EU's external action more coherent and
effective? What issues arise with regards to its structure, functioning,
mechanisms for accountability and financing?
1. Attempts to consolidate the EU's profile
on foreign and security policy risk sidelining commitments on
development. The proposal to merge the jobs of High Representative
and External Relations Commissioner into a High Representative
for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy may be an opportunity
to strengthen EU external action and strategic vision, but it
must not lead to sidelining commitments on development.
2. The proposal that the High Representative,
responsible for the implementation of the Common Foreign and Security
policy, also has at his or her disposal a significant aid budget
and staff within a European External Action Service suggests a
potential danger of increased politicisation of development cooperation
or instrumentalisation of development funds for implementing foreign
policy objectives.
3. A reduction in the number of Commissioners
could mean that there would be no Commissioner for Development.
4. What is at stake is the future political
space for development within a new institutional structure (which
is to include the European External Action Service). Proposals
on the table include incorporating all EU external actions, including
development, into the European External Action Service. This would
not only blur the division of powers between the institutions
but it would also allow development policy to be at the disposal
of the High Representative.
RECOMMENDATIONS
5. There should be a dedicated administrative
structure responsible for EU development policy and its implementation
that has a clear focus on development objectives and sufficient
capacity. Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid should
be on equal footing with the Common Foreign and Security Policy
(CFSP) within the rest of the Treaty. This separation should be
reflected within the structure of the European Commission by maintaining
a clear and strong institutional and political place for Development
Cooperation, clearly independent from the CFSP. The new Development
Service should be able to ensure that other policies are consistent
with development objectives.
6. There should be a Commissioner for Development
who is on equal footing with the High Representative and is
in a position to promote the interests of EU development policy
within the College and towards the Council. The Commissioner for
Development should have a say not only on policy formulation and
funding but also in implementation of development policies in
order to end the inconsistencies caused by the gap between policy
and implementation in the current structure.
7. The Development Service should be responsible
for development policy and programming in all developing countries—African,
Caribbean, Pacific, Asian and Latin American countries—to
avoid current inconsistencies between treatment of the African
Caribbean and Pacific Countries (ACP) and other developing countries
due to the split between DG Development and DG Relex.
8. EuropeAid should be merged or at least have
a strong link with DG Development.
9. The new EU Delegations in developing countries
should include development professionals as well as trade professionals
and diplomats working on foreign policy. Development officials
within the Delegations should report directly to the Commissioner
for Development, and work closely with the political desks to
ensure coherence. It is important to ensure that development expertise
is maintained and strengthened within the Delegations, and the
development voice is heard. Heads of Delegations should have responsibility
for engaging with civil society (especially in ACP countries).
10. Development policy objectives should be
fully reflected in the cooperation with developing countries within
the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) zone.
11. It is important to ensure that, if neighbouring
countries are going to be under the responsibility of the European
External Action Service, the EU Reform Treaty commitments, and
international commitments on Official Development Assistance (ODA)
apply to ODA destined to neighbouring countries.
December 2007
| 
