Brussels, 08/10/2003 (Agence Europe) - On Wednesday the European Commission adopted a communication putting the strong case for the incorporation of aid to African, Caribbean and Pacific Countries (ACP) from the European Development Fund (EDF) into the EU budget (EUROPE yesterday p 11). Arguments in favour of such an initiative were presented the same day at the plenary session of Parliament, as well as to journalists during the joint press conference between Michaele Schreyer, Budget Commissioner and Poul Nielson, Development Commissioner.
Ms Schreyer declared that the European Commission had proposed including the financial instrument of the European Development Fund for the ACP and OCT countries in the general budget of the Union from 2007-08 onwards. She also said that aid to these countries was already financed in part by the Community budget. The EUR 31 bn disbursed in 2002 as a total of the accumulated bilateral aid of Member States and the Community, come form the Community budget via the investment facility of the European Investment Bank and the EDF.
The Commission points out that the idea of incorporating this instrument, through the financial resources of Member States outside the Union budget, managed on the budget borderlines, together with guidelines for execution not totally different from those governing the Union budget, were not hatched yesterday and date back to a Commission proposal of 1973, which the Parliament has always supported with the goal of exercising codecision powers (and not simply discharge) but the procedure was blocked at a Council level.
In 2000 during the 9th EDF negotiations (financial protocol of the Cotonou Agreement for the period up to 2007), all Member States, except for Spain, agreed with the agreement on the principle of incorporating the EDF into the budget. In order to gain consensus, the Commission made a commitment to submit a communication on the pros and cons of budgetisation. Confident that the Council would this time support the proposal for two reasons, Commissioner Schreyer declared that "We have met our commitment and are optimistic: 1) that incorporation into the budget is part of the Convention on the Future of Europe and in the debate on financial perspectives and enlargement of the Union; 2) on the eve of enlargement, there is a need to ensure good coordination between negotiating the next EDF (10th) and negotiations of new financial perspectives from 2007, the date on which new members will be called on to contribute financially to cooperation with ACP countries.
Michaele Schreyer explained that during negotiations concluded in Copenhagen, it was agreed that new Member States would not contribute to the EDF but that "with a revised EDF, participation of new Member States is de facto on the agenda" and that the calendars coincided. She also said that the Commission thought the moment more opportune to act. In reply to a journalist who asked her whether including the EDF in the budget was an attempt to tighten the purse strings, with the knowledge that it would be difficult to spend funds that would go towards domestic budgets, the Commissioner said that, "when the funds are included in the budget, the goal is to spend them. We want to continue with improvements to the execution of the budget".
Poul Nielson, European Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid said that the "fundamental reason" for fully incorporating the EDF was the advantages in co-operation with ACP countries in terms of the Unions political priorities as well as coherence. He thought that if this activity was incorporated into the compulsory activities of the Union, the situation would by more favourable than funds from voluntary contributions that demanded better negotiations between Member States each time the EDF was renewed. The role of the European Parliament and the increase in aid efficiency are, according to Nielson, two other important reasons. He said that in terms of efficiency they had already won the case for budget incorporation as the different rules for funding cooperation with ACP was finished and that there was already a swathe of administrative committees. The Commissioner, however, revised his ideas on this score as, "budget incorporation is not a panacea". He pointed out that obtaining rapid results depended on the quality of the projects and the effective implementation by partner countries.
Food safety, humanitarian aid, bilateral cooperation agreement with South Africa, co-funding of NGOs, tropical forests, fisheries, ACP banana production, declared Commissioner Nielson. In a reply to a journalist, the Commission explained that the EDF did not jeopardise the programming of long tem aid and that despite a notable improvement in the rhythm of disbursement, the sums accounted for but not paid and the rhythm of carrying out projects needed a "more rapid approach".
Poul Nielson concluded that, "I am confident of the favourable reception by the European Parliament and ACP countries. The Council considers that the communication would be debated for the first time at the newt information meeting of Development Ministers at Trieste on 24 October.
Addressing the European Parliament, Ms Schreyer pointed out that incorporating the EDF into the budget had been called for for a long time by the Assembly which had developed the different arguments in favour of this proposal. Only British Labour member, Glenys Kinnock intervened to ask whether the Commissioner envisaged the creation of a new section in the financial perspectives. The Co-Chair of the Joint ACP-EU Parliamentary Assembly also asked about what welcome the AACP countries would give to this proposal. The Commissioner responded that, "this proposal must be discussed in a concentrated way with ACP countries…We have to offer them sufficient assurances that this will not reduce their aid…We have already said that the current level has to be the minimum for the future. the Commissioner also judged the creation of an additional section for financial perspectives as useless.
ACP countries will decide on the basis of an impact study currently being carried out
ACP countries have not yet received an official reaction to the European Commission communication. According to a source close to the ACP Council of Ministers, their official position will depend on the results of an impact study on EDF budget incorporation for ACP/EU cooperation, which is currently ongoing.
This same source declared that, "It I clear that their decision to integrate the EDF into the General Union budget belongs to the Community but some ACP countries have certain worries about political and technical aspects. The source also mentioned the fear of pending political issues (e.g. the current problem with Zimbabwe) influencing Parliament, when the budget was discussed again, the fear of delays in the disbursement of funds due to slow Commission procedures which do not encourage the budget to be reduced, as well as apprehension about new Member States which are not as sensitive to the problems of ACP countries. "Negotiating every five years with 15 Member States to maintain the level of financial donations is already difficult. What will it be like if the budget has to be discussed every year with 25 members?", the ACP is asking.