1. COMMISSION EXPLAINS WORK OF COMMON SERVICE FOR EXTERNAL RELATIONS AT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
The Director General of the European Commission’s External Relations (Relex) Common Service, Mr Philippe Soubestre, explained the work of the Commission’s Common Service to the European Parliament’s Development Committee on Wednesday 21 April in Brussels. The Common Service was set up last year to manage all aspects relating to the implementation of all non-humanitarians projects/programmes from the Commissions different external relations Directorate Generals (DGs). One of its aims is to increase the efficiency of programme management.
Mr Soubestre, speaking in defence, of the Commission stated that the Commission’s external commitments increased by over twofold between 1990 and 1998. Payments over the same period increased by twofold. He said the quality of aid during the 1990s has also increased as evidenced by the increase in commitments to civil society actors. This has however increased the administrative problems of the Commission, due to the rise in budget lines to over 70 and the risk involved when dealing with civil society.
Mr Soubestre said that among the initiatives the Common Service had taken since being set up were: 1) Harmonisation, simplification and increase in the transparency of working methods of the Commission’s different external DGs. He said the Commission will in a fortnight come up with a simplified set of rules on the issuing of contracts for development projects. These rules along with all calls for tender will be posted on the Common Services’ web-site on the Internet – www.europa.eu.int/comm/scr . 2) Encouraging decentralisation and de-concentration of decision making in the Commission from Brussels to the local level. However, Mr. Soubestre argued that reports such as those of the Committee of Independent Experts (See PAF 125) and the EU Court of Auditors, pointing to fraud in the Commission, have the effect of reversing decentralisation by giving Brussels administrators the feeling that every contract should be checked at the Brussels level. He said in order to effectively decentralise, EU delegations would have to be trained and expanded in size to meet the demands being asked of them. 3) Finding new ways of dealing with the Commission’s increasing fragmented external relations’ programmes. All the budget lines developed for decentralised co-operation etc. have increased the risk of management. Better dialogue would have to be conducted between the Commission ,the EP, the Council and the Court of Auditors to better manage the situation. The incoming Commission would also have to examine the Commission’s structure relating to the external relations DGs. He said the creation of the Common Service has meant a cut in the project cycle by separating the conceptualisation of programmes from their implementation and monitoring. A means would have to be sought to get the cycle going again. To this end the Commission will provide training for this new type of project cycle management.
In the ensuing debate, UK MEP Ms Kinnock spoke of the numerous blockages of Commission external relations’ projects since the Common Service was set up. She called for a special task force to be set up within the EP’s Development Committee to examine the delays on payments of projects in order to better respond to the concerns of NGOs. Italian MEP Mr. Vecchi called for a clearer establishment of ‘the rules of the game’ on working with NGOs in projects. German MEP Mr Telkamper questioned why NGOs still have to provide bank guarantees to the Commission when major companies investing in developing countries are not obliged to. He also quoted the recent study on Evaluation of EU Aid, which stated that the fragmentation of EU development policy was likely to increase rather than decrease with the Common Service.
Mr. Soubestre in his response blamed the poor performance of the Common Service on the following factors: a) the EU had probably tried to achieve too much too quickly with the Service; b) the capacity of the Commission in terms of human resources is too low; c) the number of legal basis (+80) and budget lines (+70) for programmes are too many to manage; and d) the political situation and security in certain developing countries had meant that several programmes could not be carried out promptly.
2. ACP-EU NEGOTIATIONS
The latest round of the ACP-EU Negotiations at ambassadorial level for a new framework agreement was held on 20-21 April in Brussels. According to an ACP source, the ambassadors’ Working Group responsible for discussions on trade and investment examined the option of the EU’s GSP (Generalised System of Preferences) for future trade arrangements between the ACP and the EU. Most participants of the Working Group agreed that the GSP is not really an attractive option for the ACP. The EU however does not want to rule it out yet till discussions on other alternatives become clearer. The ACP ambassadors are awaiting a report from the Working Group of ACP Regional Experts recently set up, to look into the viability and feasibility of alternative trade arrangements, before taking a position. At the last meeting of the ACP Group of Regional Experts, the Group decided that they would present a report to the ambassadors on alternative trade arrangement within a period of 8 weeks. They tentatively scheduled their next meeting for July 1999.
The ACP-EU ambassadors’ Working Group responsible for the Private Sector, Investment and Other Development Strategies agreed key sentences for the next framework agreement on: Social infrastructure, services and policies, Gender and youth issues, Cultural development, Environmental and natural resources and regional co-operation and integration.
3. NGO DESK STUDY ON CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION IN THE LOME PROCESS
Dutch NGO INZET in collaboration with other NGOs from ACP and the EU NGOs are conducting a desk study on civil society participation in the Lomé process. The study consists of a questionnaire directed at ACP civil society organisations on experiences, to date, of civil society participation and consultation in the Lomé process. The aim of the study is to help make proposals for dialogue mechanisms based on a comparative analysis of existing practices that will be viable and acceptable to the negotiating parties and civil society. The study should be completed by the end of this month and presented to the European Commission in early May. Should you be interested in participating or request more information you can contact Magriet Kuster at INZET: Tel: 00 31 20 627 33 39; Email: [email protected]; [email protected]
4. EP GREEN GROUP ORGANISE P7 CONFERENCE ON LOME NEGOTIATIONS
The EP’s Green Group P7 Conference will take place on 26 April at the European Parliament in Brussels. The theme of this year’s conference is The Lomé Negotiations: Towards a Fair Partnership. Amongst the items on the agenda are: The state of the Lomé Negotiations; Respect for human rights and democratic participation in decision making; and WTO rules and the Lomé Convention. Speakers include EU acting Commissioner for Development - Mr Joao de Deus Pinheiro, Carl Greenidge – Deputy Secretary General of the ACP Group and Mrs. Mohau Pheko of Motheo Integrity (Women’s organisation from South Africa). For more information you can contact Tsigereda Walelign of the EP Green Group at Tel: 00 32 284 33 54; Email: [email protected]
5. IN BRIEF
EU leaders are still split over whom to support for director general of the WTO. Eight states are backing New Zealander Mike Moore, while the rest are backing Thai Supachai Panichpakdi. According to EU diplomats the main cause of the split is US opposition to the Thai candidate. The US have however made it clear that it will not oppose the Thai if he receives overwhelming backing from other WTO members.
The EP Committee on External Economic Relations
has called on the EP to ratify the EU-Mexico Global Agreement.
The two parties signed the global agreement in December 1997. An
interim accord serves as a legal framework for current trade
negotiations in progress was ratified in May 1998. The global
agreement covers all aspects of co-operation (political,
commercial and economic) According to Spanish MEP Miranda de Lage
it is important to ratify the agreement to give a positive signal
to Mexico and the EU before the EU/Latin America summit in June.