1.
ACP MINISTERS MEET IN BRUSSELS – IN DEPTH DISCUSSION ON
PROGRAMMING PROCESS
ACP Ministers and
officials, in charge of cooperation between their countries and
the EU (National Authoring Officers) gathered in Brussels this
week for two sets of meetings. First of all a meeting between the
National Authorising Officers (NAOs), focused on the programming
of aid process under the Cotonou Agreement was held. This was
followed by an ACP Council of Ministers meeting.
The NAO meeting on
the programming of aid, looked at several aspects of this
process, including the state of play regarding the adoption of
the Country Strategy Papers on which programmes of EU aid for
individual ACP countries are supposed to be based, civil society
participation in the programming process, the process of
reviewing programmes, and ways of improving disbursement rates of
funds under the programmes. The meeting was informed that the
seventh ACP country strategy paper (Mauritania) had been adopted
last week. (See PAF 253)
A background
paper prepared by the ACP Secretariat for the meeing points out
that 35.7% of the draft ACP Country Strategy Papers that had been
submitted to the EU, by ACP States indicate the transport sector
as the focal area for cooperation with the EU. The next most
popular sector is structural adjustment (24.4%). Out of the
about 53 draft strategy papers submitted to the EU, only 4.3% and
3.7% of them focus on education and health respectively, despite
the increasing recognition of the importance of these sectors to
poverty reduction- the overall objective of ACP-EU cooperation.
Key general concerns on the programmes from the NAOs on the
programming process included:
ü
The question of ownership of projects and programmes. Many
NAOs were of the view that the European Commission and the EU
Member State Committee on ACP-EU issues (EDF Committee), in some
cases tried to impose EU objectives on the ACP programmes and
country support strategies even though national strategies are
supposed to be drafted by ACP governments. It was pointed out
that in some cases the Commission had rejected the focal areas
adopted by ACP countries and asked European consultants to
identify other priorities for the country in question, which
matched Commission priorities. Among the proposals put
forward to remedy the lack of ACP ownership was the need to
create opportunities for ACP experts, as opposed to EU experts,
in providing assistance to ACP governments in drafting country
strategies and programmes.
ü
The participatory approach to programming. The concern was
raised that in some cases, civil society participation in
programming was slowing the process down. The NAOs argued that
civil society needs to be better organised and structured at the
national level for effective meaningful consultations on
programming.
Specifically
on the review process, NAOs called for
ü
Capacity building at ACP State level in order to allow them to
participate in the annual reviews of the programmes that are
scheduled
ü
The establishment of joint monitoring and evaluation criteria
including performance indicators agreed between the EU and ACP
for reviewing the programmes
Specifically
on civil society participation in the programming process,
the ACP called for:
ü
The establishment of a national and regional policy framework
and related consultation mechanisms for dealing with civil
society
ü
The establishment of clear eligibility and selection criteria of
civil society organisations who participate in the programming
process
ü
The joint management between the ACP government and the EU of
financial resources from national programmes that are supposed to
be earmarked for civil society. (Up to 15% of every ACP national
programme is supposed to be provided to civil society. The
European Commission is proposing that it manage the
implementation of this solely, independent of the ACP government)
ü
Resources to be allocated on the basis of the capability of
different civil society organisations to deliver services
effectively in a given sector.
Other issues of
concern raised by the NAOs include: the closing down and
downgrading of European Commission delegation offices in the ACP,
the delays in adoption of the Country Strategy Papers due to EU
bureaucratic procedures, especially within the EDF Committee, and
the lack of consideration for complementarity between the ACP-EU
programming process and the PRSP process of the World Bank.
Further on the
question of the choice of focal sectors, some ACP National
Authorising Officers argued that they had been put under pressure
from the Commission to select health and education as focal
areas, even when they felt that this was not appropriate. It
was recognised that discussions on the content of programmes
would have to move from debates on the choice of broad badly
defined focal sectors to evaluations of how activities under the
programme in all sectors could actually contribute towards
poverty reduction.
The main topics
on the agenda of the ACP Council of Ministers meeting that
followed the NAO meeting were, the restructuring of the ACP
Group, the ACP-EU banana trade regime, preparations for the
forthcoming ACP-EU Trade negotiations and the financial situation
of the ACP Secretariat.
2.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION TO MEET CIVIL SOCIETY TWICE MORE NEXT WEEK
REGARDING THE OUTCOME WTO MINISTERIAL IN DOHA
Following
last week’s meeting between the European Commission and
civil society and business organisation representatives on the
outcome of the 4th WTO Ministerial meeting in Doha, a
further meeting has been scheduled by the Commission between
civil society and business representatives and EU Trade
Commissioner Pascal Lamy on Friday 14 December in Brussels. (See
PAF 253) The meeting will look at EU’s next steps regarding
the proposed new WTO round and dialogue between the Commission
and civil society organisations in the light of the new round of
negotiations.
Another
meeting between a group of so-called anti-globalist groups and
European Commission trade civil servants will take place on 10
December in Brussels. According to the Commission the meeting on
10 December was proposed by some anti-globalist groups who will
not be able to be present at the meeting with Lamy on 14
December.
3.
IN BRIEF
EU
Commissioner for Development, Poul Nielson, in his visit to
Afghanistan this week, announced the resumption of a food for
work programme in Afghanistan financed by the Commission. He
described the programme, which provides food to women artisans,
as an example of Europe’s solidarity with the victims of the
Afghan crisis.
At
last week’s meeting between EU Commissioner for Development,
Poul Nielson, and EU NGDO networks, the Commissioner confirmed
reports that the majority of Country Strategy Papers on which
programmes of EU aid for individual ACP countries are supposed to
be based, indicate transport as the focal sector of cooperation
with the EU. Mr Nielson inferred that EU NGOs should get
more involved in debates surrounding the choice of focal sectors
for aid programmes. The next meeting between Mr Nielson and the
NGDO networks is proposed for May/June 2002.
The
European Parliament is set to adopt the EU 2002 budget next week.
The budgetary procedure this year has been particularly difficult
and unpredictable because of numerous new issues, events and
commitments. A solution has been finally found to finance the
Global Health Fund in 2001, with € 60 million from the
budgetary reserve. The Commission has also proposed to use the
separate ACP-EU budget (the European Development Fund) to
finance the Health Fund in 2002. However this is yet to be
approved by a number of EU Member States.
Amnesty
International, the International Federation for Human Rights and
Human Rights Watch have questioned the European Parliament’s
claim to be playing a leading role in fighting human rights
abuses, after the Parliament’s leaders decided not to
set up a parliamentary committee focusing on violations of human
rights.