----

(2004/C 88 E/0668)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3676/03

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject:   Petition by CNASTI (Portugal)

At the World Education Forum held in Dakar, the international community agreed on the basic objectives of ensuring that all the world's children have access by 2015 to proper basic education free of charge and eliminating gender inequality in access to education by 2005. During the same year, the same targets were included in the UN's Millennium Development Goals.

In the context of the campaign ‘From exploitation to education’ launched in Portugal by CNASTI (the National Confederation for Action on Child Labour), as the national coordinating organisation for the Global March Against Child Labour, a petition was submitted calling on the Commission, inter alia: to ensure the provision of significantly increased funding for education in the field of international development and cooperation; to give its full support to the Fast Track Initiative for education and expand the programme to all countries offering sound educational programmes; and to exclude education explicitly from the sectors subject to liberalisation under the GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) agreement within the WTO.

Can the Commission state what practical action it has already taken on the above demands?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(20 February 2004)

The objectives set in Dakar to achieve ‘Education for All’ (EFA) and the United Nations (UN) Millennium Development Goals in the field of education form the basis of the Community's development policy in the field of education, as laid down in the Commission's Communication of March 2002 (1) on ‘Education and training in the context of the fight against poverty in developing countries’. The Communication also stresses that Community funding for education, in particular primary education, should be increased.

Overall, the Commission has programmed an estimated EUR 1,3 billion to education in developing countries over five years. This figure does not represent the total effort as it does not take into account some EUR 1,7 billion of financing that will go to African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries under the 9th European Development Fund (EDF) in the form of macro-economic support linked to social outcomes, in particular education and health.

Since the Community's development cooperation is based on a multi-annual programming, there is only limited leeway for increasing funding for education until the next phase of programming. However, some flexibility exists in ACP States through the recommitment exercise of unspent funds from previous EDFs and through the 2004 Mid-Term Review. Of course, in line with the principle of ownership, recipient countries ultimately decide upon the use of the funds allocated to them.

Against this background, the Commission welcomed the EFA Fast Track Initiative (FTI) as an opportunity to increase support for primary education. The FTI will also be taken into account in the next phase of programming of non-ACP States benefiting from the FTI. Moreover, the Commission has played a successful role in the second pillar on the FTI harmonisation of procedures with the other donors particularly the EU Member States.

Regarding the specific issue of education services and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), the Community and its Member States have already taken some commitments within the GATS Uruguay Round regarding privately funded education services. These commitments cover the possibility for foreign providers to have access to a certain extent within the territory of the Union, but they have not impaired in any way the right of the Member States to decide on the most appropriate organisation for the provision of education services. This is in line with the provisions of the GATS which exclude from its scope only those services which are provided under governmental authority, while allowing World Trade Organisation (WTO) Members to retain the necessary flexibility and the right, in the areas falling within its scope, to decide on the most appropriate structure for the organisation of each sector.

----

(1)  COM(2002) 116 final.

----