A4-0028/97

Resolution on the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on complementarity between the Community's development cooperation policy and the policies of the Member States (COM(95)0160 - C4-0178/95)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the communication from the Commission to the Council (COM(95)0160 - C4-0178/95),

- having regard to its resolution of 28 October 1993 on increased coordination of the development aid provided by the Member States and the Community ((OJ C 315, 22.11.1993, p. 250.)),

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Development and Cooperation (A4-0028/97),

A. whereas the European Union is the world's leading donor of official development aid,

B. whereas the European Union must continue to give development and cooperation the priority they deserve,

C. having noted the outcome of the hearing organized by the Committee on Development and Cooperation, at which the Member States expressed their views on the coordination of development policies,

D. whereas complementarity between the Member States' development policies and the common development policy is one of the objectives defined in the Treaty on European Union,

E. whereas the lack of coordination between the Community's development aid policies and those of the Member States is due not only to the wide range of actors, aid channels and procedures that are a feature of the Member States' activities but also to the differences of approach as between national policies and European policy,

F. whereas bilateral relations between certain Member States and certain developing countries are important, but whereas they should not conflict with the policy of the EU and the other Member States, and must be guided by common criteria,

G. having noted the outcome of the pilot scheme on operational coordination between the Community and its Member States,

H. aware that the Council's latest meetings held to consider coordination have produced very little progress, the outcome of the Council meeting of 28 May 1996 in particular having been completely negative,

I. deeply disturbed by the fact that very little progress has been made in coordinating the Member States' development policies and that, despite some efforts under health, education and AIDS programmes, coordination appears to have deteriorated,

1. Considers that the European Union's inability to achieve complementarity between the Member States' and the Union's policies, as provided for in the Maastricht Treaty, is a political failure on the European Union's part;

2. Notes that, aside from the difficulties raised by complementarity, and especially the very wide diversity of national arrangements, this inability is primarily due to the absence of political will in the Council and the Member States;

3. Feels that this inability is caused, on the one hand, by the difficulty of making progress where the common foreign and security policy is concerned and, on the other hand, by neglect of the objectives of development cooperation, which were once one of the European Community's priorities;

4. Draws attention in this context to the fact that the findings of the evaluation report on the pilot scheme on operational coordination between the Community and its Member States invoke as a primary obstacle to the strengthening of coordination 'too few staff in the Member States' and Commission's local offices¨;

5. Feels, however, that the values on which the common development policy pivots are likely to help the Union to acquire an external identity and considers that the existence of genuine coordination between national and Community development aid policies may help to make the European identity more recognizable on the world stage;

6. Feels that the lack of progress in coordinating development aid is due to a lack of political will and that the lack of progress towards a common foreign and security policy is often used as an excuse;

7. Considers that the interests of the peoples in the countries associated with the European Union under development agreements call for closer coordination; recalls, moreover, that the Union accounts for more than half of the official aid granted in the world;

8. Feels that closer coordination not only of activities undertaken at Union and national level but also, at Union level, of the various Community initiatives is essential if global coherence of the Union's external action is to be ensured;

9. Considers that, to optimize the Union's internal coordination, for whose success the Commission has a particular responsibility, it should be extended to include both the beneficiary countries or entities and any other international donors and that these external actors should therefore be involved in the coordination process earlier;

10. Considers that democratic control of expenditure and transparency of responsibilities call for the entry of the EDF in the budget, which would enable the Community nature of the development policy to be enhanced;

11. Considers that greater importance should be attached to evaluation, which would in particular enable closer coordination to be achieved;

12. Notes that some Member States rate coordination at world level higher than coordination at European level; believes that the tragedy of the Great Lakes region of Africa demonstrates the urgent need for effective coordination of European Union policies and programmes; believes that the developing countries as well as Europe should benefit from the ending of the cold war and that there is an urgent need for a coordinated effort by the European Union and its Member States drastically to reduce the world's arms trade;

13. Considers that closer coordination at European level would be a powerful means of improving coordination at world level;

14. Deplores in particular the lack of coordination of the Member States' approaches in the Bretton Woods institutions and, to a lesser degree, the UN;

15. Considers that closer coordination calls for the convergence of points of view when policies are formulated in the recipient countries and among the donors;

16. Believes, in particular, that it would be useful to strengthen coordination before cooperation policies are formulated, especially by improving exchanges of information and dialogue during the programming phases of the Community's and Member States' aid efforts;

17. Notes that the activities of the Member States are characterized by a wide range of actors, instrumental channels and procedures;

18. Feels that coordination will be unsatisfactory unless the recipient countries are themselves capable of administering aid efficiently;

19. Believes that coordination should also extend to the question of the developing countries' debts; reaffirms its view that these debts should be processed at Community level;

20. Refers to the need for closer coordination between the Member States and the European Union where aid is concerned in order to avoid duplication of effort at national and Community level;

21. Deplores the fact that the European Union, which is by far the world's largest donor and makes the greatest effort in terms of gross domestic product, does not manage to make its voice heard on the international stage where development aid and, more especially, development cooperation are concerned;

22. Considers that it is necessary to seek more political and public support in Europe through direct action and self-help initiatives:

(a) the Council should be invited to have each meeting of the Committee on Development and Cooperation attended either by the Presidency or by a senior official on behalf of the Presidency, as has been agreed as a follow-up to the Maastricht Treaty,

(b) there should be a debate in the Committee on Development and Cooperation before and after each Development Council,

(c) the Committee on Development and Cooperation should seek observer status at each meeting of the Development Council,

(d) there is a need for clear political statements from the Council and the Member States on coordination,

(e) there should be a question and answer session with both Council and Commission at each meeting of the Committee on Development and Cooperation,

(f) the Committee on Development and Cooperation should invite MPs from the Member States to attend a meeting of the committee at least once each year,

(g) each new President of the European Parliament should be invited to address the Committee on Development and Cooperation at the beginning of each mandate,

(h) at every meeting of the Committee on Development and Cooperation, half an hour at the beginning of one of the sittings should be devoted to hearing the views of NGOs,

(i) there is an urgent need for a follow-up to the adoption of this resolution, which should include sending a delegation to the countries of the case studies;

23. Requests the Bureau and the rapporteur of the Committee on Development and Cooperation on complementarity to monitor closely the suggested improvement of coordination and to establish the necessary contacts with the Council;

24. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission.