European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation derogating
from certain provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 laying down the detailed rulesand arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector (COM(2001) 62
 C5-0077/2001  2001/0035(CNS))
(Consultation procedure)
The European Parliament,
 having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2001) 62) (
1),
 having been consulted by the Council pursuant to Articles 36 and 37 of the EC Treaty (C5-0077/
2001),
 having regard to Rule 67 of its Rules of Procedure, having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A5-0190/2001),
1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;
2. Calls on the Council to notify Parliament should it intend to depart from the text approved by
Parliament;
3. Calls for the conciliation procedure to be initiated should the Council intend to depart from the text
approved by Parliament;
4. Asks to be consulted again should the Council intend to amend the Commission proposal substan-
tially;
5. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.
(1) OJ C 154 E, 29.5.2001, p. 278.
14. Development of the external service
A5-0199/2001
European Parliament resolution on the Commission communication on the development of the
external service (COM(2000) 456  C5-0629/2000  2000/2292(COS))
The European Parliament,
 having regard to the Commission communication (COM(2000) 456  C5-0629/2000),
 having regard to the Commissions Williamson report of 27 March 1996 on the longer-term require-
ments of the external service (SEC(1996) 554),
 having regard to the Commission communication of 27 March 1996 on staff redeployment and
rationalisation of the network (SEC(1996) 554/2),
 having regard to the Commission communication of 8 April 1997 on the development of the external
service of the Commission (SEC(1997) 605),
 having regard to the Commission communication of 8 April 1998 on the multiannual plan to allocate
external service resources (SEC(1998) 1261),
 having regard to the Commission communication of 22 July 1998 on the Commissions external
service (SEC(1998) 1261),C 53 E/390 EN 28.2.2002 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 14 June 2001
 having regard to the Commission communication of 21 April 1999 on the development of the exter-
nal service (COM(1999) 180)
 having regard to the Commission communication on the reform of the management of external
assistance established in the communication (SEC(2000) 814),
 having regard to the Commission communication of 11 April 2001 on conflict prevention
(COM(2001) 211),
 having regard to the setting up of the EuropeAid Agency on 1 January 2001 which is responsible for
implementing the Commissions external aid policy,
 having regard to its Resolution of 5 September 2000 on a common European diplomacy (1),
 having regard to Rule 47(1) of its Rules of Procedure,
 having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security
and Defence Policy and the opinions of the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on BudgetaryControl and the Committee on Development and Cooperation (A5-0199/2001),
A. whereas the objective, which is shared by the Commission and Parliament, that the common foreign
and security policy should be suitably developed in such a way as to ensure that the Union takes on afirm political role at international level requires not only political will but also the adoption of the
appropriate decisions which will allow that goal to be achieved in practice,
B. having regard to the desire expressed by the Commission in its abovementioned communication on
conflict prevention for the Union to assert itself as a credible actor on the international stage and, withthis in view, to provide itself with the means to take common decisions based on a detailed and in-depth analysis of each situation,
C. stressing, however, that the main problem regarding the implementation of the common foreign
policy is the democratic deficit affecting decision-making within the EU, which remains completelyoutside the scope of Community procedures, and that a clear, coherent and resolutely Communitydefinition of the Unions external action will help future Union delegations genuinely to play a rolein representing the policy and interests of the Union,
D. whereas it is vital, to that end, to overcome the considerable shortcomings which still affect the
external service and provide it with an overall design, given that, up to now, it has been built up inresponse to specific needs which have emerged over time,
E. whereas, as part of its activities, EuropeAid is working together with the Directorates-General for
external relations and development to decentralise to the Commission delegations responsibility for
all operations which can be more effectively managed in the field and, with this in view, EuropeAid is
undertaking to transfer some of its officials to each Commission delegation by 2003,
F. whereas it is vital for the external service to ensure a coordinated EU presence within international
organisations such as the United Nations, IMF, World Bank, WTO and other similar bodies, as well asin regions such as South America, Central America, Africa, etc.,
G. whereas Parliament has expressed its concern at the continuing existence of this situation on many
occasions, highlighting in its abovementioned resolution on the establishment of a common diplo-macy and aimed at improving the quality of the external service, the need for progress to be madein three directions:
1. Specialist training of officials to be assigned to the external service;
2. Development of a legal framework governing the status of the Commission delegations and their
relations with the Parliament and Council, without questioning their position as part of the Com-
missions establishment plan; and
3. The need for coordination between these delegations and the Member States diplomatic represen-
tations,
(1) OJ C 135, 7.5.2001, p. 69.28.2.2002 EN C 53 E/391 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 14 June 2001
H. pointing out, nevertheless, that the question of improved training for future Union diplomats is by no
means the only problem to be tackled and that, in particular, a clearer definition is needed of theUnions external activity, together with a rationalisation of the bodies responsible for these activitiesso as to ensure greater integration,
I. whereas the Commissioners responsible for external relations agreed in June 2000 to undertake an
overall review with the aim of creating an integrated external service, and Commissioner Patten gavean undertaking to Parliaments plenary sitting of 5 September 2000 that the Commission would pub-lish a communication on the external service in the first half of 2001, taking particular account of
Parliaments above-mentioned report,
J. whereas, pending this more ambitious initiative announced by the Commission, Parliament should
now adopt a position on the abovementioned communication concerning the development of theexternal service (COM(2000) 456), whose subject matter is restricted to the network of delegationsand their staff,
K. whereas in the fifty or so countries of the international community where hardly any of the Member
States have representation, the Union could establish Union embassies representing both the interestsof the Union and those of all the Member States,
L. whereas, owing to a special reserve entered in the budget since 1997, Parliament has given itself the
means to guide how the external delegations operate according to a comprehensive plan involvingvertical and horizontal redeployment of manpower on the basis of political and budgetary priorities,enhancing their role and effectiveness through staff training and reconfiguration,
M. whereas the Union must equip itself with an ambitious, high-achieving external service to perform the
priority tasks conferred on it by virtue of the subsidiarity principle, in particular provision of aid tothird countries,
N. whereas the delegations must ensure that Community aid to third countries is visible, their role and
make-up differing according to whether aid is provided by way of political representation, economic
assistance or economic intermediation,
O. whereas the abovementioned Commission communications with a view to developing and strengthen-
ing the Unions external service are an important aspect of the reform in that they seek to improveexternal-policy implementation performance, as called for by Parliament during the 2001 budgetaryprocedure,
P. whereas reform of the external service must be carried out at constant staffing levels, but, in view of
the expenditure to which redeployment measures give rise, cannot take place at the same cost,
1. Insists that the overriding priority for the external service of the Commission must be the efficient
organisation and management of EU external assistance programmes, including humanitarian aid, devel-opment aid, technical and financial assistance programmes, and pre-accession funds;
2. Agrees that progress needs to be made in the deconcentration and decentralisation of the Commis-
sions external assistance, an objective already set out in its abovementioned communication on the man-agement of external assistance (SEC(2000) 814), and reiterated in the present communication(COM(2000) 456), which should not imply an increase in superfluous bureaucracy;
3. Recognises that the process of deconcentration will require more human resources for the del-
egations, not all of which can be supplied from the posts made available as part of the proposals forreorganisation and regionalisation, but points out that the political decision to strengthen the EUs politicalpresence, as called for by Parliament, requires commitments to secure the necessary resources;
4. Points out that the difficulties encountered in making progress in the process of deconcentration do
not stem solely from the lack of human resources and that it is also necessary to improve computerequipment and adopt the necessary ancillary measures, such as policies on contracts, training plans, thereview of procedures and provisions on verification and audit;C 53 E/392 EN 28.2.2002 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 14 June 2001
5. Recognises also that deconcentration requires adequate budgetary resources to ensure that local
agents can be employed on contracts of a reasonable length;
6. Proposes that more attention be paid to the definition of officials responsibilities, the match between
the profiles of delegation staff and the tasks to be carried out, the monitoring and control of work, thesupport system for services provided by headquarters to the delegations, the drawing-up of guides andstandardised procedures and the external visibility of the delegations activity;
7. Urges the Commission to propose, in agreement with Parliament, a suitable legal framework to
regulate relations between Parliament and the delegations, including:
(a) The establishment of regular channels of information between the delegations and Parliament, which
might take the form of regular reports to be supplied by the delegations through the President ofParliament or its Committee on Foreign Affairs, which will be responsible for forwarding theinformation to the appropriate interparliamentary delegations;
(b) Practical action to ensure that heads of delegation appear before the corresponding parliamentary
bodies whenever political circumstances make this advisable, and provision for heads of delegationto appear before Parliaments Committee on Foreign Affairs as a matter of course before taking uptheir duties, in order to outline their objectives and debate them with Members;
(c) Steps to ensure that the EU delegation be systematically jointly responsible for visits by official EP
missions, with a commitment to provide assistance during visits and missions by MEPs in the course
of their parliamentary work;
(d) The submission to Parliament and the Council of an annual report by the Commission on the func-
tioning of the delegations;
8. Calls on the Commission to include in its forthcoming communication a detailed plan for reforming
the training of officials assigned to the external service, in accordance with the guidelines which Parliamentset out in its abovementioned resolution of 5 September 2000;
9. Hopes, in this context, that a meeting will be convened in the coming months between European
diplomatic colleges and institutes and the competent Commission bodies in order to consider draft trainingprogrammes for officials, the creation of a College of European Diplomacy and the development of abridging system between the external services of the Community and of the Member States;
10. Considers that both the external service and its constituent delegations should play an active role in
ensuring that the European Union enjoys a more coordinated presence on the international stage and
within international organisations;
11. Urges, in this respect, the Presidency-in-office to include this matter in one of the next General
Affairs Council meetings so as to verify the willingness of the Member States to make efforts to strengthenEU visibility and effectiveness with a view, in particular, to coordinating better the work of the variousembassies with the EU delegations and outlining proposals to encourage joint representations where poss-ible;
12. Urges the Commission to put forward more specific proposals, involving either the redeployment of
existing posts or the creation of additional posts, and to establish a better balance between statutoryofficials and local agents;
13. Calls on the Council and Commission to examine the different procedures that would make it
possible to introduce an effective system for incorporating national external services into the Communitysexternal service, including the gradual integration of Member States diplomats into the Communitysexternal service;28.2.2002 EN C 53 E/393 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 14 June 2001
14. Supports the establishment of regional delegations whose duties would extend to various neigh-
bouring states; points out, however, that this can only be done if these delegations include staff withspecialised knowledge of Community interests in the area, particularly as regards support for democrati-sation and respect for human rights;
15. Considers it necessary, nevertheless, to maintain delegations in those countries which play a positive
role in encouraging democracy and respect for human rights in the regional context concerned;
16. Calls for consideration to be given to setting up Commission delegations in third countries where
fewer than four Member States are represented by diplomatic missions;
17. Agrees that the possibility should be considered of opening delegations or information offices in
various states, strengthening the presence in areas such as:
(a) South-East Asia, where analysis should focus in particular on Singapore, which is the European
Unions fifteenth largest trading partner, and Taiwan (as already envisaged in the list of priorities foropening new delegations (SEC(1998) 1261), approved by the Commission in 1998), the Unions four-teenth largest trading partner;
(b) The countries of the Arab and Islamic world, since the Commission has no representation in the Gulf
area, which is why it would be useful to open a delegation in Saudi Arabia (as already envisaged in the
1998 list of priorities) and in Iran, which could facilitate the dialogue between producers and con-
sumers regarding oil and gas and encourage democratic reform;
(c) Latin America, where delegations should be opened (as already envisaged in the 1998 list of priorities)
in Paraguay and, in particular, Ecuador, bearing in mind the strong migratory flow from this countryto the European Union;
18. Takes the view that there can be no dispute as to the need to open a delegation in Switzerland, the
EUs second largest trade partner in 1999;
19. Urges the Commission to fulfil its commitment to approve, in the first half of 2001, a communi-
cation on the overall development of the external service, taking account of its abovementioned resolution,
as well as this resolution;
Budgetary aspects
20. Notes that the policy guidance proposed by the Commission is a step towards what Parliament has
repeatedly called for over the last few years; stresses that as they stand, however, the proposals are char-acterised by a lack of ambition, precision and budgetary rigour;
21. Cautions the Commission against any footdragging in adopting specific and ambitious flanking
measures for large-scale vertical redeployment from headquarters to delegations, and horizontal deploy-ment between delegations, on the basis of the Unions political and budgetary priorities, which mightjeopardise the policy guidance proposed in the communication;
22. Notes that the declared goal of programme management devolution seems hard to reconcile with
the way in which project cycles currently proceed, which is very much based on implementation outsourc-
ing by central Commission departments to legal persons governed by private law; expects the Commission
to make proposals promptly to clarify what respectively, within cycles, its central departments, its devolvedservices and private actors are responsible for;
23. Will scrupulously make sure that reform of the external service incorporates the performance tar-
gets laid down by the budgetary authority in 2001 by improving the project cycle, eliminating cumber-some red tape, making the chain of delegation transparent, keeping political oversight within the Commis-sion, and restricting tasks involving the Commissions discretionary powers to regular staff;C 53 E/394 EN 28.2.2002 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 14 June 2001
24. Calls on the Commission to examine how to grant recipient states Community aid from a revolving
fund equivalent to a limited percentage (5-10 %) of total programmed aid, so as to allow the states con-cerned to lose no time in embarking on programme implementation;
25. Looks to the Commission for a proposal for a precise timetable for implementing the measures to
be taken with regard to redeployment and harmonisation of the ratio between regular and local staff onthe basis of a clear definition of the role of delegations and the volume of aid they implement;
26. Points out that the fact that relatively few Commission staff are assigned to development aid is
virtually meaningless, since the ways in which the Commission intervenes differ profoundly from thoseof the Member States in that they are based on the use of outsourcing on a massive scale;
27. Is aware of the additional cost of expatriation and mobility of staff to be redeployed, but takes the
view that cost must not be an obstacle to this action;
28. Takes the view, then, that the requests for additional staff referred to in paragraphs 3 and 12 could
not be justified unless they were part of an overall reform of the project cycle which called for more directinvolvement of Commission departments in programme management;
29. Will assess during the 2002 budgetary procedure, and as the 2001 budget is implemented, the
progress made by the Commission; proposes to make use of the tools provided by the budgetary authorityin order to guarantee a substantial improvement in the Unions external assistance.
Concerning the action plan proposed by the Commission
30. Calls on the Commission, having conducted a bench-mark exercise with external services of
Member States, to submit an Action Plan by 15 October 2001 with a clear timetable on measures takenand planned, and to submit a progress report to Parliament every year and to take account of the follow-ing ten points in its Action Plan:
31. Declaration of Assurance: welcomes that under deconcentration, Delegations will bear greater
responsibility for implementation and financial management of projects; recalls paragraph 10(II) of its dis-charge resolution of 4 April 2001 (
1) whereby each Head of Delegation is asked to sign
(a) for the first time by 1 June 2001, a declaration of assurance that adequate internal controls have been
put in place;
(b) for the first time by 1 March 2002, an annual statement that all funds for which s/he is responsible
have, as far as s/he is aware, been spent in accordance with the principles of sound and efficientmanagement;
32. Mission statement and job descriptions: regrets that, in the past, an unclear definition of responsi-
bilities has hindered the management of the entire aid effort; calls for the establishment of a missionstatement for each delegation and a clear definition of the duties for all categories of staff both in head-quarters and the field involved in the project cycle;
33. Redeployment between existing delegations: points out the need to review resources allocated to
delegations; recalls paragraph 9 point (vii) of its discharge resolution of 4 April 2001 in which Parliamentencourages the Commission to continue the redeployment programme launched in 1996 in which70 officials were redeployed amongst the delegations and 50 amongst headquarters and the delegations;welcomes that 31, or nearly a quarter of delegations, now have regional responsibilities;
34. Need for new delegations: recalls that the Commission agreed in 1998 on a list of political priorities
for the opening of new Delegations in Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Saudi Arabia,Malaysia, Uzbekistan, Switzerland, Taiwan, Paraguay and Ecuador; notes the lack of representation in some28.2.2002 EN C 53 E/395 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 14 June 2001
(1) Texts Adopted, Item 4.
key regions including South East Asia, Central Asia and the Gulf States; notes that, in its amending letter to
the 2001 budget, the Commission requested a total of 261 new A-grade posts, of which 40 will be used tostrengthen existing Delegations; calls for the establishment of Delegations in regions with political andeconomic importance for the Union;
35. Over-centralisation: contrasts the heavily centralised decision-making ethos in the Commission with
that of other countries including Sweden, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and the United States
(USAID), where staff in the field are given greater responsibility (
1); notes that in 1998 the Ting report by
the analysis group on relations between Brussels and the Delegations recommended an increase in staffresponsibilities; welcomes that, in the first wave of deconcentration, a further 23 delegations have beenselected to take on direct financial responsibilities, including the delegation in Jerusalem; asks the Commis-sion to bring forward plans for subsequent phases of de-centralisation for all its remaining Delegations;
36. In-house expertise: observes that, according to the Court of Auditors, Delegations in Asia, Latin
America and the Mediterranean countries lack staff with expertise in financial management in general,and tendering and contracting in particular; notes that Technical Assistance Offices, such as the MEDA
teams, both in headquarters and in the field, have been characterised by a high turn-over of staff and a loss
of in-house knowledge and expertise; calls for appropriate and continued training of officials and locallyrecruited staff;
37. Quality-control: notes that the Commission has acknowledged the need to improve the quality of
country programming by the establishment of the interservice quality support group (IQSG) under theDirectorate-General for Development; expects that the IQSG will ensure that country strategy papers andnational indicative programmes are of consistently high quality; points out the need for explicit quantifiedtargets and performance indicators to facilitate monitoring and ex post evaluation;
38. Monitoring and evaluation:
(a) regrets that, under the current input-oriented system, form, administrative issues and quantitative
factors take precedence over substance, impact analysis and qualitative indicators; observes that alack of clear responsibilities and the use of outdated transmission methods results in the loss of timewhile documents are sent to and fro between the various actors; calls for Delegations, based on best
practice, to monitor the implementation of actions and measures taken by recipient governments and
to make the best use of information technology and telecommunications;
(b) welcomes the quality of financial controls carried out by the Delegation in Sarajevo; recalls problems
identified, in paragraph 9, points (x) and (xi) of its abovementioned discharge resolution concerningthe Commissions Representation in Stockholm and Delegation in Washington; asks that preventativecontrols be made regarding possible fictitious contracts and refurbishment of residences in other Del-egations;
(c) notes that controls were carried out by the inspectorate-general which recently examined delegations
in Angola, Bolivia, Bosnia, Gambia, Lesotho, Malawi, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Romania, Senegal, Swazi-land, Switzerland and Tanzania; calls for executive summaries of past investigations and plans forfuture controls to be submitted to the Committee on Budgetary Control;
39. Management tools: notes that the ACP Delegations employ a basic procedures manual dating from
1978; regrets that no procedures manual exists for Asian and Mediterranean Delegations; asks the Com-mission to update and consolidate manuals and publish them on its web-site; notes that for the vastmajority of Delegations accounting information is transmitted manually as most cannot access the Com-missions central accounting system Sincom II; encourages the Commission to introduce a reliable and
comprehensive management information tool;
(1) Court of Auditors Special Report No 21/2000 (OJ C 57, 22.2.2001, p. 1).C 53 E/396 EN 28.2.2002 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 14 June 2001
40. Visibility: notes that a number of delegations have taken the initiative to publish their activities on
their own websites; encourages the Commission at headquarters to facilitate this activity for those del-egations that do not have sufficient resources;
41. Believes that bottlenecks in filling vacancies should not be tackled by closing or down-grading
delegations as this only creates further problems; instead, there should be greater restructuring thanplanned, with the employment of more temporary, B and C-grade staff and, particularly in the ACP coun-tries, local staff;
42. Welcomes the Commission proposal to deploy more local and ALAT staff but believes that the EU
delegations in developing countries should make a particular effort to increase the number of potentialcandidates by offering special training courses in order to increase the chances for skilled and university-trained local staff to be employed;
43. Believes that the Commissions approach should take account of the Councils call for greater
involvement of governmental and non-governmental organisations from the Member States; believes thatparticular account must be taken of the increased opportunities afforded in the 2001 budget for NGOs toapply for funds for projects from, for example, the regional budget lines for Asia, Latin America and SouthAfrica, something which will result in additional demands being made on the expertise of the delegations;
44. Believes that better coordination between the delegations and the Member States is required in
order to give substance to the desired complementarity between the development policy of the EU andthat of the Member States; points out that such coordination is of particular importance during the pro-gramming phase of the various Community initiatives in developing countries;
45. Believes that regional cooperation, which is an important goal of development cooperation, should
be given greater material and staff back-up; notes that the present approach of regional offices, which isbased primarily on considerations of staff savings rather than substantive concepts, does not appear toguarantee this; considers, in particular, that a permanent presence is essential in individual ACP partnercountries because of communications and transport problems; points out that the regional offices thereforerequire an approach that is tailored to development policy requirements;
46. Urges the Commission to present the multiannual programme for delegations, which should figure
more prominently in the deconcentration programme, and to link it to development objectives;
*
**
47. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission and Council.
15. European Unions oil supply
A5-0163/2001
European Parliament resolution on the Communication from the Commission on the European
Unions oil supply (COM(2000) 631  C5-0739/2000  2000/2335(COS))
The European Parliament,
 having regard to the Commission communication (COM(2000) 631  C5-0739/2000),
 having regard to Rule 47(1) of its Rules of Procedure,28.2.2002 EN C 53 E/397 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 14 June 2001