(Amendment 3)
Article 2a (new)
Article 2a
By 31 December 2000 the Commission shall submit to the
European Parliament and the Council, legislative proposals
to safeguard the future of actions under the EuropeanCommunities investment partners (ECIP) financial instru-ment, in the form either of a new improved ECIP instru-ment, or of a single investment facility for all developingcountries.
European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a European Parliament and Council
Regulation regarding the closure and liquidation of projects adopted by the Commission under
Council Regulation (EC) No 213/96 on the implementation of the European Communities invest-
ment partners financial instrument for the countries of Latin America, Asia, the Mediterranean
region and South Africa (COM(1999) 726 Sdash C5-0062/2000 Sdash 2000/0034(COD))
(Codecision procedure: first reading)
The European Parliament,
.dash having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council
(COM(1999) 726)(1),
.dash having regard to Articles 251(2) and 179(1) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission
submitted the proposal to Parliament (C5-0062/2000),
.dash having regard to Rule 67of its Rules of Procedure,.dash having regard to the report of the Committee on Development and Cooperation and the opinions of
the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Budgetary Control (A5-0202/2000),
1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;
2. Asks to be consulted again should the Commission intend to amend its proposal substantially or
replace it with another text;
3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.
(1) OJ C 150 E, 30.5.2000, p. 79.
3. MEDA (annual report 1998)
A5-0205/2000
European Parliament resolution on the Commission report: Implementation of the MEDA pro-
gramme Sdash 1998 annual report (COM(1999) 291 Sdash C5-0117/1999 Sdash 1999/2120(COS))
The European Parliament,
.dash having regard to the Commission report (COM(1999) 291 .dash C5-0117/1999),
.dash having regard to the reports ‘Evaluation of the MEDA Final Report Regulation, Euronet
Consulting, February 1999’ and ‘Evaluation of the structural adjustment facilities in the countries ofthe Southern Mediterranean, CERDI-CNRS, April 1999’ requested by the Commission,C 135/62 EN 7.5.2001 Official Journal of the European Communities
Tuesday 5 September 2000
TEXT PROPOSED
BY THE COMMISSIONAMENDMENTS
BY PARLIAMENT
.dash having regard to Special Report No 1/96 of the Court of Auditors on the MEDA programmes(1) and
Special Report No 1/98 of the Court of Auditors on bilateral financial and technical cooperation withMediterranean third countries(
2),
.dash having regard to the Barcelona Declaration of November 1995 adopted by the Euro-Mediterranean
Conference,
.dash having regard to the Århus Convention of 1998(3),
.dash having regard to the conclusions of the presidency of the Euro-Mediterranean Summit of Stuttgart
(April 1999),
.dash having regard to the conclusions of the Euro-Mediterranean Conference of Ministers of Helsinki on the
environment (November 1997),
.dash having regard to the declaration of the Euro-Mediterranean Conference of Ministers of Turin on man-
agement of local waters (October 1999),
.dash having regard to the conclusions of the civil forums of Barcelona (November and December 1995),
Malta on intercultural dialogue (April 1997), Naples (December 1997) and Stuttgart on the environ-
ment and human rights (April 1999),
.dash having regard to its resolution of 30 March 2000 on Mediterranean policy(4),
.dash having regard to Article 47(1) of its Rules of Procedure,.dash having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy and
the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence
Policy and the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (A5-0205/2000),
A. whereas the 1998 report of activities gives a synthesis of MEDA I which serves as a point of departure
for tabling reform proposals for the proper functioning of the future MEDA II programme,
B. believing that a renegotiation of MEDA is an exceptional opportunity for drawing up a balance sheet
on the past and for extending the dialogue between all the operators, both governmental and non-governmental, on the future of MEDA,
C. restating its firm belief that the political stability and prosperity of the Mediterranean region are of
strategic importance to all concerned, and mindful of the importance of Euro-Mediterranean coopera-
tion as a means of promoting policies which help guarantee the stability and economic and socialdevelopment of that region,
D. whereas the MEDA programme is the keystone of the financial cooperation in the Euro-Mediterranean
partnership underpinning the huge task of coping with a non-homogeneous region and establishing
horizontal dialogue,
E. whereas MEDA is the financial instrument of the partnership and should therefore be used to put in
place measures in the framework of the three aspects of the Barcelona Declaration: political, economicand socio-cultural,
F. whereas any form of cooperation is based on respect for human rights, and whereas the purpose of
this cooperation is not simply progress in economic respects but also, and more importantly, in
respect of democracy, freedom, peace, the removal of inequalities and sustainable development,
G. whereas bilateral cooperation (90%) far outweighs regional cooperation (10%), and stressing the fun-
damental importance of the latter in establishing an atmosphere of dialogue, exchange and coopera-
tion, which is the principal objective of the partnership,
(1) OJ C 240, 19.8.1996.
(2) OJ C 98, 31.3.1998.
(3) Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental
matters. UN Economic Commission for Europe, Århus, Denmark, June 1998.
(4) Texts Adopted, Item 4.7.5.2001 EN C 135/63 Official Journal of the European Communities
Tuesday 5 September 2000
H. whereas the Commission has proposed a major simplification of MEDA management procedures
aimed at overcoming the delays and malfunctioning found under MEDA I; whereas the signatories tothe Barcelona Declaration and the European Parliament should nevertheless retain a major say in the
management of MEDA for the sake of transparency and democracy,
I. mindful of the fact that actual expenditure in this implementation period has been low,
J. whereas the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Forum for exchange and dialogue between national
representatives, civil society and the Community Institutions should play a major role in following
up implementation of MEDA,
K. whereas a large proportion of MEDA I funds has been devoted to establishing the Euro-Mediterranean
free trade area provided for in Barcelona, including structural adjustment measures and support for
economic transition,
L. whereas the creation of a free trade area should not be regarded as an end in itself but as a means of
improving the quality of life in all the partner countries, and regretting that the increased pace of
implementation of the economic measures has not been accompanied by equivalent support forother areas of the partnership, in particular the social, cultural, environmental and political dimen-
sions,
M. whereas the overall nature of Euro-Mediterranean cooperation must be respected, thus making it
essential to ensure the genuine synergy of its political, economic and human components,
N. stressing the decisive role which decentralised cooperation can play in the Mediterranean in promoting
democracy and in supporting the emergence of a civil society; regretting that the MED programmes
have been blocked since 1997despite appeals by Parliament and the Ministers of Foreign Affairs
meeting in Stuttgart in April 1999,
O. whereas only the active and equitable participation of civil society in all MEDA operations can guar-
antee democracy, sustainable development and, in the final analysis, the success of the partnership,
P. whereas, in order to guarantee the effectiveness of Euro-Mediterranean cooperation and promote
democracy and respect for human rights in the area, it is necessary to strengthen the role of non-
governmental organisations and encourage the participation of civil society in all MEDA operations,
Q. believing that this participation is impeded in certain partnership countries by excessive state control
of the management of MEDA, and whereas there are no genuine consultative processes when theindicative programmes are drawn up,
R. having regard to the six priorities of the partnership: the environment, water policy, industry, energy,
transport and the information society,
S. whereas the long-term objectives of Euro-Mediterranean cooperation include fostering lasting socio-
economic development, improving the living conditions of the population, increasing employmentlevels and protecting the environment,
T. whereas some of the priority areas have received no real political or financial support under MEDA,
as was the case with the environment and the short-term action programme (SMAP) adopted in Hel-
sinki in 1997which has encountered major start-up problems,
U. whereas water is a problem of fundamental importance in the region which deserves special attention
from the MEDA programme; concerned at the degree of overutilisation of water resources in the
Mediterranean and at the risk of a reduction in quality, in particular because of demographic changes,urbanisation, the development of tourism and inappropriate economic policies,C 135/64 EN 7.5.2001 Official Journal of the European Communities
Tuesday 5 September 2000
V. whereas in the energy sector the construction of new infrastructure and interconnections is aimed at
promoting the use of fossil fuels, which are more costly and which cause more pollution; whereasdecentralised networks of renewable and alternative energy would be better suited to improving living
conditions in the beneficiary countries,
1. Considers that, given the strategic importance of the EU’s relations with the countries in the MEDA
programme as a whole, mere consultation of the European Parliament is not in keeping with the latter’s
significance in institutional terms. For this reason, it is clearly essential for the Commission and the Coun-
cil to reach a political agreement to take greater account of the European Parliament’s views;
2. Welcomes the adoption of the MEDA regulation but calls for the programme’s implementing rules to
be simplified;
3. Calls for a more equitable breakdown of funds between the three dimensions of the partnership and
for more political dialogue in each of these areas;
4. Calls on the Member States’ parliaments which have not yet ratified outstanding association agree-
ments (notably that with Jordan) to do so as a matter of urgency;
5. Points out that the strengthening of political and economic links with the Mediterranean countries is
increasingly becoming one of the European Union’s political priorities (see also the most recent Commis-
sion statements); the strategic importance of the economic and social development of the Mediterranean
region is recognised by all the institutions and is just as great a challenge as enlargement of the Union. Forthis reason it is necessary to establish a substantial indicative budget for the years 2000-2006;
6. Considers that the economic links between the European Union and the beneficiary countries should
be based on ensuring sustainable development in those countries;
7. Wants MEDA to have a more strategic and integrated approach aimed at sustainable development,
and calls for MEDA to give specific support to drawing up and implementing national sustainable devel-
opment plans for the partnership countries;
8. Calls for interregional cooperation to be stepped up, so that wide-ranging horizontal programmes
can be put in place;
9. Stresses the need to boost interregional economic and energy projects that will result in a fully-
fledged common free-trade area by 2010;
10. Believes that, if the Barcelona process is to be an overall success, it is essential to speed up the
negotiation of association agreements with Algeria, Lebanon and Syria;
11. Calls on the Commission to speed up the process of negotiating the association agreements which
are still outstanding, while ensuring that sustainable development remains the prime objective;
12. Stresses that, as regards the programme for Turkey, it is particularly necessary that the Turkish
Government should end the State’s legal, political, cultural and social discrimination against the Kurdish
population. The granting of EU funds to Turkey should therefore be linked with steps to resolve the Kurd-
ish issue in Turkey and, in particular, with efforts to overcome economic and social underdevelopment inthe regions in which the Kurdish population lives;
13. Notes that, in the case of Cyprus and Malta particularly, the MEDA programme has essentially not
yet been implemented. Those countries must therefore remain within the programme so that MEDA com-
plements any other funding decided during the preaccession process;
14. Calls for a substantial increase in the MEDA funds intended for regional programmes and projects
with a south-south dimension, to be defined in dialogue with local governmental and non-governmentaloperators;7.5.2001 EN C 135/65 Official Journal of the European Communities
Tuesday 5 September 2000
15. Considers that a significant part of the MEDA programme must be devoted to promoting coopera-
tion between countries, and between ethnic and religious groups historically beset by conflict and hostility;
16. Calls, as a follow-up to the conclusions of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs meeting in Stuttgart, for a
broad consensus to be established with civil society on the economic reform programmes which hithertohave been the priority objective of MEDA;
17. Regrets the complexity of the implementation of Mediterranean policy and the lengthy administra-
tive procedures. Given the high political stakes and sums of money involved, the Commission should
guarantee that a sufficient number of officials work on MEDA;
18. Considers that even though the low disbursement rate remains a problem, the quality of project
preparation and the efficiency of the projects are of utmost importance in MEDA; urges the Commissionto make its project management procedures more efficient while maintaining high accounting standards;
19. While welcoming the objective of establishing a free trade zone in the Mediterranean area, points
out that the non-EU partner countries will only fully benefit when they can have full and free access to the
European Union market for their agricultural and food products and that progress to this end should be
accelerated, but with compensation within the Common Agricultural Policy for those regions of the Eur-opean Community which will be directly affected by any increased competition;
20. Calls for the reforms provided for in the new MEDA II Regulation and the simplification of the
procedures to become operational as soon as possible;
21. Believes that the low take-up of expenditure commitments under MEDA should constitute grounds
for tackling and resolving the problems behind this under-utilisation of available resources, rather than for
reducing budget lines;
22. Supports an increase in Commission staff assigned to management of the MEDA programme and
all the Mediterranean initiatives in which the Commission participates;
23. Seeks better and regular information on the effects of the MEDA programme on the stability and
expansion of jobs, raising of the poverty line and changes in the social strata of the different countriesconcerned;
24. Calls on the Commission to draw up and make available to Parliament and the public an annual
report, both hard copy and on the web, detailing the use of funds and the political strategies adopted;
25. Calls on the Commission and the EIB to forward to the Parliamentary Forum their annual evalua-
tion report on MEDA and any other document permitting regular monitoring of implementation;
26. Points out that the countries which are the beneficiaries of the programme must guarantee, espe-
cially with regard to women and children, observance of democratic principles and human rights, which
are the keystone of cooperation with Europe; compliance with this aspect must be carefully followed up by
the Commission, which must report to the European Parliament thereon at regular intervals and must nothesitate, if necessary, to propose measures to suspend assistance to a given country;
27. Calls on the Commission to draw up an annual report specifically on human rights in the Mediter-
ranean; this report should form one of the bases of the process of deepening cooperation;
28. Welcomes the new proposals for MEDA II, which seek to develop the MEDA programme further;
supports the programming approach and indicative programmes instead of individual projects, although
this does not mean an end to cooperation between the European Union and the social interlocutors in theMediterranean area;C 135/66 EN 7.5.2001 Official Journal of the European Communities
Tuesday 5 September 2000
29. Is aware of the fact that the preparation of regional projects is very time-consuming because of the
consultations needed among different partners; considers, however, that the regional projects are a veryimportant part of the MEDA programme; considers that there should be joint cross-border projects
between the Mediterranean coastal and island regions;
30. Calls, furthermore, for information on the process of programming, adoption, implementation and
evaluation of the projects to be made available in due course to permit genuine public consultation; these
requirements should apply both to projects managed by the Commission and to projects managed by the
European Investment Bank;
31. Suggests that actions aimed at small and medium-sized enterprises should be further strengthened;
points out that the main goal should be to facilitate the exchange of information and contacts between
potential partners by making available to SMEs in the Mediterranean non-member countries existing Com-
munity instruments and programmes originally created to assist European SMEs;
32. Believes there is a need to redefine the concept of ‘civil participation’ so that it is not limited simply
to free participation in calls for tender, and to give a real dimension to the concept of ‘partnership’ inaccordance with the Convention of Arhus;
33. Stresses that, in order to strengthen democracy and civil society in the Mediterranean countries, it is
of the utmost importance that non-governmental organisations are also given an opportunity to participatein the programme;
34. Calls for the criteria of democracy and sustainable development to be integral features of the pro-
gramming process, and for compliance by the partner countries with international agreements on human
rights and the environment to be considered a criterion for eligibility for MEDA funds;
35. Calls for the new process of consultation with the Commission to take into account these priorities,
in particular:
.dash support for investment;
.dash support for decentralised cooperation;
.dash support for a joint management policy with regard to migration;
36. Calls for MEDA to be subject to the same social and environmental standards as those already in
force under other Community policies and instruments, in particular the structural funds or Agenda 2000;
37. Asks the Commission to ensure that the environmental and social dimension are integrated into
each national and regional indicative programme;
38. Stresses that support for structural adjustment programmes should be linked more closely with the
objective of improving socio-economic balance in the countries concerned; highlights the importance of
reducing inequalities between the two shores of the Mediterranean basin to avoid excessive migratory
flows, which would help to improve the situation as regards illegal immigration in the area. This needsto be dealt with urgently;
39. Requests the Commission to start, before the end of 2000, a participatory process of strategic eva-
luation of the social and environmental impact of the Euro-Mediterranean free trade area, as promised bythe Commission at the Stuttgart environmental forum in April 1999;
40. Notes that special attention should be focused on urban areas; considers that action should be taken
in order to improve quality of life in urban areas, promote the development of local democracy and
decentralised cooperation between local authorities in Mediterranean non-member countries and theircounterparts in the European Union;
41. Calls for specific measures to be financed by MEDA aimed at strengthening cooperation in agricul-
ture and rural development in order to improve the quality of life of the countryside and to reduce fooddependency;7.5.2001 EN C 135/67 Official Journal of the European Communities
Tuesday 5 September 2000
42. Underlines the need to support and promote technical assistance projects and programmes for small
and medium-sized enterprises and to bolster vocational training programmes for skilled workers andemployers alike;
43. Calls on the Commission, as a matter of urgency, to relaunch the MEDA programmes under a more
appropriate formula, while ensuring that they are accessible to all sectors of civil society, including NGOs,and guaranteeing, in particular via the delegations, that access to funding is open on an equitable basis to
all representatives of civil society regardless of belief, sex or political affiliation;
44. Calls in particular for the gender dimension to be taken into account in all initiatives undertaken
under MEDA projects, and calls for it to be made an assessment criterion in future reports;
45. Calls for MEDA funds for training actions in all areas of the partnership to be increased substan-
tially and for them to be able to benefit all societies in the beneficiary countries;
46. Calls for special attention to be focused on cooperation programmes in the social, cultural and
human sphere, so as to help create a better understanding of cultural and religious diversity and thus
nurture tolerance and mutual respect;
47. Calls for the eligibility criteria of projects to be revised so that they are simplified and procedures
for the allocation and payment of funds (bank guarantees) are more flexible, with the possibility of redu-
cing the scope of projects, in particular by reintroducing MEDA micro-actions;
48. Strongly supports micro-projects, especially those involving exchanges of experts and students;49. Calls for the short and medium-term environment action programme (SMAP) adopted in Helsinki
in 1997to be reinforced so that it can become a consolidated and operational structure before the end
of 2000;
50. Welcomes the Euro-Mediterranean regional indicative programmes introduced in 1998; considers
that programmes such as the Euro-Mediterranean Information Society (Eumedis) programme will play a
significant role in setting up and supporting information technology networks and in co-financing pilotprojects for the application of information technology;
51. Calls for a regional cooperation programme for the management of water, with annual appropria-
tions of at least €10 million, to be established before the end of 2000 in order to implement the actionplan adopted in Turin in October 1999;
52. Calls, furthermore, for water to be an integral part of all MEDA programmes and projects, using
a participatory and precautionary approach;
53. Calls for water protection and purification projects to be afforded priority treatment;
54. Calls for regional cooperation projects aimed at combating marine pollution, an environmental
challenge which is crucial to the protection of the Mediterranean, to be stepped up;
55. Stresses that aid and rescue networks should be set up to respond to natural disasters such as earth-
quakes;
56. Calls for action in the area of renewable energy to be given priority in 2010, with annual energy
savings of 2,5% for all sectors of energy consumption;
57. Encourages the continuation and development of the Euro-Mediterranean Transport Forum; consid-
ers that this Forum should in the near future draw up an action plan for transport, including proposals for
measures and the means of implementing them, as well as a timetable;
58. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the Council and the parlia-
ments of the Member States.C 135/68 EN 7.5.2001 Official Journal of the European Communities
Tuesday 5 September 2000