EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/291

(2004/C 84 E/0337)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-4048/03

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(7 January 2004)

Subject: EDF budgetisation

Would the Commission agree that if a sub-heading was put in place for ODA in Heading 4, it would increase visibility of EU efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, and provide an easy way to monitor the Monterrey commitments? Furthermore, would the Commission agree that a sub-heading would also provide the possibility of increasing coherence among the EU's external actions, and provide some guarantee to the ACP states that appropriations would be used for their original purpose?

To what extent does the Commission believe that such a sub-heading could be strengthened by ring-fencing EDF resources through a co-decided financial regulation, and creation of budgetary procedures that would not compromise the partnership, ownership and joint management of the Cotonou Agreement?

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(25 February 2004)

The Commission shares the concern for transparency in the budget and for maintaining the partnership, ownership and joint management of the Cotonou Agreement.

However, it does not believe that the creation of a separate sub-heading in Heading 4 would help to achieve these objectives, assuming that budgetisation of all aid to African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States is decided, for the following reasons:

— About 95 % of commitments under heading 4 of the budget and under the European Development Fund (EDF) combined already qualify as Official Development Assistance (ODA). Putting in place in the post-2006 financial framework, an ODA sub-heading therefore would not bring any value added;

— Budget appropriations (inputs) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) (results) are linked to a certain extent, but have to be treated separately. Achievement of the MDGs is monitored at the level of the beneficiary country;

— The amounts reported to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC) already provide the appropriate basis for monitoring the Monterrey commitments in relation to Community aid;

— The best assurance to the ACP States that adequate appropriations will be guaranteed during the period of the next financial framework will consist of the incorporation, in the basic act (programme regulation) which would govern future budgetised aid to ACP States, of a multi-annual financial reference amount commensurate with the EU's commitments. This means that the external aid ceilings to be agreed for the post-2006 financial framework would need to be sufficiently increased.

The Commission further believes that the budgetary and financial provisions, as they currently exist, offer a good balance between incentives towards effective and efficient implementation and adequate possibilities for partnership, ownership and joint management.

The Commission pays increased attention to monitoring and to reporting on progress towards the Millennium development goals in its annual reports on the implementation of external aid (1). These reports now provide comprehensive statistics on EC development aid in accordance with DAC criteria.

(1) COM(2003) 527 final.