WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1203/97 by Ulla SANDBÆK to the Commission. ECHO disaster preparedness programme (DIPECHO)
Date: 1997-04-07
Institutions: European Parliament, SANDBAEK
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, aid to disaster victims, civil defence, environmental risk prevention, humanitarian aid, natural disaster, non-governmental organisation













EUR-Lex - 91997E1203 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1203

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1203/97 by Ulla SANDBÆK to the Commission. ECHO disaster preparedness programme (DIPECHO)  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0053 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1203/97 by Ulla Sandbæk (I-EDN) to the Commission (7 April 1997)Subject: ECHO disaster preparedness programme (DIPECHO)Following the meeting of the Humanitarian Aid Committee of 16 July 1996, the Commission adopted a new approach to disaster prevention, mitigation and preparedness programme for 1996-1998 (DIPECHO). Previously, ECHO had provided almost ECU 7 million in the 1994-1995 period, which financed 50 disaster prevention, mitigation and preparedness operations. An evaluation of 12 of them produced favourable assessments in all cases.What budget has the Commission reserved for the new DIPECHO programme in the three-year period for which it is designed?Considering the size of the total ECHO budget in 1994-95, does the Commission agree that ECU 7 million in those two years does not represent a great effort on ECHO's part in terms of preventing disasters?What scope does the Commission have to increase the funds available for disaster prevention, mitigation and preparedness?Considering the fact that 95% of ECHO's budget is presently going to disasters that are classified as man-made, not as 'natural' disasters, does the DIPECHO programme have scope for financing programmes which aim to prevent disasters that are not strictly 'natural' disasters?Does the Commission's choice to reverse its current practice of reacting to NGO proposals mean that it intends to take up the task of identifying and formulating projects, thus taking over the task that is the very reason why the Commission has chosen to work with NGOs in the first place?Answer given by Ms Bonino on behalf of the Commission (30 May 1997)No budget has yet been allocated to the Dipecho programme, because this year it is still only in the appraisal stage and should not therefore need funding. Studies now in hand will show up what the needs are and help to determine the budget for the coming years.The first thing that needs to be pointed out is that, since prevention is a field which the Commission endeavours to integrate into its other activities (global plans in particular), total funds actually allocated to this subject exceed those for heading B7-219 intended just for disaster prevention (ECU 7 million for 1994-95). And allocations for B7-219 are on a constant, gently rising trend: ECU 6 million in 1996 and ECU 7 million in 1997.The main thing is to compare like with like: prevention and preparation for 'natural' disasters financed by the Commission account for about 20% of funding of humanitarian aid in response to those 'natural' disasters. In relative terms these are not inconsiderable amounts, even if the figures are ethically difficult to compare. In relation to the number of victims and the damage due to these disasters the Commission admits that the preventive measures taken will never be sufficient.The Commission also plans a substantial increase, from 1998, within existing budget resources, in the amounts intended for disaster prevention in order to take into account implementation of the Dipecho programme, although no figure can be given before preparation of the programme is completed.The regions and countries on which Dipecho concentrates were chosen solely for their proneness to natural disasters. Under this programme funds will therefore be focused primarily on such disasters.With the Dipecho programme the Commission is becoming involved more in the identification and definition of projects while leaving their final development and implementation to its usual partners: non-governmental organizations and international organizations.