WRITTEN QUESTION E-2956/03 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Increased financial support for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).
Date: 2003-10-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, EU relations, UN Population Fund, United States, abortion, aid policy, birth control, health aid, reproductive health

C 88 E/442

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

published in 2002 an open appeal for submission of proposals for ‘Support to the rule of law, good
governance, public accountability and freedom of opinion’ (114716/C/G/multi).

There has been a response from at least three women’s centres from the former Yugoslavia (the Belgrade
Women’s Studies Center, Women’s Studies Center of Zagreb and the Alternative Academic Network-
Belgrade), each with a project proposal. Despite the fact that promoting the equal participation of men and
women in the democratisation process was one of the priorities of the CARDS Democratic Stabilisation
Programme for 2002, none of the three centres has obtained support from the EU for project funding.

Are there any other organisations that advocate equal opportunities for men and women and are receiving
EU funding via the open appeal 114716/C/G/multi for their project? If so, which ones?

Why were the project proposals from the Belgrade Women’s Studies Center, Women’s Studies Center of
Zagreb and the Alternative Academic Network-Belgrade not considered?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(14 November 2003)

The Commission pays utmost attention to ensure that gender issues are integrated in the mainstream of all
European Community assistance programmes. The selection of projects participating in calls for proposals
within the Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and Stabilisation Programme (CARDS)
follow very strict evaluation procedures, which aim to select the best proposals to match the financial
resources available.

As far as the proposed project that the Honourable Member mentions, it is important to highlight that out
of the 130 proposals received from the six beneficiary states in the Western Balkans, only nine have been
chosen. These nine were selected strictly on the basis of the quality of the projects in respect to factors
such as the capacity of the management and the sustainability of the proposals. The three organisations
which are mentioned by the Honourable Member unfortunately did not achieve an evaluation score which
enables them to be funded. However, it may be of interest for the Honourable Member to know that the
non governmental organisation (NGO) ‘Woman Kind World-Wide’ will be awarded a grant to develop,
with the aid of local partners, an Albanian Women’s Leadership programme.

As a general note, promotion of equal participation of men and women in the democratisation process in
Serbia and Montenegro is also one of the priorities of the European Initiative for Democratisation and
Human Rights programme (EIDHR). The 2000 EIDHR micro-projects programme which will end in
December 2003 has supported four local women organisations from Serbia (Novi Sad Women’s Center;
SOS hotline and Center for Girls; Women’s Multiethnic Group Seleus; and Autonomous Women’s Center)
and two local women organisations from Montenegro (League of Women Voters of Montenegro and
Women Forum). The Commission will continue to pay special attention to gender issues both in the
CARDS and EIDHR programmes.

(2004/C 88 E/0450)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2956/03

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(8 October 2003)

Subject: Increased financial support for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)

Although the US State Department cleared the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) of accusations of abortion
and forced sterilisation, the US House of Representatives decided on Tuesday, 23 July not to make any
further contributions to the Fund. As a result, the Fund will be deprived of nearly USD 100 million in
2004 and 2005.

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/443

The Fund helps developing countries to improve gynaecological healthcare and is an important body in
the fight against population explosion and other demographic trends that lead to poverty. One of the
Fund’s responsibilities in this area is (advice on) contraception. The cancellation of American contributions
will lead to two million unwanted pregnancies and 800 000 abortions going unprevented. It is estimated
that thousands of mothers will die in childbirth and children at birth for lack of resources.

What is the Commission’s view of this step by the USA, and has it made its position known to the US
Administration?

Is the Commission prepared to provide UNFPA with extra financial support so that countless lives can be
saved?

If so, how much will the Commission make available?

If not, why not?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(19 November 2003)

The Commission is very disappointed at the decision taken by the United States House of Representatives
to end contributions to the UNFPA. The Commission fully supports the policies set out in the Programme
of Action adopted at the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo. The
Commission considers that
this latest decision by the United States House of Representatives puts
implementation of the Programme at risk.

The Commission has supported UNFPA projects on many occasions. Last year the Commission financed a
project to support UNFPA for EUR 20 million as part of a EUR 32 million package for sexual and
reproductive health agreed after earlier cuts in United States support. A further EUR 12 million has been
set aside for an extension of this programme. The Commission is also ready to review any proposals
received from UNFPA in the call for proposals launched under Regulation (EC) No 1567/2003 of the
Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2003 on aid for policies and actions on reproductive and sexual
health and rights in developing countries (1). In the draft budget for 2004, this budget line has been
increased to EUR 17,8 million in order to respond to increased needs in this field.

(1) OJ L 224, 6.9.2003.

(2004/C 88 E/0451)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2972/03

by Bill Newton Dunn (ELDR) to the Commission

(6 October 2003)

Subject: EU funding in Kenya

Where have EU funds given to Kenya, particularly to the Gitaru Sub-location, gone and how are they
tracked? What mechanisms exist to monitor the dispersal of these funds? If no such mechanism exists,
could the Commission explain why this is the case? Furthermore,
is the Commission able to provide
information on the source of funding for places in secondary education for children in Kenya and the
Gitaru Sub-location?