WRITTEN QUESTION P-3695/03 by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission. MTR of CSPs in Asia and Latin America.
Date: 2003-12-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Asia, European Commission, Latin America, administration of the Institutions, aid evaluation, developing countries, development aid, information policy

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/155

As a basis for establishing the above-mentioned special status, the Cabo Verde Prime Minister referred to
his country’s ‘Atlantic vocation’, its presence in Europe ‘in the form of emigrant communities’ and its
proximity to Europe ‘by virtue of
(a geographical area encompassing the
the Macaronesia Islands’
Portuguese archipelagos of Madeira and the Azores and the Spanish archipelago of the Canary Islands.

The Commission:

(cid:1) is it aware of the Cabo Verde initiative which is described above;

(cid:1) what has it to say on the subject;

(cid:1) what action would it advise Cabo Verde to take in order to ensure that its proposal is accepted?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(19 January 2004)

The Commission has never been notified in a formal way by the authorities of Cape Verde of this matter.
However, the Commission is aware that the Cap-Verdian authorities, in the course of recent visits to the
capitals of some Member States, have raised these issues. The Commission is also aware that
the
Portuguese authorities have shown openness to the question of creating a working group ‘to examine the
different aspects of this question’.

(2004/C 88 E/0165)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3695/03

by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

(3 December 2003)

Subject: MTR of CSPs in Asia and Latin America

The Country and Regional Strategy Papers aim to give a coherent framework for Community cooperation
activities towards Asia and Latin American countries. The Mid-Term Review (MTR) of the Country Strategy
Papers (CSPs) assesses the validity of the priorities set up in the strategy documents. The guidelines for the
programming exercise specify consultation with stakeholders as part of the process. It is self-evident that
the programming exercise loses credibility and legitimacy when there has not been any consultation of
stakeholders. However, it appears, as some NGOs argue, that most, if not all, CSPs in Asia and Latin
American countries have been written from behind the desks of officials in Brussels. This seriously
undermines the value and validity of the CSPs.

At present a new issue is arising in relation to the process of reviewing the CSPs in the MTR. It is clear
that the validity of the MTR is in it following clear objectives, guidelines and indicators for measuring
performance, and a well-defined process. Whereas these guidelines have been developed for ACP countries,
for unknown reasons these guidelines are not seen as applying for other developing countries. More
importantly MTRs in other developing countries are being carried out without any guidelines, information
or transparent process. The Commission has also indicated that it will not seek or value consultation with
stakeholders, including civil society, in this process. This is an extraordinary position.

Is the Commission intending to apply the guidelines developed for the MTR in ACP countries to

1.
MTRs in other development countries?

2.
If not, what guidelines have been developed for the MTRs in other developing countries, and what is
the reason that these are different from ACP countries (cid:1) given that the objectives of the MTRs are the
same for all developing countries?

3. What is the information policy of the Commission on the MTR process?

4. What is the planning of the Commission on CSPs and MTRs in Asia and Latin American countries
for 2003-2005?

C 88 E/156

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 2004)

It is important to stress that Commission Delegations in Asia and Latin America (ALA) were instructed to
consult government and civil society when drafting the Country Strategy Papers (CSPs). Although there
may be differences between the relative participation of Headquarters and Delegations, it is not the case
that for any region CSPs would have been written ‘from behind the desks of officials in Brussels’.

As regards the guidelines for the Mid Term Review (MTR) exercise, the Commission is required to involve
civil society/non-state actors in the programming and implementation processes and so consult with
stakeholders. Such consultations are a key requirement for the review.

In order to maintain coherence and consistently high quality in the CSP process, it is accepted that certain
basic principles should apply to the MTR of Country Strategy Papers (CSPs) in all regions.

On 7 October 2003, the Directors General of Directorate General Development and External Relations
approved a document prepared by the inter-service Quality Support Group ‘Framework for Assessing,
revised Strategy and Programming Documents’ which builds on the orientations laid down in the Council
Conclusions as regards the Mid Term Review (MTR) of CSPs (1), and sets down the basic principles that
apply to an MTR.

Both the Asia and Latin America regions have been engaged in a Mid Term Review of country strategies
and programmes. In the light of this review, a number of revised strategies and programmes are being
prepared. It is very important to note that, given the programming horizon, the mid-term reviews for Asia
and Latin America have had to begin much earlier than those for the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP)
countries. Moreover, the review has to be carried out in full accordance with the ALA Regulation which
governs Community cooperation with these regions.

The MTR assessment will focus on four key requirements:

(cid:1) Main political, economic and social developments in the country (cid:1) ensuring that the strategy is up-to-

date.

(cid:1) New Community/Union policy objectives and commitments (cid:1) ensuring that these are taken into

account and put into operation.

(cid:1) Results, performance and lessons learned to the extent that these can already be assessed.

(cid:1) Quality improvements where these are needed (cid:1) ensuring a constant improvement of the quality of

strategy documents, in particular correcting some weaknesses in the first generation of CSPs.

The revised documents will be submitted to the inter-service Quality Support Group (iQSG) and the
relevant management committees according to the existing procedures and guidelines. For the ALA region
these submissions will take place in the next few months.

(1) 18 March 2003: Common Framework for Country Strategy Papers (cid:1) Council Conclusions, item adopted without

debate, Doc. 6377/03.

(2004/C 88 E/0166)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3819/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 December 2003)

Subject: Circulation in Greece of private vehicles fitted with Community numberplates

Freedom of movement of persons in the European Union is guaranteed, and any Community national may
elect to reside in any EU country, register his name on the relevant lists and (cid:1) if he so wishes (cid:1) purchase