EU report on policy coherence for development (2011) European Parliament resolution of 25 October 2012 on the EU 2011 Report on Policy Coherence for Development (2012/2063(INI))
Date: 2012-10-25
Institutions: Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, Committee on Fisheries, Committee on Regional Development, Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, European Parliament
Subjects: EU policy, development aid, economic and social cohesion, poverty, sustainable development








CE2014072EN.01002101.xml










11.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 72/21





Thursday 25 October 2012EU report on policy coherence for development (2011)
P7_TA(2012)0399
European Parliament resolution of 25 October 2012 on the EU 2011 Report on Policy Coherence for Development (2012/2063(INI))
2014/C 72 E/03

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to Articles 9 and 35 of the joint statement by the Council and the representatives of the governments of the Member States meeting within the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission on European Union Development Policy: ‘The European Consensus’ (1),










—


having regard to Title V of the Treaty on European Union and, in particular, Article 21(2) thereof, establishing the principles and objectives of the EU in international relations, and to Article 208(2), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,










—


having regard to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity from 1992 and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants,










—


having regard to Article 12 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement (the Cotonou Agreement),










—


having regard to the Commission Staff Working Paper entitled ‘EU 2011 Report on Policy Coherence for Development’ (SEC(2011)1627),










—


having regard to the Commission Staff Working Paper entitled "The EU – a global partner for development speeding up progress towards the Millennium Development Goals" (SEC(2008)0434),










—


having regard to the Commission Staff Working Document entitled ‘Policy Coherence for Development Work Programme 2010-2013’ (SEC(2010)0421),










—


having regard to the Commission Communication entitled ‘Policy Coherence for Development - Establishing the policy framework for a whole–of–the-Union approach’ (COM(2009)0458),










—


having regard to its resolution of 18 May 2010 on the EU Policy Coherence for Development and the ‘Official Development Assistance plus’ concept (2),










—


having regard to the Council Conclusions on Policy Coherence for Development, 14 May 2012 (doc. 09317/2012),










—


having regard to the Council Conclusions on Increasing the Impact of EU Development Policy: an Agenda for Change, 14 May 2012 (doc. 09369/2012),










—


having regard to the Council Conclusions on the EU’s approach to trade, growth and development in the next decade, 16 March 2012 (doc. 07412/2012),










—


having regard to the Council Conclusions on the Global Approach to Migration and Mobility, 3 May 2012 (doc. 09417/2012),










—


having regard to the Council Conclusions on Policy Coherence for Development, 18 November 2009 (doc. 16079/2009),










—


having regard to the DAC-OECD Peer Review of the European Union of 2012,










—


having regard to the EU Accountability Report 2012 on Review of progress of the EU and its Member States Financing for Development of 9 July 2012,










—


having regard to the Evert Vermeer Foundation Study entitled ‘The EU Raw Materials Policy and Mining in Rwanda – Policy Coherence for Development in practice’ of February 2012,










—


having regard to Declaration A(2010)21584 of 28 September 2010 of the 21st session of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly,










—


having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Development and the opinions of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on Fisheries and the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0302/2012),










A.


whereas Article 208 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union establishes the reduction and, in the long term, the eradication of poverty, as defined in the European Consensus on Development, as the primary objective of EU development policy, and whereas the Union shall take account of the objectives of development cooperation in the policies that it implements and which are likely to affect developing countries;










B.


whereas the European Union's commitment to ensure policy coherence for development (PCD), in accordance with the conclusions of the European Council in 2005,was recently reaffirmed in its conclusions on PCD;










C.


whereas there are clear inconsistencies in the EU's trade, agriculture, fisheries, climate, intellectual property rights, migration, finance, arms and raw materials policies which affect development goals; whereas PCD can contribute to poverty reduction by finding fundamental synergies among EU Policies;










D.


whereas the new development policy framework presented in the Agenda for Change aims for policy coherence not only within the Union but also with regards to the Union and its Member States by advocating joint-programming and emphasising the role of the EU as coordinator, convener and policy maker;










E.


whereas a post-2015 international framework for development cooperation has the potential to play a catalytic role in addressing important development and other global challenges and could help to fulfil individuals' rights and needs;










F.


whereas, despite the improvements, as in case of the EU, direct or indirect subsidies for agricultural products continue to have a negative effect on food security and the development of a viable agricultural sector in developing countries;










G.


whereas the EU is committed to reaching the UN target of 0,7 % of gross national income (GNI) in official development assistance (ODA) by 2015;










H.


whereas the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a judgement in November 2008 whereby the European Investment Bank (EIB) operations in developing countries must prioritise development over any economic or political objective;










I.


whereas a large number of studies have shown that there are between USD 850 billion and USD 1 trillion per year of illicit financial flows out of developing countries, which severely hinders the fiscal revenue of developing countries and consequently their self-development capacities;










J.


whereas the Agenda for Change (COM(2011)0637), in its aim to increase the impact of EU development assistance, reiterates that the objectives of development, democracy, human rights, good governance and security are intertwined;










K.


whereas public procurement accounts for 19 % of world GDP, or almost 40 times the amount provided by the EU and the Member States in ODA; whereas, as such, it has huge potential to be a tool of implementing sustainable government policies both in the EU and in its ODA recipient countries;










L.


whereas malnutrition kills an estimated 2,6 million children each year and, if unchecked, will put almost half a billion children at risk of permanent damage in the next 15 years; whereas about one-third of the pre-school age children in the world currently suffer from underweight (too little weight for their age) or stunting (too short for their age); whereas malnutrition costs countries 2-4 % of their GDP, and costs an individual an estimated 11 % of his or her lifetime earnings, while, at the same time, tested, cost-effective interventions in nutrition exist and would represent a sound investment;










M.


whereas, by 2030, the demand for energy and water is expected to rise by 40 % and the demand for food by 50 %, and whereas population growth, together with a rising middle class in emerging and developing nations, will put huge pressure on natural resources – especially water, energy and land – and on the environment;










N.


whereas the concepts of human development and human security share four fundamental perspectives: they are people-centred, they are multi-dimensional, they have broad views on human fulfilment in the long-term and they address chronic poverty (3);










O.


whereas the external dimension of the two new DG Home Affairs funds, and the Migration and Asylum component of the new Global Public Goods and Challenges Thematic Programme of the Development Co-operation Instrument (DCI), cover, as anticipated in the declared priorities, similar thematic areas although from different perspectives;










P.


whereas clinical trials that are no longer accepted by Western European ethics committees are approved by the local ethics committees in countries such as India, China, Argentina and Russia; whereas, in particular, the ethical principles which are of utmost importance for developing countries, as reflected in the Declaration of Helsinki, are ignored by companies and regulatory authorities (4);










Q.


whereas culture is, in all its dimensions, a fundamental component of sustainable development because it is, through tangible and intangible heritage, creative industries and various forms of artistic expressions, a powerful contributor to economic development, social stability and environmental protection;










R.


whereas studies show that if women are educated and can earn and control income, a number of good results follow: maternal and infant mortality declines, women and child health and nutrition improve, agricultural productivity rises, climate change can be mitigated, population growth slows, economies expand and cycles of poverty are broken (5);










S.


whereas information and communication technologies (ICT) have the potential to help mitigating climate change not only by reducing their own share of greenhouse gas emissions but also by using them to reduce emissions in other sectors and to address systemic change and rebound effects, e.g. by dematerialisation and online delivery, transport and travel substitution, monitoring and management applications, greater energy efficiency in production and use, and product stewardship and recycling;










T.


whereas the 2007 DAC Peer Review of European Communities noted that 'good understanding of the appropriateness of budget support in the local context is important';










U.


whereas education can play a pivotal role not only in environmental sustainability, health and economic growth, and in the achievement of the MDGs in general, but also in peace-building; whereas, perhaps more than any other sector, education can provide the highly visible early peace dividends on which the survival of peace agreements may depend if education systems are inclusive and geared towards fostering attitudes conducive to mutual understanding, tolerance and respect, thereby making societies less susceptible to violent conflict;






Operationalising PCD








1.


Welcomes the EU's efforts towards PCD; underlines that PCD is not only a legal obligation, but that designing accountable, transparent, human-rights-based, and inclusive policies is a chance for the EU to establish equal and sustainable partnerships with developing countries that go beyond development cooperation; stresses as well that PCD-aligned policies give governments and societies of developing countries the chance, and the responsibility, to generate successes on their own;










2.


Believes that PCD must be based on the recognition of the right of a country or a region to define by democratic means its own policies, priorities and strategies to protect its populations' livelihoods in line with the UN International covenant on Economic, social and Cultural rights;










3.


Welcomes the eight areas of action for the years 2011-2014 chosen by the Commission in its proposal for a new policy on corporate social responsibility (CSR); underlines the importance of binding CSR obligations and of encouraging employers to apply social standards which are more ambitious than current statutory provisions, including the possibility to develop and obtain a designation such as a social label; calls on the Commission to support the Member States in carefully monitoring the implementation, and ensuring the legal enforcement, of these obligations, and insists that the upcoming initiative on CSR reflects the obligations towards PCD and moves towards binding CSR standards;










4.


Stresses that PCD is not merely a technical issue, but primarily a political responsibility, and that Parliament, as co-legislator and as a democratically elected institution, has a key responsibility for translating the commitments into concrete policies;










5.


Insists that the European Consensus on Development, including its definition of PCD, remains the doctrinal framework for the EU’s development policy, and that any attempt to revise or replace it in the context of the ‘Agenda for Change’ should involve the institutions that permitted its creation;










6.


Recalls that any new political orientation in the context of the 11th EDF emanating from the Agenda for Change must be compatible with the spirit and the letter of the Cotonou Agreement;










7.


Stresses that transparency in all areas is instrumental in achieving PCD as it can not only prevent unintended incoherence but is also effective where there are clashes of interest;










8.


Calls for the introduction of structured annual meetings between representatives of national parliaments of EU Member States and the European Parliament to ensure consistency in the spending of development aid;










9.


Points to the importance of knowledge building and expertise with regard to the complex issue of PCD; asks, therefore, the Commission to ensure that provisions are made to focus some DG Research programmes on issues relevant to PCD; recommends as well the elaboration and promotion of a strategy on development research in order to engage with DG Research and other research DGs, as well as other relevant bodies external to the Commission, e.g. the OECD and the World Bank;










10.


Insists that the questions regarding the economic, environmental and social impacts of policies inside and outside of the EU laid down in the Impact Assessments Guidelines from 2009 are answered in the Commission's impact assessments as well as in the impact assessments to be made by Parliament; asks the Commission also to complete the impact assessments in advance of the corresponding policy proposal in order to ensure that civil society organisations (CSOs) and other relevant stakeholders can participate in the process, thereby also creating an added value in terms of capacity;










11.


Underlines that the Impact Assessment Board of the Commission and the similar institution to be set up by Parliament need adequate expertise in development policies in order to live up to their responsibility to verify the quality of impacts assessments in terms of PCD;










12.


Suggests that a reference to PCD be included in reviews and ex-post evaluations of EU policies if adequate; takes the view that any evaluation exercise of programmes carried out under the European Development Fund (EDF) or the DCI should include an assessment of its consequences for PCD;










13.


Welcomes the inclusion of specific PCD commitments in the Danish Presidency's work programme and asks the next Presidencies to follow up on that example;










14.


Welcomes the Commission's third biennial report on PCD 2011, but agrees with the Council on the need to include an independent assessment of progress, including qualitative and quantitative consequences and costs of policy incoherence in future reports; suggests that future reports should also include a comprehensive overview of PCD-related results of the country-level dialogues, in order to make the voices of citizens of developing countries heard;










15.


Calls on the Member States and their national parliaments to promote PCD through a specific working programme with binding timetables, in order to improve the European PCD work programme;










16.


Agrees with the Commission that in the preparation of the next rolling PCD Work Programme, a wider discussion with the European External Action Service (EEAS) and Member States and all relevant stakeholders, for example NGOs and CSOs, is needed; agrees that fewer indicators, together with more precise and better monitoring, can lead to a more operational framework and easier monitoring;










17.


Asks the High Representative and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to confirm their important roles in making PCD a reality;










18.


Suggests making PCD a clear priority for the EEAS and the Delegations by further strengthening the EU's policy dialogue with CSOs, local parliaments and other stakeholders, by asking them to gather evidence on lack of either inconsistency or coherence, by improving the PCD references in programming documents and making them operational, and by developing a training programme, together with DG DEVCO, for all new EEAS staff to ensure that they are able to understand and apply PCD; points out that adequate resources to fulfil this task must be allocated to the Delegations and the headquarters;










19.


Underlines that EU delegations have a central role in designing and managing budget support, and that their resources should be ensured correspondingly;










20.


Recalls the paramount importance of Article 12 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement and the obligation for the Commission to regularly inform the Secretariat of the ACP Group of planned proposals which might affect the interests of the ACP States; calls on the Commission to inform Parliament when such procedures are undertaken;










21.


Welcomes the Commission's proposal to deepen the cooperation with the European Parliament and national parliaments on PCD by engaging in more exchanges with them on the subject and by accompanying them in acquiring specific analytical capacity to contribute to promoting PCD in the EU; proposes that these exchanges between national parliaments, the European Parliament and the Commission should come in the form of structured annual meetings which include clear objectives along with task-monitoring activities with the goal of strengthening PCD in the EU;










22.


Considers that public procurement should be effectively used to achieve the overall EU objectives of sustainable development and, therefore, that the future public procurement directives should enable sustainability criteria to be integrated throughout the procurement process;






Specific recommendations under the five areas of focus



Trade







23.


Welcomes that the Commission, in its Communication on "Trade, Growth and Development: Tailoring Trade and Investment Policy for Those Countries Most in Need", commits itself to support small producers and promote fair, organic and ethical trade initiatives, but regrets the lack of commitment to mainstream fair trade principles across EU policies;










24.


Deplores the publication of two separate reports on trade in general and on trade and development by the Commission which was counterproductive from the viewpoint of PCD;










25.


Regrets that GDP per capita is made the sole eligibility criterion for the GSP scheme, as this could run counter to the EU's development objectives; recalls its resolution of 8 June 2011 on "GDP and beyond – Measuring progress in a changing world" (6), which makes reference to the Human Development Index;










26.


Recalls the inconsistencies produced in the context of European Partnership Agreements, namely: a) that some countries are urged to sign an agreement before its exact terms are mutually agreed, b) that the Commission proposes to delete 18 countries from Annex I to the Market Access Regulation, and c) that human rights issues are not sufficiently addressed during negotiations;










27.


Takes the view that the OECD guidelines for multi-national enterprises should become binding standards in EU investment treaties for business and industry, ensuring that investment treaties include clauses on transparency and on the fight against illicit capital flows, along with full reporting on environmental and social issues by companies; points out that investment agreements should improve the rights and duties of governments to regulate economic activities in sensitive policy areas such as the environment and foster decent work in the broader public interest and in the longer-term interest of future generations;





Agricultural and Fisheries Policy







28.


Deplores that the share of EU Aid for Trade (AfT) to LDCs declined to 16 % in 2010 (EUR 1,7 billion, as against EUR 8,7 billion to non-LDCs) from 22 % in 2009 (7); calls on the Commission to inform Parliament about the annual and/or multi-annual share of the EDF funds spent as AfT;










29.


Proposes that the Commission creates new momentum for sustainable public procurement at the international level, and that the resulting framework of the revision of the public procurement directives should give contracting authorities the policy space to make informed pro-development procurement choices;










30.


Calls on the Commission actively to promote, within the WTO, the suggestion of some donors to narrow the scope of the Aid for Trade Initiative in order to make it more monitorable, efficient and focused on key elements of the trade and development nexus, in order to make it more effective and to secure donors' financing;










31.


Draws attention to the publication of a revised IPR Strategy vis-à-vis third countries which should, from a development point of view, ensure adequate access to medicines and provide effective incentives for pharmaceutical research by making use of the TRIPs Agreement’s flexibilities in appropriate cases, such as health emergencies, and by making the Strategy compatible with the parallel agenda for "affordable access to medicine"; stresses as well that the link to the food security agenda is very important in this context, e.g. to ensure the protection of plant varieties and acknowledge the importance of diverse agricultural systems and traditional seed supply systems;










32.


Proposes the implementation of preferential trade rules that enhance green agricultural technology transfers in the WTO and in bilateral trade agreements with developing countries;










33.


Welcomes the creation in 2010,within the sustainable development team in Directorate-General for Trade, of a focal point for coordinating fair trade-related activities, which are an important example of how EU trade and development policy can be made more coherent and mutually supportive;










34.


Points out that fair trade between the EU and developing countries entails paying a fair price for the resources and agricultural products of the developing countries, i.e. a price which reflects the internal and external costs, while guaranteeing ILO's core labour standards for working conditions as well as international standards on environmental protection;










35.


Reiterates its call to address in an effective way the problem of conflict minerals and other resources related to conflict in developing countries that have resulted in the death and displacement of millions of people;










36.


Believes that developing countries should protect their economy and proceed to selective market openings, as was the case in Europe;










37.


Asks the Commission to further integrate internationally agreed labour and environmental standards into instruments like the EPAs and FTAs;










38.


Welcomes the fact that the relevance of smallholder farming for combating hunger is recognised by the EU and that adaptation measures are priorities in the food security agenda; underlines that support for women smallholder farmers is especially relevant;










39.


Reiterates that development concerns should be built into the entire process of decision making on the EU's agricultural policy, and calls for the establishment of flanking measures similar to the sugar-protocol accompanying measures (SPAM), if necessary;










40.


Repeats its call for regular and independent assessments and evaluations of the EU's agricultural and trade policies, paying special attention to impacts on local and smallholder producers, and building on evidence submitted by governments, farmers' organisations, civil society organisations and other stakeholders in developing countries which are EU trading partners;










41.


Urges the EU to strengthen EU-ACP supply chains and to support the strengthening of supply chains within the ACP countries themselves as both markets have developed in mutual dependence; suggests fostering the use of modern market management instruments in developing countries, such as transparency provisions, capacity building, technical regulations, or support with regard to contract negotiation, e.g. in the context of the Joint EU-Africa Strategy;










42.


Proposes to set up transnational twinning partnerships between Natura 2000 areas and similar agricultural ecological management areas in developing countries with the aim of: a) exchanging know-how on management of such areas by local authorities, local leaders and local farming communities to ensure that future management is sustainable, both ecologically and economically, and practicable, b) building capacity through twinning of the economic viability of business chains in these areas to contribute to sustainable food security in these areas, and c) implementing research to assist in the protection of agricultural diversity and biodiversity to assure the long-term survival of valuable and threatened species and habitat; proposes as well the establishment of a transnational twinning centre for learning and development of know-how between Natura 2000 areas and similar areas in third countries;










43.


Points out that timely information on changes in standards applied to agricultural products, or the application of alternative equivalent standards to imports by the EU, is essential to efforts in developing countries to facilitate long-term planning and ensure competitiveness on the basis of quality;










44.


Calls on the Commission to develop an integrated approach to nutrition, set up a dedicated trust fund to address the problem of malnutrition in developing countries, and mobilise the necessary resources to deliver the basic interventions that could prevent the vast majority of malnutrition, especially in the critical 1 000-day window between conception and age 2, which include encouraging optimum feeding and caring practices such as breastfeeding to avoid contaminated water, proper introduction of varied foods for infants, fortification of basic staples and vitamin supplementation; believes that such a trust fund would enable the leveraging and pooling of resources from Commission and Member States, and possibly other donors, and would enable better visibility of EU action in saving lives;










45.


Deplores the fact that only approximately EUR 418 million, or around 3,4 % of the total Commission development aid budget of EUR 12 billion per year, is currently allocated to direct nutrition intervention; believes that efforts to tackle malnutrition must be multi-disciplinary, engage multiple stakeholders and be in line with the national priorities of affected countries;










46.


Considers that the size of the EU market for fish, and the geographical range of activities by EU-flagged and EU-owned vessels, impose a high level of responsibility on the Union for ensuring that these activities are based upon the same standards in terms of ecological and social sustainability and transparency inside and outside Union waters; notes that such coherence requires coordination both within the Commission itself and between the Commission and the governments of the individual Member States;










47.


Reiterates that, in order to improve PCD, the negotiation of fisheries partnership agreements (FPAs) must be based on the contracting country's priorities for the suitable development of its fishing sector; stresses that FPA payments should be compatible with development objectives and that the impacts of FPAs should be closely monitored by the EU;










48.


Takes the view that PCD should be reinforced by: a) making DG-MARE and DG-Development jointly responsible for FPAs, b) applying relevant principles outlined in the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing, EU commitments towards Policy Coherence for Development, and the EU-ACP Cotonou Agreement, c) incorporating human rights, anti-corruption and accountability obligations in all FPAs, and d) ensuring that FPAs are consistent with or contribute to the poverty reduction and human development objectives identified in the EU's Country and Regional Strategy Papers;










49.


Stresses that any access to fisheries resources in third countries' waters must respect not only Article 62 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) regarding surplus stocks but also Articles 69 and 70 on the rights of land-locked and geographically disadvantaged states within the region, taking into account the nutritional and socioeconomic needs of local populations;










50.


Proposes that, in line with the 2006 UN General Assembly resolution on Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs), the Commission should be given an unequivocal negotiating mandate for all RFMOs for promoting marine conservation and sustainable fisheries;










51.


Considers that any system of attributing fishing opportunities to countries within RFMOs must include the legitimate rights and aspirations of developing states to develop their own fisheries; insists that the EU oppose the introduction of Transferable Fishing Concessions schemes in RFMOs, since they would jeopardise the both the livelihood and the well-being of dependent communities in developing countries;










52.


Maintains that the Union’s development policy should be carried out within the framework of the obligation agreed in the United Nations and other organisations and competent international bodies, and that the contribution of fishing to development should be made within the framework of the principles and objectives of the Union’s external action and should contribute towards the main aim of Union development policy, which is to reduce and ultimately eradicate poverty in developing countries;










53.


Believes that the Union should contribute to development in the sphere of fisheries by supporting the principle of surplus fishing stocks and other rules laid down in UNCLOS as well as the application of the FAO Guidelines for responsible fisheries and the FAO Compliance Agreement on the conservation and management of fisheries resources at global level;










54.


Emphasises that the objectives of fisheries policy must be implemented on a basis of transparency and coherence with other Union objectives, and that their impact on development must be planned, measured and assessed, and regularly and systematically subjected to democratic control;










55.


Wishes to make it clear that fisheries cooperation agreements and the fisheries-related aspects of development cooperation agreements and EU trade agreements should contribute towards making fishing a socially, economically and environmentally sustainable activity for the EU and its partners;










56.


Regrets the fact that a substantial proportion of the objectives of the FPAs have not been achieved; regrets in particular the poor results attained in the fields of scientific and technological cooperation and support for the sustainable development of the fishing industry (and allied industries) in developing countries; believes these aspects can be improved through coherent policies and governance of international fishery activity;










57.


Stresses that the EU must ensure that the current reform of the Common Fisheries Policy is mainstreamed with its commitment towards developing countries to support the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals as well as the basic human right to food as recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights;










58.


Calls on the Commission to ensure that its external action in general, and the FPAs in particular, promote good governance and transparency and create the conditions for developing third countries to base their fisheries policies on the same guidelines and sustainability standards as the Common Fisheries Policy, including: the adoption of decisions based on scientific reports and impact studies and the drafting of multiannual plans allowing exploitation proportionate to the maximum sustainable yield of stocks; special support for small-scale fishing and aquaculture activities and the communities which depend on them; promotion of selective fishing and adaptation of fleet capacity to resources and more responsible fishing practices; the gradual reduction and ultimate elimination of discards; efforts to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; improvements to safety and welfare conditions at work; protection of biodiversity and the environment and measures to combat climate change; product quality and better marketing; and promotion of research and innovation in order to increase the sustainability of activities in the sphere of fisheries, aquaculture and associated industries;










59.


Stresses that the agreements and the industries which develop around them are contributing to the development of third countries and their future ability to exploit their own resources;










60.


Maintains firmly that, in their relations with third countries and their actions within international organisations, the Union and its Member States must contribute to building the capacities of societies and governments of developing countries to draw up, implement and monitor sustainable fisheries policies which increase their food security and contribute to their development;










61.


Advocates the joint formulation of models with objectives, actions and indicators with the aim of monitoring the use of the funds more effectively in a spirit of partnership; stresses that this monitoring must include the adoption of corrective procedures, to be agreed on with the third country, whenever a deviation of one of the parties from the objectives is observed;










62.


Welcomes the example of transparency that the EU has set in a global context by publishing the conditions of its FPAs; urges the Commission to continue its openness by ensuring that the evaluations of these agreements are also publically available, respecting the principles of the Aarhus convention, for the purpose of enabling local parliaments, civil society and other stakeholders to effectively scrutinise the implementation and impact of the agreements;










63.


Draws attention to the importance of the existence of transparent and up-to-date scientific data on fish stocks, on all fisheries agreements including those of the EU, and on total fishing effort in each country’s waters; considers that scientific assessment should precede the signature of agreements or at least that the agreements should contribute to the examination of data;










64.


Draws attention to the problem of illegal, unregistered and undeclared (IUU) fishing; recalls that many vessels do not duly report their catches and are not inspected, that the data supplied by vessels are not checked and that the species caught are not clearly identified; considers that the EU can and must make a more effective contribution towards overcoming these problems; urges the Commission, in all its international relations, to support the principle of flag state responsibility, which underpins international law and is fundamental to an efficient implementation of the IUU regulation;










65.


Advocates better linkage of FPAs to existing development policy instruments, particularly the EDF, and to conditions relating to access to EU markets for developing countries.










66.


Emphasises that fisheries cooperation is able directly to benefit the 150 million people on our planet who rely on fishing and fishery-related activities for their livelihood.





Climate Change and Energy







67.


Reiterates that more attention needs to be focused on maximising the synergies between EU climate change policies and the EU development objectives, especially in terms of tools and instruments used and the collateral development and/or climate change adaptation benefits;










68.


Stresses that an investment in education for sustainable development, including combating climate change, is an area where development aid can achieve multiple objectives at once, especially when women are targeted;










69.


Believes that the challenges posed by climate change must be addressed through structural reforms, and calls for a systematic climate change risk assessment of all aspects of EU's policy planning and decision making, including trade, agriculture, food security, etc., and demands that the result of this assessment be used to formulate clear and coherent country and regional strategy papers, as well as development programmes and projects;










70.


Calls for specific attention to be devoted to the special needs of smallholder agriculture and livestock farmers facing the consequences of climate change in any policy and agreements entailing possible reduction of, or constraints in the access to, resources for food production, such as land, water, mobility, among others;










71.


Repeats its call on the Commission and the Member States to collect country-specific and gender-disaggregated data when planning, implementing and evaluating climate change policies, programmes and projects, in order effectively to assess and address the differing effects of climate change on each gender and to produce a guide on adapting to climate change, outlining policies that can protect women and empower them to cope with the effects of climate change;










72.


Welcomes the proposals made in the European Report on Development 2011/2012 on an integrated and ecosystems-based management of water, energy and land, with those three resources being crucial for development; asks the Commission to follow-up on the proposals made in the report; points especially to the existence of significant EU and global governance gaps, and stresses the necessity of a change towards more sustainability in consumption and production patterns within the Union itself;










73.


Suggests that the EU should work in developing countries to promote investment, innovative approaches and high standards of corporate practice in the inclusive and sustainable use of water, energy and land; suggests as well that the emphasis on sustainable energy and agriculture in the 'Agenda for Change' should be complemented with interventions in the area of water;










74.


Calls on the Commission to report on the social sustainability of biofuels by the end of 2012 and to consult with affected communities and local NGOs beforehand; points out that this is an opportunity to propose an adequate methodology and cover the full impacts that European biofuels targets are having on food security, land rights and other development issues; recalls that the monitoring and reporting by the Commission foreseen in the proposed directive provides an opportunity, if appropriate, to propose corrective actions, based on lessons learned;










75.


Underlines the importance of guaranteeing that imported bioenergy is produced on the basis of acceptable working environments and employment standards and respecting local communities;










76.


Encourages the further development of second and third generation bioenergy from biomass by-products, wastes and residues;










77.


Asks the Commission to reconsider the 10 % target for biofuels from renewable sources by 2020 set forth in the Renewable Energies Directive, unless strict sustainability criteria are applied;










78.


Urges the Members States to allocate a significant share of the auctioning revenues from the European Emissions Trading System (ETS) to climate change-related activities in developing countries from 2013 onwards;










79.


Urges the Commission to propose an adequate and PCD-aligned methodology to calculate the effects of indirect land use change, reminding the Commission that such a methodology was due by the end of 2010;





Security







80.


Stresses that the review of the EU’s arms exports due in 2012 must be based on comprehensive information in order to comply with the development objectives; points out that the publication of the Council’s Thirteenth Annual Report on control of exports of military technology and equipment raised questions about the reliability and usability of the data provided;










81.


Draws attention to the EU's pledges for democracy and human rights and for conditions such as those enshrined in the "more for more" approach concerning the EU's immediate Neighbourhood policy; stresses that their relevance can only be assured when no other policy area, and when no interaction with partner countries, counteract initiatives undertaken to strengthen human rights, human security and democracy in partner countries;










82.


Recalls the fact that arms exports are an inter-governmental issue and that PCD should be taken into account in this context; concludes that deciding whether to approve arms exports to developing countries in relation to the "sustainable development" criterion, i.e. criterion 8 of the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria, can be difficult, given that other policy considerations can override its application; recommends that Member States provide a full statement of the methodology used in relation to this criterion;










83.


Acknowledges the interdependence of development, democracy, human rights, good governance and security, which any discussion on PCD has to take into account;










84.


Takes the view that the concepts of human security and development should be considered as essential in the security-development nexus, as they are centred on the individual;










85.


Points out that coordination among peace-building, humanitarian aid and development activities in post-conflict situations should be improved in accordance with the "Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development" (LRRD) strategic framework in order to comply with the principles of PCD and human security, the latter still being undervalued; reminds the Commission that the Council had invited it to prepare an EU Action Plan on situations of conflict and fragility in 2009, and that the EU endorsed the New Deal for engagement in fragile states that was adopted at the Busan High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness;










86.


Emphasises that with the Council Working Group on Conventional Arms Exports being the main committee responsible for the EU's Code of Conduct on Arms Exports, it is imperative that development objectives are taken into account in this forum; calls on the Council to make the European Code of Conduct on Arms Exports legally binding;





Migration







87.


Stresses that 'brain drain' can cause serious problems in developing countries, especially in the health sector; acknowledges that 'brain drain' affecting developing countries is the result of a combination of structural causes and 'push and pull' factors; therefore asks the Commission to monitor the effects of the Blue Card system on developing countries and take corrective action if necessary; asks as well the Commission to promote the application of the "WHO Code of practice" regarding the international recruitment of health personnel to both the public and the private sectors;










88.


Underlines that it has to be guaranteed that mobility partnerships are consistent with the international human rights legal framework; asks the EU to prevent conditionality in development aid relating to migration reduction, in both bilateral and multilateral negotiations by the EU and its Member States;










89.


Insists that the external dimension strand in the Asylum and Migration Fund is fully coherent with the external aid instruments and EU development objectives; proposes that safeguards be put in place to prevent Member States from using this strand of funding merely to curb migration from developing countries;










90.


Supports a migrant-centred and human rights based approach to EU migration policy with the view to enable the Member States and partner countries to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of all migrants and to enable migrants to claim their rights throughout the migration journey; emphasises that human rights-based and migrant-centred approaches will help to analyse, in a proper way, the root causes of forced migration – notably conflicts, climate change, unemployment and poverty – and ensure that the EU offers adequate responses to these, in line with PCD;










91.


Points out that it is expedient to involve diasporas and diaspora returnees as development agents, the latter being especially relevant in the context of the European financial crisis;










92.


Emphasises the need to further explain the parameters of complementarity and to put in place a coherent and integrated institutional dialogue to plan and manage external and internal funds addressing migration-related issues from a PCD and human rights perspective;










93.


Calls on the Commission and the ACP countries, in the ongoing revision of the ACP-EU Agreement, to include in Article 13 the principles of circular migration and its facilitation by granting circular visas; stresses that the article in question emphasises respect for human rights and equitable treatment of nationals of ACP countries, but that the scope of these principles is seriously compromised by bilateral readmission agreements with transit countries which, taken together, amount to an externalisation by Europe of the management of migration, and which do not guarantee respect for the rights of migrants and may result in 'cascade' readmissions that jeopardise their safety and their lives;










94.


Reaffirms the importance of co-financing NGOs as a principle that motivates grant beneficiaries to contribute to higher accountability and development effectiveness and that improves cooperation of all stakeholders, as recommended by the Istanbul principles (8);






Other Issues








95.


Solicits attention to emphasise the overall framework of good governance and respect for human rights and its catalytic role for development in partner countries in all policy dialogues, irrespective of the five core issues identified for PCD assessment purposes;










96.


Proposes that the concept of 'aid effectiveness' be complemented with the concept of 'development effectiveness' as the latter is more suitable to measure PCD and more convenient for deepening the dialogue with BRICS countries in the field of development policy;










97.


Draws attention to the cross-cutting nature of good governance programmes in developing countries, and encourages further efforts in this regard by the Commission; draws attention as well to the need, in the current period of multiple crises, for better global governance as it has an instrumental role to play in achieving global development; regrets that the Outcome Document of the UN Rio+20 conference lacks the commitment on resource conservation, climate change adaptation and mitigation, and economic sustainability that the EU had called for; urges, nevertheless, the EU to remain closely involved in defining the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and in making them operational by 2015;










98.


Supports the Commission's proposal to create a comprehensive overview of the costs of policies that are not aligned with PCD, and of the benefits, or win-win situations, created by PCD-aligned policies that can be used both for further awareness-raising and training and as a basis for discussion with the European citizens and other affected stakeholders in order to overcome misconceptions which are still prevalent as regards the costs and benefits of PCD; such an analysis would be especially helpful in the fields of migration – where the EU should stress the linkages between migration and development policies, and provide constant information to its people on the benefits of these linkages – and sustainable energy;










99.


Calls on the Commission and the Council to develop a long-term, cross-sectoral EU strategy for development education, awareness-raising and active global citizenship;










100.


Calls on the Member States to develop – or strengthen – national development education strategies and programmes on education in sustainable development, and to make PCD part of their respective curricula;










101.


Points out that the ongoing initiative on Markets for Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID) can make a valuable contribution to the fulfilment of the overarching objectives of the Union's development cooperation by including strict position limits and a strict limitation on exemptions from MiFID, and by strengthening the powers for regulators to intervene in specific products or activities;










102.


Reiterates that, in the interest of transparency and accountability, the EEAS and DEVCO should monitor how the division of responsibilities agreed between the Commission and the EEAS works in practice, and improve it in ways that avoid overlaps and ensure synergies;










103.


Refers to the fact that the EEAS has put forward the concept of "EU actorness" in order to increase the visibility of EU actions; takes the view that this makes PCD even more important, as every negative impact will be associated even more closely with the EU; urges the Commission to make sure that this concept does not contradict other objectives of development policy as formulated by the EU, especially the objectives of ownership and policy space for developing countries;










104.


Suggests that, in line with the Cotonou Agreement and the reference document on 'Engaging Non-State Actors in New Aid Modalities' (9), the EU delegations should undertake a comprehensive mapping of NGOs, CSOs and local authorities relevant for their work in the respective country, especially of local and community-based organizations;










105.


Reiterates that the creation of a Standing Rapporteur for PCD from the ACP countries in the context of the Joint Parliamentary Assembly would facilitate the coordination with, and work of, the EP's Standing Rapporteur on PCD and the relevant department of the Commission and Council, and would help to eliminate obstacles to PCD within developing countries themselves;










106.


Recalls that, in its June 2011 Communication on the Multi-Annual Financial Framework, the Commission had proposed extending the powers of scrutiny of the EDF to Parliament; regrets that this proposal does not feature in the legislative proposal for the 11th EDF;










107.


Underlines that a post-2015 international framework for development cooperation, in order to provide a more comprehensive approach to poverty eradication and sustainable development, should go beyond a traditional interpretation of development cooperation, leveraging policy coherence for development as an important mechanism and promoting rights-based approaches; points out that such a framework should go beyond the current concept of public action and aid and should involve all countries (developed, developing, emerging) and all actors (traditional and new donors, developing and developed country governments, and local authorities, the private sector, NGOs, social partners, etc.) in a coherent and inclusive process;










108.


Welcomes the fact that the social clause in Article 9 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) applies both within and beyond the EU’s borders;










109.


Stresses the need to ensure that the social provisions enshrined in EU trade agreements are implemented and properly monitored; considers it necessary to ensure that mechanisms for revision and enforcement are available;










110.


Calls on the Commission to include provisions on social standards and on the objectives of full and productive employment, taking into account gender equality and youth, decent work, respect for workers’ rights, including for migrant workers, and gender equality in all EU trade agreement;










111.


Stresses the need to support and spread collective bargaining as a tool for reducing labour market inequalities, ensuring decent work and wages, preventing social dumping and undeclared work, and ensuring fair competition;










112.


Underlines the necessity to respect the conditions of work contracts, stressing that the work performed by young people and women should not represent any type of exploitation, whether in the form of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery;










113.


Underlines the importance of CSR obligations, and of encouraging employers to apply social standards which are more ambitious than current statutory provisions, including the possibility to develop and obtain a designation such as a social label; calls on the Commission to support the Member States in carefully monitoring the implementation, and ensuring the legal enforcement, of these obligations;










114.


Stresses the importance of establishing PCD focal points also in developing countries to improve information exchanges, inter alia on issues beyond EU competences, such as the socially-inclusive use of resource rents or taxation and remittances, and the impact of the so-called ‘brain drain’ on countries of origin; calls on the Commission to mainstream social policy in the work of the EEAS; believes it is essential also for middle-income countries to commit an increasing proportion of their revenue to social purposes, notably by developing taxation systems and social protection;










115.


Urges the Commission and the Member States to pay greater attention to the participation and integration of migrants, particularly women and children, in receiving countries, and on the portability of social rights;










116.


Calls on the Commission to engage in social dialogue with non-EU labour organisations and trade unions about the implementation of social standards in their respective countries, and to ensure more adequate technical assistance for the implementation of social and fiscal policy;










117.


Asks the Commission to consider scaling up its support for culture-related programmes or cooperation projects with partners from developing countries due to their cross-cutting nature regarding the EU's development objectives;










118.


Highlights that planning for the provision of basic services, such as primary education, needs to focus more forcefully on those specific characteristics of particularly marginalised groups that make the provision of such services more difficult and that limit the ability of the groups to take advantage of what is available;










119.


Underlines the urgent need to change the humanitarian mindset and recognise the vital role of education, especially of education during conflict-related emergencies and in the aftermath of conflicts; regrets that education is still one of the most underfunded areas of humanitarian aid;










120.


Asks the Commission to consider the cross-cutting nature of ICTs in development policies, especially the positive influence they can have on the education system, and stresses that intellectual property rights, technology transfer and local capacity-building require particular attention in that context;










121.


Points out that true banking transactions using mobile phone technology (m-banking) should be distinguished from basic money transfers using such technology (m-payments), and stresses that the need to regulate international money transactions (e.g. to prevent money laundering or terrorism financing) must be reconciled with the need to promote affordable access to money for the poor through the use of mobile phones; suggests that collecting existing best practices would be a useful way to share knowledge and address those challenges;










122.


Regrets that budget support arrangements are still characterised by a lack of citizen and parliamentarian oversight of agreements and their implementation and monitoring;










123.


Reiterates that while budget support should be in line with efforts to promote democratic governance, strengthen developing countries' own economic resources, combat corruption and strengthen the accountability of public spending, it should in the first instance focus on poverty reduction;










124.


Reiterates that the EU's efforts to secure access to raw materials from developing countries must not undermine local development and poverty eradication but instead support developing countries in translating their mineral wealth into real development; stresses that the EU should support good governance, value-addition processes and the financial transparency of governments and commercial undertakings so that local mining sectors can act as catalysts for development;










125.


Stresses that financial transparency is essential for supporting revenue mobilisation and combating tax evasion; insists that the current reform of the EU Accounting and Transparency Directives should include a requirement for listed and large private extractive and timber companies to disclose payments made governments on a project-by-project basis, with reporting thresholds that reflect the size of the payments from the perspective of poor communities;










126.


Takes the view that, while there is a limit to what donor aid can achieve in terms of strengthening domestic accountability, some forms of aid can make a difference, from 'doing no harm' to actually strengthening existing domestic accountability systems, e.g. by involving local CSOs and parliaments of developing countries in the context of sector-wide approaches (SWAp);










127.


Regrets that global health funding and interventions are skewed toward high-visibility events, such as the Asian tsunami, as well as toward a few high-profile infectious diseases (such as HIV/AIDS), obscuring the fact that non-communicable diseases account for 63 % of all deaths worldwide and injuries account for 17 % of the global burden of morbidity, and that women and children die because of the failure to deliver basic care during pregnancy, childbirth and infancy;










128.


Stresses that it can, in line with its responsibility to protect the rights of clinical trials subjects in developing countries and to protect the health of EU citizens, use its right to initiate investigations; proposes that the actions of the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) on certain issues – e.g. its actions to clarify the practical application of ethical standards to clinical trials – be monitored, making sure that EMEA is taking measures to harmonise the application of ethical standards by the responsible authorities;










129.


Asks the Commission to support local civil society groups, particularly women's groups and those that have an agenda focussed on gender issues, through accessible funding and through capacity-building in order for them to be able to fulfil their role as effective development actors and custodians of peace and good government, especially in fragile and conflict situations;










130.


Welcomes the EU plan of Action on Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment in Development, and encourages the monitoring and implementation of gender mainstreaming in EU funded projects at country level; calls on the EU High Representative to take all measures needed to provide adequate and effective training to EU delegation staff members regarding a gender-sensitive approach to peace keeping, conflict-prevention and peace-building;










131.


Welcomes the Commission’s active work, both at the policy level and through its different funding instruments and budget support mechanisms, aimed at stepping up its commitment to foster women’s empowerment, particularly by seeking to integrate the priorities and needs of women in all key PCD areas;










132.


Emphasises the need to maintain reliable statistical data and to record the causes of maternal deaths in accordance with the WHO’s ICD Maternal Mortality coding, which can guide countries and help them improve the attribution and estimation of the causes of maternal mortality;










133.


Reaffirms its declaration A(2010)21584 of the ACP-EU Parliamentary Assembly;










134.


Calls for PCD to favour a participative approach that promotes the empowerment and self-determination of local people and, above all, of women;










135.


Reaffirms the importance of taking account of the situation of women, not simply as a vulnerable section of the population, but also as active facilitators of development policies; notes, in this context, that women are responsible for 80 % of farming in Africa, even if it is still rare for them to have the possibility of owning the land they cultivate; calls, therefore, not only for agricultural and fisheries policies to be integrated into PCD because of their impact on development, but also for them to be assessed in terms of their differential impact on women and men respectively;










136.


Stresses the importance of taking account of the most disadvantaged and vulnerable social groups, notably women and girls, and of paying particular attention to them in order to avoid any further increase in inequality; point out that, as experience has shown, ‘neutral’ measures entrench the existing power structure and that it is essential to take positive, informed, systematic action in the form of measures that improve the situation of women, so as to ensure that such measures benefit the most disadvantaged;










137.


Stresses that the policy of promoting equality between men and women should not only be the subject of a specific budget heading in the context of development policies, but should also be regarded as a cross-cutting issue, since every policy that has an impact on society affects women and men differently, given the persistence of gendered roles in society and the fact that PCD offers a practical means of preventing negative externalities from adversely affecting equality between men and women;










138.


Stresses the need for PCD to incorporate a global approach which extends beyond the family and microsocial level and takes gender relations into account; takes the firm view that this cross-cutting approach to gender issues needs to be incorporated in every development project and every analysis of a society; insist that this approach must apply not only to all sectors but in all political, economic, social, environmental, cultural and other fields; points out that such an approach, which systematically takes account of the situation and role of women and gender relations in a society, is more comprehensive, humanistic and democratic than an approach which sets women apart, in particular as it avoids marginalising women in ‘women’s projects’ or projects which add to women’s workloads or responsibilities without increasing their power or control over the benefits generated by the projects in question;










139.


Affirms that, while the success of development policies and, consequently, of PCD cannot be measured solely by general indicators that have already demonstrated their limitations, such as trends in GDP per inhabitant, other indicators, such as those relating to equality between men and women, should be able to provide a fuller picture of the overall effect of development policies; points out that data, broken down by gender, must therefore be collected on the spot in order to evaluate and enhance the impact of PCD;










140.


Stresses the role of women in leveraging development policies by participating in the formulation and implementation of such policies, thereby ensuring that political and economic negotiations take women’s interests into account and creating a virtuous circle in which women are the driving force behind development policies which, in turn, set up the structures whereby women can be empowered; highlights the importance of supporting civil society organisations and groups which take on the task of promoting gender equality and women’s empowerment;










141.


Notes that women play an essential part in development, since, in their role as mothers and carers for children and other dependent members of the family, they assume responsibility for the family’s general well-being; points out, by way of example, that women play a crucial role in the field of nutrition and food security, particularly in the context of subsistence farming;










142.


Stresses that the situation of women is, in many cases, deteriorating more than that of men, both in relative and absolute terms; notes with concern that there has been an increase in poverty over the last twenty years or so, which has primarily affected women;










143.


Stresses that, although the important role played by women in development policies and development cooperation is very widely recognised, the statistics and quantitative data which specifically relate to women are still inadequate and fail to meet the objective of reporting the situation of women in developing countries, particularly in fields such as health, education, prevention and meeting basic needs; stresses, therefore, that care must be taken to ensure that in all PCD objectives, analyses, documents and assessments the quantitative data is broken down by gender, and that gender-specific indicators are included, in order to take account of women’s real living conditions;










144.


States that every child, regardless of sex, has the right to life, survival and development, and reaffirms that girl children as well have equal status under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child; calls on EU delegations in developing countries to work with the governments of those countries to ensure that girl children enjoy their rights without discrimination, inter alia by requiring the immediate registration of all children after birth, granting girls and boys equal entitlement to education and schooling, combating stereotypes and ending the unethical and discriminatory practices of prenatal sex selection, abortion of female foetuses, female infanticide, early forced marriage, female genital mutilation and especially child prostitution and sex tourism; reaffirms its resolution of 5 July 2012 on the forced abortion scandal in China (10)











145.


Stresses the need to ensure respect for the right of girl children to express an opinion and to be heard on matters affecting their health and human dignity, emphasising that the best interests of the child must be the first concern; highlights the need of all children, and of girl children in particular, to be brought up in a family environment of peace, dignity, tolerance, freedom, non-discrimination, gender equality and solidarity; calls for the strict implementation of the Geneva Declaration of the Rights of the Child and of the Beijing Declaration on Women;










146.


Recalls that the EU and the Member States must take into account the rights and duties of the parents, legal guardians, or other individuals legally responsible for the child, when dealing with the rights of the child in the context of development assistance; calls on the competent institutions to pay special attention to the relationships between parents and children, for example through programmes containing concrete measures specifically tailored to national requirements, seeking to provide maximum and optimum assistance for parents or guardians in the fulfilment of their parental duties in order to prevent family breakdown, child mistreatment or placement in social care as a result of serious poverty, or to ensure that such a measure is envisaged only as a very last resort;










147.


Asserts that, when implementing the specific clauses on the prohibition on coercion or compulsion in sexual and reproductive health matters agreed on at the Cairo International Conference on Population and Development, as well as the legally binding international human rights instruments, the EU acquis communautaire and the Union policy competencies in these matters, Union assistance should not be provided to any authority, organisation or programme which promotes, supports or participates in the management of any action which involves such human rights abuses as coercive abortion, forced sterilisation of women and men, determining foetal sex resulting in prenatal sex selection or infanticide, especially where such actions set their priorities in response to psychological, social, economic or legal pressure; calls on the Commission to present a report on the implementation of the Union’s external assistance covering this programme;










148.


Expresses great concern about the fact that gender-based violence, especially sexual violence, exploitation and feminicide, is widespread in many parts of the world, in particular in developing countries; stresses that upholding women’s rights, including their sexual and reproductive rights, and safeguarding the respect of their human dignity is essential in order to prevent and combat gender-based violence, provide protection and appropriate counselling to victims, and to ensure that perpetrators are punished; calls on the Commission to make the fight against impunity for the perpetrators of such violence one of the priorities for its development assistance policy;










149.


Points out that women are frequently discriminated against in terms of recognition of their struggles for peace, and that extreme suffering is inflicted on women as such in countries at war; maintains that action of this kind, including the rape of girls by soldiers, forced prostitution, forced impregnation of women, sexual slavery, rape and sexual harassment, and consensual abduction (by means of seduction), are crimes which must not be ignored; asserts that the EU must treat these as fundamental problems to be taken into account;










150.


Points out that particular attention should be paid to gender education of both sexes, starting from an early school stage, so as to gradually change societal attitudes and stereotypes towards parity of men and women;










151.


States that the assistance measures must take into account the specific features of crises or emergencies, and of countries or situations where there is a serious lack of fundamental freedoms, where human security is most at risk or where human rights organisations and defenders operate under the most difficult conditions; stresses that particular attention should be paid to situations in which women are being exposed to physical or psychological violence;










152.


Stresses the importance of promoting women’s human rights and of mainstreaming gender equality in the civil, political, social, economic and cultural spheres, as well as in national legislation;










153.


Underlines the importance of strengthening women’s role in promoting human rights and democratic reform, in supporting conflict prevention and in consolidating political participation and representation;




*
* *






154.


Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.






(1)  OJ C 46, 24.2.2006, p. 1.

(2)  OJ C 161 E, 31.5.2011, p. 47.

(3)  Sen, Amartya: ‘Why Human Security?’, text presented at the "International Symposium on Human Security" in Tokyo, 28 July 2000.

(4)  ‘Clinical trials in developing countries: How to protect people against unethical practices?’, study prepared by the European Parliament Directorate-General for External Policies of the Union.

(5)  Isobel Coleman: ‘The global glass ceiling: Why empowering women is good for business’,: Foreign Affairs, vol. 89, May/June 2010, p 13-20; UNFPA: ‘State of World Population 2009, Facing a changing world: women, population and climate’.

(6)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2011)0264.

(7)  European Commission, ‘2012 EU Accountability Report on Financing for Development, 9 July 2012

(8)  Istanbul principles, as agreed at the Open Forum’s Global Assembly in Istanbul, September 28-30, 2010.

(9)  Tools and Methods Series, reference document no 12: Engaging Non-State Actors in New Aid Modalities for Better Development Outcomes and Governance.

(10)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0301.