REPORT on the preparation of the multiannual financial framework regarding the financing of EU cooperation for African, Caribbean and Pacific States and Overseas Countries and Territories for the 2014–2020 period (11th European Development Fund)

27.2.2013 - (2012/2222(INI))

Committee on Development
Rapporteur: Patrice Tirolien

Procedure : 2012/2222(INI)

Document stages in plenary

Document selected :

A7-0049/2013

Texts tabled :

A7-0049/2013

Debates :

PV 11/03/2013 - 25
CRE 11/03/2013 - 25

Votes :

PV 12/03/2013 - 10.9
Explanations of votes

Texts adopted :

P7_TA(2013)0076

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
OPINION of the Committee on Budgets
OPINION of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality
RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

on the preparation of the multiannual financial framework regarding the financing of EU cooperation for African, Caribbean and Pacific States and Overseas Countries and Territories for the 2014–2020 period (11th European Development Fund)

(2012/2222(INI))

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the Cotonou Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States and the European Community (EC) and its Member States, signed on 23 June 2000[1],

– having regard to Part IV of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and the Overseas Association Decision (OAD) of 27 November 2001[2] associating the EU (previously the EC) with various overseas countries and territories (OCTs),

– having regard to the proposal for a Council Decision on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Union (‘Overseas Association Decision’) (COM(2012)0362), adopted by the Commission on 16 July 2012 and currently under negotiation in the Council,

– having regard to the Commission communication of 7 December 2011 entitled ‘Preparation of the multiannual financial framework regarding the financing of EU cooperation for African, Caribbean and Pacific States and Overseas Countries and Territories for the 2014–2020 period (11th European Development Fund)’ (COM(2011)0837),

– having regard to the Commission communication of 13 October 2011 entitled ‘Increasing the impact of EU Development Policy: an Agenda for Change’ (COM(2011)0637),

– having regard to the Commission communication of 21 June 2001 entitled ‘Programme of Action for the mainstreaming of gender equality in Community Development Co-operation’ (COM (2001)0295),

– having regard to the Commission communication of 12 September 2012 entitled ‘The roots of democracy and sustainable development: Europe’s engagement with Civil Society in external relations’ (COM(2012)0492),

– having regard to the Commission communication of 29 June 2011 entitled ‘A Budget for Europe 2020’ (COM(2011)0500),

– having regard to the European Consensus on Development of 20 December 2005 and the European road map for development and the resulting guidelines,

– having regard to the European Consensus on humanitarian aid of 18 December 2007,

– having regard to the Council conclusions of 29 June 2012 and 15 October 2012,

– having regard to Article 32 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, ratified by the European Union on 23 December 2010,

– having regard to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly resolution on the inclusion of persons with disabilities in developing countries (ACP-EU/100.954/11),

– having regard to the European Union Plan of Action on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Development (2010-2015),

– having regard to the European Union guidelines on violence against women and girls and combating all forms of discrimination against them,

– 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 Budgets and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (A7-0049/2013),

A. whereas the Internal Agreement establishing the 10th EDF will expire on 31 December 2013, and whereas the Commission has included in its communication (COM(2011) 837) a draft internal agreement to replace the existing agreement as from 1 January 2014;

B. whereas the draft internal agreement for the 2014-2020 period is currently under negotiation in the Council without the participation of Parliament; whereas, however, there is nothing to prevent Parliament from drafting an own‑initiative report on the 11th EDF on the basis of the Commission communication containing the draft internal agreement;

C. whereas the Commission is not planning to include the EDF in the budget in 2014, but only from 2021 onwards, which is highly regrettable; whereas, however, that budgetisation should be prepared now to avoid a reduction in funding for the EU-ACP partnership and development aid in general;

D. whereas the 11th EDF needs to have sufficient funding to ensure that the Union honours the undertakings made at international level concerning development and devotes 0.7% of its GDP to development aid, thus contributing to the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs);

E. whereas the MDG progress reports show that progress has been uneven and that, in particular, the MDGs relating to maternal and child health will not be achieved by 2015 in most ACP countries;

F. whereas the financial proposals for the 2014-2020 period, currently under discussion in the Council, have worrying implications for the future of European development policy, but also for the association linking the OCTs and the EU;

G. whereas EU aid is increasingly effective, even though considerable progress still needs to be made, and whereas Community measures to promote international solidarity have the support of more than three-quarters of European citizens;

H. whereas innovative forms of funding, designed to increase official development assistance by ensuring that the business and financial sectors make a fairer contribution, are essential;

I. whereas donors should stop urging partner countries to accept the ownership principle at the same time as depriving them of the funding they need to consolidate their institutions and public services;

J. whereas developing countries urgently need to establish tax systems based on their citizens' ability to pay;

K. whereas the Commission, in its communication on the Agenda for Change, called for the principle of differentiation to be applied to the allocation of European development policy funds, of which the 11th EDF is a part, and introduced the principles of sectoral concentration, combined grant/loan funding and support for the private sector;

L. whereas the European Consensus on Development and the Cotonou Agreement recognise the primary role of civil society organisations (CSOs) and local and regional authorities (LRAs) in efforts to tackle poverty and promote good governance;

M. whereas the OAD proposal takes account of the specific challenges facing OCTs, which differ from those confronting ACP states; whereas the OCTs should therefore no longer be covered by the EDF, but by an ad hoc financial instrument entered in the EU budget;

N. whereas the Partnership Agreement 2000/483/EC between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000, stipulates that ‘systematic account shall be taken of the situation of women and gender issues in all areas – political, economic and social’;

O. whereas the European Union’s Plan of Action recognises the importance of women’s involvement and a gender equality perspective for the development of its partner countries and for achieving the MDGs; whereas gender equality is one of the priorities for EU action under the ‘Agenda for Change’;

Objectives of the 11th EDF

1. Notes that the main objectives of European development policy (under Article 208 TFEU), the Cotonou Agreement and the European Consensus on Development are to reduce and, ultimately, to eradicate poverty; stresses, therefore, that at least 90% of the appropriations under the 11th EDF for ACP states should meet the official development aid (ODA) criteria, as laid down by the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee;

2. Considers that, in order to meet that objective, more needs to be done to ensure that the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) on which the least progress is being made are met, in particular those concerning the most vulnerable groups in society and gender issues, as stipulated by Articles 22, 25 and 31 of the Cotonou Agreement; reiterates its support for the MDG initiative and contracts, and calls on the Commission and Member States, in agreement with the ACP States, to earmark 20 % of the 11th EDF budget for the provision of basic social services, particularly health care and basic education, to ensure that MDGs 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and other international commitments concerning development are met; calls, therefore, for the performance indicators linked to gender equality proposed in the ‘Programme of Action for the mainstreaming of gender equality in Community Development Co-operation’ to be applied to the 11th EDF and its programming in order to ensure that the specific actions and the measures to promote gender equality in all programmes are implemented in an appropriate and consistent manner;

3. Urges the Commission and the partner countries to prioritise aid to strengthen health systems in order to ensure access to basic maternal, reproductive and child healthcare, with particular emphasis on the poorest sections of the population and the fight against HIV/AIDS, recalling that these objectives are Millennium Development Goals on which progress has been disappointing in many ACP countries;

4. Considers that, in order to meet the above objective, it is essential to include the most vulnerable groups in society, including but not limited to, women, children, and persons with disabilities, in all projects aimed at poverty eradication, both in the programming and implementation and evaluation phases;

5. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to act in a more strategic and coordinated manner on issues of social protection in developing countries, and calls for the development, in partnership with the ACP countries, of integrated social protection policies which also take into account support for basic mechanisms such as the creation of social security floors under the 11th EDF;

Promoting the economic and social development of the OCTs

6. Recalls that the EDF finances not only the ACP-EU partnership, but also the OCT-EU association arrangements, which cover 26 OCTs;

7. Welcomes the fact that the OAD proposal recognises the need to develop a new long-term partnership with the OCTs, centred around four new objectives:

– boosting the competitiveness of the OCTs;

– strengthening their adaptability;

– reducing their vulnerability,

– promoting their cooperation with other partners;

8. Regrets the absence of a financial instrument dedicated to the OCTs that could be integrated in the Union budget so as to allow democratic, transparent control over funding allocated by that means;

9. Calls for better cooperation between the outermost regions, the ACP States and third countries neighbouring OCTs, the combined use of the various financial instruments applicable to these regions, states and countries, and better access for the OCTs and outermost regions, as observers, to the plenary sessions of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly, in accordance with the Assembly's Rules of Procedure;

Budgetisation and financial allocation

10. Calls once again for the budgetisation of the European Development Fund (EDF) in the next programming period and default from 2021, with the full transfer to Section 4 of PSC (‘Europe in the world’), as this would contribute to the more effective promotion of Union priorities and thematic support and would enhance the democratic scrutiny, visibility and predictability, as well as the consistency, of the EU’s actions as the world’s largest donor of development aid;

11. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the budgetisation of the EDF proceeds as smoothly as possible, by informing the European Parliament regularly of the progress made and liaising closely with the ACP countries, in order to ensure that they are involved in the future implementation of the EDF;

12. Welcomes the fact that the contribution keys for the Member States for the 11th EDF are more similar to those used for the Union budget and that the programming period for the 11th EDF has been brought into line with the implementing period for the MFF;

13. Supports the Commission’s proposal to earmark a total of EUR 30 319 000 000 (at 2011 prices) to the 11th EDF, and calls for the sums set aside for the 11th EDF and the other cooperation instruments, including the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI), to be used to ensure that the Union’s official development aid (ODA) is maintained at its current level, or even increased, in order to help the Member States achieve their common objective of devoting 0.7% of GDP to ODA;

14. Stresses the need, given that some ACP countries are at great risk from disasters, for a substantial investment in disaster risk reduction in development programmes financed by the EDF; stresses that this investment is essential to reduce needs following an emergency situation and increase the resilience of ACP countries;

15. Deeply regrets the agreement concluded by the Member States on 8 February 2013, which provides for an 11% reduction in the 11th EDF budget proposed in July 2012 by the Commission; draws attention to the glaring contradiction between the repeated undertakings given by the Council to meet development aid targets by 2015 and the substantial cuts made to international development appropriations in both national and Union budgets;

16. Takes the view that, in making these budget cuts, the Union and its Member States, as the main ODA providers, will be held primarily responsible if the objective of reducing global poverty levels by half is not met by 2015;

17. Emphasises the importance of the Union having a budget that is capable of meeting the challenges facing it, particularly in times of crisis, as that budget provides funding, in particular for development, that could not be made available at national level; calls, therefore, for the Union's budget to be funded from own resources, such as a financial transactions tax, so that the size of the budget is no longer just about the level of payment appropriations;

18. Calls for the proportion of the EDF budget set aside for OCTs to be kept at the figure proposed by the Commission, whatever contribution scales and levels of appropriations are set for the 11th EDF;

19. Urges that, under the 11th EDF, the proportion of resources devoted to the intra-ACP programme and regional programmes should be the same as that under the 10th EDF, also providing for a flexible reserve and ensuring maximum complementarity with the Pan-African programme planned as part of the future DCI, because this reserve will be used in part to finance the new scheme to absorb any exogenous shocks with an international dimension (in particular, financial, food or humanitarian crises) that may affect an ACP country, as well as emergency humanitarian aid; stresses the importance of these programmes, which can help to increase the level of preparedness of ACP countries in the event of a crisis, boost their resilience and improve coordination of emergency measures, rehabilitation and development;

20. Takes the view that approximately 5% of the appropriations under the 11th EDF should be used to cover Commission support costs, so as to ensure that the instrument is managed effectively;

Reform of European development policy and the 11th EDF

21. Stresses that the Cotonou Agreement should continue to be the main reference framework for the 11th EDF;

22. Takes the view that the application of the principle of differentiation to eligibility for funding under the 11th EDF will be beneficial only if the impact is offset by a vulnerability index that supplements the GDP criterion, incorporates a national poverty and inequality index, and takes account of the specific circumstances of Small Island Developing States (SIDS), pursuant to Article 2, last indent, of the Cotonou agreement; notes that ongoing close political dialogue is essential if our ACP partners are to accept the principle;

23. Recognises, nevertheless, that the application of the principle of differentiation is a vital political tool which can be used to encourage middle and higher income ACP countries to establish a welfare state and devise national policies to redistribute wealth and tackle poverty and inequality;

24. Stresses the importance of maintaining all the national budgets at their current levels under the 11th EDF, given that European development aid can still have a decisive impact in some middle and higher income ACP countries, in order to support reforms aimed at reducing inequality;

25. Takes the view that differentiation should also take account of the specific situation in fragile states, given that the human consequences when a state fails are devastating and cancel out the progress made in terms of development; points out that re-establishing the rule of law in a failed state is a much more onerous and lengthy process than providing additional support to states identified as fragile, and therefore calls for a special focus on the Sahel region and the Horn of Africa in the programming of the 11th EDF;

26. Notes that the Agenda for Change contains new proposals, including combined grant/loan funding and support for the private sector; considers that the principal aim of these proposals should be to lift people in developing countries out of poverty and free them from their dependence on aid, and help strengthen the private sector in ACP States, given that failure to do so would result in unbalanced development and growth; calls on the Commission to inform the European Parliament of the results of the study it commissioned recently on private-sector participation in the development and expansion of combined EU grant/loan activities;

27. Recognises that the new funding arrangements, such as combined grant/loan funding, have definite advantages in a context of ever more scarce public resources; calls on the Commission and the EIB, nevertheless, to carry out detailed and independent impact studies in order to measure the impact of these new funding arrangements on poverty reduction, the environment, etc.; welcomes, therefore, the recent establishment of the ‘Results Measurement Framework’ (RMF), an index that enables the EIB to measure the development impact of all its operations outside the EU; calls on the Commission to publish guidelines and precise criteria that clarify the principles that should inform the selection of projects when these new arrangements are implemented; calls for more synergy and complementarity between the activities of the Commission, the EIB and other European bilateral financial institutions, such as development banks;

28. Acknowledges also the importance of supporting the private sector, in particular micro‑enterprises and SMEs in ACP countries, in order to encourage wealth creation and the establishment of business‑friendly environments so as to facilitate more inclusive and sustainable growth that helps reduce poverty;

29. Notes the establishment of the ‘EU Platform for External Cooperation and Development’, in which Parliament is an observer and which is intended to provide guidance for joint mechanisms involving combinations of existing grants and loans; believes that neither civil society nor the EIB is adequately involved in this new structure; calls on the Commission, therefore, to involve civil society directly in the work of the platform and to recognise the unique role played by the EIB as EU financial institution, in the platform governance;

30. Notes the sectoral concentration proposed by the Commission in its Agenda for Change; stresses that sectoral concentration should not be pursued at the expense of meeting the specific needs of certain countries; points out that democratic ownership is key to ensuring that aid is effective, and stresses that decisions concerning the sectors to be targeted under national indicative programmes should therefore be made on a flexible basis and through dialogue with all development stakeholders, including civil society and local authority representatives;

31. Calls without delay for the implementation of the resolution of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly on the inclusion of persons with disabilities in developing countries, especially its Articles 19, 20, 21 and 22, in order to ensure an 11th EDF that is inclusive and accessible to all;

32. Welcomes the fact that the UN initiative ‘Sustainable Energy for All’ enjoys strong support from the EU to the tune of EUR 500 million under the 10th EDF, and calls for this level of funding to be continued under the 11th EDF;

33. Welcomes the fact that agriculture, in particular support for family farms, is one of the thematic priorities of the future EU development policy; recalls the commitment, which was poorly honoured, made by ACP states in the Maputo Declaration to allocate 10% of national budget revenue to agriculture and rural development;

34. Insists that thematic concentration should not jeopardise the concept of budget support, which is designed to encourage sound management of public finances by the beneficiaries; calls for this support to remain an important aspect of the 11th EDF, subject to closer dialogue on human rights between the Commission and the ACP States;

Democratic scrutiny

35. Notes that the Commission has agreed to inform Parliament about the strategy documents for the 11th EDF, but criticises the fact that Parliament has no specific powers to scrutinise the measures taken by the Commission in this context; points out that the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly can also play a central role in exercising democratic scrutiny over all the EDF strategy documents, in accordance with Article 17 of the Cotonou Agreement, in particular the third indent of paragraph 2;

36. Reiterates the importance of observing the principle of democratic ownership, as defined in the programme for aid effectiveness; calls on the Commission, therefore, to continue its support for measures to strengthen the capacity of national parliaments and courts of auditors in the ACP States and to keep civil society informed, and on the ACP States to work more actively with their national parliaments, so that the disbursement of the funds provided for in each country's strategy documents is made subject to ex post parliamentary scrutiny; applauds the invaluable work of the Office for the Promotion of Parliamentary Democracy; recommends that all national ministries participate in the discussions between the national authorising officer and the Union delegation concerned in order to ensure that the strategy documents offer a comprehensive assessment of the country's development needs;

37. Believes that transparency and accountability are fundamental when allocating EDF funds and monitoring the projects financed, including direct aid to national budgets;

38. Draws attention to the invaluable contribution of civil society organisations (CSOs) and local and regional authorities (LRAs) as regards the provision of basic services, democratic scrutiny, support for marginalised groups and the promotion of human rights and gender equality, and calls on the Commission and ACP countries to consult CSOs and LRAs at the programming stage and to work closely with them when implementing and evaluating the 11th EDF, pursuant to Articles 2, 6 and 70 of the Cotonou Agreement; calls on the Commission to include in the progress reports on the 11th EDF a section outlining the stage reached in the talks held by Union delegations at national level with CSOs and LRAs;

Development effectiveness

39. Emphasises the merits of the joint programming of aid between the Union and its Member States, given that it boosts the visibility, impact and effectiveness of European development policy, whilst preventing duplication and waste; stresses the need, however, to expand on and clarify the rules set out in the common framework for joint multiannual programming; emphasises the key role that could be played by EU delegations, which should bring further transparency to this process, in particular by involving not only administrations, but also non-state actors, of the recipient countries concerned;

40. Calls on the Commission scrupulously to respect Article 19 C, first paragraph, of Annex IV of the Cotonou Agreement, which makes compliance with social and environmental standards a condition for obtaining public procurement contracts financed from the 11th EDF in ACP countries, in order to promote the principles of sustainable development and corporate social responsibility;

41. Stresses that the success of efforts to tackle poverty and ensure aid effectiveness is contingent on the capacity to raise revenue at national level, and that the ACP-EU partnership must therefore make it a priority to promote effective and fair tax collection systems in order to improve tax collection and prevent tax evasion and the use of tax havens;

42. Welcomes the Commission communication on ‘The future approach to EU budget support to third countries’; highlights the importance of Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement, which makes provision for aid to a state to be suspended if it violates the principles of the agreement;

43. Notes that budget support has many advantages, because it leads to more responsible decision‑making, more precise results analysis, greater policy coherence, more effective forecasting and optimum use of the funds available directly for the benefit of the population;

44. Highlights the importance of regarding women not just as a vulnerable section of the population but as active facilitators of development policies; stresses, in this respect, that women play a crucial role in nutrition and food security – not least in recognition of the fact that they are responsible for 80% of farming in Africa – even though they are still hardly ever able to own the land they cultivate; stresses, likewise, that women have proven competence in resolving problems and conflicts, and therefore urges the Commission and the ACP countries to increase the role of women in action groups and working parties;

45. Calls on the Commission to apply the performance indicators established in the EU Plan of Action on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Development;

46. Asks the Commission to provide Parliament with a progress report on the implementation of the EU Plan of Action on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Development;

47. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the EEAS, the governments and parliaments of the EU Member States, and, where appropriate, those of the ACP countries and the OCTs.

[1] OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3. Agreement revised in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005 (OJ L 287, 28.10.2005, p. 4) and in Ouagadougou on 22 June 2010 (OJ L 287, 4.11.2010, p. 3).
[2] OJ L 314, 30.11.2001, p. 1. Decision amended by Decision 2007/249/EC (OJ L 109, 26.4.2007, p. 33).

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

I. Procedural, legal and documentary framework

The legal basis for the European Development Fund (hereinafter EDF) is the Council Internal Agreement. The partnership agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States, of the one part, and the EC and its Member States, of the other part, which was signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 (Cotonou Agreement)[1], provides the formal basis for EU cooperation with the ACP States.

The legal bases for the Union’s association arrangements with the overseas countries and territories (OCTs) are Part IV of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and the Overseas Association Decision (OAD) of 27 November 2001[2] associating the EU (previously the EC) with various OCTs. The OAD proposal (COM(2012) 362 final) was adopted by the Commission on 16 July 2012 and is now under negotiation in the Council.

The background document for this report on the 11th EDF is the Commission Communication of 7 December 2011 entitled ‘Preparation of the multiannual financial framework regarding the financing of EU cooperation for African, Caribbean and Pacific States and Overseas Countries and Territories for the 2014–2020 period (11th European Development Fund)’ (COM(2011) 837).

II.1.a. Reduction and eradication of poverty in the ACP partner countries

The Commission stresses that the main objective of EU development cooperation is to reduce and, ultimately, to eradicate poverty. The EU has an obligation under Article 208 TFEU to pursue that objective, and its Member States have made commitments to that end in the European Consensus on Development and Article 1 of the Cotonou Agreement. If the objective is to be met, special attention must be paid to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) on which the least progress is being made - namely those concerning the most vulnerable members of society and gender issues (MDGs 4, 5 and 6).

Despite the fact that these issues should be a primary focus of the efforts to tackle poverty, both the mid-term performance review of the 10th EDF[3] and the Parliament resolutions on discharge in respect of the previous EDFs[4] showed that the resources invested in these key areas (in particular gender issues, health care and basic education) were insufficient. Parliament therefore reiterates its recommendation to the Commission, the ACP countries and the Council to earmark 20% of the 11th EDF for the provision of basic social services, in particular health care and basic education, in order to ensure that MDGs 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are met, in line with the priorities of the financing instrument for development cooperation (DCI).

Special attention must also be paid to the protection of women and girls, given that improvements to their status and their participation in aid programmes financed from the 11th EDF are vital for poverty reduction and economic development. Since poverty has a bigger impact on those who are already in a vulnerable situation, whether actual or perceived, the EU must make a strong commitment in the 11th EDF to improving the lives of marginalised groups (children, human rights activists, disabled people and, more generally, any persons or groups who suffer discrimination because of their religious affiliation, political beliefs or sexual orientation).

II.1.b. Promoting the economic and social development of the OCTs

The EDF finances not only the EU-ACP partnership, but also the EU-OCT association arrangements, a special form of association reflecting the ‘special relations’ (based on historical and constitutional ties) between 26 OCTs and four Member States, referred to in Part Four TFEU. The OAD proposal, as adopted on 16 July 2012, takes proper account of the need to redefine the aims of the association of the OCTs with the EU, so that the approach taken towards these territories is no longer modelled exactly on that taken towards the ACP countries. Traditional poverty eradication efforts are therefore now giving way to a determination to build a partnership that promotes sustainable development based on competitiveness, resilience to climate change, and regional cooperation and integration.

Already in the past, it would have made more sense to have had a simpler and more flexible financial instrument that took account of the limited administrative and budgetary capacity of some OCTs. Procedures should therefore be simplified now in order to facilitate the implementation of the 11th EDF, and the OAD implementing rules should be consistent with the simplified rules.

Annual or biannual meetings between the regional authorising officers and authorising officers by delegation should also be organised, along the lines of the meetings in Brussels of the authorities which manage the Structural Funds, in order to streamline the programming and implementation of the funds and to facilitate dialogue.

Lastly, regional cooperation, which is the fourth objective of the future association framework, has a key role to play. If the objective is to be met, the procedures of the 11th EDF need to be simplified and synergies sought between the cooperation programmes supported by the EU’s various financial instruments. Care should therefore be taken to ensure that ACP States, OCTs and outermost regions are involved in the programming of joint projects by facilitating dialogue between those involved in programming and by ensuring that the programming methods used for the various aid instruments are compatible.

II.2. Budgetisation of the EDF

Your rapporteur welcomes the fact that the contribution keys proposed for the Member States for the 11th EDF are more similar to those used for the EU budget. However, the two branches of the budgetary authority will be able to exercise proper democratic oversight only once the EDF is incorporated fully into the budget as from 2021. Your rapporteur expects the Commission to make every effort to ensure that the budgetisation of the EDF as from 1 January 2021, the date of expiry of the 11th EDF, the Cotonou Agreement and the MFF 2014–2020, proceeds as smoothly as possible, and to keep Parliament regularly informed of the progress of its preparations.

Whilst your rapporteur is in favour of including the EDF in the budget from 2021, this must involve the full transfer of the EDF to heading 4 of the MFF, lead to improved aid predictability, and never serve as a pretext for reducing expenditure on development aid. Budgetisation of the EDF should in fact lead to a corresponding increase in the expenditure ceilings under heading 4 of the MFF. The arrangements for democratic scrutiny must provide for the involvement of the national parliaments in the monitoring of how budget appropriations are spent.

II.3. 11th EDF budget

In its draft internal agreement, the Commission has proposed an overall budget of EUR 30 319 000 000 (2011 prices) for the 11th EDF (2014–2020), which, given the effect of inflation and the longer period covered by the 11th EDF (seven years instead of six), would represent an increase of some 13% in the volume of aid compared with the 10th EDF. The overall allocations for the 11th EDF (outside the budget) and the DCI (in the EU budget) must be sufficient to enable the Union to meet its commitment to devote 0.7% of GDP to official development aid by 2015.

However, your rapporteur is concerned at the latest proposals to reduce the level of EDF appropriations, and, in that connection, stresses the importance of securing new sources of development funding, and in particular through the introduction of a financial transaction tax, a substantial share of the revenue from which must be set aside to support international efforts to combat poverty and global warming.

Whatever contribution scales and levels of appropriations for the 11th EDF are ultimately approved by the Council, the proportion earmarked for OCTs must be the same as that proposed in the draft internal agreement.

The proportion of funding set aside for the intra-ACP and regional programme under the 11th EDF must be the same as that under the 10th EDF, and should make for maximum complementarity with the future pan-African programme provided for under the future DCI. This allocation will be used in part to finance the new shock-absorbing scheme provided for by the second revision of the Cotonou Agreement. This new scheme, intended to replace the Flex systems and other ad hoc schemes, should build on the experience gained with V-Flex and the Food Facility in order to cushion external shocks with a cross-country dimension (financial, food or humanitarian crises in particular) that might affect an ACP country. These new schemes are beneficial because they help to strengthen the links between emergency aid, recovery and development.

As regards the involvement of the European Investment Bank (EIB), the Commission is proposing not to renew the funding set aside specifically for the Investment Facility, on the grounds that there is sufficient funding available from repayments of grants awarded under the 9th and 10th EDFs. The Investment Facility will, however, be financed from the EUR 600 000 000 allocated to the EIB under the 11th EDF in the form of non-repayable grants to finance interest-rate subsidies and technical assistance funding provided for in both Annex II to the Cotonou Agreement and the OAD. The Commission should therefore include details of the projects funded by the EIB into its annual reports on the Investment Facility. A presentation on the facility, attended by the Commission and the EIB, should be given annually to the relevant European Parliament committees.

II.4. Programming of the 11th EDF and the Agenda for Change

II.4.a. Agenda for Change and the principle of differentiation

The Agenda for Change proposed by the Commission places the principle of differentiation at the heart of European development policy. Under this principle, the EU will in future concentrate its development aid on the poorest countries, even though most people living below the poverty line are in middle‑income countries, some of which are ACP States. Despite that fact, the Commission will still put forward under the 11th EDF a development aid budget for each ACP country regardless of its level of development, in accordance with the Cotonou Agreement. Your rapporteur welcomes this decision because he takes the view that EU development aid can still bring added value to some middle‑income countries, in terms of promoting and supporting reforms to reduce inequality (fiscal reforms, establishment of social security schemes, etc.) and tackling poverty.

Whilst your rapporteur agrees with this interpretation of differentiation, the principle must be:

- qualified by an internationally recognised vulnerability index, which supplements the GDP criterion as a measure of national wealth and takes account of the specific situation in Small Island Developing States (SIDS), the national poverty index, the Gini coefficient and the national inequality index;

- applied in the context of ongoing close political dialogue between the EU and each ACP partner.

Your rapporteur notes that the Agenda for Change contains several new proposals, including combined grant/loan funding and support for the private sector. The primary aim of these new approaches should be to lift people in developing countries out of poverty and to free them from their dependence on aid, in order to ensure that development and growth does not become unsustainable, lopsided and beneficial to only certain groups.

The Commission should therefore clarify its strategy regarding the promotion of the private sector and the use of new arrangements, such as combined loan/grant funding. Steps should be taken to ensure that support for the private sector is focused primarily on local private‑sector enterprises (such as small firms, small agricultural producers, family farms, etc.) and that the arrangements for combined loan/grant funding are properly managed. The Commission should launch detailed and independent studies of the existing combined funding arrangements in order to assess their impact on poverty reduction, the environment, and countries’ debt levels.

II.4.b. Aid effectiveness and democratic ownership

The principle of democratic ownership is key to fulfilling the objectives of the Paris and Accra Declarations, the programme for aid effectiveness and the Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation. This means that development strategies must be devised by the countries in which they will be implemented and should reflect the commitment of all relevant national stakeholders.

National parliaments, LRAs and CSOs must therefore be involved in the drafting and implementation of national and regional strategy documents and indicative programmes. EU delegations have a key role to play in that regard. However, it would appear that in previous EDF programming cycles the EU delegations failed properly to involve local authorities and civil society in their work, mainly because of a lack of resources. Similarly, the national authorising officer is often the Union delegation’s only point of contact, to the exclusion of most ministries, central government departments and national parliaments.

The success of efforts to tackle poverty and to ensure that development aid is effective is also contingent to a significant extent on a national government’s capacity to raise revenue. The ACP-EU partnership must therefore make it a priority to promote effective and fair tax collection systems through both political dialogue and the implementation of the 11th EDF. The aim must be to improve the collection of tax revenue, and to prevent international tax evasion, illicit capital flight and the use of tax havens.

Your rapporteur would also like to emphasise the practical benefits for the poorest in society of joint programming, which also increases the visibility and effectiveness of European aid. Recent joint programming of projects in Haiti, South Sudan, Ethiopia and Ghana demonstrates the effectiveness of this approach. Nevertheless, there is still a need to expand and clarify the rules in the common framework for joint multiannual programming.

The Commission should also be given sufficient resources to implement the 11th EDF in such a way as to increase the effectiveness, visibility and impact of European aid. The European Parliament should also support the proposal to allocate approximately 5% of appropriations under the 11th EDF to cover the Commission’s administrative costs.

Lastly, in the interests of people living in developing and developed countries, your rapporteur is calling for the European Union to lay down a number of environmental and social standards to be met by undertakings applying for public procurement contracts financed under the EDF in ACP countries.

II.4.c. Areas of cooperation and sectoral concentration

One of the innovations introduced by the Agenda for Change is sectoral concentration. The stated aim is to promote inclusive and sustainable growth in developing countries, and to strengthen the impact and visibility of EU aid, by focusing on:

- good governance, including respect for human rights and democracy; gender equality, the role of civil society and efforts to tackle corruption;

- social protection, health and education;

- the development of an environment conducive to business and closer regional integration between developing countries;

- sustainable agriculture and clean energy, by strengthening developing countries’ capacity to deal with exogenous shocks, and the potential to transform food security and climate change challenges into opportunities for growth.

Your rapporteur wishes to draw attention to the ‘Energy for all’ project developed by the UN Secretariat, whose aim is to ensure universal access to sustainable energy by 2030. Your rapporteur welcomes the fact that the project receives EU grant funding of EUR 400 million under the 10th EDF and calls for this to continue under the 11th EDF.

Your rapporteur also emphasises the need for European development policy to support agriculture. The food crises of recent years have demonstrated the need for better regulation of agricultural markets and for agricultural policies that can guarantee food security in all developing countries, provide farmers with decent incomes and withstand external shocks. However, it is fair to say that ACP States bear some responsibility for these problems, given that many are failing to honour the undertaking they gave in the 2003 Maputo Declaration to devote at least 10% of their national budget to agriculture and rural development.

Nevertheless, the focus on these particular sectors can be seen as a specifically European priority, given that they were chosen unilaterally, and not on the basis of a close political dialogue between the ACP countries and the Union. Since democratic ownership is one of the basic principles underpinning aid effectiveness, political dialogue is very important, and there should be more flexibility in determining the priority sectors for cooperation.

Your rapporteur would like to draw attention to the close link between security and development. The application of the differentiation principle should therefore also take account of the specific situation of fragile States, given that the human consequences when a State fails are disastrous and cancel out the progress made in terms of development. The cost of re-establishing the rule of law in a failed State is much higher, and requires a longer-term commitment, than that of providing additional support to States identified as fragile. Special attention should therefore be paid to the Sahel region and the Horn of Africa in the programming of the 11th EDF.

II.4.d. Budget support

The sectoral concentration advocated by the Commission must not jeopardise the benefits of budget support, which, because it can be used in any area, encourages beneficiary countries to improve their ability to manage their public finances more effectively. Budget support should therefore still be an important component of the 11th EDF, subject to closer dialogue with the beneficiary countries on human rights issues. In that regard, your rapporteur would like to stress the importance of Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement, under which aid may be suspended in cases where a State is found to have seriously violated the principles of the agreement. The arrangements for enforcing this provision should be laid down in a common EU framework.

II.4.e. Regional integration

The EU must also continue to support regional integration processes, particularly through the EDF regional programmes. Given that many ACP countries have small economies, they need infrastructure (relating to energy, roads, storage, etc.) that will facilitate the development of genuine regional markets. This is particularly important for the agricultural sector, given that the creation of regional markets would lead to an increase in the variety of agricultural products available to consumers and help prevent food crises. The EU should therefore use the EDF to continue its support for existing regional economic communities.

In addition, the fact that some ORs and OCTs are geographically close to certain ACP countries should encourage the Commission and the Member States of which they are part to draw on their know-how concerning disaster risk reduction, resilience to climate change and economic development in an island environment. In order to increase the number of joint projects between ORs, OCTs and ACP countries, the EU will need to improve coordination and synergies between the cooperation programmes funded under various EU financial instruments, as provided for in Article 7 of the OAD proposal. Dialogue between those involved in programming must be facilitated and the programming arrangements used by the various aid instruments (mainly the EDF and the European Regional Development Fund) must be compatible in order to ensure that joint regional projects are programmed properly.

II.4.f. Involvement of non-state actors and local authorities

CSOs and LRAs play an essential role in the provision of basic services and the implementation of the ACP-EU partnership. Their role must be further strengthened in future; they should be increasingly involved not only in implementing development programmes and projects, but in drafting the policies themselves. Cooperation with CSOs and LRAs should therefore be stepped up, both at global level and at national level; at national level, EU delegations must liaise more closely with CSOs and LRAs when drawing up policies and implementing the priority areas of national indicative programmes, including budget support. In order to measure progress in this area, the Commission should indicate in the monitoring reports on the 11th EDF the extent to which CSOs and LRAs were involved.

II.5. Right of democratic scrutiny

Your rapporteur welcomes the fact that the Commission voluntarily gave a political undertaking, in its declaration of June 2011 on global Europe, to grant the European Parliament the same right of scrutiny over the EDF - more specifically the documents that will put the future implementing regulation on the 11th EDF into effect, such as DCI implementing documents, - as it has over the general budget of the EU. Draft national or regional strategy documents should therefore be sent by the Commission to Parliament at the same time as to the EDF Committee (Committee of Representatives of the Member States at the Commission). Given its role as the parliamentary body that monitors the implementation of the Cotonou Agreement, the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly should also be sent the documents.

[1] OJ L 317, 15.12.00, p. 3. Agreement revised in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005 (OJ L 287, 28.10.2005, p. 4) and in Ouagadougou on 22 June 2010 (OJ L 287, 4.11.2010, p. 3).
[2] OJ L 314, 30.11.2001, p. 1. Decision amended by Decision 2007/249/EC (OJ L 109, 26.4.2007, p. 33).
[3] Commission staff working paper 10th EDF performance review SEC (2011) 1055 final.
[4] P7_TA(2012)0156.

OPINION of the Committee on Budgets (24.1.2013)

for the Committee on Development

on preparation of the multiannual financial framework regarding the financing of EU cooperation for African, Caribbean and Pacific States and Overseas Countries and Territories for the 2014-2020 period (11th European Development Fund)
(2012/2222(INI))

Rapporteur: Jan Kozłowski

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Budgets calls on the Committee on Development, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

1. Calls once again for the budgetisation of the European Development Fund (EDF), as this would contribute to the more effective promotion of Union priorities and thematic support and would enhance the visibility, as well as the consistency, of the EU’s actions as the world’s largest donor of development aid; invites the Commission to present a roadmap for the budgetisation of the EDF after 2020, containing details on the timeline and procedure for its inclusion in the Union budget;

2. Insists that the incorporation of the EDF into the EU budget should not influence the overall financial allocation for the other priority areas and policies of the Union; recalls the commitment given by the Member States in relation to official development assistance, and asks for the incorporation of the EDF into the budget to be carried out in such a way as not to have a detrimental effect on their contributions;

3. Underlines the importance of the complementary nature of EU and Member States’ assistance, and the catalyst effect of the former in terms of intervening in regions where bilateral assistance is not delivered; is particularly supportive of joint programming between Member States’ and EU actions; likewise considers it crucial to ensure coherence between development cooperation policies and other European policies that are likely to affect developing countries; considers that coordination between the EU and other aid donors is also essential;

4. Believes that transparency and accountability are fundamental when allocating EDF funds and monitoring the projects financed, including direct aid to national budgets;

5. Calls for close attention to be paid to the specific situation of ACP countries and regions exiting (no longer receiving) bilateral aid on grounds of GDP;

6. Considers that development aid harmonised at EU level ensures better predictability of financial flows for the beneficiary countries; insists on better targeting of resources where they are most needed, such as in least developed countries, and where financing would result in the greatest possible impact; calls for enhanced coordination and coherence of development aid efforts between Member States and the Union, inter alia through instruments for development cooperation within the EU budget, such as the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI);

7. Recalls that the 2015 deadline for meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), and the collective Official Development Aid (ODA) target of 0.7% of gross national income (GNI), fall within the next MFF period; stresses, accordingly, that an appropriate overall level of development aid and funding is required for the Union and its Member States to meet their international development commitments; urges Member States to take immediate action to meet their ODA targets and fulfil their development pledges;

8. Notes the need for reinforced use of innovative financial instruments, such as blending of grants and loans, in order to boost financial resources for development;

9. Notes the earmarking of 5% of EDF credits for support expenditure with a view to taking more fully into account the fact that such expenditure is needed for the management and implementation of the Fund;

10. Welcomes the increased flexibility of use of the unspent resources allocated to the ACP States to support emergency assistance and short-term humanitarian relief.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	23.1.2013
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	23 8 1
Members present for the final vote	Marta Andreasen, Zuzana Brzobohatá, Jean-Luc Dehaene, José Manuel Fernandes, Eider Gardiazábal Rubial, Salvador Garriga Polledo, Ingeborg Gräßle, Lucas Hartong, Monika Hohlmeier, Anne E. Jensen, Ivailo Kalfin, Sergej Kozlík, Jan Kozłowski, Alain Lamassoure, Giovanni La Via, Claudio Morganti, Jan Mulder, Juan Andrés Naranjo Escobar, Nadezhda Neynsky, Dominique Riquet, Potito Salatto, Alda Sousa, László Surján, Derek Vaughan, Angelika Werthmann
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	François Alfonsi, Paul Rübig, Peter Šťastný, Georgios Stavrakakis, Theodor Dumitru Stolojan, Gianluca Susta, Nils Torvalds

OPINION of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (25.1.2013)

for the Committee on Development

Draftsperson: Mariya Gabriel

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality calls on the Committee on Development, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

– having regard to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and its Optional Protocol,

– having regard to the United Nations Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children in Emergency and Armed Conflict, and to UN Security Council resolutions 1325 (2000) and 1820 (2008),

– having regard to the European Union Plan of Action on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Development (2010-2015),

– having regard to the European Union guidelines on violence against women and girls and combating all forms of discrimination against them,

A. whereas the Union’s policy on development cooperation is guided by the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), two of which specifically concern women – MDG 3: Promote gender equality and empower women and MDG 5: Improve maternal health – while a further three contribute directly to improving the living conditions of women and girls – MDG 2: Achieve universal primary education, MDG 4: Reduce child mortality, and MDG 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; whereas these goals contribute successfully to poverty reduction;

B. whereas the increase in poverty affects more women than men;

C. whereas Partnership Agreement 2000/483/EC between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000, stipulates that systematic account shall be taken of the situation of women and gender issues in all areas – political, economic and social;

D. whereas the European Union’s Plan of Action recognises the importance of women’s involvement and a gender equality perspective for the development of its partner countries and to achieve the MDGs, whereas gender equality is one of the priorities for EU action under the ‘Agenda for Change’,

E. whereas gender‑based violence, in particular sexual violence, exploitation and the killing of women and girls, is becoming more widespread;

F. whereas sexual violence in the form of mass rapes, human trafficking and other forms of sexual abuse of women and children is still used as a tactic of war by armed forces and other combatants, and notably in certain ACP countries; whereas rape in wartime has been recognised by the United Nations as a crime against humanity, and whereas the United Nations Security Council has since 2008 committed itself to combating the use of sexual violence as a tactic of war;

G. whereas various studies show that if women are educated and can earn and control their own income, a number of good results follow: maternal and infant mortality declines, women’s and children’s health and nutrition improve, agricultural productivity rises, climate change can be mitigated, population growth slows, economies expand and poverty cycles are broken;

H. whereas wherever women are engaged in conflict resolution and peace‑building processes, they play a key role in peace negotiations, broadening the scope of reconstruction, rehabilitation and peace-building;

1. Expresses its satisfaction at the recognition given in various action plans and communications to the key role played in development by gender equality and women’s empowerment, and calls for that priority to be put into practice in the geographic programmes; stresses that, as part of this aid, particular programmes should be targeted at women’s empowerment, socio-economic independence, antidiscrimination, achieving the MDGs and the overarching priority of gender equality; calls also for better coordination with the thematic programmes financed through Intra‑ACP cooperation and the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI); these programmes should promote inclusive, sustainable and climate-friendly development by means of addressing social and regional inequalities, emphasising the importance of global public goods and supporting local civil society groups, especially women’s rights organisations;

2. Urges the Commission to place greater emphasis on the health of mothers; stresses the importance of education and awareness‑raising in the area of sexual and reproductive health as an integral part of the women’s health agenda, not least in light of the fact that this is the Millennium Development Goal with regard to which the progress achieved thus far has been least satisfactory; requests, moreover, that measures immediately be considered for the post-2015 period, notably in regard to MDG 3 on gender equality and empowering women and to MDG 5 on maternal health, reproductive health and access to family planning; underscores the importance of the latter, especially as regards measures affirming the promotion and inclusion of the sexual and reproductive health and rights of girls and women, as this is not only a goal in itself but also an important means of fighting poverty and achieving the MDGs; stresses that these measure should particularly focus on addressing violence against women;

3. Welcomes the move by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) to set up a high-level taskforce to head up the review of the International Conference on Population and Development, particularly with regard to women’s sexual and reproductive rights and their right to reproductive health, and to combating HIV/AIDS;

4. Stresses the importance of the improved maternal health goal with regard to reducing the maternal mortality rate and achieving universal access to reproductive health services, which entails respect for the rights of women to sexual and reproductive health that is free of coercion or restrictions of any kind;

5. Congratulates all the States which have achieved some of the MDGs, such as that of primary schooling education for girls as well as boys; encourages the Commission to take the necessary steps to publicise those successes, promote the sharing of best practices and provide continued support to countries which are on the right track;

6. Urges the EU to promote mentoring programmes in which European women who successfully pursue academic and professional careers work alongside women in the developing world;

7. Affirms that special attention must be given to educating school children of both sexes on gender issues from start, so that attitudes and social stereotypes can gradually change, and gender equality become a basic principle of society, in the ACP countries;

8. Draws attention to the fact that progress on MDG 2 on education has been mixed, as progress has been made in terms of schooling for girls but less has been achieved with regard to ensuring that they complete their studies; calls on the ACP countries and all international partners to devise and implement, as a development policy priority, all measures needed to ensure that girls finish primary school and are given access to secondary and higher education;

9. Calls, therefore, for enhanced financing for programmes that aim to ensure that all girls have access to education (bearing in mind that female education is a cornerstone for building more egalitarian societies), thereby promoting women’s economic independence and reducing sexual exploitation of girls and women worldwide;

10. Whilst noting that some developing countries have made great progress in the area of human rights, strongly condemns EU funding to those countries that still criminalise women on grounds of their sexual orientation;

11. Recalls that democracy entails the full participation by women in public life, as stated in international and regional instruments such as the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa;

12. Urges the Commission and Council, therefore, to further encourage third countries to make express provision for women’s rights in their legislation, in particular legislation to protect girls and women from violence, to guarantee that those rights are respected, and to implement gender-sensitive policies and mechanisms to ensure that women are fully and equally involved in decision making in public life, be this in the political, economic, social or environmental spheres;

13. Urges the Commission and Council to encourage third countries to develop practical measures to help women who have been the victims of gender- based violence, for example by ensuring that refuge centres and counselling are made available to victims;

14. Strongly supports the inclusion of gender advisors or gender focal points in EU delegations, and in Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions, and calls on the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to provide delegations and missions with adequate resources and the appropriate means and spheres of activity;

15. Highlights the importance of regarding women not just as a vulnerable section of the population but as active facilitators of development policies; stresses, in this respect, that women play a crucial role in nutrition and food security – not least in recognition of the fact that they are responsible for 80% of farming in Africa – even though they are still hardly ever able to own the land they cultivate; stresses, likewise, that women have proven competence in resolving problems and conflicts, and therefore urges the Commission and the ACP countries to increase the role of women in action groups and working parties;

16. Stresses the importance of combating all forms of violence against women and girls: harassment, rape and sexual abuse, forced prostitution, sexual slavery, exploitation, murder of women, female genital mutilation, forced marriage, domestic violence, etc.; stresses that upholding women’s rights, including their sexual and reproductive rights, and safeguarding respect for their human dignity, are essential to preventing and combating gender-based violence, providing protection and appropriate counselling to victims, and ensuring 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;

17. Affirms the key role of women in democratic transition processes, in state‑building and consolidation and in conflict resolution, pacification and stabilisation; encourages the Commission, the EEAS and the ACP countries to promote tangible and voluntary policies that promote the presence of women around negotiating tables and in political and economic decision‑making positions;

18. Asserts that, in accordance with the specific Cairo International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), the prohibition of coercion or compulsion in sexual and reproductive health matters, and – with regard to the legally binding international human rights instruments, the EU body of law and the Union policy competencies in this matter – 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, or determining foetal sex for the purpose of in prenatal sex selection or infanticide, especially where such actions set their priorities in response to psychological, social, economic or legal pressure;

19. Calls on the Commission to apply the performance indicators established in the EU plan of action on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Development: 1) at least 80% of funds are to include gender‑sensitive indicators, 2) at least 75% of all projects or programmes are to score gender as a principle objective (G-2) or gender as a significant objective (G-1), and 3) at least 50% of indicative multiannual programmes are to identify gender‑equality related actions;

20. Asks the Commission to provide Parliament with a progress report on the implementation of the EU plan of action on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Development.

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	22.1.2013
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	26 1 0
Members present for the final vote	Regina Bastos, Edit Bauer, Emine Bozkurt, Tadeusz Cymański, Edite Estrela, Iratxe García Pérez, Mikael Gustafsson, Mary Honeyball, Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou, Constance Le Grip, Elisabeth Morin-Chartier, Siiri Oviir, Antonyia Parvanova, Raül Romeva i Rueda, Joanna Senyszyn, Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska, Marc Tarabella, Britta Thomsen, Marina Yannakoudakis, Anna Záborská
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Minodora Cliveti, Anne Delvaux, Mariya Gabriel, Nicole Kiil-Nielsen, Christa Klaß, Mojca Kleva Kekuš, Katarína Neveďalová, Angelika Werthmann

RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE

Date adopted	19.2.2013
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	23 4 0
Members present for the final vote	Thijs Berman, Michael Cashman, Ricardo Cortés Lastra, Véronique De Keyser, Nirj Deva, Leonidas Donskis, Charles Goerens, Mikael Gustafsson, Filip Kaczmarek, Michał Tomasz Kamiński, Miguel Angel Martínez Martínez, Gay Mitchell, Norbert Neuser, Jean Roatta, Birgit Schnieber-Jastram, Michèle Striffler, Alf Svensson, Keith Taylor, Eleni Theocharous, Patrice Tirolien, Anna Záborská
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Philippe Boulland, Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra, Enrique Guerrero Salom, Isabella Lövin, Gesine Meissner, Judith Sargentini

Legal notice - Privacy policy