Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-04-Speech-1-080"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020204.6.1-080"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
In the first instance, I should like to congratulate Mr Van den Berg on the exceptional quality of his report on what is, in fact, a relatively complex subject. Crisis situations are always complex, and we must reach consensus on the way in which the reaction of the Union as a whole can be improved on. The Commission communication, the Council’s conclusions and the parliamentary report contribute to establishing this consensus.
Mr President, as you know, the European Union is one of the key players in the world’s relief circuit. The European Community and its Member States together account for half of the international aid programmes funded by the developed countries. Via its Bureau for humanitarian aid, better known under the name of ECHO, the European Commission is actively involved in providing humanitarian aid to the most vulnerable and worst afflicted people in the world. The figures speak for themselves. Last year alone, ECHO made more than EUR 500 million available for humanitarian projects in some 80 countries which reached some 18 million people.
ECHO's task remains that of funding the coordinated provision of humanitarian aid and that of providing protection via humanitarian partner organisations with a view to saving and protecting lives, alleviating suffering and safeguarding the integrity and dignity of the peoples of third countries in humanitarian crises.
Although ECHO's key task is to grant humanitarian relief, the Bureau is also involved in short-term rehabilitation in the immediate post-crisis phase. I think we can all be agreed that improvements need to be made in the grey zone between relief and development. The speakers this evening also referred to this. We have all identified the same difficulties, such as the unduly slow decision-making processes, problems related to the scope of financing instruments and the need to find the right implementing partners. We make progress by tackling these issues more systematically, but we must realise that we are not able to solve all the problems connected with the complex nature of these situations, and we must remain realistic in our approach.
The Commission has set up a series of actions for implementing policy in directions that reflect the link between relief, rehabilitation and development. For example, ECHO is currently putting the finishing touches to guidelines for its exit strategies. This document will become the basis for consultation with other services of the Commission, describing the circumstances under which ECHO can withdraw from granting relief.
The services of the Commission are also working on an agreement to guarantee effective coordination and appropriate procedures in the framework of the implementation of the Cotonou Agreement with the countries in Africa, the Caribbean region and the Pacific. The principles stated in the communication and concerning the link between relief, rehabilitation and development should be applied. Europ I is actively working on an agenda to improve its working methods and so increase its capacity for rapid interventions.
From a budgetary point of view, the Commission realises that its operational resources and instruments must be reviewed. We are of the opinion that the number of budget lines must be reduced. On the other hand, it must be ensured that broader regulations are still able to cover all existing types of activities, that the speed of decision-making is stepped up, that there is flexibility in the choice of implementing partners and that, if necessary, decisions can be taken without the approval of the government in question. On the basis of experience, we believe that further integration of our interventions using the existing regional instruments is the right way forward and that this must lead to greater policy coherence and a higher level of complementarity between the different types of intervention within one and the same country.
In response to different questions raised this evening, I should once again like to emphasise that the complementarity of the different instruments in the reconstruction process in Afghanistan illustrates the approach pursued by the Commission.
Finally, I should like to stress one important aspect. We must be fully aware of the fact that intervening in the immediate post-crisis phase means that we have to accept higher political and technical risks. I should like to point this out with due emphasis. For that reason, the debate which we held with the Council last year, together with your report of today, are welcomed by the Commission as contributions towards a more effective response to crises and the achievement of greater coherence between relief and development."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples