Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-03-22-Speech-3-166"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20060322.14.3-166"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, Mrs Kinnock, I shall try to answer your questions as fully as possible. I fear that I shall not be able to answer all of them, partly because negotiations have not yet been concluded in all areas, and because the Council has not yet adopted a position on all these issues. Nevertheless, I hope I can give you some clarification. I would first like to refer to the agreement of the European Council of December 2005 on the budgetisation of the 10th European Development Fund and on the contribution key for the Member States, a process that was both difficult and drawn-out. You are of course familiar with the agreement reached, which provides for the future development financing of the ACP states not within the general budget, but within the framework of the 10th European Development Fund. You know the figures – the European Council agreed on an amount of EUR 22.6 billion. That is the commitment that the European Union made to the ACP countries when the Cotonou Agreement was revised in February 2005. In this context it is important to mention that as part of that process the ACP countries were given an undertaking that the aid effort would be maintained at the level of the ninth EDF, minus residual appropriations from previous development funds but adjusted for inflation and EU growth and taking account of the impact of enlargement to the ten new Member States. The reason for this is clear: we did not want to reward the inefficiency implied in the non-implementation of appropriations. This was a clear undertaking given to the ACP countries by the European Union. The Commission’s original proposal – and I hope this will answer your question – was for EUR 24.9 billion, and was based in the ninth EDF including residual appropriations from earlier funds. This was therefore right and was in accordance with the commitment made to the ACP countries to correct this Commission proposal. In reality – and I believe that we should also acknowledge this fact – the commitment promised by the EU, that is to say the amount I have already mentioned, represents a considerable real increase in funding compared with the ninth EDF, which as we know has a budget of EUR 13.8 billion. The average annual contribution is increased for all 15 old Member States on the basis of the new contribution key. The 10 new Member States will be taking part in and contributing to an EDF for the first time. This is entirely in accordance with the Council agreement of May 2005 significantly to increase public development aid by the year 2015. You also asked about the contributions from Bulgaria and Romania. Bulgaria and Romania’s planned accession in 2007 has already been anticipated in the calculation of the total volume of the 10th EDF and the individual contributions of the Member States on which the decision is based. As we know, the new 10th EDF can only start to run as from the beginning of 2008. That means that there will not be any additional funding for the 10th EDF when those countries actually accede to the EU. This is totally in line with procedure followed for earlier rounds of enlargement. The Council has also made available EUR 18 million for the new Cotonou member Timor-Leste from the ninth EDF, in order to cover EU development aid once Timor-Leste becomes an ACP State, and following the ratification of the Cotonou Agreement for 2007. It is a logical consequence of this that Timor-Leste will receive no further support under the budget line for Asia, and as from 2008 will receive aid under the 10th EDF. The Council is not at present in a position to give any information on the distribution of funds under the 10th EDF, as this will be discussed during the negotiations shortly about to start on the legal bases, that is to say on the finance protocol to the Cotonou Agreement and the internal financial agreements for the 10th EDF. The Austrian Presidency’s objective is to reach agreement with the ACP countries on the finance protocol at the ACP-EU Council of Ministers on 1 and 2 June 2006, in which I shall be taking part. There is one more point that I need to comment on, since you raised it, Mrs Kinnock, and that is how the overseas countries and territories and administration costs are to be dealt with. These are issues that are still subject to agreement and negotiation. The Commission proposal on the distribution of funds between the ACP partner countries is currently being discussed between the Commission and the Member States. Support for ACP countries in implementing the regional economic partnership agreements – I think you also asked about that – is expected to come from the funds earmarked for regional cooperation in the 10th EDF. The Council has also provided for support for the African Union to be continued under the 10th EDF. Time is of the essence. Back in January, during the Commission’s discussions with the Austrian Government, the Commissioner responsible, Louis Michel, pressed for swift action to ensure that the current programme under the ninth EDF flows seamlessly into the 10th EDF at the start of 2008. As Mr Michel explained to us in very dramatic terms, this time there is only half as much time available as the last time, so we need to act very quickly. In order to make sure that happens, in parallel with the negotiations on the 10th EDF that I have already described, the country programming process has also already started. Following the adoption of the European Development Consensus and building on the Paris Declaration efforts are being made to achieve joint country development programmes, which are to include not only the European Commission’s country programmes but also those of the Member States. We welcome this development and will continue to support it."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph