Today
• European responsibilities…• Cotonou agreement, beyond post colonialism?• 10th European Development Fund• Civil society and the Cotonou Agreement• EU-Africa dialogue
Lunch
• Workshops on influencing European aid to ACP countries
European democracy?European Parliament elections turnout…
Austria 41.8
Belgium 90.8
Cyprus 71.19
Czech Republic 27.9
Denmark 47.8
Estonia 26.89
Finland 41.1
France 43.1
Germany 43
Greece 62.8
Hungary 38.47
Ireland 59.7
Italy 73.1
Latvia 41.23
Lithuania 48.2
Luxembourg 90
Malta 82.4
Netherlands 39.1
Poland 20.4
Portugal 38.7
Slovakia 16.7
Slovenia 28.3
Spain 45.9
Sweden 37.2
United Kingdom 38.9
EU Average 47,8%
Structure of the Cotonou agreement
1. General Provisions (Political dimension and key principles)
2. Joint Institutions
3. Cooperation (development and trade)
4. Development Finance
Political dimension, strong principles
• Fight against poverty
• Millennium Development Goals
• Partnership
• Ownership
• Participation
• Dialogue on Human Rights
• Human and Social Development
Joint institutions
• ACP-EU Joint Council
• ACP-EU Committee of ambassadors
• ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly
Development Aid in practice: European Development Fund
• Programming 2008-2013: €22,8 billion
• Should be “serving the eradication of poverty and sustainable development”
• “Cotonou principles applied in theory…”
• Priorities reflecting the interest of certain elites in Europe and in Africa
• Difficult for the European Parliament to get a role in this process
Trade in practice: Economic Partnership Agreements
• “Integration of ACP countries into the world economy…”
• Free trade area between the EU and ACP regions
• Towards the end of a trade preference system really in the interest of ACPs
• Regional integration dictated by the EU
• Strong impact on small ACP producers
• Use of aid to push for further trade liberalisation
10th European Development Fund
• Countries covered: Sub-Saharan Africa, Caribbean, Pacific
• Legal basis: Cotonou Agreement (article 179)
• Procedure: Decisions taken by the Commission and the Council in theory with ACP countries.
• Establish of parliamentary scrutiny still debated
European Development Fund
CSPs / RSPs
Annual Action programmes
European Consensus
Other International Commitments
Article 179 TECCotonou
Agreement
Regional Strategies
Council
JPA / European Parliament
EDF 10 breakdown2008-2013
EDF10Amount in M€*
1. National and regional cooperation 19.5161.1 National indicative programmes (NIP) A-envelopes (programmable funds) - initial indicative amount 10.800 - incentive tranche 2.700 B-envelopes (for unforeseen needs) - initial allocation 600 - reserve for B-envelope replenishment and FLEX 1.2001.2 Regional indicative programmes (RIP) (~13% of A-envelopes) 1.7651.3 Reserve for NIP/RIP reallocations after reviews 7012. Intra-ACP cooperation 2.700Sub-total operational credits for the ACP managed by the Commission 20.4663. Investment facility (managed by the EIB) 1.500Total operational credits for the ACP 21.966(*) The amounts in bold are those adopted by the Joint Council (02 June 2005)
ACP country funding (2008-2013)General budget support 27,0
Infrastructure, communications and transport 22,6
Rural development and territorial planning 12,1
Governance 10,4
Health 3,3
Water 3,2
Education 2,7
Economic and institutional reforms 2,3
Conflict prevention and fragile states 2,1
TCF 2,1
Agriculture 2,0
Non state actors 1,6
Food security 1,5
Regional economic integration 1,2
Unspecified 1,1
EPA 1,0
Energy 0,9
Private sector development 0,8
Social cohesion and development 0,8
Environment and sustainable management of natural resources 0,6
Program aid for NO 0,5
Governance Incentive Tranche
• Part of the money made conditional to the fulfilment of a profile
• Profile includes: Human Rights, Transparency, accountability but also trade liberalisation, illegal migration, fight against terrorism
Allocations:• 10%: Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Congo Brazzaville;• 20%: Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Kiribati, Micronesia,
Kiribati, Swaziland;• 25%: Burundi, Benin, Mali, Senegal, Malawi,
Mozambique, Niger, Sao Tomé & Principe, Senegal, Lesotho, Liberia, Jamaica, etc;
• 30 – 35%: Rwanda, Botswana, Ghana, Cape Verde,
Benchmarks for scrutinizing EDF programming
• Ownership• Civil Society Participation• Health and Education• Gender Justice• General Budget Support• Regional Integration and Trade• Environmental Sustainability• Governance
EDF committee discussions
• Almost all draft CSPs ready
• Member States received them all informally
• Discussions in October/November/ January?
• Qualified Majority needed for longer discussion
• Mid-Term review coming quickly
Actions to envisage at national level
• Exchange with EDF committee representatives
• Contact European members of the Joint Parliamentary Assembly
• Contact your parliament members (EDF ratification)
Summary of the processDraft CSP prepared by the Commission
Negotiations with ACP governments
Final draft prepared in Brussels by Commission
CSP given a favourable opinion in EDF committee
CSP finalised and signed
Implementation monitored by JPA / EU Parliament??
2005 / 2006
End 2006 / beginning 2007
First semester 2007
October 2007 / January 2008
Beginning 2007
2008 / 2009
Principles of the Cotonou Agreement are being violated within the EDF programming
We should hold our governments and parliaments to account on European aid to ACP countries
Civil Society and the Cotonou Agreement
• In the ACPs:
– National Cotonou Platform/ Working Groups
– No Pan-ACP gathering
– Attempts to set up an ACP Civil Society Forum
Civil Society and the Cotonou Agreement
• In Europe:
– National Africa/Cotonou Working Groups
– Concord Cotonou Aid Working Group
– Concord Cotonou Trade Working Group
Concord Cotonou Aid Working Group
• Political Agenda:– 10th EDF programming– Governance debate– Budget debate and future of the ACP group
• Key moments– Influencing EDF committee
(November/December/January)– Engaging with the JPA (November 2007 / June 2008)– Assessing the 10th EDF programming (Spring 2008)– Seminar on the implementation of the 10th EDF
(Autumn 2008)– Debate on the EC budget review (2008)
Civil Society and the Cotonou Agreement
• Between Europe and ACP:– Coordinated advocacy activities
• Sharing information• Joint letters
– Joint Seminars• Brussels February 2007, 2008?
– Joint activities• JPA in Kigali, November 2007
How to engage with ACP NGOs?
• Sharing of information
• Case studies (We decide you own!)
• Joint Parliamentary Assembly
• Cotonou Working Group Seminar
• Visits to your country (meeting with govt, parliamentarians, Development agency…)
- Various channels to engage in EU/ACP discussions.
- Need for specific activities towards Hungarian government and parliamentarians.
Time to act…
EU-Africa Dialogue
• Strategic partnership with the whole continent based on shared objectives and common values
• Building on values and principles included in:– EU treaty– Cotonou Agreement– Barcelona Process– AU constitutive act– Nepad Manifesto
Strategies?
• Chinese strategy for Africa
• EU strategy for Africa
• Joint EU-Africa Strategy
• Any African Strategy for Africa?
• Any African Strategy for Europe?
Joint EU-Africa Strategy…
Political Content• Peace and Security • Governance and Human Rights • Trade and Regional Integration • Key Development Issues
Institutional Architecture
Follow up : Action plan
Joint strategy: impact on Cotonou
• Adapting existing instruments to new strategy?
• Review of the Cotonou Agreement in 2010
• Real space for civil society?
Renewed EU/Africa dialogue could further diminish ACP’s policy space
Cotonou commitments should be at least safeguarded
Summary of the processDraft CSP prepared by the Commission
Negotiations with ACP governments
Final draft prepared in Brussels by Commission
CSP given a favourable opinion in EDF committee
CSP finalised and signed
Implementation monitored by JPA / EU Parliament??
2005 / 2006
End 2006 / beginning 2007
First semester 2007
October 2007 / January 2008
Beginning 2007
2008 / 2009
Decision Making Process : EDF committee
• Member States receive CSPs 2 weeks before meeting
• Comments should be sent to the Commission 3 days before the meeting
• Commission responds to the comments during the meeting
• Qualified Majority to approve/change a CSP
Top Related