European Development Fund

Highlights - Discharge 2021 - Consideration of Draft Reports - Committee on Budgetary Control

Retrieved on: 
Thursday, February 2, 2023

Discharge 2021: Consideration of Draft Reports

Key Points: 
  • Discharge 2021: Consideration of Draft Reports
    02-02-2023 - 11:48
    On 9 February 2023, the Committee on Budgetary Control will consider the draft discharge reports for the European Commission, the European Development Fund, and EU Agencies.
  • The draft reports will be presented by their respective Rapporteurs, presenting what they consider to be the main points for the 2021 discharge cycle.
  • In the draft reports presented in this meeting, the CONT Committee scrutinises how the Commission and EU Agencies are implementing the EU budget and prepares the Parliament's discharge decisions.
  • Parliament considers the reports prepared by the Budgetary Control Committee, taking into account the Council's recommendations, and decides to grant, postpone or refuse a discharge.

Highlights - 2021 EDF Discharge: Hearing with Commissioner Urpilainen - Committee on Budgetary Control

Retrieved on: 
Tuesday, November 29, 2022

2021 EDF Discharge: Hearing with Commissioner Urpilainen

Key Points: 
  • 2021 EDF Discharge: Hearing with Commissioner Urpilainen
    29-11-2022 - 12:18
    On 1 December 2022, the Committee on Budgetary Control will hold a hearing with Jutta Urpilainen, European Commissioner for International Partnerships, in the presence of the reporting Member of the European Court of Auditors, Baudilio Tom Muguruza.
  • CONT Members will hear Commissioner Urpilainen on the Commission's financial management of the European Development Fund (EDF), which is subject to annual audits by the Court of Auditors in 2021.

The European Union supports Dominica’s efforts to become climate-resilient

Retrieved on: 
Thursday, June 30, 2022

Denise Edwards represented the country during the discussions with the European Member of Parliament (MEP) Stphane Bijoux, and the new MEP from Martinique Max Orville.

Key Points: 
  • Denise Edwards represented the country during the discussions with the European Member of Parliament (MEP) Stphane Bijoux, and the new MEP from Martinique Max Orville.
  • MEP Stphane Bijoux lauded Dominica's efforts to become a climate-resilient nation and to promote eco-tourism.
  • It is our responsibility to partner with developing countries as solidarity is needed in the fight against climate change."
  • As the country moves towards complete climate resilience, visitors can be confident that their trip helps preserve and boost the environment.

Togo - European Union New Partnership Framework and Renewed Financial Commitment

Retrieved on: 
Thursday, January 20, 2022

Adopted on December 16 2021, the Joint Programming Document was developed in an inclusive approach with the European Union, Germany and France.

Key Points: 
  • Adopted on December 16 2021, the Joint Programming Document was developed in an inclusive approach with the European Union, Germany and France.
  • It defines the framework for the interventions of the European partners in support of the efforts of the Government of the Togolese Republic for the next seven years.
  • Mr. Payadowa Boukpssi, Minister of State, Minister of Territorial Administration, Decentralization and Development of Territories co-chaired this presentation ceremony alongside the Ambassador of the European Union to Togo, Mr. Joaqun Tasso Vilallonga.
  • The adoption of this document is an important step in strengthening and concretizing cooperation between Togo and its European partners.

Bulgaria e-Cigarette Regulatory Market Report 2021 - ResearchAndMarkets.com

Retrieved on: 
Monday, January 10, 2022

The "E-Cigarette Regulatory Report: Bulgaria" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

Key Points: 
  • The "E-Cigarette Regulatory Report: Bulgaria" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.
  • The publisher believes regulation of nicotine e-cigarettes in Bulgaria is unlikely to change in the next two years.
  • The Republic of Bulgaria lies in the Balkan Peninsula on the south-eastern edge of Europe.
  • Prime minister Boyko Borissov of the centre-right party Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria (GERB) was elected in 2017.

Article - Global Europe: €79.5 billion to support development

Retrieved on: 
Thursday, June 3, 2021

Following a landmark deal with EU countries in December 2020, MEPs will vote during June's plenary session in Strasbourg on establishing the 79.5 billion Global Europe fund, which merges several existing EU instruments, including the European Development Fund.

Key Points: 
  • Following a landmark deal with EU countries in December 2020, MEPs will vote during June's plenary session in Strasbourg on establishing the 79.5 billion Global Europe fund, which merges several existing EU instruments, including the European Development Fund.
  • Global Europe will support projects that contribute to addressing issues such as poverty eradication and migration and promote EU values such as human rights and democracy.
  • At least 19.3 billion is earmarked for EU neighbourhood countries with 29.2 billion set to be invested in sub-Saharan Africa.
  • The EU will boost its support to sustainable investment worldwide under the European Fund for Sustainable Development Plus, which will leverage private capital to complement direct development assistance.

Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument: Coreper endorses provisional agreement with the European Parliament

Retrieved on: 
Saturday, December 19, 2020

EU member states' ambassadors today endorsed the provisional agreement reached on 15 December between the Council Presidency and European Parliament's representatives on a regulation setting up the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI), in the context of the 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework (MFF).

Key Points: 
  • EU member states' ambassadors today endorsed the provisional agreement reached on 15 December between the Council Presidency and European Parliament's representatives on a regulation setting up the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI), in the context of the 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework (MFF).
  • With the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) the EU is showing its capacity to act in the world.
  • I also welcome the fact that, with the NDICI, the EU is putting an emphasis on climate action.
  • The new instrument will streamline and simplify EU external action financing instruments for international and development cooperation, crisis response or peace-building actions in partner countries.
  • It will do so by merging ten existing external financing instruments - as well as the European Development Fund - into one single financing tool.
  • It will promote multilateralism, strategic priorities and the achievement of key international commitments and objectives, including the Sustainable Development Goals, the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement.
  • In addition, European Neighbourhood countries will benefit from enhanced political cooperationand support for the purposes of enhancing regional cooperation and promoting integration into the EUs internal market.
  • Actions financed under this component aim at strengthening resilience of crisis affected countries, linking humanitarian and development actions and addressing foreign policy needs and priorities.

Background and next steps

    • The Parliament adopted its first-reading position on 27 March 2019 and the Council adopted a partial mandate for negotiations with the European Parliament on 13 June 2019.
    • On 27 May 2020, the Commission published a revised MFF proposal and at the Special Meeting of the European Council (17-21 July 2020), and member states decided on the sum to allocate for the total budget of the NDICI.
    • Following today's endorsement by Coreper, the European Parliament and the Council will translate the agreement into legislative text before final steps will be taken for its adoption.

Multiannual financial framework for 2021-2027 adopted

Retrieved on: 
Friday, December 18, 2020

Infographic - Multiannual financial framework 2021-2027 and Next Generation EU Following the European Parliament's consent yesterday, the Council has adopted the regulation laying down the EU's multiannual financial framework for 2021-2027.

Key Points: 
  • Infographic - Multiannual financial framework 2021-2027 and Next Generation EU Following the European Parliament's consent yesterday, the Council has adopted the regulation laying down the EU's multiannual financial framework for 2021-2027.
  • The regulation provides for a long-term budget of 1 074.3 billion for the EU27 in 2018 prices, including the integration of the European Development Fund.
  • The next long-term budget will cover seven spending areas.
  • It will provide the framework for the funding of almost 40 EU spending programmes in the next seven-year period.

Key features

    • In total, around a third of EU spending under the long-term budget will contribute to new and reinforced policy areas.
    • Funding under the new recovery instrument will help EU member states to tackle the consequences of the COVID-19 crisis, thereby strengthening modernisation and resilience.
    • The EU will be spending 132.8 billion in the spending area of single market, innovation and digital and 377.8 billion on cohesion, resilience and values.
    • These amounts will increase to 143.4 billion and 1.099.7 billion, respectively, with additional funding from the Next Generation EU, including loans to member states.
    • A further 356.4 billion of funding will go to the area of natural resources and environment (373.9 billion with the contribution from the Next Generation EU).
    • Funding for the EU neighbourhood and the world will amount to 98.4 billion.

New and reinforced programmes

    • The digital strand of the Connecting Europe Facility will also get a significant boost in funding.
    • A new EU4Healthprogramme will provide a strong basis for EU action in the health field based on lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic.
    • Support for migration and border management has also been considerably reinforced, including to fund up to 10 000 border guards at the disposal of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency by 2027.
    • Programmes for young people, such as Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps, will also be strengthened, with the Erasmus+ programme expected to triple the number of participants in the course of the new multiannual financial framework.

Next steps

    • Most of the sectoral EU funding programmes are expected to be adopted in early 2021 and will apply retroactively from the beginning of 2021.
    • For the implementation of the Next Generation EU recovery instrument, the EU's own resources decision will need to be approved in all member states in accordance with their constitutional requirements.

REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2018, Section X – European External Action Service - A9-0043/2020

Retrieved on: 
Wednesday, March 18, 2020

on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2018, Section X European External Action Service The European Parliament, having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2018[1], having regard to the consolidated annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2018 (COM(2019)0316 C90059/2019)[2], having regard to the Court of Auditors annual report on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2018, together with the institutions replies[3], having regard to the statement of assurance[4] as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2018, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, having regard to Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002[5], and in particular Articles 55, 99 and 164 to 167 thereof, having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012[6], and in particular Articles 59, 118 and 260 to 263 thereof, having regard to Rule 100 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure, having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0043/2020), 1.Grants the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European External Action Service for the financial year 2018; 2.Sets out its observations in the resolution below; 3Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution forming an integral part of it to the European External Action Service, the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Auditors, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

Key Points: 
  • on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2018, Section X European External Action Service The European Parliament, having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2018[1], having regard to the consolidated annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2018 (COM(2019)0316 C90059/2019)[2], having regard to the Court of Auditors annual report on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2018, together with the institutions replies[3], having regard to the statement of assurance[4] as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2018, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, having regard to Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002[5], and in particular Articles 55, 99 and 164 to 167 thereof, having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012[6], and in particular Articles 59, 118 and 260 to 263 thereof, having regard to Rule 100 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure, having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0043/2020), 1.Grants the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European External Action Service for the financial year 2018; 2.Sets out its observations in the resolution below; 3Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution forming an integral part of it to the European External Action Service, the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Auditors, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).
  • with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2018, Section X European External Action Service (2019/2064(DEC)) The European Parliament, having regard to its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2018, Section X European External Action Service, having regard to Rule 100 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure, having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0043/2020), A.whereas the effectiveness and efficiency of management systems and the use of resources in headquarters and Union delegations are key guiding principles for achieving the objectives of foreign policy, for responding to geopolitical challenges and for strengthening the role of the Union as a global actor; B.whereas it is essential to promote a common management culture within the European External Action Service (EEAS) by reinforcing the European character and esprit de corps of diplomatic staff; C.whereas in the context of the discharge procedure, the discharge authority wishes to stress the particular importance of further strengthening the democratic legitimacy of the Union institutions by improving transparency and accountability, and implementing the concept of performance-based budgeting and good governance of human resources; 1.Regrets, as an overall remark, that chapter 10 Administration of the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors (the Court) has a rather limited scope and conclusions, even if Heading 5 Administration of the Multiannual Financial Framework is considered to be low risk; 2.Considers that the audit work under chapter 10 of the Courts Annual Report should be better balanced among the Union institutions as well as going beyond compliance requirements; 3.Believes that more audit work should be dedicated on operating expenditure or issues that are becoming of high relevance or even critical for the EEAS such as strategic communication capacity and information technology (e.g.
  • cybersecurity), the performance of the global security package for delegations or the financial management and administrative support of mission support platform to the civilian common security and defence policy; 4.Notes also that, for the second consecutive year, the Court did not report any specific issues for the EEAS; 5.Notes with appreciation that, for the second consecutive year, the Court did not identify material levels of error in the EEAS annual activity report and governance arrangement; 6.Notes that the total budget of the EEAS for 2018 amounted to EUR 678,5 million (i.e.
  • an increase of 2,8% compared to 2017) with an execution rate of 99,9% for commitments and 84,8% (slightly lower than 2017 with 86,7%) for payments as of the end of the year and with additional contributions from the Commission to cover the administrative costs of Commission staff posted in Union delegations notes the current budget breakdown, namely EUR249,7million for EEAS headquarters and EUR428,8million for the delegations; 7.Notes that a contribution of EUR 58,5million was also received in 2018 from the European Development Fund and the trust funds compared to EUR 55 million in 2017; 8.Encourages the EEAS to possibly simplify the current budget nomenclature to allow for easier and more efficient management for the EEAS by progressively streamlining the 35 budget lines used to finance Commission staff operations in the delegations, reflecting geographical and various development instruments; 9.Notes with appreciation the simplification of budget management with the entire financing of the common overhead costs relating to all delegations offices in 2018, (rent, security, cleaning and other overheads), including European Development Fund delegations, from the budget lines of the EEAS for the third consecutive year; supports the EEAS efforts to modernise and simplify its administration through the Innovative 2019 project, which includes 20 proposals under examination; asks the EEAS to report back to the Budgetary Control Committee on the proposals under examination; 10.Observes that the headquarters budget amounted to EUR 249,7 million out of which EUR 162,4 million (i.e.
  • 65,5%) concerned the payment of salaries and other entitlements of statutory and external staff, EUR 30,8 million (i.e.
  • 12%) were for buildings and associated costs, and EUR 34,9 million (i.e.
  • 14 %) were related to IT computer systems, equipment and furniture; 11.Notes that the delegations budget of EUR 428,8 million was divided between EUR 118,4 million (i.e.
  • 27,6%) for the remuneration of statutory staff, EUR 168 million (39,2 %) for buildings and associated costs, EUR 72,1 million (or 16,8%) for external staff and outside services, EUR 27,6 million (6,4%) for other expenditure related to staff and EUR 42,7 million (10%) for other administrative expenditure; notes also that EUR 196,4 million (compared to EUR 185,6 million in 2016 and EUR 204,7 million in 2015) was received from the Commission for the administrative costs of the Commissions staff posted in the Unions delegations and was split between the Commission's Heading V with EUR 47,2 million, the administrative lines of operational programmes with EUR 93,2 million, and the European Development Fund and trust funds with EUR 58,5 million (compared to EUR 55 million in 2017 and EUR 45,4 million in 2016); 12.Notes the complexity of the building administration policy in the light of the mission of the EEAS; stresses the need for sufficient explanation to be provided by EEAS related to its building administration policy when buying, renting or managing buildings; calls on the EEAS to exercise constant vigilance on its building administration policy and, in particular, to ensure any suspected cases of fraud or corruption that may be detected when buying, renting or managing buildings are immediately addressed; calls on the EEAS to provide sufficient explanation on its tender procedures and the cost of the buildings in the remit of the discharge exercise; 13.Stresses that good cooperation between Parliament and the EEAS is essential to manage and review building files; strongly encourages the EEAS to submit building files for approval in due time to allow time for a thorough review and follow-up questions; reiterates that files submitted to the budgetary authority only very close to critical due dates create unnecessary time constraints and force approvals by the budgetary authority without the possibility to extend the review period; 14.Calls on the EEAS to commit for the next discharges to keep sending its Working Document on EEAS' Building Policy to the Budgetary Control Committee, including information explaining the context and coverage of the building costs; takes note of the exhaustive and detailed information about the EEAS' building policy provided through the written questionnaires; 15.Notes that the EEAS has transferred EUR 30,8 million out of which the largest amount was used to purchase a building in Washington, the latter amount reduced the final headquarters budget to EUR 239 million while increasing the delegation budget by EUR 10,7 million; 16.Notes that the Union is confronted with an increasingly challenging international environment, which has led to increasing demands on the Union to play a leading role on the international scene; highlights the central role of the EEAS in conducting the Unions foreign policy under the guidance of the High Representative / Vice-President of the Commission; notes that the enhanced role of the EEAS has not been underpinned by a corresponding staff increase; calls for sufficient human resources to be made available in order not to put at risk the Unions effectiveness as a global actor; 17.Notes that the EEAS carries a vital role to ensure the coherence of the Unions foreign policy; also highlights the need to provide necessary resources for a successful implementation of an efficient EU Common Security and Defence Policy; 18.Recognises the difficult operational area of the EEAS in which Union delegations evolve, as political and socio-economic conditions are often complex, unstable and associated high risks with potential significant budgetary and costs consequences mainly for staff and infrastructures security; 19.Calls on the EEAS to create posts for local agents responsible for reporting on legislative work in countries of strategic interest, particularly accession countries and those of the Eastern Partnership, in order to increase the Unions understanding of the neighbourhood and its approximation to the acquis; calls on the EEAS to take action to resolve the problems leading to the procurement errors identified and to prevent future infringements of the relevant rules; 20.Notes that East Strat Com Task Force was granted EUR 1,1 million in 2018 for its work to address Russias disinformation.
  • In 2019, the budget increased to EUR 3 million; calls for a substantial increase in the budget in order for the Union to successfully counter-attack Russias information war; calls for more information campaigns to better explain Union policies in the Eastern Partnership countries; 21.Acknowledges, in that context, that the structure of certain EEAS costs, such as infrastructure costs, might be more difficult to manage due to exchange rate fluctuations or local specific market conditions, making the management and planning at the delegations level more difficult; 22.Notes that the new Financial Regulation under its Article 60 foresees new modalities of budget implementation powers for the delegations, namely the possibility for deputy heads of delegation to act as subdelegated authorising officers and to implement the operational budget of the Commission in order to ensure business continuity; 23.Welcomes in that context the EEAS adaptations of its internal rules accordingly but invites nevertheless the EEAS to carefully monitor such situations when this new provision will be used, namely in small-sized delegations; invites the EEAS in the framework of its internal control strategy to pay particular attention to the related potential risks by proceeding to intensified remote operations control on the adequacy of the financial workflows and/or by providing increased temporary support with relevant ad hoc monitoring and reporting of these periods; recalls that the internal control standard Business continuity was one of the weakest components of the EEAS internal control system for several years, especially for delegations; 24.Considers as positive steps the creation of the risk assessment and management instrument with risks registers for headquarters and delegations as well as the adoption of a new internal control framework; invites however the EEAS to go beyond risk awareness as such by making sure that risk mitigation is effectively implemented and steadily reviewed; 25.Takes note of a rate of anomalies detected in ex ante verifications of commitments and payments (respectively 209 errors out of 1041 and 258 of 1841); regrets the recurrent nature of the errors detected, i.e.
  • mainly the unavailability of supporting documents when financial operations are presented to ex ante financial verification; invites the EEAS also to continue providing specific support for all value public procurement in delegations; welcomes the implementation of financial e-workflows at headquarters by the end of 2019 intended to contribute to a reduction of the level of errors in general terms; 26.Welcomes the alignment of the ex post methodology with the Courts methodology in 2018, enabling to provide error rate per principal domains of expenditure, i.e.
  • staff expenditure, infrastructure, security and IT/telecommunications and based on random stratified samples of operations; considers that this positive evolution will provide the management and authorising officer by delegation a better overview of operational and overall financial amounts at risk based on a larger and exhaustive coverage of financial transactions; highlights that this methodology will provide more objective grounds for the issuance of dedicated action plans with mitigating measures or potential reservations; 27.Reiterates the importance of providing a result-oriented support to delegations in all areas, namely for procurement support; considers that the experience, cooperation and outcomes of the Regional Centre Europe covering 27 delegations should be properly valued, in particular for the higher level of assurance provided, while possibly considering other equally effective means; 28.Calls on the EEAS to progressively reinforce its EEAS assurance chain in line with the new set of internal control standards putting more emphasis both on the individual competence and accountability for their role in materialising controls (as also reflected in the 2018 questionnaire on the implementation of the internal control principles namely in the area of control over technology a little less well scored) and on the risk of fraud; 29.Welcomes the EEAS efforts to foster the sense of accountability of newly appointed heads of delegation for the sound financial management of Union funds falling under their operational responsibilities alongside their political mandate; considers that this also concerns all the actors within foreign affairs such as EU special representatives, EU special envoys, heads of military operations and heads of civilian missions; 30.Recalls that reservation is a keystone in the accountability construction and therefore constitutes a preventive and transparency instrument within the building of the EEAS assurance chain reflecting ongoing challenges or remaining and occurred weaknesses faced by heads of delegation; 31.Notes that only two delegations provided motivated reservations, i.e.
  • the Delegation to Syria, as in 2017, and the Delegation to the Council of Europe in Strasbourg for non-compliance of implemented contracts with procurement rules; encourages the EEAS to continue the ongoing full review of all contracts to ensure compliance with the financial rules; 32.Observes that at the end of 2018, the population of Member State diplomats in the total administrator population amounted to 33,76%, almost equivalent to the 2014 level of 33,8 %; notes the following slight fluctuations between 2014-2018: 32,83 % end 2017, 31,7% end 2016, 32,9% in 2015; invites the EEAS to stay in line with the staffing formula as set out in the Decision 2010/427/EU[7], namely a ratio of one third of staff from Member States and two thirds from Unions institutions; 33.Remains concerned at continuing imbalances in the staffing profile of the EEAS as regards nationality; notes that at the end of 2017, Member State diplomats represented 32,83% of the overall administrator staff of the EEAS (i.e.
  • 307 persons), at the end of 2016, 31,7% of the staff of the EEAS came from the Member States compared to 32,9% in 2015 in comparison to 33,8 % in 2014; 34.Stresses that the EEAS, despite repeated calls, still does not meet the requirements for geographical balance and is significantly disproportionate while having heads of delegation from Belgium (9), Germany (15), France (16), Italy (21), Poland (5), Czech Republic (2); notes, in particular, the increased number of Italian heads of delegation over the last two years; 35.Urges to enhance the geographical balance within the EEAS; reiterates the importance of appropriate and meaningful presence of nationals from all the Member States; stresses that the EEAS must ensure that all Member States are adequately represented while respecting the competences and merits of the candidates; therefore encourages the EEAS to carry on interacting with Member States to promote its posts among the national diplomat networks; 36.Calls on the EEAS to implement gender budgeting in all public expenditure; 37.Recalls that gender mainstreaming is the (re)organisation, improvement, development and evaluation of policy processes, so that a gender equality perspective is incorporated in all policies at all levels and at all stages, by the actors involved in policy-making; 38.Notes with satisfaction that the overall numerical gender balance almost reached parity in the overall number of posts occupied with 47,4 % being women; invites however the EEAS to continue to further reduce existing qualitative imbalances at all levels, functions and in different categories, especially for administrator positions with currently 34,92 % being occupied by women; encourages the EEAS to keep working on the array of measures taken to support gender balance and increase diversity, such as the network for women in pre-management posts and the dedicated trainings for women in management and those aspiring to management; 39.Observes that gender and geographic balance should also be respected with regard to the EU special representatives, two out of eight EU special representatives being women; considers also that ethical standards have to be taken into account to avoid potential conflicts of interests; supports the EEAS preparation on ethics guidelines, taking the specificities of work in delegation into account; 40.Highlights the same situation in the staff overall distribution by gender in management posts, while noting a slight improvement in 2018 with 27,1 % compared to 24,5 % in 2017, representing 71 women, i.e.
  • 60 out of 211 positions at middle management positions (or 28,4 % compared to 26 % in 2017) and 11 out of 51 senior management posts (or 21,57 % compared to 18 % in 2017); 41.calls for further efforts to address these imbalances; calls on the EEAS to update its gender and equal opportunities strategy in order to include concrete goals regarding the presence of women in management positions; highlights the fact that an improvement of the geographical and gender balance in the EEAS would contribute to improving Union ownership of external action; 42.Notes that out of 135 posts of heads of delegation, 34 are held by women; regrets also the low percentage of women candidates for management positions in the annual rotation exercise for delegations which remains low at only 18%; encourages the EEAS to continue its work with Member States to introduce more women candidates; 43.Observes that the number of seconded national experts from Member States has been stabilised to 449 with the same number as 2017 and following a regular increase since 2011; notes that 87,31% of seconded national experts are posted at EEAS headquarters with the rationale that they reply to very specialised needs within the EEAS structure; calls on also the EEAS to pay particular attention to the potential issue of conflict of interest in its recruitment policy for seconded national experts; 44.Recalls the importance of cooling-off periods for officials formerly employed by the Union institutions or agencies as unaddressed conflict-of-interest situations may compromise the enforcement of high ethical standards throughout the European administration; underlines that Article 16 of the Staff Regulations enables Union institutions and agencies, including the EEAS, to turn down a former officials request to take a specific job if restrictions are not sufficient to protect the legitimate interests of the institutions; fears that it is often not possible to enforce conditions imposed upon post-public employment activities; encourages the EEAS, all other agencies and Union institutions, therefore, to consider the full range of tools made available under Article 16 of the Staff Regulations, in particular when they are notified of a transfer to an organisation or company which has registered in the transparency register in order to exclude any risk of former officials lobbying Union institutions within two years after their termination of office; further calls on all Union institutions and agencies, including the EEAS, to strictly publish their assessment of each case as required under Article 16 of the Staff Regulations; 45.Considers the further pooling of experience in enforcement and supervision of Article 16 of the Staff Regulations and related ethics rules across all Union institutions necessary; welcomes the commitment of Commission President Ursula von der Leyen for aUnion ethics body common to the Union institutions; 46.Observes that the interest and the number of co-location projects increased gradually due to their cost-effectiveness and synergies, and that they provide a mechanism to recover full-costs of co-locations; 47.Welcomes the increase in co-location arrangements of Union delegations with Member States with the signature of twenty-two new co-location agreements in 2018, concerning 65 delegations and leading to a total of 114 co-location projects; notes also the conclusion of two service level agreements with the European Union Intellectual Property Office and the Commissions Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations and welcomes that further service level agreements are under negotiation with the European Investment Bank, European Border and Coast Guard Agency and European Union Aviation Safety Agency; 48.Notes with appreciation that co-locations generated non-negligible new sources of revenues for the EEAS amounting to EUR 52,1 million, providing room for manoeuvre to develop its real estate purchasing policy; notes that the EEAS owned 34 office buildings in delegations and rented 143; 49.Requests that the EEAS ensure that co-location in their premises is open to all interested Union institutions and bodies, such as Parliament and the European Investment Bank, with the same conditions as the EEAS; highlights the economic benefits of co-location by reducing the costs for maintenance and operating costs as well as security; further reiterates that the EEAS shall ensure that the costs for leasing or buying property for its delegations is respecting the price range the representations of Member States have to follow; underlines that the EEAS shall incorporate appropriate security cost estimations in its calculations to avoid request for additional funding at later stages; 50.Welcomes the progress made on reducing the number of delegations exceeding the maximum space of 35 m2 per person, following the Court's recommendation in order to make the best use of EEAS premises and avoid unnecessary spending; 51.Supports the permanent annual review mechanism as an effective workforce management instrument to better prioritise and to ensure a recurrent adaptation of EEAS human resources in the network of delegations to the evolving geopolitical priorities and the size of projects portfolios (e.g.
  • the preparation of the opening of the United Kingdom Delegation, the closure of the Solomon Islands Delegation, the upgrading of the Panama Delegation and the opening of a Delegation in Mongolia); notes in 2018, as a first result of this rationalisation exercise of staff resources, that 8 posts have been transferred between delegations; 52.Reiterates that the Union took a step towards fair remuneration for all within its institutions; stresses that the EEAS should ensure its trainees in headquarters and in delegations to receive a decent remuneration for all types of internships (Blue Book, Bruges and Other); welcomes the implementation of paid traineeships in delegations and the termination of offering unpaid traineeships on the Ombudsmans recommendations; notes that the number of trainees in delegations have more than quadrupled, from 26 in 2017 to 109 in 2018; however, regrets that out of the total 404 traineeships offered by the EEAS in 2018, 126 were not remunerated, as they were part of a compulsory training for students; calls on the EEAS to guarantee an appropriate allowance to all EEAS trainees in order to avoid the reinforcement of discrimination on economic grounds; 53.Considers useful to improve the management tools of workload alongside an action plan to attract and retain people taking into account various professional needs, experience and nationalities; welcomes the human resources report and invites the EEAS to clearly state its institutional needs (or new required expertise) and identify its workforce risks at corporate level that could hinder the EEAS achievement of policies objectives; supports the EEAS's measures undertaken to address the increasing workload because of the staff cuts; 54.Notes with concern the 135 mediation cases treated in delegations and headquarters in 2018 concerning either unsolved disagreements around rights and obligations or different kinds of conflict at work including alleged psychological and sexual harassment; calls on the EEAS, in particular the mediation service now reporting directly to the secretariat general, to continue giving the highest priority to this issue in the resource management; reiterates the importance of developing a culture of zero tolerance towards harassment with a strict following up on reported cases; welcomes the anti-harassment awareness raising initiative launched in 2018 by the EEAS Secretary General with the aim of providing more information on the EEAS anti-harassment policy; 55.Invites also, in this context, the EEAS to extend the network of confidential counsellors, currently representing 6 people, especially in the network of delegations by possibly increasing the number of trained volunteer counsellors in delegations; encourages the EEAS to foster the social dialogue regardless the origin of the staff and the different status of the staff; 56.Observes that the EEAS, after having updated its administrative arrangement with the European Anti-Fraud Office and reinforced its cooperation on fraud related issues with directorates-general acting in external affairs, such as Directorate-General for Foreign Policy Instruments (DG FPI), Directorate-General for European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) and Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development (DG DEVCO) in 2017, has continued its efforts to refine its anti-fraud strategy; stresses that further cooperation with the European Anti-Fraud Office and Commission (the directorates-general acting in external affairs, such as DG FPI, DG NEAR and DG DEVCO) should be implemented; notes with appreciation the awareness raising of the heads of delegation in agreement with DG DEVCO an DG NEAR on fraud prevention and reporting via its internal control principle Prevention of fraud; welcomes the fact that the EEAS is a member of the Fraud and Detection Network chaired by European Anti-Fraud Office; 57.Calls on the EEAS to indicate in its annual activity report the number of referred cases to European Anti-Fraud Office and ongoing investigations by the European Anti-Fraud Office related to potential conflict of interest in the EEAS; 58.Notes that in 2018 there was one reported case of alleged whistleblowing by an external person against a member of staff of the Commission in a Union delegation; asks the EEAS to provide Parliament with information concerning the policy and procedures it has in place, especially in delegations, when facing a case of whistleblowing; 59.Supports the EEAS efforts to improve transparency by promoting and improving the e-EEAS Register, through which citizens can request access to documents; notes with satisfaction that citizens used the e-EEAS Register on a higher frequency compared to 2017; asks the EEAS to ensure a quick response to citizens' requests; 60.Welcomes the entry into force in 2020 of the three joint decisions on conditions of employment, LA-Medical and LA-Provident Fund, which introduce a new framework of rules for local agents in delegations in order to modernise and improve social security schemes; welcomes the first joint EEAS-Commission staff survey in delegations in 2018; supports the launching of an internal audit on the recruitment and management of local agents to remedy certain weaknesses found by the Court in the recruitment procedures of local agents in delegations (i.e.
  • for the Committee on Budgetary Control on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2018, Section X - European External Action Service Rapporteur for opinion: Vangelis Meimarakis SUGGESTIONS The Committee on Foreign Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgetary Control, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its motion for a resolution: 1.Notes that the Union is confronted with an increasingly challenging international environment, which has led to increasing demands on the Union to play a leading role on the international scene; highlights the European External Action Services (EEAS) central role in conducting the Unions foreign policy under the guidance of the High Representative / Vice-President of the Commission; notes that the EEASs enhanced role has not been underpinned by a corresponding staff increase; calls for sufficient human resources to be made available in order not to put at risk the Unions effectiveness as a global actor; 2.Notes that the EEAS carries a vital role to ensure the coherence of the Unions foreign policy; also highlights the need to provide necessary resources for a successful implementation of an efficient EU Common Security and Defence Policy; 3.Calls on the EEAS to create posts for local agents responsible for reporting on legislative work in countries of strategic interest, particularly accession countries and those of the Eastern Partnership, in order to increase the Unions understanding of the neighbourhood and its approximation to the acquis; calls on the EEAS to take action to resolve the problems leading to the procurement errors identified and to prevent future infringements of the relevant rules; 4.Calls on the EEAS to implement gender budgeting in all public expenditure; 5.Recalls that gender mainstreaming is the (re)organisation, improvement, development and evaluation of policy processes, so that a gender equality perspective is incorporated in all policies at all levels and at all stages, by the actors involved in policy-making; 6.Notes the remaining gender and geographical imbalances within the EEAS staff, despite positive trends in recent years; reiterates the importance of ensuring a balanced distribution of staff in terms of gender and geographical origin within different categories and grades, particularly at middle and senior management levels; is concerned by the fact that in middle-management positions in the EEAS, men represent 75% and women 25%, while at the level of senior management, men account for 87%, while women account for 13% of the workforce; points also to the imbalances between EU officials and Member States diplomats among Heads of Delegation; calls for further efforts to address these imbalances; calls on the EEAS to update its Gender and Equal Opportunities Strategy in order to include concrete goals regarding the presence of women in management positions; highlights the fact that an improvement of the geographical and gender balance in the EEAS would contribute to improving Union ownership of external action; 7.Welcomes the short-term secondment programme between the EEAS and the European Parliament; highlights its role in enhancing the mutual understanding of each institutions structures and working methods and thereby improving the cooperation between the two institutions; encourages the EEAS to promote this programme more actively among its staff in order to boost the number of participants; recommends further to expand the Diplomatic Exchange and Secondment Programme between the EEAS and the Member States diplomatic services that is aimed at contributing to the evolution of a shared diplomatic culture.
  • 8.Underlines the need to fight propaganda and to expose disinformation and malicious foreign influence; stresses the importance of the EEAS Strategic Communication Task Force and calls for providing it with the necessary financial and personnel resources; 9.Emphasises the growing importance of the EU-Arctic Policy and the need to strengthen the Unions credibility among partners by ensuring the stability of the EUs Arctic Ambassador post; INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018 - A9-0057/2020

Retrieved on: 
Wednesday, March 18, 2020

on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018 (2019/2065(DEC)) The European Parliament, having regard to the financial statements and revenue and expenditure accounts for the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018 (COM(2019)0317 C90060/2019), having regard to the financial information on the European Development Funds (COM(2019)0258), having regard to the Court of Auditors annual report on the activities funded by the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018, together with the Commissions replies[1], having regard to the statement of assurance[2] as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2018, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, having regard to the Councils recommendations of 18 February 2020 on discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Funds for the financial year 2018 (05324/2020 C90029/2020, 05325/2020 C90030/2020, 05327/2020 C90031/2020, 05328/2020 C90032/2020), having regard to the Commissions reports on the follow-up to the discharge for the 2017 financial year (COM(2019)0334), having regard to the Partnership Agreement 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 part, signed in Cotonou (Benin) on 23 June 2000[3] and amended in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, on 22 June 2010[4], having regard to Council Decision 2013/755/EU of 25 November 2013 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Union (Overseas Association Decision)[5], having regard to Article 33 of the Internal Agreement of 20 December 1995 between the representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the financing and administration of the Community aid under the Second Financial Protocol to the fourth ACP-EC Convention[6], having regard to Article 32 of the Internal Agreement of 18 September 2000 between Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the Financing and Administration of Community Aid under the Financial Protocol to the Partnership Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Community and its Member States signed in Cotonou (Benin) on 23 June 2000 and the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies[7], having regard to Article 11 of the Internal Agreement of 17 July 2006 between the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the financing of Community aid under the multiannual financial framework for the period 2008 to 2013 in accordance with the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement and on the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies[8], having regard to Article 11 of the Internal Agreement of 24 and 26 June 2013 between the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Union, meeting within the Council, on the financing of European Union aid under the multiannual financial framework for the period 2014 to 2020 in accordance with the ACP-EU Partnership Agreement and on the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union applies[9], having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, having regard to Article 74 of the Financial Regulation of 16 June 1998 applicable to development finance cooperation under the fourth ACP-EC Convention[10], having regard to Article 119 of the Financial Regulation of 27 March 2003 applicable to the 9th European Development Fund[11], having regard to Article 50 of Council Regulation (EC) No 215/2008 of 18 February 2008 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund[12], having regard to Article 48 of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/323 of 2 March 2015 on the financial regulation applicable to the 11th European Development Fund[13], having regard to Rule 99 and the third indent of Rule 100 of, and Annex V to, its Rules of Procedure, having regard to the opinionof the Committee on Development, having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0057/2020), 1.Grants the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018; 2.Sets out its observations in the resolution below; 3.Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution forming an integral part of it to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Auditors and the European Investment Bank, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

Key Points: 
  • on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018 (2019/2065(DEC)) The European Parliament, having regard to the financial statements and revenue and expenditure accounts for the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018 (COM(2019)0317 C90060/2019), having regard to the financial information on the European Development Funds (COM(2019)0258), having regard to the Court of Auditors annual report on the activities funded by the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018, together with the Commissions replies[1], having regard to the statement of assurance[2] as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2018, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, having regard to the Councils recommendations of 18 February 2020 on discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Funds for the financial year 2018 (05324/2020 C90029/2020, 05325/2020 C90030/2020, 05327/2020 C90031/2020, 05328/2020 C90032/2020), having regard to the Commissions reports on the follow-up to the discharge for the 2017 financial year (COM(2019)0334), having regard to the Partnership Agreement 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 part, signed in Cotonou (Benin) on 23 June 2000[3] and amended in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, on 22 June 2010[4], having regard to Council Decision 2013/755/EU of 25 November 2013 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Union (Overseas Association Decision)[5], having regard to Article 33 of the Internal Agreement of 20 December 1995 between the representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the financing and administration of the Community aid under the Second Financial Protocol to the fourth ACP-EC Convention[6], having regard to Article 32 of the Internal Agreement of 18 September 2000 between Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the Financing and Administration of Community Aid under the Financial Protocol to the Partnership Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Community and its Member States signed in Cotonou (Benin) on 23 June 2000 and the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies[7], having regard to Article 11 of the Internal Agreement of 17 July 2006 between the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the financing of Community aid under the multiannual financial framework for the period 2008 to 2013 in accordance with the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement and on the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies[8], having regard to Article 11 of the Internal Agreement of 24 and 26 June 2013 between the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Union, meeting within the Council, on the financing of European Union aid under the multiannual financial framework for the period 2014 to 2020 in accordance with the ACP-EU Partnership Agreement and on the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union applies[9], having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, having regard to Article 74 of the Financial Regulation of 16 June 1998 applicable to development finance cooperation under the fourth ACP-EC Convention[10], having regard to Article 119 of the Financial Regulation of 27 March 2003 applicable to the 9th European Development Fund[11], having regard to Article 50 of Council Regulation (EC) No 215/2008 of 18 February 2008 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund[12], having regard to Article 48 of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/323 of 2 March 2015 on the financial regulation applicable to the 11th European Development Fund[13], having regard to Rule 99 and the third indent of Rule 100 of, and Annex V to, its Rules of Procedure, having regard to the opinionof the Committee on Development, having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0057/2020), 1.Grants the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018; 2.Sets out its observations in the resolution below; 3.Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution forming an integral part of it to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Auditors and the European Investment Bank, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).
  • on the closure of the accounts of the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018 (2019/2065(DEC)) The European Parliament, having regard to the financial statements and revenue and expenditure accounts for the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018 (COM(2019)0317 C90060/2019), having regard to the financial information on the European Development Funds (COM(2019)0258), having regard to the Court of Auditors annual report on the activities funded by the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018, together with the Commissions replies[14], having regard to the statement of assurance[15] as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2018, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, having regard to the Councils recommendations of 18.February 2020 on discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Funds for the financial year 2018 (05324/2020 C90029/2020, 05325/2020 C90030/2020, 05327/2020 C90031/2020, 05328/2020 C90032/2020), having regard to the Commissions reports on the follow-up to the discharge for the 2017 financial year (COM(2019)0334), having regard to the Partnership Agreement 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 part, signed in Cotonou (Benin) on 23 June 2000[16] and amended in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, on 22 June 2010[17], having regard to Council Decision 2013/755/EU of 25 November 2013 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Union (Overseas Association Decision)[18], having regard to Article 33 of the Internal Agreement of 20 December 1995 between the representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the financing and administration of the Community aid under the Second Financial Protocol to the fourth ACP-EC Convention[19], having regard to Article 32 of the Internal Agreement of 18 September 2000 between Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the Financing and Administration of Community Aid under the Financial Protocol to the Partnership Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Community and its Member States signed in Cotonou (Benin) on 23 June 2000 and the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies[20], having regard to Article 11 of the Internal Agreement of 17 July 2006 between the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the financing of Community aid under the multiannual financial framework for the period 2008 to 2013 in accordance with the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement and on the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies[21], having regard to Article 11 of the Internal Agreement of 24 and 26 June 2013 between the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Union, meeting within the Council, on the financing of European Union aid under the multiannual financial framework for the period 2014 to 2020 in accordance with the ACP-EU Partnership Agreement and on the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union applies[22], having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, having regard to Article 74 of the Financial Regulation of 16 June 1998 applicable to development finance cooperation under the fourth ACP-EC Convention[23], having regard to Article 119 of the Financial Regulation of 27 March 2003 applicable to the 9th European Development Fund[24], having regard to Article 50 of Council Regulation (EC) No 215/2008 of 18 February 2008 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund[25], having regard to Article 48 of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/323 of 2 March 2015 on the financial regulation applicable to the 11th European Development Fund[26], having regard to Rule 99 and the third indent of Rule 100 of, and Annex V to, its Rules of Procedure, having regard to the opinionof the Committee on Development, having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0057/2020), 1.Approves the closure of the accounts of the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018; 2.Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Auditors and the European Investment Bank, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).
  • with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018 (2019/2065(DEC)) The European Parliament, having regard to its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds for the financial year 2018, having regard to the answers provided by the Commission to the written questions to Commissioner Mimica for the hearing before the CONT Committee on Nov 28th, 2019; having regard to Rule 99 and the third indent of Rule 100 of, and Annex V to, its Rules of Procedure, having regard to the opinionof the Committee on Development, having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0057/2020), A.whereas the primary objective of development cooperation is to reduce poverty and, in the long term, eradicate it as set out in Articles 208 to 210 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU); B.whereas the Union must put maximum efforts in assuring that, especially in cases when investing in countries governed by non-democratic regimes, its funds and actions always benefit the people in need and not the governing structures; C.whereas the overall objective remains to reach 0,7% of gross national income to official development assistance (ODA) and to leverage private funding; D.whereas integrating the Sustainable Development Goals and implementing the Paris Agreement on Climate are core objectives to be pursued in cooperation instruments; E.whereas sustainability is crucial for achieving the set goals and results and especially the long-term impacts of development aid; F.whereas the principle of leaving no one behind is key in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; G.whereas the European Consensus on Development adopted in 2017 provides a common development policy framework for Union institutions and Member States; H.whereas the alignment of Union development cooperation with the partner countries own development priorities is the key element of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; I.whereas policy coherence and complementarity of various external policies should be steadily looked at, especially when several ones are being implemented in a single partner country, with the view to promote synergies, reduce trade-offs between these existing policies and to avoid as much as possible unnecessary administrative burdens; J.whereas good cooperation and coordination with other donors and international financial institutions is of paramount importance for avoiding duplication, ensuring efficient controls, risk sharing, results ownership that reflects true input and aid effectiveness and fostering the capacity to build development aid in beneficiary countries; K.whereas the Commission is ultimately responsible for the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying the accounts of the European Development Funds (EDFs) and for overseeing the EDFs financial monitoring and reporting process; L.whereas transparency, accountability and human rights due diligence are prerequisites for democratic scrutiny and effective development aid; M.whereas the Unions external interventions are channelled through international organisations which either implement Union funds or co-finance projects together with the Union including challenges in terms of oversight and governance; N.whereas a wide range of implementation methods, reflecting the intergovernmental nature of the EDFs, are used in 79 countries with complex rules and procedures with regard to tendering and awarding contracts; O.whereas budget support, while playing a key role in driving change and addressing the main development challenges, carries a considerable fiduciary risk and should be granted only if the beneficiary state is able to demonstrate a sufficient level of transparency, traceability, accountability, respect for the rule of law and human rights and effectiveness prior to receiving budget support assistance; P.whereas fostering transparency and fighting corruption and fraud are key for the success of the Union's budget support operations; Q.whereas EDF activities are implemented in challenging contexts by facing recurrent high-risk exposure of either a geo-political or institutional nature; R.whereas external factors to the proper implementation of the EDFs may mitigate or annihilate the efforts made in terms of development; S.whereas Union governance support is a key component of development aid to generate effective governance reforms; T.whereas the current migratory crises must not overshadow migration waves that are linked to demographic upheavals and call for different responses in the long term; U.whereas the simplification of implementation processes is a driver for enhancing the effectiveness of the delivery of aid; V.whereas it is of fundamental importance to promote Union visibility, to ensure a strategic use of EU external financial an aid instrument, to communicate on Union funding and to project Union values in all forms of development aid.
  • Statement of assurance Financial and project implementation of the EDFs (Eight to eleventh EDF) in 2018 1.Observes that the eleventh EDF represents 65% of portfolio of the Commissions Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development (DG DEVCO); notes that EDF commitments reached EUR4959 million in 2018, exceeding the annual target of EUR4537 million (or 109,3% of the initial target compared to 95% in 2017) while EDF payments amounted to EUR4124 million (i.e.
  • an execution rate of 98,2% of the annual target of EUR4200 million compared to 98,89% in 2017); notes in addition that European Investment Bank (EIB) commitments were EUR880million (EUR800million of which concerned the Investment Facility) while EIB payments amounted to EUR555million in 2018 (out of which EUR525million was made via the Investment Facility); 2.Welcomes the regular efforts of the Commissions Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development (DG DEVCO) to reduce old pre-financing, old unspent commitments with a target of 25%; notes that DG DEVCO exceeded its 25% target by reducing EDF old pre-financing by 40,33% (43,79% for other domains of aid) and by 37,10% for EDF old unspent commitments (39,71% for other aid areas); 3.Encourages DG DEVCO to pursue its efforts with regard to EDF old expired contracts as the target value below 15% was not achieved like in 2017 regardless the new procedure set up by DEVCO (with 17,27%, a slight but unsatisfactory improvement compared to 18,75% in 2017); notes that this KPI target value below 15% was achieved for the rest of DEVCOs operation with 13,88% ; 4.Regrets in general that the reduction exercise is less performing, with reduction levels that are lower for old EDF pre-financing and unspent commitments or were not achieved for old EDF expired contracts compared to other areas of intervention andresponsibility of DG DEVCO; acknowledges, however, that the operational complexity of the EDFs can hamper the achievement of KPI target values, in particular for closing procedures, thereby making it more difficult to issue recovery orders; 5.Calls on DG DEVCO as a matter of priority to close in the short term the remaining operations from the eighth and ninth EDF; Reliability of the accounts 6.Welcomes the fact that the Court of Auditors (the Court), in its annual report on the activities funded by the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh EDFs for the financial year 2018, found that the final annual accounts present fairly, in all material respects, the EDFs financial position at 31 December 2018 and that the results of their operations, their cash flows and the changes in their net assets for the year then ended are in accordance with the provisions of the EDF Financial Regulation and with accounting rules based on internationally accepted accounting standards for the public sector; Legality and regularity of the transactions underlying the accounts 7.Welcomes the Courts opinion according to which the revenue underlying the accounts for the year 2018 is legal and regular in all material aspects; 8.Expresses its growing concern over the adverse opinion of the Court as to the legality and regularity of expenditure insofar as the expenditure underlying the accounts is materially affected by an increasing level of error; 9.Is deeply concerned that the estimated level of error increased again for a second year in a raw to 5,2% for expenditure accepted in the accounts for the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh EDF (compared to 4,5% in 2017, 3,3% in 2016, 3,8% in 2014 and 2015, 3,4% in 2013 and 3% in 2012); expects the Commission to reflect on the reasons and to take the necessary steps to reverse the trend of growing error rate; 10.Notes, that part of the error rates estimated by the European Court of Auditors could be the consequence of very high workload for insufficient staff numbers, in particular in hardship Delegations; 11.Believes it is crucial, when reaching such level of estimated errors, to further invest in the staff awareness and training; calls uponthe Commission to find the ways to solve the problem of understaffing, in particular in hardship Delegations; 12.Observes that the United Kingdoms withdrawal from the Union has had no impact on the 2018 EDF financial management and that the 2018 EDF accounts correctly reflect the state of the withdrawal process; 13.Notes with grave concern the fact that out of 125 payment transactions reviewed by the Court, 51 (or 41%) were affected by errors and, in particular, of the 39 payments with quantifiable errors, nine (23%) were final transactions authorised after all ex ante checks had been performed; calls on the Commission to substantially improve the legality and regularity of the transactions and make sure that the ex ante checks are properly followed up; 14.Observes that the de-committed funds from projects under the tenth EDF that are transferred to the performance reserve of the eleventh EDF will not create any treasury issues in view of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the Union, and that the impact on the contribution of each Member State will be calculated in proportion to their initial contribution to the EDF; 15.Is deeply concerned that, despite the successive corrective action plans implemented by DG DEVCO, the typology of errors identified is, to a large extent, similar to previous years, namely a lack of essential supporting documents (36,6%), serious failure to comply with public procurement rules (27,1%), expenditure not incurred (22,7%), residual error rate (RER) adapted from DG DEVCOs RER study (5,4%), ineligible expenditure (4,3%) and other types of error (3,9%), non-compliance by beneficiaries with procurement provisions and ineligible expenditure; 16.Observes that errors mainly related to transactions linked to programme estimates, grants and contribution agreements with international organisations and delegation agreements with Union national cooperation agencies rather than to other aid instruments; 17.Is deeply concerned about this recurrent situation, despite the successive corrective action plans set up by DG DEVCO, especially when quantifiable errors point to shortcomings in the checks by international organisations; urges the Commission not to under-estimate the seriousness of such errors which could indicate irregularities such as fraud and to address the aforementioned recurrent shortcomings as a matter of urgency, to report clearly on the specific difficulties encountered in the implementation of the action plan and to duly cooperate with both the Court and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) when necessary; Effectiveness of the monitoring and assurance systems 18.Is deeply concerned that the Commission had sufficient information to prevent, detect and correct the quantifiable errors before validating and accepting the expenditure, and that using the information available would have reduced the estimated level of error rate by 1,3 percentage points lower; stresses also that certain transactions with errors were not detected by external auditors, representing 1,1 percentage points; 19.Expects DG DEVCO to be more rigorous in its use of the management information available and in the consistent running of its overall control system (ex-ante checks and external audit or expenditure verification); stresses the importance of and calls on DG DEVCOs continuous efforts to improve the implementation of its preventive controls, in particular the targeting of high-risk areas related to funds under indirect management through international organisations and development agencies and grants under direct management; 20.Notes the DG DEVCOs seventh RER study resulting in an RER of 0,85% below the 2% materiality threshold fixed by the Commission; notes, however, that the methodology used has been based for several years on very few on-the-spot checks on transactions and incomplete checks on public procurement procedures and calls on DG DEVCO to work closely with the Court to improve on the reliability of assessing the error rates; 21.Observes, however, that the results of external audits for operations implemented in the grants in direct management and indirect management with beneficiaries countries domains show that 4,64% and 3,77%, respectively, of the total amount audited was identified as non-eligible and that this situation has not led to the issuance of differentiated reservations; asks DG DEVCO to provide a further detailed explanation of the underlying rationale used in those two cases; 22.Recalls that reservation is a keystone in the accountability construction and therefore constitutes a preventive and transparency instrument within the building of the DEVCO assurance chain reflecting ongoing challenges or remaining and occurred weaknesses faced at Headquarters or within Union delegations; 23.Calls on DG DEVCO to progressively reinforce its assurance chain in line with the new set of internal control standards putting a greater emphasis both on individual competences and accountability for their roles in materialising controls and on the risk of fraud; 24.Notes that the RER study has become a building block of the DG DEVCO risk assessment, control and auditing strategy, and assurance chain, but invites DG DEVCO to ensure better consistency in the methodological standards used in its RER assessment and, when needed, consult the Court on such issues; 25.Notes the different approaches used by the Court and DG DEVCO, with the Court focusing on ongoing operations or provisional error rates at payment level and DG DEVCO dealing with closed operations; considers and underlines the fact that this duality of estimation methodology should not lead to an equivocal vision of the regularity and legality of operations, which would also prevent the comparability of results over several years; 26.Expects all stakeholders to avoid competing justifications on methodologies of assessing estimated error levels in order to present a reliable and more realistic picture of the situation and to increase confidence and fairness both in the control work performed and in the general control systems; underlines also the fact that the concept of estimated amounts at risk at closure used in various forms of reporting such as DG DEVCOs annual activity report or the Commissions annual management performance report should be duly reconsidered; 27.Calls on DG DEVCO to continue its efforts to improve the efficient implementation of its control framework and KPIs, in particular KPI 21 on undue payments prevented by ex ante controls and KPI 25 on ineligible amounts identified by external audits; notes that recovery orders were issued for an amount of EUR18,22million for the reimbursement of undue payments; 28.Believes that the targeting of high-risk areas related to funds under indirect management through international organisations and national development agencies and grants under direct management is key and that the level of risks associated to these two domains of operation should be upgraded; 29.Notes that two reservations were issued in 2018, in particular the reconduction of the reservation on the African Peace Facility (APF) initially issued in 2015 and reflecting the ongoing institutional and management weaknesses, the APF not being sufficiently effective for protecting the legality and regularity of EDF expenditure; 30.Notes that 19 fraud investigations were ongoing in 2018; Cooperation with international organisations, Union development agencies and non-governmental organisations 31.Notes that the payments in 2018 from EDFs for projects implemented via indirect management with international organisations and development agencies amounted respectively to EUR1,074 million and EUR201 million (out of which EUR347million was through the United Nations); notes that EUR2,6 billion came from the general budget; 32.Notes with concern that for the operations with international organisations 33 out of 61 transactions audited (or 54%) have quantifiable errors, representing 62,5% of the 2018 estimated level of errors; 33.Expresses its deep concern over the fact that international organisations once again did not provide supporting documentation on time, which prevented the Commission and the Court from carrying out rigorous audits; calls on the Commission in that regard to strengthen its efforts in ensuring that information is received in a timely manner from the international organisations concerned in order for the Court to be able to present full and accurate data; notes with concern that a large number of EDF contracts are awarded to a very limited number of national development agencies, with the attendant risk of re-nationalisation of Union policy contrary to the interest of greater integration of Union external policy; 34.
  • Notes with concern that the large number of EDF contracts are awarded to a very limited number of national development agencies, with the attendant risk of renationalisation of EU policy contrary to the interests of greater integration of EU external policy; 35.Calls on the Commission, to strengthen and consolidate the monitoring of the tendering and contracting procedures to avoid any risk that very few number of public or semi-private Agencies monopolising substantial shares of the EDF projects implemented in developing countries and gain a growing influence on the EU development, cooperation and neighbourhood policies which might endanger the EU policy independence; calls on the Commission to strengthen and broaden its cooperation also with other public and private entities, such as several NGOs working in the field of development; 36.Recommends the Commission to pay greater emphasis on promotion of EDFs cooperative work with international organisations, EU development agencies and NGOs; expresses concern about the inadequate and insufficient visibility of EDFs work to the public; 37.Recalls the fact that entities entrusted with the implementation of Union funds shall as a general principle to respect the principles of sound financial management and transparency; stresses that any entity must fully cooperate in the protection of the financial interests of the Union and must, as a condition for receiving funds, grant the necessary rights and access required for that the authorising officer responsible, the Court and OLAF; 38.Calls on the Commission to: (i)strictly respect and make applicable in contributions and framework agreements the aforementioned responsibilities of entities implementing Union funds and the obligation to provide the Court and OLAF with any requested document needed for audit completion; (ii)pay regular attention to the pillar assessment requirements and reports of the international organisations and NGOs concerned by this lack of cooperation to review the appropriateness of their accountability tools; to reconsider related provisions or terms of reference when pillar assessment methodology is to be reviewed to comply with the EDF Financial Regulation; calls for an adaptation, where necessary, of the existing delegation agreements in force with those international entities; (iii)Notes that there is still a need for a more systematic approach to the communication of Unions grant-funded activities to enhance Unions visibility, and to strengthen transparency, accountability and human rights due-diligence along the chain of funding; calls on the Commission to introduce in the framework agreements the obligation for the leading Agency to ensure the visibility of the Union in multi-donor projects; calls on the Commission to carry out sample-based on-the-spot controls years after the completion of the co-financed projects to check the continued impact of the EDF interventions and to take the necessary steps to ensure the long-term impacts of its operations; Union budget support 39.Notes that the EDF contribution to budget support activities reached EUR 881,9 million in 2018 out of which EUR858,6 million amounted to new commitments (with a geographical coverage of 56 partner countries representing 96 budget support contracts); observes that for overseas countries and territories (OCTs) EUR92,9 million was disbursed through the EDFs for 14 countries, representing 18 budget support contracts; 40.Notes with appreciation that sub-Saharan Africa is the largest recipient of budget support with a share of 41% and that related contracts concerned state resilience and building contracts; observes also that the share of low income countries increased to 38% compared to 31% in 2015 and that lower middle income countries, with 47% of the total ongoing commitments, are the largest beneficiaries of budget support; 41.Recalls that budget support is an investment in the Union partner countries public policies and systems and that its core principles are to implement reforms and contribute to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals; notes that Union budget support is to be guided by the internationally agreed Busan effectiveness principles such as ownership by partner countries, results focus, inclusiveness and accountability; 42.Notes that in the African Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries and OCTs disbursements are mainly made by fixed tranches; considers, however, that variable tranches might provide a better leverage for deepening the policy and political dialogue with partner countries on the main reforms to be carried out; believes that the disbursement modalities via fixed and variables tranches should be results based and rely on sufficient qualitative data to evaluate the progress achieved; considers the disbursement performance criteria to be a core factor in the management of budget support activities; 43.Calls for a close monitoring and thorough policy dialogue with partner countries regarding objectives, progress towards agreed results and performance indicators; calls once again on the Commission to better define and measure the expected development impact and especially to improve the control mechanism with regard to the conduct of the beneficiary state in the areas of corruption, respect of human rights, rule of law and democracy; remains deeply concerned about the use that can be made of Union budget support in recipient countries where there is limited or no democratic control; 44.Observes a slight overall decrease in risk perception related to budget support in 2018; stresses, however, that corruption, public finance and developmental risks remain the most significant risks while there has been an increasing trend in the macroeconomic risk; 45.Supports the focus on progress achieved in public finance management, budgetary transparency and democratic control and oversight bodies and macro conditionality in partner countries in order to optimise the capacity development; calls on the Commission to systematically monitor the reforms undertaken and results achieved, demonstrating that Union budget support has effectively contributed to the recipient countries own development agenda and strengthened its democratic ownership; 46.Points out that appropriate monitoring tools have to be reinforced to assess the way in which budget support has contributed to improve domestic revenue mobilisation and related reforms; notes with appreciation that domestic revenue mobilisation accounted in 2018 for 19% of the value of variable tranches (compared to 3% in 2014); encourages DG DEVCO to continue providing regular information in its budget support reports concerning the use of budget support contracts for domestic revenue mobilisation; 47.Calls on DG DEVCO, however, to strictly assess in its policy dialogue the risks related to corporate tax avoidance, tax evasion and illicit financial flows affecting particularly developing countries; encourages DG DEVCO to assess the fiscal impact and to help to the definition of oriented investment objectives; Risks and challenges related to the EDF aid implementation 48.Expresses great concern about the risk that EDF will be pushed into responding to agendas that distance it from its primary objective of poverty alleviation, which are irreconcilable with the EDFs core values with a risk to compromise what was done well; notes with concern the risk of diversion and invites the Commission to take this into account in the generation of projects and programs in line with policy coherence for development; calls upon the Commission to select future aid programs in accordance with the EDFs core values and consider withdrawing subsidy to programs diverting from these values; 49.Underlines the fact that the EDFs should not go beyond their scope and that the new nexus to face new challenges should not undermine the achievement of other development goals; 50.Appeals to the Commission to put greater emphasis and focus on improving and maintaining well-functioning aid programmes; calls on the Commission to secure greater media coverage and visibility of best practice and success stories; 51.Stresses the significance of the risks to sustainability, transparency and good coordination that the Union aims to address with its development aid funding in the face of a significant increase of emerging donors and new actors such as Russia and China in Africa; calls on the Commission to work towards a better alignment of international cooperation with partner countries own development priorities; 52.Considers that the relation between the issue of migration and development aid is one of the most important nexuses to manage alongside the security-development and humanitarian-development nexuses; acknowledges, however, that peace building and addressing the root causes of migration are fundamental aspects of sustainable development; 53.Recalls that the effectiveness of aid, the partner country ownership of development results and the reliance on partners countries governance frameworks are guiding principles to be regularly refined; highlights further that good governance, the rule of law and the respect for human rights are unavoidable preconditions concurring to the effectiveness of aid; calls upon the Commission to set the rule of law and the respect for human rights as the ultimate precondition to approving the financial aid; 54.Stresses that sustainability is crucial for increasing the overall effectiveness of development aid by steadily tracking impacts through all aid delivery modes; recalls the fact that the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals place much emphasis on data and indicators, considering that robust monitoring is key for an effective and operational strategy; 55.Reiterates its call on the Commission to include in the next annual activity report a structured assessment of the impact of the activities of the EDFs, with a particular focus on human rights; 56.Asks the Commission to carry out an evaluation on a country-by-country approach of the long-time on-going EDF financed projects in order to demonstrate the true impact of decades-long Union investment on the ground and how it has effectively helped beneficiary countries economic, social and sustainable development; consequently appeals to the Commission to reflect on the result of the evaluation and limit and/or terminate further funding of ineffective projects; 57.Believes that a better focus on local SMEs, private sector and civil society organisations should be a core axis of cooperation in the management of the Union delegations pipelines of projects; stresses that, given the funding gap required to reach the ambitious Sustainable Development Goals, strategic dialogue with the private sector and civil society organisations must play a crucial role for the development of local economies; 58.Believes that financial inclusion and microfinance are key factors of economic and social progress, having a proven impact on local economic activity and job creation; notes with satisfaction that the EDFs support financial inclusion in Africa through a number of instruments (the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD) Guarantee Fund, the Nasira Risk-Sharing Facility, the Huruma Fund, Boost Africa and the African Guarantee Fund), aiming, inter alia, to provide microloans to underserved farmers in Africa; discourages the Commission and other Union institutions from setting up new financial aid instruments and, instead, encourages them to ensure greater visibility of the financial aid instruments in their respective areas of operation and in the Union; 59.Notes the Internal Audit Services audit on EC-EEAS coordination and notes with appreciation the audit conclusion that the coordination activities between the Commission services (DG DEVCO, the Directorate-General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) and the Service for Foreign Policy Instruments) and the European External Action Service (EEAS) are effective and efficient overall; strongly emphasises, however, the need for establishing a non-fragmented view of the overall Union external assistance to a given country and the need to reinforce, in coordination with DG DEVCO and DG NEAR, risk assessment and management in order to develop a common view on uncertainty and mitigating strategies; Effectiveness of the European Union Trust Fund for Africa 60.Notes that the resources allocated to the EUTF by the end of 2018 reached EUR4,2billion, of which EUR3,7 billion came from EDFs and EUR489,5 million from Member States and other donors (Switzerland and Norway); notes that 187 projects were implemented in 2018; notes the enlargement of the EU-IOM Joint Initiative for Migration Protection and Reintegration Development from 14 to 26 African countries by the end of 2018; 61.Recalls Parliaments regular stance that the Commission should ensure that any trust fund established as a new development tool must always be in line with the Unions overall strategy and development policy objectives, i.e.
  • the reduction and eradication of poverty, and must, in particular, ensure that the security interests of European countries do not override the needs of the recipient populations; encourages the Commission to consider limiting financial aid to EUTF projects deflecting from this centreline; 62.Stresses that the EUTF must address the root causes of destabilisation, forced displacement and irregular migration by promoting resilience, economic opportunities, equal opportunities, security of populations, and human and social development; notes that the concept and characteristics of the root causes of irregular migration are protean and should be thoroughly adapted and analysed to better design the rationale and added value of project interventions and to better present the results achieved; 63.Notes that the Court concluded that the EUTF for Africa is a flexible tool for providing assistance in areas such as food, education, health, security and sustainable development, but considering the unprecedented challenges that it faces, its design should have been more focused in terms of objectives considered as too broad to efficiently steer action across the African regions and for measuring impact; 64.Notes with concern that the numerous concerns of the Court[27] and the authors of the eleventh EDF mid-term evaluation on the implementation of the EUTF are largely unaddressed; reiterates its concerns regarding: - the absence of a documented criteria for selecting project proposals for the Northern Africa and Horn of Africa windows, - the absence of a specific risk assessment framework, - serious flaws in the measurement of the performance of EUTF projects, - the effectiveness and sustainability of EUTF projects and the ability of the Union to closely monitor their implementation; -the absence of a constructive strategy regarding dissemination and media coverage of best practice and successful aid programmes; considers that given such findings, the added value of the EUTF is highly questionable; 65.Recalls the fact that a majority of EUTF funding comes from the EDFs which inevitably implies that development aid is put at the service not of the Union partner countries' development plans, but of the short-term objectives of the Union's migration policy, which is contrary to the Lisbon Treaty and the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness; points out that the EUTF was more an instrument focusing on quick fix projects aiming at stemming migratory mix-flows instead of tackling long-term drivers of migration in line with principles of development aid; 66.Points out that pooling resources from the EDF, the Union budget and other donors in trust funds should not have as a consequence that money flagged for development and cooperation policy does not reach the normal beneficiaries or pursues their original objectives; deplores in that regard the fact that while the Union contribution to the EUTF will be made mostly using ODA resources, the EUTF is not focused exclusively on development-oriented objectives; points out that the migration management thematic window received the biggest share of funds in 2018, rising from 17,3% in 2016 to 30,8% of EUTF funds in 2018; 67.Notes that not only did migration management increase as a share in all EUTF-approved projects but funds have also increasingly prioritised North African countries, from 23% of total migration management funds in 2016 to 52% in 2018; deplores the fact that while the Union aims to support vulnerable and marginalised populations at the forefront of the EUTF, 55% of the funding from the migration management window went to projects that aimed to restrict and discourage irregular migration through migration containment and control in 2017; warns that using development aid as a means of addressing migration and security not only undermines Union development priorities but can create more poverty and instability that forces people to leave their communities; encourages the Commission in that regard to consider limiting and/or cancelling financial aid provisions to EUTF projects that disrespect the long-term Union development policies; 68.Recalls the fact that regional and local authorities, civil society organisations and NGOs and the private sector are partners for an effective development policy, and that a constant dialogue with national authorities and local communities is essential in order to establish common strategies and priorities; calls on the Commission to ensure that the EDFs and the Union budget do not finance projects through the EUTF implemented by governmental and local forces (militias) that are involved in serious human rights violations, especially in countries such as Libya and Sudan; 69.Recalls that EUTF funding coming from development budget lines must not be used for security measures jeopardising migrants rights; calls the Commission to put in place tangible guarantees that migration-related EUTF projects are not used by the implementing authorities to violate migrants basic human rights, and that in the long term the EUTF migration-related projects do not contribute to the destabilisation of countries and sub-regions, as it is more and more pointed out by the NGOs and local people in northern Niger; stresses, that EUTF projects must integrate human rights at the core of programming and contribute to the realisation of human rights in the countries concerned; 70.Calls on the Commission to include clear and transparent human rights clauses in the contribution agreements it concludes with implementing partners (UN agencies, Member State development agencies) in order to avoid situations whereby the Union could indirectly finance projects that violate human rights; points out in that regard to the project Reconnecting Eritrea and Ethiopia through rehabilitation of the main arterial roads in Eritrea, funded by the EUTF and managed by the United Nations Office for Project Services, which finances Eritrean national construction companies using forced labour via national service; 71.Is concerned that the Court found examples of projects addressing similar needs to those of other Union instruments with the risk of duplicating other forms of Union support; calls on the Commission to take particular care to ensure that its actions are consistent and coordinated with Regional Development Programmes and to maximise the impact and effectiveness of global aid in order ensure that the main focus is on development and not on border control and security to the detriment of migrants; 72.Notes that the Commission recognises the need to further enhance the common monitoring system; welcomes the adoption of a set of 41 common output indicators during the second quarter of 2018 and that technical assistance has been put in place; notes that the three operational windows of the EUTF for Africa are working to better identify specific objectives and baselines at project level; 73.Considers that due care is needed to ensure better communication among the Commission, Parliament and Member States concerning the implementation of the EUTF and sufficient public reporting, oversight and audit of their operations and performance; invites the Court to consider an audit of the impact of the implementation of the EUTF for Africa on Union development policy both from a budgetary and results point of view; calls therefore on the Commission to draw conclusions from the audit and ensure that EUTF projects that have been inefficiently implemented are terminated or greatly limited in funding; The African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA) 74.Notes with concern that the APSA suffers from a strong dependency on external financial sources due to the low contribution of Member States to the Peace Fund and limited additional funding that the APSA attracts from alternative sources of finance; 75.Acknowledges that the EEAS and the Commission are facing highly complex situations in Africa with numerous political and operational challenges and constraints in many domains, notably the cooperation of main stakeholders, the funding and shortcomings of the institutions and the political willingness to intervene, prevent and manage conflicts; 76.Regrets the fact that the shortage of African ownership and financial sustainability with a high dependency on donors and international partners leads to operational shortcomings; invites the Commission to foster African Union ownership of the APSA in order to achieve greater financial independence and refocus Union support away from supporting operational costs towards supporting capacity-building measures.
  • 77.Regrets both the fact that Union support for the APSA has had a poor effect and has required refocusing and that Union support had mainly been focusing on contributing to the APSAs basic operational costs and that the APSA has been heavily dependent on donor support for many years; 78.Is seriously concerned by the insufficiencies in the monitoring system with regard to its capability to provide adequate data on the results of activities; asks the Commission to increase the evaluation systems capability of activities and performance to clearly show that Union contributions can be mostly linked to tangible and positive effects on peace and security on the ground; asks the Commissions services to launch a Results-Oriented Monitoring mission and to report to Parliament as soon as possible; 79.Based on the abovementioned concerns recommends the Commission to consider cancelling all the financial funding to the APSA; External Investment Plan and the EFSD 80.Recalls the target financial objective to leverage EUR44billion in investment; notes that the Union allocated EUR2,2billion for 94 blending projects under the EFSD (Pillar 1 of the External Investment Plan) and EUR1,54billion for EFSD guarantees to 28 investment programmes; 81.Encourages DG DEVCO to further increase the awareness of the leverage possibilities offered by the External Investment Plan by attracting private sector investment in development partnerships; recalls, however, that specific attention should be given not only to the additionality of the External Investment Plan but also to the criteria applied in its management in order to avoid any diversion of development funding to private investors or to interest or profit outcomes; 82.Observes that through 21 blending projects, the Union also allocated EUR547million in sub-Saharan Africa expected to unlock EUR4billion for transport, energy, private sector and agriculture; expresses its support for fostering the local dimension of blended finance; 83.Points out that Union regional cooperation was the main financial contributor to biodiversity and forest resource management projects and played a key role in preserving in the 16 protected areas in the Central and West Africa Region; 84.Calls on the Commission to place greater focus on the dissemination of successfully implemented projects and to raise public awareness about the Unions investments in global sustainable development; EIB-ACP investment facility 85.Encourages the EIB to further support local private sector development as a key driver of sustainability and resilience, to support basic social and economic infrastructure of immediate interest for the beneficiaries as well as the search for new local and regional partners in the specific domain of microfinance; invites the EIB to increase additionality through better justification of the use of the funds; 86.Encourages the EIB to increase efforts and take the appropriate measures in order to advertise better EIB instruments in countries where the impact of EIB investments will be higher; 87.Welcomes the Union contribution through the ACP Investment Facility towards microfinance credit lines of EUR139million that should result in around 26300 loans to microenterprises and individuals; 88.Believes that it is crucial for the EIB to continuously invest time in due diligence policy combined with results assessment tools in order to get a better knowledge of the profile of financial intermediaries and beneficiaries and to also better evaluate the impact of projects on final beneficiaries; Future of the EU Africa relations 89.Notes the ongoing reflection on the upcoming long-term EU Africa strategy and partnership while considering this opportunity to bring forward more efficiency in aid delivery modes; considers there is a need to move beyond a traditional aid-centred relationship towards a more strategic and integrated one; 90.Calls on the Commission to develop a more is more approach with our partners allowing to adjust our aid to the respect by the third countries of democratic rights, rule of law, respect of the international conventions etc.
  • 91.Stresses that the EDFs should be incorporated into the Union budget, as previously stated in Parliaments resolutions and in the new 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework proposal, in order to avoid budget fragmentation; points out that including the EDFs will enhance the discharge authoritys ability to scrutinise how the Union budget is spent outside the Union.