32 Amendments of Maria HEUBUCH related to 2017/2258(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 a (new)
Citation 16 a (new)
– having regard to the Council conclusions of 19 June 2017 on EU engagement with civil society in external relations,
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 b (new)
Citation 16 b (new)
– having regard to the resolution of the European Parliament of 22 October 2013 on local authorities and civil society: Europe’s engagement in support of sustainable development,
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 c (new)
Citation 16 c (new)
– having regard to the European Court of Auditor's Special Report 18/2014 on EuropeAid's Evaluation and Results Oriented Monitoring Systems,
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
– having regard to the Commission's Communication "A new, modern Multiannual Financial Framework for a European Union that delivers efficiently on its priorities post-2020" of 14 February 2018,
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital –A (new)
Recital –A (new)
-A. whereas the Commission states in its mid-term review that it is difficult to measure the overall effectiveness of the instruments in meeting their objectives, partly because of the recent start of the new instruments and partly because of the difficulty in defining appropriate monitoring and evaluation systems at the instrument-level;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security PolicyTreaty of Lisbon, the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid and the new European Consensus on Development determine the EU strategy on development cooperation and humanitarian aid; whereas the Council has adopted in addition a Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy which also deals inter alia with development cooperation;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the evaluations confirm that using the different geographic and thematic instruments in a coherent manner is actually possible;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the evaluation of the 11th EDF states that "there is a real threat that EDF will be pushed into responding to agendas that distance it from its primary objective of poverty alleviation, which are difficult to reconcile with the EDF’s core values and compromise what it does well", that "despite consultations, government and CSOs’ views (with some notable exceptions such as in the Pacific region), have rarely been taken account of in programming choices" and that "the EDF11 programming thus used a top- down approach to apply the concentration principle but at the cost of the Cotonou Agreement’s central principle of partnership";
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas on the EU-Africa Emergency Trust fund, the EDF evaluation states that "compared to standard EDF projects, the shortened preparation and approval time, the indirect involvement of the EU in project implementation and the fact that these projects originate from EU priority concerns rather than as a response to PCs [partner countries]’ long-term objectives, all raise concerns over the likely effectiveness and sustainability of EU TF projects and over the ability of the EU to closely monitor their implementation";
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
Dc. whereas according to the EDF evaluation, by April 2017, nearly 500 million € from the EDF reserve had been disbursed to support operations of the Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection Department of the European Commission (ECHO), nearly 500 € million allocated in emergency support to individual countries and 1.5 billion € disbursed to the EU- Africa Emergency Trust Fund; whereas EDF also contributes to the new external investment fund;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D d (new)
Recital D d (new)
Dd. whereas despite having received billions of euros for years from the EDF and despite serious concerns from the EU Commission on its financial management, the African Peace Facility has not been part of the EDF evaluation; whereas the African Peace Facility has not been properly evaluated since 2011;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D e (new)
Recital D e (new)
De. whereas the evaluation of the 11th EDF points to serious limitations in monitoring and evaluation systems of cooperation results which are seriously constraining the EDF’s ability to report on effectiveness; whereas according to the evaluators blending only mobilises additional resources in 50 % of the cases;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D f (new)
Recital D f (new)
Df. whereas the evaluation on the DCI states that "the DCI remains overall relevant and fit for purpose, both when it was adopted and at the mid-point of its implementation. It is broadly in line with new policy documents (e.g. the new European Consensus on Development and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development) although implementing certain priorities, could be difficult in its current format.";
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D h (new)
Recital D h (new)
Dh. whereas the DCI evaluation points as well to problems in the EU's monitoring and evaluation set-up making it difficult to measure results;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D i (new)
Recital D i (new)
Di. whereas the EU has recognised the importance of partnerships with civil society organisations(CSOs) in external relations; whereas this includes involvement of CSOs in programming and implementing external instruments;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D k (new)
Recital D k (new)
Dk. whereas one of the results of the mid-term report on Afghanistan is the intention of the Commission to shift funding of subsistence farming to agro- businesses;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the fact that a large number of countries have graduated from the EDF and the DCI in the last few years as they have become upper-middle income countries (UMICs)become upper- middle income countries (UMICs), with the effect that they respectively graduated from bilateral cooperation under the DCI or received reduced bilateral cooperation grants under the EDF;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Regrets that the mid-term review did not cover the African Peace Facility, which has not been properly evaluated for years; considers that in times where more and more political emphasis is put on the security-development nexus, evidence- based policy-making is key;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Is surprised by the discrepancy between the evaluation results and the mid-term review conclusions drawn by the Commission; regrets that the serious problems of lack of partnership and the risk to lose the focus on poverty alleviation of the instruments is not addressed at all in the Commission's conclusions despite this being a key element of the evaluation;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Is worriedConsiders it normal that UMICs that have graduated from the EDF and the DCI may be faced with a funding gap that places them in a situation of vulnerability; calls on the Commission to reflect on the consequences and to facilitate their access to EFIs tailored to their needsbilateral cooperation under the DCI or received reduced bilateral cooperation grants under the EDF may be faced with a funding gap; calls on the Commission to reflect on the consequences and to facilitate their access to EFIs tailored to their needs, in particular the partnership instrument while guaranteeing a certain amount of development funding in a limited transition phase;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Is of the view that EFIs should continue to support both EU and local CSOs and systematically facilitate their active participation in multi-stakeholder dialogues on EU policies and on all programming processes across all instruments; considers, furthermore, that the EU should promote the role of CSOs as watchdogs both inside and outside the EU; welcomes in this context the Commission's intention to deepen and consolidate ongoing work to build partnerships and dialogue with civil society working in development and to enhance dialogue and involvement of networks of CSOs in EU policymaking and processes;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls for the strict application of preconditions allowing for the use of budget support and for a more systematic monitoring of this aid modality in partner countries; regrets that the Commission has resorted to budget support in Afghanistan, a highly corrupt country, despite a negative recommendation from Parliament;
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Warns against abusive recourse to trust funds; is concerned at the fact that contributions from Member States and other donors to trust funds have been below expectations, with negative consequences for their effectiveness; is seriously worried about the findings from the EDF evaluation on the effectiveness of the EU-Africa Trust Fund;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Regrets that the Commission has not seized the opportunity of the Mid- Term Review to adapt its policies to the requirements included in the European Consensus on the support to small-scale and sustainable agro-ecological farming; notes that on the contrary, proposed measures include even more support to large-scale farming and agro-businesses;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. IHighlights the evaluations' conclusions that in particular EDF has shown a very high degree of flexibility in reacting to political urgencies; is of the view that in a context of multiple crises and uncertainty, the EFIs need to have sufficient flexibikey problem of EFIs is the absence of an instrument pursuing EU foreign politcy to be able to adjust swiftly to changing priorities and unfoobjectives besides development; this results, as shown in the evaluations, in an increaseed pressure on devents, and to deliver rapidly on the ground; recommends, to this end, a smart use of the EFIs reserve or the unused funds, more flexibility in the multiannual programming, an appropriate combination of funding modalities and greater simplification at implementation levellopment instruments to fund actions barely related to the fight against poverty; recommends, to this end, the creation of new instruments for dealing with EU foreign policy interests, which would avoid constantly using EFI reserves; considers that excessive simplification would run counter to the need to align to partner countries' priorities and to include stakeholders into programming and planning;
Amendment 156 #
30a. Is worried by the findings from the evaluators about the lack of monitoring and evaluation systems which make it difficult to measure results; highlights on the other hand the numerous positive findings on EU development policies in audits from the European Court of Auditors; recalls the observations made by the European Court of Auditors in its Special Report 18/2014 on EuropeAid's Evaluation and Results Oriented Monitoring Systems; calls on the Commission to use this occasion in order to further improve its results framework system along the recommendations made by the Court;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Notes the Commission's conclusions that coherence among instruments could be enhanced by streamlining their number; highlights that such a finding is not part of any of the different evaluations;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 b (new)
Paragraph 31 b (new)
31b. Considers that the sometimes occurring lack of coherence between the different instruments is essentially a management problem within the Commission and EEAS services; stresses the absolute necessity to maintain separate development and humanitarian aid instruments respecting key development principles in light of the evaluation findings concerning the threat to the central objective of poverty alleviation in the new framework of shifting policy priorities and the lack of partnership;
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 c (new)
Paragraph 31 c (new)
31c. Given the shift in aid modalities from direct grants to trust funds and blended finance, including through the European Fund for Sustainable Development, invites the Council, Commission and European Investment Bank to adopt an inter-institutional agreement with the European Parliament on transparency, accountability and parliamentary scrutiny on the basis of the policy principles set out in the New European Consensus on Development;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Considers it necessary to increase the current levels of EU ODA in the future architecture of the EFIs post-2020, so as to enable the EU to honour its collective commitment to provide 0.7 % of Gross National Income (GNI) in ODA and allocate 0.2 % of ODA/GNI to the least developed countries; welcomes in this context the recent Commission's communication on the new Multi-annual Financial Framework;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Is of the view that the transfer of funds between objectives and for changing priorities within an instrument should only take place on the basis of real needs of partner countries, without compromising the principles and objectives of the instrument and with adequate involvement of the monitoring authority; calls in particular for a clear distinction between ODA-eligible funding and other, non- ODA-eligible funding; is against any transfer of funds earmarked for DAC able activities to programmes that cannot be accounted for as ODA; emphasises the need for ODA-targets within EFI Regulations to safeguard this;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Stresses that budgetisation of the EDF should be accompanied by a proportional increase to the agreed EU budget ceiling so as to neither lead to a cut in the EU’s financial commitment to the ACP countries nor to an overall decrease in EU development assistance in the post- 2020 MFF;