92002E1352

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1352/02

by Didier Rod (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(6 May 2002)

Subject: Incorporation of the European Development Fund (EDF) in the EU budget

According to our information, the Spanish Government is now the only EU government to object to the incorporation of the EDF in the Community budget.

After 11 September, much attention has been paid and many promises have been made with regard to an increase in development financing worldwide. At the same time, the Commission is undertaking an extensive reform effort with a view to improving the performance of its external aid programmes. However, the EDF, a cornerstone of EU relations with the South, continues to fall outside the remit of the EU and remains in the hands of the Member States.

Why has the decisive move towards the incorporation of the EDF in the Community budget still not been made? Does not the Council believe that, for the sake of a unified and coordinated approach, as well as in the interest of higher efficiency, the EDF should be incorporated in the EU budget?

Has the Council planned any such move for the Johannesburg Summit to be held in late August as a statement of European Union commitment to enhanced development aid and, if not, when can such an initiative be expected?

Reply

(30 September 2002)

The Council's position on the budgetisation of the EDF was reaffirmed by the Council on 19 and 20 December 1994 and remains unchanged.

At that time, having examined the Commission report on the options and detailed arrangements for budgetising the EDF, the Council took the view that the present provisions for financing the EDF should not be altered. This position amounted only to a confirmation of Declaration No 12 annexed to the Treaty on European Union concerning the EDF and the judgment of the Court of Justice of 2 March 1994(1) rejecting the Parliament's appeal for the annulment of the rules of procedure of the 7th EDF.

In this context, attention should be drawn to the Court's conclusion to the effect that EDF expenditure was not Community expenditure which had to be entered in the Community budget.

The Council is not considering reopening this question at the present time.

It should nevertheless be pointed out that when the resources were fixed for the 9th EDF, the Commission made a statement according to which it intends to transmit to the Council before 2003, after an analysis of the present system, a communication assessing the advantages and drawbacks of the budgetisation of the EDF.

The Council will not fail to examine that communication at that time.

(1) Case C-316/91, ECR I-625.