DOCSLIB.ORG

The Netherlands and the European Development Fund

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Netherlands and the European Development Fund IOB Evaluation | no. 375 IOB Evaluation | no. IOB Evaluation The Netherlands and the European Development Fund - Principles and practices Evaluation of Dutch involvement in EU development cooperation (1998-2012) The Netherlands and the European Development Fund - Principles and practices | Evaluation of Dutch involvement in EU development cooperation (1998-2012) | IOB Evaluation | no. 375 | The Netherlands and the European Development Fund - Principles and practices | Evaluation of Dutch involvement in EU development cooperation (1998-2012) | IOB Evaluation | no. 375 | The Netherland The Netherlands and the European Development FundThe Netherlands - Principles and practices IOB Evaluation The Netherlands and the European Development Fund - Principles and practices Evaluation of Dutch involvement in EU development cooperation (1998-2012) March 2013 The Netherlands and the European Development Fund - Principles and practices Preface The issue of the future of Europe’s relations with its colonies and overseas territories came up during the negotiations on establishing a European common market in May 1956. The Dutch considered the demands of France and Belgium, to set up an investment fund for these areas and to provide a guaranteed market for their products rather hard to digest for both political and financial reasons. The Netherlands did not want to share in the financial brunt of such a fund, with little say on how it would be used and with a contribution that was likely bigger than the economic advantages that it could expect. While the Dutch Government was more ready to agree to a deal on trade relations, it only gave in on the funding issue when it became apparent that a simple ‘no’ would not be acceptable to the other five nations sitting around the negotiation table and could risk that the European project would be abandoned. Eventually, the Netherlands government and parliament, still not jumping of joy, agreed to a German compromise on the issue. Ratifying the Treaty of Rome, the Netherlands thus aligned itself with the EEC’s intention ‘to confirm the solidarity which binds Europe and the overseas countries and desiring to ensure the development of their prosperity, in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.’ It also agreed to contribute to the 5-year Development Fund for the Overseas Countries and Territories ‘for the promotion of social and economic development of these countries and territories, thereby ‘supplementing the efforts made by the authorities responsible.’ | 3 | Since those days, the European Economic Community has turned into the European Union with membership increasing from six to 27 at present. The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (2010) still repeats the above solidarity statement of 1957. Since 1964, the initial internal agreement on the association of overseas territories with the Community of 1957 has been supplemented by a series of international treaties. These were signed with an increasing number of African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries, with the Cotonou Partnership Agreement of 2000 as the most recent one in force. In the 45 years since Rome, the socio-economic and political context in which Europe deals with its former colonies and overseas territories as well as its neighbours has gone through drastic changes. In parallel, there has been an important evolution in the thinking on EU development cooperation and its link to EU foreign relations. What has become the European Development Fund (EDF) has survived these storms and continues to be operational to date, though not without the necessary debate. From a rather aloof participant in the early years, the Netherlands has become an involved but critical player in EU development cooperation. Exchanges in the Dutch parliament show a lively debate on the quality and effectiveness of EU development cooperation though the distinction between EU development cooperation in general and the EDF is often blurred. During these exchanges in Parliament in July 2011, it was announced that a ‘major policy evaluation’ on EU development cooperation focusing on the EDF was envisaged that would constitute an important and impartial input for making a judgment on future Dutch contributions to the EDF. This report reflects the finding of this policy evaluation. Prepared by Policy and Operations Evaluation Department (IOB) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, its overall purpose is to account for Netherlands funding and other inputs provided for EU Preface development cooperation in the period 2000-2010 and - based on the findings of this policy evaluation - gain lessons for future policy development and implementation. The report was written by Paul G.de Nooijer of IOB. He was supported by Cheshta Baboeram Panday as research assistant and a Berenschot - SEE research team. Internal quality support was provided by Antonie de Kemp and Ted Kliest. A reference group, chaired by Henri Jorritsma of IOB, has given advice. Members were Pieter Stek, former governor of the Netherlands at the World Bank, Paul Engel and Niels Keijzer of the European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM), Martyn Pennington, head of the European Commission’s Joint Evaluation Unit, and Pieter Jan Kleijweg de Zwaan, Heleen Bakker and Robert van Dijk of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Prof. dr. Ruerd Ruben Director Policy and Operations Evaluation Department (IOB) Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Netherlands | 4 | The Netherlands and the European Development Fund - Principles and practices Table of Contents Preface 3 List of Text, Boxes, Tables and Figures 8 Acronyms and abbreviations 10 Summary and conclusions 13 Samenvatting en conclusies 27 Introduction 42 Part 1 Policy matters 50 1 Basic characteristics of EU aid and the European Development Fund 52 Introduction 52 1.1 Legal framework of EU external relations and aid 53 1.2 The European Development Fund 56 1.3 EU aid funding and spending 62 1.4 Institutional structure of EU aid 77 Summary of main findings 81 2 Dutch perspectives and priorities on EU aid 84 | 5 | Introduction 85 2.1 Dutch interests in EU foreign relations and development cooperation 85 2.2 Dutch priorities 88 2.3 Organisational matters 98 Summary of main findings 100 3 EU generic aid policies 102 Introduction 103 3.1 A European Community Development Cooperation Policy (2000) 104 3.2 The European Consensus for Development (2005) 105 3.3 The EU Code of Conduct on Division of Labour (2007) 107 3.4 Policy Coherence for Development 112 3.5 Increasing the impact of EU Development Policy: an Agenda for Change (2011) 115 3.6 Budget support as the preferred aid modality 118 3.7 The Union and Africa –away from the traditional donor-recipient philosophy 123 Summary of main findings 126 Table of Contents Part II 128 4 Aid management reform – focus on Brussels 130 Introduction 131 4.1 Reforming aid management – the May 2000 reform agenda 131 4.2 Creation of EuropeAid 132 4.3 Post-Lisbon reforms 133 4.4 Aid Monitoring & Evaluation 141 4.5 Transparency 145 Summary of main findings 148 5 Aid management at Delegation level 150 Introduction 151 5.1 The devolution process 151 5.2 The current state of affairs 152 5.3 Is devolution achieving what was intended? 157 Summary of main findings 159 6 Financial matters 160 Introduction 161 | 6 | 6.1 Internal supervision and control 161 6.2 Internal financial management and reporting 162 6.3 Ensuring external financial scrutiny 164 Summary of main findings 168 Part III 170 7 EDF’s national programmes 172 Introduction 173 7.1. Aid programming main principles 173 7.2 Implementing the programming principles 176 7.3 Sector focus at country level and the issue of comparative advantage/added value 183 7.4 Results 187 7.5 (Net) Outcomes 209 7.6 Political dialogue and appropriate measures 211 Summary of main findings 215 8 ACP regional programmes 218 Introduction 219 8.1 The importance of regional cooperation and integration 219 8.2 Regional cooperation and integration and the Cotonou Agreement 220 8.3 Regional programmes 222 8.4 Results of regional programmes 225 8.5 The Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) and trade 230 Summary of main findings 237 The Netherlands and the European Development Fund - Principles and practices 9 Interregional and intra-ACP cooperation 240 Introduction 241 9.1 Principles 241 9.2 Funding and use of resources 242 9.3 The African Peace Facility 244 9.4 Other main intra ACP components 253 Summary of main findings 261 Annexes 262 Annex 1 About IOB 263 Annex 2 Shortened Terms of Reference 265 Annex 3 Respondents 268 Annex 4 EDF Data 374 Reports of the Policy and Operations Evaluation Department (IOB) published 305 in the period 2009-2012 Annexes on CD-ROM Annex 5 Views from country evaluations Annex 6 EU Treaties on aid | 7 | Annex 7 Other EDF instruments Annex 8 Other European foreign aid instruments Annex 9 The Article 8 political dialogue and what happens when it fails Annex 10 Trade & the Economic Partnership Agreements Annex 11 Effective multilateralism Annex 12 References List of Text Boxes, tables and figures List of Text Boxes, Tables and Figures Text Boxes Text Box 1.1 Legal basis of EU external aid 53 Text Box 1.2 The Yaoundé and Lomé conventions (1964-2000) 56 Text Box 1.3 The Cotonou Agreement – Article 1: Objectives of the partnership 59 Text Box 1.4 The budgetisation debate 65 Text Box 1.5 The European 0.7% debate 68 Text Box 1.6 Responsibilities of the EDF Committee (2007) 79 Text Box 2.1 The Netherlands issues paper on GBS 92 Text Box 2.2 The Dutch position
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 16.12.2019 COM(2019)
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 16.12.2019 COM(2019) 638 final REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION ON THE WORKING OF COMMITTEES DURING 2018 {SWD(2019) 441 final} EN EN REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION ON THE WORKING OF COMMITTEES DURING 2018 In accordance with Article 10(2) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers1 (the ‘Comitology Regulation’), the Commission hereby presents the annual report on the working of committees for 2018. This report gives an overview of developments in the comitology system in 2018 and a summary of the committees’ activities. It is accompanied by a staff working document containing detailed statistics on the work of the individual committees. 1. OVERVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS IN THE COMITOLOGY SYSTEM IN 2018 1.1. General development As described in the 2013 annnual report2, all comitology procedures provided for in the ‘old’ Comitology Decision3, with the exception of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny, were automatically adapted to the new comitology procedures provided for in the Comitology Regulation. In 2018, the comitology committees were therefore operating under the procedures set out in the Comitology Regulation, i.e. advisory (Article 4) and examination (Article 5), as well as under the regulatory procedure with scrutiny set out in Article 5a of the Comitology Decision. The Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 20164 recalls, in its point 27, the need to align the regulatory procedure with scrutiny: ‘The three institutions acknowledge the need for the alignment of all existing legislation to the legal framework introduced by the Lisbon Treaty, and in particular the need to give high priority to the prompt alignment of all basic acts which still refer to the regulatory procedure with scrutiny.
    [Show full text]
  • THE COURIER, SPECIAL ISSUE NEW EDITION (N.E.) Editorial Staff Director and Editor-In-Chief Hegel Goutier
    The SPECIAL ISSUE C urierMARCH 2008 The magazine of Africa - Caribbean - Pacific & European Union cooperation and relations 50 years of ACP-EU Cooperation Not for sale ISSN 1784-682X SPECIAL ISSUE N.E. - MARCH 2008 CThe urier The The magazine of Africa - Caribbean - Pacific & European Union cooperation and relations C urier Editorial Committee Co-presidents the magazine of africa - caribbean - pacific & european union development cooperation Sir John Kaputin, Secretary General Secretariat of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States www.acp.int Mr Stefano Manservisi, Director General of DG Development European Commission ec.europa.eu/development/ Table of contents THE COURIER, SPECIAL ISSUE NEW EDITION (N.E.) Editorial staff Director and Editor-in-chief Hegel Goutier Contributors François Misser (Deputy Editor-in-chief), OPENER RESULTS Debra Percival 19 Editorial Assistant and Production Development and relations with the ACP States: Success stories Joshua Massarenti Europe in action for 50 years 2 Science and technology: Contributed in this issue Cooperation on the road to emancipation 21 Marie-Martine Buckens EU’s 50th birthday: 3 Congratulations from the ACP Trade protocols and EPAs 23 Public Relations and Artistic coordination Public Relations Andrea Marchesini Reggiani (Public Relations Manager and Responsible for EDITORIAL NGOs’ and experts’ network) EXTENDING COOPERATION Joan Ruiz Valero (Responsible for Networking with EU and National Institutions) The need for Cotonou 4 EPAs: Trade for regional growth Artistic Coordination
    [Show full text]
  • Preparation of Eurogroup and Informal Council of Economics and Finance
    0(02 Brussels, 5 September 2002 3UHSDUDWLRQ RI (XURJURXS DQG ,QIRUPDO &RXQFLO RI (FRQRPLFVDQG)LQDQFH0LQLVWHUV Copenhagen 6-7 September 2002 (Gerassimos Thomas & Jonathan Todd) The EU’s Economics and Finance Ministers will start with a meeting on Friday 6 September at 15.00 hrs. A press conference by the Presidency and the Commission is scheduled at 17.00 hrs. Eurogroup Finance Ministers are due to meet at 17.30 hrs on the same date. A press conference by the Eurogroup President and the Commissioner is scheduled at 19.30 hrs. The informal Ecofin meeting will resume on Saturday with the participation of central bank governors for the whole day. A press conference by the Ecofin President, the responsible Commissioners and the ECB is scheduled for 18.00 hrs. (XURJURXS *7 The Eurogroup will start with an exchange of views on the economic situation and policy stance. This discussion will also serve as an input to the preparation of the upcoming G7 meeting. Commissioner Solbes will inform Ministers about the launch of the excessive deficit procedure for Portugal. The launch of the procedure is automatic according to the Treaty following the release of a 4.1% of GDP deficit figure for 2001. The Commission will propose to Ministers a timetable for the various steps envisaged by the Treaty. Ministers are also expected to discuss the possible budgetary effects of the disastrous floods in August. ,QIRUPDO&RXQFLORI(FRQRPLFVDQG)LQDQFH0LQLVWHUV 6DYLQJVWD[DWLRQ -7 Following a debriefing by Danish Finance Minister Thor Pedersen, the current President of the Council of Finance Ministers, on his meeting with the Swiss President and Minister for Finance Kaspar Villiger on 30 August 2002, Taxation Commissioner Frits Bolkestein will report to Ministers on the progress to date of negotiations with third countries on the taxation of savings and particularly the results of the latest discussions with Switzerland.
    [Show full text]
  • Institutions, Policies and Enlargement of the European Union
    This booklet is published in all the ofiicial EU languages of the European Union: Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, ltalian, Portuguese, Spanish and Swedish. European Commission Directorate-General for Education and Culture Publications Unit, rue de la LoiAffetstraat 200, B-1049 Brussels A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu.int). Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2000 lsBN 92-828-8282-9 O European Communities, 2000 Reproduction is authonsed provided the source is acknowledged. Printed in Belgium Pnrrurro oN wHtrE cHLoRtNE-FREE pApER Foreword This publication is an update of the previous edition of 'Glossary: The reform of the European Union in 150 definitions' that was produced in 1997. As indicated by its original title, this glossary was produced in order to help people to gain a better understanding of the challenges facing the European Union at the time of the Intergovemmental Conference that opened in 1996. It was subsequently expanded to cover the fundamentals ofEuropean integration, the operation of the institutions, the policies of the Community and the contributions of the Amsterdam Treaty. The inclusion of the essential aspects of the enlargement process and of Agenda2}O} and, in the future, the results of the Intergovemmental Conference of 2000, confirms the glossary's vocation of follow- ing European current affairs and explaining them to the public. An update of the definitions contained in this publication is available on the SCADPIus site, which can be accessed on the Europa server at the following address : http ://europa.eu.infl scadplus/.
    [Show full text]
  • Governance by Committee: the Role of Committees in European Policy Making and Policy
    Governance by Committee: The Role of Committees in European Policy Making and Policy Research Paper 00/GHA Return to Introduction STATE OF THE ART REPORT CONTRACT NUMBER: HPSE-CT-1999-00019 PROJECT NUMBER: SERD-1999-00128 TITLE: GOVERNANCE BY COMMITTEE, THE ROLE OF COMMITTEES IN EUROPEAN POLICY-MAKING AND POLICY IMPLEMENTATION MAASTRICHT, MAY 2000 Table of Contents 1. General Introduction ................................................................................................................ 4 Subproject 1: The Standing Committees in the European Parliament 2.1..................Introduction ............................................................................................................... 6 2.2..................The Evolution of the European Parliament: From Consultative ............................... 6 Assembly to Co-legislator 2.2.1...............The EP as a Legislative Actor after Maastricht......................................................... 7 2.2.2...............EP and Council on an Even Footing after Amsterdam.............................................. 8 2.2.2.1. ..........The Streamlining of the Co-decision Procedure........................................................ 9 2.3..................The Role of EP Committees in the Legislative Process ............................................ 10 2.3.1...............Membership in EP Committees.................................................................................12 2.3.2...............Powers and Competences of EP Committees...........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 11. Agreement on Comitology
    29.11.2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 339/269 Thursday 17 February 2000 21. Takes the view that implementation of the stabilisation and association agreement should be accompanied by a White Paper to serve as a precise guide for the country in its efforts to approximate to the acquis communautaire and to assess progress in implementation not merely after a period of five years in a Commission report, but continuously on a biennial basis; 22. Takes the view that implementation of the programmes should be decentralised and shifted from Brussels to Skopje, with due attention being paid to enhanced coordination between programming, man- agement, implementation and follow-up, with as short-term priorities improving the civil service, customs and frontier management and promoting small and medium-sized enterprises; 23. Is of the opinion that in order to enhance and strengthen coexistence a specific programme should be directed to the development of interethnic initiatives and projects both in civil society and the eco- nomic field; 24. Repeats its call for the Commission representation in Skopje to be upgraded to delegation status; 25. Hopes that the dialogue now being conducted between Greece and the FYROM within the UN will result as soon as possible in a name which is acceptable to both sides; 26. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission and the Council. 11. Agreement on comitology A5-0021/2000 European Parliament resolution on the agreement between the European Parliament and the Com- mission
    [Show full text]
  • The Difficult Road to the Schengen Information System
    The Difficult Road to the Schengen Information System II: The legacy of ‘laboratories’ and the cost for fundamental rights and the rule of law Joanna Parkin April 2011 Abstract This paper seeks to understand the reasons behind the considerable complications facing the project to develop a new, second generation version of the Schengen Information System (SIS II). Despite the centrality of this large-scale EU database for immigration and border control purposes and the increasing prioritisation of security technologies within the EU’s internal security strategy, the project has encountered substantial delays, an escalating budget, political crises and criticisms of the new system’s potential impact on fundamental rights. To uncover the underlying causes of these difficulties and deficiencies, the paper examines the decision-making processes that have shaped the development of SIS II over the last decade. It argues that there are strong parallels between the policy processes surrounding SIS II and decision-making under the old Schengen regime, where expert driven, security oriented and fragmented decision-making took place outside the EU framework and beyond the reach of democratic and judicial oversight. The paper contends that decision-making on SIS II undermines principles of proportionality, accountability and fundamental rights and, by extension, puts into question the political legitimacy of the EU’s Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. The paper concludes with a set of policy recommendations intended to inform the future development of large-scale EU IT systems. Research for this paper was conducted in the context of INEX, a three-year project on converging and conflicting ethical values in the internal/external security continuum in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter Three Months on from 23 June, We Are Seeing Incredible and Enduring Improvisation
    COMMISSION WITHDRAWS DRAFT ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS: OMBUDSMAN DEMANDS MORE MEASURE ON ROAMING STATE OF PLAY TRILOGUE TRANSPARENCY Brexit: the genie is out of the bottle Newsletter Three months on from 23 June, we are seeing incredible and enduring improvisation. We are barely starting to realise the huge complexity presented by the three phases of GUIDING YOU THROUGH THE LABYRINTH Brexit. WITH THE LATEST NEWS The first phase, involving the triggering of Article 50, poses www.comitology.eu #30, September 2016 countless questions: does the UK Parliament need to vote? Would this vote be binding or advisory? Could there be a general election? How and when will the assemblies of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland give their opinion? And what about the DIGITAL SINGLE MARKET negotiating framework, which the UK Public backlash forces Commission into climbdown on must propose since it is the departing Member State? roaming implementing act Once triggered, Article 50 will give When it comes to roaming, the EU cannot the new four-week consultation tool, with rise to a tapestry of preliminary be accused of phoning it in. Last November the aim of afterwards tabling it for a vote in talks: the European Council (Heads the Institutions reached a landmark deal the competent comitology committee. of State or Government) will have that will see the abolition, from 15 June to set down ‘guidelines’, on which 2017, of all tariffs for EU residents making But straight away, the proposal provoked basis the Commission will draw up or receiving mobile calls while in another a flood of condemnation from civil society ‘recommendations’, while it is up Member State.
    [Show full text]
  • The Governance of the European Statistical
    The Governance of the European Statistical Eurostat A1 Ms Åsa Jacob System (ESS) Mr Aaron Cachia Mr Dietmar Maass January 2018 Content of the presentation • Introduction to the European Statistical System (ESS) • Main governance bodies in the ESS • European Statistical System Committee (ESSC) • Partnership Group (PG) • DGINS Conference • European Statistical Advisory Committee (ESAC) • European Statistical Governance Advisory Board (ESGAB) • ESS Website • Question Time 2 The European Statistical System • Partnership between Eurostat and the national statistical authorities • Defined in European Statistics Regulation 223/2009 Member states collect and Eurostat processes the received data process the national data and disseminates European official statistics 3 Regulation 223/09 on European statistics • ESS is legally recognised and defined for the first time • Introduces the statistical principles (Art 2): • professional independence • impartiality • objectivity • reliability • statistical confidentiality • cost effectiveness • Establishes the ESS Committee (Art 7) • Introduces concept of collaborative networks (Art 15) • Introduces European approach to statistics (Art 16) 4 The European Statistical System governance bodies 5 Statistical governance structure Political level Commission Council Europ. Parliament Strategic advice ESSC DGINS ESF STC Strategic level PG ESF Bureau Management Directors Groups VIG level VIN Working level Working groups Task forces ESCBFolie 6 The European Statistical System Committee (ESSC) • At the heart of the
    [Show full text]
  • The Secret Life of Comitology Or the Role of Public Officials in EC Environmental Policy*
    The Secret Life of Comitology or the Role of Public Officials in EC Environmental Policy* Christoph Demmke Senior Lecturer, EIPA 1. Introduction towards “denationalisation” and “deparliamentarisation” In his book “Politics of Globalisation”, Ulrich Beck1 will further increase as decisions are taken more and asks what would happen if the European Union were to more at international and global level. As a result the apply for membership of the European Union. In Beck’s role of the executives will be heightened and a new form view, the EU’s application would be rejected owing to of international elite will be created with the its lack of democratic structures. responsibility for decision-making. But what about the Member States themselves? Historically, the “Act”, “Loi” or “Gesetz” has first This rather naïve question is much more difficult to of all symbolised its source, namely the will of the answer because – although the Member States of the people, and then its effect, namely its supremacy over European Union are certainly democratic states – they the monarch’s ordering powers.4 Today, international are being deprived more and more of their capacities to organisations have become the monarch and the people act as sovereign democratic states. have – through their parliaments – lost their supremacy The Member States have had to face up to this when deciding on an “Act”, “Loi” or “Gesetz”. In this reality for years. The environmental sector serves as just respect, one might say that the national parliamentarians one example: up to 90% of all environmental legal acts are increasingly turning into executive policy-makers within the national legal systems are of EU origin and who have to obey international obligations.
    [Show full text]
  • Governing a New Broad Instrument for EU External Action: the Ins and Outs of the Institutional Power Struggle
    Making policies work BRIEFING NOTE No. 107 Governing a new broad instrument for EU external action: the ins and outs of the institutional power struggle MFF By Alexei Jones, Emmanuel De Groof and Joanna Kahiluoto December 2018 Summary In this briefing note, we set the scene for the institutional battle over the governance of the proposeds 89.2 billion Neighbourhood, Development, International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI). We identify a number of thorny issues to look out for in the upcoming negotiations between the Council of the European Union, the European Parliament and the European Commission. These three institutions have their own interests, which they will seek to advance to maintain – and even enhance their influence over the instrument. Yet, in doing so they must not lose sight of the bigger picture and the acknowledged need for a more strategic, coherent and responsive EU external action. A number of trade-offs will be needed to find the right balance between a more interest-driven and flexible instrument on one hand, and enhanced transparency and accountability on the other. This will mean: • clarifying the role of the European Parliament in shaping policies, • creating mechanisms for the strategic steering of the instrument and an appropriate forum to involve the member states, • giving a stronger role to the European External Action Service in the overall coordination of the instrument, and • specifying the criteria and guarantees for tapping into the flexibility cushion. Moving forward, a number of considerations should be kept in mind for the future governance setup of the NDICI: • avoiding creating additional processes, but building on and improving what is already in place, • fostering smoother communication between external affairs and foreign policy actors that the NDICI aims to bring together, • promoting informal mechanisms too, beyond the purely legal/procedural regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Implementing the New System of Comitology and Delegated Acts
    bs_bs_banner European Law Journal, Vol. 19, No. 1, January 2013, pp. 42–56. © 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA Non-Legislative Rule Making after the Lisbon Treaty: Implementing the New System of Comitology and Delegated Acts Thomas Christiansen* and Mathias Dobbels** Abstract: The reform of comitology and the introduction of the new instrument of delegated acts in the Lisbon Treaty were followed by protracted negotiations on the implementation of both articles. This article examines the resultant system that has emerged for both types of non-legislative instruments. In the area of implementing acts, a new regulation sets out important changes: a reduction in the number of procedures, the extension of the scope to trade defence measures and the replacement of a referral to the Council with a new appeal committee. With respect to delegated acts, the search for an overarching framework resulted in a Common Understanding. Our analysis not only demonstrates the need to go beyond the treaty provisions in understanding the nature of non-legislative rule making in the EU, but also emphasises the importance of informal procedures and non-binding agreements in fully assessing the nature of non-legislative rule making in this area. I Introduction ‘Comitology’, the system of legislative oversight of implementing powers delegated to the European Commission, has long been a mainstay of the EU’s administrative system. From the early 1960s onwards, Member States accompanied the delegation of powers to the Commission with the establishment of implementing committees that would ‘assist’ the Commission in the execution of these powers.
    [Show full text]